Very interesting indeed. Is there a report anywhere on the findings?

I dont know about Lynn but I think that Chuck Evans has seen the report when he helped Sally to organize Homers last handwritten notes.

The test itself was a bit of an unconfirmed story itself until Scott Gummers book came out with who and where. I had chased the facts for ages and Joe Daniels said it might be in one of his many boxes of Homers stuff. There did not appear to be much of an effort to go look. Chuck knew the story but I don't think he actually saw the resultant 'tick'. He would have been all over the author for years if he had known who had checked out the workings.

Hmmm "Long enough?"
 

Impact is 450 millionths of a second and a 10% change of anything or any change of intentionality is significant, and that's where Dr. J's work simply misses what is going on. Let's review some facts. Two highly skilled PGA pros swing at different speeds and get different distances. Two more PGA pros swing at identical speeds yet one is almost always in the fairway and the other struggles to find it. Take one pro. Put him/her in the rough of varying lengths and watch the mayhem ensue. Try different types of sand, water, pasta, jello, mud, different types of grass in the rough (Did you see the SPIKE TV golf show with Brad Faxon. If I recall correctly, he could control his shot out of jello but not pasta. I think it was the marinara.) :laughing9 It all matters.

Why are their different golf balls? Marketing? Yep. Performance. Yep. Have you ever hit a woman's Karma with a putter vs. a Pro V 1 or a NXT? Do shafts matter? Weighting? Club materials?

What about using the "Iron Byron?" Why are clubs and balls tested? Why "V" grooves vs, "U" grooves? I think one degree of open and the intentionality of the golfer really matters a lot!

A computer takes a snapshot of an event and measures the event "as best it can." It does not see the stream of events which flow to produce the outcome. Or, let's say it measures an athlete's entire swing from start to finish. The computer's program is written by a human looking for "causality." So how did Tiger win the tournament on his broke leg? What was the chain of events? How many girls was he with during the previous contest vs. the one he won?

I swing slowly. So let's say the period of impact for me is one entire second. (Man, it feels like that some days!) While working with TGM for this first year, I must've ripped 10 gloves but never in the same spot! Every time I focused on one wobble, another appeared! Ever have a round with a loose glove or temperature variance from the front nine to the back?

Let's take Extensor Action instead of a hinge. Same speed of impact. No EA and I feel lost. The right amount of EA and "hello beautiful!"

I won't bring up Chaos Theory, yet, but just start ruminating on the idea of 43 dimensions! BTW, those people at Chernobyl learned about the damage a sub-atomic particle could do the hard way.

Little things matter a lot.


ICT

ICT,

Let's assume for a second that we replace Dr J's wording from Impact to impact separation. After any hinge action has taken place.

Does this convert his theory to match TGM?

If not, how is it still different?

JG

John, we are all struggling with the same problem.
 

We can only know at a certain fallible, limited level. I can use a "lot" of EA and really punch a shot from 150 yards right at a pin. Mostly past it or short of it by 30 feet. What I term as a Horizontal Hinge, runs out and an Angle Hinge checks up, usually short. If I forget EA, I'm missing the green.

We are talking about the smallest possible events measured at the fastest speeds. The golfers we all admire ( Norman (either), Woods (as a golfer), Hogan, Jones, Byron Nelson and Nicklaus) controlled the details in amazing ways, often, yet called them different things over time.

I don't accept the idea that a fraction of a small event in a short time is not effecting the outcome, no matter who suggests the idea.

ICT

No. A straight shot can only be produced by a Force Linear to the Ball. That's the theory applied by TGM.

This goes to the heart of Jorgensens Glancing Blow Theory. There cannot be a straight shot in Golf. Yet Jorgensen believes in "Pushes" and "Pulls". How do you reconcile those shots. Well, here is what he does. At Impact, the Clubface is open 1 degree and if the Ball was struck from the inside from 1 degree or so, a "Push" would result. He is saying that this geometry creates a force linear to the Ball. Did he fall off his chair?

He's assuming that the Clubface doesn't rotate or that all of the forces propelling the Ball are transferred from the Clubface to the Ball in the nano-second at first contact. Or, he's saying that we all "Steer" through the Ball. Actually he is saying that an "Angular Force" applied to the Golf Ball will result in a straight Ball Flight. Are you kidding me?

Let's see: Jorgensen, MIT, Manhattan Project, Homer Kelley, Blue Collar worker. I think I'm going with the Blue Collar worker on this one. "Give me "Collision Dynamics" for One-Hundred Dollars please".

Buehler...Buehler
 

you guys lost me a while back but I was curious to know if Trackman is able to verify either claim, or anything at all. I do not have the time to invest in understanding the differences between what Jorgenson and Homer believed (I am too busy making birdies!) All I know is there are a lot of great players that "swing left", or appear to be tracing a plane line left of center. This is all D-plane means to me. When I do this compression does not suffer and will never be accused of "polishing" the ball. My pivot is much more engaged (and I can sense the 3 stations a lot better as a result i.e. swinging to a particular destination in the finish.) The shaft exits mid body as opposed to over my left shoulder. I feel a lot more pressure in my hands, and my clubface is a lot "quieter" through impact i.e. no hooks! Tough to argue with a physicist who helped make the A-bomb!

I can sure see your point Okie. Wouldn't Lee Trevino be a great example? He loved to swing down - way out - and forward, catching the ball way back in the circle. He had to align his machine way left to avoid the quackers...

It's still making the ball leave practically in the same direction as the clubface just as Homer Kelley stated...

At least that's what I'm visualizing. If anybody finds something that works for them, how can it be wrong!?!?!?

Kevin

Trackman verifies D Plane. Just remember, D plane and Homer are very close. Only one small part separates them as I have learned from being here.

Like Kevin said, keep doing whatever works.

The D-Plane is very confusing to me as I am not mathmatical at all in nature. On Kev's facebook page the following link was put up that I really felt helped and made a lot of sense to me.

Is it right to be feeling this is helpful?

http://trackman.dk/Media/Videos/Josh-Zander.aspx

*apologies if this has already been posted as I am joining the conversation late in the day

I think D-Plane's and Track Man's ideal is learning about the dead straight shot, and deciphering how to achieve it. I've never been able to play that way, I'm not that good. My best golf has been trying to hit a little push draw. I like to align my machine square, and catch it a little more on the back of the circle than some, and my compensation is setting up with, and trying to maintain a bit of an open face. My path at impact is a little more right of the face, at least that's the goal for me.

There are options in how to flight it, and options as far as how you visualize what you want to accomplish. Good players have always had to make compensations for what they feel and see. I loved hearing my friend John say that D-Plane and Homer Kelley aren't very far apart. In my opinion, the small amount that they may be apart is semantics, and doesn't affect what I feel or teach. A little deeper into the "science" than I need to get, and certainly deeper than should affect how we feel about each other as professionals. Everybody posting at LBG right now is on the same team IMHO, those that aren't have gone elsewhere.

Kevin

not for me at least - it sounds like he is arguing for an OTT iron swing, with a closing club face this could be 'pull-city' couldn't it ?

but this thread has been beyond my ken, so i am probably talking horlicks

Ya, one small thing. The "Laws of Physics". :laughing9

Trackman doesn't verify D-Plane. It only makes the same false assumptions.

Daryl, play nice. I swear, I'll come to Chicago and sit on you. You'll be sorry! :laughing9

Tim, I kind of agree but should we argue with the science?

When he says that Hogan had a closed stance with a driver and a progressively more open stance with shorter irons that would seem to agree with what the wee ice mon himself wrote in modern fundamentals

i understand shifting the plane to the right of target in order to hit the driver on the up & straight

if we shift the plane left & hit down my take is that we are going left unless we have an open clubface and hold on in which case we are hitting a cut

but my understanding is some way short of patchy :-)

is hitting from the inside one of the TGM imperatives ?

Uhmmmm, I just wanted to say that ...
 

What makes TGM interesting and impressive to me is that Mr. Kelly was able to perceive the actions and dynamics that others had, but did so in a comprehensive, unified theory based on sound biomechanics when not too much information was floating around.


ICT

Absolutely Teach!

No fun stuff with computers or GPS. No video with fancy slow motion... all he had was a used camera. AMAZING how he figured everything out and we still love it today!!!

Kevin

He had Newtons Laws of Force and Motion. He could have figured everything else out in his garage if he wanted. Hmm? He did. :laughing9

Tim, the BIG stuff. Copy and paste these things, my memory is terrible, or I would say try to memorize them. :)

THE G.O.L.F. SWING IS:
1) THE HINGE ACTION = Clubface Control
2) Of an ANGULAR MOTION = Club head Control
3) On an INCLINED PLANE = Club shaft Control

THE IMPERATIVES ARE:
1) A “Flat” Left Wrist
2) A Club head Lag Pressure Point
3) A Straight Plane Line

THE ESSENTIALS ARE:
1) A Stationary Head
2) Balance
3) Rhythm

THE MACHINE CONTROLS THREE FUNCTIONS
1) The Inclined Plane is CLUBSHAFT Control – See 2-F and 4-0
2) The Pressure Points are CLUBHEAD Control – See 2-K and 4-0
3) The Left Wrist is CLUBFACE Control – See 2-G and 4-0

THE THREE STATIONS OF THE MACHINE
1) ADDRESS - be as prepared as possible
2) THE TOP - be as precise as possible
3) THE FINISH - be as smooth and complete as possible through Impact to the Finish

THE STAR SYSTEM TRIAD
1) ·The THREE IMPERATIVES (2-0)
2) ·Controlling the THREE FUNCTIONS (1-L-A/B/C)
3) ·Through the THREE STATIONS (12-3)

Tim, all science is a war where facts win, we hope.
 

I think science should always be a war of comprehension and the biggest circle that accounts for and encloses the most facts. I don't think people should be insulted in the war, but we owe it to each other to embarrass and expose weak ideas, like breaking 85% of health care to fix 5.7% of the population that care to have it and cannot afford it. The remaining percentage of people are students covered at school or illegal and it is not necessary to break what works in health care for them, imho.


Homer created a very large circle that described and explained lots of facts.

ICT

nice one - will do - thanks