position golf is usually vague & TGM is precise, position golf just tends to say get here here & here & everything will be alright but there is usually no depth to the instruction & in my experience it doesn't help a great deal - HK said something to the tune of ''by making the golf swing simple you don't make it easier you just make it incomplete & it is easier to understand something complex than something mysterious & incomplete''
i believe the answer to not coming OTT probably lies in improved zone 1 (body) movements
Daryl or someone else might clarify, expand or (more likely) correct (my understanding is very limited as you know)
Somebody can translate what McLean shows in the video into TGM terms if they want - he showed 3 ways to do the downswing in motion - with emphasis on the delivery (line). Personally I would rather look at this / have an AI help me than just reading about it in the book.
It's not my business or intention to promote this, but there's a lot of good and recognizable elementary stuff here and talk about alignments and teaching methodes that I found interesting. If there's some bad stuff here as well - please tell me what it is..
interesting vid Air, espec the bit about kids taking the club inside because it is heavy for them & then looping towards the plane line but still finding an attack/approach angle that brings them inside the ball not OTT
you might search for attack angle or approach angle threads & see where it leads ?
i may do the same later & we can compare notes
Angle of Approach Procedure & Right Forearm #2
Old 12-01-2007, 08:24 AM
YodasLuke
Lynn Blake Certified Master Instructor
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 1,290 great post
Originally Posted by gmoney_69
When using the Angle of Approach Procedure do I adjust my Impact Fix Alignments to place the Right Forearm On Plane with the steeper Plane required, or do I use my original Turned Shoulder Plane, in my case, Fix alignments and let the covering of the Angle of Approach dictate the steep Plane? I've researched the book and haven't found what I think are any definitive answers.
Per 7-2-3 the back of the Flat Left Wrist and the #3 PP both face down the Angle of Approach.
Per 7-3, "The "Angle of Approach" position of the Right Forearm shows the precise Cross-Line direction the Forearm must take through Impact." And, "The Right Forearm must leave -- and precisely return to -- its own Fix Position (7- "Angle of Approach" (regardless of the true Clubhead Angle of Approach)." I understand that this refers to visual Impact Point and Crossline direction of Thrust.
Per 2-N-0, "This 'Delivery Line' procedure completely replaces the geometric Plane Line (2-F) and the Target Line because these were established at Impact Fix (7- according to the intended Hinge Action (2-J-1) and Stance Line (10-5) requirements, and their control is completely automatic."
This leads me to believe I don't adjust the Impact Fix alignments since we're dealing with a VISUALLY Equivalent Delivery Line for the Impact and the use of the Angle of Approach is to guide Clubhead delivery.
But then, the Index refers to 10-5-0 for Angle of Approach Procedure where the book says, "The relations among Plane Line, Angle of Approach and Ball Location are constant per 2-N. Changing one changes all three and ususally, Plane Angle as well, but not necessarily the Clubface alignment (2-J-1). All can be synchronized by 'Laying the Clubshaft on the Line' (the selected Plane Line) during the 'Parallel to the Ground' (2-F) portions of the Stroke."
10-5-0 throws me off, which leads me to my question. I'm leaning towards using my original Fix alignments and letting the Clubhead covering of the 10-5-E guideline take care of Plane Angle. It seems to me that this would take care of any shifting necessary for steepness and still allow me to return at Impact to my Impact Fix alignments. 2-N-0 also tells me that "The orbiting Clubhead must maintain its visual relationship to the Delivery Line, per 2-F and 2-J-3, during all Twelve Sections...". What do any of you Hitters do when using the Angle of Approach Procedure?
Thanks.
..................
Until I met Lynn, NO ONE had ever been able to explain 2-J-3 to me in it's totality.
Your post shows a great deal of insight. I'll shed some light on some of Homer's comments about 10-5-E. Compare these comments to what's found in the book and see if they help to connect any of the dots. Then, let's talk again. Each of these random comments are taken from one of the Master's classes and are direct quotes from Homer.
"you've got a plane that's going to trace that line"
"It's steep, now remember. For this reason, you can't point at the line with the clubshaft. To point at the line with the right forearm, it's going to be a steeper plane."
"The original plane is gone - don't even think about it. It's totally replaced."
"This procedure is very upright."
"You're not concerned with the clubshaft."
"The clubshaft seems to be immaterial."
"It's not a true on plane motion."
"Actually, it's a vertical plane for the clubhead" (slight pause) "slightly inclined."
"It represents a clubhead plane rather than a clubshaft plane."
"Line momentum of the clubhead."
One of my original teachings in TGM was that it was the same as the original plane, but it was just an illusion that the clubhead was traveling in a straight line. Thank God I met Lynn, and he told me the truth.
__________________
Yoda knows...and he taught me!
Angle of Approach Procedure & Right Forearm #2
Old 12-01-2007, 08:24 AM
With due respect to the eloquence -- and accurate and important information -- of all parties in the quotes above:
Swingers with their Drag Loading Pattern (12-2-0) should totally ignore the Angle of Approach Procedure.
Hitters should explore it, but only after they've mastered the Drive Loading Pattern (12-1-0).
The two cited Stroke Patterns are structured so that moving from one to the other (Hitting versus Swinging) can be accomplished with a minimum of disruption to the player's Basic Pattern. Therefore, both Patterns use the Square-Square Plane Line / Stance Line Combination (10-5-A).
The Angle of Approach procedure described in the quote above uses that Square Plane Line (the Geometric Plane Line) to determine the new Angle of Approach Delivery Line. From that point, the original Plane Line becomes irrelevant. Hence, it is a procedure foreign to both the Basic Stroke Patterns.
Bottom Line: the Angle of Approach Procedure is For Hitters Only. And then only when you know you're ready for the ultimate sophistication in Golf. Until then . . .
With due respect to the eloquence -- and accurate and important information -- of all parties in the quotes above:
Swingers with their Drag Loading Pattern (12-2-0) should totally ignore the Angle of Approach Procedure.
Hitters should explore it, but only after they've mastered the Drive Loading Pattern (12-1-0).
The two cited Stroke Patterns are structured so that moving from one to the other (Hitting versus Swinging) can be accomplished with a minimum of disruption to the player's Basic Pattern. Therefore, both Patterns use the Square-Square Plane Line / Stance Line Combination (10-5-A).
The Angle of Approach procedure described in the quote above uses that Square Plane Line (the Geometric Plane Line) to determine the new Angle of Approach Delivery Line. From that point, the original Plane Line becomes irrelevant. Hence, it is a procedure foreign to both the Basic Stroke Patterns.
Bottom Line: the Angle of Approach Procedure is For Hitters Only. And then only when you know you're ready for the ultimate sophistication in Golf. Until then . . .
Stay away.
I see, I am way over my head in these matters. But for those involved, I hope this sets the record straight...
I guess the "position golf" argument was where he was heading though.
I think Yoda has previously stated that he doesn't agree with Jim McLean's take on the golf stroke. He was a guru a few years ago - I think he had good timing and came as an alternative after the age where everybody had their knees flying all over the place since they tried to swing as Jack the Ripper. But consencus nowdays seem to be that there are better alternatives. McLeans "arms tucked together" can't compete with Homer's flying wedges.
I guess the "position golf" argument was where he was heading though.
I think Yoda has previously stated that he doesn't agree with Jim McLean's take on the golf stroke. He was a guru a few years ago - I think he had good timing and came as an alternative after the age where everybody had their knees flying all over the place since they tried to swing as Jack the Ripper. But consencus nowdays seem to be that there are better alternatives. McLeans "arms tucked together" can't compete with Homer's flying wedges.
In any case this video was very relevant.
I thought he talked even more about alignments than positions. And that he had no method that the students should copy, but let each student have their own swing to work on -- it sounded kind of familiar - if you know what I mean...
Linear Mode
