Explanar

[abjunky]

What do you guys think of the explanar. I feel it is poor product.

1) too expensive
2) does not guarantee you to be on plane
3) the inventor says you have to swing on the perfect biomechanical plane(turned shoulder)
4) the inventor also says that the shaft plane does not matter (he has told me this personally)
5) the whole shaft cannot be guaranteed to rest on the plane (except when on the plane finn) and it cannot be guaranteed to be parallel to the plane line.
6) The plane is a rectangle

Personally I would have thought it would be better to have the finn on the bottom of the explanar.

I have also seen on this site from golf professionals that the explanar works the same as dowel on a plane board. Sorry guys that is wrong. Dowel on a plane board means the whole shaft rests on the flat inflexible inclined plane whereas the explanar only has one point of contact, which means in cannot guarantee to have the full length of the shaft on the flat inflexible inclined plane.
Another comment I have seen is that a professional uses it to teach the flying wedges. Seems a pretty expensive tool to get a simple concept across to the customer. What happens when you go somewhere else to teach? Two dowels will show the flying wedges in a great way.

What do you all think guys?

[bray]

What do you guys think of the explanar. I feel it is poor product.

1) too expensive
2) does not guarantee you to be on plane
3) the inventor says you have to swing on the perfect biomechanical plane(turned shoulder)
4) the inventor also says that the shaft plane does not matter (he has told me this personally)
5) the whole shaft cannot be guaranteed to rest on the plane (except when on the plane finn) and it cannot be guaranteed to be parallel to the plane line.
6) The plane is a rectangle

Personally I would have thought it would be better to have the finn on the bottom of the explanar.

I have also seen on this site from golf professionals that the explanar works the same as dowel on a plane board. Sorry guys that is wrong. Dowel on a plane board means the whole shaft rests on the flat inflexible inclined plane whereas the explanar only has one point of contact, which means in cannot guarantee to have the full length of the shaft on the flat inflexible inclined plane.
Another comment I have seen is that a professional uses it to teach the flying wedges. Seems a pretty expensive tool to get a simple concept across to the customer. What happens when you go somewhere else to teach? Two dowels will show the flying wedges in a great way.

What do you all think guys?

Two dowels will show the wedges very well, but when you do have access to the explanar it is good for showing the student how the wedges can be maintained on a plane.

This product in my experience is best for beginning students to teach them the genearal shape of the swing, it can also be used to explain the Geometry of the Circle and how it is a little incorrect the line or crack in the explanar where you start should have been placed further back so that the student can see that low point and the center of the circle is after you strike the golf ball, and under the left shoulder.

Abjunky,

Very interesting first posts, I remember mine I came in challanging Yoda about the stationary head right away, and that is how I learned.

I believe a great teacher is one who understands The Golfing Machine, he can then use that knowledge to assess the validity of training and teaching aids. I found the Explanar is not perfect but it can be used to represent The Golfing Machines principles. If it's worth buying is up to your decision, I am lucky enough to have it supplied to me.

Sorting Through the Instuctor's Textbook, and learning everyday.

B-Ray

[abjunky]

I understand your points, but as an AI I find it difficult to use a product where the inventor is allegedly rubishing TGM and Homer Kelly. He does not agree with basic geometry. Aslo it is so unbelievably expensive. If I had it for free I may use it for giving beginners the basic swing shape as well.

We are on the same side as AI's and I cannot agree with the inventor or his principles. A person that says the shaft is not important has some serious issuses with how the golf club works in the golf swing.

I take your point about being a great teacher and I totally agree.

Great to talk, thank you for your reply.

[REEVES WEEDON]

I agree with Abjunky, the explanar totally opposes true geometry.Anyone riding a commercial venture will soon be found out, as their motive is not to promote the science of golf.