US20200222774A1

US20200222774A1 - Golf grip hand structure efficiency device and method of use

Info

Publication number: US20200222774A1
Application number: US16/743,999
Authority: US
Inventors: William Alan Kostuj
Original assignee: Individual
Current assignee: Individual
Priority date: 2016-10-15
Filing date: 2020-01-15
Publication date: 2020-07-16

Abstract

Improvements in a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and a method of using the device are disclosed. The device is used determine a value of a parameter for a golfer called a golf grip hand structure efficiency. A golfer's determined golf grip hand structure efficiency value may be applied to create proper base gripping and swinging structures for the golfer for use in applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes.

Description

A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever.

BACKGROUND

Athletically speaking, a golf swing in and of itself is not a complex activity to learn and master, despite a reputation to the contrary. In fact, it is relatively easy compared with many other common activities, both inside and outside the realm of sporting activities. Swinging at and hitting an object that just sits still in fact requires less physical strength to perform well, less hand-eye coordination, and no reflexes to cite a few examples. However, there are a few unique attributes to the game of golf that are not present in most other activities. And to those people having insufficient experience and/or knowledge, certain of these attributes can make it appear that a golf swing is harder than it really is. Prominently among these attributes is that a golf swing, in the normal course of playing the game, is performed while regularly switching between different individual golf clubs from one swing to the next (up to fourteen clubs are currently permitted under the rules).
And there is no such thing as a perfectly made and/or fit golf club, ever, so golfers need to constantly make adjustments to their swing(s). While such adjustments are frequently small, they are nevertheless commonly noticeable, and these swing inconsistencies that take place are regularly believed to be swing flaws regarding an activity that historically has been believed to be difficult. Compare this with most other activities, where even with a piece of equipment that is not perfectly made and/or fit, a performer will commonly be performing repeatedly with the very same piece of equipment. This allows the performer to become increasingly used to the specific piece of equipment and oftentimes results in the individual being able to perform quite proficiently with the equipment.
But the game of golf does not traditionally have this kind of luxury. Even if a set of golf clubs is fit theoretically perfectly to a golfer, yet due to manufacturing and construction tolerances that can still be detected by golfers, one swing might be made with a golf club that perhaps has a slightly different grip size than for the last swing, the next swing might be made with a golf club that has a slightly different balance, and so on. Furthermore, very poor and incorrect clubfitting theories and practices in several areas, and which in certain ways have become even worse in recent times, have commonly resulted in even more swinging inconsistencies for golfers than there used to be among golf clubs used by golfers.
To further illustrate, if certain golf club specification values of a club are a decent fit for a golfer, he or she might be able to swing the club well all day long, and it may be believed (by the golfer and/or swing instructor as applicable) that the golfer cannot really swing any better. And at some point, the golfer might switch to any given second golf club and find that he or she also swings that club well. But then, rather uniquely, the golfer might return to swinging the first club, the very same club that was swung well at what might have literally been one minute earlier. And all of a sudden the golfer does not and cannot swing the first club well anymore (while the second club continues to be swung well upon switching between the two). This is not an unusual happening at all and routinely occurs when one golf club fits a golfer's swing better another club in one or more ways.
So in hindsight, and even though the golfer was able to swing the first golf club quite well (for a while anyway under limited circumstances because it was partly a good fit for the golfer's swing), the swings made with the first club were pretty obviously not the best that the golfer could make and the initial assessment about that was incorrect. And with one of the unique attributes of the game of golf being this routine changing between different individual clubs for successive swings, this kind of almost vicious circle of events can go on forever, leaving golfers, swing instructors, and/or clubfitters as examples with questions and confusion unless and until effective devices and/or methods are developed that can help overcome such occurrences.
Fortunately, a solution(s) is now available. And the plain fact is that there is only one way to soundly put an end to that described above. This way is to make certain that base golf swing specimens for golfers, as starting points for far more successful swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes, are always performed absent the influence of any golf clubs on the swings of golfers, golf clubs that fundamentally leave a golf swing in a state of perpetual adjustment and inconsistency. The traditionally applied manner of creating so-called base swings for golfers for the purpose of implementing golf swing instruction and/or clubfitting processes as examples, which is commonly to have golfers swing with at least one of their current golf clubs, is a badly flawed foundational basis and very inappropriately termed in all such instances. And it has unfortunately contributed to the development of many misconceptions and faulty golf swing and clubfitting theories and practices that remain in existence today.
Unknowingly, the golf industry as a whole over time has in fact adopted certain elements that can be considered foundational predecessors to the present disclosure, primarily among them being the traditional gripping structures taken by most golfers today of either overlapping or interlocking parts of their hands in the course of forming their golf grips on their golf clubs. But the reason(s) for the existence of this common gripping structure among golfers has never been properly understood throughout the golf industry. Consistent with earlier comments, the reason most commonly given for the existence of the element when the subject comes up is because a golf swing is so hard to learn and perform. But this makes no sense when evaluated in a logical manner.
Although not effectively utilized to this point, the true reason for the existence of this element is to be able to effectively perform a true base golf swing that is consistently unaffected by the eternal imperfections in the constructions and fittings of golf clubs for golfers. The present disclosure, which comprises a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and an accompanying method of use, helps to soundly overcome these past insufficiencies and helps to create vast improvements in swing instruction and/or clubfitting techniques.

BRIEF DESCRIPTIONS OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is of a hand gripping structure by a golfer as taken on a golf club device, where the device provides an essentially straight and rigid object that is common to both hands and substantially keeps the hands in alignment with each other along the axis of the golf club device in the course of a swing;

FIG. 2 is of an efficiently formed hands-only gripping structure where no golf club device is needed to substantially keep the hands in alignment with each other in the course of a swing;

FIG. 3 is of an inefficiently formed hands-only gripping structure, where the hands are not able to be kept in alignment with each other without an aiding device;

FIG. 4 is an embodiment of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device;

FIG. 5 is another embodiment of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device;

FIG. 6 is a larger cutaway of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device embodiment as illustrated in FIGS. 7 through 18;

FIGS. 7 through 12 are of a swing sequence of a golfer where a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and a golf club device are simultaneously used;

FIGS. 13 through 18 are of a swing sequence of a golfer where a golf grip hand structure efficiency device alone is used;

FIG. 19 is a flowchart comprising at least one method of implementing a golf grip hand structure efficiency device.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The following preliminary information defines, describes, and/or clarifies certain terms, expressions, and/or details as used throughout this specification, and including the claims, unless the specific context indicates otherwise:
The term golf swing (or more simply swing) is not just limited to a full golf swing and applies to any part or parts of a swing. This can comprise but not be restricted to any part of a backswing, forward swing, follow-through, and/or any part(s) of a pre-swing period in preparation for a swing. From an analysis point of view, a swing as examples may even comprise a still image or single data point from any part of a swing;
A golf club device may be defined as a completed golf club, or any part(s) of or substitute part(s) for a golf club intended to substitute for at least part of a golf club. One particular element of a golf club device that may be referred to more often within this disclosure involves the grip section of any such device. Typically the section is substantially rigid in nature along its length or provides a similar effect. And when placed in or about the hands of a golfer, it provides an object common to both hands that helps keep the hands in alignment with each other along an axis of the object. Thus, the hands are forced to work more as a single unit together the over the course of a swing;
A golf club device within the context of the present disclosure is generally considered to be a device to be avoided or eliminated as being a bad influence on an attempted creation of a foundational, base swing. This includes a golf grip substitute device, a specific type of golf club device. Such a device can be broadly defined here as an object intended to be common to both hands and help keep or force the hands to be in alignment with each other along a specified axis over the course of a swing, while also eliminating all undesirable effects as much as possible that perpetually imperfectly made and/or fit golf clubs (forms of golf club devices) can have on an attempted creation of a base swing. As will be seen, however, under certain circumstances, such as where the hands of a golfer are determined to have poor and/or inconsistent alignments at one or more points of a swing when implementing a hands-only gripping structure, the use of a golf grip substitute device can be more advantageous than disadvantageous;
The term structure as utilized can refer to gripping and/or swinging, for the two are related to each other. The term generally refers to bodily movements and/or positions surrounding the way a golfer forms a gripping structure and/or performs a golf swing, where any difference in gripping structure might also result in a difference(s) in swinging structure. Such a cause and effect difference(s) might immediately appear or might take an undetermined amount of time to appear. While not limited to the following, gripping structures within the present disclosure comprise using only the hands with no added object(s) of any kind located within or about the hands (hands-only structure), and using a hand structure efficiency device within or about the hands, with or without the addition of a golf club device. References to structural factors are fundamentally unrelated to any performance factors related to hitting a golf ball;
When discussing trying to make a golfer's swing better and/or trying to fit a golf club(s) to a golfer better in any manner, terms including but not limited to advanced, proper, or correct swing and/or clubfitting improvement, development, or instruction might be combined with terms including but not limited to methods, processes, systems, or programs as examples and can be considered interchangeable and synonymous with each other. Swing improvement and/or clubfitting methods that can most benefit through the use of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and a method of use for the device are disclosed;
A base golf swing or swing (specimen) is a swing principally created and performed for the purpose of most efficiently proceeding further with applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes for a golfer. The base swing is created using a hands-only or golf-grip-substitute-aided gripping structure by a golfer as determined with the aid of using a golf grip hand structure efficiency device. The term reference swing can also be a base swing, but a swing that could be created by a different golfer (or it could potentially be a swing that is computer generated for instance) and whose swing is selected and attempted to be emulated by the base swing of a golfer targeted for improvement. And during a clubfitting process, a reference swing can be a base swing of the same golfer, and where various golf club specifications and specification values are tested in an effort to substantially emulate the golfer's own base swing when a golf club device is swung by the golfer;
A determined goal may be to more simply just try to improve a golfer's grip hand structure efficiency based on results from using a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, even if no applicable swing development and/or clubfitting processes are further pursued. This alone can in turn help to improve the golfer's entire swinging structure. Even if there is no reference swing specimen chosen for the golfer to emulate, he/she will still possess base gripping and swinging structures that can be created and analyzed. And these structures should still be created for analysis consistent with if an applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting program were to be further pursued. Analyses of the base gripping and/or swinging structures of the golfer, even absent any reference swing to compare against, are extremely valuable procedures toward determining any subsequent course of action for the golfer;
One solution provided by a golf grip hand structure efficiency device can be a golf grip (gripping) hand structure efficiency value for a golfer. The value might alternately and synonymously be referred to as a reading, rating, or other relevant term. And while this disclosure regularly refers to the value in the form of a percentage, this is largely for explanatory purposes and this particular type of value is not required. A golfer's gripping structure efficiency value may be developed and provided in any desired format(s) depending upon any number of factors like the type(s) of sensor(s) used, the type(s) of data measurable and/or output by the sensor(s), the configuration(s) of any related analysis software, and more;
There is seemingly little that can be done regarding potentially changing and/or properly interpreting the term golf grip or any expressions containing the term. The term can commonly refer to either a physical golf grip component that is part of a completed golf club and held onto by a golfer, or a manner in which a golfer forms his or her hand (structure) around a physical golf club and grip. The term must be evaluated within the context it is used in on any given occurrence. To illustrate, within the expression golf grip hand structure efficiency device, the term golf grip refers to the latter of the two descriptions above. But for the expression golf grip substitute device, and while not intended to be part of a completed golf club, the term golf grip refers to a discrete physical object that is more related to the former of the two descriptions above;
Steps provided in the specification and claims are not required to be performed in the specific order presented. To cite just one example here, the use of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device might be simultaneously combined with the use of a golf club device. Doing so might provide valuable supplemental baseline data information about a golfer that can be used toward determining a recommended gripping structure for the golfer's base swing performance. Without such information, a developed, perhaps one-size-fits-all chart might be the only reference information available from which to make such a decision. (The term reference chart could refer to paper, computer-provided information, or other possible manifestations). And if implemented, using such a combination of devices may be done either before or after using just a golf grip hand structure efficiency device on a golfer;
For simplicity, the sensor and measurement types described in this disclosure will basically be limited to a somewhat common sensor unit available today, that being an orientation-type sensor (preferably wireless). Among various measurements that such a sensor unit typically provides are orientation readings (or units that can be converted into orientation readings) of the device in three-dimensions. This can be one very good protocol for a golf grip hand structure efficiency device. If, for instance, each hand of a golfer had such a sensor device strategically placed about it, then the orientations of each sensor (and resultantly each hand if testing is performed appropriately) can be independently measured throughout the course of a swing.
Software might be developed and used to compare the measured orientation values relative to each other at one or more determined points of the swing, and perhaps provide one or more calculated golf grip hand structure efficiency values for a golfer. Elements of three-dimensional and/or two-dimensional analyses may be applied in order to compare the orientations of the sensors/hands as desired. Because computer- or software-generated vectors can generally be formed to extend through and beyond such sensor devices to produce axis lines that might be helpful for analysis and/or understanding purposes, terminology like the axes of, through, or about the hands or similar might at times be used in place of or in conjunction with terminology like sensor and/or hand orientation(s);
However, keeping in mind the foundational requirements of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, these being the ability of the hardware and/or software device to measure the movement(s) and/or position(s) of each hand independently throughout the course of a swing made by a golfer, and the ability to analyze and/or compare such data to aid in determining a golf grip (gripping) hand structure efficiency value for the golfer, there can be various other sensor and/or measurement types that can also accomplish the device requirements very effectively. A sampling of other possible sensor types (with some likely unknown at this time), any of which might be configured for just a two-dimensional analysis instead of three dimensions if appropriate, and which might be utilized alone or in combination with any number of other sensor types, might include but not be limited to accelerometers, gyroscopes, magnetometers, AC or other magnetic sensors, lasers, tilt sensors, ultrasonic technology, or optical sensors (including video cameras), with or without the use of tracking markers placed about the hands;
While more than one sensor may be used for measuring the movement(s) and/or position(s) of a golfer's hands independently at one or more determined points of a swing made by the golfer, a single sensor capable of simultaneously measuring a value of a predetermined parameter (such as but not limited to a video camera where some type of computer vision program might be able to track the hands independently of each other) may of course be used if suitable for the needed task(s). The sensor device(s) may be placed within the hands in a similar manner to the way a golf club/grip would be held on to, around the outsides of but still in contact with the hand(s), totally removed from any physical contact with the hand(s) (like with using a video camera at a distance), or a combination of any of the above. The expression about the hands may be used in the disclosure and broadly represents any of the above;
Aside from orientation parameter values as noted above, other potential measurement types (with some likely unknown) about the hands, individually and/or relative to each other, and which might be utilized alone or in combination with any number of other measurement types, might include but not be limited to three-dimensional and/or two-dimensional rotations of the hands, angles of the hands along a determined plane(s) in space, distances between determined points of each hand and/or between determined points of each hand and a determined reference point, or raw or adjusted sensor data as measured by the sensor(s) such as sensor acceleration, which might be used in part to reconstruct and/or visually display and/or compare the movement(s) and/or position(s) of the hands at one or more determined points of a swing and which might enhance the accuracy and/or understanding of a desired analysis. Any sensor(s) and/or measurement type(s), alone or in combination with any other sensor(s) and/or measurement type(s), may be utilized as desired toward achieving the described requirement(s) of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device;
It would seem like the game of golf, primarily due to one of the game's unique attributes of regularly making successive swings with different individual pieces of equipment, would be among the biggest benefactors of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and its method of use. But use of the device is certainly not limited to just the game of golf. There are uncounted other activities, both within and outside the realm of perceived sporting activities (perhaps a contractor working with a tool as one example), where use of the device can be extremely beneficial. The device can help to better analyze and/or advance participant performance in the activities and even the activities themselves (for which the name given to the device here might be altered some). This could include but not be expressly limited to improving the performance structures of participants in the activities as well as improving the fitting and/or making of any equipment related to the activities. The device and/or device use as disclosed herein but suitably adapted for use in an activity aside from golf, are deemed covered by this disclosure.
FIG. 1 shows a golfer with a formed gripping structure on a golf club/grip, before a swing is begun. For a right-handed golfer as pictured, the right hand 20 is the lower hand while the left hand 22 is the upper hand for a traditionally taken gripping structure. The hands are securely formed around a partially shown golf club (golf club device), which as shown comprises a golf shaft 24, which extends essentially to the top of the club 26, and over which a golf grip 28 is installed that extends to the top of the club 26. Golf grips themselves can oftentimes be rather pliable in nature in part to help achieve certain desirable surface characteristics for golfers and also to aid in grip installation as a couple of examples. But once installed over a golf shaft that is substantially rigid and straight in nature, particularly along the segment of the shaft/grip that is traditionally held onto by a golfer, then the club segment held onto becomes a substantially rigid and straight golf club device. The centerline axis running through the length of the golf club device is shown as 30.
Even upon a very brief visual analysis of FIG. 1, it might be observed how the golf club device will force the hands of the golfer to remain in consistent alignment with each other essentially along the centerline axis 30 of the golf club device throughout the course of a golf swing. In isolated ways the hands can still move independently of each other, one example being that the bottom hand 20 will typically be moved at a somewhat faster rate than the top hand 22 around what would be the approximate point and time of club/ball contact in the course of a golf swing. But the more important element here is that throughout the course of a swing, and due to the presence of the substantially rigid and straight section of the golf club device being held onto, the hands will be forced to remain in alignment with and relative to each other along the axis line 30 provided by the golf club device, which is common to both hands.
It is noted here that the gripping structure taken by the golfer in FIG. 1 is the most common among golfers, that being an overlapping gripping structure where the little finger of the right hand 20 is actually substantially placed on top of (overlaps) the index finger of the left hand 22. Intermediate steps of how and why this gripping structure is commonly formed, while not crucial here, are described more in prior art. But it is important to be aware of this hand structuring here. It is also important to note here that even if the hands were instead adjacent to one another and no overlapping were present, or even if the hands were totally separated from each other with some amount of gap in between them, and whether one likes it or not, the hands would still be forced to remain in substantial alignment with each other throughout the course of a swing along the substantially rigid and straight axis 30 that is present due to the golf club device that is common to both hands.
These starting circumstances seem good toward a golfer being able to consistently perform an accurate base swing. And they are, at least until golf clubs are brought into the scenario. With the regular switching between individual clubs on successive swings being an integral part of playing the game, with no such thing as a perfectly made or fit golf club, and with even average players commonly being able to sense differences between clubs (even if unconsciously) and constantly making swing adjustments as a result, (even if unknowingly), the seemingly good starting point(s) described above takes a turn for the worse very quickly. And these circumstances, being unsolved and uncorrected in the past, have over time helped to create a massive but unjustifiable reputation of a golf swing being far more difficult than it really is, and a similar reputation that uncounted golfers have flaws in their golf swings when in fact they do not.
In order to correct these past errors and unwarranted reputations that have hurt the game over time, a critical process to develop is for golfers to be able to perform base golf swings absent the influences of any golf club devices. This might be a completed golf club or even part of a golf club that could still negatively impact the swing performance of a golfer away from his or her truest and most consistent base swing. In order to accomplish this, a stability of the hands as described regarding FIG. 1 and an ability of the hands to function together as substantially a single unified unit, as if a golf club were always present as in FIG. 1, must be effectively achieved. Otherwise, if no golf club device is used, any undesired movement(s) and/or position(s) of either of the hands of a golfer throughout the course of a swing will potentially cause just as much (if not more) error and/or inconsistency at any given point(s) of the swing (compared with the golfer's truest possible base swing) than if the swing were performed using a poorly constructed and/or fit golf club(s).
In light of this, FIG. 2 displays a very solid hands-only gripping structure of a golfer. Using an overlapping hand gripping structure here also as described some above, this particular structural element is an extremely effective aid toward being able to form a golf gripping structure where the hands can work together as effectively a single unified unit, even in the absence of any golf club device. The left-hand 22 thumb 32, hidden by part of the right hand 20, extends further into the right hand 20 due to the overlapping structural element of the hands in the course of forming the grip, where the left-hand 22 thumb 32 is able to be securely grasped by the two middle fingers 34 of the right hand 20. The result is a formed hands-only gripping structure, comparable to if a substantially rigid and straight golf club device were present within the hands and being held on to, with both hands secured along a common axis 36, and with no perpetually imperfect golf club device present that can prevent the golfer from performing and creating the best and most consistent base swing that he or she is capable of.
A brief overall comparison between the gripping structures of FIGS. 1 and 2 might visually hint at certain gripping structural changes that commonly take place between when a golf club device is actually present and when one is not. Such changes might or might not seem natural early on if and when a gripping structure such as that in FIG. 2 may be pursued. But such alterations typically eventually become very natural, almost instinctive in nature, as to some degree they might even be considered necessary in order to form an effective hands-only gripping structure. Additional details of some common gripping structural adjustments that are frequently made between when a golf club device is actually held on to and forming a hands-only gripping structure can be found in prior art. One embodiment of the present invention is in helping to make the transitioning from the gripping structure of FIG. 1 to the gripping structure of FIG. 2 a more objective and efficient process.
Prevailing beliefs in the game of golf still mostly surround the incorrect and unwarranted teaching(s) that traditionally accepted and specialized golf gripping structures like the overlapping grip, with another one being a similar interlocking gripping structure, exist because a golf swing is a more difficult activity to learn and perform consistently well than most other activities. The teaching(s) also primarily contends that the specialized gripping structures should be utilized solely when golf clubs are also utilized, and that in instances of forming such gripping structures where no golf club device is present, the gripping structure learned under the condition of utilizing a golf club device should fundamentally be migrated over to the condition of a hands-only gripping structure.
But this is the complete opposite of the truth and perhaps partly explains why the game of golf has previously been unable to learn certain principles properly, and maybe why the game has been becoming less popular in recent times. It is under a hands-only condition where gripping structures like the overlapping grip should first be effectively learned so that a golfer can learn how to create and efficiently and consistently perform his or her best and truest base swinging structure. Thereafter, it is the learned hands-only gripping structure that should be fundamentally migrated over to a golf club device gripping structure. This is proper and there is nothing else that even comes close to making any logical sense.
In moving on to FIG. 3, this displays an example of a rather inefficient hands-only gripping structure that would not produce accurate base swing and base swing structures for a golfer. It is not a desirable condition under which a golfer can create a base swing suitable for further use within more advanced and efficient swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes. And unfortunately, the gripping structure shown in FIG. 3 is representative of the hands-only gripping structures of countless golfers. But such an inadequacy can be corrected or improved through the implementation of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and a method of use for the device.
Of prime importance, note that the axis line 38 extending through the right hand 20 is visibly at a different angle or orientation than the axis line 40 extending through the left hand 22. And the hand positioning displayed is before the golfer's swing has even begun. More often than not, such a discrepancy at the start will tend to get worse at one or more points of the swing than it was at the start. And this commonly results in grip and swing structure attributes for the golfer that are discernibly different, unsound, and invalid relative to the golfer's truest and best possible base gripping and swinging structures. It is noted here that any changes in the movement(s) and/or position(s) of either hand anywhere in the course of a swing can in turn affect the movement(s) and/or position(s) of any part(s) of a golfer's body from head to toe, commonly significantly so but generally still present even if not readily noticeable.
Such changes can occur in uncounted varying manners and degrees and be very inconsistent in nature, thus greatly (and negatively) affecting golf swing efficiency and consistency. Such changes can include but not be limited to the extent or range of the backswing, the directions and amounts of movements of the hands, wrists, elbows, shoulders, and the consequent filtering down of these changes to all other parts of the body as well, any of which can occur at any point(s) of a swing. The entire swing can become fundamentally totally different in nature compared with swing performance when the hands are consistently functioning more as a single unified unit together throughout the course of a swing. In momentarily discounting negative effects of golf club device use on a swing and considering only the golf grip structuring of golfers, the swinging structures of numberless golfers are so noticeably different between their hands-only and golf-club-device use swinging performances that they look like totally different people.
Under such circumstances, and regardless of whether golf swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes are involved, no two swings can be legitimately compared against one another when the hand gripping structure of one swing is so different from the hand gripping structure of the other swing at one or more common, comparable points of the swings. The gripping structures of both swings need to be made substantially comparable before any correlation(s) could be reasonably attempted. Based on this, the gripping structure of a golfer remains one of the most important elements (if not the most critically important element) toward the most efficient and consistent base swing structure possible for any golfer.
Because the little finger 42 of the right hand 20 is visibly present in FIG. 3, this is one indicator that there is no functional overlapping of the hands and that the gripping structure taken is that of a ten-fingered or baseball-style gripping structure/style. That is a style more similar to gripping structures taken in most other activities, where the hands 20 and 22 are more simply just placed adjacent to each other. Nevertheless, there are still uncounted golfers, many though not all being less experienced players, who utilize such a hand gripping structure for playing the game of golf. It is noted here that a ten-fingered or baseball-style gripping structure when implemented in a hands-only configuration can be known for more easily producing discrepancies between the axes or orientations of the hands throughout the course of swinging (not a good thing).
But this is not always the case. Similarly, just because a golfer might implement an overlapping or interlocking gripping structure, this is no guarantee whatsoever that the golfer will achieve a consistent axis or orientation alignment among the hands, largely referring here to when a hands-only gripping structure is implemented. Due to all kinds of variables, uncounted golfers that have overlapping or interlocking gripping structures may still be shown to have notable discrepancies (again not a good thing) between the axes or orientations of the hands at one or more points of a swing. Each golfer is a unique person that ideally should be tested individually. With that said, a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and a method of use for the device are now described in more detail.
FIG. 4 shows one embodiment of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device. The device as a whole is designed to be placed within the hands of a golfer in a manner substantially similar to if a golf club/grip were being held. The centerline of the device along its length is shown by 44. The center section 46 of the device might be of a material that extends to both sides of the centerline 44 of the device. There is no specific requirement as to the length of the center section 46 and/or that its length be equal on both sides of the centerline 44 of the device. The length of the center section 46 might be very roughly around two inches, but with considerable variations in this dimension plausible based on numerous factors. The section is designed to be placed between the right and left hands when a golfer assumes his or her gripping structure, with the device centerline 44 placed at substantially the functional intersection of or pivot point between the hands, and with the center section 46 designed to allow as much independent freedom of movement of each hand as possible. The center section 46 should very broadly be composed of a material(s) comprising features of being as flexible, small in diameter, and light in weight as possible, yet have sufficient strength of a determined amount to withstand the forces exerted among the hands over the course of a swing without breaking. Features not limited to these mentioned may be conducive to best accomplishing the stated objective(s) for the device center section 46.
One possible material that comes to mind for the center section 46 might be silicone or a similar type of rubbery material or composite material(s). Consistent with the requirement(s) stated above, the use of such a material(s) may permit substantial freedom of movement and/or positioning of each hand independently in areas not limited to three-dimensional hand angle changes, hand rotational changes, and/or distance changes between determined points about each hand and while possessing adequate strength for repeated use of the device. However, many other types of materials and/or composite materials are likely available that will also fulfill the requirements of center section 46 equally well if not better. While not being able to achieve any given stated objective(s) to its fullest might be expected to lessen the highest possible efficiency of the device, any such embodiments are still anticipated to perform better than that needed from a golf grip hand structure efficiency device.
The outer sections 48 of the device should be constructed of a more rigid material(s), largely because sensors 52 used in conjunction with this particular embodiment are designed to be securely attached to these sections 48 outside of yet as closely as reasonably possible to the boundaries of the hands (70 and 72 of FIG. 3) along the length of the device without interfering with any hand movement and/or positioning. Thus, sections 48 lengths are required to extend beyond the boundaries of the hands a sufficient amount to be able to secure the sensors 52 on the sections 48. Sections 48 lengths beyond that are not required, and lengths too long can potentially interfere with various elements of a golfer's gripping and/or swinging structures, noting that the boundaries of the hands can vary extensively from golfer to golfer. Parts of sections 48 closer to center section 46 are designed to be held within at least part of each of the hands, thus providing secure links between each of the hands and their associated sensors, where sensor data can accurately measure the movement(s) and/or position(s) of the hands over the course of swinging.
Possible materials for sections 48 might comprise but not be limited to a type of strong, rigid plastic, aluminum, graphite, or any other preferred type of material or composite material(s). While feature objectives such as though not limited to generally making the device as small as possible in diameter overall (different sections and/or section parts of the device need not be of the same dimension[s] in design), and stating a very crude but not bound by range here of one-eighth to one-half of an inch in diameter, certain circumstances might warrant some deviation. As just one of many possible examples, if the sensor(s) 52 is found to be larger and/or heavier than anticipated, then increases in the diameter and/or length of sections 48 (though fundamentally as little as necessary) might be warranted and may help toward being able to hold the sections more securely within the hands. That might help to eliminate or reduce as much as possible any sensor movement(s) and/or position(s) that do not coincide with actual hand movement(s) and/or position(s) throughout the course of a swing. Device sections may be made solid or hollow as another example of possible feature choices.
The joints 50 connecting sections 46 and 48 may be of varied construction as desired. The joints might be permanently formed with an appropriate adhesive suitable for all involved materials. Alternately, the joints might be designed for assembly and disassembly with changeable or replaceable sections, perhaps at least in part to be able to adjust the device to the hand sizes and/or gripping structures of individual golfers, which may lead to better overall results when using the device. The device could alternately be made of a single piece (considering sensors 52 separately), where the material(s) and/or construction(s) are varied along its length in order to help accomplish the desired objectives of the device.
One or more reference markers, such as a visible dot or some other physical feature at one or more locations along the length of the device may be provided in order to aid in placing a specific part of the device at a specific part of the hand structuring. One such location might commonly be at a centerline point 44 of the device, where such a point might be referenced and placed for instance where it is determined that the two hands functionally separate or independently pivot from each other within a golfer's gripping structure.
The current design of certain features of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device have been dictated by and developed due to the fact that wireless sensors as a general whole still appear to be too large as one example to be able to achieve more advanced features that may be desirable. The embedding of sensors within various materials and through various construction means in determined strategic locations along the length of the device can be a very efficient advancement. Somewhat comparably, sensors that are small enough could possibly be externally portably attached to the device in determined strategic locations, even within the gripping structure of a golfer, while minimally affecting the gripping and/or swinging structures of a golfer. This could potentially provide better versatility and/or precision to the device over needing to place bulkier sensors 52 just outside the gripping structure of a golfer in order to accomplish the best results with the components available. As sensor technology presumably continues to advance, such embodiments of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device are eventually expected and considered disclosed and covered by this specification.
And comparably, if a wired sensor(s) might not interfere with the gripping and/or swinging structures of golfers as much as currently thought (relative to an otherwise similar device configuration without any wire[s] present), then such a sensor type could certainly be utilized. It might be notably smaller than its wireless counterpart, and thus an effective golf grip hand structure efficiency device design might turn out quite differently than the embodiments presented herein. Device embodiments using such a sensor type are disclosed and considered covered by this specification.
Wireless sensors as components of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device are represented by 52 of FIG. 4. The sensors 52 are fundamentally considered to be part of the device, yet they can also be considered separate components that might be separately available from other components of the device. An orientation-type wireless sensor unit as described here commonly comprises hardware parts that might generally include but not be limited to various sensors types like an accelerometer(s), gyroscope(s), and magnetometer(s), along with a microprocessor(s), a wireless data transmitting component(s), and one or more batteries, which may or may not be rechargeable in nature. A discrete sensor unit may be designed for use with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device comprising hardware components that meet the needs of the device more precisely. This might include a dedicated casing or enclosure and/or fastening mechanism to work more conveniently with other design attributes of the device. However, there are already off-the-shelf sensor hardware units that might be adaptable for use as part of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device. Such sensor devices may be utilized if desired, suitably configuring or reconfiguring them as warranted. Movement and/or position data measured by the sensor(s) might be sent wirelessly to a discrete device capable of running a related software program, or a golf grip hand structure efficiency device may be a completely self-contained unit that displays a result(s) itself as technology might allow.
The sensors 52 might be made for portable attachment to and removal from the outer sections 48 of the device based on some of the following reasoning, but this is not an absolute recommendation and the sensors may be permanently attached as desired. When considering the various sizes of hands that individuals have that play the game of golf, from juniors to full-grown adults, and also considering how potentially different the gripping structures of individuals can be even among those having comparable hand sizes, distances from one end of a hand gripping structure to the other along an axis line comparable with that of when a golf club is held on to (basically 70 to 72 of FIG. 3), can vary extensively among individuals that play golf, from roughly five inches and perhaps even less for smaller juniors, to ten inches and perhaps even more for adults having large hands.
With that noted, it can now be further noted that a length of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device that is too long or short for a golfer can cause problems and have potentially devastating consequences depending upon various details. Of these two, a device length that is too short is usually more serious in nature. If the device does not extend completely through the gripping structure of a golfer's hands (this will be further detailed below when describing a method of use for the device) such that both ends of a golfer's or other subject's gripping structure are not able to secure and control the device at those points (not the only important but nevertheless very important points) throughout the course of a swing, then measurements provided by the device could potentially be very inaccurate regarding what the hands are actually doing. Thus, if a one-size-fits-all (lengthwise) version of the device were produced and its length made to be eight inches, then there might be a notable number of golfers for which the device may not function properly on.
Alternately, and depending upon the finer details of various elements, a device length that is noticeably longer than needed for any given golfer might also potentially result in unreliable device measurements and/or inconvenience(s) in using the device. For instance, a junior having a gripping structure hand span of only six inches, if trying to use a one-size-fits-all version of the device made to a length of twelve inches as perhaps a somewhat exaggerated example, might struggle with a notable protrusion of the device extending from one or both sides of his or her grip structuring. A protrusion extending further up from the left (top) hand 22 would generally be more concerning largely due to its closer proximity to the rest of a user's body and potential effects in that regard. But unneeded protrusions of the device beyond either end of a user's grip structuring can potentially considerably affect a user's gripping and/or swinging structures, resulting in measurements from the device that would be quite inaccurate relative to measurements from the user's truest and best base swing. And if there are any unmovable sensors about any protruding portions of the device (particularly if able to move around in a freer and less secured manner) and they cannot be operationally turned off under such circumstances, then sensor measurements will not accurately represent actual hand movement(s) and/or position(s) and will be in error in that respect.
In light of these attributes, it might be contemplated to make a golf grip hand structure efficiency device adjustable in one or more ways, potentially considering various versions for perhaps personal and commercial use. For personal use, the device might as one example be initially made longer than necessary and, with appropriate instruction, be made shorter by cutting or other process as a one-time task by a user or other qualified entity to best fit the length of the device to the current hand size and grip structuring of the user. Creating such an embodiment might influence the material(s) used and/or any number of other design features of any part(s) of the device. Alternately, a commercial version of the device that might be expected to perform equally well on all types of different hand sizes and/or gripping structures might instead have portable sections 48 that are available in different lengths and that could be changed as needed to fit various golfers.
For these reasons, the ability to portably attach and remove sensors 52 from the outer sections 48 of the device is a feature that can be contemplated and implemented as desired. The outer sections 48 of the device are not required to be of the same lengths (or the same of any other design parameter) on both sides of the centerline axis 44 of the device, though they may be if preferred. Due to the general nature of golf grip hand structuring, and then further adding in some of the finer details, it might ultimately be determined that the lengths needed for the outer sections 48 of the device may best be somewhat different, relative to a determined center point of the device, for the left (top) hand 22 and right (bottom) hand 20 (for a right-handed golfer) areas of many golfers. Surface texture(s) and/or material(s) hardness might also be relevant features to consider for any given component(s) used in the making of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device in order to help best achieve device objectives. A one-size-fits-all design can still be considered and might still be very effective if any number of the conditions and/or effects presented are found to be not as problematic as currently evaluated. Further research might be performed regarding what single length may be best to accommodate all or the most possible golfers and provide the best overall results. The device may also be produced in a selection of different discrete lengths (unchangeable by design).
FIG. 5 shows a different embodiment of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, with no authoritative evidence at present regarding which embodiment might perform better overall. As in other presented figures, the right hand 20 and left hand 22 are displayed. In this figure a golf club device 54 is being held on to by a golfer, with the golf club device 54 in this instance comprising at least a composite of a shaft and grip as shown, with perhaps one or more other components not shown. A pair of wireless sensors 56, both of which may be of identical design although not mandatory, by themselves can represent a very effective golf grip hand structure efficiency device when suitably located about the hands of a golfer. With a possible exception of using different casings and/or mechanisms for attaching the sensors to a different object(s) for use, the inner component design of sensor unit 56 might be the same as that of sensor unit 52. But sensors 52 and 56 may also be of very different designs as desired.
In a case where any generalized off-the-shelf hardware sensor units might already exist that could be adapted to work suitably for FIG. 4 and/or FIG. 5 embodiments, it would be a dedicated software program application of novel design produced to work in conjunction with such sensor units that would comprise the most unique element(s) of the device overall. Described further later, the software broadly converts sensor data about each hand independently into three-dimensional and/or two-dimensional orientation values (and/or values of a different preferred parameter[s]), comparing and calculating the orientation difference between the hands at one or more determined points of a swing by a golfer (or other determined activity), and outputting/displaying the information as a novel solution(s) of the application. Part of the unique element(s) also requires that sensor/hand data input into the software program is specifically from a swing where no golf club device is permitted about the hands, or the data is invalid. In view of this type of embodiment and notwithstanding any disclosures of novel hardware elements and/or methods of use, it is deemed here that the software program application element(s) of the golf grip hand structure efficiency device stands on its own merits as being patentable.
It is acknowledged here that with orientation, inertial, or comparable types of sensors generally indicated in 52 and 56 and that are generally termed hardware in nature, various types of software programming are also typically involved in sensor operation. While the software described above might be termed application software, a different aspect might be termed firmware software, the latter broadly having more to do with configuring the various individual hardware components of the sensor to work together just to achieve determined sensor functionality to begin with. The two types of software can generally be distinguished from one another, with firmware oftentimes just assumed to be included with hardware as part of its ability to function. But the two types of software might also have some operational connection with each other, thus unique firmware software may also be an integral part of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device. It is possible that at least part of the software operation described above as being application software may be accomplishable through firmware programming.
The placements of the orientation sensors 56 are located on the outsides of the hands, approximately opposite of yet in line with the centers of the palms on the insides of the corresponding hands. These can be good data collection points for the sensors 56 toward helping to measure orientations of each of the hands as a whole independently of one another throughout the course of a swing. Depending upon design, such sensor units might also be able to provide other types of data like movements and/or positions of each of the hands throughout the course of a swing as just a couple of examples. Such data might be put to very good use in conjunction with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, and over time might even become more preferable than hand orientation values for the device.
For reference purposes, horizontal axis lines 58 for right hand 20 and 60 for left hand 22 substantially through the centers of sensors 56 are provided in FIG. 5 as indicators that sensors 56 placed on the backs of the hands approximately midway between the knuckles of the two middle fingers and wrist joints are approximately aligned with the centers of the palms on the insides of the corresponding hands. Such sensor placements can help provide for good measurement data representative of the overall hand movement(s) and/or position(s) of each hand independently, whereas a sensor placed on the tip of a finger as one example might produce data that is vastly different from what the hand is doing as a whole.
While good sensor locations to obtain relevant data from, these locations are not the only ones from which good and relevant sensor data can be obtained. Other good locations to obtain relevant data from can be approximately where the hands at both ends of a golfer's gripping structure end. Such points are represented by 70 and 72 of FIG. 3, located approximately by the little finger of the left, top hand and index finger of the bottom, right hand respectively. Sensors might instead (or in addition to) be placed about these fingers if desired. These can also be very strategic and important sensor data collection points. Under certain conditions, data from sensors placed more toward the perimeters of the gripping structure of a golfer might tend to show larger differences in movement(s) and/or position(s) between the hands than when sensors are placed more in the centers of the hands. But such a feature may actually be desirable at times.
Other sensor locations may be used as desired. As seen in the above embodiment, sensors are not required to be placed at identical or even similar locations about each hand and may be placed where preferred. While trying to place sensors at desired locations as accurately as possible is always important and reasonably should produce more precise data and results, it is noted here that hand relationships relative to each other are generally anticipated to be more useful of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device than absolute measurements. In light of this, a taring feature via software programming that can electronically align the hands at the start of a measuring process (even though the hands might not actually physically be that way) is expected to be fairly regularly utilized. And in some circumstances such a feature could help to somewhat diminish any sensor placement errors.
Securing sensors 56 about the hands of a subject being measured can be heavily dependent upon factors including though not limited to the sizes, shapes, weights, and/or other configuration types of the sensors and/or where it is determined to place the sensors about the hands. General objectives if mechanically attaching a sensor 56 to any part(s) of a hand are to secure the sensor in a manner(s) that minimizes any sensor movement(s) and/or position(s) not corresponding with any movement(s) and/or position(s) of the hand part(s) the sensor is attached to, and minimizes any interference from the sensor and/or sensor attachment that might detract from complete freedom of movement(s) and/or position(s) of all parts of the hand. Better accomplishing such objectives can help to produce more reliable data.
For a sensor 56 attached to the back of a hand, a few possible attaching options might be but not be limited to adhesives and/or adhesive tapes of various types that might be reusable or replaced with every use, Velcro or other types of fabric attaching system where parts of the system might be located on both the sensor casing and hand (adhesives might also be involved here), straps/bands, subject to an additional device objective(s) stated below, snaps, braces, or combinations of any of the above. While an off-the-shelf solution cannot be ruled out, a specifically designed mechanism(s) or any part(s) thereof for sensor attachment to the back of a hand that more precisely takes into account sensor dimensions and sensor placement on the hand as examples would feasibly help to achieve golf grip hand structure efficiency device and device use objectives better.
Very broadly, the smaller and/or lighter sensor units 56 can be, the more effective any given type of fastening system might generally be and/or the more options there may be toward effective types of fastening systems. So such an objective would reasonably be a constant goal for sensor design and construction for a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, not ruling out the use of a wired sensor(s) for instance.
A known swing analysis application, which uses a similar sensor hardware device attached in substantially the same location, has a glove being worn by a golfer. The sensor device attaches to a Velcro-type mechanism located about the back of the glove and hand when the glove is worn, a common type of golf glove fastening mechanism. Golf gloves are specialty gloves worn by many (though not all) golfers that might be helpful some toward playing the game. But such gloves are typically worn only on the top gripping hand 22. Thus, for a golf grip hand structure efficiency device implementing such a fastening system, it might be a very awkward sensation for countless golfers to wear such a glove on the bottom hand 20. And this in turn may influence unwanted changes to gripping and/or swinging structures.
Other aspects of glove use, including but not limited to a potentially inadequate hand fit to begin with aside from any sensor attachment aspects, may also diminish the overall effectiveness of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device in various ways. Nevertheless, a glove(s) with a sensor(s) externally attached to it, or even sewn within it as another of numerous possible glove embodiments, may be implemented for either or both hands. The latter might sometimes be referred to as virtual-reality-type gloves worn on both hands. This can be quite different from the possible wearing of a golf-glove-style glove(s) as discussed above, with virtual-reality-type apparel (including gloves) generally having uncounted motion and/or position sensors permanently or portably contained in and/or on it, often wired in nature but wireless seems to be becoming more common. Such a sensor glove system might potentially be modified for use as a golf grip hand structure efficiency device in order to effectively provide the relevant data for analysis. An efficiently performing glove embodiment design might be possible.
Yet another possibility might include but not be limited to an adjustable strap, elastic band, or similar in nature that is temporarily or permanently secured about sensor 56 and also secured about all or part of a hand in order to keep the sensor firmly in place throughout the course of a swing about the back of the hand or other determined location. However, and for a reason(s) stated further below, any part(s) of a sensor fastening system that encroaches anywhere upon the inside part(s) of a hand might diminish the versatility of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device somewhat. Because the hands can move independently below the joints of the wrists, sensors should fundamentally never be placed at or above the joints of the wrists, as that defeats the purpose of the device and using the device as designed. Of course an aspect like user convenience of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, not limited to any discomfort and/or other undesirable effects regarding elements of adhesive use on the hand(s), is reasonably an important aspect to take into consideration.
Briefly mentioning one other type of hardware that could potentially be used as a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, there is a wireless sensor ring that can be worn on a finger of a hand and where orientation movement(s) and/or position(s) of such a ring might be tracked. In using two such rings for tracking each hand independently and subject to other objectives discussed, the rings might be placed on the index finger of the right hand (62 of FIG. 2) and the little finger of the left hand (64 of FIG. 2). These are two valid locations that can be determined separately (though not the only possible valid locations) from which to obtain orientation movement(s) and/or position(s) data about each hand independently. And such locations might be less intrusive with less potential toward negatively altering gripping and/or swinging structures than other locations. Other types of hardware and/or hardware configurations may also be suitable for, may be considered for, and may be implemented as desired for use as a golf grip hand structure efficiency device.
One possible advantage of the embodiment of FIG. 5, and with sensors 56 being situated about the outsides of the hands, can be being able to more easily swing with a golf club device in hand as well. While not necessary in order to use a golf grip hand structure efficiency device extremely effectively, being able to swing with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device alone and no other object(s) in or about the hands, and also being able to swing with the device while simultaneously adding a golf club device in hand, can help provide some valuable supplemental information to work with beyond what might be referencing a predeveloped chart alone for determining certain solutions. While a suitable design of the embodiment of FIG. 4 can enable a variation of largely the same functionality, particular inconvenience(s) and/or limitation(s) might increase. As examples, sensors 52 may need to be alternated between the end sections 48 of the golf grip hand structure efficiency device and comparable locations on a golf club device (unless additional sensors are utilized), and/or sensor placement options about the insides of the hands might be more limited in nature unless dimensions of the sensor(s) are smaller than those usually seen currently.
But alternately, attaching sensors 52 onto sections 48 of the embodiment of FIG. 4 and/or a golf club device might result in more accurate and/or accordant data regarding actual hand movement(s) and/or position(s) than attaching sensors 56 onto the backs of the hands in the embodiment of FIG. 5. Both embodiments are extremely viable as golf grip hand structure efficiency devices, with the full extent of pluses and minuses of each embodiment not yet fully known.
Any measurement(s) taken and/or analyzed under the condition of simultaneously using a golf grip hand structure efficiency device (or part[s] of the device) and a golf club device is considered to be baseline information and data regarding a golfer's gripping and/or swinging structures. One benefit of obtaining baseline data and related analysis information is to potentially help reveal any nuances or patterns in the gripping and/or swinging structures of individuals and/or even groups of golfers to be able to reference. Such nuances or patterns might be present even where grip sections of golf club devices are substantially straight and rigid and strongly influence the hands to substantially align in a comparable manner that. Such information might for instance help supplement any reference chart information developed to help determine a golfer's gripping efficiency value, a chart that otherwise may have to be depended upon more blindly. Circumstances that can be extreme, unique, and/or extenuating in nature will oftentimes be encountered during analysis. Especially under such circumstances, predeveloped chart information used for reference, no matter how good it might otherwise be, might be very inaccurate and/or insufficient.
But baseline data and related analysis information concerning the gripping and/or swinging structures of a golfer(s) could still comprise valuable supplemental reference information even under more normal analysis circumstances. Baseline data and related information can be pursued either before or after pursuing data and related information using a golf grip hand structure efficiency device alone and the two compared as desired. Notwithstanding any potential benefits, it is pointed out here that as a whole the value of baseline data and related information is still rather limited in its scope of usefulness. This is in view of the fact that there is still literally no such thing as a perfectly fit and/or made golf club device for any golfer. And such attributes can commonly influence the creation of unreliable and untrue data of greatly varying and unknown amounts even for baseline gripping and/or swinging structures of golfers. (This might possibly be mitigated some by one highly skilled regarding proper swing and/or clubfitting principles and practices, but with no assurances as to how much). This must be kept firmly in mind if considering pursuing any optional baseline data and analysis information for reference. Supplemental baseline gripping and/or swinging structure information may be applied in any manner(s) preferred.
Pursuing optional baseline data for reference might help toward better determining solutions for a golf grip hand structure efficiency value for a golfer and, if further pursued, whether the golfer should create a base swing using a hands-only or golf-grip-substitute-aided gripping structure as examples. However, due to the uniqueness of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and its operational principles, part of which can include optional unique baseline data and related analysis, such baseline data, perhaps gathered and/or analyzed in a somewhat different manner(s), might be instrumental toward also improving swing instruction, golf club devices (including but not limited to golf clubs, golf club components, and golf grip substitutes), testing devices including reference materials toward obtaining solutions, and more.
Attention is now turned to software features associated with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device to aid in obtaining the desired solution(s). As noted earlier, this disclosure will largely describe one particular measurement parameter for more simplicity in describing the device, that being a three-dimensional orientation value produced through the use of an orientation-type sensor.
However, any other predetermined parameter(s) may be measured and utilized instead of or in addition to orientation values of the hands in order to acquire desired data and help arrive at a desired solution(s). And the data and solution(s) largely sought from a golf grip hand structure efficiency device comprise, simultaneously measuring the movement(s) and position(s) of each hand of a golfer independently at one or more determined points of a swing, sometimes under different specified swing conditions for comparing with other specified swing conditions, displaying the measurements in a determined form(s) as comparative hand measurements relative to each other, and determining a solution(s) based on the comparative hand measurements relative to each other in the form of a golf grip hand structure efficiency value for the golfer. A further feature(s) might recommend, based on the golfer's determined golf grip hand structure efficiency value, whether the golfer might best create his/her base gripping and swinging structures using a hands-only or golf-grip-substitute-aided gripping structure for further use in applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes.
While the application may be attempted in essentially real time, it is not mandatory and hand movement(s) and/or position(s) data from a swing may be recorded and analyzed at a later time. A golf grip hand structure efficiency value is a newly developed parameter or specification previously not provided by any previous device. Additional software features might include an ability for a user to input measurements not limited to where the locations of any or all sensors are along the length of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, where sensors are located in relation to a golfer's gripping structure, and/or the span of the gripping structure. For any golf club device(s) used, various parameter values of the device(s) such as its length, grip size, and/or swingweight as just a few possible examples might be input and analyzed and might be helpful toward determining a desired solution(s).
Fundamental orientation values as described might appear on a visual monitor as just a simulated pair of individual hands remaining attached to and rotating around a determined point(s) on the monitor, changing orientations around that point(s) over the course of a swing. This alone would be a highly successful implementation of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, with simulated hands that might be represented by line vectors, hand representations, sensor representations, or many other possibilities as preferred. More advanced operation as technology allows might also comprise hardware and/or software capable of providing accurate motion tracking, location(s) in space, and/or other very useful data regarding the hands and more. With the availability of such parameters, a graphical representation might be formed that more closely and realistically reproduces the actual swing of a golfer from beginning through end (at least the movements and positions of the hands for our purposes) instead of viewing the hands more simply just rotating around a stationary point(s) on the monitor. Being able to include such a feature might help the analysis and/or understanding of data measured by the device.
A very rudimentary software application might compute just an average or maximum differential in measured orientations of the hands relative to each other over one or more determined points of a swing, with the hand orientations relative to each other before the swing begins being relevant (see further below). A more involved application, however, might comprise a more detailed analysis that would presumably lead to more accurate results and solutions. Such an analysis might include though not be limited to when and where any differentials in hand orientations occur throughout the course of a swing, how much any orientation differential is at any given point, in which direction(s) and/or directional plane(s) any differentials are taking place, how abruptly or subtly any differentials increase and/or decrease, how long any specific differentials last, and more. Visual and/or other graphical representations of the data may be included as part of an analysis, where such visual aids might help in analyzing, explaining, and/or understanding what is taking place and perhaps why, which in turn might help determine the best solution(s) to proceed with.
I turn here to a brief discussion of taring and/or calibration features (whichever might be technically more proper in view of the context) for potentially being able to use a golf grip hand structure efficiency device more efficiently. The following is mainly discussed in terms of utilizing multiple sensor units, but elements can also apply where only a single senor unit is utilized. Due to numerous factors involved in the placement(s) of sensors, sensor units will rarely if ever be aligned on a subject at the start of a swing in a manner(s) that might make a subsequent swing analysis extremely efficient. In addition to pointing in different directions, sensors might be turned so that their natural or default x, y, and z measurement planes are not aligned with each other, which might cause errors in measurements and/or confusions during an analysis.
So taring and/or calibration features that if and when enabled might electronically realign sensors at the start of a swing in a desired manner(s) could be convenient features to have. Even though they may not physically be, sensors might appear to be aligned with each other in the same directions and/or along the same measurement planes at the start of a swing, with subsequent measurements over the course of a swing based on the tared and/or calibrated/recalibrated sensor alignments. This might help toward better analyzing sensor movement(s) and/or position(s) once a swing commences. If not available, differences in sensor alignments right before the start of a swing might have to be determined, and then all other sensor measurements throughout the course of a swing adjusted by the determined amount(s) in order to accurately observe and analyze sensor movement(s) and/or position(s) in the direction(s) and/or amount(s) as they occur over the course of a swing. While the discussion as continued below is described in terms of a taring feature, in view of this information the term calibration or recalibration may be substituted if more appropriate.
An important and helpful feature for a golf grip hand structure efficiency device that might be implemented with hardware and/or software where possible would be a taring feature that can provide a starting point of electronically aligning sensors in a determined manner even if they are not physically aligned in such a manner (to potentially help an analysis under conditions of any unintended sensor placement errors and/or naturally occurring phenomena as examples). To illustrate, by way of a taring feature, sensors 56 of FIG. 5 might be electronically aligned at the start of a swing so that they both appear to be aligned in exactly the same direction even though physically they would commonly not be. And from there, all movements and/or positions of the sensors/hands throughout the course of a swing would be calculated as deviations away from the tared positions. This can be a valuable and convenient feature for aiding in an analysis. Without such a feature, countless situations would arise where naturally occurring sensor/hand orientation differentials would exist and be measured/calculated even before a swing begins, and then all further measurements/calculations throughout the course of a swing would have to be adjusted based on what the initial measurements/calculations were in order to perform certain comparisons and analyses more efficiently.
Variances in starting sensor placement(s) and/or alignment(s) are broadly not to be considered deficiencies in the testing equipment, process, and/or golfers. They are instead natural occurrences, inconsistencies, and nuances where if they could be adjusted for, any analysis could be potentially better and more efficient. A taring feature could help accomplish this. Even the embodiment of FIG. 4 can be subject to natural nuances, where some degree of deforming of the device even at the start can commonly take place within a golfer's gripping structure largely due to its center section 46, and sensors might not be placed exactly the same each time. Plus golfers in general usually have different hand positions when forming their gripping structures, thus placing sensors in countless different starting positions and alignments even if placed at the same location about the hands of every golfer.
Various shapes of various hands and resultant placement differences of sensors can easily change the starting positions of sensors relative to each other. Even for the same golfer the positions of sensors about the hands, even starting positions before the golfer even commences his or her swing, can indeed be quite different when only a golf grip hand structure efficiency device is used compared with when a golf club device is used. These natural occurrences can possibly cause delays, inaccuracies, confusion, and/or more when trying to determine a solution(s) most accurately. Hand orientation differentials at one or more points of a swing might be calculated as being inefficient and/or misaligned when that might not be so because there might be a significant hand differential right at address before the swing even begins and not properly taken into account.
A taring feature could potentially help a noticeable amount with this, where it might aid in better analyzing, explaining, and/or understanding what is taking place and perhaps why, which in turn might help determine the best solution(s). Still, there might be legitimate instances where such a taring feature may not want to be enabled in order to analyze a specific element(s) that perhaps just cannot be effectively analyzed when such a feature is enabled. This might be more prevalent but not limited to wanting a more detailed and advanced analysis for deeper learning and/or research purposes in one or more areas, where such a feature might actually get in the way. A taring feature might be enabled and disabled in various manners, and possibly differently for different embodiments of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device.
Some preliminary research and testing might be done to develop at least one criterion to be integrated into software related to the device. A selection of golfers might be thoroughly examined for any swing performance differences when alternating between using only a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and only a golf grip substitute device as just one possibility, with all other testing conditions kept the same as closely as possible. It might be generally found that differences in swing performance begin to be observed among golfers whose measurements using the golf grip hand structure efficiency device show a differential in the orientations of the hands of about three degrees at one or more measured points of tested swings compared with swing performance when using the golf grip substitute device (which forces the hands to have more consistent alignments relative to each other throughout). Reference axes 38 and 40 of FIG. 3 if desired, and consider measurable differences in swing performance to occur for golfers whose angles between the axes measure at least three degrees at one or more measured points of swings.
Detecting differences in golfer swing performance when working to establish any such criterion might be accomplished through any number of analysis means. This can include but is not at all restricted to video analysis (with or without any aiding computer software), various other sensor types, some of which might be unobtrusively placed directly on a golfer to measure and/or analyze swing performance (also commonly accompanied by aiding computer software), direct visual observation by a qualified individual, and/or golfer swing feel, detailed more thoroughly in prior art. Expanding slightly here regarding sensor types, there are more and more virtual-reality-type sensors becoming available, with numerous such sensors commonly being simultaneously placed on various parts of a golfer's body, or even worn as a type of specialized body apparel. Such sensors or sensor systems might be wired or wireless in nature and may potentially be helpful toward determining how various hand orientation changes, directions, differentials, relationships, and more relate to various other swing performance changes. While possibly very valuable in this regard, it is currently not well known how much such sensor configurations may negatively affect a golfer's swing that might otherwise be unaffected by such sensors.
In this example, it was judged on the whole that for golfers who exhibited hand orientation differentials of at least three degrees at one or more measured points of their swings when using a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, as compared with their baseline swings when using a golf grip substitute device, these golfers had at least one swing performance change determined to be detrimental in nature compared with golfers having hand orientation differentials of less than three degrees under otherwise like testing conditions.
It might be determined based on such testing that for golfers who exhibit three degrees or more of hand orientation differential at one or more measured points of their swings when using a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, they cannot really have their swings befittingly compared against anyone (including their own when using a golf club device) having hand orientation differentials of less than three degrees unless and until a specified protocol(s) is followed. Stated somewhat more generally, swings where the hands move in directions not unified with each other and not operating together more as a single unified unit at as little as one point of the swing cannot be logically compared with swings where the hands are more unified in nature from the start through the end of the swings (by way of an efficient hands-only gripping structure or the use of a golf club device for instance). And one critical parameter and parameter value is how much measured/calculated differential there can be between the hands before any detrimental swing changes take place for a golfer (compared with the golfer's swing when his/her hand structuring is forced to be more unified in nature).
Thus, a foundational criterion might be established, where hand orientation differentials of three degrees or more at one or more determined points of a golfer's swing, as measured with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, would generally indicate that the golfer should utilize a golf grip substitute device in the creation of his or her base gripping and swinging structures for further use in applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes as desired. It might be determined that this would create the best, truest, and most consistent base gripping and swinging structures the golfer can create and perform. Alternately, hand orientation differentials of less than three degrees at one or more determined points of a golfer's swing, as measured with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, would generally indicate that the golfer should utilize a hands-only gripping structure in the creation of his or her base gripping and swinging structures for further use in applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes as desired. It might be determined that this would create the best, truest, and most consistent base gripping and swinging structures the golfer can create and perform.
It is distinctly noted here that the degree figures presented are merely for illustrative purposes. Different golf swing improvement and/or clubfitting methods or systems may have goals, priorities, and/or procedures that are quite different from one another. And any criterion established as a guideline for use with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device could, for many various reasons, be quite different from one such method or system to the next. A criterion that may be more complex or advanced in nature for example might be established where hand orientation differentials have varying degrees of importance at various points of a swing.
It might be determined that a new, extremely critical golf swing parameter is to be developed, named a golf grip hand structure efficiency value of or for a golfer for illustrative purposes, and that one possible design of the new parameter shall comprise values tied to hand orientation differential angle measurements/calculations of golfers at one or more determined points of their swings. It might be determined to initially provide golf grip hand structure efficiency values in terms of percentages, and based on research and testing it might be determined that hand orientation differential measurements/calculations of zero degrees at any given point of a swing shall be assigned a hand structure efficiency value of 100%. And from there, for every one degree of hand orientation differential measured/calculated at any given point of a swing, the hand structure efficiency value shall be reduced by 10%.
Based on these criteria and in referencing potential preliminary research and testing described, the swings of golfers in general started to show signs of deteriorating swing structures at hand structure efficiency values of about 70%. This value might be an initially recommended cutoff point. In addition to calculating and providing a golf grip hand structure efficiency value as indicated, related software might also be programmed to calculate and provide a result of recommending the use of a golf grip substitute device (which would be expected to raise the golf grip hand structure efficiency value) in the creation of base gripping and swinging structures for golfers having hand structure efficiency values of less than 70%. And the software program would alternately recommend the use of hands-only base gripping and swinging structures for golfers having calculated hand structure efficiency values 70% or higher.
These elements might be integral parts of a golf grip hand structure efficiency software application, designed for use with measurements obtained from a golf grip hand structure efficiency hardware device. Such software may be integrated as part of a golf grip hand structure hardware/software device, and/or the software application might be made as a supplementary yet stand-alone application available separately from the hardware device. Various software embodiments comprising various features might be developed for use with various hardware embodiments and their various features.
Based upon these particular disclosures, it might subsequently be determined as further advancement to redefine or more narrowly define the terms base grip(ping) and/or swing(ing) structures, for instance amending the terms to be defined as such only when a gripping structure efficiency value is at or above a certain percentage in addition to and/or in place of any other term(s) definition requirements.
With that, a somewhat simple example of using the device is now presented. 66 of FIG. 6 is a larger cutaway of 66 as presented in FIGS. 7 through 18. FIG. 6 shows a golfer's hands along with the use of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device intended to substantially replicate the embodiment of FIG. 5. While FIGS. 7 through 18 are shown in terms of using the embodiment of FIG. 5, the embodiment of FIG. 4 could very certainly be used instead, so I first briefly return here to that embodiment. In referencing FIG. 4 along with FIG. 3, the golf grip hand structure efficiency device of FIG. 4 would be placed within and through the hands of FIG. 3 in substantially the same manner as golf club device 54 within and through the hands of FIG. 5.
The center section 46 of the golf grip hand structure efficiency device embodiment of FIG. 4 and the device's centerline 44 should be substantially aligned with 68 of FIG. 3, along which is determined to be a functional pivot point about which the two hands can fundamentally move independently of each other. Depending upon gripping structure elements that can vary, the actual functional pivot point may be somewhat higher or lower along the length of the gripping structure than 68 of FIG. 3 indicates, and adjustments can be made as warranted. Putting sensors 52 momentarily aside, the golf grip hand structure efficiency device should ideally extend at least totally through the span of the hands, the span boundaries marked as 70 and 72 of FIG. 3, with too short generally being more harmful than too long respecting obtaining measurements having the most relevancy and accuracy for analysis.
Still keeping sensors 52 aside, a device length extending substantially beyond a gripping structure at either or both ends might influence undesirable changes and/or inconsistencies in a golfer's gripping and/or swinging structures, potentially even unconscious changes. I will use an early dimension here of up to two inches past either or both ends as being reasonable toward not detrimentally interfering with a golfer's gripping and/or swinging structures. An adjustment(s) can be made to the dimension as necessitated. Provided that essential operation of the device is not compromised (such as moving its flexible center section 46 so much that it is no longer placed substantially at the functional pivot point about the hands), placing any unneeded length of the device so that it protrudes more out and away from the bottom of the gripping structure 72 might be preferable. The top of the gripping structure 70 is typically moved about much closer to the rest of the body, and any unneeded length of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device protruding from the top of the gripping structure 70 can generally be interfered with more easily and with potentially more detrimental effects.
Placing the base of the FIG. 4 embodiment of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device (the embodiment but minus sensors 52) within any otherwise hands-only gripping structure might commonly result in some amount of deformation of the device base (whereas there would commonly be no such deformation of a golf club device placed within a gripping structure). Such deformation can be brought about by certain unique alterations that might somewhat involuntarily occur when moving from a gripping structure formed using a golf club device to a gripping structure formed using a hands-only structure, described in more detail in prior art. This is not a deficiency in the device, testing process, and/or golfer. In fact, such deformation and process can be considered efficiencies, and use of the device may help a golfer to subsequently develop hands-only gripping and/or swinging structures more effectively.
The amount and/or type of deformation along the length of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device could vary considerably from golfer to golfer based on individual golfer nuances even for the same device design. Such deformation is actually considered a good feature that supports a goal of accomplishing minimal interference of the device on the gripping and/or swinging structures of golfers in order to help bring out their truest and most unaffected gripping and/or swinging structure performances. With its advantages noted earlier, a taring feature could electronically realign sensors of a device initially deformed to make the sensors initially appear aligned, and from there vital measurements can still take place very soundly and in a manner that can help certain comparative analyses become easier and better understood.
In referencing FIG. 3 once again, choosing a length of the golf grip hand structure efficiency device of FIG. 4 needs to be determined. If no sensors 54 are considered yet, the device would be placed within the hands of a golfer or other subject and a length chosen, if an option, that completely covers the span of the gripping structure from 70 to 72, with as little as possible beyond that to prevent the device from interfering with any elements of the gripping and/or swinging structures. Though not always, the distance between 70 and 72 can sometimes increase slightly for various reasons when actually performing a swing, though this is not normally expected to be much (perhaps no more than one-half inch in total) unless the gripping and/or swinging structures are more unusual. So allowing a small amount extra for this when examining any initial gripping structure might be a good idea, or some practice swings might be made with the device before a length is determined to see if any adjustment(s) might be made in that regard.
With various basics of the device now detailed, any final length adjustments and sensor attachments can be proceeded with. Depending on the size of sensors 56, enough device length must be provided beyond 70 and 72 to firmly attach the sensors to, as close as possible to 70 and 72, yet not right up against the hands to where the hands cannot move freely and even naturally expand some over the course of a swing as the case may be. So a small gap might best be left between the hand structuring and sensors 56, and experience is really the best for determining how much regarding this. The outer sections 48 of the device might be adjustable to be no more than needed to accommodate sensors 56. Depending on the exact design of the device, outer sections 48 might be portably adjusted for each golfer with components that may be assembled and disassembled, trimmed on a one-time personal basis for an individual user, or adjustable in some other determined manner(s). Of course if the device(s) is nonadjustable but comes in different lengths, then the best length can be chosen. Sensors 56 are then attached to the outer sections 48 just above 70 and just below 72 as viewed in FIG. 3, two good locations (though not the only good locations) from which to gather relevant measurements. Such locations may tend to maximize measured/calculated hand orientation differentials when compared with other measuring locations.
Next reference sequential FIGS. 7 through 12 and initially note some of the following. While the golf club device 74 in FIG. 7 (the same golf club device is used throughout the sequence) might be deemed to be excellently fit and constructed for the golfer, this is nevertheless always an unknown to some degree. Thus, and while optional as mentioned earlier, this particular sequence comprises the measuring of some baseline data for the golfer, which if done may be done before or after swinging with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device alone. In this particular sequence, both a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and a golf club device are used simultaneously. If desired, envision the golf grip hand structure efficiency device embodiment of FIG. 4 being used instead of the embodiment of FIG. 5 as pictured. Both are equally possible.
For the embodiment of FIG. 4, however, in order to obtain baseline data regarding the golfer's gripping and/or swinging structures, the device in its current form would feasibly need to be attached to golf club device 74, where thereafter the golfer may perform his gripping and swinging structures in order to obtain some baseline information. This might be somewhat inconvenient and raise a question(s) regarding how the gripping and/or swinging structures of the golfer might be adversely affected. But given that it is done for baseline data that is not imperative and to broadly comparatively reference against other data, data obtained through such a setup might still be more advantageous than disadvantageous. Alternately and if portable, just sensors 52 might be attached to golf club device 74 for the purpose of obtaining baseline data in locations comparative to where they would be positioned when attached to the base of the embodiment of FIG. 4. Other techniques may be used as desired toward obtaining the best baseline swing data possible.
Next, temporarily visualize the elimination of both FIG. 4 and FIG. 5 embodiments in FIGS. 7 through 12 and instead the use of a video camera obtaining the sequence shown through its data. While perhaps not as ideal for a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, it is nevertheless a potential hardware/software embodiment if desired. A software programming type commonly known as computer vision might for example be able to zoom in on or isolate the gripping structure 66 in all but FIG. 12 and return very satisfactory results, optionally including adding computer-generated graphics of measured hand orientations superimposed on the actual video and/or video images, which in a certain way(s) might help toward analyzing, explaining, and/or understanding what is taking place better than other embodiments. It is further pointed out here that, while at least a second camera can be placed, in a down-the-line or flight-line view as one example (not shown), and data from the cameras coordinated or synced to obtain more comprehensive three-dimensional data and analysis, three-dimensional data is not required. Measuring/calculating and analyzing hand orientation differentials in just two dimensions (as FIG. 7 though 12 are), from a desired viewing direction(s), and along just one plane in space, is still a highly effective unique embodiment of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device.
Regardless of what form of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device may be implemented, and if available as a feature, one of the first things that might oftentimes be done after the device is placed appropriately about a golfer may be to enable a taring feature. This would commonly apply any time the device is used. This might be done essentially just before the golfer commences a swing, which would be in FIG. 7 and just momentarily moving ahead also in FIG. 13. A taring feature could help to eliminate or minimize any subtleties (or larger) of the golfer, any devices utilized over the course of measuring and analyzing, any errors in utilizing the device(s), and more. It could electronically realign all sensors to be in alignment with either other and/or a determined reference point when the sensors are not in actual physical alignment with each other and/or a determined reference point. While the device can certainly be used without enabling such a taring feature, and at times that might be advantageous, any alignment discrepancies among the sensors/hands/orientations before a swing even starts would have to be carefully noted and then corresponding adjustments made to all subsequent measurements and/or results occurring throughout the course of the swing for the most effective analysis to take place. (A different feature[s] may exist that might be implemented in addition to and/or in place of taring to help address the condition[s] described).
In returning to FIGS. 7 through 12 as presented and also referencing FIGS. 13 through 18 now, a testing sequence(s) of a first golfer is considered. Some baseline data is gathered and analyzed for swing positions FIGS. 7 through 12, with the golfer simultaneously using a golf grip hand structure efficiency device (comprising two orientation sensors placed on the backs of the golfer's hands as in 66) and a golf club device 74. A tare function is enabled when the golfer is approximately in the position of FIG. 7, and based upon or relative to the tared sensor orientations, sensor orientations are subsequently measured about each hand independently at the various swing positions. A comparative analysis of the measurements might show hand orientation differentials of no more than two degrees at any of the swing positions, and no unusual matters of concern are found, so it is determined that predeveloped chart recommendations can be followed for the golfer's swing when using a golf grip hand structure efficiency device alone.
The golf club device 74 is removed and the golfer proceeds to form his gripping structure using only the golf grip hand structure efficiency device (66 of FIG. 13). The tare function is enabled again and the golfer proceeds to make a swing using only the golf grip hand structure efficiency device. Sensor orientations are subsequently measured about each hand independently at the various swing positions of FIGS. 14 through 18. A comparative analysis of the measurements might show that, along any and all planes in space determined to be analyzed, the hand orientation differentials of the golfer still reach a maximum of just two degrees among all of the swing positions. Thus, the golfer's golf grip hand structure efficiency value is determined to be 80%, and it is further recommended that the golfer should best use a hands-only gripping structure in the creation of his/her base gripping and swinging structures used in applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes.
The testing of a second golfer yields somewhat different results. Returning to FIGS. 7 through 12 again, some baseline data is also gathered for this golfer, using the same procedure as that applied to the first golfer as described above. The results obtained might be quite comparable to that obtained for the first golfer. Such results may indicate that measured/calculated hand orientation differentials for the second golfer are also no more than two degrees at any of the swing positions in the sequence. This may not be unusual for a large number of golfers, as when using a golf club device 74, which traditionally provides a substantially straight and rigid object that is common to both hands of golfers, the hands are basically forced to remain in alignment with and relative to each other throughout the course of a swing. And with no unusual matters of concern found in the baseline data and/or any other performance factors regarding the second golfer either, it is determined that predeveloped chart guidelines can also be followed regarding the swing data of the second golfer when using a golf grip hand structure efficiency device alone.
The golf club device 74 is removed and the second golfer proceeds to form his gripping structure using only the golf grip hand structure efficiency device (66 of FIG. 13). The tare function might be enabled if available (though not required for golf grip hand structure efficiency device operation) and the golfer proceeds to make a swing using only the golf grip hand structure efficiency device. Sensor orientations are then measured about each hand independently at the various swing positions of FIGS. 14 through 18. The measurements are compared. In this case for the second golfer, the analysis turns out rather differently. While some swing positions such as those of FIGS. 14 and 16 might have calculated results of acceptable hand orientation differentials, the swing positions of FIGS. 15 and 17 might have calculated results of hand orientation differentials of as much as five degrees along at least one plane in space determined to be analyzed. Reference FIG. 3 as needed, axis lines 38 and 40, and visualize an angle between them 76 that can vary in value (hand orientation differential value) as discussed and how variances in the value of the angle could detrimentally affect a swing structure in various manners and to varying degrees. The swing positions of FIGS. 15 and 17 are positions where various additional and/or different stresses might potentially be placed upon the hand gripping structure, thus the hands may be more prone to moving independently of one another.
Therefore, if applying a protocol where the golf grip hand structure efficiency value is equal to the largest hand differential calculated, then the second golfer's hand structure efficiency value is determined to be only 50%. And predeveloped guidelines recommend that the golfer should utilize a golf grip substitute device (in order to help improve that value) in the creation of the golfer's base gripping and swinging structures needed in applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes. It is expected based on these test results that the second golfer will create and perform his/her best, truest, and most consistent base gripping and swinging structures when using a golf grip substitute device, while the first golfer will create and perform his/her best, truest, and most consistent base gripping and swinging structures when using a hands-only gripping structure. The reasoned and calculated base gripping and swinging structures created and performed by each of the golfers and that are required within applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting methods/processes can be utilized as such in order to help each golfer achieve the best results possible. Descriptions regarding golf grip substitute devices and applicable swing development and golf club fitting methods/processes are more appropriately detailed in prior art.
Generally speaking, the use of a golf grip substitute device can be acutely helpful and essentially mandatory for many golfers in order to be able to reasonably compare their swings to the swings of others (others who by design would typically need to meet a minimum golf grip hand structure efficiency value requirement within applicable swing development/improvement and/or clubfitting processes). However, the use of a golf grip substitute device can have drawbacks and be detrimental if used when such a device is not really warranted and the hands already function well together as a single unified unit throughout the course of a swing when using a hands-only gripping structure. This can be true even if, for instance, testing a golfer reveals a hand structure efficiency value when using a golf grip substitute device equal to or greater than a hand structure efficiency value when using a hands-only gripping structure. Any effects would be largely dependent on the exact design of the particular golf grip substitute device utilized, of which there can be various designs. So any number of device features could potentially adversely affect a golfer's gripping and/or swinging structures compared with what those structures would be if such a device were not really needed and the golfer used a hands-only gripping structure.
For the very best results in any further swing improvement and/or clubfitting process, a golfer of any ability should always be tested (or retested as applicable) with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device before any such process begins. Any new or changed data or other information from any previous testing could potentially critically affect one or more steps in a subsequent process and greatly affect results. Such data or other information is not simply limited to whether a hands-only or golf-grip-substitute-aided gripping structure should be used at the time of testing (and this can certainly change over time). Even a relatively small change in a golfer's hand structure efficiency value could for instance result in important differences in one or more steps of an applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting method/process. Such changes might occur very slowly over time or might occur very rapidly, and in either case they might not be noticed or recognized unless and until ascertained through testing or retesting. Just a few select examples of such commonly occurring changes are changes in the gripping and/or swinging structures of a golfer (potentially unnoticed), modifications and/or improvements in golf grip hand structure efficiency device hardware and/or related software, and/or changes in guidelines for using the device and/or applying its results.
For anybody who might be tested perhaps only once for a golf grip hand structure efficiency value, and the determined value or any data thereof related to the value is used in any subsequent swing development/improvement and/or clubfitting methods and/or processes, no matter how many in number, it is rightly reasoned that a golf grip hand structure efficiency device has been used as part of each and every such method/process.
Here the operation of a software application related to a golf grip hand structure efficiency device is broadly described. For illustrative purposes, the hardware used comprises two sensors 56 placed on the backs of the hands of a golfer as basically depicted in FIG. 5, but without the use of golf club device 54 so that a golf grip hand structure efficiency value can be determined for the golfer. The parameter described is a three-dimensional orientation parameter measured by or derived from data measured by the sensors. However, the parameter does not need to be an orientation parameter and/or does not need to be in three dimensions in order for the device and application to function efficiently.
The golfer's general position when just about ready to commence a swing might be comparable to that of FIG. 13, with the golfer's hand structuring comprising 66, and with a closer view in FIG. 6. With the sensors visibly physically in some misalignment with each other, a taring and/or calibration/recalibration feature is implemented and enabled within the software so that on a visual display monitor the sensors will appear and also be calculated to be in alignment with each other right before the start of the golfer's swing. Subsequent sensor/hand measurements over the course of a swing will then be based upon the taring/calibration adjustment(s). This may help in analyzing the orientation movement(s) and/or position(s) of the sensors/hands throughout the course of a swing, especially relative to each other from the start of a swing. While absolute sensor orientations relative to a determined reference point may be of great use, movement(s) and/or position(s) of the hands relative to each other over the course of a swing may be a more crucial consideration toward determining a golfer's hand structure efficiency value.
Orientations of an object as measured by and/or derived from orientation sensor data generally revolve around a single point, presumably ideally where an actual sensor component is located within the hardware device as a whole. But since the orientation of a single point cannot at least as a practical matter really be observed and/or analyzed, various graphics that can be visually observed are commonly associated with orientation sensors, such graphics typically larger in scope than and rotating around the orientation point as the orientation of the sensor/object changes. Such graphics can commonly be designed as desired, even in the shapes of hands if preferred. In this illustrative example, rather simple line vectors shall be applied, formed to represent the lengths of each hand, with each vector passing through is respective sensor orientation point. The vectors will be in the form of arrows, made to point essentially downward at the start based on the golfer's starting position of FIG. 13 (perhaps adjustable for different golfer styles) on a visual display for easier referencing and/or analysis regarding sensor/hand orientation directions over the course of a swing. For much the same reasoning, the arrows will also be given different colors and/or shapes for more easily distinguishing the hands apart.
With the placement positions of the sensors about the hands in FIG. 5 deemed to be in approximately the lengthwise centers of each hand when the gripping structure is formed, the arrows in the visual display are correspondingly made to rotate about the centers of their lengths. An option might be made available to user to adjust this feature. If, for example, sensor rings are worn on the index finger of the right hand and the little finger of the left hand instead, orientation points might be moved toward the bottom of the right-hand arrow and the top of the left-hand arrow (as viewed on the display right before the golfer is about to begin a swing), with each of the arrows rotating around its respectively chosen rotation point location to indicate sensor/hand/arrow orientations over the course of a swing.
In referencing FIG. 6 again, there is no requirement to position representative arrows on the display in locations comparative to where the sensors are about the hands, though this may certainly be done if desired. Each arrow and its respective rotation point location may be placed at any preferred location(s) on the display to suit a particular analysis that might like to be performed. In this case, and since determining the golfer's hand structure efficiency value is principally related to differential angle values between the hands relative to each other, it is decided to visually place the determined rotation point locations of each arrow directly over one another on the display. While not the only feasible location(s), it is a configuration where it can be easier to visually see any differences in orientations between the hands over the course of a swing, particularly if and when such differences might be smaller in nature, compared with if (and by how much) the arrows and their respective rotation point locations were separated more on the display. While mathematical calculations of hand angle differentials might not be affected, the visual presentation may be.
So in relating FIG. 13 to one possible configuration of a software application or embodiment to aid in determining the golfer's golf grip hand structure efficiency value, there is a two-dimensional visual display, with two line vectors configured like arrows representing the lengths of the hands, of adjusted shapes and/or colors to be able to distinguish between the hands, basically centered on the display and with determined rotation point locations along the length of each arrow placed at the same coordinates on the display, the arrows pointing downward as the golfer is about to commence a swing. With orientation measurements sought here and no travel movement(s) and/or position(s) of the hands in space otherwise demanded, the respective rotation point locations of the arrows are configured to fundamentally remain at a determined location on the display, while the remaining structures of the arrows rotate around their respective rotation point locations. If desired, a video specimen might be taken of the golfer's swing and synced to the more stationary hand orientation graphics as an example to potentially help better reference where over the course of the swing the hand orientations are what they are.
The golfer performs a swing, and three-dimensional hand measurement data provided by the sensor hardware throughout the course of the swing (including though not necessarily limited to the swing positions shown in FIGS. 14 through 18) is in this case logged or recorded. The inclusion and implementation of some sort of absolute and/or relative time code that can be associated with logged/recorded (or even real-time if applicable) data at one or more operational points of the software application is generally considered advantageous. Such reference information may be helpful toward syncing various data together, potentially resulting in better comparison(s) of the data during an analysis. The data is synced among the hands and converted into orientation values of the hands before or after recording. An analysis of the hand orientations is subsequently performed. Application software is provided that allows a user to manipulate certain swing data visualized on the two-dimensional display in a manner(s) such that various three-dimensional views/angles of the hands can be seen at various points of the swing. Playback of the recorded data might be paused or stopped at a desired point of the swing, and a desired three-dimensional view might also be rotated to on the display at the desired point of the swing.
Despite the advantageous ability to manipulate the two-dimensional display to be able to see an object from different three-dimensional perspectives, the desired view stopped at is nevertheless still a two-dimensional image or graphic, and the analysis proceeds in this two-dimensional plane. Any difference between the orientation angles of the hands at the stopped view is determined. Such a determination might be made by a computer vision type of process, where hand orientation angles are visually determined and/or compared based directly at least in part on the displayed graphics through one or more computer software processes. Alternately, using mathematical figures including though not necessarily limited to data as provided by the sensors and also potentially available regarding viewing angles rotated to by a user, a purely mathematical solution(s) might be possible and might be more accurate than a computer vision type of solution(s). A combination of these and/or any other alternatives may also be considered as desired.
If this were the only view desired for analysis for simplicity, then any calculated orientation angle difference between the hands would be considered the golf grip hand structure efficiency for the golfer, its value converted into a preferred parameter as desired. But in practice many more views would commonly be selected, where hand differential angles might be expected to vary based on different swing positions, different viewing angles of the same swing position, and countless other factors as well. Such an analysis might be performed more manually as done here for illustrative purposes, or other application software features based on the analysis outlined could quickly perform uncounted more such analyses more automatically as directed. Just one such analysis might comprise computing hand orientation differentials at uncounted different swing positions of a swing sequence from a desired viewing angle. Of course a combination of automatic and manual analysis might be utilized and may be desired under certain conditions. A calculated golf grip hand structure efficiency value for a golfer derived from analyzing a larger number of swing positions and/or viewing angles might comprise a calculated average of all or certain hand angle differentials, the largest of all hand angle differentials, or a different calculated value if preferable. In addition to various graphics being presented on the display, calculated numerical solutions and various other aiding numerical information would rather naturally also be presented on the display.
Because three-dimensional sensor data needs to in effect be converted back to two-dimensional data before a hand orientation angle differential(s) can be calculated and a golf grip hand structure efficiency value can be calculated for a golfer, utilizing just two-dimensional data to begin with can certainly be done if desired, could still work very effectively with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, and might simply some of what has been described. But with capably made hardware and/or software, the added depth, comprehensiveness, and versatility of data that starts in three dimensions are hard to deny and would seem to make any added hardware and/or software complexities worth the effort. If working in two dimensions for instance, two separate recordings, and from distinctly different views, and with the data from both synced well together, might be required in order to provide somewhat equivalent data to a sensor unit able to provide three-dimensional measurement data.
The software application process described portrays a feature where the hand orientations and orientation differentials at any given swing position might be rotated to and viewed from essentially an infinite number of different planes, as critical orientation relationships between the hands, even for the same stopped point of a swing, can change dramatically from one two-dimensional viewing plane to another (in a three-dimensional realm overall). While an extremely useful and perhaps more advanced feature, a more basic yet still immensely effective configuration might have a more limited number of viewing perspectives available from which to choose. In broadly applying what three-dimensional orientation sensors offer in the way of providing data along the x, y, and z planes of space, being able to view hand orientations and orientation differentials on a display along just each of these three planes for any given swing position can still be profoundly effective. This essentially amounts to hand orientation views from face-to-face, flight-line, and overhead perspectives for any given swing position of a golfer. Provided that sensors can be effectively tared and/or calibrated/recalibrated just before a golfer begins a swing, analyses from just these three planes of view may still provide superb data from which to calculate a very precise golf grip hand structure efficiency value for a golfer. And certain programming aspects might be less complex for such a software application configuration and/or embodiment.
This represents just a rather basic outline of one possible software application embodiment related to a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, where the disclosed foundation may be further built upon with various other features and operations. As only one brief example, if baseline data is also obtained for the golfer, a split-screen (or may be overlaid graphics) might be utilized on the visual display, where the golfer's baseline data might be contained on one side, and with the other side containing the golfer's data when using a golf grip hand structure efficiency only, with the two sides perhaps synced as well as possible together to aid in comparing the two specimens. I note here that one golf grip hand structure efficiency device embodiment might potentially comprise a completely self-contained unit, may be having a rather small display screen only capable of providing a numerical solution(s). But even absent a larger display screen as described and possible graphics as a result, uncounted software application structural elements disclosed would still apply.
Software application embodiments may take on forms not limited to desktop computers, phone applications, individual users, commercial users, various programming languages, and/or more as desired.
The newly introduced parameter of a golf grip hand structure efficiency and its value for a golfer, and a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, help to accurately identify the true underlying, base gripping and/or swinging structures of the golfer under the most critical of conditions in the game of golf. These conditions are when no golf club device is present about the hands that can artificially unify the hands to work basically as a single unit together throughout the course of a swing. A golf grip hand structure efficiency value for a golfer might very well be the most critical parameter value to know toward how successful the golfer may ultimately be at developing an efficient and consistent golf swing as well as how successful the golfer may be fitted for any golf clubs. Consistently knowing its value (perhaps along with certain other information not limited to where over the course of a swing its value was determined) can affect subsequent steps and be crucial toward most successfully implementing an applicable swing development/improvement and/or clubfitting process. The use of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and the solution(s) it helps to provide might also help golfers to better avoid inapplicable and far less effective and less successful swing development and/or clubfitting methods/processes.
Among other novel features, a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and its use provide new scientific measurements and solutions regarding whether a golfer should utilize a hands-only or golf-grip-substitute-aided hand gripping structure required in applicable swing improvement and/or clubfitting processes. In previous art, a systematic way of achieving this toward creating foundational base gripping and/or swinging structures for golfers was totally and conspicuously absent. Decisions that were much more subjective and vague in nature in the past can now be made more scientifically, with measurements obtained using the device, analyses performed by an associated software application(s), and any resultant guidelines developed being examples of powerful and accurate scientific tools.
Notwithstanding this, an entire book can still likely be written containing uncounted examples of potential and legitimate exceptions where developed guidelines might perhaps not be strictly adhered to. Thus, one is not strictly bound by any such developed guidelines in connection with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and its use. One may use the data, analysis, and/or any developed guidelines in any manner desired. There will likely be countless situations where guidelines indicate that a golfer should best use a hands-only gripping structure toward creating base gripping and swinging structures, yet a gripping structure that utilizes a golf grip substitute device will be chosen instead with very good reason(s). And the opposite can be reasonably expected as well. But this does not diminish in the least the importance and impact of the data, analysis, and/or guideline features provided through the use of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, and how instrumental these disclosed features are toward attaining new and/or better scientific solutions than in the past.
Various embodiments or versions of hardware and/or software associated with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device might naturally be expected to be developed over time. Referring to certain software attributes here, many people might tend to believe that higher end or more advanced operation means more automated operation. But this can be a very faulty belief. Providing options for more manual operations and/or analyses of various types might be considered more advanced in nature, and can aid in more thorough analyses and better determinations of when exceptions might be made to any developed guidelines as opposed to strictly more automated operation and perhaps just being provided with a final solution(s).
Other new types of hardware and/or software devices and/or methods might be derived and developed in association with the use of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device. Some might be used in conjunction with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device, while others might evolve into independent devices and/or methods. Very briefly describing two potentially new types of swing analysis devices/methods, the first surrounds the fact that many swing analysis devices that are sensor based use only one sensor unit and point of data measurement, attempting to reconstruct a swing from that data. But with a golf grip hand structure efficiency device using data from at least two independent data measuring points about the hands (for fundamentally a different type of analysis), such data might also be used for and result in more accurately reconstructing swings than in the past. The second surrounds the fact that most swing analysis devices/methods prominently focus and even fixate on golf club movement(s) and/or position(s) for their so-called swing analyses. So any swing analysis device and/or method derived from the use of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device would require countless new and/or revised swing analysis and/or comparison features to function aptly that are quite different in nature from any previous swing analysis devices/methods and would be more effective toward swing development/improvement.
A golf grip hand structure efficiency device can actually be used extremely effectively as a stand-alone self-improvement tool if desired, where no subsequent (formal, commercial, or the like) swing development and/or clubfitting methods/processes really need to be implemented at all. Working to improve one's own gripping structure efficiency using the device even in one's own home is essentially also working to improve one's own swinging structure. Such an embodiment of the device requires no creations of base gripping and/or swinging structures for further use and their requirements thereof, and no recommendations and/or decisions regarding whether one might best create base gripping and/or swinging structures using a golf-grip-substitute-aided or hands-only gripping structure. One more simply measures/calculates his/her gripping hand structure efficiency, works to improve it by any desired means, and retests to see how much if any improvement is achieved. This process in and of itself can help one to accomplish the best and most consistent swinging and/or clubfitting possible. Such an embodiment comprises more of a type of self-help device/tool and personal swing aid/trainer. One distinct advantage over other type of swing aids is being able to swing in one's own house without the need of swinging a golf club and the space required for that.
Self-improvement attempts regarding any golf swing and/or clubfitting elements are very common and popular endeavors that can be extremely worthwhile and successful. This is partly because many paid swing improvement and/or clubfitting entities have, with legitimate reason(s), unfortunately developed rather widespread, poor records of accomplishments and reputations over time throughout the industry, continuing to send countless golfers away swinging and/or playing notably worse instead of better. This is also partly because the game of golf can be relatively expensive to learn and/or play, yet the game would like to be learned, played, and enjoyed by many of more modest means. For these and other reasons, self-improvement attempts by golfers are expected to remain strong and perhaps become even stronger in the foreseeable future.
For putting strokes as one example, certain modifications in the use of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device might be warranted, partly but not limited to the fact that gripping structures for putting, not further detailed in this disclosure but detailed in prior art, are commonly somewhat different than for that of other golf swings. But with any such modifications, a golf grip hand structure efficiency device can be equally effective for analyzing the gripping and/or swinging structures and hand structure efficiencies of putting strokes of golfers as well, of which putting is also a very important part of the game.
FIG. 19 is a generalized flowchart comprising at least one method of using a golf grip hand structure efficiency device. It should not by any means be construed as the only possible embodiment(s) of using the device.
While computer implementation regarding any given hardware and/or software element of a golf grip hand structure efficiency device and/or method of using the device might not be required in order to ably achieve that disclosed herein, it is generally assumed that computer implementation may oftentimes result in making and/or using the device in a more efficient manner(s), and thus might be taken advantage of where possible and reasonable.
A golf grip hand structure efficiency device and/or method of using the device are disclosed that may utilize any of the embodiments, materials, components, constructions, software features, and/or configurations as described, but are not limited to that disclosed, as descriptions have been reasonably confined for illustrative purposes.

Claims

What is claimed is:

1. A hand structure efficiency device comprising:

at least one sensor, the at least one sensor configured to be disposed about the hands of a performer while performing a swing, configured so that the hands can achieve movement independently of one another throughout the course of the swing, and configured to simultaneously measure values of a predetermined parameter independently about each hand at one or more points of the swing.

2. A method comprising:

configuring a subject for measuring a value of a hand structure efficiency parameter, the parameter confining the use of any device capable of operationally linking the hands if to obtain the most valid results, allowing the hands to be moved and/or positioned substantially independently of each other throughout a predetermined activity;

disposing a hand structure efficiency device about the hands of the subject, the device configured to allow substantially independent movements and/or positions of each hand and provide sensor data independently about each hand;

measuring device data independently about each hand at one or more determined points of at least part of a predetermined activity performed by the subject;

computing differences in the sensor data about each hand at the one or more determined points of measured sensor data; and

figuring the value of the hand structure efficiency parameter of the subject using at least one of the computed differences.

3. A software process comprising:

inputting data from a hand structure efficiency device;

displaying hand orientation data of the two hands independently;

calculating a difference in angles between the two hands; and

determining a hand structure efficiency value based on the difference in angles between the two hands.