impact on TSP

[12 piece bucket]

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.