When I wrote that you recommended a zero plane shift, I inferred it from your previous statement that 12-1-0 and 12-2-0 is desirable, and I presumed that if it is desirable then it must be recommendable.
I personally can understand why a zero plane shift could be perceived to be desirable from a mechanical/geometrical perspective, but I believe that it is very undesirable from a biomechanical perspective, which is presumbaly the reason PGA tour players do not use it. Most PGA tour players use a double plane shift swing - hand plane (or elbow plane) to the turned shoulder plane in the backswing, and turned shoulder plane to the elbow plane in the downswing. I think that the major reason for this choice is biomechanical - it is biomechanically natural and therefore it is easier to develop a repeatable swing.
The other point that I cannot understand about 12-1/2-0 is the choice of TSP for the downswing plane. Why would it be desirable to come down on the turned shoulder plane? Virtually all PGA tour players are on, or near, the elbow plane at impact.
Jeff.
12-1-0 and 12-2-0 the discussion was the Turned Shoulder Plane not plane shifts.
"Virtually all PGA tour players are on, or near, the elbow plane at impact".
I suggest you study the Mr. Kelley's plane further 10-6-a,b,c. It is not a question of where the elbow is at impact but rather the plane the club was swung down from the top into impact.
Threaded Mode
