I had once posted here or somewhere else regarding my take on hitting down or up. Everyone references the ground and clubhead path.
I contend that you can be hitting down with regrard to your power applied and yet in reference to the ground it would appear because of the clubhead path's that you are hitting up. My focus was on the Right Shoulder path, still moving down and foward assuming you have your wedges in tact.
IMO drawing lines and applying definitions with out the understanding of the reference used in the definitions can lead to suspect conclusions.
Take the standard definition of Low Point, left shoulder, arm vertical line down to define it on or below the ground. Now does this require the shoulders to be square to the clubhead plane line? If the shoulders were open does this change it anyway, the definition and location? Does Axis Tilt impact it, assuming no sway? And there are more questions. Is it convenient to define low point to the ground, even if you have an uphill or downhill lie? If low point is truly the full extension of the swing radius, then I would think position of the shoulders, rotation and tilt, will change this point.
Though it may be projected to the ground, isn't the real purpose in defining low point is for location of the ball such that it is at or behind low point so the applied force will be down and through vs having an upward motion characteristic where applied power will no longer be accelerating?
If we had an overhead view of the golfer in question, and applied traditional definitions as seen in the lines, what would we see in regards to the Impact Line and Low Point Line? What would be the clubhead orbit? As it is being defined it would appear that the clubhead orbit would be from out to in since we would have to pass over the low point to reach the impact point. (The Impact Plane Line is always parallel to the Low Point Plane Line on the Sweet Spot Plane. They can be one of the same lines when the ball is located at low point, else the Impact Plane Line is aways between the golfer and the Low Point Plane Line.)
I think that he is driving down and out or has the ball at the true Low Point Location.
I shall hang on to this picture, makes for good notes in my study of the lines, angles and analysis of video and pictures.
I think your second picture is at an angle the right side closer to the camera than left.
Again, the more I see these lines applied for analysis the more I begin to believe that they are mis-applied.
Again, the more I see these lines applied for analysis the more I begin to believe that they are mis-applied.
Martee,
That's great -- I'd love to learn more about drawing lines. So may you please demonstrate how you would do it on the same pictures? Of course, a complementary analysis and explanation would also be helpful.
That's great -- I'd love to learn more about drawing lines. So may you please demonstrate how you would do it on the same pictures? Of course, a complementary analysis and explanation would also be helpful.
I will appologize if you took my post to be offensive, it was not the intent.
HOWEVER I stand by my analysis that I did provide and by the statement that 'AT LEAST FOR ME" I find that lines applied certainly raise questions as to their application.
Again, using your lines, it indicates to me
a. The club head orbit is moving out to in (from Low Point to Impact Point).
b. Right appears to be still moving down the plane.
c. The clubhead could be very well moving upward at Impact, but the Applied Force is down IMO. Thus rendering the identification of Low Point of little use. (My understanding again is that after Low Point is reached the applied forces are no longer driving downward. Probably not the best worded, sorry)
Now the Lines for the Triangle Assembly appear to illustrate correctly though without knowing the grip, can introduce a variable that could lead to the wrong conclusion IMO.
I have seen so many lines drawn on pictures and statements made, yet they don't track between pictures at times. How many times do we actually get photos of golfers at Impact Fix so we can identify the alignments and locations, most of the time they are done at Adjusted Address which will bias the results at true impact for analysis purposes.
Another case in point regarding lines, are those at the top and they identify the golfer having an arched (usually rare) or bent left writs. But yet we know that the grip can affect how it will appear at the top and what may appear to be flat is actually arched (that was how it was in may case and Yoda lifted the fog) or may appear bent (more often the case) and cause of the grip is not.
I am interested in how different people go about analyzing photos, the reference lines, the statements and conclusions. I just find this to be an interesting topic and one which seems to have a lot of differing opinions as to what is what.
Again, sorry did not mean to offend you and by no means don't stop drawing lines cause of what I have said.
I will appologize if you took my post to be offensive, it was not the intent.
HOWEVER I stand by my analysis that I did provide and by the statement that 'AT LEAST FOR ME" I find that lines applied certainly raise questions as to their application.
Again, using your lines, it indicates to me
a. The club head orbit is moving out to in (from Low Point to Impact Point).
b. Right appears to be still moving down the plane.
c. The clubhead could be very well moving upward at Impact, but the Applied Force is down IMO. Thus rendering the identification of Low Point of little use. (My understanding again is that after Low Point is reached the applied forces are no longer driving downward. Probably not the best worded, sorry)
Now the Lines for the Triangle Assembly appear to illustrate correctly though without knowing the grip, can introduce a variable that could lead to the wrong conclusion IMO.
I have seen so many lines drawn on pictures and statements made, yet they don't track between pictures at times. How many times do we actually get photos of golfers at Impact Fix so we can identify the alignments and locations, most of the time they are done at Adjusted Address which will bias the results at true impact for analysis purposes.
Another case in point regarding lines, are those at the top and they identify the golfer having an arched (usually rare) or bent left writs. But yet we know that the grip can affect how it will appear at the top and what may appear to be flat is actually arched (that was how it was in may case and Yoda lifted the fog) or may appear bent (more often the case) and cause of the grip is not.
I am interested in how different people go about analyzing photos, the reference lines, the statements and conclusions. I just find this to be an interesting topic and one which seems to have a lot of differing opinions as to what is what.
Again, sorry did not mean to offend you and by no means don't stop drawing lines cause of what I have said.
Your post didn't sound offensive to me. Would you "fix" the position or let it alone?
Your post didn't sound offensive to me. Would you "fix" the position or let it alone?
I am not sure what or why you need to fix something? Is it broke? Maybe it doesn't match the ideal pattern, but is it really wrong? Will this style work 10, 20 or 30 years from now? Does it work well with other clubs? All questions I don't know the answers too. Certainly not the poster boy for the ideal TGM patterns.
I could be wrong, but I still think he is hitting down and out.
I had once posted here or somewhere else regarding my take on hitting down or up. Everyone references the ground and clubhead path.
I contend that you can be hitting down with regrard to your power applied and yet in reference to the ground it would appear because of the clubhead path's that you are hitting up. My focus was on the Right Shoulder path, still moving down and foward assuming you have your wedges in tact.
IMO drawing lines and applying definitions with out the understanding of the reference used in the definitions can lead to suspect conclusions.
Take the standard definition of Low Point, left shoulder, arm vertical line down to define it on or below the ground. Now does this require the shoulders to be square to the clubhead plane line? If the shoulders were open does this change it anyway, the definition and location? Does Axis Tilt impact it, assuming no sway? And there are more questions. Is it convenient to define low point to the ground, even if you have an uphill or downhill lie? If low point is truly the full extension of the swing radius, then I would think position of the shoulders, rotation and tilt, will change this point.
Though it may be projected to the ground, isn't the real purpose in defining low point is for location of the ball such that it is at or behind low point so the applied force will be down and through vs having an upward motion characteristic where applied power will no longer be accelerating?
If we had an overhead view of the golfer in question, and applied traditional definitions as seen in the lines, what would we see in regards to the Impact Line and Low Point Line? What would be the clubhead orbit? As it is being defined it would appear that the clubhead orbit would be from out to in since we would have to pass over the low point to reach the impact point. (The Impact Plane Line is always parallel to the Low Point Plane Line on the Sweet Spot Plane. They can be one of the same lines when the ball is located at low point, else the Impact Plane Line is aways between the golfer and the Low Point Plane Line.)
I think that he is driving down and out or has the ball at the true Low Point Location.
I shall hang on to this picture, makes for good notes in my study of the lines, angles and analysis of video and pictures.
I think your second picture is at an angle the right side closer to the camera than left.
Again, the more I see these lines applied for analysis the more I begin to believe that they are mis-applied.
Martee,
I have been wondering about a lot of the same things...especially the first part regarding Thrust and a 2nd Low Point"....both in relation to the body (or R. Shoulder or the shoulder line or Axis Tilt or w/e).....
As you say, not in relation to the ground.....
The thrust seems to end when the right arm straightens, regardless of actual Low Point (Left Shoulder).
I'm thinking in relation to the body....taking into account Axis Tilt angle....shoulder line, etc.
. Perhaps my eagerness was misinterpreted as sarcasm. Thanks for your reply.
Hybrid Mode
