In my opinion, it really IS all about impact.  Impact is only clubhead and ball.  It doesn't matter how it looks in still photos or on video.  If you get a centered strike, with the clubhead going the right direction, and oriented the right way, and moving at the right speed, its all good.  Of course, the problem is that impact is the end result of a swing, with a million variables on the way, not a magical thing all on its own.   Its nearly impossible to achieve good impact consistently without all of the rest of the stuff being reasonably correct as well.  

I guess to me, the idea that impact is everything doesn't simplify the game at all.  You still have to get all the other stuff right in order to make impact happen.

What I really have a problem with when "they", announcers, magazine articles, etc... talk about impact is they always take a face on point of view, which is a more speed/power centric bias. They rarely talk in context of both face on and down the line perspectives. You need to have forward shaft lean, bowed/flat wrist and show the face on view but from the down the line view, you have to be on plane, trail elbow and left shoulder should be within a certain range, hips and shoulders open within a certain range relative to target. They don't talk about that. There's a certain "one and done" nature to the analysis that loses a lot of nuance but sounds great as a sound bite.

I agree, but the way they frame it, or at least the way I read it, is if you get impact right, you've "solved" the swing. Not so much. I don't agree that trying to look a certain way at impact may be the best way to go about it either. Impact is important, but the framing of it, that's the problem I have with it. I think people are capable of going a little beyond it's all about impact.

2 minutes ago, nevets88 said:

I agree, but the way they frame it, or at least the way I read it, is if you get impact right, you've "solved" the swing.

I understand your dislike of the phrase as an oversimplification, especially in the way you understand their meaning.  I actually think the reality is the complete reverse.  Once you "solve" the swing, you'll get the impact correct most of the time.  Everything we do with the swing is done with the intention of improving impact.

10 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

I understand your dislike of the phrase as an oversimplification, especially in the way you understand their meaning.  I actually think the reality is the complete reverse.  Once you "solve" the swing, you'll get the impact correct most of the time.  Everything we do with the swing is done with the intention of improving impact.

That's true. The framing of it is what I don't like. It's kind of like lag. You get that lag, boy, you're good to go. The same way I'm interpreting it for impact, maybe most people don't see it that way, I guess it all depends on the person.