Do these 2 parallel developments share the same origin?

Status
Not open for further replies.
On one side, we have Trackman data suggesting to zero out by shallow-ing the attack angle.

On the other, we have the Team here and the scientists proposing this Release, which essentially promotes a shallower attack.

Are the two concurrent developments arising from the same philosophical basis, to build a swing that is Trackman inspired?
 

Brian Manzella

Administrator
On one side, we have Trackman data suggesting to zero out by shallow-ing the attack angle.

On the other, we have the Team here and the scientists proposing this Release, which essentially promotes a shallower attack.

Are the two concurrent developments arising from the same philosophical basis, to build a swing that is Trackman inspired?

Sort of.


Here are 7 things we now know about "hitting a golf ball," that we didn't know because of these machines and their ability to measure.

1. Resultant Path — More Down equals more out/ More up equals more in.

2. Secret of the Straight Ball - You HAVE TO SWING LEFT to hit down and make the ball go straight.

3. The D-Plane — Ball flight in 3D helped find exact combinations of PATH/ANGLEofATTACK and DOWNorUP/DYNAMIC LOFT.

4. Dynamic Loft — Not just how much "lean" — where on the face is important.

5. Spin Loft — Reduce Angle of Attack and maintain (or reduce) dynamic loft, and you get MORE compression, BALL SPEED and often, distance.

6. If you teach "on plane" and aim the plane at the target, you'd better realize the ball HAS TO HOOK to go in the hole on a center hit with a correct lie angle.

7. You can reduce spin loft (see above) for added ball speed, but for more carry + distance at any given ball speed, there is a OPTIMUM angle of attack, so for most any speed, YOU HAVE TO HIT UP ON YOUR DRIVER TO GET YOUR MAX DISTANCE.



Not only RADAR and collision geometry, but when we realized that EVERY scientist was saying basically the same things on release. Michael Jacobs work on that science was key.


So the new stuff is pretty much a result of ALL of the above.
 
Sort of.


Here are 7 things we now know about "hitting a golf ball," that we didn't know because of these machines and their ability to measure.

1. Resultant Path — More Down equals more out/ More up equals more in.

2. Secret of the Straight Ball - You HAVE TO SWING LEFT to hit down and make the ball go straight.

I'm with you 100% good stuff. Just for fun - where are 1 and 2 not correct.
 

Brian Manzella

Administrator
#1 - It was thought that plane equals path, or a straight plane line could produce a straight shot if the stars were properly aligned.

uh-nope.

#2 - "Swinging Left" was called "avoidance" or something else stupid. Lots of folks intuitively knew this ha dot happen to map ethe ball fly straight, but NOBODY knew why.
 
But "swinging left" is so confusing!

Do you mean to aim to a target slightly off (correspondingly) to the left of the original target and then swing your regular swing? (I understand we are talking about irons here)
 
I agree those are the reasons or history of #1 and #2, and I'm 100% in agreement with your number one and two. However, that doesn't show me where or what situation #1 and #2 are not correct. So still looking for answers - "just for fun" and for clarity. Golfdad's already getting warmer on #2
 
Last edited:

Brian Manzella

Administrator
But "swinging left" is so confusing!

Do you mean to aim to a target slightly off (correspondingly) to the left of the original target and then swing your regular swing? (I understand we are talking about irons here)

Nah.

The whole swing just needs to be about 4 to 5 yards left for every shot off the ground if you down BANG DOWN on the ball too much.

You can stand in Gulf Shores, Alabama, aim at Philly or Denver, and hit it at Chicago as long as you SWING at Oshkosh.


I agree those are the reasons or history of #1 and #2, and I'm 100% in agreement with your number one and two. However, that doesn't show me where or what situation #1 and #2 are not correct. So still looking for answers - "just for fun" and for clarity. Golfdad's already getting warmer on #2

Not sure what you are asking....
 
Sort of.


Here are 7 things we now know about "hitting a golf ball," that we didn't know because of these machines and their ability to measure.

1. Resultant Path — More Down equals more out/ More up equals more in.

2. Secret of the Straight Ball - You HAVE TO SWING LEFT to hit down and make the ball go straight.

3. The D-Plane — Ball flight in 3D helped find exact combinations of PATH/ANGLEofATTACK and DOWNorUP/DYNAMIC LOFT.

4. Dynamic Loft — Not just how much "lean" — where on the face is important.

5. Spin Loft — Reduce Angle of Attack and maintain (or reduce) dynamic loft, and you get MORE compression, BALL SPEED and often, distance.

6. If you teach "on plane" and aim the plane at the target, you'd better realize the ball HAS TO HOOK to go in the hole on a center hit with a correct lie angle.

7. You can reduce spin loft (see above) for added ball speed, but for more carry + distance at any given ball speed, there is a OPTIMUM angle of attack, so for most any speed, YOU HAVE TO HIT UP ON YOUR DRIVER TO GET YOUR MAX DISTANCE.



Not only RADAR and collision geometry, but when we realized that EVERY scientist was saying basically the same things on release. Michael Jacobs work on that science was key.


So the new stuff is pretty much a result of ALL of the above.


#2 - "Swinging Left" was called "avoidance" or something else stupid. Lots of folks intuitively knew this ha dot happen to map ethe ball fly straight, but NOBODY knew why.

Brian, not trying to be provokative, but high school maths would be enough to work out the general principles of impact geometry. The radars just proved the maths and showed up all the different combinations.

I'm not sure nobody knew. Maybe just nobody you knew.
 
Brian, not trying to be provokative, but high school maths would be enough to work out the general principles of impact geometry. The radars just proved the maths and showed up all the different combinations.

I'm not sure nobody knew. Maybe just nobody you knew.

People knew that the farther back you played the ball the more inside out the swing was. The problem is that most people thought the ball started in the direction of the path and curved to the face. Everyone else thought you could replace the path with the plane line and hit it straight and didn't understand the D-plane. Those people were closer to the truth, but this is golf not horseshoes or hand grenades. This is where the problem was.
 
Brian, not trying to be provokative, but high school maths would be enough to work out the general principles of impact geometry. The radars just proved the maths and showed up all the different combinations.

I'm not sure nobody knew. Maybe just nobody you knew.

Wulsy,
Sure it's easy to look at the list and say to yourself - well logically this must be the case - from what I know. Or even that this doesn't contradict what I knew 15 years ago, therefore it's really not that new. That's like a Monday morning quarterback. The fact is that aiming a plane line left to hit a straight iron shot or jorgensen D-plane being a common area of understanding or discussion - was not understood enough to create some of these practical understandings. So "nobody" relatively speaking is an accurate assessment in my mind. Let's just say "nobody" is ten or less and then you can be part of the ten if you want.
 

Brian Manzella

Administrator
Wulsy,
Sure it's easy to look at the list and say to yourself - well logically this must be the case - from what I know. Or even that this doesn't contradict what I knew 15 years ago, therefore it's really not that new. That's like a Monday morning quarterback. The fact is that aiming a plane line left to hit a straight iron shot or jorgensen D-plane being a common area of understanding or discussion - was not understood enough to create some of these practical understandings. So "nobody" relatively speaking is an accurate assessment in my mind. Let's just say "nobody" is ten or less and then you can be part of the ten if you want.

HALL OF FAME POST.
 
Answers

Sort of.


1. Resultant Path — More Down equals more out/ More up equals more in.

2. Secret of the Straight Ball - You HAVE TO SWING LEFT to hit down and make the ball go straight.

First let me restate that I am 100% in agreement with Brian's post, no issue and great information.

Maybe trivial -however understanding the context of a statement or manipulating contexts for the researcher are important issues. In addition, if you assume a given context and your student is looking at it from a different context then you'll never be able to communicate it clearly to them.

#1 assumes the context of any one particular swing - on a constant particular plane. So you imagine a plane and the clubhead traveling on a circle (close enough) on that plane. The more the clubhead moves vertical during the orbit say at halfway down you measure it's movement for 8 inches of the orbit - the more out it moves, compared to the more horizontal it moves for that same particular distance (say 8 inches around low point) the less out it moves.

Here is the context where that statement would be incorrect. If you are comparing resultant paths of two swings. One swing is flat and one is on an upright plane. We compare these two resultant paths at the same section of the orbit - say halfway down when the clubhead is making it's most direct vertical line at the plane line. Now, when you were to talk about these two resultant paths - here would be the correct answer in this context - more down equals less out and more up equals less in, i.e. steeper plane for any particular distance of travel has less out than the same distance on a flatter plane.

#2 As Golfdad alludes to - the idea of swinging left - can be a confusing concept without a clear understanding of the context. Aiming the plane line left of the target (on paper) would be necessary with a descending blow with an iron in order to hit a straight shot at the target. But is "swinging left" the best term for that? And what are the other contexts that someone could use "swing left" in?

Certainly in the context of the clubhead- we don't want that swinging left at impact - needs to be moving right at the target or "On-line". Even with your plane line a few degrees left, a player could move his hands and arms in relation to his trunk/body where he could sense that he was swinging left or right of his "body", even if they move more left of the target line than a square plane. That's the biggest potential mis-cure takeaway for somebody - that they'd actually swing more left in relation to their body in order to achieve "swinging left". So the context in #2 is to say the plane line direction is aimed left in relation to the target. "Swinging left" is not a correct context for the clubhead movement through impact or necessarily the movement or feel of the hands, arms or club in relation to the midline of the body.
 
Last edited:
2. Secret of the Straight Ball - You HAVE TO SWING LEFT to hit down and make the ball go straight.

Probably already discussed elsewhere.
For any given distance the ball is played back of lowpoint, the amount of aiming the plane line left (theoretically) would be influenced by the plane angle and the radius of the orbit of the clubhead, as they both affect the path of the clubhead in relation to the target.

The larger the radius the less left you'd need to aim.
The steeper the plane angle the less left you'd need to aim.
 
Wulsy,
Sure it's easy to look at the list and say to yourself - well logically this must be the case - from what I know. Or even that this doesn't contradict what I knew 15 years ago, therefore it's really not that new. That's like a Monday morning quarterback. The fact is that aiming a plane line left to hit a straight iron shot or jorgensen D-plane being a common area of understanding or discussion - was not understood enough to create some of these practical understandings. So "nobody" relatively speaking is an accurate assessment in my mind. Let's just say "nobody" is ten or less and then you can be part of the ten if you want.

Mike 0, I didn't know! Honestly.

Are you a high school math teacher by any chance? You sound like one, ie you write as if you are talking to a child.

Brian did not invent the "D-plane" concept. Brian was not the first, or even one of the first, users of Trackman. Brian taught golf firstly from an intuitive/traditional standpoint and then became heavily TGM influenced. Then he went beyond this and realised for example that releasing the club in the way he has described would not make the ball go left. All good, and Brian is bringing these ideas to his forum.

But do you honestly think that no-one else ever, in the history of golf/golf instruction came to these conclusions? Anyone who believes that is very naive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top