Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
iacas

The One- and Two-Plane Golf Swings, by Jim Hardy

Note: This thread is 1028 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

103 posts / 80460 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

Amen Brother!

Hey Mike, way to be sympathetic.

Golf doesn't work that way for everyone. Some people need to think their way through it, not just feel their way through it. You should know better!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

I started with the plane truth last year needing some kind of consistency, as my practice time was non-existent with 2 little kids. I struggled with it at first. I wanted to be a 1 planer as it just seemed to be a simpler swing, even though I had more of the 2 plane characteristics. After trying a while, i gave up and worked on the 2 plane. Since then I have actually been playing some the best golf I have in a while. The real key with that is you have to work on your tempo alot, but I do feel it is a very easy wing to learn, much easier than the 1 plane. My main thought is to just keep my arms in front of my body throughout the swing. I hit has added length for my irons without feeling like I am swinging. I would encourage you, if you try the method, to go with the one that you have dominant characteristics. Good luck.

No does anybody have anything to say about putting gurus? I have tried Pelz for awhile, but I just struggle with my putting, and I tend to practice alot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guinness,
No I am dishing the two plane swing cause i have not been inconsistent all these many years.
The one plane is different alright especially what yer body has to do to get the club to the ball. But its nice
Putting....now thats another mystery..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started with the plane truth last year needing some kind of consistency, as my practice time was non-existent with 2 little kids. I struggled with it at first. I wanted to be a 1 planer as it just seemed to be a simpler swing, even though I had more of the 2 plane characteristics. After trying a while, i gave up and worked on the 2 plane. Since then I have actually been playing some the best golf I have in a while. The real key with that is you have to work on your tempo alot, but I do feel it is a very easy wing to learn, much easier than the 1 plane. My main thought is to just keep my arms in front of my body throughout the swing. I hit has added length for my irons without feeling like I am swinging. I would encourage you, if you try the method, to go with the one that you have dominant characteristics. Good luck.

Both swings (1P or 2P) are good

As you said ... dominant characteristics should help you decide which route to go. However It's essential to know what "advice" is for each swing. Just look at "swing tips" and you'll see a lot of confusion in this regard. As JH said most of the times advices are opposite for 1P/2P. And if you don't know/learn theoretical part ... it's hard to learn true goal = repetable impact/swing regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all of u. I am new to Sandtrap, in fact this is my first forum.

From some other member : "Basically, you play ball more centered then back. Put weight on forward foot and keep it there, so no shifting weight to right(65% on the left foot, *tilt* slightly left, pivot on left leg through shot). Stance can be open or square. You swing with passive arms, and hit the ball more with a body pivot, like your current swing feeling. Biggest things is to turn around spine rather then rock shoulders up and down like some people do to chip or put, which causes a very steep plane."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I'm a big lover of the 1 plane method,in fact I read an article unrelated to hardy's musings that a lot of tour pro's have more rotational elements than golfers from the nicklaus era.
The main difference of course still is how upright the arms are.On my my quest for my swing I have based much of my swing on hardy's book,but have found one element I just can't master and feel it is too restrictive to employ for me and it feels totally unatural.
It's his advice to keep the weight going back on your front foot,a spine tilt to the left almost as he says.I find the advice of PGA pros like Jeff Ritter and Chuck Quinton about letting your turn get you behind the ball much more in keeping with the bodies biomechanics much more free to execute.Since using this method my ballstriking has the consistency I need,whereas before I always felt too much on top of the ball.
It's a more subtle difference and there's no dramatic shift to the right,but my weight at the top feels on the inside of my right foot as opposed to and even balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These couple of months of any kind of crazy golf wise...
Having switched to the one plane I must declare that I'm back to the 'modern' two plane I had before.
I was struggling for consistency so I probably wasn't doing it right.
The other reason was the short game which I believe should be a mini version of the long game.
Somehow taking the club back in a sort of' closed position' doesn't work
with pitching and chipping.
I must haven't seen Jim Hardy's short game video but I have seen Jeff Ritter's videos onYou Tube where he teaches pitching.
I find his method quite unnatural compared to the very elegant traditional method of chipping and pitching that we're all kinda used to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These couple of months of any kind of crazy golf wise...

I'm affraid it's not that simple

Stane Utley teaching (and Jim Hardy and ....) have common basis : getting shallow to the impact in short game too. What you have to do, to achieve that it's very simmilar (and it's opposed to the "2plane" swing method which is too steep by definition). HowEver whatever feels more natural to you ... regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I'm a big lover of the 1 plane method,in fact I read an article unrelated to hardy's musings that a lot of tour pro's have more rotational elements than golfers from the nicklaus era.

I'm not familiar with "

It's his advice to keep the weight going back on your front foot,a spine tilt to the left almost as he says " and have JH books. If you have in mind so called step 2(1 backswing, 2 downswing, 3 on your left leg before clearing your left hip) .. it's hard to learn. Even harder is downswing One of the fundamental Jh teaching is not exact positions but in "that" direction... regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not familiar with "

Sorry mate I just did a quick review of the book and didn't explain myself properly.There's a little section talking about where the weight should be in the backswing,and how he says you shouldn't allow yourself to turn behind the ball,but allow your weight to favour the front foot so you remain absolutely centered.

He uses Hogan and Duval as examples of players who had a slight spine tilt toward the target as examples at the top of the backswing. It's on pg 38-40.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Went out of town last weekend and needed something to read and this was the only decent choice available at the bookstore. I tried, really tried to get through this.

After struggling with it for the better part of 5 evenings I have decided to never open it again. It will disappear from the house early next Monday morning in a green bag.

I just don't buy the "bright line" distinction he is making, nor agree that some of the player categorizations are as clear cut as he suggests. Struggled with the way he communicates, just not for me.

I'm sure I'm in the minority, but even if I could get through his thought process on either the 1 or 2 plane, I know trying to incorporate it into my game would be a disaster, just not seeing the all or nothing in his approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really got off track recently by mixing advice,by keeping my head behind the ball which has lead to me hitting fat or behind the ball.I didn't need to because I'm wide and shallow already so don't need the extra width.

Keeping centered and let ball position of different clubs get me enough behind the ball and shorter clubs I need to be more on top of the ball.Back end of the summer before I started messing with my ball position I was hitting great,fantastic ball flight and compression.

Then it was getting a bit here and there,but my scores haven't suffered so a testament to my improved short game.I really believe in Hardy's clear advice on seperate moves for 1 plane and 2.It's spot on in my opinion.I have just read the book again and really need to stop experimenting so much.The swing is fairly simple to repeat.Weight on the inside of the right instep at the top,then rotate hard to the left are my swing keys,and I basically can't screw up the contact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually have gained a clear appreciation for what Jim Hardy has written.Coaches like Brian Manzella and Brady Riggs have not been too kind to Jim's work in this book.They have called it a fad,but researching the net and reading peoples comments I think all Jim meant to do was put golfers on the right track.
I don't think it was his intention to say one swing is this and other is this period.Like he says in the book it was to clearly outline what coaching advice we implement into our games so 2 plane moves don't cross one plane moves.I'm eternally thankful for Jim's work on this book because before I used to experiment with tips unknowingly realising the impact on my swing for good or bad.I am now clear in my mind what I need for my rotational based swing.This is the thing for me,I don't think it was Jim's intention for one to copy his exact swing in the book,and I think he knew that students had their own tempo,timing and individualities that indentify someones swing from another.
For me personally this is what I took from the book,hard cold fundamentals that facilitate a baseball like action and away I went,and now I have increased my understanding by taking bits from Chuck Quinton and Jeff Ritter etc who believe in that concept.It's a great book and as my ballstriking improves it's all the proof I need to ignore respected instructors who really should see the simplicity in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No does anybody have anything to say about putting gurus? I have tried Pelz for awhile, but I just struggle with my putting, and I tend to practice alot.

Use your right hand for putting.

Gently grip the club using the "Reverse-overlap" grip. Your left hand doesn't really do much work but acts as a stabilizer. Use your right hand to keep the club on plane and for the correct distance. I've found gently gripping with the right and then using the left handed index finger that runs down apply just a slight amount of pressure. That gives your right hand a nice "grip" feeling without tightening the muscles of the right hand. It relaxes me into the putt. Anyways, putt with your right hand. Move the putter back with it s the left hand is mainly along for the right and then "putt" it forward. You may be amazed at you straight it comes off and the accuracy with distance control. Eye your target, look back across to the ball and putt using he right hand/arm. Follow through should come naturally with this kind of stroke. This style of putting has worked wonders for me. 10' putts have a much, much higher rate of dropping and 30' putts are always close and some even fall. The feel is really all there for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got his book and browsed through it and got the impression that I was a two-plane golfer. I read that section more carefully and confirmed that impression. Then I read through the one-plane section just to see what it said, and kept thinking that I do some things that one-planers do, too.

So I shut the book and haven't given it another thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just picked this up. I'm a natural one planer which is probably why my instructor is getting so frustrated with me. He's from the school that the only good swing is a two plane apparently. Coming from baseball and hockey, I just can't adopt a two plane move.

We'll see what I get out of this book and I found a new instructor that has studied with Jim Hardy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. . .I don't completely agree that everyone is either a 1 or 2 planer - there are a lot of hybrids out there. The closer you are to a 1-planer, the more the 1 plane drills will help. There are also many variations of 1 plane swing out there (many consider the stack and tilt a variation, for example). The big thing to look for is whether the shoulders turn on nearly the same plane as the club. . . .

MonkeyClaw I agree with you for the most part and find this book extremely fascinating. Hardy's book in my mind is groundbreaking from a golf swing-analysis point of view in that it simplifies the golf swing into 2 categories: One-plane vs. Two-Plane. However, I believe there is a critical flaw in his theory.

. . .in the one plane swing, the swing plane of the club is nearly the same as the plane of the shoulders. In a two plane, the should turn flatter. Many golfers use a mix of both techniques. . .

And herein lies the problem with this One-Plane vs. Two-Plane theory. Let's pretend that a golfer's shoulder plane based on his anatomy is exactly 52°. Now according to Hardy's theory, for a golfer to be a one-planer his left arm plane angle at the top of his swing should be exactly at 52°.

The problem is twofold. 1.) How does the golfer determine if his left arm is exactly at 52°? 2.) Suppose that we could correctly measure the left-arm plane angle and it was measured to be 52.5° or 53° or 54° which technically is steeper than the shoulder plane. Should we all of a sudden convert to 2-plane swing principles? Is there a tolerance that we should account for +/- x degrees? The golf swing has many grey areas - as you mentioned above when moving from irons to woods. All of a sudden this theory no longer holds water as Hardy suggests that golfers do not mix one and two plane principles.
What I meant to say is that anthony kim doesn't have a conventional "jim hardy" oneplane swing. He teaches that you bend the right arm right at the takeaway and fold the left on the follow through. That's obviously not what anthony does in his swing.

Interesting. . . but consider this. Anthony Kim is about 5'-10". He describes himself as someone with a long torso and short legs relatively speaking and as a result of his anatomical differences chokes down on the club. I believe the reason why he doesn't swing like Hardy's prescribed method is that AK is choking down on the club effectively playing his driver @ 42". He doesn't need to 'bend the right arm on the takeaway" immediately because the length of the club has been shortened. If you look closely at his SwingVision clips on youtube, you'll see that the right elbow in fact doesn't start bending until the club is behind his toe line. In my opinion, he's as close to a one-plane position (as per Hardy) as I've ever seen.

The strength of this book is that it identifies the dominant sources of power in the golf swing whether it be one-plane or two plane. 1. In the One-Plane swing the club is swung around the body, as the body is the primary source of power (generating centripetal force). The torso and arms rotate together. 2. In the Two-plane swing, the torso and arms move independently of each other. In other words on distinctly different planes. The arms employ a lifting action. This lifting action on the backswing is what creates problems on the downswing with regards to 'timing' (i.e. what goes up must come down first, then around.) Two-planers will often talk about pulling the club down or letting the club fall to gravity on the downswing. While one-planers (Hogan) talk about the hips unwinding to start the downswing. These two concepts defined by Hardy are worth their weight in gold. Great dialogue here....I'd love to hear more opinions on this great book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: This thread is 1028 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...