Yes for sure......I was talking Pivot Strokes.

Line not Circular.
 

7-23 par. 4

"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 a Line Delivery Path but does not require it."

Homer Kelley excluded Non-Pivot strokes for par. 3 ( chips etc.)

HB

Interpretation: Homer is saying that when using the TSP with a Straight Line Delivery Path, a Player can "Zero out" the #3 Accumulator by Gripping the Shaft in the Cup of the Left Hand. Homer is claiming that this procedure is unavailable to Elbow Plane users for obvious reasons.

He doesn't preclude the Procedure when using "Circle Path" Delivery and we know that Circle Path is available to both TSP and Elbow Plane users during non-Pivot Strokes. So, the subject of this Paragraph is about the use of this particular "Zero-ing out" Procedure being viable for TSP users and it's not being viable for Elbow Plane users.

I actually thought this paragraph was about the straight line delivery path.

My good neighbor,

I thank you for commenting,

BUT

I am not with you on your translation. Perhaps, we shall let this thread age and receive other input for a few more days.


The Bear

Further Thought
 

Adding to this thread on 7-23 par. #3 , I would include for thought, 7-13 Par #2;

Homer Kelley wrote (6th edition)

7-13,par.#2

“ When the Shoulder moves on the same Downstroke Plane as the Hands it provides its greatest suppurt and its best guidance to the Stroke.”


As an sub-comment I note that Homer Kelley does not associate TSP. It may be mentioned, implied or assumed for some procedures but, although, it may be my oversight, I have not found it from HK.

The Bear

Lets continue to explore!
 

If Homer Kelley favored the TSP then why would he say the angled path with a true elbow plane has an advantage?

"But the latter [angled path] is a very natural movement and has the advantage of the true Elbow Plane through impact." 7-23 paragraphy #3

Does anyone see in 7-13 paragraph #2 the same ideas as in the hogan shoulder thread linked below??

7-13,par.#2 “ When the Shoulder moves on the same Downstroke Plane as the Hands it provides its greatest suppurt and its best guidance to the Stroke.”

Hogan shoulder thread link below.

http://www.lynnblakegolf.com/forum/thread7856.html

The Bear

The "transition" question
 

EXTENDING THE QUESTION:

Assuming arguendo –(That is my “bullet proof” vest) , that a golfer chooses a stroke pattern which starts at TSP location at top and transitions to EP for impact.

What are the available/best transition ALIGNMENTS?
Lay-off the shaft at start down ( Sergio, Hogan)?
Sweeping “D” (Stricker)?
Other- like between #2 and #3 release as shaft passes throug parallel to the PL?

What are the implications and effect of the 3rd dimension off plane/under plane forces of the transition?

and, what are the available COMPENSATIONS for this pattern??

This is a Machine and can/should be analyzed as a machine 1-L and 1-L-21??

HB

A lot, I think, depends on how the Player Aligns the Shaft at Start-Down. Some Align to the Elbow Plane while others remain more Vertical and expect to transition the Shaft to the Elbow Plane at Release.

One solution that all Players who shift to the Elbow Plane can adopt is "Double Wrist Action". Then, the Shaft can remain On-Plane without Right Shoulder alignment support and the Right Forearm can return to the Angle of Approach for Impact.

Keep in mind that while it is more common to shift from a TSP to an Elbow Plane, Homer did portray a zero shift along a (low) TSP , (high) Elbow Plane combo.....a single Plane Angle that meets both definitions. Its perhaps a little awkward and rare but .....just saying.


Not sure what you mean by "transition" but this comes to mind assuming you mean the transition from one plane angle to another per your first sentence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NeizRf3JZY

The Plane is one singular Plane but it shifts angles, tilts up and down in various manners. Meaning you can for sure ride it with your Clubshaft and be Plane compliant, despite the various shifts up and down. No problem....but it's takes some training of course. You are overriding pure CF in doing this to my mind. Manipulating. Making it harder to find your Delivery Line until you perfect the shifts.


A bent plane line. A non circular clubhead orbit that will tend to lose speed , direction and burn up upon reentering the earths atmosphere. Risking a total system failure.

Booster rockets. Anything you can muster to manipulate or muscle your way back on course. All is not necessarily lost but you are intervening to correct things and therefore have assembled an unnecessarily complicated , energy inefficient machine that is prone to inconsistencies, timing problems and breakdown to varying degrees. Well, as compared to a pure CF , zero shift model theoretically speaking of course....not saying there arent master manipulators out there.


Couldnt agree more HB. It occurs to me that the Machine of 1-L (the underlying geometry of golf) has far more than the mere 21 listed implications. Homer just listed the greatest hits maybe? He could have kept going with that list.


PS I still think Homer's definitions and opinions on things evolved slightly over the course of the various editions and that not all of these revisions had the necessary accompanying weeding out of corresponding text in other parts of the book. I could be wrong of course, I often am.