There must always be a definite Accumulator #3 'Overtaking' Action unless...
Accumulator #3 has been Zeroed out.
In which case, the Left Arm and Clubshaft are already In Line.
Hence, there can be no 'seeking to maintain the In Line condition' characteristic of the #3 Accumulator action.
I understand that this is the case when #3 accumulator is zeroed out - no travel, only clubface action.
I was just trying to emphasise the point that if a #3 accumulator angle makes the mandatory right arm wedge flying wedge improper, why would Homer have us use any accumulator #3 angle in the first place?
I thought the 'in line' requirement was just that of the left arm flying wedge (vertical plane), so, with or without #3 accumulator, we are always in line as long as we have a flat left wrist. If 'inline' meant zero #3 accumulator then the left arm would be on plane.
Also, I thought the 'overtaking' action that Homer described was the feel of the clubhead overtaking the hands due to release rotation whenever a #3 accumulator angle is employed. It is not actually overtaking, it just has a longer distance to travel when the #3 angle is large (large pulley). Please correct me if I am wrong
So, does anybody know why anyone would incorporate a #3 accumulator angle when swinging if a snap release and a small pulley provides maximum power? Shouldn't this angle be avoided?
And, when hitting, is this angle beneficial in some way? Should it be incorporated into all hitting procedures?
Threaded Mode
