Brian Manzella for Golf Magazine, Golf.com & FRONT9 - Justin Rose's Right Arm Move

Status
Not open for further replies.
drewyallop

drewyallop

New
From Kwon and Como et al ...

At BI (Before Impact) the left hand and right elbow are closely aligned with the FSP (Functional swing plane) meaning that near impact the clubshaft and right forearm also join the FSP.

 
W

wulsy

New
You mean like this cool dude drew?;)

2hexzl5.jpg
 
lia41985

lia41985

New member
drewyallop said:
From Kwon and Como et al ...

At BI (Before Impact) the left hand and right elbow are closely aligned with the FSP (Functional swing plane) meaning that near impact the clubshaft and right forearm also join the FSP.
Click to expand...
Uh oh...

"On plane' forearm

How to reconcile new scientific discoveries with old yellow book?
 
B

Brian Manzella

Administrator
Nothing wrong in a million years with an "on plane right forearm."

The low-back, and mid-back golfers who have a decent amount or a LOT of tumble, will have the lowest hands, and therefore—by default—the lowest right forearm.

The main point I used to make about the right forearm NOT having to be on plane, is well, it doesn't have to be, and you can be a world-class champion.
 
lia41985

lia41985

New member
That's subtle and acquainted. I like that. In terms of potential "causal relationships": the more and earlier the tumble the "lower" the back, would you say? What's the relation?
 
B

Brian Manzella

Administrator
lia41985 said:
That's subtle and acquainted. I like that. In terms of potential "causal relationships": the more and earlier the tumble the "lower" the back, would you say? What's the relation?
Click to expand...

For a more modern view, the 3D posted of the PGA Tour winner is a low back golfer.

I may be misunderstanding you, but if you reverse tumble, you can be flatter, you'll rarely have a steeper eventual plane.
 
lia41985

lia41985

New member
Brian Manzella said:
For a more modern view, the 3D posted of the PGA Tour winner is a low back golfer.

I may be misunderstanding you, but if you reverse tumble, you can be flatter, you'll rarely have a steeper eventual plane.
Click to expand...
The latter is a great explanation. Thanks. Others may require some clarification, however. Also, which 3-D are you talking about? Thanks again.
 
Erik_K

Erik_K

New
wulsy said:
By the way, could someone just briefly clarify what a "low-back" golfer is? How is it defined?
Click to expand...

Brian put together a video (of Sergio I think) where he used that term. I think the term actually comes from Dr. Zick.

Erik
 
B

Brian Manzella

Administrator
There is this scientifically proven concept called the FUNCTIONAL SWING PLANE. Read the Dr. Kwon/Chris Como paper on it, but basically it the the same thing TMan and FScope measure VERTICAL SWING PLANE, the clubhead from "8 o'clock to 3 o'clock."

At the time of the video, I was calling it the "EVENTUAL SWING PLANE."

Golfers tend to have this "FUNCTIONAL SWING PLANE" bisect the lower back, the mid-back or the upper back. TGM would call it elbow plane, turned shoulder plane, and something in between.

I'll probably come up with better terms, or maybe someone else will, and I'll adopt it and give them attribution.
 
lia41985

lia41985

New member
So Haney may have been onto something.

It's just that his functional swing plane was the whole dang swing (parallel planes throughout) whereas you feel (because of the research you've seen) that the proper focus should be on 8 to 3. Some would even say 9 to 3. Would that be correct?

And it's definitely not just Haney. There are a lot of pros who preached plane.

They may have been right but, what you might say is, they were for the wrong reason...?

Obviously if we look at plane from a down-the-line perspective we're seeing a plane because of our two dimensional perspective. Of course the motion is actually occurring in three dimensions. The depth of motion to and from the target (in and out of the picture) is missing. Motion along that plane occurs dramatically during the transitional phase. Then there's the execution along the functional swing plane.

The paper by Kwan, Como, et al. discusses this and more.
 
Last edited:
L

Lifter

New
Great Point

lia41985 said:
So Haney may have been onto something.

It's just that his functional swing plane was the whole dang swing (parallel planes throughout) whereas you feel (because of the research you've seen) that the proper focus should be on 8 to 3. Some would even say 9 to 3. Would that be correct?

And it's definitely not just Haney. There are a lot of pros who preached plane.
Click to expand...

This! ^^^^^^^^ I reeeeelly reeeeelly agree with this. I think there is way too much obsession with the direction the shaft is pointing during the takeaway / backswing. Particularly Harmon and Haney (who strongly disagree with each other, I'm pretty sure).

Top of the backswing does matter somewhat but as we see with the best ballstrikers, there are lots of ways to do it. What ultimately matters is what the plane looks like during the second half of the downswing / post-impact.
 
lia41985

lia41985

New member
The rate at which motion occurs through 3-dimensional space. A complicated topic, always. Doesn't matter if it's dressed up as a discussion of "swing plane." We're still talking about the movement of an object, the club, in free space.
 
lia41985

lia41985

New member
Why not call it the dynamic lie angle plane? The angle at which you return the club at impact (at separation) is "formed" earlier than impact. This is the planar execution phase that's being executed, ultimately.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top