"THERE MUST BE ENOUGH LATERAL MOTION FORWARD TO TRANSFER THE WEIGHT TO THE LEFT FOOT"

[JOEGOLFWRX]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1296739643' post='2948253']
[quote name='JOEGOLFWRX' timestamp='1296700327' post='2947420']he wrote this in 5 lessons, IMO a left over from his early tabloid teachings, but videos appear to consistently show his rear foot open as ken venturi very specifically attests to.[/quote]

Well, he wrote what he wrote. [b]If[/b] flaring the rear foot of even these 10% [b]was of[/b] any [b]conceptual importance[/b], ..[b]he would have both said it and showed it on the diagramme. [/b]
[/quote]

this is pure opinion, lets stick to logic and the scientific method, that is; observations -> hypothesis -> peer replication of results -> peer review -> theory

it also directly contradicts your opposite opinion in your blog

[quote][b]Feet now[/b] - ......Moreover, I can finally understand the diagonal stance Mr.Hogan performed while hitting longer clubs and [b]I am surprised[/b] he did not use it with his short clubs as well. Or better said, [b]he did not described it in the book[/b]...
[/quote]

your first opinion states, all important concepts were documented in 5L
your second opinion states, they were not. (to your surprise)

you also are [url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/400358-hogans-imagery-of-elbows-close-together/page__view__findpost__p__2630212"]quoted here[/url] (as requested as noticing and opinionating on other reasons for the books discrepancies with hogans swing, blaming hogans lack of feel and the illustrators drawing ability

[quote]Of course. I believe that the [b]difference between feel and[/b] physical [b]real[/b]ity [b]is[/b] sometimes [b]huge. Hogan was no exception. [/b]

He felt that they pointed to the sky because the positions of the elbow joints in relation to wrist bones were turned outside (supinated).
Same with famous elastic band visualization. Hogan did not feel the linear CoG slide in the hips area, he felt only the rotation there.[/quote]

[quote]Well, [b]the truth is[/b] that in reality [b]he never setup[/b] his elbows such extreme [b]the way Ravielli drew in the book.[/b]
[/quote]


the point being
[b]when your theory matches hogans reality, then -> reality is right
when your theory contradicts hogans reality, then -> book is right[/b]

now, obviously hogan didn't tell all, but some of your 'surprise' may be due to the fact that hogans theory sometimes contradicts your theory, that may be why your theory isn't fully documented in 5 lessons. so how are we to ascertain truth, oh yeah, the scientific method, which begins with observation.

long before 'theory', even before hypothesis, is observation, which is why i'm curious about the [b]real observations[/b] of hogans set up. which is why i asked you...

[JOEGOLFWRX]

[quote name='JOEGOLFWRX' timestamp='1296700327' post='2947420']
1) have you any video showing point (1) ? (rear foot always perpendicular to target)[/quote]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1296739643' post='2948253']

Your reasoning is flawed because you fail to see the big picture and concentrate on microscale details:

ad.1) even if Hogan always had in reality his rear foot flared out a bit in the majority of causes ([b]because of his preferences[/b])
[/quote]
[b]opinion[/b], lets stick to observations
[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1296739643' post='2948253']
it does not change the facts that his intentions were to set it perpendicularily to the target
[/quote]
[b]opinion[/b]
[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1296739643' post='2948253']
and b) it does not matter in view of the answer for your question no.2 because the amount of flare after the rear ankle/knee joints preset is negligible - same as few per cent is negligible comparing to 25%.
[/quote]


if i stand 15 degree closed and flare my rear foot 10 degrees then my rear foot is 25 degrees open to the target line, that is the same as 25 dgrees open, lol,

but there is more to it anyways, by diagram 5 L prescribes, the black foot, hogan is observed as doing the red foot, you prescribe the green foot and the green lines represent BioK concepts, pressure point etc.

[attachment=723775:diag0001.jpg]

if we suppose hogan follows your hypothesis and transcribe your green lines on to the red foot, the red lines are created.
so if hogan follows your hypothesis you are saying by presetting the rear ankle and knee ccw, [b]it doesn't mater where he put his foot it has negligible effect on the entire swing ?[/b].

i thought the swing starts "from the ground up", if it doesn't mater why have any foot prescription in BioK.


should i take this whole answer above as
[b]"NO, I HAVE NO VIDEO". no observations of hogan ever following my rear foot prescription ?[/b]


[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1296739643' post='2948253']
[quote name='JOEGOLFWRX' timestamp='1296700327' post='2947420']
[s]2) if ken is not imagining things, then when hogan went deep (toward the rear heal), would the setting of the rear foot open not be a bio-kinetic big picture ideal for a counterfall more north than south as you have hypothesized ? [/s]

lets simplify question (2) to its most basic 'big picture' preposition

2) is it correct that IYO the more you flare the rear foot the more north you countefall all other things unchanged ?[/quote]



ad.2) rotation causes shift - the linear motion, according to my studies, can be an automatic result of de-torquing the joints; torquing and detorquing are rotational motions of opposite direction - if the torquing is clockwise, the other is counterclockwise; while the counterclockwise rotation of the knee joint affects the femur bone it starts to move South-West because there is no other option left - which is the essence of automatism. If the rear foot is significantly flared out the impact of torquing and detorquing in the joints would be drastically limited (generally speaking, benefiting from horizontally oriented forces would be drastically limited) and as a result one would have more options where to direct the linear motion, even in the Nort-West direction you prefer. Therefore, yes, the simple answer to your question is that the chances that the direction of the linear shift is to the S-W also drastically diminish.
[/quote]

ok, 'detorquing' isnt a word, it has no meaning and wouldn't be used by a scientist/engineer. so if this is a BioK term, can you give me it's stringent definition, i have an idea what you mean but i dont want to 'put words in your mouth.'

but thank you for the answer to my other question.
[b]"YES, the chances that the direction of the linear shift is to the S-W ..drastically diminish"[/b]

whew, lol.

[JOEGOLFWRX]

Now, I have a question to you. We know very well that body compresses in the transverse plane (squatting) that means the overall CoM lowers. How it would be possible to lower CoM and not losing tush line (or better said, increase tush line) when the linear shift of the pelvis area goes even slightly to North ?

 

Cheers

 

well first of all as i haven't put forward a theory my opinion is of very little relevance, that's the harsh reality of science.

 

but IMO

 

firstly i don't see the relationship you are correlating here, what chris welsh is taking about is a CoM that is not directly above the CoP on the ground but somewhat north-west of it, causing an imbalance, which causes a counterfall more north than south. you are talking about the point which is the CoM in 3d space and making assumptions about where it is in relation to some arbitrary point in the body, it doesn't even have to be in the body, its position in space relative to any arbitrary point in the body will change as you move the body, flex/extend/side-tilts/head-location etc

 

secondly i havent observed this deepining of the tush line on video as i stated i have observed the opposite on video tush-line falls forward as lead foot slips forwards.

 

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

do you not see it ? i think you are thinking to micro-scale, lol, forget the pelvis look at the big picture.

 

maybe its like that spining balerina girl, lol.

[williambenjamin11]

I think the answer to this may be related to weight distribution at address. Hogan's is more heelwards, so with the deep turn/pivot and pulled/closed right foot (whether square or angled open), he has to go nw, otherwise he will fall on his a55 as 8i and joe said. Maybe in your case Dariusz you have to make it sw bec of your rletively bigger tire?

But in practicality, what's the big deal with this Dariusz, joe, 8i? I don't think you have to think about this at all, right, wrong?

[shooby]

I'm a big fan of Hogan and have read all books by him and many about him. In my searches for how to do some of the things he did so well I saw this video.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNwSfz0_KDM[/media]

The way this instructor turns the hip is a good way to make sure your left hip gets on top of your left leg / foot. (For a righty obviously). But I'm not exactly sure if some of the Hogan experts in this forum agree? I know it's helped me greatly.
I would like to know your thoughts on how this video might apply to the lateral movement. After doing the drill for some time It almost happens naturally and I don't feel as if I stick on my right back pocket, but when I start to slice or pull I know I'm spinning more than I'm transferring the weight to my front foot.

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1296779115' post='2949711']No, I asked what part of the rear side is adducting........ I know the actual definitions of adduction and abduction , which are towards and away from anatomical neutral and usually referenced with the frontal plane......... I am also aware of sagittal plane ,usually referencing flexion and extension, but once again what part is exactly adducting on the rear side........ Simple question
[/quote]

Generally, all parts of the rear side abduct/expand sequentially from the ground up during the backswing, not mentioning under-pelvis section because they are subdued to friction (noone in golf lifts the rear foot and abduct the rear leg like in case of preparing to a throw). Of course, the lower the part is the earlier it "hits" the firm rear side and the earlier starts to adduct/compress (arms are being treated as last in the queue). It can happen while upper body parts are still in abduction/expansion phase.
BTW, I am afraid you're mistaken as regards body planes. Abduction/adduction refer to the sagittal plane while extension/flexion refer mainly to the coronal plane, sometimes only to the sagittal one. But this are details.

Cheers

[jak_bot]

EDIT

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='williambenjamin11' timestamp='1296779460' post='2949722']
Dariusz, I think the terms you are using are indeed not necessary for all golfers to hear. I think what's necessary is what the golfer will consciously do. The how. They ddont care what happens inside their organs, bones, ligaments etc, unless they're in the hospital already.. I believe you made it more difficult rather than easier for golfers to understand what to do. And it aint Hogan, at least to me that's what seems to be your overall presentation.
[/quote]

Of course, but I am obliged to explain theories in a more formal language so that one could verify a correct meaning in case of doubts. Believe me, I am doing my best to eliminate this dreadful biolingo whenever I can.

[quote]
Now to the merits in layman's terms...

When you just let the lower body/hips rotate automatically after the automatic linear motion, the lower body will not be sufficiently ahead of upper body to ENSURE that lefts are totally eliminated. In other word, this will ensure the fades, rights and straights. The faster you swing, the straighter it gets bec the faster you swing the upper body (after the hip turn), the straighter it gets bec the upper body catches up more with the lower body which as I said is ahead.

This is the "timing" lesson in talking about--how ahead the hips should be to the upper body. The more ahead, the more right. The more behind the hips, the more left. Since Hogan's swing is designed to hit it left but solid and far, all he has to do is make sure the hips/lower body be ahead of upper body, this eliminated the lefts, totally..

If you rotate (moreso if you just let it automatically) the hips after the linear motion, its too late bec by that time the upper body has already caught up. Yoi can delay the catching up, but that's not enough to ensure you eliminate lefts of Hogan. Also, if you can delay the upper body, that means you're not coiling enough, hence sapping the shot of distance.
[/quote]

Well, it would depend how early and how effective is the linear motion. Mind you, it occurs only in pelvis section because the "bipedality ends there" if you understand what I am trying to say. I'd agree, however, that in practice, the linear motion cannot end exactly when the rotational motion starts (although it's the best theoretical scenario) and the first part of the rotational motion is, say elyptical as a fusion of two types of motion.

Cheers

[Dariusz J.]

the point being

when your theory matches hogans reality, then -> reality is right

when your theory contradicts hogans reality, then -> book is right

 

now, obviously hogan didn't tell all, but some of your 'surprise' may be due to the fact that hogans theory sometimes contradicts your theory, that may be why your theory isn't fully documented in 5 lessons. so how are we to ascertain truth, oh yeah, the scientific method, which begins with observation.

 

long before 'theory', even before hypothesis, is observation, which is why i'm curious about the real observations of hogans set up. which is why i asked you...

 

I never tried to hide that even post-secret Hogan motion do not match the ideal model. Besides, my observations refer to a few golfers (best ballstrikers) and sometimes the common denominator is prevailing no matter what's written or shown. What's the most important though is the very theory that must be coherent and without blind holes in it. This goal sometimes needs victims and selective eye.

Call it what you want.

 

 

if i stand 15 degree closed and flare my rear foot 10 degrees then my rear foot is 25 degrees open to the target line, that is the same as 25 dgrees open, lol,

 

Nah. If one stands 15 degree closed and has his rear foot 10 degree flared relative to the target it means his rear foot is 10 degree open in relation to the target, not 25 degrees.

 

 

if we suppose hogan follows your hypothesis and transcribe your green lines on to the red foot, the red lines are created.

so if hogan follows your hypothesis you are saying by presetting the rear ankle and knee ccw, it doesn't mater where he put his foot it has negligible effect on the entire swing ?.

i thought the swing starts "from the ground up", if it doesn't mater why have any foot prescription in BioK.

 

I am sorry but cannpt grasp what you want to tell me now. Could you explain the whole section further ?

 

should i take this whole answer above as

"NO, I HAVE NO VIDEO". no observations of hogan ever following my rear foot prescription ?

 

Yes, more or less. I probably would find a sequence with his rear foot perpendicular to the target but it seems that in the majority of cases his rear foot was flared out a few per cent. However, much closer to perpendicularity than to 25* of his lead foot flare.

 

 

ok, 'detorquing' isnt a word, it has no meaning and wouldn't be used by a scientist/engineer. so if this is a BioK term, can you give me it's stringent definition, i have an idea what you mean but i dont want to 'put words in your mouth.'

 

This is very rude of you. You know very well that English is not my native language and I wrote posts from my "brain" without special preparations or language checking. The more you admitted you have an idea what I meant but still you used this opportunity to belittle me. I believe what you've done would be still rude towards a guy whose native language is English.

Just to explain - I thought that using the prefix "de-" is enough to underline the reverse action, therefore, the word "detorquing" will mean "releasing the torque".

 

secondly i havent observed this deepining of the tush line on video as i stated i have observed the opposite on video tush-line falls forward as lead foot slips forwards.

 

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

do you not see it ? i think you are thinking to micro-scale, lol, forget the pelvis look at the big picture.

 

maybe its like that spining balerina girl, lol.

 

No, I do not see it, especially on these poor angle GIFs. In order to see the rear hip joint linear motion one would need not a DTL view, but either from the above (bird view) or best from I guess you simply concentrate on the part of the action that occurs much later. I repeat - we discuss the linear motion of hips when they are slanted while the backswing of the upper body has not been finished yet.

 

Cheers

[eightiron]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1296841752' post='2951349']
[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1296779115' post='2949711']No, I asked what part of the rear side is adducting........ I know the actual definitions of adduction and abduction , which are towards and away from anatomical neutral and usually referenced with the frontal plane......... I am also aware of sagittal plane ,usually referencing flexion and extension, but once again what part is exactly adducting on the rear side........ Simple question
[/quote]

Generally, all parts of the rear side abduct/expand sequentially from the ground up during the backswing, not mentioning under-pelvis section because they are subdued to friction (noone in golf lifts the rear foot and abduct the rear leg like in case of preparing to a throw). Of course, the lower the part is the earlier it "hits" the firm rear side and the earlier starts to adduct/compress (arms are being treated as last in the queue). It can happen while upper body parts are still in abduction/expansion phase.
BTW, I am afraid you're mistaken as regards body planes. Abduction/adduction refer to the sagittal plane while extension/flexion refer mainly to the coronal plane, sometimes only to the sagittal one. But this are details.

Cheers
[/quote]

First you ask posters to read this....

[color=#1C2837][b]Start reading with the following sentences, please: "OK, as it has been already discussed when talking about the spine, the rear side adduction that happens as a natural consequence of a correctly performed backswing is also the crucial force in the pelvis area. Before the lead side leads the parade via its abduction the sagittal plane of the pelvis should be compressed. It won't be if we start the transition by lead hip pulling as it was drawn in '5 Less[/b]ons' (famous elastic tape image), we need to let the rear hip
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]and I ask what part of the rear side adducts and you then say generally they all abduct......... [/color]
[color=#1C2837]
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]and then you state that i must be mistaken about how medical terms are used..... thats fine , however the medicos/ bio-guys in golf actually refer from anatomical neutral and what plane the motions are done on........ for example one may flex or bend over and touch the toes and then stand up , extend may change angle on the frontal plane but the activity is on the sagittal plane. They would also detail motion of joints individually from an anatomical neutral point of view simply because in motion sports the neutral position is moving / changing position in 3-dim....... [/color]
[color="#1C2837"]
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]http://www.teachpe.com/anatomy/movements.php [/color]
[color=#1C2837]
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]http://www.brianmac.co.uk/musrom.htm[/color]

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1296865577' post='2952189']First you ask posters to read this....

[color=#1C2837][b]Start reading with the following sentences, please: "OK, as it has been already discussed when talking about the spine, the rear side adduction that happens as a natural consequence of a correctly performed backswing is also the crucial force in the pelvis area. Before the lead side leads the parade via its abduction the sagittal plane of the pelvis should be compressed. It won't be if we start the transition by lead hip pulling as it was drawn in '5 Less[/b]ons' (famous elastic tape image), we need to let the rear hip
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]and I ask what part of the rear side adducts and you then say generally they all abduct......... [/color]
[color=#1C2837]
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]and then you state that i must be mistaken about how medical terms are used..... thats fine , however the medicos/ bio-guys in golf actually refer from anatomical neutral and what plane the motions are done on........ for example one may flex or bend over and touch the toes and then stand up , extend may change angle on the frontal plane but the activity is on the sagittal plane. They would also detail motion of joints individually from an anatomical neutral point of view simply because in motion sports the neutral position is moving / changing position in 3-dim....... [/color]
[color="#1C2837"]
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]http://www.teachpe.com/anatomy/movements.php [/color]
[color=#1C2837]
[/color]
[color=#1C2837]http://www.brianmac.co.uk/musrom.htm[/color]
[/quote]

OMG, I wanted to present the logics of the concept, that's why I started with sequential abduction/expansion from the ground up in order to show why and how body parts starts to adduct/compress also sequentially. If I started to answer you without introduction you will find immediately a hole in it to prove how stupid I am.
And now I just have given you another reason to change topics for less important...

...apropos changing topics - both and coronal planes will always interact with each other because they are both vertical and because of freedom of the movement of various body parts. However, what I am interested in it is towards what central axis the changes in a motion occurs. This is what matters. When e.g. leg flexes in the knee joint changes happen towards the coronal plane axis, i.e. knee goes away from the axis opposite direction to the rest of the limb in proportions while in the sagittal plane you will have just right and left part of the same leg, no matter if flexed or extended the axis will look the same. But as I said, these are very deep details that should not affect any discussions about golf swing.

Cheers

[eightiron]

I didn't change the topic at all, just quoted you and I would think most would find it difficult to follow the words you wrote.......

Whatever...... Once again I find your reasonings to be opposite to biomedical guys , aside from that exactly what joints are doing what and when in terms of adducting in the rear side as a result of the abduction in the backswing

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1296868705' post='2952298']
I didn't change the topic at all, just quoted you and I would think most would find it difficult to follow the words you wrote.......

Whatever...... Once again I find your reasonings to be opposite to biomedical guys , aside from that exactly what joints are doing what and when in terms of adducting in the rear side as a result of the abduction in the backswing
[/quote]

Ah yes...you did not

Whatever...you're right...if your biomedical guys (together with other swing gurus you believe in) are these responsible for recent developent of golf stroke biomechanics, it is a very big compliment for me to be put on the opposite polar of them.

Cheers

[eightiron]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1296870077' post='2952357']
[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1296868705' post='2952298']
I didn't change the topic at all, just quoted you and I would think most would find it difficult to follow the words you wrote.......

Whatever...... Once again I find your reasonings to be opposite to biomedical guys , aside from that exactly what joints are doing what and when in terms of adducting in the rear side as a result of the abduction in the backswing
[/quote]

Ah yes...you did not

Whatever...you're right...if your biomedical guys (together with other swing gurus you believe in) are these responsible for recent developent of golf stroke biomechanics, it is a very big compliment for me to be put on the opposite polar of them.

Cheers
[/quote]

Ironic isn't it.......... Mindless guys...... Suppose they should rename forward bend flex as lateral flex

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1296872389' post='2952465']Ironic isn't it.......... Mindless guys...... Suppose they should rename forward bend flex as lateral flex
[/quote]

It is not necessary. What is necessary is look at the motion [b]relatively to the goal[/b].

I can see you like to quote various strange links from the net instead using your own brain. Here's one for you then :

http://home.comcast.net/~wnor/terminologyanatplanes.htm

Cheers

P.S. It's the last post of mine that wanders off the subject. If you cannot stay on subject, don't post. Simple as that.

[eightiron]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1296873584' post='2952502']
[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1296872389' post='2952465']Ironic isn't it.......... Mindless guys...... Suppose they should rename forward bend flex as lateral flex
[/quote]

It is not necessary. What is necessary is look at the motion [b]relatively to the goal[/b].

I can see you like to quote various strange links from the net instead using your own brain. Here's one for you then :

[url="http://home.comcast.net/~wnor/terminologyanatplanes.htm"]http://home.comcast....yanatplanes.htm[/url]

Cheers

P.S. It's the last post of mine that wanders off the subject. If you cannot stay on subject, don't post. Simple as that.
[/quote]

yeah , no brains , those strange links like the biomedical bloke are often a bummer ...... check out these are ones


1/ bio blokes..... absolute nutjobs

[url="http://books.google.com/books?id=JsFvOy1w-1QC&pg=PT51&lpg=PT51&dq=adducting+on+sagittal+plane&source=bl&ots=vMCrs369M1&sig=7Jp6LvU_4uf6vnv8xVhLETtRLWQ&hl=en&ei=OSdNTbvFEIfQcbr2vbkJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDEQ6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q&f=false"]http://books.google....epage&q&f=false[/url]

2/ UK secondary school..... failures for sure

[url="http://www.pearsonschoolsandfecolleges.co.uk/Secondary/PhysicalEducationAndSport/16plus/ALevelPEForAQA/Samples/SampleMaterial/AS_PE_AQA.pdf"]http://www.pearsonsc...l/AS_PE_AQA.pdf[/url]

3/more nut crackers out there than you thought

[size="2"]
[b]Search Results[/b]
[list][*]
[b][url="http://www.brianmac.co.uk/musrom.htm"]Range of Movement (ROM)[/url][/b]
[i]Sagittal Plane[/i] - a vertical plane which passes from front to rear dividing [b]...[/b] normal ranges of movement: Elevation, Depression, [i]Adduction[/i] and Abduction. [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]www.brianmac.co.uk/musrom.htm - [color="#767676"][url="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:XtuzND7b7MoJ:www.brianmac.co.uk/musrom.htm+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=safari&source=www.google.com"]Cached[/url] - [url="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=related:www.brianmac.co.uk/musrom.htm+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&ved=0CBgQHzAA"]Similar[/url][/color][/color][color="#4273DB"]►[/color][*]
[b][url="http://www.slideshare.net/ttfitness/strength-training-basics-part-1-presentation"]Strength Training Basics Part 1[/url][/b]
The Lats are responsible for frontal plane movements: Shoulder [i]Adduction[/i]. The rhomboids are responsible for [i]Sagittal plane[/i] movements: [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]www.slideshare.net/.../strength-training-basics-part-1-presentation - [color="#767676"][url="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:cVBTQwt2UT0J:www.slideshare.net/ttfitness/strength-training-basics-part-1-presentation+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=safari&source=www.google.com"]Cached[/url] - [url="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=related:www.slideshare.net/ttfitness/strength-training-basics-part-1-presentation+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&ved=0CB8QHzAB"]Similar[/url][/color][/color][*]
[b][url="http://www.teachpe.com/anatomy/movements.php"][i]Planes[/i] of motion and terms of movement[/url][/b]
The [i]frontal plane[/i] divides the body into front and back. Movements in this plane are sideways movements, called abduction and [i]adduction[/i] [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]www.teachpe.com › [url="http://www.google.com/url?url=http://www.teachpe.com/anatomy/index.php&rct=j&sa=X&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&ved=0CCUQ6QUoAA&q=adducting+on+sagittal+plane&usg=AFQjCNFEwsZO1UDMS4teVmWaKlbf0l8B8g"]Anatomy & Physiology[/url] - [color="#767676"][url="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Ee8ZRn6z_AsJ:www.teachpe.com/anatomy/movements.php+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=safari&source=www.google.com"]Cached[/url] - [url="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=related:www.teachpe.com/anatomy/movements.php+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&ved=0CCgQHzAC"]Similar[/url][/color][/color][*]
[b][url="http://davisplus.fadavis.com/starkey/Animations/animations.cfm?exercise=rom_31_14&title=Hands%20and%20Fingers%20(Condyloid%20Joints;%20Interphalangeal%20Joints%20are%20Hinge):%20Finger%20Abduction,%20Thumb%20Abduction,%20Finger%20Adduction,%20and%20Thumb%20Adduction"]Hands and Fingers (Condyloid Joints; Interphalangeal Joints are [b]...[/b][/url][/b]
Finger [i]Adduction[/i]—Movement occurs in the [i]frontal plane[/i] around an anteroposterior axis with the third metacarpal serving as the reference point. [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]davisplus.fadavis.com/.../animations.cfm?...%20Finger%20[b]Adduction[/b], %20and%20Thumb%20[b]Adduction[/b] - [color="#767676"][url="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:FBNGtgklKj0J:davisplus.fadavis.com/starkey/Animations/animations.cfm%3Fexercise%3Drom_31_14%26title%3DHands%2520and%2520Fingers%2520(Condyloid%2520Joints%3B%2520Interphalangeal%2520Joints%2520are%2520Hinge):%2520Finger%2520Abduction,%2520Thumb%2520Abduction,%2520Finger%2520Adduction,%2520and%2520Thumb%2520Adduction+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=safari&source=www.google.com"]Cached[/url][/color][/color][*]
[b][url="http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/3490-joint-movement-technology/"]Joint Movement Technology - Science Forums[/url][/b]
[color="#767676"]7 posts - 4 authors[/color]Flexion includes anteriorly directed [i]sagittal plane[/i] rotations of the head, trunk , [b]...[/b] Although abduction and [i]adduction[/i] are frontal plane movements, [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]www.scienceforums.net/topic/3490-joint-movement-technology/ - [color="#767676"][url="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:woalcuG7hFwJ:www.scienceforums.net/topic/3490-joint-movement-technology/+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=safari&source=www.google.com"]Cached[/url][/color][/color][*][color="#2200C1"][size="2"][b][PPT][/b][/size][/color]
[b][url="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDcQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fkirkham.tamu.edu%2F426-03%2520PLANES-AXES.PPT&rct=j&q=adducting%20on%20sagittal%20plane&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&usg=AFQjCNEkK8eFDTSFxgv2gr5BXVu3cc8AAA"][i]Planes[/i] and Axes[/url][/b]
[color="#767676"]File Format:[/color] Microsoft Powerpoint - [url="http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:OxrM8nwy68YJ:kirkham.tamu.edu/426-03%2520PLANES-AXES.PPT+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&hl=en&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgLAro1EtteIw6el8rvMGJ-pKHim6ueHNAw2nKeZe6l1lczme4ftzZRfUb_UcTGOw-KUNzo_ZMr5BiN14vaFzvbXQ_uvPUtrXnERKb6PPqvMtIgjN9rTt4kAPiJV3BHtVfbTUix&sig=AHIEtbSjE5gjPIFAverjAaGvpejcaRzjdw"]Quick View[/url]
Back flips and front flips are whole body [i]sagittal plane[/i] movements. [b]...[/b] Horizontal [i]adduction[/i]and abduction are segmental transverse plane movements. [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]kirkham.tamu.edu/426-03%20[b]PLANES[/b]-AXES.PPT - [color="#767676"][url="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=related:kirkham.tamu.edu/426-03%2520PLANES-AXES.PPT+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&ved=0CD0QHzAF"]Similar[/url][/color][/color][*][/list][/size]
the last one gives some nice pics as well

but lets get back to your new definition of flexion and extension on the coronal/ frontal plane, so its adduction and abduction relative on , well lets say relative to sagittal plane...... bewdiful stuff .... just a reminder

[color="#1C2837"][size="2"]...[b]apropos changing topics - both and coronal planes will always interact with each other because they are both vertical and because of freedom of the movement of various body parts. However, what I am interested in it is towards what central axis the changes in a motion occurs. This is what matters. When e.g. leg flexes in the knee joint changes happen towards the coronal plane axis, i.e. knee goes away from the axis opposite direction to the rest of the limb in proportions while in the sagittal plane you will have just right and left part of the same leg, no matter if flexed or extended the axis will look the same. But as I said, these are very deep details that should not affect any discussions about golf swing.[/b][/size][/color]
[color="#1C2837"][size="2"][b]
[/b][/size][/color]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]can you draw some pictures of this
[/size][/color][/size][color="#1C2837"] [/color]
[color="#1C2837"][size="2"][b]
[/b][/size][/color]

[williambenjamin11]

If something has abducted, doesn't that mean you need to go to surgery room? Lol Or if adducted, you're having cramps? Lol pardon me D, been trying to keep that joke for days.. Lol I think your conversations are not entertainment anymore, hence the joke.

Damnit I cannot see any relevaance or importaance in them in practical terms. If I'm wrong, please enlighten me..

D, can't these be summed up to: "during bs keep your weight/pressure in inner right foot, keep the right leg amgle and flex, then when you can't anymore turn for the ds?" In other words, what should the golfer do and think during the swing? If I'd think about adduction/abduction, spc, cor plane, ligaments, muscles, etc, I don't think I can swing Hogan. You get me D? Otherwise your theories is useless bro even granting correct..

Can you make a point by point swing to DOs from setup to finish? Like what 8i posted a few pages back? Thanks.

[JOEGOLFWRX]

the point is very simple D,
[b]
bad observation = bad science[/b]

plain and simple
[b]
bad science = opinion[/b]

so get off your moral high horse when others opinions differ.


what you have is a

pattern, and an opinion, backed up by bad science.

sound familiar, lol.


and please don't give me that macro-scale perspective-shift misdirection routine, automating hip linear transfer while adding in more bounce/rebound at the top is not a logical route to more consistent impact physics, and it ain't how hogan tackled it. your forgetting his 'grace', a direct result of his consistency solution.

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1296876365' post='2952614']yeah , no brains , those strange links like the biomedical bloke are often a bummer ...... check out these are ones

1/ bio blokes..... absolute nutjobs

[url="http://books.google.com/books?id=JsFvOy1w-1QC&pg=PT51&lpg=PT51&dq=adducting+on+sagittal+plane&source=bl&ots=vMCrs369M1&sig=7Jp6LvU_4uf6vnv8xVhLETtRLWQ&hl=en&ei=OSdNTbvFEIfQcbr2vbkJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CDEQ6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q&f=false"]http://books.google....epage&q&f=false[/url]

2/ UK secondary school..... failures for sure

[url="http://www.pearsonschoolsandfecolleges.co.uk/Secondary/PhysicalEducationAndSport/16plus/ALevelPEForAQA/Samples/SampleMaterial/AS_PE_AQA.pdf"]http://www.pearsonsc...l/AS_PE_AQA.pdf[/url]

3/more nut crackers out there than you thought

[size="2"]
[b]Search Results[/b]
[list][*]
[b][url="http://www.brianmac.co.uk/musrom.htm"]Range of Movement (ROM)[/url][/b]
[i]Sagittal Plane[/i] - a vertical plane which passes from front to rear dividing [b]...[/b] normal ranges of movement: Elevation, Depression, [i]Adduction[/i] and Abduction. [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]www.brianmac.co.uk/musrom.htm - [color="#767676"][url="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:XtuzND7b7MoJ:www.brianmac.co.uk/musrom.htm+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=safari&source=www.google.com"]Cached[/url] - [url="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=related:www.brianmac.co.uk/musrom.htm+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&ved=0CBgQHzAA"]Similar[/url][/color][/color][color="#4273DB"]►[/color][*]
[b][url="http://www.slideshare.net/ttfitness/strength-training-basics-part-1-presentation"]Strength Training Basics Part 1[/url][/b]
The Lats are responsible for frontal plane movements: Shoulder [i]Adduction[/i]. The rhomboids are responsible for [i]Sagittal plane[/i] movements: [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]www.slideshare.net/.../strength-training-basics-part-1-presentation - [color="#767676"][url="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:cVBTQwt2UT0J:www.slideshare.net/ttfitness/strength-training-basics-part-1-presentation+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=safari&source=www.google.com"]Cached[/url] - [url="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=related:www.slideshare.net/ttfitness/strength-training-basics-part-1-presentation+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&ved=0CB8QHzAB"]Similar[/url][/color][/color][*]
[b][url="http://www.teachpe.com/anatomy/movements.php"][i]Planes[/i] of motion and terms of movement[/url][/b]
The [i]frontal plane[/i] divides the body into front and back. Movements in this plane are sideways movements, called abduction and [i]adduction[/i] [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]www.teachpe.com › [url="http://www.google.com/url?url=http://www.teachpe.com/anatomy/index.php&rct=j&sa=X&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&ved=0CCUQ6QUoAA&q=adducting+on+sagittal+plane&usg=AFQjCNFEwsZO1UDMS4teVmWaKlbf0l8B8g"]Anatomy & Physiology[/url] - [color="#767676"][url="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Ee8ZRn6z_AsJ:www.teachpe.com/anatomy/movements.php+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=safari&source=www.google.com"]Cached[/url] - [url="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=related:www.teachpe.com/anatomy/movements.php+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&ved=0CCgQHzAC"]Similar[/url][/color][/color][*]
[b][url="http://davisplus.fadavis.com/starkey/Animations/animations.cfm?exercise=rom_31_14&title=Hands%20and%20Fingers%20(Condyloid%20Joints;%20Interphalangeal%20Joints%20are%20Hinge):%20Finger%20Abduction,%20Thumb%20Abduction,%20Finger%20Adduction,%20and%20Thumb%20Adduction"]Hands and Fingers (Condyloid Joints; Interphalangeal Joints are [b]...[/b][/url][/b]
Finger [i]Adduction[/i]—Movement occurs in the [i]frontal plane[/i] around an anteroposterior axis with the third metacarpal serving as the reference point. [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]davisplus.fadavis.com/.../animations.cfm?...%20Finger%20[b]Adduction[/b], %20and%20Thumb%20[b]Adduction[/b] - [color="#767676"][url="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:FBNGtgklKj0J:davisplus.fadavis.com/starkey/Animations/animations.cfm%3Fexercise%3Drom_31_14%26title%3DHands%2520and%2520Fingers%2520(Condyloid%2520Joints%3B%2520Interphalangeal%2520Joints%2520are%2520Hinge):%2520Finger%2520Abduction,%2520Thumb%2520Abduction,%2520Finger%2520Adduction,%2520and%2520Thumb%2520Adduction+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=safari&source=www.google.com"]Cached[/url][/color][/color][*]
[b][url="http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/3490-joint-movement-technology/"]Joint Movement Technology - Science Forums[/url][/b]
[color="#767676"]7 posts - 4 authors[/color]Flexion includes anteriorly directed [i]sagittal plane[/i] rotations of the head, trunk , [b]...[/b] Although abduction and [i]adduction[/i] are frontal plane movements, [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]www.scienceforums.net/topic/3490-joint-movement-technology/ - [color="#767676"][url="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:woalcuG7hFwJ:www.scienceforums.net/topic/3490-joint-movement-technology/+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=safari&source=www.google.com"]Cached[/url][/color][/color][*][color="#2200C1"][size="2"][b][PPT][/b][/size][/color]
[b][url="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDcQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fkirkham.tamu.edu%2F426-03%2520PLANES-AXES.PPT&rct=j&q=adducting%20on%20sagittal%20plane&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&usg=AFQjCNEkK8eFDTSFxgv2gr5BXVu3cc8AAA"][i]Planes[/i] and Axes[/url][/b]
[color="#767676"]File Format:[/color] Microsoft Powerpoint - [url="http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:OxrM8nwy68YJ:kirkham.tamu.edu/426-03%2520PLANES-AXES.PPT+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&hl=en&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgLAro1EtteIw6el8rvMGJ-pKHim6ueHNAw2nKeZe6l1lczme4ftzZRfUb_UcTGOw-KUNzo_ZMr5BiN14vaFzvbXQ_uvPUtrXnERKb6PPqvMtIgjN9rTt4kAPiJV3BHtVfbTUix&sig=AHIEtbSjE5gjPIFAverjAaGvpejcaRzjdw"]Quick View[/url]
Back flips and front flips are whole body [i]sagittal plane[/i] movements. [b]...[/b] Horizontal [i]adduction[/i]and abduction are segmental transverse plane movements. [b]...[/b]
[color="#767676"]kirkham.tamu.edu/426-03%20[b]PLANES[/b]-AXES.PPT - [color="#767676"][url="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=related:kirkham.tamu.edu/426-03%2520PLANES-AXES.PPT+adducting+on+sagittal+plane&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=MjpNTdu8HIbRceyd_fsF&ved=0CD0QHzAF"]Similar[/url][/color][/color][*][/list][/size]
the last one gives some nice pics as well

but lets get back to your new definition of flexion and extension on the coronal/ frontal plane, so its adduction and abduction relative on , well lets say relative to sagittal plane...... bewdiful stuff .... just a reminder

[color="#1C2837"][size="2"]...[b]apropos changing topics - both and coronal planes will always interact with each other because they are both vertical and because of freedom of the movement of various body parts. However, what I am interested in it is towards what central axis the changes in a motion occurs. This is what matters. When e.g. leg flexes in the knee joint changes happen towards the coronal plane axis, i.e. knee goes away from the axis opposite direction to the rest of the limb in proportions while in the sagittal plane you will have just right and left part of the same leg, no matter if flexed or extended the axis will look the same. But as I said, these are very deep details that should not affect any discussions about golf swing.[/b][/size][/color]
[color="#1C2837"][size="2"][b]
[/b][/size][/color]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]can you draw some pictures of this
[/size][/color][/size][color="#1C2837"] [/color]
[color="#1C2837"][size="2"][b]
[/b][/size][/color]
[/quote]

Good links and a good read. I cannot see nothing revolutionary in the material you presented.
Again, you need to finally understand the difference between watching a given motion happen in a plane and watching how a given motion relates to the axis of the plane.
Look here at series of Hogan photos with a coronal plane axis drawn:

http://biokineticgolfswing.blogspot.com/2010/12/balance-in-coronal-plane.html

Look e.g. at how his spine flexes when he squats. His butt goes more left while his head goes more right and their relations towards the coronal plane axis change. When you look at the same motion from the sagittal plane perspective (watching the same action FO) you will observe nothing interesting since the relation between his lead and rear sides of the body remain unchanged. Same with all actions - what matters is the impact on the axes ! Capisci ?

I really do not know how I can explain it better.


[quote name='williambenjamin11' timestamp='1296908940' post='2953124']
If something has abducted, doesn't that mean you need to go to surgery room? Lol Or if adducted, you're having cramps? Lol pardon me D, been trying to keep that joke for days.. Lol I think your conversations are not entertainment anymore, hence the joke.

Damnit I cannot see any relevaance or importaance in them in practical terms. If I'm wrong, please enlighten me..

D, can't these be summed up to: "during bs keep your weight/pressure in inner right foot, keep the right leg amgle and flex, then when you can't anymore turn for the ds?" In other words, what should the golfer do and think during the swing? If I'd think about adduction/abduction, spc, cor plane, ligaments, muscles, etc, I don't think I can swing Hogan. You get me D? Otherwise your theories is useless bro even granting correct..

Can you make a point by point swing to DOs from setup to finish? Like what 8i posted a few pages back? Thanks.
[/quote]

Well, I know that my posts are not entertaining. Maybe this gloomy period of time will change when my shadows finally foind another object of interests.

As per your request - although all is written on my sites, here you are, in short points:

1. Setup correctly with a diagonal stance principles and good alignment;
2. Form a correct grip;
3. Preset your rear side joints;
4. Start the motion with trigger compression;
5. Don't use any conscious thoughts.

It's a setup-dependent motion, as Chris beautifully once said. Every conscious thoughta are left before the motion starts. The only one exception is the trigger of the motion. The rest should just care for itself forming a good swing motion rthat would use ground forces, swing from the ground up, automatic sequential transition and unintentional release of the kinetic chain.



[quote name='JOEGOLFWRX' timestamp='1296921435' post='2953425']
the point is very simple D,
[b]
bad observation = bad science[/b]

plain and simple
[b]
bad science = opinion[/b]

so get off your moral high horse when others opinions differ.


what you have is a

pattern, and an opinion, backed up by bad science.

sound familiar, lol.


and please don't give me that macro-scale perspective-shift misdirection routine, automating hip linear transfer while adding in more bounce/rebound at the top is not a logical route to more consistent impact physics, and it ain't how hogan tackled it. your forgetting his 'grace', a direct result of his consistency solution.
[/quote]

How you don't understand anyhing, lol. Or better said, lol, how superbly you pretend to be resistant to my arguments, lol.

Cheers, lol.

[eightiron]

[color=#1C2837][size=2]
Good links and a good read. I cannot see nothing revolutionary in the material you presented.
Again, you need to finally understand the difference between watching a given motion happen in a plane and watching how a given motion relates to the axis of the plane.
Look here at series of Hogan photos with a coronal plane axis drawn:

[url="http://biokineticgolfswing.blogspot.com/2010/12/balance-in-coronal-plane.html"]http://biokineticgol...onal-plane.html[/url]

Look e.g. at how his spine flexes when he squats. His butt goes more left while his head goes more right and their relations towards the coronal plane axis change. When you look at the same motion from the sagittal plane perspective (watching the same action FO) you will observe nothing interesting since the relation between his lead and rear sides of the body remain unchanged. Same with all actions - what matters is the impact on the axes ! Capisc[/size][/color]
[color=#1C2837][size=2]
[/size][/color]
[color=#1C2837][size=2]DJ, [/size][/color]
[color=#1C2837][size=2]
[/size][/color]
[color=#1C2837][size=2]its not revolutionary its science and basic bio-mech , I totally get what you are saying about the motion and the axis of the plane, but I see that line drawn as baloney . School me on how you think the spine is flexing , give me the new bio-mech definition of that picture, and next how the coronal plane line you drew remains in a constant fixed position during the swing. [/size][/color]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]
[/size][/color][/size]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]Don't the joints all have individual axis , so by your statement of what matters is the impact on the axes ( plural ) then why are some joints part of the big picture but other joints like right elbow , shoulder are just non entities in your hogan theory. [/size][/color][/size]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]
[/size][/color][/size]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]its seems strange you don't want to check out those real experts , like the one you thought needed your schooling on ground forces , when he actually invented gadgets , 3-D 6 deg of freedom gear etc to measure all [/size][/color][/size]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]this stuff..... what have you got hidden in the basement thats better than that lol[/size][/color][/size]

[williambenjamin11]

D, not just your posts per se. I mean the back and forth conversations of the 3 of you, well 4 of us.. lol

Your points are too elementary D. Can you be more detailed and useful?

[williambenjamin11]

D, I mean, how do you do the takeaway, bs, trans, ds.. I find if I just follow point 5, I can't swing.. you know what I mean D. Let's be practical here. Please elaborate.

[JOEGOLFWRX]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1296928270' post='2953623']
How you don't understand anyhing, lol. Or better said, lol, how superbly you pretend to be resistant to my arguments, lol.

Cheers, lol.
[/quote]


well at least we can both laugh about it, lol.

but seriously D, this is basic stuff, i'm not feigning resistance to your arguments, they are a time consuming miss-direction. if you think i'm going to take your hand on the merry dance of avoidance, contradictions, and perspective shifts your wrong.

it took 3 pages of waffle to get you to say a 'no and a 'yes' that i knew the answer to anyways and i knew ultimately you'd prefer them to be a 'yes' and a 'no'. i could ask you another question that i know would get an immediate 'yes', and some comment about how great a question it was and how smart i am.

what im talking about is the basic foundation of science and logic, from Aristotle to Einstein, even your hero Newton had his spake [i]"We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are [b]both true and sufficient to explain their appearances[/b]."[/i]

you are breaking the scientific method at step 1, observation.

you have videos showing X which instruct us to observe Y.

you don't have a theory, you have multiple separate hypothesis, from big picture macro, to small picture micro.

some of the micro hypothesis only describing swing components not the full swing. but you try to infer correctness of micro by proving the correctness of macro.

[b]huge leaps of logic[/b].

eg
here is my big picture theory 'you make the club hit the ball'.
correct ? yes. useful description, no.
so i need a more micro theory for the explanation to be of use, but unless the micro theory stands up on its own right when tested by the scientific method, then it is bad science. i cant simply say 'as we already know from the big picture' i'm right so therefore i'm right here also', lol.

science isn't about reputation and trust, it's about solid information separated from identity.

each separate hypothesis needs to be observable, repeatable, predictable. which includes your biggest hypothesis that the areas you identify to be the areas responsible for consistency in golf are indeed the areas that govern it and also that these are the areas that separated hogan from the rest.


no offense, but if hogan is so close to perfection how come your so far from hogan, how come there are so many people in between who don't share your prescriptions.

if hogan dropped his rear foot back 10 inches and turned it in we probably wouldn't be here bickering about him because he probably would of remained a croupier to feed his family.

and i only mentioned the foot because everyone knows where their foot is and it doesn't move much, all this stuff is transferable to much more complex areas, areas where the circular debates can quickly whirl into a tornado.

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='eightiron' timestamp='1296948122' post='2954291'][color=#1C2837][size=2]DJ, [/size][/color]
[color=#1C2837][size=2]
[/size][/color]
[color=#1C2837][size=2]its not revolutionary its science and basic bio-mech , I totally get what you are saying about the motion and the axis of the plane, but I see that line drawn as baloney . School me on how you think the spine is flexing , give me the new bio-mech definition of that picture, and next how the coronal plane line you drew remains in a constant fixed position during the swing. [/size][/color]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]
[/size][/color][/size]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]Don't the joints all have individual axis , so by your statement of what matters is the impact on the axes ( plural ) then why are some joints part of the big picture but other joints like right elbow , shoulder are just non entities in your hogan theory. [/size][/color][/size]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]
[/size][/color][/size]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]its seems strange you don't want to check out those real experts , like the one you thought needed your schooling on ground forces , when he actually invented gadgets , 3-D 6 deg of freedom gear etc to measure all [/size][/color][/size]
[size="3"][color="#1C2837"][size=2]this stuff..... what have you got hidden in the basement thats better than that lol[/size][/color][/size]
[/quote]

I never said my work is flawless, never said I own the correct explanation of Hogan's swing; moreover, I often underline that some important issues are beyond my perception or ability of explanation. Some issues must be presented the way people understand the whole concept (like e.g. the CP plane/axis & balance that you criticized so much).
You may laugh at my "basement", but at least I am trying to make something creative that helps people; OTOH, tell me one thing - sincerely - do you really think an average golfer has ever seen a positive impact of such experts like you quote on golf instruction ? I guess not. Nobody cares about weekend hackers who can play once a month and cannot afford lessons or invest time for training. Think about it.


[quote name='JOEGOLFWRX' timestamp='1296956271' post='2954566']
but seriously D, this is basic stuff, i'm not feigning resistance to your arguments, they are a time consuming miss-direction. if you think i'm going to take your hand on the merry dance of avoidance, contradictions, and perspective shifts your wrong.

it took 3 pages of waffle to get you to say a 'no and a 'yes' that i knew the answer to anyways and i knew ultimately you'd prefer them to be a 'yes' and a 'no'. i could ask you another question that i know would get an immediate 'yes', and some comment about how great a question it was and how smart i am.

what im talking about is the basic foundation of science and logic, from Aristotle to Einstein, even your hero Newton had his spake [i]"We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are [b]both true and sufficient to explain their appearances[/b]."[/i]

you are breaking the scientific method at step 1, observation.

you have videos showing X which instruct us to observe Y.

you don't have a theory, you have multiple separate hypothesis, from big picture macro, to small picture micro.

some of the micro hypothesis only describing swing components not the full swing. but you try to infer correctness of micro by proving the correctness of macro.

[b]huge leaps of logic[/b].

eg
here is my big picture theory 'you make the club hit the ball'.
correct ? yes. useful description, no.
so i need a more micro theory for the explanation to be of use, but unless the micro theory stands up on its own right when tested by the scientific method, then it is bad science. i cant simply say 'as we already know from the big picture' i'm right so therefore i'm right here also', lol.

science isn't about reputation and trust, it's about solid information separated from identity.

each separate hypothesis needs to be observable, repeatable, predictable. which includes your biggest hypothesis that the areas you identify to be the areas responsible for consistency in golf are indeed the areas that govern it and also that these are the areas that separated hogan from the rest.


no offense, but if hogan is so close to perfection how come your so far from hogan, how come there are so many people in between who don't share your prescriptions.

if hogan dropped his rear foot back 10 inches and turned it in we probably wouldn't be here bickering about him because he probably would of remained a croupier to feed his family.

and i only mentioned the foot because everyone knows where their foot is and it doesn't move much, all this stuff is transferable to much more complex areas, areas where the circular debates can quickly whirl into a tornado.
[/quote]

I have underlined many times that my researches are amateur and that I cannot afford to make them more professional. Therefore, putting me on the same level as professional scientists and trying to sneer at what I differ from them is absurd.

Apropos, I have been told another time how I am far from Hogan's motion while I dared to show that my pelvis area motion principles are rather close to Hogan's. But if it comes to showing the same thing from people like you, you prefer to put your head into the sand, like an ostrich. I could treat your critics seriously [b]if you show me a better hips area motion belonging to a weekend hacker, like I am.[/b] There we would have a good comparison point.

Cheers

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='williambenjamin11' timestamp='1296953465' post='2954454']
Your points are too elementary D. Can you be more detailed and useful?

D, I mean, how do you do the takeaway, bs, trans, ds.. I find if I just follow point 5, I can't swing.. you know what I mean D. Let's be practical here. Please elaborate.
[/quote]

Isn't it you who asked for a basic version ? The details are described on my sites.

I do not have much more to elaborate. The trigger compression builds initial momentum and enhances the rear side to use this inertia to lead the motion from the ground up at a square angle to the spine. The rest is just a cascade of events ocurring one after another, i.e. sequential transition and the downswing utilizing momentum that's built during changing the orientation of the motion. Providing everything at setup is made correctly the rest is just a no-brainer that probably will not drive a hacker at low 70-ies but surely let him play below 90 very soon and easily.

Cheers

[JOEGOLFWRX]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1297019088' post='2956031']
I have underlined many times that my researches are amateur and that I cannot afford to make them more professional. [b]Therefore, putting me on the same level as professional scientists and trying to sneer at what I differ from them is absurd.[/b]

Apropos, I have been told another time how I am far from Hogan's motion while I dared to show that my pelvis area motion principles are rather close to Hogan's. But if it comes to showing the same thing from people like you, you prefer to put your head into the sand, like an ostrich. I could treat your critics seriously if you show me a better hips area motion belonging to a weekend hacker, like I am. There we would have a good comparison point.

Cheers
[/quote]

other peoples hip area motion are irrelevant, we could all be paralyzed and it wouldn't change a thing. look at this video on the mathematics of golf.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6v9ib-dOtg&feature=player_embedded

the professor doesn't even play golf, he doesn't have to if he follows the scientific method.

and i don't know how anyone can claim to have hip area motion like hogan, when any number of anatomical conscious or unconscious movements or presets, either universal or shot dependent, could be going on under his huge pants. scientifically, observation is most difficult.

for arguments sake let's pretend you have hogans hips, exactly, no difference, then from this hypothetical stand point the more distal we move from the hips the more observably different your pattern and prescriptions are to hogans. scientifically, the distal differences are easier to observe.

[b]it is not absurd[/b] to expect you to observe objectively what can be easily observed without expensive machinery.

at its most basic low level observation you prescribe standing more closed and play more deliberate punch, how you manage to do both with hogan-esque hips is a beyond me.

anyways, one of your hypothesis is, that pitch and punch with slap-hinge are the same in real world application, too simplex, its like all that circle stuff, lol. imo, pitch [b]might allow[/b] you to vary scratch golf variables like 'parametric acceleration' easier with similar pivots and with less adjustment to setup leading to more efficient LSI (mentioned earlier).

and i haven't got a 'pitch fetish', before you get all emotional, i think some guys are best on sp punch, at least until good pitch info becomes widely available.

[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1297020018' post='2956067']Providing everything at setup is made correctly the rest is just a no-brainer that probably will not drive a hacker at [b]low 70-ies[/b] but surely let him play below 90 very soon and easily.

Cheers
[/quote]

what adjustments would you make to break 70 consistently, i realize it opposes automation to prioritize chain-action components but if you had a hierarchy what might it be, a body part, or motion or a part of the swing ? personally i work on either side of both impact and transition and stick a flail in between.

how does this kind of research effect your thoughts, summary of different papers;
[url="http://baebi-huus.ch.host.setup.ch/koni/golf.pdf"]http://baebi-huus.ch.host.setup.ch/koni/golf.pdf[/url]
or do you look at this kind of stuff ?

[TeeAce]

[quote name='JOEGOLFWRX' timestamp='1297043604' post='2956772']
[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1297019088' post='2956031']
I have underlined many times that my researches are amateur and that I cannot afford to make them more professional. [b]Therefore, putting me on the same level as professional scientists and trying to sneer at what I differ from them is absurd.[/b]

Apropos, I have been told another time how I am far from Hogan's motion while I dared to show that my pelvis area motion principles are rather close to Hogan's. But if it comes to showing the same thing from people like you, you prefer to put your head into the sand, like an ostrich. I could treat your critics seriously if you show me a better hips area motion belonging to a weekend hacker, like I am. There we would have a good comparison point.

Cheers
[/quote]

other peoples hip area motion are irrelevant, we could all be paralyzed and it wouldn't change a thing. look at this video on the mathematics of golf.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6v9ib-dOtg&feature=player_embedded

the professor doesn't even play golf, he doesn't have to if he follows the scientific method.

and i don't know how anyone can claim to have hip area motion like hogan, when any number of anatomical conscious or unconscious movements or presets, either universal or shot dependent, could be going on under his huge pants. scientifically, observation is most difficult.

for arguments sake let's pretend you have hogans hips, exactly, no difference, then from this hypothetical stand point the more distal we move from the hips the more observably different your pattern and prescriptions are to hogans. scientifically, the distal differences are easier to observe.

[b]it is not absurd[/b] to expect you to observe objectively what can be easily observed without expensive machinery.

at its most basic low level observation you prescribe standing more closed and play more deliberate punch, how you manage to do both with hogan-esque hips is a beyond me.

anyways, one of your hypothesis is, that pitch and punch with slap-hinge are the same in real world application, too simplex, its like all that circle stuff, lol. imo, pitch [b]might allow[/b] you to vary scratch golf variables like 'parametric acceleration' easier with similar pivots and with less adjustment to setup leading to more efficient LSI (mentioned earlier).

and i haven't got a 'pitch fetish', before you get all emotional, i think some guys are best on sp punch, at least until good pitch info becomes widely available.

[quote name='Dariusz J.' timestamp='1297020018' post='2956067']Providing everything at setup is made correctly the rest is just a no-brainer that probably will not drive a hacker at [b]low 70-ies[/b] but surely let him play below 90 very soon and easily.

Cheers
[/quote]

what adjustments would you make to break 70 consistently, i realize it opposes automation to prioritize chain-action components but if you had a hierarchy what might it be, a body part, or motion or a part of the swing ? personally i work on either side of both impact and transition and stick a flail in between.

how does this kind of research effect your thoughts, summary of different papers;
[url="http://baebi-huus.ch.host.setup.ch/koni/golf.pdf"]http://baebi-huus.ch.host.setup.ch/koni/golf.pdf[/url]
or do you look at this kind of stuff ?
[/quote]

Can't stop wondering how even scientists on that level are still living in double pendulum world and in 2 dimension swing. For example driver head is traveling about 6 feet in 0.01 seconds in "depth direction" so it makes almost 10 feet around the vertical axis on that time.

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='JOEGOLFWRX' timestamp='1297043604' post='2956772']
other peoples hip area motion are irrelevant, we could all be paralyzed and it wouldn't change a thing. [/quote]

Wrong. The ultimate verification of a theory one believes/applies is always practice. If you cannot achieve results that a theory you believe in prescribes it means that this theory sucks. [b]This is the most probable reason why you (and people like you) are afraid to present a theory alongside with attempts to use the theory in practice.[/b] You can say as eloquent things as you can and present as abstract vids as you can but you won't change my way of thinking. Sorry, mate.

[quote]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6v9ib-dOtg&feature=player_embedded

the professor doesn't even play golf, he doesn't have to if he follows the scientific method.[/quote]

Yes, but the professor's goal is only to depict what happens in the swing motion in detail using scientific values (exactly as in Jorgensen's or this guy you presented below - Penner's case). [b]He knows very well that he is of no direct help to golfers[/b] since the missing part is to explain how to apply the principles of the optimal motion (no matter if the goal is to maximize CHS or coefficient of repeatability).


[quote]
and i don't know how anyone can claim to have hip area motion like hogan, when any number of anatomical conscious or unconscious movements or presets, either universal or shot dependent, could be going on under his huge pants. scientifically, observation is most difficult.[/quote]

Again, I never said my hip motion is the same. I said the macroscale biokinetic principles are the same. I agree that observation is not easy and I know very well that my observations may be misguided here and there, especially in microscale.

[quote]
for arguments sake let's pretend you have hogans hips, exactly, no difference, then from this hypothetical stand point the more distal we move from the hips the more observably different your pattern and prescriptions are to hogans. scientifically, the distal differences are easier to observe.
at its most basic low level observation you prescribe standing more closed and play more deliberate punch, how you manage to do both with hogan-esque hips is a beyond me. [/quote]

It may be beyond yourself since you follow a methods of recognizing only white and black colours while omitting all grey shades in between.

[quote]
anyways, one of your hypothesis is, that pitch and punch with slap-hinge are the same in real world application, too simplex, its like all that circle stuff, lol. imo, pitch [b]might allow[/b] you to vary scratch golf variables like 'parametric acceleration' easier with similar pivots and with less adjustment to setup leading to more efficient LSI (mentioned earlier).
and i haven't got a 'pitch fetish', before you get all emotional, i think some guys are best on sp punch, at least until good pitch info becomes widely available. [/quote]

I am waiting for this good info regarging pitch elbow with anxiety then. As I always say, making "the Hogan's disorder" available for people will be one of the most important date in history of golf instruction. But please in advance - spare me with infos like that already TGM or MORAD people (or whomever) already know how to achieve this, lol. Pitch elbow concept they present is totally different an action.

[quote]what adjustments would you make to break 70 consistently, i realize it opposes automation to prioritize chain-action components but if you had a hierarchy what might it be, a body part, or motion or a part of the swing ? personally i work on either side of both impact and transition and stick a flail in between.
[/quote]

I do not know since it is not a sphere I am capable to offer something. Most probably either I'd just advice such a great player to use his/her instincts or advice them to find a great real microscale instructor.

Cheers

[eightiron]

D,

Give us your rub down on the Morad swing and the pitch elbow

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmZFvkGFM4U

[Dariusz J.]

The chances that MORAD is the best golf swing theory until today are very huge. This is practically the only one theory that cares for anatomy and its impact on the motion to a big degree. Too bad that it is secret and O'Grady stubbornly rejects to publish the data of his researches openly.
As regards pitch elbow concept comparing to Hogan's elbow there are crucial differences. They are very visible when watching O'Grady's motion that you brought. In short (since we have discussed it ad nauseum here), just to remind - Hogan's rear elbow moves forward till the biolimit then stalls at the rear hip until coming into impact zone and just moves alongside with body pivot (and no its own motion in relation to the body); Mac's elbow moves forward and continue to move in relation to his body all the time until entering the impact zone ending with having it too much in the front of the hip/body.- no stalling here = no fixing the motion of the rear elbow to the main body movement.

I do not need to stress how big impact on repeatability and consistency could Hogan's supreme way has over traditional "pitch elbow" concept. The rule is simple - the sooner one is able to subdue the motion of distal limbs to the body movement - the better. And the way of achieving it is also simple to describe but impossible to achieve for everybody except Hogan until now - to ensure the rear elbow early motion down and forward so big that it can stall and not cause being stuck with the elbow to much behind the rear hip joint.

The problem of the so called "punch elbow" is exactly opposite - it leads to fixing its motion to the pivot but it does not ensure proper release queue of kinetic chain and, therefore, robs energy and calls for compensations.

This is what I see.

Cheers