...nah I just know that this is the golfer who has made every Swede and every Scot stand proud. I can see Scottish men booking flights to Sweden as I type this.
I have to say, her launch angle seems awfully high. I suppose that if you were to make a simplifying assumption that hitting a golf ball results in parabolic flight (no air-resistance) which further can be simplified by a semicircle, then the apex would be equal to the radius. So for a 300 yard shot, again making the simplifying assumption that carry plus rollout would complete the semi-circle, what does the absence of rollout mean. It means that the ball has lost all velocity along the ground. We know this to be the effect of air-resistance as the ball is not launched vertically. This is a statement of fact that the ball is launched so high that it basically just goes up to the apex, at least, and then dies down to the ground. So not getting ANY rollout is a sign that the launch-angle is too high. And we know this well: optimal launch angle is about 30-40 degrees based on the wind, not 40, 45 even 60 deg off the tee. These shots look impressive and they are actually useful on occasion relative to a lower apex but for distance this is not what you want at all. It's too much of a launch-angle, clearly, but the question is, how much too much of a launch-angle. Well again if you assume that the flight path is semicircular then the launch angle is 45 deg. And likewise there is no rollout. But it doesn't take much to see that the flight-path can still be assumed to be semicircular just that the ground interferes before the ball reaches the opposite side of the circle and then the rollout would be the distance from the intersection with the ground to the opposite side of the hypothetical circle, if that part of the semicircle were projected up onto the ground-plane, say the cosine of that angle times the distance between the intersection and the far point of the semicircle. Just as an approximation. So it can be thought of as equally optimal to hit with a 10 deg launch angle as it would be to hit with a 60 deg launch angle and her launch angle is pretty damm close to 60 deg in quite a few of these tee-shots. The difference is that with a high launch angle you carry all of the intervening hazards that you'd have trouble with when hitting with a 10 deg launch-angle and that is clearly what her swing is tuned for. The clear downside of this is that all she needs to do is hit a shot a few degrees higher and it's going nowhere, or have the wind come up and suddenly she's having to guess where the ball is going to land. And if it comes down in soft sand it's a guaranteed fried-egg. Not to mention in thick rough or a wet fairway.
What are you talking about? (A) Your assumption that the flight of the golf ball is parabolic is demonstrably wrong, (B) you have completely ignored that her ball stops both because of its landing angle *and* backspin, and (C) it’s better for the ball to stop about where it lands on the green because you have more control over where you play your next shot. Rather than completely overthink this and try to show off what you clearly don’t understand, just watch this woman play great golf. Edit: Also, not a single one of her drives had anywhere near a 60* launch angle. At most, they might have launched as high as 13-14*. Her clubs are dialed in for her, and no one in their right mind would give her a driver that launched that high. Not even her 60* lob wedge would have a 60* launch angle, as she’s hitting down on it to compress the ball.
Men, women and children, this is the swing you want to watch before heading out to the course. Fantastic.
Nah, that swing is very dependent on timing. Looks very nice though.
...nah I just know that this is the golfer who has made every Swede and every Scot stand proud.
I can see Scottish men booking flights to Sweden as I type this.
@@xcvbxcvb2179 don’t make me laugh…. 🥴
@@xcvbxcvb2179 every swing is dependant on timing. Hers is no more so and is very simple.
You forgot Hyo Joo Kim.
Next time Linn, you went for it!
There will be many more opportunities for wins for Linn in the future. She's got game and is legit 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿🇸🇪⛳🔥
What a star and what a handsome Woman perfectly shaped.
Redicolous birdie in hole 16
Flawless swing. Just need to improve on her putting and she will win majors.
The birdie at 5:35 is 100% ridiculous. You're not supposed to do that.
เชียร์สาวไทย
"...damm, I shot another 67. Fuck."
男子プロで言うとアダムスコット的
I have to say, her launch angle seems awfully high.
I suppose that if you were to make a simplifying assumption that hitting a golf ball results in parabolic flight (no air-resistance) which further can be simplified by a semicircle, then the apex would be equal to the radius. So for a 300 yard shot, again making the simplifying assumption that carry plus rollout would complete the semi-circle, what does the absence of rollout mean. It means that the ball has lost all velocity along the ground. We know this to be the effect of air-resistance as the ball is not launched vertically. This is a statement of fact that the ball is launched so high that it basically just goes up to the apex, at least, and then dies down to the ground. So not getting ANY rollout is a sign that the launch-angle is too high. And we know this well: optimal launch angle is about 30-40 degrees based on the wind, not 40, 45 even 60 deg off the tee. These shots look impressive and they are actually useful on occasion relative to a lower apex but for distance this is not what you want at all. It's too much of a launch-angle, clearly, but the question is, how much too much of a launch-angle.
Well again if you assume that the flight path is semicircular then the launch angle is 45 deg. And likewise there is no rollout. But it doesn't take much to see that the flight-path can still be assumed to be semicircular just that the ground interferes before the ball reaches the opposite side of the circle and then the rollout would be the distance from the intersection with the ground to the opposite side of the hypothetical circle, if that part of the semicircle were projected up onto the ground-plane, say the cosine of that angle times the distance between the intersection and the far point of the semicircle. Just as an approximation. So it can be thought of as equally optimal to hit with a 10 deg launch angle as it would be to hit with a 60 deg launch angle and her launch angle is pretty damm close to 60 deg in quite a few of these tee-shots. The difference is that with a high launch angle you carry all of the intervening hazards that you'd have trouble with when hitting with a 10 deg launch-angle and that is clearly what her swing is tuned for. The clear downside of this is that all she needs to do is hit a shot a few degrees higher and it's going nowhere, or have the wind come up and suddenly she's having to guess where the ball is going to land. And if it comes down in soft sand it's a guaranteed fried-egg. Not to mention in thick rough or a wet fairway.
What are you talking about? (A) Your assumption that the flight of the golf ball is parabolic is demonstrably wrong, (B) you have completely ignored that her ball stops both because of its landing angle *and* backspin, and (C) it’s better for the ball to stop about where it lands on the green because you have more control over where you play your next shot.
Rather than completely overthink this and try to show off what you clearly don’t understand, just watch this woman play great golf.
Edit: Also, not a single one of her drives had anywhere near a 60* launch angle. At most, they might have launched as high as 13-14*. Her clubs are dialed in for her, and no one in their right mind would give her a driver that launched that high. Not even her 60* lob wedge would have a 60* launch angle, as she’s hitting down on it to compress the ball.
@@evandh1989 ....look at you with your ruler and protractor, you babbling nonsensical idiot.
...aren't there LPGA regulations against the abuse of the words 'absolute" and "perfect" in golf commentary?