Sweet Spot Plane
- Thread starter mandrin
- Start date
- Status
Brian Manzella
Administrator
HALL OF FAME post Non-TGM!!!!
Have you ever used an APAS 3D Motion Analysis System...We have one here is our "Biomechanics Lab at Campbell University".....As matter of fact ...Dr. Brian Bergerman thought the sweetspot plane concept was pretty cool...there is big difference between Mathematics and Physics....Just Curious...Are you a mathematician ? or an Engineer? an aeronautical engineer? biomechanical engineer or a railroad engineer? LOL
BTW...Your drawings are nice
The GNAT
BTW...Your drawings are nice
The GNAT
Brian Manzella
Administrator
quote:Originally posted by mandrin
Brian, what is the magic procedure one uses to distinguish in 3D between two planes, virtually the same? Proprioceptive sensing attuned to such a fine degree is a marvelous feat. However I just wonder if some take their wishes for reality. Reading so does not make it so.
Great Question, Mandrin!
Ok....
When you change direction, you should be loading lag pressure.
This pressure—when a conventional grip is employed—should occur at the crook of the right forefinger, Homer's #3 pressure point.
This pressure starts in motion a downswing that produces an outward force....swinging or hitting.
This outward force—which begins to pull everything in-line—pulls the sweetspot in line with the force.
The force is at the #3 pressure point (like I said above), and there is a 'created' imaginary line along the in-line pull of this force.
THAT IS THE SWEETSPOT PLANE.
The golfer mearly AIMS this force, so as to 'hit the ball.'
You can only 'hit the ball' with what you FEEL, and you FEEL the SWEETSPOT along this in-line LINE.
Proprioceptive sensing attuned to such a fine degree is a marvelous feat?
Nah, just mash it with what you feel.[8D]
mandrin
New
NATGM, the charm of a forum is the democracy due to not being known. I like it that way. All is based solely on what is written, nothing else. Let’s just say that I have a certain familiarity with both golf and science. [
]To get a handle on HK’s ideas it is best to look at the premises. For instance, he takes the alignment of the club by gravitational pull to be the same as for centrifugal force. Well, too bad, but HK is wrong. [:I]
I made up a very simple example to show another time very clearly that alignment in a gravitational field is not the same as in a centrifugal field. If HK is wrong than posters who say how they feel HK’s sweet spot plane are therefore feeling an imaginary sweet spot plane.
mandrin
Imaginery "Sweetspot Plane"....NO
Invisible "Sweetspot Plane"...YES
Invisible "Sweetspot Plane"...YES
Mandrin,
Good to see a familiar name here ...
Couple of random points in no particular order:
a) If you take the line from the left wrist joint to the "COG ensemble" as being the longitudinal axis of the club, is it fair to say that any forward thrust (negative torque) from the right hand on the club will tend to OPEN the clubface?
b) The thing I have been thinking about re: the swing plane is how it ties with the rotation of the clubface. I think the independent rotation of the clubface about the longitudinal axis of the club is wrong. We see this kind of rotation with the Iron Byron, but I think it just isn't compatible with the human anatomy and trying to emulate it will inevitably lead to less than a perfect swing. What is your view on the clubface rotation? How should the golfer utilize science to get the clubface square (or close to) at impact? (For TGMers, this might be at separation)
c) I find your mathematical models interesting, but you don't seem to show us how a golfer might be able to put your theories into practical use. Homer, whether he was correct or not, suggested how one might utilize the sweet spot plane. Can you tell us how a golfer might utilize your stuff re: centrifugal force line? I'm not disagreeing with your theory. Are you simply saying that Homer is wrong on this point so one should abandon the concept of the sweet spot plane? Or do you think there's a way of utilizing your work to help the golfers find the sweet spot better? I believe that a good golfer's proprioception (combined with his sense of sight) is good enough to distinguish the small distance between the hosel and the sweetspot, even when the club is moving at high velocity. Otherwise, he'd be hitting shanks all day ... FWIW, I don't agree with Homer's idea of the sweet spot plane either. I've got my own ideas about how to "find" the sweet spot (still in development ... ), but would love to hear your views.
Lastly,
I know you value your anonymity on the golf forums, but we must play a game one day. I'll come to Canada, if you want. Or you could come down to Australia and enjoy good weather for a change ... [8D] I have to see how you put your swing model into action.
Good to see a familiar name here ...
Couple of random points in no particular order:
a) If you take the line from the left wrist joint to the "COG ensemble" as being the longitudinal axis of the club, is it fair to say that any forward thrust (negative torque) from the right hand on the club will tend to OPEN the clubface?
b) The thing I have been thinking about re: the swing plane is how it ties with the rotation of the clubface. I think the independent rotation of the clubface about the longitudinal axis of the club is wrong. We see this kind of rotation with the Iron Byron, but I think it just isn't compatible with the human anatomy and trying to emulate it will inevitably lead to less than a perfect swing. What is your view on the clubface rotation? How should the golfer utilize science to get the clubface square (or close to) at impact? (For TGMers, this might be at separation)
c) I find your mathematical models interesting, but you don't seem to show us how a golfer might be able to put your theories into practical use. Homer, whether he was correct or not, suggested how one might utilize the sweet spot plane. Can you tell us how a golfer might utilize your stuff re: centrifugal force line? I'm not disagreeing with your theory. Are you simply saying that Homer is wrong on this point so one should abandon the concept of the sweet spot plane? Or do you think there's a way of utilizing your work to help the golfers find the sweet spot better? I believe that a good golfer's proprioception (combined with his sense of sight) is good enough to distinguish the small distance between the hosel and the sweetspot, even when the club is moving at high velocity. Otherwise, he'd be hitting shanks all day ...
FWIW, I don't agree with Homer's idea of the sweet spot plane either. I've got my own ideas about how to "find" the sweet spot (still in development ... ), but would love to hear your views.Lastly,
quote:Originally posted by mandrin
NATGM, the charm of a forum is the democracy due to not being known. I like it that way. All is based solely on what is written, nothing else. Let’s just say that I have a certain familiarity with both golf and science. [
I know you value your anonymity on the golf forums, but we must play a game one day. I'll come to Canada, if you want. Or you could come down to Australia and enjoy good weather for a change ... [8D] I have to see how you put your swing model into action.
quote:Originally posted by Non-AuthorizedTGM
This is PGA Tour Veteran ...Neal Lancaster "tracing " the base line with the "Mysterious Sweetspot Plane that supposedly does not exist!"
The Plane of the Shaft is a "Visible Plane"
The Plane of the Swetspot is an "Invisible Plane"
They both come together and join at the first joint of the right forefinger....
The GNAT
Pardon my frankness, but what does this show? [?]
If you are trying to show the validity of the sweet spot plane with pictures, you need to:
a) show the downswing (especially near the bottom part of the swing), not the backswing. Downswing is where you would be concerned with (how the sweet spot is moving and whether indeed it is staying on plane with the pressure point).
b) show a view of the swing that is free from distortions. You need to have the camera directly behind the golfer, in line with his hands at address, and far enough away from the golfer to reduce perspective errors.
mandrin
New
Brian, I have no problem with your post for the simple reason that you remain exclusively in the domain of FEEL. And proper identifiable repeatable feel is THE important ingredient in golf. [^]quote:Originally posted by brianman
quote:Originally posted by mandrin
Brian, what is the magic procedure one uses to distinguish in 3D between two planes, virtually the same? Proprioceptive sensing attuned to such a fine degree is a marvelous feat. However I just wonder if some take their wishes for reality. Reading so does not make it so.
Great Question, Mandrin!
Ok....
When you change direction, you should be loading lag pressure.
This pressure—when a conventional grip is employed—should occur at the crook of the right forefinger, Homer's #3 pressure point.
This pressure starts in motion a downswing that produces an outward force....swinging or hitting.
This outward force—which begins to pull everything in-line—pulls the sweetspot in line with the force.
The force is at the #3 pressure point (like I said above), and there is a 'created' imaginary line along the in-line pull of this force.
THAT IS THE SWEETSPOT PLANE.
The golfer mearly AIMS this force, so as to 'hit the ball.'
You can only 'hit the ball' with what you FEEL, and you FEEL the SWEETSPOT along this in-line LINE.
Proprioceptive sensing attuned to such a fine degree is a marvelous feat?
Nah, just mash it with what you feel.[8D]
But HK is pretending to more and correct feelings based on wrong science is fine with me as long as one doesn’t pretend to have a correct scientific method.
Strictly speaking I could argue that concluding from the feeling that the centrifugal force passes through PP#3, the sweet spot plane does equally, is scientifically wrong.
But I am still intrigued how a TGMer can distinguish between being either on shaft plane or sweet spot plane, going at full throttle. If he can’t, why then fuss over it? [
]"But I am still intrigued how a TGMer can distinguish between being either on shaft plane or sweet spot plane, going at full throttle."
By observing whether or not he shanked the ball. The shaft rotates around the sweetspot in all good swings, otherwise, the hosel is being swung - clank!
By observing whether or not he shanked the ball. The shaft rotates around the sweetspot in all good swings, otherwise, the hosel is being swung - clank!
mandrin
New
Jono, trying to model the human body to the nth degree is likely a waste of time, except for some golf nuts, doing this as an interesting hobby. Your favourite golf instructor/scientist Jack Kuykendal, what about him, still following him faithfully; he hasn’t shown you the light yet?quote:Originally posted by Jono
Mandrin, couple of random points in no particular order:
a) If you take the line from the left wrist joint to the "COG ensemble" as being the longitudinal axis of the club, is it fair to say that any forward thrust (negative torque) from the right hand on the club will tend to OPEN the clubface?
b) The thing I have been thinking about re: the swing plane is how it ties with the rotation of the clubface. I think the independent rotation of the clubface about the longitudinal axis of the club is wrong. We see this kind of rotation with the Iron Byron, but I think it just isn't compatible with the human anatomy and trying to emulate it will inevitably lead to less than a perfect swing. What is your view on the clubface rotation? How should the golfer utilize science to get the clubface square (or close to) at impact? (For TGMers, this might be at separation)
c) I find your mathematical models interesting, but you don't seem to show us how a golfer might be able to put your theories into practical use. Homer, whether he was correct or not, suggested how one might utilize the sweet spot plane. Can you tell us how a golfer might utilize your stuff re: centrifugal force line? I'm not disagreeing with your theory. Are you simply saying that Homer is wrong on this point so one should abandon the concept of the sweet spot plane? Or do you think there's a way of utilizing your work to help the golfers find the sweet spot better? I believe that a good golfer's proprioception (combined with his sense of sight) is good enough to distinguish the small distance between the hosel and the sweetspot, even when the club is moving at high velocity. Otherwise, he'd be hitting shanks all day ...
I believe that many TGMers are so immensely proud of their method that they are losing their sense of reality and truly think they can feel things that even quite sophisticated scientific equipment would have a very hard time detecting adequately.
A objective test would be to have a golfer wired up and have him state his choice, shaft or sweet spot plane, and see if that mounts up to any measurable difference. Yet if his believe system helps him to be a better golfer than it is perfectly all right. You are, I am sure, somewhat familiar with the placebo effect. [
]Brian Manzella
Administrator
Mandrin,
There are other forums out in cyberspace that are much more about exactly what is in 'the book.'
Why fight your fights here and not there? (not that I want you to)
Just curious. Have you tried?
There are other forums out in cyberspace that are much more about exactly what is in 'the book.'
Why fight your fights here and not there? (not that I want you to)
Just curious. Have you tried?
- Status