Answers and questions for you above . . . .

Witcha . . . BUT . . . . what defines a TGM purist? To me the beauty of Mr. Kelley's work is the catalog . . . . putting the components together . . . . Just think about the different stuff just with something as isolated as Knee Actions and all the different implications that result in the other components (even how it effects the hand path stuff in this thread) Does one Knee Action make it easier to have a particular Hand Path? . . . . pretty awesome that a dude could even catalog that WITHOUT video.

First a correction
 

***First a correction***

In my last post I said that during the optimization part of the study Nesbit/McGinnis studied a "circular delivery path" and found it to be better than the scratch golfer's original hand path. That's not true ... what they found was that to get the same clubhead speed using a "circular delivery path" would require 10% MORE power (a lot more torque). (See table 7 http://www.jssm.org/vol8/n2/11/T7.htm ) . Looks like "circular delivery" is out.

**********************

Now as to your question bucket...

It takes three points to define a plane (any plane). So if we were to take the coordinates of the hands at the top of the swing, in the middle of the downswing and at impact we can define a plane... lets call it the hand (hub) plane. That's what we're looking at in that graphic I overlayed the spiral on. Its not a front view, side view etc. ... is a view perpendicular to that hand plane.
X and Y are just cartesian coordinates on a plane. The curves are the path the hands trace on that plane. BTW Nesbit does not tell us how much the hands actually deviate from said plane. That would be nice to know.

I hear the question: How do you teach it?

Our problem statement is: how do we to maximize CHS given fixed kinetic (muscle power) limitations?

To solve any problem we must get to root cause; and a jouney of 1000 miles begins with the first step.. That what Nesbit and McGinnis have done here... They have shown definitively that hand path is THE KEY FACTOR involved in maximizing the kinetic transfer (from body to club) i.e. root cause. Furthermore the computer has told us that the optimal hand path for the blended second and third phases of the downswing should resemble a spiral (at least for this scratch golfer). Now biomechanics must tell us how that hand path goal is best achieved... what muscle groups need developing to improve the kinetic limitations and what areas of flexibility are needed... sequencing etc.

Today the latest rage is radar reports of what is happening at impact. That's all well and good but I can envision a day in the not too distant future when Instruction will begin by setting up camera(s) (or sensors of some type), plugging in computer having a validated biomechanics model of student (not unlike Nesbit's). Swing is captured and within seconds optimized improvement suggested (including animations showing how to move differently in order to achieve).

I can see it now... in the not too distant future Kostis will be expounding on a golfer's screwed up hand path seconds after the mis-hit. Gone are the days when golf was a pastime of the pipe-smoking leisure class dressed in stiff suits and bowtie swinging hickory sticks. We're on the the verge of maximizing human potential now.

PS.

If I was an instructor... And if I had an instruction studio... I would get a big mirror and paint a big spiral on it today. I'd have the student stand infront of said mirror and teach him/herself how make their hands trace that spiral before proceeding to the net/range. Just a suggestion

NM . . . Thanks for posting . . . . I'm still not sure I am following you. Let's take your "mirror" deal for example. Would you position the student to see spiral from "face on" or "down the line?"

Also . . . Imagine that you have a player standing on a mat and you were going to plot the curve of the hand path on the ground for his hands to "cover" as he stood in the middle of the hand path "graph". . . . what would that mat with the "spiral" or whatever you want to call it look like?

If this is gonna be revolutionary . . . you gotta be able to make it so dillweeds like me can get it.

Thanks!

Bucket

I think that TGM is a Method and that it's Itemized in 12-1-0 and 12-2-0. Specialty strokes use a different variations or are zeroed out.

Daryl: TGM "Straight Line Power Package Delivery Path" are Hands Delivered on a Single Plane (no Plane Shift). This is the Wheel Track HK talks about. Face on, it's not a Straight Line, but Down the Line it is a Straight Line. In years past there has been confusion about this.

Bucket: If that is the case then why does Homer illustrate the concept with the face on caddie view? I think this is simply his concept. Don't think your right on this . . . not the procedure just illustrating the concept.

Daryl: Delivery Paths are three Dimensional. In a Straight Line Power Package Delivery Path, the Down and Out occurs on a Single Plane. The Forward is an attempted Straight Line by synchronizing the Shoulder Turn with the Downstroke of the Power Package. The Arc at the Top occurs because the Power Package and Shoulder Turn Occur simultaneously. As the Power Package Accelerates and the Hands move faster than the Shoulders, a Straight Line Path is theoretically possible. The Arc at the Bottom occurs because the Hands can't travel any lower than their Length allows and will appear to Flatten out at Release. The Picture 10-23-C is taken from a angle. It was HK's intent that The Bottom Arc would occur when the Hands reach the Line of Sight to the Ball. All of this amounts to a "Turned Shoulder Plane, Straight Line Delivery Path and Right Elbow Closer to the Belt Buckle".

Don't know about all that boss . . . . regardless . . . . it's all about handpath and laying the club on the plane . . . . see Sergio and other "throwaway artists" for an illustration.

Understand impact fix, the flying wedges and the path of PP#1.

See EdZ Drills.

Thanks for this NM

Assuming a straight left arm and club through the ball, I can imagine how the hands could be pulled closer to their "center" by an abrupt upward movement of the left shoulder as the club approaches the ball. If this is correct would there not be a need for the head to drop too?