When using the Angle of Approach Procedure do I adjust my Impact Fix Alignments to place the Right Forearm On Plane with the steeper Plane required, or do I use my original Turned Shoulder Plane, in my case, Fix alignments and let the covering of the Angle of Approach dictate the steep Plane? I've researched the book and haven't found what I think are any definitive answers.
Per 7-2-3 the back of the Flat Left Wrist and the #3 PP both face down the Angle of Approach.
Per 7-3, "The "Angle of Approach" position of the Right Forearm shows the precise Cross-Line direction the Forearm must take through Impact." And, "The Right Forearm must leave -- and precisely return to -- its own Fix Position (7-8) "Angle of Approach" (regardless of the true Clubhead Angle of Approach)." I understand that this refers to visual Impact Point and Crossline direction of Thrust.
Per 2-N-0, "This 'Delivery Line' procedure completely replaces the geometric Plane Line (2-F) and the Target Line because these were established at Impact Fix (7-8) according to the intended Hinge Action (2-J-1) and Stance Line (10-5) requirements, and their control is completely automatic."
This leads me to believe I don't adjust the Impact Fix alignments since we're dealing with a VISUALLY Equivalent Delivery Line for the Impact and the use of the Angle of Approach is to guide Clubhead delivery.
But then, the Index refers to 10-5-0 for Angle of Approach Procedure where the book says, "The relations among Plane Line, Angle of Approach and Ball Location are constant per 2-N. Changing one changes all three and ususally, Plane Angle as well, but not necessarily the Clubface alignment (2-J-1). All can be synchronized by 'Laying the Clubshaft on the Line' (the selected Plane Line) during the 'Parallel to the Ground' (2-F) portions of the Stroke."
10-5-0 throws me off, which leads me to my question. I'm leaning towards using my original Fix alignments and letting the Clubhead covering of the 10-5-E guideline take care of Plane Angle. It seems to me that this would take care of any shifting necessary for steepness and still allow me to return at Impact to my Impact Fix alignments. 2-N-0 also tells me that "The orbiting Clubhead must maintain its visual relationship to the Delivery Line, per 2-F and 2-J-3, during all Twelve Sections...". What do any of you Hitters do when using the Angle of Approach Procedure?
When using the Angle of Approach Procedure do I adjust my Impact Fix Alignments to place the Right Forearm On Plane with the steeper Plane required, or do I use my original Turned Shoulder Plane, in my case, Fix alignments and let the covering of the Angle of Approach dictate the steep Plane? I've researched the book and haven't found what I think are any definitive answers.
Per 7-2-3 the back of the Flat Left Wrist and the #3 PP both face down the Angle of Approach.
Per 7-3, "The "Angle of Approach" position of the Right Forearm shows the precise Cross-Line direction the Forearm must take through Impact." And, "The Right Forearm must leave -- and precisely return to -- its own Fix Position (7- "Angle of Approach" (regardless of the true Clubhead Angle of Approach)." I understand that this refers to visual Impact Point and Crossline direction of Thrust.
Per 2-N-0, "This 'Delivery Line' procedure completely replaces the geometric Plane Line (2-F) and the Target Line because these were established at Impact Fix (7- according to the intended Hinge Action (2-J-1) and Stance Line (10-5) requirements, and their control is completely automatic."
This leads me to believe I don't adjust the Impact Fix alignments since we're dealing with a VISUALLY Equivalent Delivery Line for the Impact and the use of the Angle of Approach is to guide Clubhead delivery.
But then, the Index refers to 10-5-0 for Angle of Approach Procedure where the book says, "The relations among Plane Line, Angle of Approach and Ball Location are constant per 2-N. Changing one changes all three and ususally, Plane Angle as well, but not necessarily the Clubface alignment (2-J-1). All can be synchronized by 'Laying the Clubshaft on the Line' (the selected Plane Line) during the 'Parallel to the Ground' (2-F) portions of the Stroke."
10-5-0 throws me off, which leads me to my question. I'm leaning towards using my original Fix alignments and letting the Clubhead covering of the 10-5-E guideline take care of Plane Angle. It seems to me that this would take care of any shifting necessary for steepness and still allow me to return at Impact to my Impact Fix alignments. 2-N-0 also tells me that "The orbiting Clubhead must maintain its visual relationship to the Delivery Line, per 2-F and 2-J-3, during all Twelve Sections...". What do any of you Hitters do when using the Angle of Approach Procedure?
Thanks.
Until I met Lynn, NO ONE had ever been able to explain 2-J-3 to me in it's totality.
Your post shows a great deal of insight. I'll shed some light on some of Homer's comments about 10-5-E. Compare these comments to what's found in the book and see if they help to connect any of the dots. Then, let's talk again. Each of these random comments are taken from one of the Master's classes and are direct quotes from Homer.
"you've got a plane that's going to trace that line"
"It's steep, now remember. For this reason, you can't point at the line with the clubshaft. To point at the line with the right forearm, it's going to be a steeper plane."
"The original plane is gone - don't even think about it. It's totally replaced."
"This procedure is very upright."
"You're not concerned with the clubshaft."
"The clubshaft seems to be immaterial."
"It's not a true on plane motion."
"Actually, it's a vertical plane for the clubhead" (slight pause) "slightly inclined."
"It represents a clubhead plane rather than a clubshaft plane."
"Line momentum of the clubhead."
One of my original teachings in TGM was that it was the same as the original plane, but it was just an illusion that the clubhead was traveling in a straight line. Thank God I met Lynn, and he told me the truth.
Hitting has long been misunderstood, ignored, and discounted, even in TGM circles. So, I knew that there were concepts that I was missing from previous instruction and that I had a long road ahead. I started looking at the Angle of Approach Delivery Line, because of 6-H-0, #10. Also, Homer spoke at length about AADL in another Master's class. So, I became totally intrigued with 2-J-3.
I wanted to understand the geometry, and I knew that the clubhead had to (visually) move in a straight line. The only way that I could fathom the clubhead moving in a visual straight line and the circular orbit of the clubhead staying intact was for the eyes to be on the Plane of the clubhead orbit. In the beginning, I was troubled as the Plane seemed to be steeper than anything I knew to be acceptable. ("It's steep, now remember. For this reason, you can't point at the line with the clubshaft. To point at the line with the right forearm, it's going to be a steeper plane. This procedure is very upright. Actually, it's a vertical plane for the clubhead, (slight pause), slightly inclined."
Then, I had issues with the Clubshaft. I didn't want to violate any of the 21 commandments in 1-L. But, the geometry left 1-L, #5 & #6 in jeopardy. His quotes verified my beliefs: "You're not concerned with the clubshaft. The clubshaft seems to be immaterial. It represents a clubhead plane rather than a clubshaft plane. Line momentum of the clubhead."
What adjustments in loft/lie have you found necessary for this procedure, for yourself as well as students?
Usually, the only difference that I see is less variance between Address shaft angle and Impact shaft angle. Since we test Impact dynamically on a lie board, it matters less what they look like at Address. I'm sure you've seen plenty of people with the toe of the club off the ground at Address that also marked it perfectly at Impact. I know for a long time it looked like Mac was tying his shoes at Address, but his shaft angle looked normal at Impact.
But, I find very little (if any) difference in the way I'm marking the club when using 10-5-A or 10-5-E.
As an aside, anyone that attended the Falcon's Fire school saw the most remarkable transformation that I've ever seen when someone changed to 10-5-E.
8cork was remarkable in almost no time when he tried the procedure. He went from shanking every ball to pure 3-D Impact. I know his life changed that day, and I think he still shoots in the 70's. I have no idea what his scores were with the shanks.
Why is the shaft on a steeper plane?
Doesn´t the shaft point at the closed planeline?
When you teach people AoA, do you than put them closed-closed.
Where does the clubface point in a closed-closed scenario, let´s say with a seven iron ?
Do you use AoA?
Why is the shaft on a steeper plane?
Doesn´t the shaft point at the closed planeline?
When you teach people AoA, do you than put them closed-closed.
Where does the clubface point in a closed-closed scenario, let´s say with a seven iron ?
Do you use AoA?
Thank´s!
I can use either 10-5-A or 10-5-E.
"You're not concerned with the clubshaft. The clubshaft seems to be immaterial. It represents a clubhead plane rather than a clubshaft plane."
So, you have to disregard the shaft and think outside the box. Think of the clubhead moving on a steep Plane, with the clubshaft somewhat internal to the circular orbit of the clubhead.
"Angle of Approach" (regardless of the true Clubhead Angle of Approach)." I understand that this refers to visual Impact Point and Crossline direction of Thrust.
Linear Mode
