Jump to content

Dr Kwon and Functional Swing Plane vs Chris Ryan Video - Hand Path Explained


Recommended Posts

Just seen this Dr Kwon video below about functional swing plane but cannot reconcile his opinion that the club shaft remains on that plane between MD (P6) and ZC (Zero lead wrist cocking - approx P7.3)   vs Chris Ryan's video further below.  Please see 15:00 - 17:22 where he says the mid-hand-point and the clubhead (and therefore whole club shaft) are swinging on that functional swing plane.

Chris Ryan says that the hands move in as the clubhead moves out and when I took a snapshot blur image (see further below), the club shaft doesn't seem to be swinging on some constant functional swing plane. 

I cannot understand how the lead hand grip section can still remain on some unchanging functional plane if there is an angle between the lead arm and club shaft approaching impact while the forearm supinates to try and square the clubface.

Am I making a mistake somewhere in my interpretation of these videos?

 

image.png.8d5ca60cee52e28b2490874b2a5ee60d.png

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Here is a video of a double pendulum where the club shaft is being swung on a vertical functional plane.  In this scenario, the clubface is being kept square to the club path , similar to a golfer with a very strong grip and this is why a golfer can ensure the hinge, shaft and clubface can swing on a single functional plane .

But imagine a 2nd scenario where the golfer has a weak/neutral grip and needs to rotate his forearm/arm (ie. 1st lever and that hinge) from club horizontal in downswing to ensure the clubface is square by impact.  Also consider that the '1st lever arm & hinge' is having to rotate while there is still an angle between it and shaft approaching impact (like Sergio Garcia see image below).

If you can imagine that 2nd scenario, it would seem impossible for the 'hinge/shaft/clubface' to all be swinging on a single well defined functional plane from P6-P7.3 (or   MD-ZC using Dr Kwons swing event terminology).  And if you attempted to keep the hinge (ie. the hands) swinging on that same 'functional plane' with a weak-neutral grip, you would probably shank it.

 

GarciaMickelsonAccumulator3Two.jpg

 

Phil Mickelson at impact won't need to alter his 'functional swing plane' much because the angle between his lead arm and shaft (ie. between the blue line and the shaft)  is far less than SG.  So from a down the line view , one would expect SG's lead hand to move more left approaching impact than PM which would mean his lead arm would become steeper as per images below.

This sort of matches what Chris Ryan was demonstrating, albeit in an exaggerated fashion, in the video that I posted earlier. But there could be only a 3/4 inch difference between a shank and a solid strike so, in my humble opinion, one has to be precise about these events  and not give the golfer an incorrect perception about moving his 'hands/shaft/clubhead sweet spot' on some well defined functional swing plane (especially if he has a weak/neutral grip and retains an angle between his lead arm and club shaft approaching impact).

 

image.jpeg.e74da690c17b4ded265a1cedf41edbc8.jpeg

 

Addendum : 3rd June 2022

Here is a graph from Coleman and Anderson research article 2007 where they measured the shaft plane angle to the horizontal throughout the golf downswing  (for a driver -see black dotted line).  If the club was swinging on some well-defined functional swing plane from P6-P7.3 , the graph should become horizontal in the late downswing about 70 msecs from impact (around the 80% of downswing point).

 

image.png.b280ab1cb2273c4afc93d7bcd6152cd2.png

Edited by Wildthing
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Here is Martin Hall explaining the use of a 'Plane Board' .

Although this tool might be useful to train the feel of a more optimal swing plane approaching impact (ie. for someone whose plane might be too steep or flat) , in my humble opinion it is also teaching the golfer (who has a weak-neutral grip ) to shank the ball.

How To Get Your Swing on Plane With Martin Hall | Golf Channel

image.png.b6a244d62c84af9a7c231be554db99f5.png

 

image.png.3b439de1457a94011f94095ed2d9483d.png

 

Look at 1:55 where she moves the club slowly from P6 to P7 and you can clearly see that the shaft is not inclined on the angle of the plane board. If you placed a golf ball touching that board at impact , the hosel would come into play.

Edited by Wildthing
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked the Hogan example in Kwon's video as a visualization. The club head stays on plane- doesn't much matter how you achieve it. If I worry about where the shaft is I'm just asking for trouble.

Mostly :taylormade-small: ITB. SIMMs, P790s...etc

Won't you pour me a Cuban Breeze, Gretchen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Wildthing said:

Here is Martin Hall explaining the use of a 'Plane Board' .

Although this tool might be useful to train the feel of a more optimal swing plane approaching impact (ie. for someone whose plane might be too steep or flat) , in my humble opinion it is also teaching the golfer (who has a weak-neutral grip ) to shank the ball.

How To Get Your Swing on Plane With Martin Hall | Golf Channel

image.png.b6a244d62c84af9a7c231be554db99f5.png

 

image.png.3b439de1457a94011f94095ed2d9483d.png

 

Look at 1:55 where she moves the club slowly from P6 to P7 and you can clearly see that the shaft is not inclined on the angle of the plane board. If you placed a golf ball touching that board at impact , the hosel would come into play.

You must have decided to skip or ignore the last part of the video where he talks about the difference between address and impact and puts her in the impact position twice. 

Also here is Mike Bender another highly regarded teacher using a plane board and have shaft lean

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CcYMo89ghbl/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

 

9AD6C377-208D-4F36-945C-C8662C86B6A1.jpeg

67508721-6302-41C0-8BBF-F3BD20B5B659.jpeg

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

You must have decided to skip or ignore the last part of the video where he talks about the difference between address and impact and puts her in the impact position twice. 

Also here is Mike Bender another highly regarded teacher using a plane board and have shaft lean

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CcYMo89ghbl/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

 

9AD6C377-208D-4F36-945C-C8662C86B6A1.jpeg

67508721-6302-41C0-8BBF-F3BD20B5B659.jpeg

 

No, I saw the shaft lean but that won't make the club shaft lie flat on that plane board like some constant well defined 'functional swing plane' as per Dr Kwon's assertion from P6~P7.3 (MD->ZC).

The whole point I am making is that if you have a weak-neutral grip and are rotating your lead forearm to square the clubface between P6-P7.3, then your 'hands/shaft/clubhead' cannot swing together on some constant 'functional swing plane'.  They can swing on the same 'instantaneous swing plane' but not together on a constant one like that plane board.

Try the table top demonstration that Kevin Ryan mentioned below (Ryke Effect -see video below which was presented to the World Scientific Congress Of Golf).). 

Comment From Kevin Ryan:

(a) In the functional swing plane, the whole shaft (including the Hands) will traverse a plane.

(b) the lead arm must move inside (and therefore off the functional swing plane) as the forearm rotates to square the clubface.

To understand this take a club in your lead arm and bend down against a table top with your lead underarm on the tabletop. Do this slowly, I don't want accidents. Now try to execute a double pendulum. You can't because your lead wrist locks. You could rotate your forearm but then the clubshaft would leave the functional swing plane. Now to understand the RYKE effect, as the clubshaft reaches club horizontal, lift your shoulder off the table top. Now you can rotate your forearm and the ryke angle will form and the shaft will stay on the functional swing plane. This is equivalent to moving the lead arm inside. In a full swing this inside move starts at about club vertical.

 

 

 

See the image below and imagine its a lefty golf downswing with clubface going into the screen. Lets also imagine the blue line to be the 'functional swing plane' that Dr Kwon defines as being constant between MD-ZC  where the 'hands/shaft/clubface'  will all swing together on that plane.  But if your a golfer who has a weak-neutral grip and an angle between the lead arm and shaft, rotating the forearm will cause the hand/clubshaft to move off that functional plane. To keep the clubface sweet-spot on that functional plane, the golfer will need to steepen his lead arm  (ie. the grey lever in the image) approaching impact. 

 

image.png.eab78ac2454e6331cc7d96dd9ed955fa.png

Edited by Wildthing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Wildthing said:

No, I saw the shaft lean but that won't make the club shaft lie flat on that plane board like some constant well defined 'functional swing plane' as per Dr Kwon's assertion from P6~P7.3 (MD->ZC).

The whole point I am making is that if you have a weak-neutral grip and are rotating your lead forearm to square the clubface between P6-P7.3, then your 'hands/shaft/clubhead' cannot swing together on some constant 'functional swing plane'.  They can swing on the same 'instantaneous swing plane' but not together on a constant one like that plane board.

People with weak or neutral grips don’t swing the same as those with strong grips. The wrists and forearms work differently in each of those three grip styles as well as to how the body reacts to where the shaft is at in the swing and how it makes the compensation for that. So you cant make the assumption of what is being shown in that video to all grips, some grips or other swing aspects.

Good instructors or elite instructors aren’t going to teach someone to make a bad swing. They are going to loom

at what the golfer does and what they are trying to accomplish with the swing and help the golfer get into better positions. If the golfer has a weak grip or even a neutral one and the block the ball or hit pushes they aren’t going to have that person swing in a way that makes that result worse. They are either going to strengthen the grip and/or position them in a manner to swing differently. 
 

Just like someone with a strong grip who is prone to pulls and hooks. The instructor isn’t going to have that person swing in a manner that’s going to have the ball go further in that direction. You have to understand the golf swing is about matchups. 
 

looking into all the science and data that Dr Keon, AMG and some others do is cool for those into that, but these guys also have the ability to translate all that into working with the avg Joe golfer and making them better by fixing their faults. 
 

no offense but imo some of these basics of the swing are things you are lacking in your understanding and I would suggest looking into the material that GG has on his training site, AMGs website and youtube, Eric Congornos website and YouTube, Monte Scheinblum website and Chris Ryan’s YouTube. Learn and understand how the swing works from that perspective 

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

People with weak or neutral grips don’t swing the same as those with strong grips. The wrists and forearms work differently in each of those three grip styles as well as to how the body reacts to where the shaft is at in the swing and how it makes the compensation for that. So you cant make the assumption of what is being shown in that video to all grips, some grips or other swing aspects.

Good instructors or elite instructors aren’t going to teach someone to make a bad swing. They are going to loom

at what the golfer does and what they are trying to accomplish with the swing and help the golfer get into better positions. If the golfer has a weak grip or even a neutral one and the block the ball or hit pushes they aren’t going to have that person swing in a way that makes that result worse. They are either going to strengthen the grip and/or position them in a manner to swing differently. 
 

Just like someone with a strong grip who is prone to pulls and hooks. The instructor isn’t going to have that person swing in a manner that’s going to have the ball go further in that direction. You have to understand the golf swing is about matchups. 
 

looking into all the science and data that Dr Keon, AMG and some others do is cool for those into that, but these guys also have the ability to translate all that into working with the avg Joe golfer and making them better by fixing their faults. 
 

no offense but imo some of these basics of the swing are things you are lacking in your understanding and I would suggest looking into the material that GG has on his training site, AMGs website and youtube, Eric Congornos website and YouTube, Monte Scheinblum website and Chris Ryan’s YouTube. Learn and understand how the swing works from that perspective 

 

No offence taken as I am talking specifically about instruction that gives some golfers an incorrect perception to swing the 'hands/shaft/clubface sweet-spot'  down some single plane from P6~7.3  (ie. like using those plane boards).  Specifically golfers who have weak-neutral grips with an angle between the lead arm and shaft while rotating their lead forearm to square the clubface by impact. In TGM terms , that would be a golfer releasing PA#3 while still having a PA2 angle (see image link below).

http://www.theswingengineer.com/media/3rdPA.png

I'm unsure whether you would define Dr Kwon as an elite golf instructor but he is an expert on biomechanics . Further , he doesn't state that his instruction excludes golfers that I have specified above.

Basic pragmatic golf instruction from the people you have mentioned (ie. GG/Cogorno/Monte/Ryan) does not seem to have any relevance to the point I am raising in this thread. AMG do seem to have more quantitative data via GEARS  but they still have to apply their own opinions on cause and effect.

The incorrect perception I am talking about is explained quite well by Kevin Ryan in this video below:

 

 

Edited by Wildthing
changed qualitative to quantitative
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Wildthing said:

No offence taken as I am talking specifically about instruction that gives some golfers an incorrect perception to swing the 'hands/shaft/clubface sweet-spot'  down some single plane from P6~7.3  (ie. like using those plane boards).  Specifically golfers who have weak-neutral grips with an angle between the lead arm and shaft while rotating their lead forearm to square the clubface by impact. In TGM terms , that would be a golfer releasing PA#3 while still having a PA2 angle (see image link below).

This is what I’m trying to tell you. An instructor isn’t going to have someone swing on a plane board with a grip that’s going to cause them to hit bad shots.

The plane board is a tool used to help golfers make better swings. Instructors are going to watch their student swing, they are going to check their grip, watch how the club and body move and how that influences what happens in the transition and downswing. Based these observations they will make the necessary adjustments to the student and use whatever tools they think are needed to help the student.

Someone with a weaker grip has to manipulate the wrists and arms more to set the club properly compared to a neutral or strong grip. Most instructors are going to have a student with a weaker grip change to more neutral or possibly stronger grip. 

From an instructor standpoint they are going to help the student swing better and with less manipulation to help increase consistency in the movement patterns to help improve consistency in strike patterns.

Dr Kwon os smart when it comes to biomechanics and he’s an elite instructor. Knowing how the body moves  helps instructors work with their students to make swings that their body is capable of and not have them do something they can’t physically do.

So no there are no good instructors who are going to have the student get bad perceptions by using a swing plane. Which is why as they video went on Martin out Sara in the impact position and drew the line. Same with the video from Mike Bender. But also let’s not forget some of tigers best years were with a single plane swing and Bryson has had success with it as well.

You’ve done a lot of research/reading/studying in theory but seems like you don’t have the knowledge of the teaching aspect of how to apply knowledge of the golf swing to the actual golf swing or how any of the instructors teach the golf swing to average every day golfers up thru the really good golfers 

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

This is what I’m trying to tell you. An instructor isn’t going to have someone swing on a plane board with a grip that’s going to cause them to hit bad shots.

The plane board is a tool used to help golfers make better swings. Instructors are going to watch their student swing, they are going to check their grip, watch how the club and body move and how that influences what happens in the transition and downswing. Based these observations they will make the necessary adjustments to the student and use whatever tools they think are needed to help the student.

Someone with a weaker grip has to manipulate the wrists and arms more to set the club properly compared to a neutral or strong grip. Most instructors are going to have a student with a weaker grip change to more neutral or possibly stronger grip. 

From an instructor standpoint they are going to help the student swing better and with less manipulation to help increase consistency in the movement patterns to help improve consistency in strike patterns.

Dr Kwon os smart when it comes to biomechanics and he’s an elite instructor. Knowing how the body moves  helps instructors work with their students to make swings that their body is capable of and not have them do something they can’t physically do.

So no there are no good instructors who are going to have the student get bad perceptions by using a swing plane. Which is why as they video went on Martin out Sara in the impact position and drew the line. Same with the video from Mike Bender. But also let’s not forget some of tigers best years were with a single plane swing and Bryson has had success with it as well.

You’ve done a lot of research/reading/studying in theory but seems like you don’t have the knowledge of the teaching aspect of how to apply knowledge of the golf swing to the actual golf swing or how any of the instructors teach the golf swing to average every day golfers up thru the really good golfers 

"An instructor isn’t going to have someone swing on a plane board with a grip that’s going to cause them to hit bad shots."

Why not?  Dr Kwon says he has found through his research that elite golfers are swinging their 'hands/shaft/clubface' on a constant functional plane from P6-P7.3 .  He has never mentioned that they only apply to a certain subset of elite golfers with a certain grip.  If you are an instructor using the data from some of the worlds most renowned biomechanics experts , why wouldn't you use a plane board? Obviously, this might not apply if you are an instructor who has his own theories/opinions on the golf swing and pay no regard to the science data. 

"Someone with a weaker grip has to manipulate the wrists and arms more to set the club properly compared to a neutral or strong grip. Most instructors are going to have a student with a weaker grip change to more neutral or possibly stronger grip. "

Bryson DeChambeau has a weak grip but doesn't seem to manipulate his wrists and arms more . In fact his objective is to remove as many variables from his swing as possible. I'm not sure that most instructors are going to have to change a students grip from a weak grip to a more neutral/stronger grip? I suspect it might depend on the unique body biomechanics of each student (ie. check out Mike Adams/Terry Rowles/EA Tischler).

"From an instructor standpoint they are going to help the student swing better and with less manipulation to help increase consistency in the movement patterns to help improve consistency in strike patterns."

I have no doubt that instructors are trying to assist students to achieve their goals and we have a multitude who have their own ideas and theories that might work for some and not for others.

"Dr Kwon is smart when it comes to biomechanics and he’s an elite instructor."

I agree he is very smart but I don't think he is an elite instructor (just yet). Need more proof to see if his theories are working and improving student swings. To be honest, much of his instruction seems awfully similar to Shawn Clement golf instruction dating back to 2009, but is using force plate/3D data to back up some of his claims

"So no there are no good instructors who are going to have the student get bad perceptions by using a swing plane. Which is why as they video went on Martin out Sara in the impact position and drew the line. Same with the video from Mike Bender. But also let’s not forget some of tigers best years were with a single plane swing and Bryson has had success with it as well."

If the swing is really a conical one and not double-pendular, then using a plane board might create the wrong perception. Dr Kwon seems to be in the double-pendulum camp from MD-ZC (see image below).

 

image.png.0d17af33adee2662a00a6187d43ea855.png

 

With regards Mike Bender instagram, he is just copying Tom Tomasello from many years ago (nothing new). View from 4:41 onwards , just old TGM stuff.

 

Also look at the student on that plane board , who has a bowed wrist at P4 , then looks to have an extended lead wrist at P6 (difficult to confirm from face on but looks extended to me), and what seems like an open clubface at P7 (see images below).

image.png.55a8c31435eed2f766444e9f94fa92f5.png

image.png.b1565c66423966520ecec6a51156e8d9.png

 

 

 

Edited by Wildthing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Out of curiosity I've looked at several Mike Bender you-tube videos and I think his understanding of the physics involved in the golf swing is poor.  These are old videos so I don't know whether he's changed his opinions.

Example below:

 

His explanation using energy transferred to the ball is highly flawed.

The 'whooshing' of the stick is slightly more complicated because it's acting like a lever without a load (see Dave Tutelman's website link below).

Physical principles -- statics (tutelman.com)

If you added a load (ie. mass) to the end of that stick and created the same angular velocity (with more applied torque effort) I doubt it would be biomechanically natural for the golfer to just actively brake his lead arm as shown.

Check out this other video:

 

See some of the comments by viewers regarding the physics explanations he was using:

Dr. Reid Sheftall Truth in Science

I don't mean to be too critical because Zach's swing is great and so is the analysis by Mike but please be more careful with the physics... As a former physics major at MIT, I can tell you it is easy to get it very wrong with loose language. For example saying ''ellipse'' when you mean circles of ever- decreasing diameter. The tether ball moves 90 degrees to the chord the entire time independent of the speed. It is the angle of the chord with the pole that varies. Also, the tether ball speeds up because of the principle of conservation of angular momentum.(This is why ice skaters spin faster when they pull their arms in...). Other confusing things.. for example, the arrow doesn't have to slow down for gravity to act on it. Gravity acts on it independent of the speed (by applying a force toward the centre of mass of the Earth.) Remember satellites stay in orbit because they are being acted on by that same gravitational force and they are going 17,500 miles per hour (at about 200 miles up)!; higher orbits would require slower speeds of course... TV commentators are notorious for getting the physics all wrong too when they try to describe the movement of the ball using physical principles and as a tour player myself and surgeon, it drives me crazzzy. (I'll shut up now... sorry...).


OutrageousMisfortune

Another Physics geek here and I agree. He got all 4 of his physics analogies completely wrong. Example the ice skating analogy. Simply by pulling your arms in increases angular velocity (RPM) does not necessarily increase the linear velocity of the point furthest from the center. By his logic starting a golf downswing with arms fully extended and then pulling your elbows into you body would increase your RPMs and hence club head speed. But it doesn't. I would love for a true physicist to work with some of these hacks to truly explain what is really going on. For example the X factor, which is the separation of the hips and shoulder rotation during the back swing. This promotes  separate rotational RPMs during the downswing. If the hips are rotating at x RPMs and  the shoulders are rotating at y RPMs and the two are rotating independently, you get an additive effect. Club RPMs z= x + y. He is right about the swing plane but for the wrong reasons, which again shows his lack of understanding of physics. Swinging a club above or below plane requires extra energy, although the amount is probably negligible. The real reason for swinging on plane is to deliver the club back to the ball square and with a straight to the target path at impact. Swinging over plane results in a slight out to in path resulting in a slice/fade. Swinging under plane results in an in to out path resulting in a hook/draw. The degree depends on of draw/fade depends on how over/under plane you are. Also you can compensate by opening/closing the face so the club face at impact is consistent with your plane to get a straighter ball flight.  

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Wildthing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...