You guys are killing me slowly! The combination of me not understanding what your saying and you guys throwing in stuff that isn't clear - it's a tough road- but I've been on this road before so although frustrated I'm still able to hold the composure together.
I could be wrong but I'm hoping you guys can work on being a little better and careful about defining your terms and ideas. One way to do that is to write in addition to the answer those answers or ideas that are wrong- the one's that are easy to mis-interpret and then clarify and compare those with the correct answer. Also, definitions are especially helpful. OK I'll get off my soap box now- just ignore me when relevant.
Don't get me wrong- appreciate the help already- I'm just saying you guys are capable of better- and I'm pushing you to do it.No problem, except that as an engineer, I can see the angles and planes, and understand their action, however, my TGM vocabulary is severely lacking, so my apologies. I just try to explain what I see
Golf2much- I don't think/agree that at the top the #3 accumulator and the sweetspot plane are on the same plane. Sure could be but that would be the isolated exception and not the norm. What I meant was that the club's sweetspot and the #3 accumulator would be in the same plane at the top (for a swinger with a roll in the backswing)
I'll start on this particular topic and let you add to or finish it.
Differences at impact fix between the #3 accumulator plane and the Sweetspot plane. First - I'd like you to clarify what you mean by the sweetspot plane in this post, because you could be referring to the sweetspot plane as that inclined plane that the sweetspot travels through as the clubhead travels during the stroke.Yes. If I take an impact position still of myself, and draw a line from the ball and through the right forearm, and then animate the action, this is the plane the sweet spot of the club travels from the top Or you could be referring to a different sweetspot plane- the one that is slightly different than the #3 accumulator- I'll call it the #3 accumulator sweetspot plane as opposed to the #3 accumulator shaft plane. I'll try to clarify. On the same still as above, if I draw a line from the ball to the #3Acc, (butt end of the club) of the club at the top, and annimate the action, the #3acc tracks this plane until just before impact when the #3acc drops slightly below the sweetspot plane defined previously. If you draw a reference line from the ball to the #3acc one frame past impact, the 3frames pre impact and 1 frame post impact plane lines are separated by 6* (with the apex at the ball) This has to happen to some degree or another or the sweetspot of the club would miss the ball and you would have heel/hozel impacts.
Let's look at that one for a moment.
AThe #3 accumulator shaft plane at impact fix with a sandwedge would form a plane that includes these three points- the left shoulder, the #3 pressure point/grip end of the shaft, and the end of the clubshaft near the clubhead/hosel. For clarification sake - if you isolated that #3 accumulator shaft plane - then the three sides of that plane would be 1) the left arm 2) the clubshaft, 3) from the clubshaft near the hosel to the left shoulder. All of those would line up or be on the plane of the #3 accumulator.Remember, we were talking about the Right Arn
The #3 accumulator sweetspot plane at impact fix with the sandwedge would have a couple of differences due to the fact that the sweetspot is 1) further back from the leading edge than the shaft i.e. roughly or crudely half way between the leading edge and rear or top of the clubface - also 2) further away from the hosel i.e. roughly or crudely half way between the hosel and the toe of the clubface.
So that creates two separate differences of the #3 accumulator shaft plane and the "#3 accumulator sweetspot plane". They are as follows: #1) Looking down target- that is from behind the player with the ball between you and the target- the angle of the sweetspot plane at impact fix will be less steep than the shaft angle. Because both use the same point- i.e. #3 pressure point, or end of the grip as one end of that side of the plane but one uses the sweet spot and the other uses the shaft plane as the other point that makes up the "side of the plane".Yes, that is exactly what I am describing
#2) Same thing- from a different perspective- when looking down from above- as if you are hovering over the player in a helicopter- at impact fix with the sandwedge- the #3 accumulator formed on one side by the line between the sweetspot and the #3 pressure point or end of the grip will be leaning more towards the target than the #3 accumulator shaft plane- because the sweetspot is further back of the hosel/end of the shaft. So if that line from the sweet spot and the #3 pressure point or end of the grip were extending up to the left shoulder it would not go through the left shoulder like the #3 shaft accumulator does- the #3 sweetspot accumulator would actually point slightly ahead of the left shoulder. Bringing a little more precision to that relationship to clarify the concept- let's say that the distance from the sweetspot on the clubface to the #3 pressure point is the same distance from the #3 pressure point to the left shoulder- let's just say they were both 3 feet. Now let's say that the sweepspot is 3/4 of an inch back of the shaft- then assuming the shaft was point right at the left shoulder socket at impact fix- as viewed vertically from the helicopter- then the #3 sweetspot accumulator would point 3/4 of an inch ahead of that shoulder socket. Yes, that seems pretty much right.
I'll stop rambling for now- I guess I was trying to clarify the concepts of sweetspot plane that you were referring to and the #3 accumulator plane that you were referring to. I didn't address why they are different and not the same at the top yet,I think they are in the case of a swinger that rolls his clubface to the #3acc plane before starting down but let me know which sweetspot plane you were talking about and any other feedback on this limited and maybe somewhat off topic issue.
Thanks,
Mike o
Great post, sorry for the less than clear explanations.
G2M
Last edited by golf2much : 09-08-2006 at 05:45 PM.
Great post, sorry for the less than clear explanations.
G2M
No need for an apology- just ignore any venting that I post.
Here is section of the post above with your my post in red and your comment(s) in blue:
AThe #3 accumulator shaft plane at impact fix with a sandwedge would form a plane that includes these three points- the left shoulder, the #3 pressure point/grip end of the shaft, and the end of the clubshaft near the clubhead/hosel. For clarification sake - if you isolated that #3 accumulator shaft plane - then the three sides of that plane would be 1) the left arm 2) the clubshaft, 3) from the clubshaft near the hosel to the left shoulder. All of those would line up or be on the plane of the #3 accumulator.[color="red"]Remember, we were talking about the Right Arn
In the Golfing Machine when referring to the #3 accumulator 6-B-3-0 we are referring to the angle established between the clubshaft and the left forearm. So I didn't follow your comment that "we were talking about the Right Arm".
No need for an apology- just ignore any venting that I post.
Here is section of the post above with your my post in red and your comment(s) in blue:
AThe #3 accumulator shaft plane at impact fix with a sandwedge would form a plane that includes these three points- the left shoulder, the #3 pressure point/grip end of the shaft, and the end of the clubshaft near the clubhead/hosel. For clarification sake - if you isolated that #3 accumulator shaft plane - then the three sides of that plane would be 1) the left arm 2) the clubshaft, 3) from the clubshaft near the hosel to the left shoulder. All of those would line up or be on the plane of the #3 accumulator.[color="red"]Remember, we were talking about the Right Arn
In the Golfing Machine when referring to the #3 accumulator 6-B-3-0 we are referring to the angle established between the clubshaft and the left forearm. So I didn't follow your comment that "we were talking about the Right Arm".
Understood, but your post was in response to my post which said in part "For the RFA to be on the SS Plane, your wrists", and you brought in all the #3 ACC references etc. That is why I reminded you that the original discussion was about the RFA being on the SS plane as I described it in the earlier response.
From Mathew's earlier post "the right forearm is on the inclined plane - which includes the sweetspot at impact for, lets just say a very short time, as the right forearm has a 'cross-line motion' as it straightens. This is due to the right shoulder being above the inclined plane used for release."
This "crossline motion" Mathew speaks of is what I am trying to describe with the discussion you and I are debating. I will try to post some pictures if I can get stills to work from my V1 program
Understood, but your post was in response to my post which said in part "For the RFA to be on the SS Plane, your wrists", and you brought in all the #3 ACC references etc. That is why I reminded you that the original discussion was about the RFA being on the SS plane as I described it in the earlier response.
In my post#135 I quoted your post#119- take a look at it- no where does it say "For the RFA (Right Fore Arm) to be ...."
You've lost me again.
For clarification- When I don't follow something I try to isolate something specific so that I know at least something that is on solid ground- so the area of discussion of any of my posts on this thread - in principle - would ignore the larger context of Matthew's graphic/theory and just isolate one concept that I'm trying to understand.
Sounds like some interesting stuff- but I'm a little burnt- here's a section of my post#34 in this thread
Tell me we're not going to have a "engineer guided thread" - you know the kind that take 200 posts to get to the point! (West Coast LOL)-
Hey, it's probably just me but I could see it coming. I'll just finish off by saying "Looks like some great stuff. Graphics are great compared to anything I could do, but could be better with some shading etc. to show the plane relationships. It'd be nice if you could explain it so I could understand it- but maybe that's an issue with the reader (me) and not the writer. I'll check in every once in awhile on the thread and get caught up to date with any of your new discussions."
In my post#135 I quoted your post#119- take a look at it- no where does it say "For the RFA (Right Fore Arm) to be ...."
You've lost me again.
For clarification- When I don't follow something I try to isolate something specific so that I know at least something that is on solid ground- so the area of discussion of any of my posts on this thread - in principle - would ignore the larger context of Matthew's graphic/theory and just isolate one concept that I'm trying to understand.
Sounds like some interesting stuff- but I'm a little burnt- here's a section of my post#34 in this thread
Tell me we're not going to have a "engineer guided thread" - you know the kind that take 200 posts to get to the point! (West Coast LOL)-
Hey, it's probably just me but I could see it coming. I'll just finish off by saying "Looks like some great stuff. Graphics are great compared to anything I could do, but could be better with some shading etc. to show the plane relationships. It'd be nice if you could explain it so I could understand it- but maybe that's an issue with the reader (me) and not the writer. I'll check in every once in awhile on the thread and get caught up to date with any of your new discussions."
I didn't realize which post you had responded to... sorry about that chief(in my best Maxwell Smart voice)But hey, look at it this way... we've got 60 more posts to get to the point.
G2M
Last edited by golf2much : 09-09-2006 at 04:34 PM.
I didn't realize which post you had responded to... sorry about that chief(in my best Maxwell Smart voice)But hey, look at it this way... we've got 60 more posts to get to the point.
G2M
Thats it!
That's the solution!
The cone of silence.
We need to raise the cone of silence, then we can hear each other!
I didn't realize which post you had responded to... sorry about that chief(in my best Maxwell Smart voice)But hey, look at it this way... we've got 60 more posts to get to the point.
G2M
A little humor just at the right time- nicely done Golf2much!
We need to look at the relationship of the right forearm and the motion it makes in relation to the inclined plane in the right elbow bend plane which dictate the wrist conditions.
Heres a graphic.
Now lets define this - regardless of anatomical restrictions
- If the plane of the elbow bend is onplane (pics - row 2)
a)bend and arch wrist motion is onplane with a level wrist throughout when the hand is vertical to the inclined plane (90 degrees turned from elbow bend plane)
b) cock and uncock motion is onplane with a flat wrist when the palm faces the inclined plane (0 degrees from elbow bend plane).
- If the plane of the elbow bend is directly vertical to the inclined plane (pics - row 1)
a) if the hand is vertical to the inclined plane(0 degrees from elbow bend plane), the onplane motion is that of bending and arching, the right forearm motion becomes uncocking (r forearm below plane) and cocking (r forearm above plane)
b) Also if the palm is directly facing the topside of the inclined plane (90 degrees rolled from elbow bend plane) then the cocking and uncocking motions are onplane as the wrist would arch (r forearm below plane) and bend (r forearm above plane)
c) If the palm is facing the underside (90 degrees turned from elbow bend plane) then the bend and arch are reversed from b) but still with the cocking and uncocking motions onplane.
- If the plane of the elbow bend is 45 degrees into the inclined plane (pics - row 3)
a) If the wrist is vertical to the inclined plane (45 degrees turned from elbow bend plane), the onplane motion is that of bending and arching and the right forearm motion becomes uncocking (r forearm below plane) and cocking (r forearm above plane). However the right forearm motion will also change the relationship to the onplane motion in the degree of bend or arch.
b) If the palm is on the topside of the inclined plane (45 degrees rolled from elbow bend plane) then the onplane motion is that of cocking and uncocking and the right forearm motion becomes arching (r.forearm below plane) and bending (r.forearm above plane). Again the right forearm motion will also change the relationship to the onplane motion - cock and uncock.
- If the plane of the elbow bend is 45 degrees into the inclined plane (pics - row 4)
a) If the wrist is vertical to the inclined plane (45 degrees rolled from elbow bend plane), the onplane motion is that of bending and arching and the right forearm motion becomes uncocking (r forearm below plane) and cocking (r forearm above plane). However the right forearm motion will also change the relationship to the onplane motion in the degree of bend or arch.
b) If the palm is on the underside of the inclined plane (45 degrees turned from elbow bend plane) then the onplane motion is that of cocking and uncocking and the right forearm motion becomes bending (r.forearm below plane) and arching (r.forearm above plane). Again the right forearm motion will also change the relationship to the onplane motion - cock and uncock.
This has been a wee bit tricky to type out so if made any errors please correct
The combination of me not understanding what your saying and you guys throwing in stuff that isn't clear - it's a tough road- but I've been on this road before so although frustrated I'm still able to hold the composure together.
Hybrid Mode
