Are we just making things up with nose angle stuff now?

[Brychanus]

[COLOR=var(--text-lighter)]I think a lot of the standard cues (pour the coffee, turn the key) can be exaggerated to the point where they have the opposite effect. I mostly believe this because it seems like it happened to me, and when I started emphasizing a more neutral nose to the trajectory, rather than trying to get a negative angle, my swing feels better and my discs fly farther. Take all of this with a mega dose of salt because its all feel based.[/COLOR]

I do not personally have a tech disc, but will in a couple of weeks from what it sounds like. Maybe I will find some interesting ways that I am wrong

/Not to brag, but my tech disc setup is gonna be sick. My Dad is the one actually getting it, and they live out on a bunch of land with this 100 foot astroturfed, air conditioned barn. The net he set up is like 12' high by 15' long so I can throw whatever shots I want lol. Hoping I can help him figure out nose angle without using the bonapane style grip as one of my main objectives lol.

Hey, I'll make you have a point here because you know I love ya.

I think you and I share a budding/common experience about finding "natural" cues that work. I have made far more progress using things like an Indian club and noticing how my arm works as a unit to transfer force, then trying to get the same thing to happen with a disc. That's why I like that Clement "arm unit" video so much. I also like my hammers, but it was interesting that I needed something at a certain weight moving in a certain way for it to work and then the hammers made more sense to me, but in a slightly different way. I literally just went through that again yesterday messing around with 10 lb weight plates trying to understand how to fix something else and why one move was naturally much more powerful than the other without micromanaging it.

I'm not sure the initial video at the top of the thread is inconsistent with that in the sense that philosophy by isolating and exaggerating part of it. Like you're saying, people can take any part of this stuff and overexaggerate it to the extreme to their peril. I think you and I are in that ballpark where finding those naturalistic moves can help sometimes. But I also personally needed help getting to that point in the first place too when it comes to tossing these dinky little circles, ya know?

 

[koiyote]

Im not trying to argue here, but even if I believe tech disc data is accurate, which I do, that still does not mean any 'proof' occurred. One person who has a lot of experience throwing discs claimed to be using the cue for a couple of demonstrations, that is all that happened.

In terms of "proof" the video proves that with the one person in the video the cue did work (assuming tech disc is accurate).

Now if you show me a video of a group of amateur players who struggle to ever throw nose down, we can get some idea of the value of this cue. Show me people who cannot otherwise figure this out implementing this cue successfully, and I will change my mind at least somewhat.

Fair enough. That's kind of what a coach does. They test the cue with multiple people and see if it works. One that works more often for more people is more of a "go to" than another.

As it stands, this cue, to me, is objectively bad. It is LITERALLY cueing people to introduce OAT, and honestly just misdirected torque on the body itself will be the most common result that I would expect.

I would argue a cue could not be objectively bad; it can only be situationally bad. If the cue caused Overthrow to introduce a bunch of OAT it would have been seen in increased wobble. If there is no increase in wobble/OAT then the cue was objectively good in this situation.

If the cue causes someone to introduce OAT then in that situation it may be seen as bad, but as Neil posted earlier it worked for some pros he had try his tech disc and not others.

I personally do not think supinating or pronating the forearm necessitates adding OAT and I believe that can be evidenced by GG and others that do use supination/pronation.

Whatever you want to say about Sheep being a slight asshole sometimes, cool, I don't think he disagrees lol. His video on how to think about nose angle makes a ton more sense to me and is pretty damn close to how I try to help people sometimes. At the very peak of the hit, things are moving so quickly that it is extremely hard to 'feel' whether you are doing something wonky with your wrist. Really digging into how your joints unfold, particularly the wrist, in conjunction with your grip choice, unconvers almost all explanations for nose-up issues in my experience. Maintaining the integrity of that 'dingle arm' unfolding and going out of your way to NOT introduce a dramatic or deliberate roll of the wrist gets my vote for a much better cue. Basically the opposite of what this video is saying.

You found a cue that worked for you and this is the value in having many cues. I won't poo poo that for sure.

 

[Sewer bill]

I didn't really have a point I just like to talk shit about youtubers with suspiciously good production value. The defense council for overthrow has made a compelling case and I'm inclined to start my own business and in this thread shift back on topic and argue about coaching techniques and forced nomenclature.

I firmly belive doing anything intentional with your hand or wrist without extensive practice and understanding of your own well established swing will act as a detriment to progress if distance or ease of applying power is the goal.

Also making up your own phrases that describe a motion is dumb even though I do it too when I demonstrate my techniques to people who ask.

 

[RowingBoats]

In terms of "proof" the video proves that with the one person in the video the cue did work (assuming tech disc is accurate).

Fair enough. That's kind of what a coach does. They test the cue with multiple people and see if it works. One that works more often for more people is more of a "go to" than another.

I would argue a cue could not be objectively bad; it can only be situationally bad. If the cue caused Overthrow to introduce a bunch of OAT it would have been seen in increased wobble. If there is no increase in wobble/OAT then the cue was objectively good in this situation.

If the cue causes someone to introduce OAT then in that situation it may be seen as bad, but as Neil posted earlier it worked for some pros he had try his tech disc and not others.

I personally do not think supinating or pronating the forearm necessitates adding OAT and I believe that can be evidenced by GG and others that do use supination/pronation.

You found a cue that worked for you and this is the value in having many cues. I won't poo poo that for sure.

I get what you mean.

I suppose it isn't my place to project my personal goals onto the entire disc golf community. There is some interesting discussion here related to the value of cues, that is for absolute sure. There have been some interesting assertions about the merit of whether cues need to necessarily line up with proper biomechanics. I can see why one would argue that the end result is all that matters.

I think we are talking about different goals for that end result though.

There is a lot of talk in this thread about the gimmicky click-bait nature of youtube, and why it annoys some of us. But that did not evolve in a vacuum. The reason youtubers are forced to behave that way is because the majority of audiences are actively SEEKING a gimmicky cue that instantly fixes their nose angle. Look at the comments of that video lol. For some people it instantly fixed all of their nose issues lol. Which, even if true, would fail to satisfy me, and a majority of this particular community.

I am not trying to belittle anyone else's goals either. I just think that we have a huge variation of them, and it causes people to misunderstand each other a bit. There are a lot of people here who are absolutely obsessed with the most nuanced concepts of the swing. We don't just want to throw a disc 350 feet, or even 600 feet as the goal. We want to have a true understanding of how our bodies work, and radical movement cues like this are jarring to me in that respect because they are not biomechanically sound.

None of this means you can't get some kind of result from trying it though.

I donno man.

 

[RowingBoats]

I firmly belive doing anything intentional with your hand or wrist without extensive practice and understanding of your own well established swing will act as a detriment to progress if distance or ease of applying power is the goal.

Lol. Ya pretty much this.

 

[Brychanus]

^ That seemed fairly reasonable to me on first read FWIW.

In terms of "proof" the video proves that with the one person in the video the cue did work (assuming tech disc is accurate).

Fair enough. That's kind of what a coach does. They test the cue with multiple people and see if it works. One that works more often for more people is more of a "go to" than another.

I would argue a cue could not be objectively bad; it can only be situationally bad. If the cue caused Overthrow to introduce a bunch of OAT it would have been seen in increased wobble. If there is no increase in wobble/OAT then the cue was objectively good in this situation.

If the cue causes someone to introduce OAT then in that situation it may be seen as bad, but as Neil posted earlier it worked for some pros he had try his tech disc and not others.

I personally do not think supinating or pronating the forearm necessitates adding OAT and I believe that can be evidenced by GG and others that do use supination/pronation.

You found a cue that worked for you and this is the value in having many cues. I won't poo poo that for sure.

I appreciated this.

I'm getting too semantically picky even for me, but this did come to mind: I might only add that it seems possible that we might end up with cues that we find are objectively bad if they always cause a poor action (in whatever objective measure we agree on). I don't know what that would be though because if I've learned anything, it's that almost every cue I've encountered has its place. Knowing what the place is is the hard part. I'm sure I'll be surprised again in the future.

I think part of what I'm hearing from Rowing and Bill is that it's possible to get too ticky-tacky about arms and wrist action. For sure that's true. I think a lot of people who learn here have a "ground-up" way of learning from weight shifts that is unusual compared to other places. It's how I got my big buffalo looking ass to make my throws easier, and I wasn't getting that input elsewhere. On the other hand we talk about wrist and release point and late-in-the-action-can-make-or-break-you fairly frequently, so again, everything probably has its place.

 

[RowingBoats]

The defense council for overthrow has made a compelling case and I'm inclined to start my own business and in this thread shift back on topic and argue about coaching techniques and forced nomenclature.

Haha. The idea of a channel that is dedicated to highly scientific biomechanics of the swing, but makes up the nomenclature as it goes and NEVER stays consistent with it sounds like something I'd subscribe to.

The first video can be: "Don't flip the flapjack, butter the biscuit."

 

[Brychanus]

Haha. The idea of a channel that is dedicated to highly scientific biomechanics of the swing, but makes up the nomenclature as it goes and NEVER stays consistent with it sounds like something I'd subscribe to.

The first video can be: "Don't flip the flapjack, butter the biscuit."

Monday:
"If you aren't warglemocking your shenockins, I'll take two tilted vargons and rotate you into lateral objectivity."

Wednesday:
"Subjectively, laterally rotate your gonvars one time vertically so you can nikonesh a mockingwargle."

Friday:


Ugh time to stop avoiding work now. This has been swell.

 

[geebob]

Good question. Not at all. I'm against assuming the motivations of someone posting content on the basis of it producing a lucrative revenue stream.

If Sheep and Sewer Bill were questioning the motivations instead of assuming them the conversation would be much different at this point.

Ok, I guess I fall into the assuming camp then. I assume it is being posted because it will generate revenue, just as I'd assume that someone selling a $100 Cadillac is out to scam me. I'm not going to stretch that into intentional misrepresentation or peddling snakeoil, but I'm going to consider it suspect until I have good evidence to the contrary. I do find some of the OT hyperbole to be overdone, but maybe that comes from being a mid-westerner over 60.

Im not trying to argue here, but even if I believe tech disc data is accurate, which I do, that still does not mean any 'proof' occurred. One person who has a lot of experience throwing discs claimed to be using the cue for a couple of demonstrations, that is all that happened.

I'm with you on that one. I see the motion as being a bit similar to throwing a curve ball (although the difference in throwing planes makes it a bit hard to visualize), so having thrown about a million of those in my life I think I can play around with it a bit without risking any damage.

 

[Sewer bill]

Haha. The idea of a channel that is dedicated to highly scientific biomechanics of the swing, but makes up the nomenclature as it goes and NEVER stays consistent with it sounds like something I'd subscribe to.

The first video can be: "Don't flip the flapjack, butter the biscuit."

I'll start throwing right handed as a baseline and say do this with arrows and ai tuned face like Mr beast in the thumbnail and name it something outlandish then throw lefty with the video mirrored and it will look like I gained 450 feet by doing the slam your hand in a car door swing move.

 

[disc-golf-neil]

I've been using the flip the disc over cue the past two weeks and it does kind of work to help get the nose down, but I now have tennis elbow which I've never had before. Needless to say I'm not going continue doing this for my own health reasons. YMMV.

I never thought about that risk but it definitely makes sense because it's an aggressive torque suddenly. Luckily, despite throwing hard nonstop for my first 6 months of dg, I haven't had any elbow issues probably because I used to climb a lot for 8 years and already went through that and now my tendons are more adapted.

Have you tried the exaggerated 'inverted swoop' technique (that's what I'm calling it) as a nose down test? I was able to get similarly really low nose angles with tech disc the first time I tested it but didn't stick with it because I thought it was wasn't really used significantly, only subtly, but after hearing Jake Hebenheimer literally say "I CRANK it over to bring it nose down" and seeing his low default reach back, it makes me want to test it some more. Might end up liking it enough to only do a subtle and more comfortable turn the key and rely more on the reverse swoop. The only thing is it seems easier to accidentally stand up out of a hyzer lean for me when trying the move while not used to it, and, I'm not sure how to gauge the launch angle as much since it feels like you are chopping it lower at the end which seems like it would require an unreasonable exaggeration if wanting a really high launch angle.

 

[koiyote]

Ok, I guess I fall into the assuming camp then. I assume it is being posted because it will generate revenue, just as I'd assume that someone selling a $100 Cadillac is out to scam me. I'm not going to stretch that into intentional misrepresentation or peddling snakeoil, but I'm going to consider it suspect until I have good evidence to the contrary. I do find some of the OT hyperbole to be overdone, but maybe that comes from being a mid-westerner over 60.

I prefer the innocent until proven guilty mindset personally as that's how I would prefer to be treated.

A $100 Cadillac is a far cry from what OT is doing when putting out free content and selling discs/merchandise at retail value. Comparatively that would be closer to OT charging $15,000 for a 1 hour lesson (assuming a used Cadillac is $15,000), in which case you should be suspicious of the deal.

 

[koiyote]

That's it from me on the Overthrow defense.

Back to coaching cues and biomechanics.

 

[disc-golf-neil]

Tech disc stats on different nose angle techniques.

Tech disc test driven development

Started a playlist on YouTube for tech disc tests, the first one is comparing nose angle techniques. Turn the key, vs pour the tea, vs inverted swoop:

www.dgcoursereview.com

 

[koiyote]

Tech disc stats on different nose angle techniques.

Tech disc test driven development

Started a playlist on YouTube for tech disc tests, the first one is comparing nose angle techniques. Turn the key, vs pour the tea, vs inverted swoop:

www.dgcoursereview.com

Interesting! I'll have to try the reverse swoop

 

[geebob]

As promised, I fooled around with the "turn the key" technique over the weekend. I few things I noted...

• It will produce a nose down throw.
• It does cause some degree of stress similar to throwing a baseball curveball, so anyone else who tries this will want to power wayyyy down.
• I'm not sure that it can produce a useable nose down effect for the average player. I worked on it for about 30 minutes and found that I couldn't get any consistency in the amount of nose angle I was getting. For my game, the relative benefits of achieving a severe nose down throw aren't really worth the additional effort, so I'm going to drop it at this point.

 

[disc-golf-neil]

As promised, I fooled around with the "turn the key" technique over the weekend. I few things I noted...

• It will produce a nose down throw.
• It does cause some degree of stress similar to throwing a baseball curveball, so anyone else who tries this will want to power wayyyy down.
• I'm not sure that it can produce a useable nose down effect for the average player. I worked on it for about 30 minutes and found that I couldn't get any consistency in the amount of nose angle I was getting. For my game, the relative benefits of achieving a severe nose down throw aren't really worth the additional effort, so I'm going to drop it at this point.

When I turn the key casually at a comfortable level (without any other nose down cue, other than trying to throw on plane) I probably average around -2 to +2 nose angle btw. I only crank it if I want to get <= -3 nose angle but that isn't required often on the course since it's not super common for me to have a huge wide open hole with a big fairway where I can throw high enough to need <= -3 nose.

Consistency came faster than I thought it would, initially it was tough for me to time it, but I think because I spent a lot of time before just training to main a decently supinated wrist during my full throw sequence (not max supination but more than is comfortable to hold a disc up for a while at your chest to ensure nose neutral at least), so my wrist is used to being somewhat supinated at the hit and therefore when I started out more pronated it naturally wanted to return to supination which I think made turn the key quicker for me to pick up.

 

[tastes like plastik]

I thought "turning the key" was for anhyzers, and don,t you do it in the back swing?
The way I am understanding this other technique( flipping ) just before release seems like a bad habit that will hurt you pretty quickly.

To change the nose angle I simply adjust my grip.
Like ball golf , I think most issues players have are due to poor grip.

 

[disc-golf-neil]

I thought "turning the key" was for anhyzers, and don,t you do it in the back swing?
The way I am understanding this other technique( flipping ) just before release seems like a bad habit that will hurt you pretty quickly.

To change the nose angle I simply adjust my grip.
Like ball golf , I think most issues players have are due to poor grip.

If you try to do a new movement aggressively at high power without conditioning, you can get hurt pretty easily. It's definitely more strenuous to supinate (turn key) dynamically with power compared to just maintaining a level of supination and not suddenly rotating your wrist, but you can develop conditioning for it like many difficult movements in high level sports. Even with good mechanics in many sports tendonitis is still common because strain is unavoidable at high performance levels and has to be conditioned and ideally cross-trained / prehabbed to avoid and reduce injury risk.

For anhyzers you might be thinking about briefcase carry which is pronating to hold the disc more comfortably. Idk the exact definition but people who initially start out with briefcase carry don't all maintain it during the backswing, some do and some don't. If your wrist is more pronated during the power pocket, the back of your hand is facing more upwards, and if you throw towards the back of your hand from there, it will be more anhyzer because you are then bringing your wrist above your elbow, but, you can still at the last moment turn the key to supinate and get more nose down at release even for a high launch angle anhyzers.

Gannon Buhr describes pronation coming into the power pocket as 'putting the disc on anhyzer' but it just appears to be more on anhyzer at that point because the disc hasn't started rotating yet out of the hand at the release point, at which point pronation is more nose up (what people who swoop and air bounce usually do) while supination would be more nose down (turn the key moves away from pronation and into more supination).

I think it's very difficult and unlikely achieve -4 nose angle just with a grip adjustment (assuming other throw mechanics are good and by grip you aren't talking about wrist rotation). Especially on wide rim drives unless you have very big hands / long fingers. Getting up to -4 nose angle I think most often requires some active intervention during the swing in addition to a grip that isn't significantly nose up already.

 

[Brychanus]

If you try to do a new movement aggressively without conditioning at high power, you can get hurt pretty quick. It's definitely more strenuous to do it dynamically with power compared to not rotating your wrist at all but you can develop conditioning for it like many difficult movements in high level sports. Even with good mechanics in many sports tendonitis is still common because strain is unavoidable at high performance levels and has to be conditioned and ideally cross-trained / prehabbed to avoid and reduce injury risk.

It took me quite a while to find the late and "longest" action through the tip of my fingers that allowed my arm to move for the highest leverage at lowest effort like other objects, and a lot of work with those other objects to find it and then get it to work on a disc.