[lekommend]

Just read all the posts and I am glad to see that everyone still talking to eachother - Lynn makes a great diplomatic statement!

Back to the question you asked - I am new to TGM too, Leko. About 10 months old now. I, like almost everyone, went round asking this type of question. A cornerstone of TGM is that is all about options - do whatever you like as long as you do the imperatives and essentials...

I used to find this very frustrating!! "Come on" i'd think, "there must be some ideal swing to copy/ use as model!!" - but TGM gurus love all patterns!!

Somewhere there is an audio recording of young Yoda on the phone to Homer(introduced by Tom Tomasello) and even Lynn asked Homer what his preferred option was for such-and-such component - guess what Homer said (approx) "they are all as good as each other..." ( even Lynn seemed to get a bit frustrated with Homer's inability to chose one component as "best"...)

EdZ came up with the key , and the route of your question , and that comes down to efficiency of pattern.

My understanding of your question is "whose swing obeys all TGM imperatives and essentials and is really powerful/efficient" - I take it you don't want a single barrel ( one accumulator) swing as a model!! But Homer would probably love that just as much as any other!!

So you probably want a :-
-swinger
-3 barrels ( Homer was never keen on 4 barrel swinging for most players)
-max trigger delay on most of those accumulators to give max clubhead speed
-all essentials/imperatives obeyed.
-turned shoulder plane at the top( no flatter planes are commonly seen in top pros) and most will ahve
-at least one shift - almost always in backswing because few have the hands high enough at address to make TSP backstroke without a plane shift) and if they did then they probably did not have level wrists at address.

My reading of the book has identified the components above as either being termed "advisable" or "efficient" or some some such term which makes it sound as though it ought to be tried as an option in the first instance before being thrown out due to some preference that you may have.

That is an ideal model for a person of good athletic ability ( again i asume that you are aiming at this end of the athletic spectrum).

Steve Elkington is pretty good on all those boxes, Hogan maybe delayed his triggers bit longer? Ernie Els has many of these features... but they all look different because they vary in anatomy and some of the less mechanically critical comonents (see below)

Now the bits where your options really come into play and there seems to be much more personal variation without any overt benefit in terms of efficiency or power or accuracy are:-

-Wrist action
-Grip ( within reason!)
- Fix
- Plane line/ address
- Pivot (do whatever as long as lag is maintained)
-Shoulder/hip/knee/foot
-trigger( but maybe limited by choice of max trigger delay above)
-power package assembly point/loading action/ release

and add tempo to that list - this is not a TGM component but is a key feature to the visual individuality of a swing.

Well - see what you think but i no longer want to have a model to copy - i want component upgrades in some / many areas to increase power / efficiency/ accuracy - but ultimately it is my swing i want with imperatives/ essentials intact.

eg. I would love Hogan's trigger delay but suspect that i am not flexible enough to create the pivot required to produce this. So my plan would be to do a bit of Yoga and lose weight!! No point in trying till the anatomy can support the component i chose!

Thanks golfbulldog for your wonderful answer.