[12 piece bucket]

Bucket,
Due to privacy agreements with tour players, I can't mention names.
Over the years the boys have provided evaluations to at least 4 former number 1 players in the world over the years.
Interesting enough.
They all had 6-M-1 starting form the ground. This was measured.
They all had an awesome kinetic link (6-M-1).
at impact their hips were open between 20 to 25 degrees.
Hips and shoulders were perpendicular to their spine at impact. So hips and shoulder were square to each other at impact.
With minimal right lateral bending.
Then all had good muscular loading. Fire and load muscle in right sequence in swing.The way they fired their body in sequence was all very similar.
All had ground forces and stable lower body mechanics, which stabilized at impact, actually their hip counter torque at impact.
Once the upper body was square to their hips at impact and club was released the hips and shoulder turned to finish position as together as one.

Like all these guys above appear to be similar.

This is what is interesting, their geometry all looked different,
even though their physics was the same, they created similar movement patterns. One thing which was the same is their sequence or kinetic link to start the downswing were the same. ( 6-M-1)

Although their plane work around the axis of their spine.

Is interesting even though their physics were identical their geometry appeared different. There swing all looked unique and different to each other.
I thinks it's pretty cool.
Primarily we focus on is creating the right physics and movement patterns. Then create training programs for each person so they can develop effective movement patterns.
Basically what we do is screen a golfers to measure their movement patterns, then create a program to improve movement patterns to create the right physics and develop a kineticlink (6-M-1

Very good . . . . so focusing on the similarities exclusive of geometry (which I think is significant at least to the curvature of the ball) . . . .

I highlighted some of what you mentioned in terms of similarities . . .

1. When you say the hips and shoulders are perpendicular to the spine . . . .what do you mean there?

2. As far as the hips and shoulders, was the center of the hip turn in front of the center of the shoulder turn? If so how much?

3. When you say the hips and shoulders were square . . . you mean open the same amount?

4. Minimal lateral bending . . . is that bending to the right with the spine?

5. Could you elaborate on muscle loading?

As to geometry, to me the geometry differences are very significant maybe not interms of generating speed BUT almost everything interms of determing trajectory, start line and curvature. If you consider the differences in grip type and where the arms of the players I posted are in relation to the ball the release motions are vastly different. These players all hit vastly different "stock" shots as well as a result of the different launch conditions produced by their respective geometry.

No question the ball responds to speed generated by the similarities you mentioned that you have studied. But it also responds to the particular face path angle of attack, angle of approach and ascent produced by the different geometries.

But I'm very interested in similarities that you have found.