Your interpretation-explanation, and my drawings - match. If you don't think so, then please explain.
Is this drawing easier to understand?
I believe this is keerect. (Assuming you rotated the whole machine in that last drawing, what Homer refers to as a "Rotated Plane Line "....it certainly appears that way to me as I look that third drawing. Not to be confused with a mere change in foot line or some such thing.)
This is an illustration of how a True Swinger would need to Rotate his Plane Line to square his Clubface for balls positioned forward of Low Point given that he hasnt Rotated his Grip. A Draw resulting as True Swinging assumes no compensational Hand Manipulation to offset the draw alignments, Divergence in Path and Face during the swing. CF alone will square the face during the swing (CF naturally creates Horizontal Hinging without any manipulation by the hands). These are the "passive hands" of golf literature taken to their logical extreme.....with some accompanying passive arms too I believe although Im still thinking the True Swinger could employ Extensor Action it being a non accelerating thrust of the right arm. Not sure .. life line .....anybody?
D, would you care to try the manipulated hands Swinger / Hitter version......which I believe Doctor Sandridge is perhaps referring to? The Rotated Grip version in other words .....where the face is squared to the target via "manipulation" as opposed to CF alone. (As I interpret Homer anyways).
How bout an iron played back in the stance with and without Grip Rotation.
As a side note the thing that really troubled me when I first read 7-2 was that there seemed to be two sets of physics, impact geometry laws .........one for true swinger , one for hitter. But I read it wrong of course. There is but one sets of laws, natural and universal and as I believe Ben Doyle says "either you're lawful or you're awful".
(Was I correct in thinking that's Ben Doyle's line David? I figure you'll know having had lessons with Misters Doyle , Sloan , Tomassello , McHatton, Blake etc.......thats the entire group from the "pioneer" first GSEM class with Homer and a couple of bright lights from Lynn's GSEM class...... as some of you guys who keep track of such things will notice).
Daryl, how 'bout a ball played back in the stance with a mid iron , Grip Rotation and Angled Hinge? Gonna have to draw the face staying square to the Arc or Inclined Plane.......
Im seeing a brave new world of TGM drawings. Where once there were just words, beautiful words but poorly suited for illustrating geometry.......we shall see illustrations and boldly go where no man .......
In your third drawing......Ball positioned back of low point, grip rotation (and given True Hitting we assume Angled Hinging) resulting in a Draw given enough Divergence.
This is where I go a little foggy ..........the implications of Angled Hinging to the ball response. Gotta think a bit on that one, do some research.....
Re your second drawing and the accompanying quote from 7-2. "Moving the ball back (hook alignment) ...." I believe that should be accompanied by a drawing showing Grip Rotation with the ball fore and aft of low point. Your drawing shows a "Slice Grip" with a probable Push ball response which could be compensated for with an adjustment to the Target Line , Plane Line rotation in other words. Which would give you a straight at the hole shot but higher and softer given the increased loft on the club and slightly steeper Angle of Attack maybe. Not sure , maybe in the future they'll invent a machine that can measure all these dynamics....
Somewhere in the book Homer mentions the influence of an increase in the Angle of Attack on ball flight....it goes higher. Cant find it right now.....again its kinda hidden in there somewhere. But suffice it to say that moving the ball back and rotating the grip has implications.
We're talking Machine Adjustments. The tools of the trade for the shot maker. Like Jacks towering long irons.......or Tigers low spinning wedge 1/2 wedge ....or Trevino or Bobby Lockes putting or or or. This is the dna of their business.
In your third drawing......Ball positioned back of low point, grip rotation (and given True Hitting we assume Angled Hinging) resulting in a Draw given enough Divergence.
This is where I go a little foggy ..........the implications of Angled Hinging to the ball response. Gotta think a bit on that one, do some research.....
"Moving the ball back (hook alignment) ...." I believe that should be accompanied by a drawing showing Grip Rotation with the ball fore and aft of low point. Your second drawing shows a Slice Grip with a probable Push ball response.
I thought "moving the Ball Back" is step 1 and Closing the Clubface by rotating the club in the grip was step 2.
I thought "moving the Ball Back" is step 1 and Closing the Clubface by rotating the club in the grip was step 2.
Ok I see what you mean now. So those three drawings show grip rotation, I guess for a Hitter since you drew the Angle of Approach.
Just saying the series of drawings doesnt line up with the words. But I could be wrong again......happens all the time.
Oh man you're close to crackin 7-2 wide open Dude. But this thread was really about Angled and a Draw or something.......cant remember. So Im gonna shut up before I get called a thread jacker by Mike O or somebody equally ironic. Mike O being the Grand Masta Thread Jacka of all time....although Vegas has seen a lot money coming in on Inner City lately.
Daryl, this should be continued in its own thread maybe? Something like "whats up with 7-2 anyways?" Or "whats the deal with True Swinging? or Grip Rotation, Plane Line Rotation , what the.....?
A very simple answer would be the go here,you guys have got yourselves all tied up in a "Drawing contest" and we have here "SENIOR MEMBERS" having a peeing contest as to knows more than the other and can draw better
Does anybody understand what is being said here "I doubt it".
I would say if someone saw the answers here,would they be able to determine what the opening question was without seeing the opening question first.........I DONT THINK SO....your "in depth" answers answer zilch.........I have written this reply without animosty...thank you
Found it finally. The influence of an increase in the Angle of Attack on the ball flight.
From 2-N-0
"When the Ball is positioned at the Low Point, the two Plane Lines combine as one, but as the Ball is moved toward the Right Foot, these lines appear farther apart and the Angle of Approach becomes wider. Then, the steeper the Plane Angle (10-6), the steeper the Angle of Attack (2-N-1), the higher the trajectory and the deeper the Divot (7-6)."
This discussion touches upon a very fascinating topic: What you need to do to work the ball as a hitter is in many ways the opposite of what a swinger need to do. And if yo drag & drive you better know what you're asking for. Cause you will get it
Originally Posted by O.B.Left
Found it finally. The influence of an increase in the Angle of Attack on the ball flight.
From 2-N-0
"When the Ball is positioned at the Low Point, the two Plane Lines combine as one, but as the Ball is moved toward the Right Foot, these lines appear farther apart and the Angle of Approach becomes wider. Then, the steeper the Plane Angle (10-6), the steeper the Angle of Attack (2-N-1), the higher the trajectory and the deeper the Divot (7-6)."
I just read this part four times and I don't get it. Why does Homer say that the steeper the Angle of Attack, the higher the trajectory (in this context)? With angled hinging I would assume a "lay forward" (deloft) impact. And with dual horizontal? I dunno. Are we talking about a glancing blow here?
I just read this part four times and I don't get it. Why does Homer say that the steeper the Angle of Attack, the higher the trajectory (in this context)? With angled hinging I would assume a "lay forward" (deloft) impact. And with dual horizontal? I dunno. Are we talking about a glancing blow here?
I hate to say this but yes. Moving the Ball back introduces Glancing Blow, roll up the face, higher trajectory.
Hybrid Mode
