The forces in play when you grip the club , sole it and align the face are not present when you lay the club on a table and let gravity have its way......or when the shaft is a string for that matter. Have you factored that into your theory about me taking out my left foot?

Gripping the club and aligning the face at address are the first manipulations in the hierarchy of manipulations.

Homer had a screw head inbedded in the balsa wood iron head's sweetspot , a cog back of the leading edge. It had hook face therefor Id imagine. Meaning to hit a ball straight away with that club, theoretically , he'd have to play the ball back of low point.

If his experiment displayed horizontal for a cone shape shaft travel .... what force made it so?

Again Im not a theorist just a golfer who has on occasion fallen into a groove and swung horizontals all day long. It sure felt like a product of something. Not a manipulation .

I sometimes use to much irony. The Socratic Method maybe.

Here is todays cone experiment.

Take off your shoe, hold it by a lace and swing it around yourself in the HK cone shape. note the shoe will settle into an orientation because of the cone plane.

CAUTION; This may make you dizzy and U could fall down.

Warning; Although your shoe assumes an orientation U can not play soccer this way just as U can't play golf that way.

HB

ps- the physics- The cone has 2 forces on the suspended clubhead. 1. The outward cf caused by the radial acceleration of a curved path- the horizontal circle AND 2. the vertical force of gravity. T^he resultant of these two forces is the string angle and direction- [a vector resultant]
When a golf club is swung on a SINGLE plane there is only 1 force- If U need orientation of the club face, as is prefered for golf, manipulate it.

I like the discussion on the physics ! IMHO, there's a big difference between the Homer experiment and a TGM swing: the uncocking of the left wrist has given the club head extra velocity compared to the simple rotation around the body and that probably has an influence on the rate of closure of the face.

So cf would align the shoes grip and shaft but not its face given on plane travel? Thats fine for me being a manipulated hands swinger. I still sense a Horizontal tendency though when swinging . Angled for Hitting too.

Just a "guess" from me. It feels like the face is being aligned bu cf but the face is held by the flat left hand. the left wedge - #3 accumulator- move through inpact with RHYTHM. to me this is rhythm and feels good but is a result of educated flat left hand and your hours of looking and practicing.

HB

Not really i have already discussed this exact thing earlier in the thread the hookface is an unalterable result of weight distribution and clubshaft attachment angle loft lie etc and also to give the club it's proper relation to the plane line. Cf seeks this cog at low point so u position the ball back from low point with the necessary adjustments fr the horizontal hinge. Hungrybear u are talkin about manip hand swinging a true swing is aligned by centrifugal force.

I tried to formulate an answer here, but you said it better.

Ya Aka manipulatedhands swinging

This issue has two sides, whip.

One is the mechanical/physical aspect of whether CF - by some mysterious way can create rotation around the longitudinal sweet spot axis. Well - it can't. Unless the two wedges respond to CF in a certain way that really means that the wedges imposes this torque.

The other side is what you do with your two wedges. As we all know, any golfer has the potential to ruin whatever CF may or may not do to square the face at impact.

So let me get this straight you think that if you drag a club longitudinally and create centrifugal force it won't have a natural tendency to horizontal hinge?Instea it's only a product of educated hands?

A feel based thing then , something learned , ingrained . I can see how it could be so intellectually but I still believe otherwise in my golf brain. Magical thinking maybe ..

Just trying to think of the implications to all of this. What it means to other things we hold as truths.

The free flowing , rolling with rhythm flail produces the fastest club head speeds and more face rolling. A farmer would never flail with a vertical hinge it being less speedy , less effective , more injurious , more effortful too perhaps. Compression does require the higher rates of face closure IMO. But there is a rate which is too much! To find the exact rate of closure that is ideal in the absence of cf producing it would require even more skill than Homer thought necessary. Hogan might concur with this line of thinking as he believed that as a golfers swing (flail) improved the natural by product was a hooked shot and so he held off his #3 rotation somewhat. There's some irony there perhaps as he possessed the worlds greatest flail and in the end held it off on occasion , to varying degrees.

HB what about Horizontal then ? Is it the ideal compression wise ? Or are the various basic planes "arbitrary" so to speak? Mere bench marks?

3-B, par.#4, "... Inability to execute a full Pivot Stroke at one half and one quarter speed as smoothly as at full speed indicates a flaw in the full speed procedure. ..."

Hogan had his super-slow-motion "concentration" drill.

I believe the swing is very mechanical in how it executes the physics and the/my/anyones UNCOMPENSATED stroke contains avery limited access to component variations.

I believe horizontal hinge fits with swinging and angled fits with hitting. And for good reasons. In swinging pp#3 is mainly sensing and ihas no restriction about rotating on the shaft. BUT hitting the right hand pp#1 mmust retain geometric relationship th the left which controls hinging therefore angled is necessary to maintain this relationship.

As you can see I would make my chapter #13 grow and limit component selection substantialy.

I am a believer in the "KISS" keep it simple philosophy. If a motion is not "advantageous" eliminate it. The face is aligned at the top for good reason. Why mess up this alignment then do a recovery move through impact. The wedge"s assembly rolls into impact. maybe ~30 deg. and this is insync with the unfolding right arm, and the swivel at both arms streight is again only about 30 deg. this must be a swivel because there is no other way to keep the shaft near the plane. Hogan looks like he is holding off but I think he has eliminated unnecessary "stuff". If you look at hogan release carefully you can see a release that goes closed to open and reduces arror. On the other hand, "so many" seem to have the philosophy of OPEN to CLOSE through impact. (phil mickelson perhaps) Now PM has great hands. Hogan had great ball striking. and I am convinced Hohan could do all that PM does but only when needed.

HK also wrote- 1-L THE MACHINE CONCEPT, C. The Left Wrist is Clubface Control

Very Clear.

HB

It's a good thing homer wrote it then...

Now you're just making stuff up hungrybear random degrees of closing talking abouthogan going from closed to open?!? This is definitely not what's happening. lol so many have this philosophy of open to close...it's called physics hb not philosophy they do itbecause it is anatural product of cf. U seem to greatly misunderstand how the golf swing creates geometry with physics not vis versa and u obviously highly disagree with the core concepts of the Golfing machine such as swinging hinge actions etc. I have no endorsement to your so called findings and everyone should know that thy are nowhere in te book

Also u do not understand the flying wedges as it seems very few do on here because u guys always seem to think thy are not intact. First of all it is not an assembly the primary lever with the right armcheckrein is properly an assembly the flying wedges are rather simply a relationship it is not an actual component or assembly te right wrist bend perpendicular to the left wrist cock this is what u need to worry about front wedges a strong single action grip and no bend or arch of the wrist ur understandin is not high enough to make analysis of wether or not the wedges are in tact.

Please annotate your statements with the proper notes from the book so we can separate fact and fiction.
Thank You
HB

You seem to imply swivel trough impact (forarm mouvement), why not Hinge (arm mouvement) ?

Frankly hb it is not me that needs to back up my statements because I'm only telling u basic concepts of Tgm it's u that has these theories and new truths you talk about. My story is a nonfiction one I dont need to annotate in the book where it says cf aligns the clubface for a true swinger I dont need to quote how the left wrist is perpendicular to the right wrist bend for the flying wedges I don't need to copy and paste the fact that The flying wedges ate not an assembly they aren't they are a relationship

HK also wrote- 1-L THE MACHINE CONCEPT, C. The Left Wrist is Clubface Control

Very Clear.

We are done.

HB

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIes_-QSaO8&sns=em


Sent from my iPhone

Yes.

Of course, educated hands know how to work CF to the golfer's advantage.

The reason why pros look effortless is because the swinging action is completely passive with longitudinalacceleration, once you start down u must only clear the hip cf will align the face auimatically producing the dual horizontal hinge what you and hb are describing is manipulated hands swinging with non automatic release of course for swinging to work the ball must've positioned accordingly so that the cog of the clubace aligns at low point the ball must be played precisely at the right ball location factoring in the closing only of the horizontal hinge the face must be open at address to allow for closing this is why homer preferred hitting and manipulated hands swinging ball position matters less and the hassle can control it from start to finish the pivotand balance with lag and axis tilt is what allows an effortless true swinging action which is what allows a small person to drive par fours,effortless passive speed

For me CF , Horizontal , #3pp are tools I use ... I do admit that I am surprised to consider that Horizontal is manipulated , measured as it seems so natural. But even if it is so, it doesn't change what I do procedurally. Horizontal is compression and an ideal. However it is achieved.

There are a lot of guys out there looking at face angles and thinking that most of the pros are flippers etc .... "They don't hit em like they used to". Now that is crazy! Far crazier than what HB is proposing. Most every guy on tour is a flipper? Uh huh. These theorists don't know what Horizontal with a strongish left hand grip should look like in Finish Swivel. The face should look down ish. Hands to Plane. The face angle as set in the hands makes it so when the hands are rolled to plane.

Give me the "rolling wedges" ( I like that one HB) and inside out impact and Im good. Give me the opposite to Steering in all its forms. Well unless I need Steering for an intentional loss of compression.

While I can't speak for HB, this is a misrepresentation of my position.

Words like "completely passive" "manupulation (free)" are very vague when we try to sort out what squares the club face.

Even a "manipulation" free swing will show a distinct rotation of the RFFW and LAFW towards and through impact. And with your late snap release, the face stays open , looking out of the swing plane, for as long as possible - and the rotation will happen as late as possible, and also as fast as "possible". When the RFFW rotates back on plane, the club face will rotate from facing out of the swing plane to facing down the swing path.

The Nesbit paper shows negative gamma torque prior to impact. Negative means anti clock wise, which is a closing torque. What CF does or doesn't makes no difference to the club face alignment whatsoever. It feels manipulation free because the force required to close the club face is negligible compared to the forced used to create swing speed.

Bernt r I am only usig terms from te book manipulated is not my word hr actually refers to it as manipulated handswinging which is not a bad thing it's just not true swinging I could care less about the Nesbit paper I don't disagree that the wedges roll that means nothing about whether it was passive or not

I do try to stay within the bounds of HK's great work-I think my only most visible contridiction is on the "cone" thing- but that is not important.
HK had a great and developing understanding of the ALIGNMENTS and geometry of what "works" in a human golf swing. It is presented in HIS work - G.O.L.F - TGM - The Golfing Machine. That is the thrust of his work.
HK also developed a good outline of ways to POWER the Machine.
Primary is the alignments, them come a way to power the machine, without "breaking" the machine.
This thread may be built on misunderstanding.
Part of the machine is a "flat left hand"- clubface control - HK could not have been more emphatic.
HK was also clear that a swinger POWERS his machine with cf. Didn't HK say that the only thing a swinger has going fo himself isw THE Ability to MANIPULATE CF? That is not a negative but a good thing.
The swinger uses cf to extend the lever assembly. BUT the club face alignment remain with the Flat Left Hand.
This is the importance of this thread which is being missed.
Golf is an athletic endevor with the hands as "primary" command post as with most all athletic endevors. Find what athletic skills you have in support of your hqand and golf becomes "almost" a practical game.

HP

That's where a tiny doze of Newton comes in handy. It can't be passive.

Y not? What part of centrifugal force pulls objects in line and on plane with their cog doesn't make sense?

First of all, whip, there are two meanings of CF.

1) A fictitious force that seems to pull the club head away from the golfer in a rotary system of reference.

2) A real force that works from the club back on the golfer, pulling the golfers hands out - and working towards stretching everything between the sweet spot and the swing center.

I don't have the book in front of me, but as far as I can remember, HK's definition a little bit of both. Club head inertia resisting the golfer's effort to keep the club head in orbit. Or something like that. This could be interpreted as a force that works the club head (fictitious) or a force that works the golfer (real)

The mechanism underlying both those forces is club head inertia, as per Newton's 1st law. Any moving or not moving mass will resist any change of speed or direction. The law applies to every molecule in the golf club. That's all the golf club does. It resists any acceleration.

If the club head is rotating towards a closed face already it will continue to rotate at a constant speed. But an external force has to initiate the rotation. The short and long of it is that the golfer has to create the rotation. There is no magic in CF and there is no magic in Newton's laws.

In a swing, with proper power package alignment, the golfer will close the club face by simply continuing the motion through impact. No manipulation. No deliberate club face closing effort. But it doesn't mean that the club closes by itself. It only seems that way.

We r essentially agreeing as far as te second point but cf pulling the object towards it's cog is what close the clubface making swinging truly effortless

I'll trust in 40 years of research...

This is true to a certain extent. For a driver, this alignment "mechanism" will induce toe- down and a backward leaning shaft towards impact. But this mechanism doesn't really care where the face is pointing. It happens because centripetal force pulls the rope in one direction and club head inertia pulls it in another direction. If the face is aimed towards the sky, your "hook face" will "close" towards the sky as well. The golfer has to produce a geometrically flat left wrist to square the face at impact. Luckily, the geometry of the pivot and the power package is such that this can be made to happen without any deliberate club face manipulation in an uncompensated golf stroke.

PS: I like 40 years of research too, but I read TGM through a pair of Newtonian glasses. Some of the stuff that appears to be written between the lines in TGM takes on a different meaning then....

Im seeing the Right Elbows Pitch or Punch Alignment as a major factor in face rotation .

Can U see 2 lists?

Pitch
Horizontal
Swing

Punch
Angled
Hit

Can U see more rotation for the punch, angled, hit list?
Hb

U guys really must be reading a different book. The roll completed by the time the shaft is parallel??? Hb u have got it very wrong.

Look I'm an an instructor of the golfing machine and what is outlined in it I am not looking into new theories or frontiers as far as I'm concerned homer wrote the book, the end there is nothing missing, incorrect or anything else required. You are telling me what's right and wrong based on your own minimally researched theories vs homers forty years unless you can show me and prove to me how what you are saying is true rather than just throwing out arno penzias name and you're engineering expertise, let's see it then... For you to convince me otherwise it better be backed up

The manzella called us book literalists but it seems like most have their own theories what's wrong with the book??? Nothing!

My book is autographed by both Ben Doyle and Lynn Blake, but I haven't learned the secret TGM handshake.

I do not have LB autograph but I have read Joel Chandler Harris in dialect and that is MUCH harder than TGM. (Being in the neighborhood counts doesn't it?)

HB

Never heard of him before, but I see the connection.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Chandler_Harris

I have Nolan ryans rookie card autographed doesn't make me an expert at pitching, I guess you are ignoring my question?