Swing Plane, Path and other considerations.

http://www.aroundhawaii.com/lifestyl...ns-part-1.html

Saw this from Kelvin Miyahira and thought that it provided a very different perspective on the plane from TGM. Kindly remove this thread if inappropriate.

Originally Posted by comdpa http://www.aroundhawaii.com/lifestyl...ns-part-1.html

Saw this from Kelvin Miyahira and thought that it provided a very different perspective on the plane from TGM. Kindly remove this thread if inappropriate.

I really like a lot of Kelvin's ideas and have nothing but respect for him as a teacher...

I think it has become "in vogue" to go against the grain of TGM and Homer Kelley, which I think is a shame. My teaching improved by leaps and bounds following the work of Homer Kelley as interpreted by Lynn Blake. HUGE difference that I have seen with my own eyes through my own experience. I don't think Kelvin is wrong, I just believe there are many ways to get R done. I've found mine...

Kevin

good stuff...............

Originally Posted by KevCarter I really like a lot of Kelvin's ideas and have nothing but respect for him as a teacher...

I think it has become "in vogue" to go against the grain of TGM and Homer Kelley, which I think is a shame. My teaching improved by leaps and bounds following the work of Homer Kelley as interpreted by Lynn Blake. HUGE difference that I have seen with my own eyes through my own experience. I don't think Kelvin is wrong, I just believe there are many ways to get R done. I've found mine...

Kevin

I can't see where Kelvin is bashing TGM or Homer Kelley.
My next statement is going to open a can of worms but make your own conclusions.

Homer Kelley was neither a high-level player nor did he have access to high speed video.

Originally Posted by comdpa My next statement is going to open a can of worms but make your own conclusions.

Homer Kelley was neither a high-level player nor did he have access to high speed video.

No can of worms for me , Id say thats correct. Maybe he saw some high speed film somewhere or other, Jones say?

Homers geometry was pretty basic stuff , no equations for instance and as old as the ancient greeks. Who didnt have high speed video either but still knew how to draw beautiful curves, precisely , consistently , over and over again in 3D space and in 2D on a chalk board for instance.

Perhaps Im missing your point? Please expand. Are we still talking about planes and circles?

Originally Posted by comdpa I can't see where Kelvin is bashing TGM or Homer Kelley.
My next statement is going to open a can of worms but make your own conclusions.

Homer Kelley was neither a high-level player nor did he have access to high speed video.

What is the definition of a 'planeoligist'? If we knew that we might ,at some point, be able to give this thread a purpose. Being a reasonably practical person, when I enter a room with sh!t covered walls I don't debate the intent, I move on.

Bumby

Originally Posted by Bumpy Being a reasonably practical person, when I enter a room with sh!t covered walls I don't debate the intent, I move on.

Bumby

Your point is a very good one, wish Id said that. Your Freudian slip, assuming it was a slip, on the spelling of your nom de plume is priceless. Never would have thought a discussion about golf geometry would come around to a story about a guy named Bumby entering a room with sh!t covered walls! This is one of heck of a thread!

comdpa's been around for a while .... I like him, just wondering whats up? Doesnt sound like him. Maybe we been hacked ? Divide and concur? Mike O. might be behind all of this.

Originally Posted by comdpa I can't see where Kelvin is bashing TGM or Homer Kelley.
My next statement is going to open a can of worms but make your own conclusions.

Homer Kelley was neither a high-level player nor did he have access to high speed video.

Where did I say he was bashing him? Just going a different direction, I have no problem with that...

Originally Posted by KevCarter Where did I say he was bashing him? Just going a different direction, I have no problem with that...

My bad...

"I think it has become "in vogue" to go against the grain of TGM and Homer Kelley, which I think is a shame."

Originally Posted by comdpa My bad...

"I think it has become "in vogue" to go against the grain of TGM and Homer Kelley, which I think is a shame."

Exactly. Thank you.

Originally Posted by comdpa http://www.aroundhawaii.com/lifestyl...ns-part-1.html

Saw this from Kelvin Miyahira and thought that it provided a very different perspective on the plane from TGM. Kindly remove this thread if inappropriate.

Jeez where do you start? Kelvin is not wrong , neither is Homer. Was he addressing Homer there?

-Furyk's swing plane is defined in the book , see Turning Shoulder Plane.
-The red line Kelvin disses is what Homer would call the hands plane and yes its really hard to draw on a monitor correctly. Its far better to trace the clubhead path to see whats really going on with path from DTL.
-It would be wrong to assume that Homer thought you should stay on a Hands Plane for a regular shot. Although theres a great little lob shot you can like that .... Homer was all about everything. Homer was not a "one plane only and its the hands plane" guy who Kelvin seems to be addressing.

etc etc etc


I could go for days on this whole question. Lets just say that Homer wanted the path through the ball and the face angle and the hinge action and the Angle of Attack (in his terms) to be consistent with the impact dynamics necessary to hit the shot at hand. That they were machine adjustments.

K here's a shocker ... In the audio tapes Homer seemed to be articulating a preference for a takeaway where the club head ONLY travelled up the Turned Shoulder Plane .... a non shaft plane takeaway. Although the shaft or sweetspot plane does ride the inclined plane on the downswing given CF's influence.

Homer IMO was very different from the "planeologists" Kelvin refers to.

I like Kelvin stuff too. Interesting guy hope he's not lumping any mention of plane in the golf swing into his "planeology " thing That wouldnt be correct or fair IMO. There's cones, planes, plane shifts , non planar ....theres a lot of geometry that jumps out at those who are so inclined to see it.

To subscribe to a plane perspective is not to subscribe to a fixed plane of motion, necessarily.

This video is a nice introduction to things. If you plotted the path of the sweetspot in 3D space it wouldnt appear to be riding a flat plane ..... but it is. Some see it , some dont. Some dont want to maybe.

[URL}="http://

Originally Posted by O.B.Left K here's a shocker ... In the audio tapes Homer seemed to be articulating a preference for a takeaway where the club head ONLY travelled up the Turned Shoulder Plane .... a non shaft plane takeaway. Although the shaft or sweetspot plane does ride the inclined plane on the downswing given CF's influence.

Would that look like that ?

=Etzwane;93840]Would that look like that ?

More like this below , but the top line and the clubhead path should run smack dab through the Turned Right Shoulder at Top to more precisely comply with what Homer was talking about in the audio tapes from 1982. Disregard the narrative , just talking about the visuals on this video.

(Homer would have prescribed an intact Right Forearm Flying Wedge at address too Id imagine. With the Hands , the Right Forearm and Elbow on the same plane as the shaft . Making those two lines closer together.... But thats a different topic. Hmmm I should clarify things maybe. Anyone confused , beguiled or frustrated by Homers 1982 non shaft planar backswing audio should know that IMO Lynn teaches an on plane right forearm at address and a 10-13-A Standard Shoulder Turn with a slight plane shift up to the 10-6-B Turned Shoulder Plane . Making for two lines that are fairly close together ... minimizing plane angle shift but not negating it. So for those reading between the lines Lynn does not teach the high hands as depicted photo 10-6-B #1 that are required to plane the on plane right forearm and shaft to a Turned Shoulder Plane for a true zero shift procedure. This is what he taught me anyways. This what I see in Hogans swing too for example. But, of course and Homer would be the first to say .... you do have options.)

[url}

I have 4 points- only the last 2 are helpfull:

1. I like Kelvin M's work because it puts a lot into the incubator. BUT this months article is more confusion an I don't Understand the points yet.

2.As KM stated "Dr. Sheldon Cooper of the Big Bang Theory" may have said but he is good only for entertainment. I am familiar with Dr. Arno Penzias, also of the Big Bang Theory but I do not think he does golf.

3. O.B.Left video of the shifting plane is very usefull. If I may add a comment- the plane is not shifted during the LOWER 180 Deg. of the clubshaft arc, ie. the plane dose not shift after the elbow plane ( or whatever U choose) is established. This is important.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=1NeizRf3JZY

4. pictures for plane analysis must be taken with care. the pix in the article are not good. If the pix is accurate and looking at the edge of a flat plane then the plane angle line will lie EXACTLY on the base line.


HB

Originally Posted by HungryBear I have 4 points- only the last 2 are helpfull:

1. I like Kelvin M's work because it puts a lot into the incubator. BUT this months article is more confusion an I don't Understand the points yet.

2.As KM stated "Dr. Sheldon Cooper of the Big Bang Theory" may have said but he is good only for entertainment. I am familiar with Dr. Arno Penzias, also of the Big Bang Theory but I do not think he does golf.

3. O.B.Left video of the shifting plane is very usefull. If I may add a comment- the plane is not shifted during the LOWER 180 Deg. of the clubshaft arc, ie. the plane dose not shift after the elbow plane ( or whatever U choose) is established. This is important.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=1NeizRf3JZY

4. pictures for plane analysis must be taken with care. the pix in the article are not good. If the pix is accurate and looking at the edge of a flat plane then the plane angle line will lie EXACTLY on the base line.


HB

Just a general note on # 3.

That video shows just one of a myriad of possible plane angle shifts or none at all for that matter.

If you traced the clubhead (sweetspot) with dots you'd see a 2 D flat to plane circle for the (theoretical) zero shift procedure but then as you plane shift more ...beautiful curves would appear as you approach Furykian near constant shifting . (3 dimensional clubhead orbits ). Picasso like curves in their perfection.

Who was the mid century golfer who described a plane shift in the downswing as "paint my Picasso" ? Cant remember. Henry Cotton? Elk talked about it. Thinking he was British for some reason.

My apologies if i sound like a planeologist. I prefer the term Circleist. Cant understand ovals without first understanding circles. Cant undertand the effects on the clubhead orbit of shifting until you understand zero shift.

Not saying Kelvin was wrong, I hate those "shaft lines" too. But guys , professionals who know their golf geometry should not be discredited by the mistakes, false assumptions of others . A lot of which we're created back in the early days of video analysis . It was like "hey we got this video machine now ... .what the heck are we gonna draw on the screen?" Took a while to figure it all out. A long while.

Interestingly , position golf seems to have come into vogue around the time that photographs were included in golf books. It was sorta like ... " Ok here I am at the top of my backswing , club parallel to the ground".

Are we seeing a trend here? Are there false assumptions being drawn from todays doppler radar? I dunno. Maybe by some.

Originally Posted by O.B.Left No can of worms for me , Id say thats correct. Maybe he had high speed film however.

Homers geometry was pretty basic stuff , no equations for instance and as old as the ancient greeks. Who didnt have high speed video either but still knew how to draw beautiful curves, precisely , consistently , over and over again in 3D space and in 2D on a chalk board for instance.

Perhaps Im missing your point? Please expand. Are we still talking about planes?

Originally Posted by O.B.Left More like this below , but the top line and the clubhead path should run smack dab through the Turned Right Shoulder at Top to more precisely comply with what Homer was talking about in the audio tapes from 1982. Disregard the narrative , just talking about the visuals on this video.

(Homer would have prescribed an intact Right Forearm Flying Wedge at address too Id imagine. With the Hands , the Right Forearm and Elbow on the same plane as the shaft . Making those two lines closer together.... But thats a different topic. Hmmm I should clarify things maybe. Anyone confused , beguiled or frustrated by Homers 1982 non shaft planar backswing audio should know that IMO Lynn teaches an on plane right forearm at address and a 10-13-A Standard Shoulder Turn with a slight plane shift up to the 10-6-B Turned Shoulder Plane . Making for two lines that are fairly close together ... minimizing plane angle shift but not negating it. So for those reading between the lines Lynn does not teach the high hands as depicted photo 10-6-B #1 that are required to plane the on plane right forearm and shaft to a Turned Shoulder Plane for a true zero shift procedure. This is what he taught me anyways. This what I see in Hogans swing too for example. But, of course and Homer would be the first to say .... you do have options.)

[url}

The point I was trying to make is advancement. As a better player, I believe I am able to feel things in the golf swing that a lesser player would not be able to feel. Do you think that hi speed video the likes of the Swing Vision camera was available to Homer back then?

Originally Posted by comdpa The point I was trying to make is advancement. As a better player, I believe I am able to feel things in the golf swing that a lesser player would not be able to feel. Do you think that hi speed video the likes of the Swing Vision camera was available to Homer back then?

Ok , NO to the high speed video thing. That didnt come along till recently. Agreed on the feel thing theoretically but he sure wrote some wonderful stuff about feel for a mid handicapper, no? I like it , obviously.

So what are you feeling and seeing on high speed then?

Originally Posted by O.B.Left More like this below , but the top line and the clubhead path should run smack dab through the Turned Right Shoulder at Top to more precisely comply with what Homer was talking about in the audio tapes from 1982. Disregard the narrative , just talking about the visuals on this video.

(Homer would have prescribed an intact Right Forearm Flying Wedge at address too Id imagine. With the Hands , the Right Forearm and Elbow on the same plane as the shaft . Making those two lines closer together.... But thats a different topic. Hmmm I should clarify things maybe. Anyone confused , beguiled or frustrated by Homers 1982 non shaft planar backswing audio should know that IMO Lynn teaches an on plane right forearm at address and a 10-13-A Standard Shoulder Turn with a slight plane shift up to the 10-6-B Turned Shoulder Plane . Making for two lines that are fairly close together ... minimizing plane angle shift but not negating it. So for those reading between the lines Lynn does not teach the high hands as depicted photo 10-6-B #1 that are required to plane the on plane right forearm and shaft to a Turned Shoulder Plane for a true zero shift procedure. This is what he taught me anyways. This what I see in Hogans swing too for example. But, of course and Homer would be the first to say .... you do have options.)

[url}

Thanks ! I had never seen his swing from that point of view !

I haven't read the entire article but I've never seen anyone promoting swinging on the “Original Shaft Plane” with a hands only plane at address.