|
Post by Richie3Jack on Feb 5, 2013 14:24:00 GMT -5
I wanted to start a thread with regards to The Golfing Machine's hitting vs. swinging patterns.
This should not be confused with John Erickson's (www.advancedballstriking.com) 'hitting vs. swinging patterns.' Although we can discuss it here (I may end up moving it to a new thread if the discussion becomes too much since TGM hitting/swinging is different from Erickson's hitting/swinging).
As defined by Homer Kelley in the 7th Edition of The Golfing Machine, the hitting procedure occurs when the golfer drive loads and the swinging procedure occurs when the golfer drag loads.
Drive Loading = Pushing the club into impact with the rear arm/hand.
Aka the 'crap smacker.'
I often refer to it like a 'palm heel thrust' into the ball.
With drag loading (swinging procedure) this is more of a pull down with the lead arm/hand. As Homer Kelley described the sensation and visualization of a golfer pulling the rope to ring a large bell.
PLEASE, let's refrain from criticizing the processes in this thread and more or less get to analyzing the patterns. This thread is more designed for those who don't understand TGM and its terminology and therefore have no idea what we are talking about when it comes to things like 'punch elbow', 'pitch elbow', etc.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Feb 5, 2013 15:52:39 GMT -5
For all intents and purposes, Homer Kelley didn't really care what parts of the golf swing a golfer used if they were hitting or swinging. However....for all intents and purposes...he was really recommending certain parts go with hitting and certain parts of the swing go with swinging as they were more 'compatible.' I'll go over some of the key parts for hitter: - stronger grip, impact hands, right forearm on plane p1Even though Hogan is at impact, the right forearm is on plane. The hitting procedure recommends the forearm on plane at p1. Part of the reason is that it simplifies the swing by having the golfer simply return the right forearm on plane at impact. The same concept with 'impact hands' at address. p4 - Usually a shorter backswing p6 - punch or push elbow p7.1 to p-8 - what's called an 'angled hinge' or the clubface being square to the swing arc. Plane wise they prefer a 'single shift', going from the elbow to shoulder plane in the backswing and then continuing down the shoulder plane in the downswing. Again, it is NOT MANDATORY to have all of these key parts in place. Without actually stating it, it is more or less recommended to have them in place. So you can be an effective 'hitter' using 'address hands', with a longer backswing, a double plane shift, horizontal hinge, etc. Because as Homer Kelley defined it, a 'hitter' is solely defined by them drive loading (push with the rear arm/hand). By TGM terms, Lee Trevino would be considered a 'hitter.' 3JACK
|
|
|
Post by virtuoso on Feb 5, 2013 16:07:32 GMT -5
I was looking for something just like this--thanks Richie.
Do you know of any other dtl vids or images of anyone who would be considered an archtype for TGM hitting?
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Feb 5, 2013 16:18:43 GMT -5
Look at Ted Fort.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Feb 5, 2013 16:41:28 GMT -5
The Swinging Procedure is more lead arm oriented in particular because the sole component that defines swinging (drag loading) is executed by the lead arm. Whereas TGM hitting pattern uses more ‘angled hinging’ (clubface square to the swing arc), it is recommended with TGM swinging to use ‘horizontal hinging’ (aka toe up). Thus, with hitting pattern the clubface is more closed at p2 and the swinging pattern is recommended to be more toe up at p2. Going ‘toe up to toe up’ Here are the basic traits you tend to see from a swinging pattern: P1: ‘address hands’ (butt end of the club pointing mid-body instead of impact hands which is butt of club forward of the clubhead). Grip more neutral (to allow for more clubface rotation back and thru). Right forearm ABOVE the shaft plane. P2: Toe up, typically a wider swing arc. P4: hands very high, longer backswing. P6: Punch or Pitch Elbow P7-P9: Horizontal Hinge (toe up) Bobby Clampett is a good example of what TGM would call a ‘swinger.’ So is Davis Love III Love III is more of a swinger with punch elbow. Clampett was a swinger with pitch elbow and 'maximum trigger delay' (aka getting the hands further forward at p6). 3JACK
|
|
|
Post by theswingengineer on Feb 5, 2013 17:16:58 GMT -5
I'm still toying with the idea of a Hitting & Swinging chapter on my website. The problem with explaining it fully is that I don't think anyone would be bothered to read it!
Last year I went through the book, cover to cover, with a notepad, jotting down everywhere Hitting and Swinging are mentioned. I'd counted 54 occasions from the preface to the index where Mr Kelley explains a part of what it means to "hit" or "swing". It's certainly a lot more complicated than most folk give it credit.
|
|
|
Post by kevcarter on Feb 5, 2013 17:44:10 GMT -5
Very good thread again Richie. Especially like the video of Trevino and the explanation of his hitting with Right Forearm on plane. Exactly the stuff I enjoy fooling around with... Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by hogan49 on Feb 5, 2013 19:19:04 GMT -5
For all intents and purposes, Homer Kelley didn't really care what parts of the golf swing a golfer used if they were hitting or swinging. However....for all intents and purposes...he was really recommending certain parts go with hitting and certain parts of the swing go with swinging as they were more 'compatible.' I'll go over some of the key parts for hitter: - stronger grip, impact hands, right forearm on plane p1Even though Hogan is at impact, the right forearm is on plane. The hitting procedure recommends the forearm on plane at p1. Part of the reason is that it simplifies the swing by having the golfer simply return the right forearm on plane at impact. The same concept with 'impact hands' at address. p4 - Usually a shorter backswing p6 - punch or push elbow p7.1 to p-8 - what's called an 'angled hinge' or the clubface being square to the swing arc. Plane wise they prefer a 'single shift', going from the elbow to shoulder plane in the backswing and then continuing down the shoulder plane in the downswing. Again, it is NOT MANDATORY to have all of these key parts in place. Without actually stating it, it is more or less recommended to have them in place. So you can be an effective 'hitter' using 'address hands', with a longer backswing, a double plane shift, horizontal hinge, etc. Because as Homer Kelley defined it, a 'hitter' is solely defined by them drive loading (push with the rear arm/hand). By TGM terms, Lee Trevino would be considered a 'hitter.' 3JACK Is a closed or open stance more advisable for a hitting motion or doesn't it matter?
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Feb 5, 2013 20:22:49 GMT -5
I don't recall the book ever going into that.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Feb 6, 2013 1:44:21 GMT -5
I'm still toying with the idea of a Hitting & Swinging chapter on my website. The problem with explaining it fully is that I don't think anyone would be bothered to read it! Last year I went through the book, cover to cover, with a notepad, jotting down everywhere Hitting and Swinging are mentioned. I'd counted 54 occasions from the preface to the index where Mr Kelley explains a part of what it means to "hit" or "swing". It's certainly a lot more complicated than most folk give it credit. And the other problem with that is that there is also many combos and still many ways to make it look like same in some positions and still actions are very different. Pitch/Punch elbow is good example of that as it can be in same position but in very different orientation at that point. I still wait that day when people stop thinking things relative to the plane
|
|
|
Post by kevcarter on Feb 6, 2013 6:14:59 GMT -5
I'm still toying with the idea of a Hitting & Swinging chapter on my website. The problem with explaining it fully is that I don't think anyone would be bothered to read it! Last year I went through the book, cover to cover, with a notepad, jotting down everywhere Hitting and Swinging are mentioned. I'd counted 54 occasions from the preface to the index where Mr Kelley explains a part of what it means to "hit" or "swing". It's certainly a lot more complicated than most folk give it credit. And the other problem with that is that there is also many combos and still many ways to make it look like same in some positions and still actions are very different. Pitch/Punch elbow is good example of that as it can be in same position but in very different orientation at that point. I still wait that day when people stop thinking things relative to the plane Tee, I don't wish to be disrespectful. I know your modern equipment and knowledge are making huge advances in understanding the golf swing... Understanding the TGM version of PLANE was huge in my learning, both for my own swing and for my teaching. It's been a huge part of understanding the swing for years for many. I couldn't teach without it. I don't understand how such a valuable concept for many can be simply thrown away. Perhaps it's another of those feel things... Kevin
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Feb 6, 2013 7:39:07 GMT -5
And the other problem with that is that there is also many combos and still many ways to make it look like same in some positions and still actions are very different. Pitch/Punch elbow is good example of that as it can be in same position but in very different orientation at that point. I still wait that day when people stop thinking things relative to the plane Tee, I don't wish to be disrespectful. I know your modern equipment and knowledge are making huge advances in understanding the golf swing... Understanding the TGM version of PLANE was huge in my learning, both for my own swing and for my teaching. It's been a huge part of understanding the swing for years for many. I couldn't teach without it. I don't understand how such a valuable concept for many can be simply thrown away. Perhaps it's another of those feel things... Kevin Kevin, with all the respect, I just had meeting with few guys here and we were talking about that issue. As they are guys who work in 3D industry (and golfers also) they all were shocked about what I said... and proved. Plane really creates an illusion that things are moving on it, but only from some projection and only in 2D. The worst case is that it's thought to be kind of shield in some angle. In reality it's not and nothing moves on it. It's bend, and also not linear. The second thing is that hands and club head got totally 2 different planes, also bent and non linear ones, so nothing really moves on that plane also. Or yes, it moves on some players who slings the club, but not for others. When we look those players planes from DTL as usual, they still got similar looks on their planes. Even the movements are totally different. Hard to explain like this, but I hope we meet some day and I can show the difference F2F.
|
|
|
Post by kevcarter on Feb 6, 2013 8:05:06 GMT -5
Tee, I don't wish to be disrespectful. I know your modern equipment and knowledge are making huge advances in understanding the golf swing... Understanding the TGM version of PLANE was huge in my learning, both for my own swing and for my teaching. It's been a huge part of understanding the swing for years for many. I couldn't teach without it. I don't understand how such a valuable concept for many can be simply thrown away. Perhaps it's another of those feel things... Kevin Kevin, with all the respect, I just had meeting with few guys here and we were talking about that issue. As they are guys who work in 3D industry (and golfers also) they all were shocked about what I said... and proved. Plane really creates an illusion that things are moving on it, but only from some projection and only in 2D. The worst case is that it's thought to be kind of shield in some angle. In reality it's not and nothing moves on it. It's bend, and also not linear. The second thing is that hands and club head got totally 2 different planes, also bent and non linear ones, so nothing really moves on that plane also. Or yes, it moves on some players who slings the club, but not for others. When we look those players planes from DTL as usual, they still got similar looks on their planes. Even the movements are totally different. Hard to explain like this, but I hope we meet some day and I can show the difference F2F. Tee, I hope so too my friend. No doubt I would learn a ton!!! In the meantime, I appreciate you sharing your work and trying to teach us old dawgs some new tricks. :-) Cheers
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Feb 6, 2013 8:22:20 GMT -5
Kevin, with all the respect, I just had meeting with few guys here and we were talking about that issue. As they are guys who work in 3D industry (and golfers also) they all were shocked about what I said... and proved. Plane really creates an illusion that things are moving on it, but only from some projection and only in 2D. The worst case is that it's thought to be kind of shield in some angle. In reality it's not and nothing moves on it. It's bend, and also not linear. The second thing is that hands and club head got totally 2 different planes, also bent and non linear ones, so nothing really moves on that plane also. Or yes, it moves on some players who slings the club, but not for others. When we look those players planes from DTL as usual, they still got similar looks on their planes. Even the movements are totally different. Hard to explain like this, but I hope we meet some day and I can show the difference F2F. Tee, I hope so too my friend. No doubt I would learn a ton!!! In the meantime, I appreciate you sharing your work and trying to teach us old dawgs some new tricks. :-) Cheers Kevin, we all are here to learn and I learn more every day. For me learning is also finding new ways to think of things and sometimes they put us at middle of confusion. Everything was so clear and easy for me also before starting this project in 3D.. or in 4D world. And don't get me wrong. I respect a lot HK's work at that era as well many others. They made good work with those tools they got back then. And I also talk a lot about plane every day, but only as an indicator for some positions. I talk a lot about dropping on elbow plane, I check many things from DTL view relative to some planes, so I don't really deny that term or say it's useless. I was just too long in my teaching seeing things the old way and after these years I have really figured out those misunderstandings it can create. Trying to swing on plane has made so much harm for me and my students that I want other instructors to find those same things some day. The worst thing happens, which seems to be obvious with some radar systems, that plane is used to define the path at impact. In that case that bend and non linearity makes big difference for measurements and they can give totally wrong idea of the real action.
|
|
|
Post by Sharky2 on Nov 14, 2013 13:43:27 GMT -5
Does anyone have any useful Trackman or Flightscope data from any of todays top players. We have the averages of the tour, but no personal data, I would love to see the different swing patterns of top players. Thanks
|
|