Yoda - at this time point we hold contrary viewpoints. I remain open to serious, well-intentioned input from interested forum members and I hope that their input can help clarify matters. I am willing to change my viewpoint in the face of a solidly convincing argument
The problem that I have with the idea that the "sweetspot must be in line with the PP#3 point" is the "belief" that there is a causal connection between the two observed phenomenon. In a swinger, there is no thrust at PP#3. A golfer senses/monitors clubhead lag at PP#3. However, sensing clubhead lag doesn't necessarily prevent a clubhead throwaway problem where the clubhead bypasses the hands near impact, or at impact. In this situation of i) the clubhead traveling at 160mph and the ii) hands slowing down just prior to impact, I can imagine that the golfer can lose his sense of clubhead lag pressure at PP#3 whether he likes it, or not. This loss of a sense of clubhead lag pressure at PP#3 would not necessarily occur if the clubhshaft was not capable of flexing in response to the clubhead's enormous pre-impact momentum, and I could then easily imagine a straight-line relationship between the PP#3 point and the clubface's sweetspot.
Threaded Mode
