Clubshaft "on plane"
 

When is the clubshaft on plane during the downswing?

There are many TGMers who would state that the clubshaft is "on plane" when the end of the clubshaft that is nearest to the ground points at the ball-target line (or its extension) at all time-points during the downswing, when it is not parallel to the ground. That means that the clubshaft end should always point at the ball-target line even when it is shifting planes during the downswing. So, for example, many golfers shift planes from the turned shoulder shoulder plane (at the start of the downswing) to the elbow plane (at impact) and HK's "on plane" idea is that the clubshaft end should always point at the ball-target line even while it is shifting planes. However, I presume that this is not an ironclad rule, but a generally useful guideline.

Hank Haney has his own idea of being "on plane". He states that when the clubshaft is on a plane that is above the clubshaft-at-address plane, that the clubshaft should always be parallel to the clubshaft-at-address plane. Therefore, according to Hank Haney's model, when the clubshaft is shifting from the turned shoulder plane to the elbow plane in the downswing, it should always be parallel to the clubshaft-at-address plane. Haney calls these parallel planes "congruent planes".

Here is a photo showing Hank Haney demonstrating his parallel clubshaft plane idea.



Note that the butt end of the club doesn't point at the ball-target line, so Hank Haney's idea of being "on plane" is incompatible with HK's idea of being "on plane". It would seem to me that neither Hank Haney or Homer Kelley has an ironclad theoretical justification for their "on plane" theory, and that it is only a rough guideline. It would seem to me that the clubshaft's behaviour will fit in more with Hank Haney's model during the early/mid downswing if the hands (and therefore) clubshaft drops down (groundwards) more per unit time than the left arm rotates counterclockwise per unit time, and that it is individual golfer-dependent. Consider three golfers.



Images 1-3 show Sergio Garcia at varying time-points in the early/mid downswing, and you can see that his clubshaft is nearly parallel to the clubshaft-at-address plane. In other words, he better fits Hank Haney's model simply because his hands drop more per unit time (relative to the degree of left arm counterclockwise rotation per unit time) than the "average" professional golfer. Image 4 shows Tiger Woods and image 5 shows Adam Scott, and neither of their clubshaft-ends precisely points at the ball-target line, but they are closer to the HK model. From my perspective, it only means that their clubshaft is dropping groundwards less per unit time (relative to the degree of left arm counterclockwise rotation per unit time) than Sergio Garcia's clubshaft, and that it is only an individual golfer characteristic.

In other words, there is seemingly no "fixed" rule that specifies how much the hands should drop per unit time (relative to the degree of left arm counterclockwise rotation per unit time) during the downswing. The only critical time point is when the hands reach a below-waist-level position, and at that time point the clubshaft should point at the ball-target line so that the final clubshaft release can be "on plane" (as can be seen in this photo of Aaron Baddeley).



What do you think?

Jeff.

Jeff one problem with pics is unless the camera angle is perfectly square to the player the plane angles will not be precise. Additionally many pros manipulate the hands near impact to get the club on plane. If you look at some of the youtube slo mo videos of Mickelson you can see this just before contact. Hogan really got that right forearm on plane pointing at the ball.
There is "magic" in the right forearm.

Geometrically Oriented Linear FORCE
 

Jeff, Until you can forsake the shaft and its visuals you will never get to the exciting essence of TGM.

The sweetspot and PP3 should be on plane...there are times during a swing when they can follow the same plane as the shaft but there are times when there are seperate.

But the key is to FEEL the force and FEEL what on plane is...If you can't feel it with a golf club then use a heavier weighted implement and swing...FEEL the sweetspot in your hands and then draw the lines in your head.

Sorry if that sounds cryptic but there is a level of understanding and appreciation that comes only through feeling. You can do the Math afterwards!

Start to swing heavy things around your body...build a plane board like Homer did...LOOL, LOOK, LOOK....and FEEL , FEEL, FEEL...

Then do it again and again...1 month minimum...

Then wonder why you ever worried about drawing lines on videos which will always be plagued by parallax problems...

I think that this is what VJ was getting at when he replied to you....

Invisisweetspotplanemagic
 

I did not have the guts to mention the part about disregarding the shaft. Tough to substitue an imaginary line (sweetspot plane) with an actual line (the clubshaft) I built one of those thingmy-jigs with a length of yarn connecting the pressure point spots on the aft side of the grip with the sweetspot. I went a step further and spray painted the club head, the face and the shaft different colors! Without seperate identities there is nothing but chaos! Moooohahahahah! Diabolically evil laughter for the puzzled!

Haney is plane wrong!
 

I gotta throw in that focusing on the shaft is playpen stuff. I do not know other teachers that identified the sweetspot plane, so perhaps Haney should be mentioned in the same breath as someelse who does not know! Clue: not Homer Kelley! A little caustic...I know! :laughing1

Golfbulldog

I am aware that the key points are the PP#3 (and not the hands) and the sweetspot plane (and not the clubshaft plane). However, the angular difference and point location difference is so small that using the hands/clubshaft as a surrogate visual marker is not far off. I, therefore, find your theoretical objections somewhat invalid. You are free to draw the sweetspot plane on my images, and then demonstrate the relevant differences. I will be very surprised to find that it makes any difference to my contention that "being on plane" needs to factor-in the amount of hand dropping per unit time relative to the amount of left arm rotation per unit time, and that the entire concept of "being on plane" is an arbitrary construct.

Regarding your idea of practicing "feelings" as a replacement for accurate visual examination of "real life" swings (despite the small problem of parallax error) is an even greater mistake from my perspective - in terms of understanding the concept of "being on plane" instead of the concept of "feeling on plane".

Jeff.

Pay attention to Homer’s words: the base plane line of the inclined plane is usually BUT not always the line of flight.

Also pay attention to this photo also:



You are not the camera man and even you are, you might not take the right angle to let you study what is on plane or to disprove Homer study….as Tiger will not allow you to stand right behind him. BTW, can you analysis what is the degree of the camera shooting Tiger and Adam and their intended line of flight?

Homer spent 28 years and went on research, and with today technology, we can find out what the ^$%#% is “on plane” or not...and, how about the sweet spot plane line?

The below real 3d motion captured picture showed one or two things Homer stated…



And finally, question to TGM expert, is there any difference when Homer put with quotation mark or not with the words ON PLANE?

Regardless of your plane theory, the longitundinal center of gravity (which is a line) must stay be aligned to that plane. The clubshaft is at an angle to this line so as the LCOG is the axis on which the turn and roll takes plane, the shaft will make a conical shape and will be aligned with the inclined plane only at 2 points around 360 degrees of rotation.

Now to the Hank Haney parallel plane theory. To those not acquanted with the golfing machine would think it contradictory to the TGM however they are mistaken. Homer Kelley clearly states in 7-7 - I don't have my book with me so I will have to paraphrase "other controlled procedures may be more difficult but not be deemed incorrect such as positioning the club to the plane angle intended for release". This is exactly the same as the parallel plane theory. However going into this in detail is another post however I concur with Homer Kelley on this that it is unnessesarily difficult.

KOC

I have no problem appreciating the fact that camera angle variations can distort our perception of whether the clubshaft is on plane - using HK's definition (peripheral end of the club pointing at the baseline of the inclined plane).

However, I can tell from looking at Sergio Garcia's clubshaft-hand movements in images 1,2, 3 that he is definitely not "on plane" per HK's definition (even when accepting the potential presence of camera angle perceptual problems), and the reason relates to the fact that Sergio has the individual idiosyncrasy of dropping his hands groundwards a large amount per unit time, with only a small degree of left arm rotation per unit time, during that time period of his downswing. I also cannot label Sergio's downswing action imperfect if he successfully gets his clubshaft-on-plane at the critical time point - at impact.

Jeff.

You've just found the definition of "on plane". To expand a bit, it's when the right forearm and clubshaft are tracing the plane line. Prior to that, just about anything goes.
Mathew put up a nice 3D animation at one point. Pretty sure its still in the gallery.