LynnBlakeGolf Forums - Must See Videos >

LynnBlakeGolf Forums (http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/index.php)

- The Golfing Machine - Basic (http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - Must See Videos > > > (http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7655)

Confessions of a Cave Man

Quote:

Originally Posted by nevercrosses (Post 77093)

I hope you enjoy the learning process.

Eventually it will be required knowledge similar to making sure they hold the end with rubber on it.

nevercrosses,

This may surprise you, but I have enjoyed the learning process my whole life. Hopefully, that enjoyment will continue . . . at least for a while yet!

:smile:

You also are on that path. I see that and appreciate it. Maybe someday we will meet, smile and shake hands and perhaps even get a chance to share our varied experiences over a glass of "something". I would like that.

Today, in another thread, I read your lengthy and well-reasoned post with its terrific visuals illustrating your points. I got your message right away. Wonderful!

Your core question:

"Why two Plane Lines? More specifically, why the Chord Plane Line (and not the Tangent)?".

I answered your question -- succinctly and correctly. As a result, you know more about golf this evening than you knew this morning. And that's a good thing.

:smile:

Why has this happened?

Because I took the time to read your post, digest your thoughts and respond. I knew my knowledge would be valuable to you. Now, you know, too. At least I think you do. In any event, that's why I did it: To help you along the way.

But, with your quoted response, you do not thank me for your new knowledge.

Nor do you credit me for passing it along.

Heck, you don't even acknowledge it.

:shock:

Hey, no problem!

:3gears:

Somewhere, sometime that may happen.

But not today.

Today that realization is a bit too painful, and I understand that.

Here's my 'rub':

Today you sarcastically write me off as someone living in a Dark Age. Someone who needs only to understand the D-Plane to make golf make sense. Someone who has had the whole thing 'bass-ackwards' all these years . . . and didn't even know it.

Shame on you, nevercrosses.

I deserved better.

Or maybe not!

:laughing9

Quote:

Originally Posted by gmbtempe (Post 77073)

Why would I need the D Plane to explain this? Sounds like simple geometry to me.

Well certainly. D-Plane is like I said before, just an explanation of impact using geometry. I don't know if it interferes with anything Homer claimed about impact. Seems like a lot of people are arguing it does though I have not seen enough actual information to know who's right or wrong. That's why I've never said Homer was wrong... yet apparently a few people here seem to think I did for whatever reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoda (Post 77074)

You're right: I am a D-Plane novice. I turned off quickly a few years back when a seminar speaker promoting it attempted to "prove" that Impact was really 'Outside-In' and not Inside-Out'.

I get that. I don't know who would have said such a thing but it sounds like it wasn't explained quite properly. Basically just think for a second that Ben Hogan is setting up with the ball back in his stance relative to his right foot (it's the same relative to his left foot). This positioning of his body relative to the ball ensures a very steep, descending angle when striking the ball.

Just as Homer said, the clubhead is moving down, out, and forward all the way to low point. So if Hogan strikes the ball while not yet achieving low point, wouldn't the resultant path be to the right of his plane line? THAT is what the D-Plane helps to understand. Homer said it too from what I gather, he just never jumped to this area of thinking. Admittedly though I am pretty stale on my knowledge of HK and TGM. He might have said something to this effect and I simply don't know it.

Quote:

:shock:

Given the interest here and elsewhere, I'll learn more about it in the weeks ahead, relate it to the principles that have served me well for more than three decades, then draw my own conclusions. My main motivation for the exercise will be to determine if (and then how) I could use it to improve my teaching and, consequently, the results my students achieve.

That's what any good teacher would hopefully do with new information. I used to be an old laws guy and I've turned around considerably because the evidence is just so overwhelming. It's FINALLY starting to get through to people that the clubface does way more to the initial direction than path does.

Quote:

Despite my D-Plane ignorance, I will attempt to answer your question. First, a few principles:

1. Unless manipulated in some fashion, Clubshaft length determines when a given Club will reach its Impact condition. Therefore, there is only one ‘Straightaway Point’ built into every golf club, i.e., only one place in the stance where Centrifugal Force alone will align that particular Clubface and Clubshaft correctly for Impact.

I won't take issue with the usage of Centrifugal force because I know it's a reliable feel for people. I also agree that there is only one point along the path where it is straight. But I do think we can "U" out the arc a little at the bottom by leading with the hands through impact. I have also seen some people "counter roll" and block off shots trying to keep the face square to the target. Not at all ideal but it would be interesting to see what high resolution video would have to say about the face.

Quote:

2. True Swingers have little choice here: They simply must move the ball backward or forward in the Stance until that precise location is achieved. Otherwise, because Centrifugal Force (unmanipulated) is indifferent to Ball Location, a more forward (of Straightaway Point) ball position will result in a Closed Clubface at Impact (Draws and Hooks), and a more aft location will produce an Open Clubface (Fades and Slices).

All true but there is of course the possibility of a changed swing center from one swing to the next. On a perfect machine that never changes it's axis yes, but on a human I think there can be some nominal to gigantic axis shifting.

Quote:

3. Manipulated Hands Swingers and Hitters can likewise move the ball up or back in the Stance, but they also have the option of using a single Ball Location and compensating via the Aiming Point Technique (6-E-2). Actually, these players can hit the ball dead straight from any Ball Location (and from any of the nine Plane Line-Stance Line-Target Line Combinations) simply by aligning the Clubface and Clubshaft at Fix (8-2), then returning the Flat Left Wrist to its Vertical-to-the-ground alignment at Impact (as opposed the theoretical configuration per 7-10, i.e., at Low Point).

I concur.

Quote:

4. Players employing the Flip Release (10-24-F) must also accommodate the Ball Location requirements dictated by Shaft length, but, since their Release is Body-related (always in the same place with regard to Body position), the Ball-related options (simply moving the ball within the Stance or manipulating the Aiming Point) are not available. Hence, they must ‘effectively’ move the ball without changing the Release point relative to the Body. This can be done only by Opening and Closing the Stance Line for the shorter and longer Clubs respectively.

Honestly couldn't follow you on this one. I just didn't understand. Help me lift the fog if you don't mind.

Quote:

Now, to your point:

Hogan’s Five Lessons illustrated a constant Ball Location (in relation to the Left Heel) and a varying Stance Line. [Actually, as the Stance narrows, the Ball Location varies considerably in relation to the Center of the Arm Swing, i.e., Left Shoulder.] To the extent he employed a truly constant Ball Location, he compensated (subconsciously) for its single Location using the Aiming Point procedure. There is no alternative: If the Ball is not in the correct place, then you must change where you aim the Thrust.

As a Flat Left Wrist player with a definite Hinge Action and a Clubface aligned appropriately – in other words, a player not at all dependent on the one Straightaway Point of the True Swinger -- Hogan had no need to “align” (as you say) left or right of the Target with his Stance Line to compensate for the varying Clubshaft lengths.

Further, the Stance Line itself governs only the degree of Pivot Motion and its freedom or restriction in either or both directions (10-12-0/A/B/C/D). Opening and Closing the Stance does not “align” the Stroke left or right of the target. This can be accomplished only by Rotating the Plane Line per 10-5-A, -D or -E.

My guess is that, if Hogan were here, he would tell us he was referring to his Stance Line as an automatic governor of his Pivot Motion. In fact, he described exactly that on page 125 of his book. Certainly, at no time did he even begin to suggest that by opening and closing his Stance he was changing his Direction of Aim.

Instead, in assuming the Stance Lines illustrated, he was promoting an unrestricted Backstroke Motion with the longer Clubs (for Power). With the shorter Clubs, his goal was a slightly restricted Backstroke Motion coupled with an unrestricted Follow-Through (for Accuracy). All of which has been known at least since the days of 'Old Tom' Morris.

:salut:

I appreciate the explanation. I certainly understand that Hogan was changing alignment for a feel he was trying to achieve with his pivot. Could it not be said though that it also coincidently helped him hit straighter shots through the set simply because the geometry worked in his favor by doing so? Sort of the "cherry on top".

Leaving on a D-Plane

So far, I see nothing earth-shattering with the D-Plane versus TGM.

Pro or con.

But that could change in a flash of perspiration and insight.

Stay tuned!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLBKOcUbHR0

:golf:

Quote:

Originally Posted by pistol (Post 77092)

Rofl , You are not as smart as you think Ringer , Hogan has a closed stance with longer clubs BUT since he takes a Divot even with his 3 wood how is he catching it past low point , COMEDY

What the heck is your problem?

Doin' What Comes Natur'ly

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ringer (Post 77104)

Maybe, Ringer. I wouldn't be a bit surprised.

The TOUR players are great athletes who operate with tremendous talent, instinct and feel. I've coached a fair number of them over the past six years, and I know and have studied many more 'up close and personal' as an instructor at more than forty championship events the world over. Trust me, I appreciate what they bring to the table.

Homer Kelley understood these things as well. In fact, not only did he recognize the physical and psychological constraints involved in the game of Golf, he also was able to reduce the employed althletic 'feels' to their Mechanical essence. Evidence of his understanding and genius is found here:

"Don't hesitate to change your Stance Line -- for physical or psychological reasons or for the situation at Hand. Stance Line does not affect the Plane or Target Lines. Just use the corresponding Pivot per 10-12 and don't be misled by the apparent results -- your "Down-the-Target-Line Impact" could be just a well executed Push Shot. Even from an ASSUMED Square-Square position. And your apparently Outside-In Impacts may actually be fine Pull Shots. Study 2-L."

Homer Kelley
Inside-Out Impact (2-J-2)

As I've said, I'm studying the D-Plane and, as always, am seeking to learn something new. I've been around awhile and will gladly settle for the incremental addition.

:-)

Yet, there is hope for more: Today in this thread I was encouraged by another advocate and told that the ultimate realization will be as striking as learning to "hold the end with rubber on it".

Cool!

:thumleft:

So far, though . . .

Nada.

:(

Ringer - I think the answer you are looking for is in chapter 2.

Daryl posted some of the diagrams, and they are worthy of more than 1000 words IMO. The d-plane, as I understand it, in part from the video you posted, is largely in agreement with chapter 2 (setting aside Yoda's earlier exposure, which clearly is not in agreement).

That said, I don't think d-plane is 'wrong' per se, just not as complete as chapter 2.

As I mentioned, the image with the airplane wings on the ball is a nice one. One that will help people get the concepts of chapter 2 for practical purposes - but one that is limited in its explaination of 'all the rest'.

Either way, the image is a very useful way for people to understand the so called 'new' laws. Something we can all hopefully agree on, whatever road we've taken to get there.

Think of d plane as a 3d representation of what Daryl posted from chapter 2.

After all, physics is physics, however you decide to describe it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12 piece bucket (Post 76942)

I never said Homer came up with the D-plane . . . however in 2-D-0 . . . he clearly says PRACTICALLY right angles to the face . . .

Sorry if this post doesn't fit.

My book (7th ed) in 2-D-0 says "properly at right angles", not "practically". I noticed this from the very first time I read the book because it is an unusual combination of words.

Is it meaningful? a typo? a 7th ed change?

Thanks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3Putt (Post 77144)

A typo that appeared in the 7th edition. The 6th edition says practically.

Kevin