Thanks, Arnie.
So it’s not pointing at 4:30 on the ball but in the air over the ball at clubshaft level,
which is parallel to the ground?
My take on this whole angle vs arc approach is this: if you really want to understand this issue and all of it’s attendant illusions, spend some time on a plane board, sheet of plywood 4x8 feet size with a semi-circle cut out of it, like a half moon shape. The clubhead makes an eliptical shaped arc from about waist height on the golfers right or Lags P3 position to the P4 position at waist height on the left side. This is NOT an illusion, it is a fact. The clubhead itself is only on the target line for a fraction of an inch during impact interval. But an extension of the shaft would touch the target line or base of the plane board (lets not make a big deal out of difference between that and real sweetspot plane for any TGM fanatics who may be reading this!) at all times in this impact segment of the swing, ie p3 to p4.
It helps to be able to “think in 3d” when pondering this issue. From a down the line viewpoint, if you watch a swing in slow motion, you would see an on plane clubshaft and a clubhead moving both down and out and forward simultaneously. Wrist cock release and pivot thrust and right spine tilt all contribute to this 3 dimensional clubhead motion, one of the big secrets of golf is blending these three things in the right proportions so the clubhshaft stays on plane during release, another way of saying the clubhead makes its very own properly shaped arc.
Angle of attack is the angle that the clubhead approaches the ground and Low Point - steep or shallow or just right. And that varies quite a bit by club category - driver vs L wedge is a huge difference. Release segment back on the original address plane or very close to it in practical terms, the Elbow Plane, affords optimum angle of attack. If you hit the ball on a steeper angle of attack than this, Shoulder Plane, you will not achieve as pure a contact, unless you set up on that steeper plane, as Moe did, and only if you have your clubs set with much more upright than normal lie angles. Lie angle also affects starting line direction after impact, too upright the clubface is actually pointing left of the intended target line, but this illusion is almost impossible to see without a special magnetic pointing tool that can attach to the clubface.
thanks Arnie
Parallel to the ground; not parallel to the target line.
Thanks Lag, going to work on getting the straight right leg into my move.
Here is a link to the video for anyone that’s interested
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lKZU4ti2Y0[/youtube]
If I ever get over to San Francisco I will take you up on that invitation to see the Moe footage.
Loren, think of it this way…
The clubshaft is only going to be visually square and parallel to the plane line or base line on the ground for about 1/10000th
of a second… our eyes simply can’t ever see it…
What we do see if we are swinging the club properly, is the shaft feeding out of the corner of our right eye coming from a very inside and or behind us… delivery path… the butt end leading, and appears to be aiming at the inside quadrant of the golf ball. This is absolutely visually detectable by our eyes. We call this the 4:30 line for simplicity, but in actuality we see an arc of the path of the clubhead moving over the top of that line… regardless, a shallow arc visually painted across a 4:30 line on ground gives the student the proper visual, and biomechanical sensation.
In the ABS class here, we teach the students to strengthen their forearm rotation so that right at the last split second, they actively rotate the shaft so that the clubhead strikes the back of the ball (just inside 3:00 lets say 3:15 on the ball to allow for the ball to stay on the clubface for it’s milliseconds) but only top touring pros would really need to be concerned about this… and then even probably not.
The stronger the students hands, the deeper they can go into the 4:30 line. There is a very important correlation that we address as we move through the course during the low point and ball positioning options module. But it makes no sense to talk about that stuff until the student has leaned to swing the club actually on plane… and not the overrated or I should say over exaggerated TGM version of down and out which encourages a disconnect at the #4 pressure point.
I encourage the students to learn to hook the ball first, so that an angled hinge can then be installed properly. I never encourage or suggest down and out.
The reality of the down and out is that it is only slightly visually perceivable as the club hits the ball (iron shot), moves down into the ground and visually away from us for about 1/2 an inch… so that’s not something most people would even notice… only the already advanced player, and at that point, it’s an intuitive subconscious thing anyway… so I leave it alone.
I simply don’t want students swinging inside out ever. Better to feel inside out all the way down and at the last second…
CHANGE YOUR MIND! 
BPSGI
Sorry all for the delay but I do have other things in my life that take priorities.
My reference the feel factor during the downswing related to the period from that just prior to excitation to final brain recognition of the actual value of the impulse involved. It isn’t mystical, it’s mechanical and therefore it takes time. The crux of the matter here is that we have a very limited and quite measurable time in which to do many things of seemingly critical importance to the outcome of each golf swing. My original quest was to work out if we had enough time to do all that has been suggested, by so many, in so many conflicting ways. So let’s pursue this a little deeper and not get too pedantic in the process.
We agree that we have no more than 0.25s for the entire downswing, from direction change to impact. I feel it’s a tad closer to 0.20s but I’m happy to make the added allowance and go out to 0.25s to meet your estimates. Let’s calmly, objectively and without prejudice have a quick look at just some of the things that are known to be happening in that time frame;
We seem to be in agreement that the angle between the shaft and the left forearm must be prevented from opening in the early downswing. If that isn’t the case, what is this lag and lag pressure all about? To achieve that, the right arm must not be allowed to straighten in the early downswing. If it does, it must open the angle in question. By general consensus here, it seems acceptable that serious muscle forces must be allocated consciously (I stress the word consciously) to counteract the quite serious effects of CF acting generally, and on the right arm in particular. That being the case, wouldn’t our conscious awareness and our associated sensory feedback be dominated by maintaining that resistance to CF? How and where and by what means do we override that with sensory information relating to other matters relating to things in motion etc?
You mentioned proprioception. Isn’t the state of body tonus also related to genetic proprioception? The body has an inherent knowledge/ sense of where all of it’s parts belong in a state of rest and will immediately and involuntarily return the body to rest or status position when not engaged in work. Not only is a high level of force required to prevent the opening of involved angles but are we not, by whatever degree, acting against our own genetic inheritance?
Let’s just touch on time frames and accelerations without getting too involved right now. We can get very involved later, if there still remains the need to! Acceleration requires both time and distance, particularly where lever assemblies are involved. All of this holding the angle and lag stuff must actively retard clubhead acceleration, surely we can agree on that. Incidentally, I’m a profound believe in lag, I even invented and entire golf shaft/ club technology to further accommodate it. However my acceptances of lag apply quite differently.
If we needed all of the distance we provided in the backswing to achieve maximum/ optimum acceleration in the downswing then holding back the clubhead, severely impeding it’s acceleration, for more than half the distance available, leaves an absurdly short distance in which to achieve required acceleration.
Alternately, one could ask, tongue in cheek, why we didn’t only go about half the distance back, in the first place.
Now we move onto another problem of seemingly critical importance. At address, the right hand is lower than the left hand, it is further away from the body also. At the top the right hand is closer to body. On the way down we are consciously and very forcefully holding the angles therefore we arrive at this ‘release point’ with a massive task yet to be completed. The right hand must be driven below the left hand and outside the line of the left hand before we can hope to mechanically get the clubhead back out to impact, to where it was at address. In the time and distance available that seems an incredibly difficult ask, to me anyway.
At least 1/2 to 2/3rds of the original 0.25s of the downswing must surely have elapsed. In a time of less than 0.01s we must disengage the contracted holding muscles on the right side, reprogram a new event involving right triceps as the prime mover, with all associated support muscle groups, and then move all of the aforementioned masses and weights from place to place.
On top of that there is a further ‘problem’ of serious proportions. The head of the biceps involved in the holding of the right arm angle is attached to the ulna and acts as a ‘supinator’, it turns the palm up. Its antagonist in the triceps group is very weak. Try doing some pushups with the back of your hands on the floor and not the palms and you will quickly experience what I’m saying. And it gets worse! The movement of the right upper arm/ elbow away from the side and in an upwards arc is the true, correct initiator to the act of pronation of the right hand. For maximum effect shouldn’t all levers acting in an acceleration be moving in a common plane? It gets worse still; the pull of the biceps supinator has locked the right palm up. How does it rotate through more than 90 degrees to get back to its address/ impact position, in the time and distance available? I am serious!
We can go much deeper than this, if there is the need. However, translated into another arena in which I have had vast experience; if I was in the dock, charged with murder, and this weight of supportable, provable evidence was massing up against all the pleas and defenses flowing from my defense team, I would be contemplating my last will and testament, with a very sweaty and prickly feeling tightening around my neck!
Regards to all
Gerry
Gerry - I have no idea what points you were attempting to make in your post. We can leave the finer points of my previous critique of your post on iseek aside, since it seems we are in agreement about the need for pre-programmed motor habits, often called “motor programs” in neurophysiology. I teach that your conscious mind (with very few exceptions and then only for advanced golfers) should never try to “do” any thing mechancial during the golf swing. I dont believe in swing thoughts - period.
As for some of the biomechanical references you made, I really don’t understand much of what you said. It’s clear you are a great advocate for your beliefs about the golf swing. I am much more inclined to use concepts that have stood the test of time in my own and other teachers I respect experience on the lesson tee. There seems to be a lot of complicated analysis in your post here, but I can’t even begin to describe what your basic operating premise is when it comes to swing mechanics. This is not unusual. We all explain reality through the bias of our own filters.
Maybe you could try again?
Gerry,
Thanks for the wonderful post…
This strongly echoes my thoughts exactly…
Any of my students here I am sure will attest that this is essentially the very first thing we work on in the golf swing. We have a biomechanical module or you might call it a drill, that teaches the student to actively DRIVE or FIRE the right hand, into a point of resistance from a full cocked and loaded position what we call P3 (the third parallel of the shaft , just before impact) By working on maximizing the range of motion, we train the muscles to work in both hands individually, and also in unison with the pivot or body rotation under extremely tight tolerances that I supervise. The proper execution is absolutley vital. The students that get it improve quickly… the better players and my touring pros usually get it much quicker, but some of the higher handicappers are able to grasp it within 3 to 6 weeks… I hold students back until they do get it, because there is no point of moving on until they do… This is the heart of the golf swing, and we start right there… first lesson.
Relying upon CF to do it for us is very tedious stuff… any interference from extra tensions in the arms or wrists… over acceleration, stiffness in the joints is fatal with this approach. The acceleration rate must be steady and even, if not it’s a train wreck… I know! I tried to do this for years under the blanket of TGM swinging methodology.
So I really like what you are saying…
I have taken issue with TGM because I believe a proper “hit” is done with the hands and forearm rotation, not the right elbow.
straightening.
Ben Hogan talked about “hitting with the right hand… and also hitting just as hard with the left hand…” and I agree with what he said 100% on that one.
I have no problem with a quick hit of the hands at the bottom of the swing happening within a fraction of the .20 of split second late in the downswing…
Wonderful topic…
BPGS1,
Thanks for sharing this insight.
Can you please expand on this answer in relation to Steb’s question? I share a similar affliction and have tried the focussing ahead of the ball trick but that does not work either, is there a yet more extreme solution or can you distil some more information in relation to ‘the readiness potential’ for us? I have ordered a copy of the book too and will report back any insights I glean but just wondered what your individual advice would be.
Hey Arnie
I have found a solution for this and has worked very well for me in the last few weeks since I have been on M#4. I had to set up my plane bars indoors so they are within the arc of my swing. So I set them up slightly above Lag’s recommended plane. Now I have to be able to physically miss them or knock them out. That way even the unconcious has another obstacle to avoid after the ball. I actually hit lots of balls like that (makes m4 drill more addictive). On the course I try to imagine the target side bar is there, and needs to be avoided and this has done wonders for my driver.
The “Ballbound” thing is very interesting and is something that I believe had always affected me when I was trying to use “CF Swinging” (which until now has always been by approach).
My practice swing and ball-striking swing could look dramatically different at times… the practice swing was very on plane, I had a steady head and stayed tall, acceleration was smooth thru the bottom, etc. When the ball was present I had a good backswing, but it was followed by an under-plane transition, a head-drop, impact (which was still pretty good), and a bit of a flip with a low-left finish. The greater the pressure, the bigger the visual differences. I could play decent golf with it, but just not consistently enough for me.
I was very aware of these differences and it was maddening! But I actually got to where I was able “fake myself out” and pretend there was no ball present. I was looking at the ball but it was as if I could put myself into a “mini-trance” for the few seconds it took to set up and swing. The results were almost always better but I couldn’t count on being able to do that for a whole round of golf. It was a band-aid and I was very frustrated with not being able to figure out why I couldn’t “consciously” make a better swing.
With ABS I’m finding that (perhaps because I am PHYSICALLY TRYING to square up the club from p3 into impact) being ballbound is much less of a problem. The ball is there but it’s more incidental to what I’m trying to do. With swinging it was as if I had to expend a huge effort to NOT interfere with centrifugal force.
robbo
One way to feel the difference between ball bound and non ball bound is to just throw the club down the target line. It has nothing to do with Lag’s drills, but can give you the sense of rotational down the line movement that might be a new one. I guess this wouldn’t work very well in a 10 story driving range in Tokyo, but here in Tennessee all you chance on hitting is the odd assorted wildlife. Off topic, I have to say I really like Two’s Lag Bag as a name for what we hit, and from there purpose going by the name Lag Bagger.
I think what we are talking about is “The hit impulse”. There is a desire “to hit” when there is in fact something there “to hit”
Whether we see it… or simply sense (blindfolded) that it is there (the ball) it’s enough to trigger the hit impulse.
Now there are two basic broader sense ways to deal with this… one… we learn to overcome the impulse, through any number of techniques,
from mental keys, looking past or through the ball, practicing in the dark, meditation, could even be drugs such as beta blockers, or even alcohol.
All these are attempts to DO SOMETHING with the desire to actually do NOTHING.
The other way, is to actually embrace the hit impulse by learning how to PROPERLY “hit”… and this is very much at the core of what we are working on with our module work. If you hit at the right time, you can hit all you want. However, for the hit impulse to be fully embraced, it needs to have the physical support to do so.
New golfers naturally hit, in an attempt to pick up velocity… to get the clubhead moving. They simply hit early by throwing their hands from the top, because they don’t have either the motor installed to hit later, nor do they have the technique to go along with it.
Prot is a classic example for those who followed his thread. It was a classic case of over acceleration hand throw right from the top. When I worked with him, I never addressed the issue directly… but instead, had him grind on module #1, then #2 then #3. Without getting into the unnecessary details of that homework assignment, we basically installed a fast strong set of hands and trained them to fire at the bottom of his swing… not from the top.
By adding stability and a resistance point through active ground force work, and proper foot pressures that were non existent, then adding another big engine (that still needs lots of work) we moved the instinctive hit impulse about three feet down the hand arc. Trying to do it rarely works. Learning to do it always works…but you have to put in a bit of effort and dedication.
This what I had to work with…
and this is what we did basically in about 6 months
Because we actually went in and changed things biomechanically, re programming the firing order of his hit impulse, this is now his new swing DNA.
He couldn’t go back to the old way if he wanted… it’s not him anymore. By doing it this way, it lasts… if you try to fix a golf swing with a band aid, you might fix it, but the band aid might fall off at anytime, even later that day.
I choose Prot to work on because it was the worst swing I could find…and he was up for the challenge to change, so through a team effort, we turned a 90 to 100 shooter into a guy who shot in the 70’s for the first time, and now has a chance at becoming as good a player as he wants to be.
The whole point here, is that you can overcome the hit impulse by learning to hit properly, rather than trying your hardest not to… and of course the age old saying… you can’t unlearn something.
Lag
You may have worked with swings worse than Prot like mine but we did not have his courage to show it up in public. Just before joining your class I had a few sessions with a Kiwi coach working in Edmonton whose biggest asset was the lesson spot had multiple cameras. He would always mention the caoching offers he had in line from California. Anyway I have a CD full of his junk in my trunk. Would try to post parts of sometime to show my pre Lag DNA. 
Lag
In most things it is always best to start at the beginning, and what could be more of a golf beginning than when the club contacts the ball. You are providing us a very specific moving supervised plan that is right at the point of golf truth. Thanks. 
Can’t believe these are the same golfers! Prot looks like a PGA Tour Pro in the second sequence! This is really encouraging for us high handicappers!
I love the idea of “embracing” the hit impulse, training it fire at the right time, rather than eliminating it. Sounds like it could work for me. 
BPGSI…
This approach is not what I teach, it’s the manner in which I go about the analysis of any and every theory that crosses my path. I do this in a very clinical, cold blooded and objective way, never allowing myself to become emotionally involved in the processes or the outcome of my work. I have never been interested in who is right, only in what is right. I owe no allegiance to any peer or authority figure, living or dead.
My approach is actually the very opposite to what you may seem to think it is. My purpose is the Process of Elimination, the very same methodology that is the foundation stone of Police investigation and a major contributor in all research. Eliminate what cannot be until one is left with only what can be, and what can be proven to be, beyond all possible doubt.
From your responses to a simple comment that I made, in a most simplistic way, relative to nerve speed travel time, time and motion considerations etc and other post that you have made, it seemed to me that you adhere to the belief that you can ‘change horses in midstream’ in the downswing, so to speak. I interpret what you are saying to mean that the golfer can commence a downswing by holding back or preventing the progressive acceleration of the clubhead until later in the chain of events and then, at will and on command, release this pent up energy in a burst of clubhead acceleration into the ball at impact. It also suggests to me that you adhere strongly to the belief that ‘advanced’ golfers are so attuned as to be able to ‘sense’ a deviation from the optimum in their downswings and make changes and corrections prior to impact. If my interpretations are incorrect, kindly point that out in a future post and I will be delighted to change my views.
My approach, for more than three decades now, has been to objectively challenge every theory relating to human motion/ performance through the uses of nothing other than the accepted Laws and Rules of any arena of science that can be applicable, in any way, shape or form, to the point in question and to also use any provable information that is accepted by the scientific community, at large.
In my last post I provided evidence that seriously challenges the concept of hold and release and that any form of change or correction can be made to the downswing, once it is underway. Everything that I put forward in that post is valid and can be proven to be so. It is not personal nor is it personally directed, it’s all evidence offered to challenge a specific theory and it was offered in the most clinical and dispassionate manner possible. It was totally objective.
Correct me if I’m wrong but I sense that you are a devoted TGM disciple. If it’s a fundamental of TGM beliefs (and I have no idea, either way, if it is or it isn’t) that hold and consciously release, or consciously direct changes in the downswing, is a reality then I most certainly hold to the contrary view point and can prove, beyond all possible doubt, that it cannot be achieved by the human golfer. What I have put forward so far is rather the tip of the iceberg. If that belief is inherent in TGM philosophies/ methodologies then I respectfully suggest that closer consideration of Newton’s Laws of Motion and the Laws of Levers could be advisable.
As for my own teaching philosophies/ methodologies they all boil down to an extraordinarily simple premise;…one conscious intention triggers one subconscious pre-programming which executes a reaction chain of sequential motion. If one knows how to isolate and execute that singular intention, without fear or favour, then that’s about all she wrote!
For all of you adherents to the belief that conscious changes to pre-programmed motion that is underway, here is a very simple little experiment that can offer remarkable observations, if you care to look and consider; Imagine that you have a bug on your left lower leg around towards the left rear of the leg. You can’t get at it with your left hand so you reach across and down and swat it with your right hand. You have just just pre-programmed a subconscious reaction to a conscious intention that is of extraordinary complexity, a complexity that is far beyond your own understanding and in which every required Law of Motion and Law of Levers was ideally complied with, where every bone movement, to every precise degree of distance and rotation, was executed, in the exact sequence required. The ideal amount of muscular force/ energy was applied to the movement of every bone involved (and almost all of the 206 bones in the human body were involved, to some degree). During all of this your involuntary balance was also maintained. You couldn’t even begin to comprehend the enormity of what is involved here yet you can understand and pontificate upon a sequence of motion, such as the golf swing, that is almost immeasurable more complex than swatting that bug?
Remember that I did not initiate this questioning of TGM or your personal teachings or beliefs. I made some statements which you challenged in open forum, more than once. Failure to respond on my part would be deemed as acceptance by me, you left me no alternative but to respond. I’m happy to leave it at that. There is an ancient Chinese adage that says it can be unwise to stir the sleeping tiger…
Gerry
hI Gerry and thanks for your posts.
You are obviously well educated and probably have years of research experience behind you. Could you share with us what is your profession and what you work on, im quite curious.
Also, could you elaborate on something else. I could not quite follow your earlier post where you had a very technical description of biomechanical movement and so forth. Could you
sum up for me if 1. You disagree with Lag on some of his teachings. 2 if yes, explain it to me if you can, in as near to layman´s terms as you can in what areas you tink hes wrong.
Regards
Jon
Gerry,
Although you addressed this to BPS1, it seemed that it might have been addressed to me also? BPS1 and I are not TGM followers…if anything we are TGM questioners…maybe even heretics!.. and like you, I question everything, as I’m sure BPS1 does also. I find the best testing device I can find is me… and if I can’t do it… I certainly will not teach it to my students… whatever principle or concept is at the cornerstone of debate.
I teach my students a five step process for playing a golf shot.
- Design the shot to be hit within your the mind
- Feel the feeling that will create that shot within your body
- Commit to that feeling without hesitation
- Execute that feeling to the best of your ability
- Live with the results
Any form of execution that falls outside of that process is not playing golf. If you have any conscious thoughts in your head you are practicing. Any concern imposed upon the outcome becomes observation. Practicing and observation are a different process. Unique unto themselves. Both have their special time and place within the overall context… or bigger picture of the game.
However, a player can move from conscious thought (design) into the next four steps of the playing process seamlessly from a very different place within themselves… call it the subconscious, autopilot, the zone, a zen state or, whatever term you wish.
So if you agree that a properly played golf shot cannot be altered within the swing, then I would be in 100% agreement.
Regardless, I’m not in anyway looking for agreement… just openly sharing my views on the game, the inner experience, and so forth based upon my years as a tour player, a tour winner, an observationist, and a practicer.
Jon
Thank you for your question.
No I do not disagree with in his teachings, I don’t know what he teaches.
I’m not invading anybody elses beliefs or what they choose to teach. I am only interested in what the provable facts are, nothing more, nothing less. I don’t accept that the player in his or her downswing can alter or change horses mid stream. I do not accept that any part of the downswing can be consciously controlled after it has commenced, relative to ‘positions’, as advocated in virtually all current teaching philosophies and theories. What I wrote in the post was merely an indicator of some of the identifiable and provable problems and impediments that lie in the way of controlling ‘positions’ in association with the known and provable time limitation in which the downswing must be completed. If there are too many things to do in the time available then, obviously, the theory or the teaching is flawed, nothing else is possible.
My intent is only to put forward FACTS that can be proven. How others relate to those facts is purely a matter for their own choosing. It’s of utterly no consequence to me, either way. I didn’t say, or infer, that anyone was right or anyone was wrong, nor will I. I merely identified certain factors that must be considered and fully accounted for if what is being proposed is to be valid. It has never been my intention to tell anyone how to think or what to think, not even my own sons. It is my hope that I may, from time to time, influence a few other people to think for themselves and not to accept blindly what they are told to accept. I simply try to point people in directions where they can search for themselves and be responsible for what they come up with.
As for discussing my academic standings, life achievements and so forth, no I will not do that and for a most valid reason. Judge me solely on the value of the facts that I present to you and nothing more. I do have vast experience in researching and I have the required mental tools to do it well. But that’s as far as I go, I refuse to be type cast or pigeon holed. I have nothing whatever in my life to be ashamed of and I am exceedingly happy living in the skin that I’m in, let’s leave it at that. If you want to learn, then go and learn, what can stop you if just dive in the deep end and see if you can swim. You have a computer with an entire world of knowledge at your fingertips, use it well.
Regards
Gerry