"Plane Golf"
 

The definition or description of being "On Plane" I usually hear is... one end of the club or the other is either pointing to the plane line or parallel to that line.

What percentage of pros do you think actually comply with this definition on the BACKSWING? They are all obviously doing this on the DOWNSWING, or at least during the later stages(or very close to this).

Do you believe there are some VARIATIONS where being off plane, by this definition, on the BACKSWING is actually correct?

It is extremely important to be exactly on plane at Impact.
It is very important to be on plane at Release.
It is important to be on plane at Start Down.
It is good to be on plane at The Top.
It is useful to be on plane during Backstroke.

There are very few pros, if any, that are perfectly on plane during from Address to The Top. Not enough 'forces' are present in the backswing to keep club on plane (that is just my opinion...not Homer's).

Edit: when I'm talking about being on plane, I include any plane shifts (angle), but not shift in plane line direction.

Interesting questions and answers, guys. We "west coasters" try to get those gyroscopic forces going right from the start. Pivot, pivot, pivot. Drag, drag, drag.

Everyone is always on "A Plane"...But not necessarily the Intended Plane.....Some Shift Up and Down.....and/or Right or Left....But few are those who keep it straight with a zero shift.........

AS

This will be a bit off topic, but...
Do you usually teach students to use their pivot (big back muscles, hips) to take the club back, or do you teach Right Forearm Takeaway?

Thanks.

Responses
 

Good responses... but the qusestion had to do with whether most pros comply with the definition of "On Plane" that says-- the club should be parallel to the baseline(planeline) or be pointing to that line with one end of the club or the other(handle or head), on the BACKSWING.

Many of David Leadbetter's students, for example, have the butt of the club pointing inside the baseline during the early phases of the BACKSWING.

Good question Tong,

Do you west coast boys teach right forearm takeaway for swingers or do you let the pivot or shoulder turn takeaway initiate the backswing?

I prefer a pivot-oriented takeaway. Std. hip action. Some players do better with r. forearm takeaway. Golf is a game of choices.

It depends on the flexibility of the person. The so called 'one piece' takeaway simply can't be done properly if you are not flexible enough and IMO it can be hard to do RFT if you are very flexible.

One can use right forearm takeaway for both swingers and hitters, but if the person has no real preferences, then I think the pivot oriented takeaway is better for the swinger.

A reason why this pivot takeaway has had a bad rep recently is because if your hands are not educated, it will take the club underplane. Well, it's pretty obvious isn't it -- if you just turn your shoulders, and hips without lifting your arms, then the club will go under plane, i.e. just go around the body.

One of the issues with right forearm takeaway for the swinger is if your bring the club up with right forearm, you tend to bring it back down using your arms also, which you clearly don't want if you're a swinger.

Forgive my monumental ignorance but, I have never understood how an object that is raised up by the arms can get itself back down again without those same arms being the prime movers.

The arms take the club back, in and up whilst the body responds to the motion involved. Likewise, the arms bring the club back down, out and forward, again with the body responding to the motion.

If you don't use your arms how in the name of G.O.L.F are you going to get the clubhead down into and through the ball, irrespective of whether you swing or hit?

Not just arms!!!!
 

The Shoulders can turn on an inclined plane ....YES...that means there is both horizontal and vertical motion that produces inclined motion...thus providing some "LIFTING" and "Lowering"...however the right forearm pick-up is the real magic...

Right forearm pick -up ....Kind like....Pickin up the cell phone....Put it back down....Not straight up and down...

BUT up n down the Inclined Plane

:cool:

Is your name Mac? J


Hey Tong!
Can you elaborate? I think a pivot oriented backswing and educated hands are kinda conflicting but I may be misinterpreting….


Sorry to seem like I am singling you out, I’m not! But…I don’t get it – if the hands do in fact control the pivot, doesn’t this negate your concern? Just curious.

Don't believe the above assumption in the last paragraph is correct! Just look to the Magic of the Right Forearm and Tomasello videos...remember, with TGM there is more than one way to strike a golf ball effectively.

DG

Couple things i have noticed:

As a swinger...i don't like RFP as my entire takeaway option. Works for monty and couples, but i don't feel like i can mash it with a pivot takeaway.

Also i don't like a true shoulder turn takeaway either because it takes the club too inside on the backswing and since i don't "shift" on the downswing, i tend to get underplane or swing too much inside/out on the downswing.

So i use more of a "hybrid" takeaway that includes both a RFP and a STT. I use the STT for first few feet of the swing and then i immediately fold my right arm and bring everything to the end.

It's all about choices :)

Yes, I was being naughty -- you're right.

By definition, the Shoulder Turn Takeaway takes the Club Off Plane (underplane) in the Backstroke.

All comes back down to having a good Zone #1 (Pivot) first. And a lot of people don't have that.

And yes, if the Hands Control the Pivot, then everything is going to be alright. Also the Hands are not Educated until they control the Pivot.

So, theoretically, everything is hunky-dory.

But like I said, most amateurs have a dismal Zone #1. A good Pivot is so essential for good golf.

Therefore, using Pivot Controlled Hands as a transitional undertaking is good for the learning process.

But at the end of the day, it comes back down to the Hands and their Clubhead Lag, Plane Line Tracing, etc.

Sometimes in life you have to do what you don't want in order to get what you want!

"personal preference" - what preference ?
 

One of the areas I find hard to understand and find "PGA pro golfer evidence" for is the right elbow position at address. TGM sets out a “Basic pattern” for drive loading and drag loading( 12-1-0 and 12-2-0)which involves zero plane angle variation and plane angle basic on “turned shoulder”. This appears to a sound mechanical position for the simplest, most secure , yet powerful, swing. Homer says plane variations can be hazardous etc….( not sure of the reference but I have seen it quoted somewhere)

This position is illustrated in photos in TGM 9-2-1 #2. preliminary address. Right forearm is on same plane as clubshaft ( elbow in line with shaft extension). This is a position rarely seen by top pros today who appear to have elbows on a more inclined plane than the clubshaft at address. Very few pros have any fix other than a forward press , which does not realign the forearm and shaft at all but only leans shaft forward. This immediately puts them into a basic swing pattern requiring single or double plane variation. In 7-7 Homer states that due to “personal preference…it is not always possible to adhere to a single inclined plane classification throughout the whole swing” but goes on to stress the importance of the forearm at impact. This makes sense but why is it that almost all top pros have some “personal preference, natural inclination or pressure of conditions” ( 7-7) that means that they shift planes!!

Is there something about the human anatomy (eg. upper arm : foream ratio) that makes this variation of swing pattern difficult for top pros to adhere too ?

Please understand that I ask this question as a beginner( to TGM) who has experimented with the pattern described in TGM 12-1-0 and 12-2-0 but find my hands are unusually high and the ball-striking variable. Should I persist or do I have some “personal preference, natural inclination or pressure of conditions” ( 7-7) which means I should alter my pattern to shift planes? If so what is this “preference” which is leading me toward a mechanically more complicated swing - something I am not consciously looking for!! Unless there is some power, accuracy advantage – unlikely!

Thanks

Is there something about the human anatomy (eg. upper arm : foream ratio) that makes this variation of swing pattern difficult for top pros to adhere too ?

IMHO more due to a lack of understanding the geometry involved by the teachers and pupil. How many golf teachers can demonstrate/teach a shiftless plane swing?

Thanks RWH
 

That is the first real attempt to answer my question. As a new reader of TGM I am interested in the prospect of a mechanically simple swing - zero plane shift variation with right forearm on plane at impact offers that opportunity.

I have noticed that players who have right forearm on plane at impact seem to achieve this in two differing ways

a) Impact shaft plane higher than address shaft plane forearm and hands elevate ( from address) to come in line at impact. I have written about this in another thread but this seems to be possible (if body/ spine angles is maintained) if the shaft is leaning forward ( or conceivably backward but one would hope not!!). You are right that if we adopt this from address it seems unusually high but same feeling is not "unusual" at impact. This has impact shaft plane higher than address shaft plane. See ernie els mid iron (http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/79626/1/2770245) on Redgoat site.

or

b) impact shaft plane is same as address shaft plane This is potentially the position that would be achieved with a correct "zero plane shift" swing.The foream and shaft are on same plane at impact as address shaft plane. However , for whatever reason it is rarely adopted but can be incorporated into a uni/multi plane shift variation .see Aree Song ( http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/110120) on Redgoat website ( OK not exactly same but very close) The body angles look OK but the head has dipped??

I wonder whether one of these strategies is actually more consistent/ powerful or "better" than the other for a given style of swing?? Can players be grouped into one of these two patterns? is it useful??

I also wonder whether the true zero plane shift style is at all possible?? I know that TGM is not about prescribing one swing for all but it does set out a scientific argument for this swing being simple and successful - yet nobody uses it in any pure fashion... if the theory were 100% true then people must have a really good reason to alter it. NOWHERE in TGM does it specify these reasons other than saying in 7-7 " due to personal preference, natural inclination or the pressure of conditions it is not always advisable to adhere to a single inclined plane classification throughout the entire stroke".
That pretty much includes everybody as far as I can see because they don't use zeroplane shift!! To vary from sound physics they must have good reason.

Mechanically great, in theory, but are those mechanics based on human anatomy??

I had similar experience with Dave Pelz "PILS" putting stroke. Does "Perfy" truly recreate the human joint mechanism? Is it a natural style to adopt if the anatomy has to be manipulated to produce a mechanically perfect stroke?

Thanks for any comments

Few examples of shaft / impact plane variations
 

Few examples of planes at impact and address. Not sure what one can meaningfully derive from this but i am not an expert - I am sure there is somebody who can think of some useful point.

Is there a particular bad shot which may occur if one has one pattern or the other ?

Does it matter? Probably not because they are all pretty good strikers of the golf ball!



Address = impact shaft plane line ( approximately)

Vijay = http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/80095/1/2785263


Couples = http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/80514

Sergio = http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/80523/1/2799712

http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/80523/1/3795131




Impact Shaft plane line > Address

D Clarke = http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/83043


Robert Damron = http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/87167

http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/87167/1/3042242


Faldo = http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/88672

Peter Jacobsen = http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/102519/1/3788047

Kenny Perry = http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/81497/1/2831358

My only conclusions are that to retain Address shaft plane at impact there appears to be a substantial amount of Body ( eg vijay) manipulation or head dipping ( eg Sergio – but body angles stable)

Head can stay a bit higher if impact plane line is higher than address. BUT body angles are lost unless there is forward lean of shaft.

It is clearly a spectrum of swing pattern – here is Justin Rose http://redgoat.smugmug.com/gallery/120728/1/4341641
halfway between the two ( minimal change in shaft plane) who has dipped head quite a lot.

I am not sure which is “cause” or “effect”.

I am sure this is what Brady Riggs is demonstrating but I have not considered this before myself . He appears to be showing Justin Rose maintains Tush line and nearly keeps impact shaft plane on same plane as address but only at expense of head dipping

Price
 

I believe Nick Price is on very nearly the same plane at IMPACT and ADDRESS... one of the few players like that. His right forearm is on there as well.

the hands control the pivot even in hitting.i use right forearm tracing and i am a swinger.start down is controlled by your aiming point.get your dowels out if you need some clarification.hopefuuly this will help.aslso see yodas video.probably the best golf lesson anyone will ever receive