I'm wondering about some pros and cons to the downswing being on the TSP.. including impact. Are there any specific components or accumulator sequences that would be necessary?
not sure where this can go but a little discussion on it might trigger a few questions. thanks
You should read my Book, "1001 Problems with the Elbow Plane".
Consider this:
Normally, the Elbow Plane requires a Delivery Path Shift. You can (but almost impossible) Trace the Plane Line after the Shift. Until then, no tracing. But this is overshadowed by a bigger problem. Hand Path and Clubshaft Plane are different until Release. That means while the Hands trace one path, the Clubhead is tracing another. Elbow Plane Golfers need to find "The Slot" or "Groove". With the TSP, the Hand Path and Clubshaft Plane share the same Angle throughout the Downstroke and Impact.
Shallower Planes require the Left Arm to move away from the Chest earlier than Steeper Planes. The Shallower the Plane, the Earlier the Release. Early Release is a Cause of Throwaway. Therefore, Shallow Swing Planes Cause Throwaway. An Elbow Plane is a Shallow Plane, therefore the Elbow Plane Causes Throwaway.
Elbow Planes are notoriously Pivot Controlled Hands Procedures. This means that the #3 or #2 PP trace the Pivots Rotation, not the Plane Line.
Elbow Planes rely on Pivot Speed. TSP relies on Downstroke Acceleration Sequence.
You should read my Book, "1001 Problems with the Elbow Plane".
Consider this:
Normally, the Elbow Plane requires a Delivery Path Shift. You can (but almost impossible) Trace the Plane Line after the Shift. Until then, no tracing. But this is overshadowed by a bigger problem. Hand Path and Clubshaft Plane are different until Release. That means while the Hands trace one path, the Clubhead is tracing another. Elbow Plane Golfers need to find "The Slot" or "Groove". With the TSP, the Hand Path and Clubshaft Plane share the same Angle throughout the Downstroke and Impact.
can you show me a golfer that really gets on the TSP at impact? Most golfers who play at the highest levels are on the elbow plane . . . do you have an explanation for why they do such a thing?
Shallower Planes require the Left Arm to move away from the Chest earlier than Steeper Planes. The Shallower the Plane, the Earlier the Release. Early Release is a Cause of Throwaway. Therefore, Shallow Swing Planes Cause Throwaway. An Elbow Plane is a Shallow Plane, therefore the Elbow Plane Causes Throwaway. Why would the left arm moving away from the chest be a problem? Is not the release sequence 4-1-2-3? Is this not a natural occurrence? Why would you want to delay #4? Could this not cause a Bob?
Elbow Planes are notoriously Pivot Controlled Hands Procedures. This means that the #3 or #2 PP trace the Pivots Rotation, not the Plane Line. What does this mean?
Elbow Planes rely on Pivot Speed. TSP relies on Downstroke Acceleration Sequence.
is the downstroke acceleration sequence not dependent upon pivot speed . . . massive rotor?
Ed . . . why do you think there is more accuracy inherent in the TSP? Not sure I'm ready to buy in . . . interested to hear your rationale.
The steeper the plane, the less potential sidespin (within the limits of the clubs designed lie angle).
In an ideal application for accuracy (not a human, but a mechanical machine), the plane would be verticle, with exactly the right alignments (ball at proper low point etc).
Of course that assumes a club designed differently (a 90 degree lie angle).
In an ideal application for power, the plane would be horizontal, with exactly the right alignments for ball position. (for those being picky, I suppose you would have to account for gravity's downward pull)
If you hold a club out in front of you, arms straight out in front of the chest and make a baseball swing, you have a more rotational motion, more potential power, but less potential accuracy (less margin for error in ball position and clubface alignment). Lots of #3, very little #2.
If you do the same thing, but swing up/down like an axe, you'd have great potential for accuracy, but power variation might be more difficult (less margin for error in angle of attack/spin). Lots of #2, but little #3.
Mechanically speaking, the best plane angle would be 45 degrees for all shots - to give the most margin for error in power and accuracy.
Of course all of the above must consider the human machine, and the club's design.
__________________
"Support the On Plane Swinging Force in Balance"
"we have no friends, we have no enemies, we have only teachers"
Simplicity buffs, see 5-0, 1-L, 2-0 A and B 10-2-B, 4-D, 6B-1D, 6-B-3-0-1, 6-C-1, 6-E-2
The steeper the plane, the less potential sidespin (within the limits of the clubs designed lie angle).
I think you are making some assumptions here about the rate of rotation of the face though. You of course are very aware of this but this is all with the assumption that the face and path are "matching" with in reason to project the ball to the target. My point with the elbow plane (which most great players end up on) is it is the ideal blend of power and accuracy. Power as you say below and also the rate of rotation is slower due to the #3 requirements.
In an ideal application for accuracy (not a human, but a mechanical machine), the plane would be verticle, with exactly the right alignments (ball at proper low point etc). assuming the face isn't slinging around like a screen doe in a tornado.
Of course that assumes a club designed differently (a 90 degree lie angle).
In an ideal application for power, the plane would be horizontal, with exactly the right alignments for ball position. (for those being picky, I suppose you would have to account for gravity's downward pull)
Maybe . . . could there be a relationship with the "axis of rotation" that overrides what basic plane is being used?
If you hold a club out in front of you, arms straight out in front of the chest and make a baseball swing, you have a more rotational motion, more potential power, but less potential accuracy (less margin for error in ball position and clubface alignment). Lots of #3, very little #2.
If you do the same thing, but swing up/down like an axe, you'd have great potential for accuracy, but power variation might be more difficult (less margin for error in angle of attack/spin). Lots of #2, but little #3.
Mechanically speaking, the best plane angle would be 45 degrees for all shots - to give the most margin for error in power and accuracy.
45 to what? The ground? Spine? Axis?
Of course all of the above must consider the human machine, and the club's design.
Questions/Queries above . . . Thanks for the response . . . interesting discussion. Not sure I'm on board but good stuff to hash out.
__________________
Aloha Mr. Hand
Behold my hands; reach hither thy hand
Last edited by 12 piece bucket : 10-19-2009 at 10:49 AM.
The whole confusion of both golf and G.O.L.F.'s application is where the human machine gets involved.
If there is one area I would have loved to have learned more of re: Homer's views, it is how the human machine relates to what he has described in the book.
there is geometry, there is physics, and there is anatomy
It doesn no good to look at a golf motion without considering all three.
As far as the questions in your post, yes I am assuming a primary lever, and to whatever extent reasonable, fair to say that my initial comments re: ideals are likely more applicable to a hitter than a swinger, who must deal with the face rotation and its 'physical' relation to plane more than a hitter would.
as far as 45 degrees - to the ground (again, mechanically speaking, for margin of error in both distance and accuracy)
I'm curious if anyone has any data looking at what angle the right forearm is to the ground at impact on average for the top players? Any key differences for accurate players vs. powerful ones?
__________________
"Support the On Plane Swinging Force in Balance"
"we have no friends, we have no enemies, we have only teachers"
Simplicity buffs, see 5-0, 1-L, 2-0 A and B 10-2-B, 4-D, 6B-1D, 6-B-3-0-1, 6-C-1, 6-E-2
Hybrid Mode
