## 4 Discussion and Conclusions  
This review aimed to examine the influence of golf clubs on three-dimensional GRFs in both legs, utilizing a mixed and indirect comparison approach between a driver and other club types. The GRF of the trail foot and lead foot in the three planes were compared as follows. First, according to the results of studies, different clubs produce different forces during a golfer's swing since golf clubs are available in various lengths and shapes; these factors can significantly influence a player's posture and swing power. The variations in the length and weight of the club seem to induce changes in leg stiffness, consequently leading to different GRFs. Second, the RFH of the driver is significantly greater in both legs than that of an iron, and the RFH on the lead foot is also greater than the RFH on the trail foot when compared to an iron. Thirdly, individual studies have shown that the lead foot generates a larger GRF than the trail foot. Last, the distribution of weight between the lead and trail foot is unformed when golfers swing. The force difference in the three-dimensional direction among various golf clubs after weight standardization can be attributed not only to differences in club design but also to differences in motion control strategies. Golf clubs are available in multiple lengths and shapes, and these factors can significantly influence a player's posture and swing power. A player's position while using a long club (e.g., driver) necessitates a more significant reach back to make contact with the ball and achieve a greater shot distance. This position results in an increased GRF on the player's lead foot, which must bear the player's physical weight while providing maximum stability and balance; conversely, the trail foot functions primarily as a support point for the player's forward swing. In contrast, a player's stance while using a short club, such as an iron, is more upright because of the shorter shot distance and the lesser need for a strong backswing. This location promotes a more even delivery of the physical center of mass and GRF between the lead and trail foot [19; 24]. When using a PW, golfers may adopt a more closed stance with their feet, resulting in a more uniform distribution of weight between the lead and trail foot. Studies have revealed significant variations in the temporal characteristics of GRF exerted on both legs during golf swings [7; 12]. The variability in clubs used may also contribute to changes in GRFs [20]. During putting, the golfer may shift more weight onto their front foot, resulting in a higher GRF on that foot. In contrast, during a full swing with a driver, the golfer may shift more weight onto their back foot, resulting in a higher GRF on that foot. [PERSON]'s third constitution of movement states that for every deed, there is an identical and facing response. Therefore, when a golfer requests force to the association to raise the ball rate, there will be a corresponding compulsion in a facing way, resulting in different GRFs [1; 25]. The kinetic contribution of the lower body is crucial for achieving higher club head velocity, leading to greater driving distance and overall golf performance [26]; research conducted by [PERSON] (2022) has demonstrated that different golf clubs cause changes in the swing process and generate varying GRFs. Consequently, different clubs produce different GRFs during a swing [27]. As such, the GRF and movement during a swing are in a state of constant change [28]. Although the GRF in golf can improve a golfer's proficiency and guide the development of golf shoes, the current literature on this topic, particularly concerning for GRFs, is limited in opportunity and depth and there is a dearth of direct investigation into motion control strategies. It is important to note that the current review only covers certain kinds of golf clubs and the studies contained in this analysis were limited to adult individuals of both genders.