Let's examine this issue of the clubface's relationship to the clubhead swingarc more closely.
Here is a photo of Vijah Singh at impact.
One can see that his left wrist is flat and that the back of his left hand is facing the target. Note that the clubshaft has forward shaft at lean at impact and that is has not yet reached its low point (when it should be vertical to the ground). So, the question becomes - where will the clubface, and the back of the left hand, be facing at the club's low point?
I presume that you agree that a neutral grip will mean that the back of the left hand is parallel to the lower edge of the clubface (or lower clubface grooves if the lower clubface edge is rounded) - as demonstrated by Brian Manzella in this photo from an article that he wrote.
Thirdly, I will presume that you agree that all clubs have a slight degree of hookface-offset built into the club.
OK. So, consider my argument. Here is a diagram showing the movement, and orientation, of the clubface through the impact zone.
The green curved line represents the clubhead arc (as seen by a golfer - when viewed from above). The dotted orange line represents the ball-target line and the intended direction of ball flight of a straight shot. The red dot represents the ball. The blue lines represent the clubshaft and its offset hook-faced clubface.
Let's presume that the low point of the clubhead arc (and therefore deepeset part of the divot) is 4" ahead of the ball position.
Point 1 is a representation of the clubface approaching the ball with a slightly open clubface. At this point, there is forward clubshaft lean because the clubhead has not reached its low point, and the hosel of the clubshaft is still moving downwards and outwards and forwards. At this point. the clubface is slightly open to the ball-target line, and also minimally open to the clubhead arc of travel.
Point 2 is the time-point of ball-clubface separation. If the ball remains in contact with the clubface for approximately 4/1,000th of a second, then the clubface will travel about 0.88" further (from the point of first ball contact) before ball-clubface separation happens. At this time-point, the clubface needs to be square to the ball-target line for the ball to go straight towards the target. However, the clubface will not necessarily be perfectly square to the clubhead arc at this time-point - because it presumably depends on the amount of hook-face offset built into the club.
Point 3 is the low point of the clubhead arc, and it is 4" ahead of point 1 (as measured linearly along the ground). It is at this point on the clubhead arc, that the hosel of the clubshaft is going to start moving forwards, upwards and inwards. At this time point, the clubshaft must be vertical to the ground, and if it is vertical to the ground, and the club has a hook-faced offset clubface, then surely the clubface must be slightly closed to the clubhead arc at this time-point. That also means that the back of the left hand must be facing slightly left of the target at the low point of the clubhead arc (if it was facing the target at impact).
After point 3 (during the followthrough phase of the swing), the clubface will surely become even more closed to the clubhead arc, and the back of the left hand will face even more leftwards relative to the target) if the golfer is using horizontal hinging, and not closed to the clubhead arc if the golfer deliberately uses angled hinging.
Finally, regarding the "fact" that horizontal hinging predisposes to a straight ball flight with a tendency to fall to the left at the end of its ball flight - I got that perception from Tom Tomasello's swing video lessons in the gallery. He demonstrated that the ball tends to roll to the left after landing when using horizontal hinging, while the ball tends to roll to the right when using angled hinging. I have presumed that the end of the ball flight is not straight (even if the clubface is square to the target at the time of ball-clubface separation) due to draw spin imparted by horizontal hinging, and slice spin imparted by angled hinging. Am I wrong?
Dariusz
You wrote-: "angle hinging (that means keeping the clubface square to the arc) brings more repeatability and consistency because it may eliminate (or better said, may limit) the timing issues and subdue the clubhead motion to the pivot much better."
First of all, angled hinging only keeps the clubface square to the clubhead arc after impact, and not pre-impact (during the release swivel phase of the swing). Secondly, from a swinger's perspective, horizontal hinging can be perceived to be the more natural hinging action, while angled hinging requires an additional deliberate effort (to keep the clubface square to the inclined plane and clubhead arc) during the followthrough. Therefore, I could imagine a person rationally arguing that a horizontal hinging action will be a more consistent/reliable hinging action for a swinger (while angled hinging is more natural for a hitter).
You also wrote-: "I am surprised you thought that square-to-the arc means a square to the target line position at impact." I didn't make that mistake! See my post to Mike above.
Finally, although I enjoy "digging dirt" in the library, I also go to my local golf practice facility 2-3x per week for 3-4 hour sessions of "digging in the dirt" Hogan-style.
You wrote-: "angle hinging (that means keeping the clubface square to the arc) brings more repeatability and consistency because it may eliminate (or better said, may limit) the timing issues and subdue the clubhead motion to the pivot much better."
First of all, angled hinging only keeps the clubface square to the clubhead arc after impact, and not pre-impact (during the release swivel phase of the swing). Secondly, from a swinger's perspective, horizontal hinging can be perceived to be the more natural hinging action, while angled hinging requires an additional deliberate effort (to keep the clubface square to the inclined plane and clubhead arc) during the followthrough. Therefore, I could imagine a person rationally arguing that a horizontal hinging action will be a more consistent/reliable hinging action for a swinger (while angled hinging is more natural for a hitter).
You also wrote-: "I am surprised you thought that square-to-the arc means a square to the target line position at impact." I didn't make that mistake! See my post to Mike above.
Finally, although I enjoy "digging dirt" in the library, I also go to my local golf practice facility 2-3x per week for 3-4 hour sessions of "digging in the dirt" Hogan-style.
Jeff.
That's great to hear that you practice, Jeff ! next time try Tomasello's concept and swing with a dominant right arm throwing out and down and report your feelings. I am anxious to hear your OBJECTIVE opinion after.
OK, I am not familiar with TGM language that much and if angled hinging means a square-to-the-arc clubface ONLY after impact, it's not the same as the concept of having the clubface square during the whole impact zone (i.e. pre-impact part as well). However, I have a feeling (please correct me if I am wrong) that a person who tends to use angled hinging post-impact, must square the clubhead earlier before impact as well. Common sense tells us so.
Ah, one more thing - for a slight moment in time, do not think in swingers/hitters category and admit what scenario minimizes timing issues more.
BTW, why do you think that all clubs have so strong offset clubfaces ? Remember that Hogan's clubs not only were with zero offset but also bent open a few degrees. Consider the same diagramme without offset factor and you'll see the difference.
Moreover, in a perfect scenario of a rotary swing motion in-to-in, the divot will be slightly curving left, showing exactly the way the swing arc is going, not because the clubhead is already closed or in a process of closing, but just because it remains square-to-the-arc.
Jeff,
I agreed with all your points except for these:
1) You could call that grip neutral if you want- I'd just call it bad. But certainly assuming one used it- then yes at low point it would be facing left.
2) Horizontal hinging does not have a draw bias. You can slice, fade, draw, hook using horizontal hinging as it really depends on the clubface relationship to clubhead path.
__________________
Life Goal- Developing a new theory of movement based on Brain Science
Interests - Dabbling with insanity
Hobbies- Creating Quality
You also wrote-: "Horizontal hinging does not have a draw bias. You can slice, fade, draw, hook using horizontal hinging as it really depends on the clubface relationship to clubhead path."
I cannot understand this point. Why would one use horizontal hinging if one deliberately wanted to fade/slice the ball? Secondly, consider a golfer who wants to hit the ball as straight as possible. I presume that you agree that he must have a slightly open clubface at the time of first ball impact, and a square clubface at the time of ball-clubface seperation. So, what type of hinging action would result in a perfectly straight ball flight (with no tendency to fading/drawing) if the clubhead arc is perfectly symmetrical to the ball-target line and the clubface is square to the ball-target line at the exact moment of ball-clubface separation?
Dariusz
I have attempted the Tomasello "right arm throw" action on many occasions. I have found that it only works well when I use an "arm swing" style rather than a "body-swing" style, where the rotating torso drives the swing ala Hogan. Any attempt to blend the two (swinger's "pull" action secondary to a downswing pivot action powering/releasing power accumulators #4 and #2 and a hitter's "push" action due to an active right arm throw action powering/releasing power accumulators #4 and #2) results in switting, which is very problematic in terms of generating a smoothly executed clubhead swing path.
You also wrote-: "However, I have a feeling (please correct me if I am wrong) that a person who tends to use angled hinging post-impact, must square the clubhead earlier before impact as well."
I don't exactly know what you mean by squaring the clubface earlier by impact? Are you referring to squaring it to the ball-target line or to the clubhead arc? Either way, I think that the clubface should never be squared before impact, and the clubface must always be slightly open to the ball-target line and the clubhead arc in the few inches before the clubface impacts the ball - whether using angled hinging or horizontal hinging.
By the way, I realise that all clubs have variable degrees of offset, but I have never seen a zero-offset club that didn't have a hook-face relationship between the clubface and the clubshaft. Are you claiming that Hogan's club's clubface was not hook-faced relative to the clubshaft - even if they had zero offset?
Do you have a photo of Hogan's clubs?
Finally, I agree that the divot should always be going left after the low point of the clubhead arc - because it reflects the clubhead arc/path that moves inside, upwards, forwards after the low point. However, the clubface has a variable degree of rotation relative to the clubhead's arc during that part of the followthrough (after the low point), depending on whether the golfer uses angled versus horizontal hinging. The first part of the divot reflects the clubhead's movement outwards, downwards and forwards prior to it reaching the low point of its arc, and that part of the divot must be directed minimally right of the target.
Jeff.
Last edited by Jeff : 06-18-2008 at 01:10 PM.
Reason: add additional comment
I have attempted the Tomasello "right arm throw" action on many occasions. I have found that it only works well when I use an "arm swing" style rather than a "body-swing" style, where the rotating torso drives the swing ala Hogan. Any attempt to blend the two (swinger's "pull" action secondary to a downswing pivot action powering/releasing power accumulators #4 and #2 and a hitter's "push" action due to an active right arm throw action powering/releasing power accumulators #4 and #2) results in switting, which is very problematic in terms of generating a smoothly executed clubhead swing path.
Understood. It's the opposite feeling to mine since I have found that RAS is a great pattern that combines power of the right forearm while subduing the motion to the pivot. But, hey, wit would be dull if we all were the same.
You also wrote-: "However, I have a feeling (please correct me if I am wrong) that a person who tends to use angled hinging post-impact, must square the clubhead earlier before impact as well."
I don't exactly know what you mean by squaring the clubface earlier by impact? Are you referring to squaring it to the ball-target line or to the clubhead arc? Either way, I think that the clubface should never be squared before impact, and the clubface must always be slightly open to the ball-target line and the clubhead arc in the few inches before the clubface impacts the ball - whether using angled hinging or horizontal hinging.
Jeff, when I say square I always mean squaring to the swing arc (never to the target line); note that the clubhead travels from the inside to the inside, that means it is open when coming to the ball and closed after separation simultaneously being square to the swing arc.
By the way, I realise that all clubs have variable degrees of offset, but I have never seen a zero-offset club that didn't have a hook-face relationship between the clubface and the clubshaft. Are you claiming that Hogan's club's clubface was not hook-faced relative to the clubshaft - even if they had zero offset?
Do you have a photo of Hogan's clubs?
Unfortunately, I have not a good photo of Hogan's clubs (only a general view of the bag); however, people on other fora who met The Man and/or were fortunate to hold Hogan's clubs in their hands, say that apart their SW was very high, they were bent open several degrees. Others said that Ben Hogan manufactured his forged blades the way thaey can be bent and even have negative offset, but I can't say if it's true or not.
There are some clubs with minimal or even without offset (e.g. KZG ZO blades) on the market; generally, the more blade-like is the iron the less is the offset.
Finally, I agree that the divot should always be going left after the low point of the clubhead arc - because it reflects the clubhead arc/path that moves inside, upwards, forwards after the low point. However, the clubface has a variable degree of rotation relative to the clubhead's arc during that part of the followthrough (after the low point), depending on whether the golfer uses angled versus horizontal hinging. The first part of the divot reflects the clubhead's movement outwards, downwards and forwards prior to it reaching the low point of its arc, and that part of the divot must be directed minimally right of the target.
You also wrote-: "Horizontal hinging does not have a draw bias. You can slice, fade, draw, hook using horizontal hinging as it really depends on the clubface relationship to clubhead path."
I cannot understand this point. Why would one use horizontal hinging if one deliberately wanted to fade/slice the ball? Secondly, consider a golfer who wants to hit the ball as straight as possible. I presume that you agree that he must have a slightly open clubface at the time of first ball impact, and a square clubface at the time of ball-clubface seperation. So, what type of hinging action would result in a perfectly straight ball flight (with no tendency to fading/drawing) if the clubhead arc is perfectly symmetrical to the ball-target line and the clubface is square to the ball-target line at the exact moment of ball-clubface separation?
Jeff.
I am curious. Why is that grip bad?
Obvsiously, you can integrate a movement with any grip. Is it a grip that someone could play well with? - sure. That said- here is my perspective. To call that grip neutral is a crime really. Historically and even in the Golfing Machine book- that grip is a weak grip- the left thumb is on top of the shaft and not more behind the shaft at impact. There is a reason that historically those terms were used - i.e. strong and weak - in relation to different grips. Weak isn't good.
For golfing machine fanatics that would want to grip the club with the left hand flat, level and vertical- that grip doesn't accomplish that for a normal straight shot with the ball separating at or before lowpoint.
That's my viewpoint.
You also wrote-: "Horizontal hinging does not have a draw bias. You can slice, fade, draw, hook using horizontal hinging as it really depends on the clubface relationship to clubhead path." I cannot understand this point. Why would one use horizontal hinging if one deliberately wanted to fade/slice the ball?
In golfing machine terms- horizontal hinging is the result of a golf swing that uses centrifugal force- that's what creates that amount and type of clubface closing through impact. Since golf swings that use centrifugal force- are no different than other golf swings - they all encounter on course conditions that require fading or drawing the golf ball at times. Therefore alterations are made to the impact conditions that create fading and drawing - while the motion the face makes through impact is still horizontal hinging created by centrifugal force. At least that would be "your" golf machine answer in a nutshell.
__________________
Life Goal- Developing a new theory of movement based on Brain Science
Interests - Dabbling with insanity
Hobbies- Creating Quality
I can readily accept the idea that horizontal hinging occurs naturally when a golf club releases naturally in a swinger's action. However, you didn't answer my two questions.
i) Why would a swinger employ horizontal, rather than angled hinging, if he wants to fade/slice the ball?
11) What type of hinging action will result in a perfectly straight ball flight if the clubhead arc is perfectly symmetrical to the ball-target line and the clubface is square to the ball-target line at the exact moment of ball-clubface separation?
I presume that you agree that a neutral grip will mean that the back of the left hand is parallel to the lower edge of the clubface (or lower clubface grooves if the lower clubface edge is rounded) - as demonstrated by Brian Manzella in this photo from an article that he wrote.
Jeff.
Jeff,
I don't have the energy lately to post in detail on a lot of these subjects. You are usually pretty thorough about analyzing golf data. In regards to the photo above- the two yellow lines are parallel to each other - but do you really think that each one represents what it is suppose to represent? I see the leading edge or the equivalent score lines as not lining up with the yellow line. Also, likewise I don't see the yellow line representing the true angle of the left arm? Just camera angles etc. - obviously if someone wants to grip the way he describes it they certainly could.
Regardless of all the details - that is a really weak grip. It appears that Brian Manzella via reading the linked article that you provided has derived that grip by associating it with Arnold Palmer, Tiger Woods, Sam Snead etc. and he has made that determination by noting that at the top of their swings the left wrist matches the angle of the leading edge of the clubface. All I can think of - there must be some poor measurements that were taken to come to that conclusion. To think that Sam Snead and Arnold Palmer had a flat left wrist and leading edge of the clubface that faced the target only at lowpoint- you're kidding me right? Arnold Palmer!? YOU'RE KIDDING ME right?
__________________
Life Goal- Developing a new theory of movement based on Brain Science
Interests - Dabbling with insanity
Hobbies- Creating Quality
As for the '3 right hands', I would suggest that some who are trying to understand this concept, at least as I think I understand it, read John Schlee's "Maximum Golf" and Tom Bertrand's "The Secret of Hogan's Swing".
Add the original Hogan's book and VJ Trolio's "The Final Missing Piece of Ben Hogan's Secret Puzzle".
Leadbetter's book is good for pics as is the DVD series Hogan Collection and one other. But at least for me most of the questions, debated topics can be answered with those 4 books.
Why Hogan had the weakened grip and how he managed to square the clubface with it, the reason for the arms close together, and why he stated others should not use his pictures to learn the golf swing but rather the book. (Thus the reason the still pics and diagram don't always track with his real life motion, cause he had to make adjustments cause of his accident).
you're kidding me right? Arnold Palmer!? YOU'RE KIDDING ME right?
Hybrid Mode
