why straight?

[Yoda]

Ok. To be more clear, I should have said impact separation would be on the target line. Fair enough.

The reality is that the impact separation line is not parallel to the low point plane line.

Here are a couple pics:





It's quite possible that I am using the phrase plane line incorrectly. If the ball is struck before low point under all the conditions you mentioned, the direction of the club into the ball is to the right of the low point plane every time.

Hopefully the pictures help and if my use of terminology is incorrect, I do apologize.

Thanks for your drawing. Despite your statement that "the Clubhead is still moving downward, outward and forward" through Impact -- words I have lived by for many years and which led me to believe we referring to the same geometrical model -- it is now evident that we're talking 'apples and oranges'.

As you have indicated, we have an entirely different conception of the term 'Plane Line'. Until we come to grips with that, we have no business attempting to differentiate Impact versus Low Point Plane Lines, much less Square versus Open or Closed Plane Lines.

To wit:

You have illustrated an Open-Open Plane Line (10-5-D). Not being familiar with your model and terminology, I assumed a Square Plane Line (10-5-A), i.e., toward the Target. With the Clubface aligned per 2-J-1, this will produce a "Push" Line of Flight (see Photo 10-5-D and description in 11-5-D). Hence, the "straight shot" result you referred to in your post. But, in reality, it is a 'Pushed' Shot to the right of the Open Impact Plane Line (and its parallel Low Point Plane Line).

I guess all I can do here is ask you to define what you mean by "Low Point Plane Line"? Then, maybe we will be better able to understand one another.

Here's the way it looks in my world:

In every geometrically correct Stroke, the Clubhead Path from Impact to Low Point -- assuming Impact occurs prior to Low Point -- is 'Inside-Out' (relative to the Impact Plane Line). This is true even with an 'Outside-In' Stroke (Plane Line Open to the Target Line) because Impact and Low Point are on the same Plane and that Plane is Inclined. It matters not how the Base Line (Plane Line) of the Plane intersects the Target Line, i.e., Square, Open or Closed.

Then, because the Low Point Plane Line (tangent to the Circle) is Down Plane from the parallel Impact Plane Line (chord to the Circle), it must always remain 'outside' it, never 'inside it (again, assuming a geometrically correct Stroke, even when that Stroke is 'Outside-In'). Therefore, with a Square Impact Plane Line, the likewise Square Low Point Plane Line can never point "left of the target".

So, summarizing the procedure I thought we were dealing with, namely:

1. A Square Impact Plane Line, i.e., one that is aligned to the Target;

2. A ball positioned on that Impact Plane Line and prior to Low Point (and thus struck on the Downstroke);

3. A parallel Low Point Plane Line located, by definition, Down Plane from the Impact Plane Line; then . . .

The Low Point Plane Line can never point left of the Target Line.

[nevercrosses]

Thanks for your drawing. Despite your statement that "the Clubhead is still moving downward, outward and forward" through Impact -- words I have lived by for many years and which led me to believe we referring to the same geometrical model -- it is now evident that we're talking 'apples and oranges'.

As you have indicated, we have an entirely different conception of the term 'Plane Line'. Until we come to grips with that, we have no business attempting to differentiate Impact versus Low Point Plane Lines, much less Square versus Open or Closed Plane Lines.

To wit:

You have illustrated an Open-Open Plane Line (10-5-D). Not being familiar with your model and terminology, I assumed a Square Plane Line (10-5-A), i.e., toward the Target. With the Clubface aligned per 2-J-1, this will produce a "Push" Line of Flight (see Photo 10-5-D and description in 11-5-D). Hence, the "straight shot" result you referred to in your post. But, in reality, it is a 'Pushed' Shot to the right of the Open Impact Plane Line (and its parallel Low Point Plane Line).

I guess all I can do here is ask you to define what you mean by "Low Point Plane Line"? Then, maybe we will be better able to understand one another.

Here's the way it looks in my world:

In every geometrically correct Stroke, the Clubhead Path from Impact to Low Point -- assuming Impact occurs prior to Low Point -- is 'Inside-Out' (relative to the Impact Plane Line). This is true even with an 'Outside-In' Stroke (Plane Line Open to the Target Line) because Impact and Low Point are on the same Plane and that Plane is Inclined. It matters not how the Base Line (Plane Line) of the Plane intersects the Target Line, i.e., Square, Open or Closed.

Then, because the Low Point Plane Line (tangent to the Circle) is Down Plane from the parallel Impact Plane Line (chord to the Circle), it must always remain 'outside' it, never 'inside it (again, assuming a geometrically correct Stroke, even when that Stroke is 'Outside-In'). Therefore, with a Square Impact Plane Line, the likewise Square Low Point Plane Line can never point "left of the target".

So, summarizing the procedure I thought we were dealing with, namely:

1. A Square Impact Plane Line, i.e., one that is aligned to the Target;

2. A ball positioned on that Impact Plane Line and prior to Low Point (and thus struck on the Downstroke);

3. A parallel Low Point Plane Line located, by definition, Down Plane from the Impact Plane Line; then . . .

The Low Point Plane Line can never point left of the Target Line.

I can not disagree with anything above that you have mentioned. Excellently stated and quite clear as I sift through my book (which is already coming apart).

My concern is, why should the impact plane line be a chord of the circle and not tangent to the circle and any chord that connects impact and low point is not parallel to a tangent of the circle from the same low point. This is true by definition of what a chord is.

A chord is "A line that links two points on a circle or curve only covering the inside of the circle."

for example:



Let's look at a secant because it helps with visualization.

A secant is, "A line that intersects a curve or circle at two points that extends to infinity." Basically, it's a chord but the line extend outside the circle to infinity.



and a tangent:

It "A line that contacts an arc or circle at only one point."




I define low point plane line as the line tangent to the point where low point occurs. I would also define the impact plane line using the same definition (a line tangent to the point where impact occurs).

Why would one plane line have a different definition than the other?

The only way to get a chord/secant parallel to a tangent is to move the point of low point. If one of the point remains constant, you will never get a chord/secant parallel to a tangent.

Consider the following (I'll use secants because it helps the viewer with visualization. Remember, secants are chords of the circle but with the lines extended to infinity)

In each picture, point (P) remains constant and point (Q) moves closer to it. Point (P) represents low point and point (Q) represents impact.






Clearly you can see that at no point is any chord parallel to the low point plane line. When (P) and (Q) are the same point then it becomes a tagent.

Can I move point (P) and make a parallel chord? Sure.

But why would I?

What would be the reason to justify that?

Thanks for your consideration.

[Yoda]

I can not disagree with anything above that you have mentioned. Excellently stated and quite clear as I sift through my book (which is already coming apart).

My concern is, why should the impact plane line be a chord of the circle and not tangent to the circle and any chord that connects impact and low point is not parallel to a tangent of the circle from the same low point. This is true by definition of what a chord is.

I define low point plane line as the line tangent to the point where low point occurs. I would also define the impact plane line using the same definition (a line tangent to the point where impact occurs).

Why would one plane line have a different definition than the other?

Clearly you can see that at no point is any chord parallel to the low point plane line. When (P) and (Q) are the same point then it becomes a tagent.

Can I move point (P) and make a parallel chord? Sure.

But why would I?

What would be the reason to justify that?

Because, except during a Low Point Impact, the Ball does not leave the Circle on an Impact Tangent (a line perpendicular to the radius and necessarily to the right of Target when the Ball is Up Plane from Low Point). Instead, because of the Golf Club's design (Hooked Face) it leaves the Circle on an Impact Chord (Impact Plane Line pointing toward the Target).

[nevercrosses]

Because, except during a Low Point Impact, the Ball does not leave the Circle on an Impact Tangent (a line perpendicular to the radius and necessarily to the right of Target when the Ball is Up Plane from Low Point). Instead, because of the Golf Club's design (Hooked Face) it leaves the Circle on an Impact Chord (Impact Plane Line pointing toward the Target).

Ok Great. So am I understanding correctly that the impact plane line is of the ball and not the club head?

Seems strange. Hopefully, I'm misunderstanding.

[gmbtempe]

What is confusing to me is looking at the bottom two circles from nevercrosses, and knowing that a ball struck before low point is going to produce an inside out path given an on plane swing from a square-square setup, now factor in a hooked face as stated.........wouldn't this produce one nasty hook?

[12 piece bucket]

Ok Great. So am I understanding correctly that the impact plane line is of the ball and not the club head?

Seems strange. Hopefully, I'm misunderstanding.

ABSOLUTELY . . . that is what is impacted no? The ball would always be on the impact plane line . . . low point plane line and impact plane line get farther apart as you move the ball more back. as a result the angle of approach (and angle of attack in 3D) become more acute with angle of approach being defined as the line that connects impact point and low point. . . low point plane line and impact plane line would be the same if the ball is struck at low point . . . this is the only time impact would result in a tangent . . . impact plane line would be above the low point plane line if the ball were struck after low point . . . but still be a chord and not tangent.

[nevercrosses]

Because, except during a Low Point Impact, the Ball does not leave the Circle on an Impact Tangent (a line perpendicular to the radius and necessarily to the right of Target when the Ball is Up Plane from Low Point). Instead, because of the Golf Club's design (Hooked Face) it leaves the Circle on an Impact Chord (Impact Plane Line pointing toward the Target).

Thank you for bringing my lack of respect and manners to my attention. I am truly grateful for any input received here from you and others that comment on my questions.

Thank You.

[nevercrosses]

ABSOLUTELY . . . that is what is impacted no? The ball would always be on the impact plane line . . . low point plane line and impact plane line get farther apart as you move the ball more back. as a result the angle of approach (and angle of attack in 3D) become more acute with angle of approach being defined as the line that connects impact point and low point. . . low point plane line and impact plane line would be the same if the ball is struck at low point . . . this is the only time impact would result in a tangent . . . impact plane line would be above the low point plane line if the ball were struck after low point . . . but still be a chord and not tangent.

Thanks for that 12 piece.

Some follow up questions if you don't mind.

As I reread your reply and Lynn's reply, I get the impression that the impact plane line is the same as target line for a straight plane line strike from a square-square set-up.

Is that correct?

Secondly, where in this parallel line arrangement is the direction of the club head taken into account at impact? Surely, because the club head is still moving downward, outward and forward from impact to low point that the club path at impact is right of the impact plane line and the low point plane line.

If the face was square to the target at impact and the path is right of the target at impact, won't this ball draw?

If not, why not?

As always, Please forgive my lack of TGM terminology and understanding.

[Yoda]

. . . where in this parallel line arrangement is the direction of the club head taken into account at impact? Surely, because the club head is still moving downward, outward and forward from impact to low point that the club path at impact is right of the impact plane line and the low point plane line.

If the face was square to the target at impact and the path is right of the target at impact, won't this ball draw?

If not, why not?

For Horizontal Hinge Action (Ideal Compression), the Clubface is Open at Impact and Square only at Separation (1-L #17).

And, using approximate 'clock' terms, the Center of the Ball is at 7:00 at Impact and at 6:00 -- and precisely On Line -- at
Separation.

Study 2-C-1 (Linear Force -- The Ideal Application) and Sketches 2-C-1 #1, #2A & B and #3.

[12 piece bucket]

Thanks for that 12 piece.

Some follow up questions if you don't mind.

As I reread your reply and Lynn's reply, I get the impression that the impact plane line is the same as target line for a straight plane line strike from a square-square set-up.

Is that correct?

Secondly, where in this parallel line arrangement is the direction of the club head taken into account at impact? Surely, because the club head is still moving downward, outward and forward from impact to low point that the club path at impact is right of the impact plane line and the low point plane line.

If the face was square to the target at impact and the path is right of the target at impact, won't this ball draw?

If not, why not?

As always, Please forgive my lack of TGM terminology and understanding.

With your assumptions on the face conditions the ball would likely draw left of the target . . . I would think.