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?
Hybrid Mode
