Hardy puts foot in mouth....

[palmreader]

300Drive,

You wrote..

"Dont agree with the "hop on this...." at all, BUT, some TGM guy (B. Manzella) should produce a high quality DVD that does translate into "laymans terms" (with only a little TGM jargon).

Chuck Cook, to my knowledge, it the only TGM guy who has produced a good book on the golf swing. Hebron's stuff, although has a lot of info. is not well organized/presented"

I checked out Amazon.com for Chuck Cook book. It is some $79. Is that the one you mentioned?

Have you (or anyone else) got the e-book by Chuck Evans? Any thought on that (good/bad etc with regard to TGM). Thanks

 

[Brian Manzella]

I will be doing an internet-video on the plane very soon.

 

[BigBadDonkey]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

"...Whether this is the exact top of his backswing or not is arguable since Hogan started his hips moving to the left before he completed his backswing. The point is that you will not find one photo of Hogan where his left arm ever swung higher than his shoulder plane."

What????

Next.[|)]

Is he just saying Hogan has an early transistionshort backswing (left arm height wise), thus it's hard to judge wether Hogan is a one or two planer ('cause that is how Hardy deciphers one or the other (left arm) ) ?

 

[BigBadDonkey]

Ok, fair enough, just found that email on the GD site .. can see what your saying.

 

[DeadAim SF]

quote:Originally posted by 300Drive

quote:Originally posted by DeadAim SF

quote:Originally posted by 300Drive

quote:Originally posted by jeffy

The Golf Academy Live segment is a reasonable intro to Jim's concepts but his presentation at the 2004 Teaching Summit is much better. It is THE most fascinating presentation on golf I've ever seen or read. His book is good but should be read in conjunction with the DVD which covers some areas more completely (I don't think John Andrasani is much of a writer). Your pro ought to be able to order the DVD, if he doesn't have it already; BTW, if he doesn't have it already, or hasn't studied it, I wouldn't take a lesson from him!

I read through TGM again recently and certainly many of the elements of Jim's theory are covered but his core message that certain set up, posture, spine tilt, weight distribution, weight shift and other fundamentals are only compatable with with one or the other swing type is definitely not in there. Rather than pooh-pooh Hardy's work as something "Homer figured out a long time ago" (but apparently never published anywhere, since it is not in his book), some TGM guru should hop on this and produce the TGM interpretation and application of Hardy's "one-plane/two-plane" theories.

Dont agree with the "hop on this...." at all, BUT, some TGM guy (B. Manzella) should produce a high quality DVD that does translate into "laymans terms" (with only a little TGM jargon).

Chuck Cook, to my knowledge, it the only TGM guy who has produced a good book on the golf swing. Hebron's stuff, although has a lot of info. is not well organized/presented.

Brian's video clips explain things just fine and with the visual aids, TGM terms make perfect sense and are actually far more accurate, IMHO than Hardy's. To me Hardy's DP swing is less to do about swing planes and more to do with high hands and vertical hinging...I don't think Hardy is wrong with noting the differences but I personally don't like the way he choses to define the two swings. I agree Chuck Cook's book is excellent.

Do you have Brian's $90 beta testing dvd from 2 years ago?

No. Not yet at least. I have just been downloading some of the video clips.

 

[Brian Manzella]

The plane.....the plane....


I asked Jeffy this question:

"How many great players were UNDER the turned should plane at the top of the swing?"

answer:

0

 

[lutesk]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

The plane.....the plane....


I asked Jeffy this question:

"How many great players were UNDER the turned should plane at the top of the swing?"

answer:

0

Hmm. In lots of pics and videos of Hogan, it sure appears to me that his hands are " WAY " under his shoulders at the top. However, I'm new at this, and my eyes may be lying to me. I'm trying to learn though.

 

[jeffy]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

The plane.....the plane....


I asked Jeffy this question:

"How many great players were UNDER the turned should plane at the top of the swing?"

answer:

0

The question, actually, was how many well-known players (not great) and the answer, actually, was one (John Mahaffey), perhaps Ollie, though I think on him I was just misled by an iron swing.

That all said: so what? Hardy doesn't talk about "the turned shoulder plane" nor has he ever said, to my knowledge, that you can play good golf, let alone great golf, with the left arm on a plane that is shallower than the plane of the shoulders at the top. In fact, based on my conversations with Carol Mann, I would expect him to say exactly the opposite.

I do not understand the point you are trying to make...

 

[matt]

The "turned shoulder plane" that Brian is referencing IS NOT the angle the shoulders turn in the backstroke.

It's a line drawn from the ball to the position of the right shoulder at the top of the backstroke. These are two VERY different lines.

 

[Brian Manzella]

THE POINT!!!!! IS THAT IF YOU ARE ON (OR ABOVE0 THE TURNED SHOULDER PLANE OF HOMER KELLEY YOU HAVE A TWO-PLANE SWING BY HARDY'S DEFINITION!!!!!

So there are no "one plane" swings in the record book.

Oh...Hogan NEVER was below the turned shoulder plane at the top of a full backswing.

 

[jeffy]

quote:Originally posted by brianman

THE POINT!!!!! IS THAT IF YOU ARE ON (OR ABOVE0 THE TURNED SHOULDER PLANE OF HOMER KELLEY YOU HAVE A TWO-PLANE SWING BY HARDY'S DEFINITION!!!!!

So there are no "one plane" swings in the record book.

Oh...Hogan NEVER was below the turned shoulder plane at the top of a full backswing.

Well, maybe by your defintion of Hardy's definition of a two-plane swing (for the umpteenth time he doesn't talk about the turned shoulder plane), but my recollection is that most golfers on the turned sholder plane are Hardy one-planers, including all five career grand slam winners (Nicklaus had a two-plane backswing and a one-plane downswing, like Freddy and now, it seems, Tiger, but since it is really the downswing, set-up, posture, spine tilt, and weight transfer that distinguishes the two types, I'm happy to call Jack a one-planer since those elements of his swing were all one-plane fundamentals).

 

[matt]

How do you check for one-plane-ness on the downswing per Hardy?

 

[jeffy]

quote:Originally posted by matt

How do you check for one-plane-ness on the downswing per Hardy?

One-plane downswing per Hardy is narrow and steep and driven by the rotating torso. The arms are pulled toward the chest and quite often there is noticable downcock. Looking down-the-line, one-planers appear "double-shift" in TGM terms.

Also, when viewed down the line, the club shaft appears to be at almost right angles to the spine about half way down.

In contrast, a two-plane downswing is wide and shallow. The arms remain extended or even extend more away from the chest; rather than downcock, if anything, there is an uncocking of the wrists or a casting motion (very visible in Watson's). Viewed down the line, it is a TGM single-shift swing with the club shaft at an angle much less than 90* to the spine.

 

[birdie_man]

quote:Originally posted by jeffy
Well, maybe by your defintion of Hardy's definition of a two-plane swing (for the umpteenth time he doesn't talk about the turned shoulder plane), but my recollection is that most golfers on the turned sholder plane are Hardy one-planers, including all five career grand slam winners (Nicklaus had a two-plane backswing and a one-plane downswing, like Freddy and now, it seems, Tiger, but since it is really the downswing, set-up, posture, spine tilt, and weight transfer that distinguishes the two types, I'm happy to call Jack a one-planer since those elements of his swing were all one-plane fundamentals).

Most players end up pretty much on the turned shoulder plane. The only difference is how they get there.

To use Brian's example: Vijay goes under it on the backswing and then eventually shifts up to it. Toms goes straight up it.

Which is better? Hell if I know.

W/E works for you.

 

[palmreader]

Have you guys seen this in Golf Digest on Hardy' book? Is this the one started this discussion thread?

http://www.golfdigest.com/instruction/index.ssf?/instruction/gd200505swingplane1.html

 

[swamproot]

The 2 plane swing that Hardy describes is simply going from off plane going back (high hands/across the line), to on plane coming down or somewhat close. His description of single plane is nothing but parallel shifts. I count four plane shifts with Els from an on plane camera angle at the Tour Championship 04, 1. Shaft takeaway, 2. Elbow mid of backswing 3. Hands above rt. shoulder at top. 4. Elbow plane in downswing to ball and thru ball. Hardy lost me when he said this dude was a great example of a one plane swing.

 

[Bigwill]

quote:Originally posted by swamproot

The 2 plane swing that Hardy describes is simply going from off plane going back (high hands/across the line), to on plane coming down or somewhat close. His description of single plane is nothing but parallel shifts. I count four plane shifts with Els from an on plane camera angle at the Tour Championship 04, 1. Shaft takeaway, 2. Elbow mid of backswing 3. Hands above rt. shoulder at top. 4. Elbow plane in downswing to ball and thru ball. Hardy lost me when he said this dude was a great example of a one plane swing.

Hardy's interpretation of "plane" has to do with the relationship of the left arm to the shoulders. If the left arm is on the same line as the shoulders at the top, it's one plane; if the left arm is steeper than the shoulders at the top, it's 2 planes. It has nothing to do really with either TGM plane definitions, or even traditional plane definitions; he dosen't take into account the sweet spot or even the clubshaft in his definition of "plane". It's a totally different thing altogether.

 

[matt]

quote:Originally posted by Bigwill
Hardy's interpretation of "plane" has to do with the relationship of the left arm to the shoulders. If the left arm is on the same line as the shoulders at the top, it's one plane; if the left arm is steeper than the shoulders at the top, it's 2 planes. It has nothing to do really with either TGM plane definitions, or even traditional plane definitions; he dosen't take into account the sweet spot or even the clubshaft in his definition of "plane". It's a totally different thing altogether.

My thoughts exactly.

But what makes me wonder is...what does any of his stuff have to do with anything? I know he says the you supposedly can't mix the two strokes, but just like all these other fad things he doesn't seem to actually tell you how to do anything. No talk of clubface control, etc. Now I haven't read the book, so maybe he does talk about it there. But from what I've seen of his stuff I don't see the big deal. Just put it on-plane correctly per TGM and you're set.

 

[6bee1dee]

quote:Originally posted by matt

quote:Originally posted by Bigwill
Hardy's interpretation of "plane" has to do with the relationship of the left arm to the shoulders. If the left arm is on the same line as the shoulders at the top, it's one plane; if the left arm is steeper than the shoulders at the top, it's 2 planes. It has nothing to do really with either TGM plane definitions, or even traditional plane definitions; he dosen't take into account the sweet spot or even the clubshaft in his definition of "plane". It's a totally different thing altogether.

My thoughts exactly.

But what makes me wonder is...what does any of his stuff have to do with anything? I know he says the you supposedly can't mix the two strokes, but just like all these other fad things he doesn't seem to actually tell you how to do anything. No talk of clubface control, etc. Now I haven't read the book, so maybe he does talk about it there. But from what I've seen of his stuff I don't see the big deal. Just put it on-plane correctly per TGM and you're set.

Ditto Matt and BigWill.

I was hitting balls on the range today and was thinking about this Hardy stuff about planes- single or double- and it came to me. Screw this! Homer didn’t fuss with two stroke patterns determined by the number of planes used. No, his genius gave us two Stroke patterns determined by how the power package is delivered. A three dimensional golf stroke has an infinite number of planes, none of which Hardy has a clue about.

 

[Pro]

6bee,

All star post!!!

Todd