Aligning the Clubface

[MizunoJoe]

See why discussion can not be had!
I with answer with the same depth of information U provided.
What you said is Just wrong.
I was going to explain it by saying you are a DOPE but that would not fit the rules of the forum so I( will just say, have a good Day.

hb

A DOPE is someone who doesn't know that the shaft rotates around the sweetspot or can't even type "I will answer".

[whip]

Once again I agree with mizunojoe and bumpy as far as u I can see u deleted all your posts regarding your theories against c.f. aligning the clubface th end you thought more about it found a lb quote and realized u were wrong and deleted your posts

[whip]

Also as usual I aagree with mike o at least we r getting some useful contributions on here

[whip]

Bumpy u made a new thread and changed your ideas we have already discussed all of this bogus scientific theories manipulated swinging etc etc. Mayne we should start another thread on the same.topic just for fun

[HungryBear]

Once again I agree with mizunojoe and bumpy as far as u I can see u deleted all your posts regarding your theories against c.f. aligning the clubface th end you thought more about it found a lb quote and realized u were wrong and deleted your posts

No- I am correct- If you want to know why I would delete anything it is in this story.

Two men met on a narrow bridge.
The first said "I never back up for an idiot"
The second man said "I will"
So he did.

The moral of the story is left to U...

HB

[whip]

I didn't say you deleted posts ? Look in your quote no mention of hungrybebear

[Bumpy]

This post is problematic for me.
http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/s...ght=separation

..............

The True Swinger allows Centrifugal Force to align for Impact all three Functions of the Club, i.e., the Clubhead, the Clubshaft and the Clubface.

..............

Yoda

Something I am missing in the physics, club, machine or in my in interpretation. Suspect this aligning is CF reacting to something I have not accounted for. Gravity? Shaft is a snake?

Bumpy

I read more into it than there is.

Bumpy[/quote]

Indeed, CF aligns the face for impact, the amount of 'hookface' must be accounted for.
Bumpy

Whip,

MY pertinent post have been highlighted in red.

1. MY posts in your thread were intended to get you to make a valid argument which you never did. So I deleted them. Your posts in this thread are pointless and distorted.
2. I misinterpreted Lynn's post.
3. My idea's regarding CF and the clubface remain unchanged and they are old theories.
4. I only disagree with Homer on one point so far and that may change. I believe the condensed nature of the book is of little practical benefit.

Everybody,

On a lighter note, which this thread could use, we may all want to move to the North Pole for Dec.21, 2012. The link is about CF not DOOMSDAY.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...BSkMj1wLc&NR=1

Bumpy

[Mike O]

O.K. again.

No Risk- No Reward. So here goes.

2 approaches:

1. The COG of the clubhead displaced from the shaft allows CF to aligne thye clubface.

2. The clubface is aligned and held by the flat left hand and is brought into impact with the flat left hand, the left wedge, #3 accumulator etc. all with RHYTHM. And the CF is driving everything. the shaft down the plane, the club head down. ecverything. And that aligns the clubface.

#1 is WRONG, AND I do not think HK ment to convey that- although he did some "experiments" that would trap U into thinking that way.
MY ADVICE- fORGET ALL THIS "SWEET SPOT" STUFF. It is not helpfull.

#2 is correct. HK conveyed that in his discussions of hinges, wedges, rhythm steering, etc.


So YES, from the perspective of thos who hold with #1, it would appear the subject is being changed by those who hold with #2, and vice versa.

The #1 vs #2 debate Is hard but should be made.

I'm done for now.HB

Thanks HB -
Your #1 the True Swinger and your #2 the Manipulated Swinger - you knew the difference.

My added comments and where we still disagree (no big deal) would be that you don't think Homer meant #1 and I do.

Further - I gather from your comments that you are not a fan of #1 in any practical manner - and I agree with that. Didn't really follow your "hold with #1 or hold with #2 comment" but I'm guessing that's not a big deal.

For me this is the first post of yours in this thread that I understood where you were coming from - maybe more an issue of mine than yours - but thanks for the reply!

I guess if you had the interest I'd be interested in having you elaborate on your thoughts in regards to your comment above "although he did some "experiments" that would trap U into thinking that way." However, if you don't have an interest - no obligation to reply.

Thanks,
Mike

[O.B.Left]

MIke , would super flexible or loosened wrists, as distinct from grip pressure be a prerequisite for #1. Who in the history of golf was a #1'r? Bobby Jones, Freddy? Or is it a theoretical end of a spectrum deal where some may approach it more than others but no one ever quite gets all the way there? Im thinking its the latter.

Homer did have a lot of definitions that at the extremes seemed well , "ungolf like" but theoretically possible IMO , this might be one of em.

I dunno.

Interesting thread. Didnt intend to start a ruckus with the adrenalin thing....

[whip]

It's the former Ob