Single plane or TGM?

Hello all. I am new to the forums. Looks like an interesting place with tons of info and a bunch of enthusiastic people. I like it.

I sent an email to Ted earlier today (he frequents another forum I am on)... I thought I would throw my query out there as well to those students that have used TGM to perhaps get their input as well. I recently read Hardy's Plane truth and found some of the concepts to be very interesting. I am trying to find out the differences between TGM and Single plane theory. Trying to decide which will work better and help me achieve my goals.

I must be clear... I am certainly not asking anyone to bash Hardy's Theory, nor am I questioning the validity of TGM. I am simply trying to gain an understanding of each so that I can make an informed decision as possible about which road I should travel down.

Below is the copy of the email I sent to Ted.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Ted,

Thank you in advance for your time. I am looking to take my game to the next level. My index has been in the 0.5 to 4.0 range for quite some time (generally it is around 2.0). I would like to take it a touch lower and more importantly develop more consistency in my ball striking. I have competed in our State Am a few times and have also done well in the past in local Am events.

I want to become more consistent, and more competetive. I have taken 3 lessons in total in my life (I am 33 years old). I have always just had a mindset of "I'll figure it out on my own". I am a touch stubborn and it took me a while to learn that if I want to get my game to the next level, I am going to have to seek out the help of people that can assist me in getting there.

I am in my discovery phase for trying to find an approach that will help me get to where I want to go. TGM may be just that, Hardy's one plane may be that as well. I do not know enough about TGM to understand the difference between the two.

As I posted earlier, I am not at all questioning the validity of TGM, nor am I asking you to "bash" Hardy's theories of the one plane swing. I am just trying to gather as much info as I possibly can so I can make the best decision for what approach I need to take for my improvement process.

Looking very much to hearing back from you.

Regards,

Stags

Originally Posted by stags14 Hello all. I am new to the forums. Looks like an interesting place with tons of info and a bunch of enthusiastic people. I like it.

I sent an email to Ted earlier today (he frequents another forum I am on)... I thought I would throw my query out there as well to those students that have used TGM to perhaps get their input as well. I recently read Hardy's Plane truth and found some of the concepts to be very interesting. I am trying to find out the differences between TGM and Single plane theory. Trying to decide which will work better and help me achieve my goals.

I must be clear... I am certainly not asking anyone to bash Hardy's Theory, nor am I questioning the validity of TGM. I am simply trying to gain an understanding of each so that I can make an informed decision as possible about which road I should travel down.

Below is the copy of the email I sent to Ted.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Ted,

Thank you in advance for your time. I am looking to take my game to the next level. My index has been in the 0.5 to 4.0 range for quite some time (generally it is around 2.0). I would like to take it a touch lower and more importantly develop more consistency in my ball striking. I have competed in our State Am a few times and have also done well in the past in local Am events.

I want to become more consistent, and more competetive. I have taken 3 lessons in total in my life (I am 33 years old). I have always just had a mindset of "I'll figure it out on my own". I am a touch stubborn and it took me a while to learn that if I want to get my game to the next level, I am going to have to seek out the help of people that can assist me in getting there.

I am in my discovery phase for trying to find an approach that will help me get to where I want to go. TGM may be just that, Hardy's one plane may be that as well. I do not know enough about TGM to understand the difference between the two.

As I posted earlier, I am not at all questioning the validity of TGM, nor am I asking you to "bash" Hardy's theories of the one plane swing. I am just trying to gather as much info as I possibly can so I can make the best decision for what approach I need to take for my improvement process.

Looking very much to hearing back from you.

Regards,

Stags

I've had so many lessons today, but I'm going to try to get back to post a response soon.

I can help you get better, guaranteed!

Originally Posted by YodasLuke I've had so many lessons today, but I'm going to try to get back to post a response soon.

I can help you get better, guaranteed!

He ain't lying!

Please realize that Hardy's "concept of plane" really has no basis on ANY KIND OF SHAFT PLANE ANYWHERE.

He's simply describing too different "patterns" as we say in TGM (ways to swing a club)

The single plane idea is simply:
-more bent over
-stand further away from it

this will cause you to have a rounder/flatter swing that if you do as he says puts you UNDER PLANE at the top of the swing. The only way to find the plane properly on the downswing is to STEEPEN your swing and swing outside in. That's why you see Olin Browne practicing that routine so much and also why he mainly hits the fade.

The two plane idea is one where:
-you stand closer
-you stand more upright

this basically makes your swing more vertical and upright and imo easier to find the REAL plane.

----------

IMO, don't worrk about 1 or 2 plane just simply SWING ON PLANE.

Homer said it best, all you need is a:

1) flat left wrist
2) swing on plane (trace a straight plane line)
3) have lag

Can't do much wrong if you do all 3 above

Originally Posted by jim_0068 Please realize that Hardy's "concept of plane" really has no basis on ANY KIND OF SHAFT PLANE ANYWHERE.

He's simply describing too different "patterns" as we say in TGM (ways to swing a club)

The single plane idea is simply:
-more bent over
-stand further away from it

this will cause you to have a rounder/flatter swing that if you do as he says puts you UNDER PLANE at the top of the swing. The only way to find the plane properly on the downswing is to STEEPEN your swing and swing outside in. That's why you see Olin Browne practicing that routine so much and also why he mainly hits the fade.

The two plane idea is one where:
-you stand closer
-you stand more upright

this basically makes your swing more vertical and upright and imo easier to find the REAL plane.

----------

IMO, don't worrk about 1 or 2 plane just simply SWING ON PLANE.

Homer said it best, all you need is a:

1) flat left wrist
2) swing on plane (trace a straight plane line)
3) have lag

Can't do much wrong if you do all 3 above

Please excuse my beginner question, but what do you mean by the "real plane"?

Originally Posted by stags14 Please excuse my beginner question, but what do you mean by the "real plane"?

If you ever picked up Hogans Five Lessons, he introduced the concept to the masses, that the golfswing is performed on a geometric inclined plane. Actually it was introduced prior to Hogan, but probably didn't hit mainstream consciousness until then.

Hardy has unfortunately introduced a great deal of confusion regarding terminology.

In TGM swinging the clubshaft on the inclined plane without deviation, is one of the three basic imperatives in making a sound golfstroke. From putt to drive.

Bagger

Originally Posted by YodasLuke I've had so many lessons today, but I'm going to try to get back to post a response soon.

I can help you get better, guaranteed!

What type of guarantee do you offer?

Well, i'm not ted but i usually guarrantee when i give a lesson that i will get you to hit a ball like you never have before (fully compressed)

Doesn't matter the handicap usually, i can always find some kind of leakage

Originally Posted by jim_0068 Well, i'm not ted but i usually guarrantee when i give a lesson that i will get you to hit a ball like you never have before (fully compressed)

Doesn't matter the handicap usually, i can always find some kind of leakage

What do you mean exactly by fully compressed?

Not trying to be argumentative, but I am pretty sure I have hit many golf shots over the years where the ball was fully compressed. Certainly not all the time, but by dumb luck I have probably fell backwards into a few very good swings. I just wish I did it more often

Originally Posted by stags14 What type of guarantee do you offer?

I am not easily impressed and have had many lessons with many people. Ted helped me at the Canton golf school. No question Ted is a brilliant teacher and he genuinely wants his pupils to improve he also knows his stuff inside out. That combination is very rare. Improvement with him is inevitable providing YOU make some effort to do as he says.

Originally Posted by hue I am not easily impressed and have had many lessons with many people. Ted helped me at the Canton golf school. No question Ted is a brilliant teacher and he genuinely wants his pupils to improve he also knows his stuff inside out. That combination is very rare. Improvement with him is inevitable providing YOU make some effort to do as he says.

Traveling to Georgia is not the most feasible of options for me. I wish they were closer.

First off, welcome. Second off, I know exactly where you are coming from because I was there recently (although not quite as good as you already are). I have Hardy's book; I have Hogan's book; I now have The Golfing Machine. I used to frequent another "one-plane" swing site that I now consider a fraud.

To me, Hardy has a great concept but there are several pieces missing in it and not very much good information out there to help you get through it. I like his concept because he comes from a simplicity standpoint. However, I think it's a bit too simplistic. I tried implementing his stuff and found that other "one-plane" swing site and tried doing that as well. I ended up with the shanks and couldn't figure out how to fix them. I would go through periods of decent ball striking only to have a period of shanks come back.

Then I started looking more into TGM, and honestly I thought these guys were a bunch of freaks at first. It's the jargon (sorry guys) that creates a barrier at first. It's also the fact that people have been told over and over that the golf swing is simple and we should just keep it simple. Why cloud your mind with all these thoughts about mechanics? I'll tell you why. I can self-diagnose my own swing with decent results. I am even starting to correct it. I think those who think we should swing "natural" or forget about mechanics never really competed in other sports. Or, if they did they didn't really understand what their bodies were doing. And they never really attained any real level of success.

Hardy's "idea" of a one-plane swing in TGM terms would be a zero-shift swing, meaning that the backstroke and downstroke trace a single plane. But Homer Kelley defined a few different planes that one can choose or is naturally inclined to use. The golfer is free to pick the one best suited, but the preferred plane (I think) is the turned shoulder plane. Kelley also described other versions where there are varying amounts of shifts, which would be akin to Hardy's dual-plane concept.

In the last couple of months I have sifted through hundreds of postings on this site and two others. I have studied the Yellow Book and taken a lesson from a member here who is also an AI (ldeit). Best of all, I am seeing results, using what I call the world's cheapest training aid -- two wooden dowels.

My advice -- start sifting through some of the stuff around here and try to get a grasp of the vocab. Check out all the videos here, visit Brian Manzella's site and ask questions. Depending on where you are located I'm sure someone here can also recommend a good AI to get you started. Oh yeah, I recommend TGM over Hardy. TGM is not a method or a trend. It is a description of the entire process and how it works and the variations that can work.

Hardy's concept of plane is flawed because angular motion does not work on parallel planes, there can only be a downplane force directly towards the plane line. Its not even a speculation or opinion, that is fact!

Originally Posted by Vandal ...TGM is not a method or a trend. It is a description of the entire process and how it works and the variations that can work.

Whoa look at you now Vandal, you have come a long way.

Originally Posted by Vandal Hardy's "idea" of a one-plane swing in TGM terms would be a zero-shift swing, meaning that the backstroke and downstroke trace a single plane. But Homer Kelley defined a few different planes that one can choose or is naturally inclined to use. The golfer is free to pick the one best suited, but the preferred plane (I think) is the turned shoulder plane. Kelley also described other versions where there are varying amounts of shifts, which would be akin to Hardy's dual-plane concept.

And therein lies the beauty of TGM it allows a golfer to apply a set of fundamentals he or she can use reliably based on their body type of natural inclination to do certain things well physically.

It's also the biggest problem I have with most other golf swing theories. Very seldom do these theories take into the consideration a person's body type of natural attributes.

Originally Posted by Yoda And unless the 'guarantee' works both ways...

It is a foolish instructor who extends it.

And a deluded or perhaps opportunistic student who accepts it.

Seeing that my index generally is in the 2.0 range, I think it is safe to say that I have and do work on my game very seriously. I am no Bruce Leitzke, meaning I have to work very hard to maintain my playing level.

Respectfully, I disagree with your statement that it is a "deluded or perrhaps opportunistic" student that accepts an offer of a guarantee.

Originally Posted by stags14 Hello all. I am new to the forums. Looks like an interesting place with tons of info and a bunch of enthusiastic people. I like it.

I sent an email to Ted earlier today (he frequents another forum I am on)... I thought I would throw my query out there as well to those students that have used TGM to perhaps get their input as well. I recently read Hardy's Plane truth and found some of the concepts to be very interesting. I am trying to find out the differences between TGM and Single plane theory. Trying to decide which will work better and help me achieve my goals.

I must be clear... I am certainly not asking anyone to bash Hardy's Theory, nor am I questioning the validity of TGM. I am simply trying to gain an understanding of each so that I can make an informed decision as possible about which road I should travel down.

Below is the copy of the email I sent to Ted.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Ted,

Thank you in advance for your time. I am looking to take my game to the next level. My index has been in the 0.5 to 4.0 range for quite some time (generally it is around 2.0). I would like to take it a touch lower and more importantly develop more consistency in my ball striking. I have competed in our State Am a few times and have also done well in the past in local Am events.

I want to become more consistent, and more competetive. I have taken 3 lessons in total in my life (I am 33 years old). I have always just had a mindset of "I'll figure it out on my own". I am a touch stubborn and it took me a while to learn that if I want to get my game to the next level, I am going to have to seek out the help of people that can assist me in getting there.

I am in my discovery phase for trying to find an approach that will help me get to where I want to go. TGM may be just that, Hardy's one plane may be that as well. I do not know enough about TGM to understand the difference between the two.

As I posted earlier, I am not at all questioning the validity of TGM, nor am I asking you to "bash" Hardy's theories of the one plane swing. I am just trying to gather as much info as I possibly can so I can make the best decision for what approach I need to take for my improvement process.

Looking very much to hearing back from you.

Regards,

Stags

It depends whether you want a single theory or an infinite # of variations.I don't honestly know much about the single plane theory ...but I have met Ted during a lesson with Yoda .You would not be disappointed.

I caddy on the tour and can tell you Olin Browne does not hit a fade. He also doesn't do exactly what Jim Hardy teaches. Those feels however have definitely helped Olin. He is very accurate. He was first on tour last year in proximity to the hole. I believe hardy has helped some tour players and hurt others. Unlike TGM, there is no basis for his findings other than his feels he used when he played the tour.

Originally Posted by tedscott I caddy on the tour and can tell you Olin Browne does not hit a fade. He also doesn't do exactly what Jim Hardy teaches. Those feels however have definitely helped Olin. He is very accurate. He was first on tour last year in proximity to the hole. I believe hardy has helped some tour players and hurt others. Unlike TGM, there is no basis for his findings other than his feels he used when he played the tour.

Very nice first post Tedscott. Welcome to the forum and please continue sharing your insights. Like everyone else; throw off the hat, kick off your shoes, put the bag in the corner and make youself right at home.

Stags - You can order the book directly from The Golfing Machine at www.thegolfingmachine.com and you can view a huge amount of plane diagrams on this site, including stickman figures created by Rob Noel, one of the Professional Contributors in the Advanced TGM Section.

Bagger