Exactly what a waste - HH must have a primitive knowledge of the inclined plane. Was he trying to get Tiger to match his impact shaft line to his setup shaft line? IMHO that would be a power/consistancy leak.
Don't know.
But this would be stock TGM with level left wrist and right forearm on plane at address and implact. (The flying wedges) And keeping the shaft on the same plane at all times would be the TGM basic pattern with turned shoulder plane and without planeshift.
Whether that produces a power / consistency leak depends amongst other things on how you perfer to time your arms swing in relationship to your pivot turn. With reasonably square sholders and a lot of accumulator #4 release before impact it should work all right. If you like to have more pivot rotation through impact and save the Accumulator #4 a little longer it's a major swing wrecker. At least in my stroke.
Haney wants to see the shaft moving on a plane with a constant plane angle. So a Haney plane shifting is merely a plane dropping than a change of plane angle. A consequence of this philosophy is that a "Haney" golfer will not be thrusting and pulling the club towards the plane line until the very last instance. At least not longitudinally. Most of the time the shaft would point above the plane line.
While Tiger has been struggling with his driver during his time with Hank Haney, his iron striking has improved. And he has wone more than a couple of tournament. So Haney is probably not an idiot although he has a non-TGM philosophy.
thanks all for the input, I am still pretty confused but thank you for info. I am going to try reading it few times to see if it sinks in.
Hi Scott. You sort of got threadjacked by everyone. It's not you!
The search function on this site is awesome as you might know. To benefit from this experience, pick a theme that one of our peeps referred to and start researching the heck out of it. Your game will improve and someday, you will be shooting par or better and being gracious to those you do not know because they are suffering golfers as you once were!
Patrick
__________________
HP, grant me the serenity to accept what I cannot change, the courage to change what I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. Progress and not perfection is the goal every day!
D, It should be pointed out that it is not to be found in 1-L!!!!!!! Per 1-L-18. So it is not a Machine concept. A characteristic of all Geometrically and Mechanically correct golf strokes.
Hmm? I understand O.B. but that wasn't the question. I suppose then that since Tiger or Hank don't prescribe to the Machine Concept, then they aren't "characteristic of a Geometrically and Mechanically correct golf stroke". So, tell Tiger to give back the money.
There is a fundamental problem with 1-L 18 in combination with a plane shift.
Question: How do you change the plane angle from turned shoulder to elbow plane while you at all times drag and drive towards the same plane line?
Answer: You do it by applying additional forces that is way off plane:
a) a PP#2 pressure that is backwards and downwards at the start of the plane shift. And the opposite direction by the end.
b) a torque through the hands that drives the clubhed even further down than the hands, per a) and later stops it from rotating even flatter.
In other words: Steering. There will be two steering components: One that consists of the club as a whole being moved on a curved plane. The second being that the club itself will have to be rotated from one plane angle to the next.
The physicists amongst us could then proceed to argue that, when you try to rotate a rotating object with around 90* angle to the first rotation, you get a coriolis acceleration that works in the 3rd dimension. If it has any real impact it will work towards rotating the plane line on the ground.
Whether you're a fysisist or not: Rotating the swing plane and rotating the club your're swinging with around two different axes for a while - before you stop the plane bending and the secondary club rotation - it is not the easiest thing to do. Not in theory anywway. But that's the implication of 1-L 18 combined with plane shifting.
The Haney plane thing can be made basically steering free. The club itself will have a constant plane angle so you don't need to worry about additional club rotation. If you simply add a vertical component to a swing that would othervise pass the impact zone high above the ball, you can have a basically compensation free stroke. If from mother earth gravity doesn't do the whole vertical part for you, you will have to torque the club head towards the ground as you start lowering your swing plane. If you do it in a certain way you can keep your clubhead on the same plane angle throughout the stroke. Like a frisbee that spins nice and clean as it approaches the ground. But your hands will be above the clubhed plane most of the time and cross to the underside at some point prior to impact.
Of course, all of this is theory. But so is 1-L. There may be physiological reasons that speaks for a certain amount of steering and I don't know whether that will be in favor of TGM plane shift or Haney parallel planes.
There is a fundamental problem with 1-L 18 in combination with a plane shift.
The problem isn't with 1-L because 1-L is about Geometrically Oriented Linear Golf. TGM is Hands to Pivot. In this regard, the Shaft always points to the Plane line except when Horizontal to the ground.
The book does help with Pivot Controlled Hands Procedures in some places but for the most part you're on your own.
Linear Mode
