The reality of the right wrist condition vs TGM

[Deadly_Scope]

It is often been told that the left wrist cocks but the right wrist does not. It is often been said that the right wrist is to 'fixed' in its impact condition. Im here to convince you otherwise. Now obviously this discussion relates to your standard total motion as there can be exceptions.

The first thing I want you to ask yourself is does the right arm bend in the backstroke. Obviously it does. On the backstroke does the right elbow get further away from the inclined plane. Obviously it does.

Now according to the golfing machine - the right hand is turned towards the plane at the top of the backstroke. The reality is a little more complex however... but just for the mean time lets go along with what Homer Kelley's geometrical model in the golfing machine and I will relate it back to the real world application. Just for the meantime - think open hands....

These two ideas cannot co-exist. Let me explain why.

If the right elbow is getting further away from the plane, the right forearm is becoming increasingly offplane also. Therefore the wrist condition bends the more the right arm bends. So that pretty much means that the idea of a fixed degree of bend cannot be true. This graphic should show you what is mean't....

Now again if the hand is towards the plane and the right hand doesn't cock why doesn't the right forearm point down this line?

Obviously this is absurd and not very well thought out.

So if you accept that the right hand is turned towards the plane on the backstroke then you also have to accept that this position requires wristcock because geometrically there is no other way.

 

[Brian Manzella]

Excellent.

I used to call what I was doing was teaching in the "Real World."

Baloney!

I was teaching in a very small little world called "Who really wants to be the best ever at this helping folks hit a golf ball better game."

Tough sport, let me tell you.

ANYONE who ever played this particular game, knew that the right wrist bends only (doesn't cock) concept was very wrong. They also knew that the "fixed" position of the right wrist throughout the swing would produce powerless shots.

So, great first post Deadly. Keep 'em coming!

The problem with concepts that are proven wrong SCIENTIFICALLY, is this:

If you are the teacher selling an incorrect concept, you point to your students who can play, at least allegedly trying to do the incorrect concept.​

That proves nothing but this:

The player is playing well DESPITE your incorrect theory.​

What's next, Deadly?

 

[Deadly_Scope]

What's next, Deadly?

How about these contradictions....

The concept of the right shoulder staying onplane and the right forearm being onplane cannot co-exist.

Lets say the right shoulder stays onplane and at impact the right forearm is also onplane. Using very simple logic - this obviously means that the entire right arm is onplane. Look at it this way - if the right forearm is onplane - the elbow is on a plane, and if the elbow is onplane and the shoulder is onplane - a line drawn between these two points is onplane (the humerus or upper right arm).

Again this is just absurd... no tour player has the club going down a zero plane with the right shoulder being onplane and the right forearm on that plane. Obviously Homer Kelley himself didn't see this simple logic as can be backed by the text of the golfing machine and by denoting differences between elbow locations he is contradicting himself. If the entire right arm is onplane - there would no difference in elbow location....

 

[holeout]

How about these contradictions....

The concept of the right shoulder staying onplane and the right forearm being onplane cannot co-exist.

Lets say the right shoulder stays onplane and at impact the right forearm is also onplane. Using very simple logic - this obviously means that the entire right arm is onplane. Again this is just absurd. Obviously Homer Kelley wrote these words and then contradicts himself when he denotes the differences between elbow locations. If this was the case there would no difference in elbow location....

I think you are simply saying that the right forearm and right shoulder can't be on the SAME plane, which I think just about anyone who knows a lick would agree with. They can both be "on-plane" though, just not on the SAME plane.

Then again, I'm sure Brian would say that they don't necessarily HAVE to be on-plane. I remember him saying that David Toms' right forearm is most definitely not on-plane, and when he tried getting it there, he hit it worse .

I like your stuff about the right wrist conditions too, by the by. The illustration with Els is actually kind of humorous; as in, when you look at it, it's silly to think of his right forearm being positioned there .

 

[Deadly_Scope]

I think you are simply saying that the right forearm and right shoulder can't be on the SAME plane, which I think just about anyone who knows a lick would agree with. They can both be "on-plane" though, just not on the SAME plane.

Shoulder motions are geometrically one of the most complex to describe as it ties into so many factors and make it beyond the scope of this thread. Im just trying to debunk some myths because there are some people who actually think this is the case.

Then again, I'm sure Brian would say that they don't necessarily HAVE to be on-plane. I remember him saying that David Toms' right forearm is most definitely not on-plane, and when he tried getting it there, he hit it worse .

Obviously, the shoulders do move on a plane - although its not a fixed stationary plane certainly at least in total motion just as the spine is not fixed in stationary space however much golf digest wishes it to be. That plane does not have a relationship with the plane line except for at the beginning of the downstroke where the right shoulders initial motion is onplane.... this requires a spine tilt during initial startdown - however your spine doesn't just keep on tilting constantly all throughout the downstroke.. which is actually what is required if you are to maintain a singular fixed plane of the right shoulders displacement towards the plane line with the stationary point above the plane....

I have a vague idea of what Brian teaches however I don't think he actually believes this zero shift - whole right arm onplane stuff either. Im not 100% sure exactly but don't think there is a conflict and hopefully he can chime in. But you can rest assured that this is not aimed at him.

I like your stuff about the right wrist conditions too, by the by. The illustration with Els is actually kind of humorous; as in, when you look at it, it's silly to think of his right forearm being positioned there .

Its amazing the goofy ideas that are hidden behind big words....

 

[curtisj76]

Welcome Matthew!

 

[Deadly_Scope]

Welcome Matthew!

Well guess ive been found out.

I have held back much of my research because I didn't want to create discussions that would be detrimental to anyone's beliefs.

However - that will be remedied!

 

[holeout]

Shoulder motions are geometrically one of the most complex to describe as it ties into so many factors and make it beyond the scope of this thread. Im just trying to debunk some myths because there are some people who actually think this is the case.



Obviously, the shoulders do move on a plane - although its not a fixed stationary plane certainly at least in total motion just as the spine is not fixed in stationary space however much golf digest wishes it to be. That plane does not have a relationship with the plane line except for at the beginning of the downstroke where the right shoulders initial motion is onplane.... this requires a spine tilt during initial startdown - however your spine doesn't just keep on tilting constantly all throughout the downstroke.. which is actually what is required if you are to maintain a singular fixed plane of the right shoulders displacement towards the plane line with the stationary point above the plane....

I have a vague idea of what Brian teaches however I don't think he actually believes this zero shift - whole right arm onplane stuff either. Im not 100% sure exactly but don't think there is a conflict and hopefully he can chime in. But you can rest assured that this is not aimed at him.



Its amazing the goofy ideas that are hidden behind big words....

Gotcha. I see what you're saying and am intrigued to see what else you have to say.

And I'm pretty sure that Brian doesn't believe in the "zero shift" stuff either .

 

[Deadly_Scope]

Gotcha. I see what you're saying and am intrigued to see what else you have to say.

And I'm pretty sure that Brian doesn't believe in the "zero shift" stuff either .

I believe Brian has said in the past that wants the shoulders (I am assuming from an overhead view) to be open at impact... or pointing left of the plane line. Thats precisely where it should approx be on pretty much any golfer on this planet.

Did you realise that if the right shoulder has moved on a plane towards the plane line that because the stationary point is above the plane - that if you draw the line from the right shoulder to the left shoulder that line would would always point to outside of the plane line! - Just to disprove this lunacy in yet another way....

Of course I could burn some incense sticks and do some voodoo and keep thinking just move that right shoulder towards the ball on the downstroke. After all "it was good advice then and its good advice now" - as someone once told me....

Actually I wish I had a picture of this to just show how absurd this would look.... might make one .

 

[pecky987]

I believe Brian has said in the past that wants the shoulders (I am assuming from an overhead view) to be open at impact... or pointing left of the plane line. Thats precisely where it should approx be on pretty much any golfer on this planet.

Did you realise that if the right shoulder has moved on a plane towards the plane line that because the stationary point is above the plane - that if you draw the line from the right shoulder to the left shoulder that line would would always point to outside of the plane line! - Just to disprove this lunacy in yet another way....

Of course I could burn some incense sticks and do some voodoo and keep thinking just move that right shoulder towards the ball on the downstroke. After all "it was good advice then and its good advice now" - as someone once told me....

Actually I wish I had a picture of this to just show how absurd this would look.... might make one .

ok matthew, you obviously know your stuff. but i cant quite follow. are you saying that at start down, the right shoulder does not travel down the TSP until the golfer comes out of their waist bend? as far as i can see, and almost all golf swings i have analysed, from dtl, i see the right shoulder travelling down the TSP, and around the follow-through, both shoulders line up with the TSP. i cant understand how it cant move down this plane all the way down. i think there might be a diagram needed

 

[Brian Manzella]

How about these contradictions....

The concept of the right shoulder staying onplane and the right forearm being onplane cannot co-exist.

First of all, I couldn't care less about the right forearm being any particular place. THE BALL HAS NO IDEA!!!

The shoulders, or right shoulder, or left shoulder can be all sorts of differnet places and still the club produces the proper TRUE PATH, & TRUE CLUBFACE relationships for a desired shot.

But...

I can have my shoulders and my right forearm pointing to the same plane line.

Correct?

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

But...

I can have my shoulders and my right forearm pointing to the same plane line.

Correct?

I'd agree with that but they would obviously be on different planes.

 

[jeffgladchun]

Finally someone to shake things up again!

 

[puttmad]

Wow, how many things are you supposed to think about in 1/3rd of a second?....

 

[JonWil]

As many as you would like to disrupt your swing!

 

[niblick1]

Wow, how many things are you supposed to think about in 1/3rd of a second?....

I find I am usually able to think of only one thing during that third of a second..."DONT GO LEFT!"

 

[Deadly_Scope]

Ive drawn a picture here -

Notice that if you have a stationary point above the plane and the right shoulder is below the plane and remaining on the plane that any motion between these two points will be conical in nature into the plane (same from stationary point to left shoulder) as the motion is fixed...

Now lets just take a picture of a famous golfer at impact alignments from the front view to get a ballpark figure and we can work from a purely visual standpoint and then make use of the 3d model.

I now set this as a constant on all pictures

Now obviously if the plane is on that stationary point and the right shoulder (and the left is onplane) - then they will indeed be open with a relation to a top view. However in reality - no one has both shoulders onplane at the top of the backstroke - the right shoulder is on a plane under that of the stationary point.

So therefore we are concerned with the distance the plane is on top of the backstroke. Because the further the plane is away from that stationary point the more the line of the shoulders points right of the target.... just like in my diagram here....

So lets reverse this logic and take the impact position to the top of the backstroke in accordance to the conical nature that this produces.

Does this look silly or what.....

Now there remains one more variable...before we can put this to rest... the distance of the plane line forward from the stationary point in relation to the top view. So lets again take that picture of woods...

Again taking that angle which is coincidently approx 30 degrees lets move the shoulders to that degree and make its subsequent motions.... and then find out that degree.

And for the shoulders to point left of target the plane of the shoulders towards the plane line is only going to get more acute in relation to the ground plane. The prior picture is more inline to the lie angle of a mid/short iron.... which looked goofy...

Ive animated the golf stroke many times - and I know it just cannot be done....

 

[birdie_man]

Yo D_S.

Welcome.

You're for sure correct.....it does cock. I used to be a bit confused on this but at the same time always felt it would be difficult not to cock it. Or at least- difficult to hit good shots not cocking it.

That was a while ago but confusion and certain (mis?)information kept me trying to "conform." (to the principle of not cocking the RW) The desire to didn't really last all that long though because I have always gone with results.

...

Deadly_Listerine.....will make your brain cells become jumbled........!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Swdb7Wxavx4&fmt=18

 

[Brian Manzella]

The Reality

Mathew (deadly scope),

I think I understand your post, but here are some quick questions to help the forum members understand:

1. Can the ZERO SHIFT pattern have the right forearm, club and shoulders on plane at impact? On Any plane?

2. When Tiger swings, what does he do with his shoulders? Are they ever on plane? If so when?

3. Does having the Stationary "point" location BELOW the right shoulder (say, between the shoulder sockets) at the top make it easier to have "on plane" shoulders?

I have dozens & dozens more...

 

[jmessner]

Lie Angle & Plane Angle

I don't think this precludes the ideas presented, but don't forget the shaft bends down a fair amount at impact so the plane angle of the shaft (and maybe right forearm?) is usually less (sometimes much less) than the lie angle of the driver. I've measured around 30 pros with cSwing and the average "plane" angle at impact is 46-47 degrees. Curiously, they set up with an average 43 degree shaft angle. See example of Chad Campbell here:

[FONT=&quot]http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/7789/chadcampdrvvx6.jpg


[/FONT]