![]() |
Quote:
I agree, but, with the prior noted exception - posts #48 and %53 Again my #1 would be "true swinger" and #2 "manipulative. I have said #1 does not exist. The "true swinger" alignments are a SPECIAL CASE of manipulative hands. The FLAT LEFT HAND controls. Always. That would be manipulation. HB |
Quote:
Yoda is wrong? |
This may help!
|
Quote:
Anyone can be wrong - and when you find out that you are wrong that's a good thing! Specifically what you are referencing - the quote in post 54 - I didn't reference it as wrong at the time - because it was only a partial quote and I felt that after reading it - most likely in the context of the question that came before it (that i couldn't see) and the entire context of the written answer/comment (which I couldn't see) that chances are it was more likely to be appropriate than wrong for that particular full context of his post. To some degree I feel like that was a correct assumption after reading the link in post 83. On a broader perspective - could Lynn be wrong - absolutely, could I be wrong - absolutely - any of us can be wrong - big deal. The real issue is not asking if someone is wrong - it's using your own mind to ask the appropriate questions, understand all or as many of the facts as possible and then determine what is right, from there as a side note you could see who falls where if you had an interest. |
Quote:
I was eventually going to respond to your post 48 and 53 and still plan to do so, however to be honest, that might take a number of posts for us to get on the same page so I've delayed doing that for when I have the energy and motivation. On another front - above in the quote where you say "#1 doesn't exist". I just want to be clear that you understand the nature of my posts. I'm just relaying my understanding of the concepts in the book. I'm not making any comment about usefulness, if they exist, or anything in regards to application. It's as if one were to start by understanding the concepts and then another stage might be you learn more other information beyond those concepts, and then another stage might be that you disagree or have other perspectives than the Golfing Machine writings. I'm just posting on a limited perspective - stage one - "this is what he means". No response needed - just wanted to make sure you understood my approach here. I know you were just re-iterating your point - no problem with that - I just wanted to clarify the limited nature and purpose of any of my posts. It's curious - the lack of questions asked on this forum - in order to understand other's posts. Anyone have a theory on that? (Oops a question!) Finally, a question regarding your quote above HB. "I have said #1 does not exist. The "true swinger" alignments are a SPECIAL CASE of manipulative hands." I'm not being a "smarta..." here - just making sure I understand your perspective or clarifying your post. What alignments of the theoretical True Swinger are a SPECIAL CASE of manipulative hands - can you clarify that for me. In other words - in what way and what alignments are a Special Case for the concept of True Swinging? Thanks |
Quote:
Bumpy |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I've defined Hand Manipulation earlier in this threasd and via that definition if one were to say that Hand Manipulation is only accomplished at impact fix then that would be incorrect. If one said that first Hand Manipulation requires one to identify the lead hand condition (For example Flat, Level and Vertical)and the corresponding clubface alignment intended for impact via impact fix AND then if one has some intent, focus, awareness to return to that lead hand location to control the clubface alignment at impact - then that would be correct and in fact would be a better definition of "Hand Manipulation" than my original definition - hence this will be the new definition that I give it. Now if the question in the original thread was - Is Hand Manipulation accomplished at Impact Fix or Adjusted address? Then an appropriate answer in that context would be - Hand Manipulation is accomplished at Impact Fix. It's an appropriate answer in the context of the knowledge of the person asking the question. Is it a complete answer in the context of the broadest and fullest description of Hand Manipulation - NO. I didn't know what the question was, what the context of the thread was, etc. etc. - so the conservative approach was not to leap to conclusions. Hope that sheds some light on the subject - I do understand your post and I see your point. Well taken. |
Quote:
|
HB Quote: "I have said #1 does not exist. The "true swinger" alignments are a SPECIAL CASE of manipulative hands."
As I understand it. The "true" swinger is defined where clubface alignment is automatic via CF and is confined to a single impact alignment by the physics of CF for streight-away flight. I (my points in this discussion not TGM)see it as a alignment that doesn't require manipulation (special) but still is Flat Left Hand clubface control. Your view - as you stated clearly above is that in a true swinging procedure (as you correctly identified it per TGM) you see it as a clubface alignment that is under the control of the flat left wrist through impact but doesn't require manipulation - now if I quoted you correctly (with my additional words for clarification in Orange) then that wouldn't appear to me to make any sense if you used my definition of "manipulation". Your feedback is invited :) My definition: "Hand Manipulation requires one to identify the lead hand condition (For example Flat, Level and Vertical)and the corresponding clubface alignment intended for impact via impact fix AND then if one has some intent, focus, awareness to return to that lead hand location to control the clubface alignment at impact" |
May I start by re-posting this link I put back in #69
http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/s...ipulated+hands and this post from eithin the aqbove link- I extracted from and linked in #83 http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/post32114-8.html Some of this is what informed my def. These are important . I will edit within, below. Quote:
Is this thing being lost because of all the patches getting stuck on?? HB |
Quote:
|
HB,
As the thread winds down - the quote below of my defintiion of "Manipulation" with your comment in between (blue) provided me with the most interest in responding. My definition: "Hand Manipulation requires one to identify the lead hand condition (For example Flat, Level and Vertical) MY problem here- only FLAT- Because level is controled by the shaft on the plane and vertical is a function of hinging (the vertical would then be to the associated plane) and the corresponding clubface alignment intended for impact via impact fix AND then if one has some intent, focus, awareness to return to that lead hand location to control the clubface alignment at impact" OK - when you say MY problem here - I'm assuming you are taking on your frame of reference and not the Golfing Machine frame of reference. However, I wasn't sure if MY problem here - was MY problem based on my understanding of the Golfing Machine or MY problem here from my theory. As I stated before - it's tough enough for someone to follow me in understanding the Golfing Machine concepts - if I added my personal theory, thoughts - it would really be confusing. So I stay on the Golfing Machine Frame of Reference when posting. 1) Although I could have put in - any grip type in my defintion as an example- Homer preferred grip was Flat, Level and Vertical - because all of those are visually identifiable with precision - as opposed to a curved line or angles which are not- without using measurement instruments. 2) Regardless of lie angle - he would always want the grip taken with LEVEL lead hand position. 3) Regardless of hinge action employed he would always want you taking the grip at impact fix with the a Vertical Lead Hand position and returning to impact with it Vertical - hinging takes place after that (during impact). 4) If you define your face and hand positions at impact fix - and then when you arrived at impact, if you changed the shaft angle or arrived at a different location than vertical then you would have changed the clubface alignment. |
Quote:
I have been rethinking. therefore I shall retract "SOME" of my thoughts. Since I am still thinking, I am not sure what is no-good anymore. I am convinced that what we are doing with 7-2 has a lot to do with clubface alignment but little to do with the CF theory of clubface alignment. My biggest current thought is.-when we think ball flight vs position- "should we be saying "true" swingers and hitters or should we be saying HORIZONTAL and ANGLED hingers? I will continue to think this through. HB |
Last thoughts
Now that the thread is done- almost done - :
Did the original , Bumpy, questions get answered? Was there anything discussed that gave you an Ah-Ha moment? Looking back-the thread has almost 100 post over a period of 10 days- what can we take from all those posts? (looking for that executive summary if U have one) HB |
Quote:
2. Nothing of substance concerning clubface alignment. The fact is that you can do anything you wish, statically or dynamically, to influence face alignment as long as impact alignments are maintained and you do not interfere with the free-wheeling shaft through the release interval. |
Quote:
1. Yes. 2. Yes, several. 3. Scrambled eggs don't incubate. Bumpy |
Bumpy-
you edited my post within the quote. That is WRONG. Even when U are answering the post. It confuses the reader because U do not state what U are doing. Then You add an outside the quote reply. HB |
Quote:
I understand your concern - for what it's worth - given that Bumpy put his comments in blue - it was clear to me that those were not your comments. (Assuming I'm correct on that and the intent of your post) |
Quote:
HB |
Quote:
Quote:
Bumpy |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:40 AM. |