Page 1 of 1

New Determinator Videos from Mo

Posted: July 7th, 2017, 5:26 pm
by MegaMav
These were posted to Facebook, so you likely will need an account to view.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Enjoy.

Re: New Determinator Videos from Mo

Posted: July 7th, 2017, 7:04 pm
by bowl1820
Interesting series on the Determinator.

can't wait for the rest

Re: New Determinator Videos from Mo

Posted: July 8th, 2017, 3:36 am
by TonyPR
More proof that the position of the CG has almost no effect in ball motion. Really enjoyed the videos, wish he would do one spinning Radical symmetrical balls drilled with only the finger holes 3.5" deep and no thumb or third hole.

Re: New Determinator Videos from Mo

Posted: July 11th, 2017, 6:41 pm
by stevespo
TonyPR wrote:More proof that the position of the CG has almost no effect in ball motion. Really enjoyed the videos, wish he would do one spinning Radical symmetrical balls drilled with only the finger holes 3.5" deep and no thumb or third hole.
We were discussing the videos the other day, and that same exact question came up. We suspected that shallow fingers (no thumb or balance) wouldn't influence the PSA location, but deep fingers might.

Steve

Re: New Determinator Videos from Mo

Posted: September 15th, 2017, 2:36 am
by MathIsTruth
Great videos and glad you are combating all the fallacious information out there. In the last video, I wanted to point out to everyone that it was a coincidence for the PSA to coincide with the endpoint of the line from pin through CG... If the balance hole was smaller, the PSA would not have shifted as much as it did in the video and if the PSA was larger then the PSA would have shifted even more. Just wanted to avoid confusion for some. Great video series!!

Re: New Determinator Videos from Mo

Posted: September 15th, 2017, 2:35 pm
by pjape
MathIsTruth wrote:Great videos and glad you are combating all the fallacious information out there. In the last video, I wanted to point out to everyone that it was a coincidence for the PSA to coincide with the endpoint of the line from pin through CG... If the balance hole was smaller, the PSA would not have shifted as much as it did in the video and if the PSA was larger then the PSA would have shifted even more. Just wanted to avoid confusion for some. Great video series!!
Off topic, but nice to see you back MathIsTruth.

Re: New Determinator Videos from Mo

Posted: September 21st, 2017, 3:37 pm
by fufu
Love these videos.... I'd like to show these to my proshop buddy....he still thinks CG matters.

Re: New Determinator Videos from Mo

Posted: September 22nd, 2017, 12:41 pm
by Arkansas
MathIsTruth wrote:Great videos and glad you are combating all the fallacious information out there. In the last video, I wanted to point out to everyone that it was a coincidence for the PSA to coincide with the endpoint of the line from pin through CG... If the balance hole was smaller, the PSA would not have shifted as much as it did in the video and if the PSA was larger then the PSA would have shifted even more. Just wanted to avoid confusion for some. Great video series!!
I think you meant to say "if the balance hole was larger then the PSA would have shifted even more.