golfbulldog, I'll attempt an answer with one caveat: I'm no Homer Kelley TGM expert. My understanding of "straight line delivery path" is taking ones hands from the top straight towards the ball. My understanding of "circular delivery path" is ones hand following a circular path from the top.
Neither of those scenarios happens... ever... The only golfer that has a circular delivery path is a machine: either pingman or iron byron. Its clear from Nebit et al that the hand path of all (real) golfers is curvilinear and is unique to each person. Furthermore all hand paths have three distinct phases defined by max/min of the hand path radii and a change in the trending direction of the center of curvature. Those parameters define a golfer's unique signature or swing "fingerprint" if you will.
In the optimization phase of the subject study, Nesbit (and McGinnis) did consider a circular delivery path and (given the scratch golfer's individual constraints) it was indeed better than the scratch golfer's original (much more elliptical) hand path (that is assuming a human golfer is even physically capable of putting his/her hands on a circular delivery path) but.... (as mentioned above) Not as good as an optimized curvillinear path.
Homer Kelley would have been lucky to have had a Commadore 64 computer when he's was researching the golf stroke. Its almost unfathomable how much more commuting power Nesbit (and all of today's researchers) have access to (including software tools and speed). Perhaps one needs a technical to understand this tremendous advantage and therefore no fair comparison can be made.
That said ALL research builds apon what came before... ALL technical papers begin with a review of the previous literature. We scientists pay hommage to people like Homer who paved the way for what was to come.
One of my favorite movies is Kubrick's 2001 a Space Odyssey... Its an allegory for man's "Great Work" in the alchemical sense based on Clarke's Childhoods End. One could liken TGM as the result of the first appearance of the black monolith... Thanks to the efforts of people like Prof. Nesbit the black monolith has made its its second appearance and Golfdom is the beneficiary. The wheels of progress grind slow ... but oh so smooth!
I encourage those readers that find value in Nesbit's reseach like I do to drop him a linet. He says if we keep reading he'll keep writing. (What a deal!) Anyway I've asked him to test some pros so we can see how their dynamics compare to the amateurs.
Thanks for linking this stuff. Haven't had a chance to read . . . . BUT am VERY interested. I'm pretty sure I won't be able to comprehend all of the math stuff . . . But if you had to give a for doofus' explanation of the "optimal" hand path what would it be? Is there any "fixed point of reference" with regards to the measurements? Is it the spine or shoulders or ball or some sort of point "in space"? You mentioned that the radius is constantly changing (which makes sense) . . . but radius from the hands to what point? Also do you think the "optimum" path changes for different clubs?
A few years ago on a now defunct (Mike Austin) golf forum I wrote a post largely based on my reading of Nesbit's earlier research, I titled the "Golden Spiral Golf Swing". The idea is our hands should trace a spiral, and the origin of that spiral would be a point in space (perhaps on or in the golfer's body) but definitely not a body part (left shoulder etc).
The image below shows a golden spiral (fibonacci ratio 1.61 overlayed on the computer derived optimized scratch golfer swing. See how well the sprial fits (the second two phases of the swing)? In essence the fact that the radius (of the spiral is continuously decreasing helps prevent the early release or casting that costs golfers so much CHS. I suspect if Nesbit measures some of the top pros we will find their hands do trace a spiral (particulary the longer hitters ... people like Bubba and Camillio).
A few years ago on a now defunct (Mike Austin) golf forum I wrote a post largely based on my reading of Nesbit's earlier research, I titled the "Golden Spiral Golf Swing". The idea is our hands should trace a spiral, and the origin of that spiral would be a point in space (perhaps on or in the golfer's body) but definitely not a body part (left shoulder etc).
The image below shows a golden spiral (fibonacci ratio 1.61 overlayed on the computer derived optimized scratch golfer swing. See how well the sprial fits (the second two phases of the swing)? In essence the fact that the radius (of the spiral is continuously decreasing helps prevent the early release or casting that costs golfers so much CHS. I suspect if Nesbit measures some of the top pros we will find their hands do trace a spiral (particulary the longer hitters ... people like Bubba and Camillio).
OK . . .. read the article . . . as I expected . . . . didn't get anything out of it really. I'm sure there is meat there but I don't have the toofuses to chew on it.
So let me ask you a few questions about your spiral deal. What does axis X & Y represent? So with the spiral is it like wide to narrow to more narrow? Let's say that you were going to take somebody with a "constant radius" path if there is such a thing to the optimum path. How would you describe the motions during the different phases of the downswing? Could we possibly use terms such as wider/narrower, more in/more out? Something that we could all maybe apply?
I think there's certainly something here to learn. I'm just not smart enough to figure out what and how to apply it. But again . . . . I think the WHOLE DEAL is about hand path. I think if you could take this stuff and make it into something most people could understand . . . . you may have something.
Thanks NMG for your further decriptions! If Nesbit and Homer were to meet I am sure that they would have had a fun chat.
My interpretation of straight line delivery path is a hand path which is generally steeper than a circle delivery path...I agree with you that it's "straight line" component is tiny or none existent but the attempt to achieve a straight line thrust of pp3 (with relatively forward aiming point) gives a steep delivery hand path - I would be surprised if this was not close to the optimal path that you describe.
Rather than test a "pro" (who has usually a pivot controlled hands procedure) ...test a TGM person who uses aiming point and hands controlled pivot methodology...
Trying to tell the average pro that the secret to golf is the path that the hands take back to the ball is fruitless...they don't think like that ...there have been at least 2 decades of taking hands out of golf...all big muscle stuff...
Whilst Daryl is on a bit of a rant at the moment he does have a point...how would you use what Nesbitt has found...see what HK suggested achieves and I'm sure that a HCP aiming point guy will be more optimised than Nesbitt's amateurs.
What you have posted may be clear to you; but not me. It intrigues me, but without more precise narrative, I don't get it.
Please describe and illustrate your message so that the masses can grasp it. Use stick figures if necessary. Otherwise, your posts are interesting but not useful, at least to me and Bucket.
Sorry for being such a pain in the ass. But I can't help it.
Power Package Delivery Paths are Straight-Line, Angled-Line and Circular. None of these claims that the Hands travel in a perfect Circle when facing the Golfer. That’s not the purpose of the Power Package Delivery Paths.
Nesbits research does not measure TGM’s Circular Delivery Path. Non-Pivot Strokes, No Axis Tilt, Chip and Pitch Shots (Soft Strokes).
Nesbits research is limited to the Straight Line Delivery Path. No Plane Shift from Top to Impact. Therefore, no one who shifts back to an Elbow Plane for Release is included in his study.
Quote:
7-23 POWER PACKAGE DELIVERY PATH The three possible paths of the Hands down the Inclined Plane (10-23) are the Basic Delivery Procedures and the Delivery Line Equivalents (2-J-3) must comply with them. Per 2-F, the LINE Delivery Paths are “Cross Line” procedures and the CIRCLE Delivery Path is “On Line” in their relation to the geometric Plane Line. For a Circle “Equivalent:, the Hands sense (5-0) an flat gyroscopic circular “orbit” path from Takeaway (8-4) to The Top (8-6) AND BACK AGAIN. So the player envisions – is consciously aware of – a turning wheel RIM motion of the Hands, Clubshaft and Clubhead toward and on through the Ball. For a Line “Equivalent”, the Hands from Takeaway to The Top AND BACK AGAIN, sense the Clubshaft as a wheel SPOKE tracing a straight line extension of the selected Delivery Path. So the player envisions – is consciously aware of – a straight line wheel TRACK motion (rather than its rotation) toward and on through the Ball.
Normally, Delivery “THRUST” is “Cross Line” – Delivery “MOTION” is “On Line”. Even at Low Point, because Delivery Path Angle (direction) is ALWAYS the alternate Target Line (7-2-3) even with Circle Delivery Path (1-L-9, 1-L-10). Study 7-11 and 7-19.
The Straight Line Path is a simpler procedure than the Angled Line Path. But the latter is very natural movement and has the advantage of the true Elbow Plane through Impact. The former can have a steeper-than-normal Elbow Plane compensated with a reaching-out of the arms and a shifting of the Left Hand Grip that places the Clubshaft in the Cup of the Hand instead of under the heel of the Hand, and the Right Hand Grip adjusted to correspond. The sharpness of the arcs at either end of “Line” Paths determines how much of that “Line” can remain and how much the change from Linear Speed (Downstroke) to Angular Speed (Release) will increase Clubhead Speed without changing Hand Speed – the “Endless Belt Effect” of #3 Accumulator per 2-K#6 and 6-B-3-B.
The Circle Path of the Hands is mandatory for all Non-Pivot Strokes (6-L-0) whether Hitting or Swinging (7-19). The “Axis Tilt” (2-H) allows Line Delivery Path but does not require it.
Therefore, Circle Delivery Path is for Non-Pivot Strokes, Angled Path is for Pivot Controlled Hands (Plane Shifts-focus on Rotation) and Straight Line Delivery Paths (Focus on wheel track) are for Hands Controlled Pivots where the Hands travel on the Selected Plane from Top to Impact.
Furthermore, he admits that his findings do not include measuring the differences in Force (Centrifugal) between Sweep and Snap Release of the Power Package. He never intended to measure CF or Right Arm Thrust.
Furthermore, all modeling was limited to Zero Roll and Turn of the Clubface.
The Purpose of his Study was to examine the Path of the Hands to determine if they moved in a Circle or Not when facing the Golfer.
He blasts the Double Pendulum Model as we all have. The Double Pendulum Model assumes a Perfect Circle Path of the Hands on Full Strokes. Computer modeling using the Double Pendulum is inherently flawed.
The Hands don’t travel in a Circle during Full Strokes. We already knew that. Nesbit believes that his Computer Modeling is Superior to other Computer Models, which assume that the Hands Travel in a Circle. Nesbits is the first Computer Modeling, of a portion of the Golf Swing, that includes Hands moving in a path other than a Circle. If someone would teach Nesbit about the "Endless Belt" effect then he may be able to improve his Computer Model.
Is that a Big deal? Not for Golfers. It is a huge deal for Computer Modelers like Nesbit. It may only take fifty years, when modeling can include all of the Bio-mechanics and Golf Swing Theory, including various Procedures.
Golfers looking for the Long Ball are reading into this research more than whats there. We all know that a 7 iron can be played from 1 to 180 yards. If you want 185, take a 6 iron and swing at 80%.
I don't know . . . . this dude is on to something . . . . As I think Homer was in the earlier editions. I still believe that hand path is the deal. I think some of this can be found in the evolution or maybe "de-evolution" of Mr. Kelley's thoughts on the elbow plane.
10-6-A Elbow Plane FIRST AND SECOND EDITION
The location of the Elbow during Impact is the reference point used for this Plane Angle. This alignment not only allows the Right Forearm to move On Plane through the Impact but also allows the torso to be position at right angles to the Plane - which are the unexcelled alginments for Right Arm Power and Control.
Remember-the Right Forearm cannot become "On Plane" until the Right Elbow becomes "On Plane".
10-6-A Elbow Plane THIRD EDITION
Where the Right Elbow touches the waist is the reference point used for this Plane Angle. It is the "flattest" normal Plane that will still allow the Right Forearm to be On Plane during Impact. This means that normally the Right Forearm will be moving at right angles to the torso - which are the unexcelled alignments for Right Forearm Power and Control.
10-6-A Elbow Plane FOURTH AND FIFTH EDITIONS
Where the Right Elbow touches the waist is the reference point used for this Plane Angle. It is the "flattest" normal Plane that will still allow the Right Forearm to be On Plane during Impact. This means that normally the Right Forearm will be moving at right angles to the torso - which are the unexcelled alignments for Right Arm Power (6-B-1-0) and On Plane "Throw Out" action (2-K).
10-6-A Elbow Plane SIXTH AND SEVENTH EDITIONS
Where the Right Elbow touches the waist is the reference point used for this Plane Angle. It is the “flattest” normal Plane that will still allow the Right Forearm to be On Plane during Impact. This should produce a very flat Angle of Attack (2-B) with reduced Backspin and should be avoided for Short Shots unless it is also part of your Full Stroke Pattern. The Elbow Plane allows maximum #3 Accumulator requiring earlier Release per 6-N-0. This procedure is executed by the Right Forearm per 7-3 and 10-6-B and Elbow Location per 6-B-3-0-1.
I think it's interesting that some of the "unexcelled" alignments for Right Forearm power got yanked. I think he had it. I'm not physics guy but it seems to me that you get the most effective motion when something is moving at right angles to the axis of rotation. Now we've certainly established that the hands don't move in a straight line or in a true circle. But I think there is an optimum hand path (maybe optimum for the type of shot as well). Homer was on to this for sure. Not sure why he let it go. But I think the colored statements in the 1st thru the 5th are very interesting. For some reason these were "deconstructed" in the 6th (who knows what would have made it in the 7th).
So check these out on their own . . . .
also allows the torso to be position at right angles to the Plane - which are the unexcelled alginments for Right Arm Power and Control.
This means that normally the Right Forearm will be moving at right angles to the torso - which are the unexcelled alignments for Right Forearm Power and Control
This means that normally the Right Forearm will be moving at right angles to the torso - which are the unexcelled alignments for Right Arm Power (6-B-1-0) and On Plane "Throw Out" action (2-K).
The Elbow Plane allows maximum #3 Accumulator requiring earlier Release per 6-N-0. This procedure is executed by the Right Forearm per 7-3 and 10-6-B and Elbow Location per 6-B-3-0-1
I think there's a lot to be learned from the above. We can certainly has them out and I think they work well with what No-Mind has submitted here. May not be exactly the same deal . . . but close I think.
If you look at most of the pros . . . I'd submit that the vast majority of the pros end up on the elbow plane thru the ball. They may do some dynamic shifting before and afterward (which effects all the vectors of face and path) . . . but for power and precision these cats are on the Elbow-Plane. Why? I believe that it produces the hand path that produces the best mechanical advantage.
Another thing to D's point about Straight Line Delivery . . . . I think an important thing to remember is . . . that is a CONCEPT . . . not what actually happens. The actual amount of what could be even considered Straight Line Delivery is not very long on the arc. I think the Straight Line Delivery concept can no doubt help TONS of golfers . . . to a point. But if you over cook that you can get off Plane quickly . . . .the hands have to go back up and in On Plane . . . it may suprise some how early the hands start working back IN in order for the club to continue down and out On Plane. You can get tons of right vector if you have your hands traveling "out" off Plane late in the downswing.
Law of the Flail. Endless Belt Effect. Accumulators. Straight Line Delivery Path. Snap Release.
What this study teaches is that after spending time and money, nothing is learned that wasn't already known, and the summary information won't reduce your scores by a single stroke. Geeks.
D . . . Question for you . . . In another thread on Right Forearms you have sited Sergio for "throwaway" . . . . now we can certainly debate his Power Package alignments at Impact . . . but I will agree with you that the integrity of his wedges are compromised certainly after the ball is gone and maybe before. BUT . . . . . most of the pros believe that he is the best ball strike on tour . . . .
So what is he doing correctly that overrides his Flying Wedge alignments?
I would put my Flying Wedge alignments up against most on this forum and not be embarrassed . . . BUT I can certainly hit some shots that would embarrass me. So . . . the wedge alignments are certainly HUGE . . . but they are not the only deal. The ball doesn't know if you bent your left wrist if the club is still satisfying the On Plane and 3 function alignments. Not saying you should do that BUT . . . . you believe the best ball striker in the world to be a throwaway artist . . . . maybe we should look at his hand path and the alignments in his pivot and the dynamic loading and unloading of his accumulators and see what we can learn. Just because his compromised wedges offend your TGM sensibilities doesn't mean that there's not something there of GREAT IMPORTANCE to get in the old game.
TGM "Straight Line Power Package Delivery Path" are Hands Delivered on a Single Plane (no Plane Shift). This is the Wheel Track HK talks about. Face on, it's not a Straight Line, but Down the Line it is a Straight Line. In years past there has been confusion about this.
In Editions 1-5, HK is referring to Hitting Patterns and his comments remain as true today as they did back then. In the Sixth Edition he added "Throw-Out" for Swingers, but with a Warning about the occurrence of an earlier Release.
A Turned Shoulder Plane Locates the Right Elbow On-Plane and Closer to The Belt Buckle. This Geometry also includes a Right Forearm at 90 degrees to the Torso at Release.
Shoulders are more open at Impact for Flatter Swing Planes than Steeper ones because more Pivot Rotation is needed to locate and Keep the Right Elbow On-Plane for Impact (the Right Elbow needs more Pivot Rotation to locate it closer to the Ball when using the Elbow Plane while Swinging)
D . . . Question for you . . . In another thread on Right Forearms you have sited Sergio for "throwaway" . . . . now we can certainly debate his Power Package alignments at Impact . . . but I will agree with you that the integrity of his wedges are compromised certainly after the ball is gone and maybe before. BUT . . . . . most of the pros believe that he is the best ball strike on tour . . . .
So what is he doing correctly that overrides his Flying Wedge alignments?
I would put my Flying Wedge alignments up against most on this forum and not be embarrassed . . . BUT I can certainly hit some shots that would embarrass me. So . . . the wedge alignments are certainly HUGE . . . but they are not the only deal. The ball doesn't know if you bent your left wrist if the club is still satisfying the On Plane and 3 function alignments. Not saying you should do that BUT . . . . you believe the best ball striker in the world to be a throwaway artist . . . . maybe we should look at his hand path and the alignments in his pivot and the dynamic loading and unloading of his accumulators and see what we can learn. Just because his compromised wedges offend your TGM sensibilities doesn't mean that there's not something there of GREAT IMPORTANCE to get in the old game.
Sergio is one of the greatest Golfers to ever play.
Sergio has a tiny little Throwaway. So do most of the Pros at least off the Tee. It's hardly anything. But anytime the Clubhead gains on the Hands before or During impact, by Flattening the Right Wrist, no matter How Slight, it's termed Throwaway. Hinging is the Opposite of Throwaway.
I believe that there's a Lot more to Golf than Swinging a Club Perfectly. It's still and always will be part "Art". Hinging may be easier for a Hitter. I know that its much more difficult for a Swinger to learn.
When it come to Scoring, I don't care how it gets done. When I'm thinking TGM Theory I'm a purist.
The wheels of progress grind slow ... but oh so smooth!
overlayed on the computer derived optimized scratch golfer swing. See how well the sprial fits (the second two phases of the swing)? In essence the fact that the radius (of the spiral is continuously decreasing helps prevent the early release or casting that costs golfers so much CHS. I suspect if Nesbit measures some of the top pros we will find their hands do trace a spiral (particulary the longer hitters ... people like Bubba and Camillio).
Linear Mode
