I like 2-M-4. To me it speaks of "how to pull". Dont pull with the Left Arm for Total Motion. It'll pull off the body....triggering Release. Chip Basic is a different story, with the Pivot zero'd you can , if you so choose, employ a 10-3-D Left Arm Pull. You need to pre position your Right Shoulder so you dont run out of right arm.
In Total Motion the left arm is inert , stretched out by EA at the #1 , a "non accelerating" Thrust. The turning Pivot , the On Plane dive of the Right Shoulder in Startdown turns the Left Shoulder which pulls the left arm. For me the pull feels like a tug at the #2pp with the Left Hand turned to Plane. The #4pp is snug.
Sorta sounds like a Startdown Waggle doesnt it? You have to be on your left side.
Couple of point :
I have 2 6th editions.
Oldest copy has the 12-2 error in 23 says C then straight line- as mentioned
newest copy has a sticker over 23 and 24 and the change to 23 is A then top arc and straight line- transposition of the error. I got it new that way- anyone else see this??
I wish the explanation of swinging/hitting said this is how to move the "hands" not "clubshaft/clubhead".
It is a feel to me that (beyond the application of force) it is the PIVOT that creates the "out" in swinging and the "around" in hitting.
Couple of point :
I have 2 6th editions.
Oldest copy has the 12-2 error in 23 says C then straight line- as mentioned
newest copy has a sticker over 23 and 24 and the change to 23 is A then top arc and straight line- transposition of the error. I got it new that way- anyone else see this??
Bummer.
Times two!
What to do?
Just take matters into your own hand -- the pen and your knowledge of truth! -- and make the appropriate changes.
Where's the Thrust? If the Thrust is "ahead" of the deadweight, it's pulling, if it's "behind" the deadweight, it's pushing.
Yes!
And as long as you have two hands on the club as per driveloading or extencior action, you will have a two sided thrust. One side pushing and the other side pulling, whether you hit or swing.
Quote:
Most of the 24 Components already are the same with Swinging and Hitting.
Precicely.
I don't think you can become a good hitter without mastering most of the swing fundamentals.
You can replace some of the pivot motion range perhaps with a right hand thrust but you still need a lively and connected pivot to get anything out of that thrust. And as long as you turn those shoulders, there will be rope handling that creates swing speed, whether the other side axes or not.
"Some of the difference that is different - or so I think - is that when you swing, you swing your primary lever with your shoulder. You use dead hands and after transition the shoulder turn and CF keep your hands where your shoulder turn gives you max leverage.
When you hit, you still swing with you shoulders, but you also swing your primary lever around your left shoulder. You delegate some of the swingers' pivot work to the right arm. But you need a proper pivot action as a basis to be sucessful with the TGM hitting."
Gets even more complicated when you consider that you can pull with the left side or the right side.
I think you have nailed the most basic difference between hitting and swinging. When you hit, you substitute some of the pivot rotation with arms rotation.
This discussion is taking us into an area where TGM seems to be at odds with Sir Isac Newton's physics theories and laws. I wouldn't go as far as saying that TGM is wrong, but I would say that TGM is confusing and inconsistent with regards to separating hitting and swinging. Faulty assumptions and explanations that are raised here on LBG passes unnoticed ever so often.
There is unclarity with regards to the difference between rope handling and centripetal force (what was called radial force above) that is highly misleading. They are not the same, but they seem to be regarded a such very often.
When you pull the rope, you're partly pulling the club towards the swing center and partly pulling it forward. The first part of the pull carries the centripetal force and all it does is keep the club in orbit. No change in swing speed because of centripetal force, only change in speed direction. The other part - the forward part - is tangential force that adds swing speed. It works in pretty much the same way as a right hand thrust with PP#1. I really like Daryl's take on this.
This centripetal / centrifugal / rope handling mess often leads to the misconception that a swinger uses centripetal force to create clubhead speed. Centripetal force doesn't produce speed. Never has, never will. Only tangential force (linear force per TGM) produces swing speed.
I really like the G.O.L.F acronym. It says it all, really: Geometrically Oriented Linear Force. Homer is so close there. Centripetal force handles the geometry by keeping the club on a circular path. Linear Force creates speed. It's really that simple.
Then there's the implied assumption that you can't use centripetal force in a hitting procedure. While the truth is that you must if you want to create a motion that looks remotely like a golf stroke where the club moves around your body. You can't avoid doing it. And with two hands on the club you will to a large extent create clubhead speed the same way as a swinger does. The hiting stroke is in this regard a swing without pp#3 rotation and where driveloading substitues some of the swingers rope handling.
Much of this confusion is related to the description of Accumulator #4 which is incomplete in TGM.
It starts in chapter two:
Quote:
2-L. Application of Force. The forces generated in a Golf Stroke need to be understood before there can be any degree of genuine mastery of them. ......
From there, Homer proceeds to present the three lever forms that he uses throughout. They are supposed to be all inclusive. In doing so, he basically excludes the shoulder rotation from the equation. Instad the shoulder turn is labeled as a "carrier of motion and nothing more" when PP#4 isn't engaged.
I think Homer used PP#4 as the partner to Accumulator #4 because he made his explanations dependent on the three lever forms. The only lever force he found with regards to the left arm was the pp#4 so he used that. Doing so he missed the incredible torque that the left shoulder pull and the right shoulder push represents each of their own and together. The strong pull that you get through the left arm during the down swing is often mistaken for pp#4 pressure and the "blast-off".
There are several ways to model how the left shoulder really works. A simple torque around the swing center would be be sufficient. But none of the lever forms is fit to describe how the left shoulder actually creates swing speed. The lever forms only covers the PP#4 part of it. Same thing can be said about driveloading and the right shoulder. The part of it that is done between the ground and the right shoulder may very well be analysed in a similar manner.
I haven't been able to find where Homer describes when Accumulator #4 is inline. I don't think he did. But it seems to be assumed that Accumulator #4 is inline when the left arm has left pp#4. But in reality, Accumulator #4 is in a very good out-of line condition when the arm is at 90 degrees to the shoulders (as seen from above). That's the alignment where the pull from the left arm has the largest distance away from the swing center. Accumulator #4 isn't inline before the left arm is raised to shoulder high and pointing down the shoulder line. Something that will not happen until the finish.
TGM:
Quote:
6-B-4-B. Zero Accumulation is either no Shoulder Turn or use of Accumulator #1 alone.
First part of this is correct. If you don't turn the shoulders, the swing center will move towards the left shoulder and you will only get centripetal force through the left arm. Yet we see a lot of hitting descriptions as if the shoulders doesn't turn.
Second part is incorrect for a stroke with a straight left arm and a left hand holding on to the club. Only with one hand can you use Accumulator #1 alone. If the rope is thight you're using Accumulator #4 also.
Admittedly, there are several paragraphs in TGM that more than hints that there's more going on with the pivot than a little pp#4 thrust. But those parts are only prosaic and lacks foundation in the theoretical framework that Homer prepared for TGM. Thus you get a lot of instances where TGM is lacking and not lacking at the same time, depending on which paragraph you read. But as a framework this is a serious omission and it does impact how we understand TGM.
TGM doesn't have the mechanisms for power transmission from the pivot to the accumulators properly outlined. No wonder then, that TGM is regarded among a few critics as underplaying the significance of the pivot drive. This is especially the case in the hitting stroke. But also in the swing, where you may get the impression that all efforts are over when the right arm has left pp#4.
Much of what I've said here may be somehow off topic, but it makes all the difference in the world towards understanding the similarities between hitting and swinging and the common requirements for producing a stroke as far as physics and geometry is conserned. And also towards understanding how some of the big horsepower is generated and leveraged in the golf stroke. I tried to start a thread a few months ago in the lab that addressed Accumulator #4 but the response was zero. There are geometrical drawing and force diagrams there that outlines how Accumulator #4 works and hopefully they do not require an MSc degree to understand. Here: http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/thread7114.html
This post and your post in the Lab are excellent examinations into the #4 Accumulator.
I doesn't seem like you have ever experienced the "Blast Off" that Homer Kelley talks about.
The #4 Accumulator becomes In-Line when the Triangle (Both Arms Straight) re-forms at Follow-Through. The "Straight" Left Arm doesn't actually ever become 90 degrees to the Shoulders.
I think you have nailed the most basic difference between hitting and swinging. When you hit, you substitute some of the pivot rotation with arms rotation.
This discussion is taking us into an area where TGM seems to be at odds with Sir Isac Newton's physics theories and laws. I wouldn't go as far as saying that TGM is wrong, but I would say that TGM is confusing and inconsistent with regards to separating hitting and swinging. Faulty assumptions and explanations that are raised here on LBG passes unnoticed ever so often.
There is unclarity with regards to the difference between rope handling and centripetal force (what was called radial force above) that is highly misleading. They are not the same, but they seem to be regarded a such very often.
When you pull the rope, you're partly pulling the club towards the swing center and partly pulling it forward. The first part of the pull carries the centripetal force and all it does is keep the club in orbit. No change in swing speed because of centripetal force, only change in speed direction. The other part - the forward part - is tangential force that adds swing speed. It works in pretty much the same way as a right hand thrust with PP#1. I really like Daryl's take on this.
This centripetal / centrifugal / rope handling mess often leads to the misconception that a swinger uses centripetal force to create clubhead speed. Centripetal force doesn't produce speed. Never has, never will. Only tangential force (linear force per TGM) produces swing speed.
I really like the G.O.L.F acronym. It says it all, really: Geometrically Oriented Linear Force. Homer is so close there. Centripetal force handles the geometry by keeping the club on a circular path. Linear Force creates speed. It's really that simple.
Then there's the implied assumption that you can't use centripetal force in a hitting procedure. While the truth is that you must if you want to create a motion that looks remotely like a golf stroke where the club moves around your body. You can't avoid doing it. And with two hands on the club you will to a large extent create clubhead speed the same way as a swinger does. The hiting stroke is in this regard a swing without pp#3 rotation and where driveloading substitues some of the swingers rope handling.
Much of this confusion is related to the description of Accumulator #4 which is incomplete in TGM.
It starts in chapter two:
From there, Homer proceeds to present the three lever forms that he uses throughout. They are supposed to be all inclusive. In doing so, he basically excludes the shoulder rotation from the equation. Instad the shoulder turn is labeled as a "carrier of motion and nothing more" when PP#4 isn't engaged.
I think Homer used PP#4 as the partner to Accumulator #4 because he made his explanations dependent on the three lever forms. The only lever force he found with regards to the left arm was the pp#4 so he used that. Doing so he missed the incredible torque that the left shoulder pull and the right shoulder push represents each of their own and together. The strong pull that you get through the left arm during the down swing is often mistaken for pp#4 pressure and the "blast-off".
There are several ways to model how the left shoulder really works. A simple torque around the swing center would be be sufficient. But none of the lever forms is fit to describe how the left shoulder actually creates swing speed. The lever forms only covers the PP#4 part of it. Same thing can be said about driveloading and the right shoulder. The part of it that is done between the ground and the right shoulder may very well be analysed in a similar manner.
I haven't been able to find where Homer describes when Accumulator #4 is inline. I don't think he did. But it seems to be assumed that Accumulator #4 is inline when the left arm has left pp#4. But in reality, Accumulator #4 is in a very good out-of line condition when the arm is at 90 degrees to the shoulders (as seen from above). That's the alignment where the pull from the left arm has the largest distance away from the swing center. Accumulator #4 isn't inline before the left arm is raised to shoulder high and pointing down the shoulder line. Something that will not happen until the finish.
TGM:
First part of this is correct. If you don't turn the shoulders, the swing center will move towards the left shoulder and you will only get centripetal force through the left arm. Yet we see a lot of hitting descriptions as if the shoulders doesn't turn.
Second part is incorrect for a stroke with a straight left arm and a left hand holding on to the club. Only with one hand can you use Accumulator #1 alone. If the rope is thight you're using Accumulator #4 also.
Admittedly, there are several paragraphs in TGM that more than hints that there's more going on with the pivot than a little pp#4 thrust. But those parts are only prosaic and lacks foundation in the theoretical framework that Homer prepared for TGM. Thus you get a lot of instances where TGM is lacking and not lacking at the same time, depending on which paragraph you read. But as a framework this is a serious omission and it does impact how we understand TGM.
TGM doesn't have the mechanisms for power transmission from the pivot to the accumulators properly outlined. No wonder then, that TGM is regarded among a few critics as underplaying the significance of the pivot drive. This is especially the case in the hitting stroke. But also in the swing, where you may get the impression that all efforts are over when the right arm has left pp#4.
Much of what I've said here may be somehow off topic, but it makes all the difference in the world towards understanding the similarities between hitting and swinging and the common requirements for producing a stroke as far as physics and geometry is conserned. And also towards understanding how some of the big horsepower is generated and leveraged in the golf stroke. I tried to start a thread a few months ago in the lab that addressed Accumulator #4 but the response was zero. There are geometrical drawing and force diagrams there that outlines how Accumulator #4 works and hopefully they do not require an MSc degree to understand. Here: http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/thread7114.html
Although I don't understand much of this - it would a shame to let it die without any more comments. Shouldn't some of the big guns respond?
Hybrid Mode
