When reading 2-C-1#1 remember that the Impact interval has been extended to Low Point (Homer has this statement in the first paragraph). Does that clear things up?
How you can trace either the impact line or the low point line since the ball could be located at low point, thus no difference in line.
The Impact Plane Line and the Low Point Plane line reside on the same plane as shown in 2-C-1#1. The Low Point line is further down the sweet spot plane (lower) thus it presents a 2nd line outside the impact line when represented on the ground.
I probably haven't explained this very well, but if you look at 2-C-1#1 and keep in mind the extended impact interval to Low Point, it should clear it up (I hope).
When reading 2-C-1#1 remember that the Impact interval has been extended to Low Point (Homer has this statement in the first paragraph). Does that clear things up?
Great catch Martee - I never even looked at the paragraph.
Originally Posted by Martee
How you can trace either the impact line or the low point line since the ball could be located at low point, thus no difference in line.
Yes, but only in that instance, no?
Originally Posted by Martee
The Impact Plane Line and the Low Point Plane line reside on the same plane as shown in 2-C-1#1. The Low Point line is further down the sweet spot plane (lower) thus it presents a 2nd line outside the impact line when represented on the ground.
Agreed - which is kinda my point.
Originally Posted by Martee
I probably haven't explained this very well, but if you look at 2-C-1#1 and keep in mind the extended impact interval to Low Point, it should clear it up (I hope).
No sir - your explanation is much more thought out then mine...
Let me see if I cant get my thoughts better organized and more concise. While I agree, both impact and low point are located on the same plane, my contention is, from a players perspective, one cannot trace both and get the same result.
Give me a day or so and let me see if I can articulate this better.
While I agree, both impact and low point are located on the same plane, my contention is, from a players perspective, one cannot trace both and get the same result.
Give me a day or so and let me see if I can articulate this better.
Yes, no need, I see your point already
Basically, even though the Low Point Plane Line is located on the same Inclined Plane as the Impact Point Plane Line (the one we usually Trace), from the player's perspective, that Low Point Plane Line looks like the Impact Plane Line, hence we have a devastatingly bent Plane Line. The way to break through this illusion is to realise that you are Tracing a line which is under the ground. But why go through all this effort I wonder. Just use the basic Plane Line.
Basically, even though the Low Point Plane Line is located on the same Inclined Plane as the Impact Point Plane Line (the one we usually Trace), from the player's perspective, that Low Point Plane Line looks like the Impact Plane Line, hence we have a devastatingly bent Plane Line. The way to break through this illusion is to realise that you are Tracing a line which is under the ground. But why go through all this effort I wonder. Just use the basic Plane Line.
I would disagree that the Low Point Plane Line looks like the Impact Plane line for the simple reason that you would have to be looking down the at the lines at the same angle of the Plane. The golfers traditional position does not place the eyes on the Plane. But if you did look down the plane at that angle, you would only see the one line, as the one would be on top of the other.
Mechanically Tracing the basic plane line (clubshaft plane at impact definition) is what happens in a good golf shot and is what should be used when analyzing the golf stroke. Note the definition of this line IMO needs to be defined at IMPACT or IMPACT FIX, hopefully both are one of the same.
To eliminate the mechanics in the golf stroke, to free up the golfers power, FEEL is the key here. I am sure that most people who first exerperience the plane board discover a new feel, even for partial shots.
This is a case of 'Feels Like' but 'Really Is'.
The more I review TGM, the more I am coming to realize that Homer wasn't explaining mechanics per-se he was explaining the 'Feels Like' of the 'Really Is'. For example the thrust applied cross line for a hitter is a the correct application and feel, but in reality the golf clubs path doesn't have a bent plane line to accomodate this cross line application.
Cotton was definitely on to something when he said the golf stroke was in the hands, Homer was able to translate that and bridge the gap between mechanics and feel.
Obviously I have been slow in my education cause as I look back at my notes, the book, Feel is all over the place in the book. Just because this book has a techincal format and style, it should not be approach or considered that is only a mechanical description, it is or I am coming to the conclusion that is foundation and bridge between the proper mechanics (as defined using geometry and physics) the Feel to accomplish this.
I am not sure that this is the best anology, but here goes. When shooting a wadded up paper into a basket across the room, do you look at the basket, the front rim, the center, or the back rim? You focus on the back and apply the force to push it to the back to get it to drop in the center.
I would disagree that the Low Point Plane Line looks like the Impact Plane line for the simple reason that you would have to be looking down the at the lines at the same angle of the Plane. The golfers traditional position does not place the eyes on the Plane. But if you did look down the plane at that angle, you would only see the one line, as the one would be on top of the other.
Mechanically Tracing the basic plane line (clubshaft plane at impact definition) is what happens in a good golf shot and is what should be used when analyzing the golf stroke. Note the definition of this line IMO needs to be defined at IMPACT or IMPACT FIX, hopefully both are one of the same.
To eliminate the mechanics in the golf stroke, to free up the golfers power, FEEL is the key here. I am sure that most people who first exerperience the plane board discover a new feel, even for partial shots.
This is a case of 'Feels Like' but 'Really Is'.
The more I review TGM, the more I am coming to realize that Homer wasn't explaining mechanics per-se he was explaining the 'Feels Like' of the 'Really Is'. For example the thrust applied cross line for a hitter is a the correct application and feel, but in reality the golf clubs path doesn't have a bent plane line to accomodate this cross line application.
Cotton was definitely on to something when he said the golf stroke was in the hands, Homer was able to translate that and bridge the gap between mechanics and feel.
Obviously I have been slow in my education cause as I look back at my notes, the book, Feel is all over the place in the book. Just because this book has a techincal format and style, it should not be approach or considered that is only a mechanical description, it is or I am coming to the conclusion that is foundation and bridge between the proper mechanics (as defined using geometry and physics) the Feel to accomplish this.
Sigh...you missed my point regarding the Impact/Low Point Plane Line discussion Martee! I'll leave it to Philly to clear up the mess!
By the way, Thrust is always Cross Line (think Right Forearm Angle of Approach and Aiming Point), even for the Swinger. However, Delivery Motion is On Line. Please tell me I haven't opened another can of worms
Sigh...you missed my point regarding the Impact/Low Point Plane Line discussion Martee! I'll leave it to Philly to clear up the mess!
By the way, Thrust is always Cross Line (think Right Forearm Angle of Approach and Aiming Point), even for the Swinger. However, Delivery Motion is On Line. Please tell me I haven't opened another can of worms
Sorry I missed you point, but either my reading or your writing led me to my response.
As for you last statement, I didn't question the application of thrust crossline, I question that the description by itself leads to bent plane lines when a golfer reads crossline. Okay they don't understand the concept, actually the lack a good understanding of the geometry of golf stroke.
Golfers don't bend plane lines cause they think they should, they bend them cause they have been told too or they think they have been told too by some other action in the golf stroke.
Martee, remember that every separate item in the Stroke is properly understood only when learned and mastered separately and its separate identity maintained.
Basically, even though the Low Point Plane Line is located on the same Inclined Plane as the Impact Point Plane Line (the one we usually Trace), from the player's perspective, that Low Point Plane Line looks like the Impact Plane Line, hence we have a devastatingly bent Plane Line. The way to break through this illusion is to realise that you are Tracing a line which is under the ground. But why go through all this effort I wonder. Just use the basic Plane Line.
Well....
Tongzilla has been able to articulate eloquently what I have not been able to...his post here says exactly what I was trying to say!!! Thanks Tong!!!
Let's leave this sit and incubate for a little time...and then come back to it...my brain is fried!!!
. These moments are one of the reasons I post.
Hybrid Mode
