Ok, here we go...
If you have a Straight at the Target HSP/Plane Line/Direction of Swing/base line, and do a certain angle of attack, a resultant path that is 4° inside-out, it is 4° inside-out to the plane line.
So, the face would have to be about ~2.5° open to the target at impact to make the ball go "in the hole" so-to-speak.
So what?
So this.....
As you look down at the RESULTANT PATH, if the face would be SQAURE to the RESULTANT PATH, that face in this example would also be 4° open, and produce a straight push.
So....
This 4° open clubface is also SQUARE TO THE PLANE, like "angled hinge" action.
So....
The 2.5° open clubface is not.
It is NOT "cutting through the plane."
It is closed to the plane.
And of course, it has to be slightly differently closed through the set, to a given HSP, to produce shots at the target....for a variety of reasons.
So, I think, for most golfers, the STRAIGHT BALL IS EASIER TO DO.
Just have the face SQUARE at impact, and swing left the correct amount.
Period.
This REQUIRES A CLUBFACE that is OPEN TO THE PLANE at impact
We are talking about the bottom of the Dplane and the HSP here, right? A straight shot off the ground that goes in the hole requires a clubface that is square to the bottom of the Dplane, but open to the HSP.
We are talking about the bottom of the Dplane and the HSP here, right? A straight shot off the ground that goes in the hole requires a clubface that is square to the bottom of the Dplane, but open to the HSP.
For a straight shot off the deck the face must be open to the HSP, but square to the resultant path (the only path the ball gives a hoot about i.e. the true path) right?
what is the best term, plane line, swing direction, or HSP?
Swing Direction.
Swing direction is the same as True Path, right?
Here she is doing that:When I say "many people back the shaft up" I am referring to what many pop instructors call inside steep. After or during the transition/counterfall, if the hand path (from down the targetline view) moves on a line that is to high or on a diagonal that appears to be more horizontal than vertical, the clubhead must fall behind and thus orient the shaft under/laid off.
As a consequence of a high and clockwise rotated left arm:[T]he "transition torques" on your left arm…keep it high and rotated clockwise
Here’s her out left arm when the club is at last parallel:The more out the left arm the more late roll or roll/arch of the left wrist is required. You can do this but id like to strive for more #3 accummulator roll early then right arm POW with a free wheeling clubhead.
In page 127 of Golf My Way Nicklaus stated:Natalie has very little wrist-cock in her takeaway. To compensate for the lack of leverage this creates (combined with the added flexibility she gets from an extra vertebra in her lower back) she over-turns and puts the club and herself in that funky at-the-top position.
In my opinion her left arm is too stiff and there is too much negative torque on her left wrist. So schematically, here’s what I’m thinking:There are three ways to extend the backswing arc…The worst way of all to lengthen your backswing is to loosen your hands at the top…Almost as bad a way of getting the club back is bending the left arm…The best way to extend your backswing arc is to keep your hands firm and your left arm straight (but not stiff).
Here's the video of her swing again:The crux of our program is to change her position at the top by getting her to hinge the wrists a little more and move the clubhead before she moves the hands and the handle.
Which may have been his way of describing what Brian stated here:arrive at an ideal impact position that she carries through
In closing, although I believe Harmon and I have identified the same root cause, "change her position at the top by getting her to hinge the wrists a little more", this modification hasn't been achieved and as such, all of the other components function the way they do per my schematic.Her right shoulder movement is perfect for her eventual plane.
I'm hypothesizing that the convexity of Gulbis's hand path is the reason why she gets so much onto her toes/has so much jump. It would seem that she needs to "shorten her radius" otherwise she'd shank/push. In thinking about the Butch Harmon quote about how Natalie's right elbow is on the other side of the ball at the top of her swing, it seems to me that she loses a lot of her width (away from the ball that she had going back) by the time she reaches the top because of the right elbow position (especially when paired with the prominent amount of towards the target spinal tilt she has). I'm speculating that perhaps having the elbow in this position (and the consequent loss of away from the ball width) has something to do with the convexity of her hand path. From this position she backs the club up and gets under the sweet spot. What that means:
Here she is doing that:
The top position also puts, as Kevin would call it, the "transition torques" on her left arm. What that means:
As a consequence of a high and clockwise rotated left arm:
Here’s her out left arm when the club is at last parallel:
The MATT video of Gulbis shows her late rolling/arching left wrist:
YouTube - Natalie Gulbis Swing Analysis
The result of doing it optimally:
She seems to apply a lot of negative torque to her left arm moving to the top of the swing but she attempts to, as Jack Nicklaus called it, "extend the arc", with her right elbow position. In page 127 of Golf My Way he stated:
In my opinion her left arm is too stiff and there is too much negative torque on her left wrist. So schematically, here’s what I’m thinking: stiff left arm and too much negative torque on wrist → right elbow position and toward the target spinal tilt → club backs up → convex hand path → pronounced jump
Thanks for the kind words. I've made some modifications to the original post. Let me know what you think.Makes since. Nice description(s).