@Daryl - Ok so thickness isn't a dimension of plane......so if my grip points at baseline its on plane. If it was a big old fat club id have alot more tolerance then right? If my shaft and grip were pencil then I guess it'd be really hard to be on plane!!!! So its exactly the width of a clubshaft? Who decided that!?? There is no width as a dimension? Then why do you draw a line, how can you illustrate it?
The line is a representation. Same as when you draw a square with a paint brush and claim the corners to be 90 degrees. But if you must know his name, I think his name was "Bob".
Originally Posted by JTillery
You'll have to gimme that deal one more time on how to rotate the whole plane left without increasing angle of attack? If I swing down 60 degrees, then change nothing but rotate the plane line, Im coming in at more than 60 degrees from the balls perspective ....???
Ok, but please understand that I'm telling you something that "appears" to contradict HK's "Swingers" procedure. But I assure you that it doesn't. I outlined the answer below, but bear with me a moment to explain something that has a very direct effect and HK assumes that YOU are completely aware of this. Anytime you move the Ball aft of Low-point, YOU MUST adjust your Plane Angle (not direction) so that the Orbiting Clubhead will intersect the ball at its new location. So, if you move the ball aft, then the Plane Angle must be "Steepened" and if you move it forward again, then you must "Flatten" the Plane Angle.
Quote:
When the Ball is positioned at the Low Point, the two Plane Lines combine as one, but as the Ball is moved toward the Right Foot, these lines appear farther apart and the Angle of Approach becomes wider. Then, the steeper the Plane Angle (10-6), the steeper the Angle of Attack (2-N-1), the higher the trajectory and the deeper the Divot (7-6). So, Ball Location determines the Angle of Approach (2-J-3), making the Forearm motion three dimensional (2-C-0).
HK referenced 10-6 in the above quote because he wants you to steepen the Plane Angle by tilting the Plane from it's Plane Angle Reference Point. Turned Shoulder Plane Swingers will steepen the Plane more than an Elbow Plane Swinger.
So, when HK says to move the Ball "Aft" he is assuming that you understand that the Ball will no longer rest on the existing Plane line, but rather on the new Plane Line (closer to your feet) because YOU Steepened the Plane Angle. If the Ball was moved 3" back on the existing Plane Line, then you will "Miss the Ball" because it no longer intersects the Clubhead Orbit (unless you make a postural change).
Set-up and hit a straight shot at the Target. Then, set-up and hit a straight shot 20 yards left of Target. Then, Set-up to hit a straight shot 20 yards left of the Target but rotate the shaft/clubface in your hands clockwise. HK wants you to move the Ball Forward or Aft rather than rotate the Grip because moving the Ball aft 1" is easier than rotating the Grip 1/2 of 1 degree. However, in his procedure, he assumes that you won't change the Angle of Approach although most everyone does.
Originally Posted by JTillery
Finally, tell me how the "BLUR" isn't indicative of 3D path?
It is, but is it indicative of equal dimensions down, out and forward simultaneously?
"Ok, but please understand that I'm telling you something that "appears" to contradict HK's "Swingers" procedure. But I assure you that it doesn't. I outlined the answer below, but bear with me a moment to explain something that has a very direct effect and HK assumes that YOU are completely aware of this. Anytime you move the Ball aft of Low-point, YOU MUST adjust your Plane Angle (not direction) so that the Orbiting Clubhead will intersect the ball at its new location. So, if you move the ball aft, then the Plane Angle must be "Steepened" and if you move it forward again, then you must "Flatten" the Plane Angle."
So, in redneck terms, if you move the ball to your back foot and hit the ground by your front foot,...............ugh,... you missed. Aside from this, I would argue outside of theory and in the real world that most people with a ball too back will build a compensation to shallow the angle of attack. Vice versa for the guy who gets it too forward. Regardless, as you just said, moving the ball back and then on top of that increasing plane angle will have a great effect on the "down"......and unless you're swinging up and down a wall, THAT MAKES PATH PATH PATH TO THE RIGHT!!!!!
**CAN YOU SWING DOWN A STRAIGHT LINE WHILE INCREASING AND DECREASING ANGLE OF ATTACK WITHOUT CHANGING ACTUAL PATH AND AFFECTING THE GOLF BALL? DO YOU THINK YOU CAN HIT ZERO DOWN ON A BALL, 2 DEGREES DOWN ON A BALL, THEN 6 DEGREES DOWN ON A BALL WITH ALL SQUARE FACES, ALL TRACING STRAIGHT LINES, AND HIT 3 OF THE SAME STRAIGHT SHOTS?**
* Why do guys swing "under" plane with drivers on tv all the time, then point their wedges at lines that are outside of the straight line baseline?
"the steeper the Plane Angle (10-6), the steeper the Angle of Attack (2-N-1), the higher the trajectory and the deeper the Divot (7-6)."
WHAT!????? Steep plane angles and steep angles of attack hit higher trajectory golf shots? So when you play your ball back, swing down 70 degrees and take a beaver tail divot, you hit it to the moon????
I respect your convictions and dedication, but Im going to bow out now, cause we are obviously playing different games!
Quote:
When the Ball is positioned at the Low Point, the two Plane Lines combine as one, but as the Ball is moved toward the Right Foot, these lines appear farther apart and the Angle of Approach becomes wider. Then, the steeper the Plane Angle (10-6), the steeper the Angle of Attack (2-N-1), the higher the trajectory and the deeper the Divot (7-6). So, Ball Location determines the Angle of Approach (2-J-3), making the Forearm motion three dimensional (2-C-0).
You sure Homer isn't referring to how the ball moves further and further back of low point as you move to progressively shorter irons? The shorter irons with their inherent steeper lie angles.
I think he's referring to how the Angle of Approach and the Angle of Attack are related. How one turns into the other as the plane angle changes. (I know, words again describing geometry , so bad!)
Say you have a perfectly horizontal plane , a mouse swinging a driver. The club head path circular but never getting off the ground, like a hula hoop lying on the ground.... Zero angle of Attack, max Angle of Approach . Now for a hula hoop standing vertical to the ground , a pure vertical plane of motion ..... you get the opposite with the club head path : Max Angle of Attack , minimal Angle of Approach.
The steeper plane angles have more down to them and less out ... meaning they create less Divergence in Path and FAce for balls played back of low point. That and the increased loft of shorter irons minimize the curve of the shot for balls played back of low point with Grip Rotation. That is to say a face that is rotated in the hands so its parallel to the plane line. Its looks like its going to be a big draw shot but the path is not all that far out to the right when you scale things and take into consideration loft .
This is why I don't bother rotating my plane in the manner described in the video above. For short irons. I just take the draw tendency into consideration when aiming my plane line .. It isn't much of a draw after all . Not as much as implied in the video. Or as JT says you can Angled Hinge it too ,swing left, like a little insurance policy against the draw. Nothing wrong with a draw but they do tend to roll out .... not something you want generally with a short iron. Sometimes maybe. If so don't angle hinge it.
If you were to play a 5 iron way back in the stance with the face squared to the target, given its plane angle , lie angle ........look out draw. The flatter plane having more associated OUT less Down. More Divergence in path and face, less loft too.
You can draw all this stuff out on paper. Geometry of the Circle . Seems to me Geometry of the Circle , D plane (not that I know anything about it), Radar , cameras are all addressing the same issue but looking at it from different perspectives . Different disciplines . There should be a lot of overlap but there could be some points of departure too. The latter doenst really bother me much. Whats wrong with "new information of all kinds" as Homer would say? But guys looking for points of departure or worse still cooking them up in a vengeful way do bother me. Its a total waste of their time and ours, the readers.
If a D plane or Flightscope or Foresight guy etc convinced me that I was missing something .....of course Id put it in play. Why not? If they convinced me of something outside of TGM? Id put it in play. If somebody thinks Im nuts to rotate the face instead of the plane ......Im all ears.
Actually if the Foresight company wishes to donate a unit for my personal testing please pm me. Ill do it gladly , pro bono even.
O.B.Left --You sure Homer isn't referring to how the ball moves further and further back of low point as you move to progressively shorter irons? Yes, I'm sure. The shorter irons with their inherent steeper lie angles.
I think he's referring to how the Angle of Approach and the Angle of Attack are related. How one turns into the other as the plane angle changes. No. Their roles are not exchanged. (I know, words again describing geometry , so bad!)
Say you have a perfectly horizontal plane , a mouse swinging a driver. OK The club head path circular but never getting off the ground, ok like a hula hoop lying on the ground....I understand Zero angle of Attack, okmax Angle of Approach Zero Angle of Approach. Now for a hula hoop standing vertical to the ground , a pure vertical plane of motion ..... you get the opposite with the club head path : Max Angle of Attack "0", minimal Angle of Approach "0".
The steeper plane angles have more down to them and less out no... meaning they create less Divergence in Path and Face for balls played back of low point. No That and the increased loft of shorter irons minimize the curve of the shot for balls played back of low point with Grip Rotation. That is to say a face that is rotated in the hands so its parallel to the plane line. Its looks like its going to be a big draw shot but the path is not all that far out to the right when you scale things and take into consideration loft .
This is why I don't bother rotating my plane in the manner described in the video above. For short irons. I just take the draw tendency into consideration when aiming my plane line .. It isn't much of a draw after all . Not as much as implied in the video. Or as JT says you can Angled Hinge it too ,swing left, like a little insurance policy against the draw. Nothing wrong with a draw but they do tend to roll out .... not something you want generally with a short iron. Sometimes maybe. If so don't angle hinge it.
If you were to play a 5 iron way back in the stance with the face squared to the target, given its plane angle , lie angle ........look out draw. The flatter plane having more associated OUT less Down. More Divergence in path and face, less loft too. If you want to draw the ball then do as you say. But if you want to move the ball aft in your stance and hit the ball straight, then tilt the Plane the correct amount. Then, insure the face is square to the angle of approach at impact and the increased closing ratio of the Right Forearm Angle of Approach (because of the steeper plane) will sustain the Line of Compression.
You can draw all this stuff . Geometry of the Circle . Seems to me Geometry of the Circle , D plane (not that I know anything about it), Radar , cameras are all addressing the same issue but looking at it from different perspectives . Different disciplines . There should be a lot of overlap but there could be some points of departure too. The latter doenst really bother me much. Whats wrong with "new information of all kinds" as Homer would say? But guys looking for points of departure or worse still cooking them up in a vengeful way do bother me. Its a total waste of their time and ours, the readers. Trackman supports that an increased Angle of Approach, thus increasing divergence, then if supported by an increase Angle of Attack will again reduce the divergence.
If a D plane or Flightscope or Foresight guy etc convinced me that I was missing something .....of course Id put it in play. Why not? If they convinced me of something outside of TGM? Id put it in play. If somebody thinks Im nuts to rotate the face instead of the plane ......Im all ears. The Clubface is the Target Line. If you move the ball aft, then you've opened the face (Target Line), then rotate the face (Target Line) back to square, but you need to also steepen the plane to maintain Low Point and reduce the divergence to comply with the Turning (Closing) rate of the RFAOA.
D Plane and Trackman have conclusions very, very close to Homer Kelley. But they use "Elastic" collision and HK uses "Inelastic" collision. HK uses Hinge Action to help sustain the line of compression, while Trackman and Jorgenson were/are un-knowledgeable about such things.
I'll just wait until I can produce my video. Better yet, let's get together at the end of April if the weather permits. We can meet in Michigan for a day of Golf.
O.B.Left --You sure Homer isn't referring to how the ball moves further and further back of low point as you move to progressively shorter irons? Yes, I'm sure. The shorter irons with their inherent steeper lie angles.
I think he's referring to how the Angle of Approach and the Angle of Attack are related. How one turns into the other as the plane angle changes. No. Their roles are not exchanged. (I know, words again describing geometry , so bad!)
Say you have a perfectly horizontal plane , a mouse swinging a driver. OK The club head path circular but never getting off the ground, ok like a hula hoop lying on the ground....I understand Zero angle of Attack, okmax Angle of Approach Zero Angle of Approach. Now for a hula hoop standing vertical to the ground , a pure vertical plane of motion ..... you get the opposite with the club head path : Max Angle of Attack "0", minimal Angle of Approach "0".
The steeper plane angles have more down to them and less out no... meaning they create less Divergence in Path and Face for balls played back of low point. No That and the increased loft of shorter irons minimize the curve of the shot for balls played back of low point with Grip Rotation. That is to say a face that is rotated in the hands so its parallel to the plane line. Its looks like its going to be a big draw shot but the path is not all that far out to the right when you scale things and take into consideration loft .
This is why I don't bother rotating my plane in the manner described in the video above. For short irons. I just take the draw tendency into consideration when aiming my plane line .. It isn't much of a draw after all . Not as much as implied in the video. Or as JT says you can Angled Hinge it too ,swing left, like a little insurance policy against the draw. Nothing wrong with a draw but they do tend to roll out .... not something you want generally with a short iron. Sometimes maybe. If so don't angle hinge it.
If you were to play a 5 iron way back in the stance with the face squared to the target, given its plane angle , lie angle ........look out draw. The flatter plane having more associated OUT less Down. More Divergence in path and face, less loft too. If you want to draw the ball then do as you say. But if you want to move the ball aft in your stance and hit the ball straight, then tilt the Plane the correct amount. Then, insure the face is square to the angle of approach at impact and the increased closing ratio of the Right Forearm Angle of Approach (because of the steeper plane) will sustain the Line of Compression.
You can draw all this stuff . Geometry of the Circle . Seems to me Geometry of the Circle , D plane (not that I know anything about it), Radar , cameras are all addressing the same issue but looking at it from different perspectives . Different disciplines . There should be a lot of overlap but there could be some points of departure too. The latter doenst really bother me much. Whats wrong with "new information of all kinds" as Homer would say? But guys looking for points of departure or worse still cooking them up in a vengeful way do bother me. Its a total waste of their time and ours, the readers. Trackman supports that an increased Angle of Approach, thus increasing divergence, then if supported by an increase Angle of Attack will again reduce the divergence.
If a D plane or Flightscope or Foresight guy etc convinced me that I was missing something .....of course Id put it in play. Why not? If they convinced me of something outside of TGM? Id put it in play. If somebody thinks Im nuts to rotate the face instead of the plane ......Im all ears. The Clubface is the Target Line. If you move the ball aft, then you've opened the face (Target Line), then rotate the face (Target Line) back to square, but you need to also steepen the plane to maintain Low Point and reduce the divergence to comply with the Turning (Closing) rate of the RFAOA.
D Plane and Trackman have conclusions very, very close to Homer Kelley. But they use "Elastic" collision and HK uses "Inelastic" collision. HK uses Hinge Action to help sustain the line of compression, while Trackman and Jorgenson were/are un-knowledgeable about such things.
I'll just wait until I can produce my video. Better yet, let's get together at the end of April if the weather permits. We can meet in Michigan for a day of Golf.
Thanks D. Im playing tomorrow in Oakville , Ontario if you're available. Light snow, pins are in , greens are ok. Bring a hammer for teeing the ball up.
Dude . Two pointS on the above:
-You Sir are totally insane .
-You will never stay ahead of Air with long winded posts like that. Gotta break it up into little pieces .
-You left out my shameless attempt at getting ........ uh reviewing a Forsight GC2.
This message brought to you by Foresight Golf makers of the GC2 Smart Camera System. Its more than a launch monitor . Its more than a simulator ....ITS A GAME CHANGER.
-You left out my shameless attempt at getting ........ uh reviewing a Forsight GC2.
This message brought to you by Foresight Golf makers of the GC2 Smart Camera System. Its more than a launch monitor . Its more than a simulator ....ITS A GAME CHANGER.
Hybrid Mode
