Two-Plane swingers, are you out there?

[Stacey_E]

In another thread where I was trying to eliminate a swing problem, a very simple question was posed to me....are you a one-plane or two-plane golfer. I had to think about that for a week. I am aware of the differences. I had even intentionally tried both methods over the past 3 seasons since I first became aware of the differences.

This past year I played my best golf so far by ignoring swing thoughts and just playing what worked naturally for me. It wasn't pretty, but on the better half of my days it was effective enough to lower my handicap. Now I have hit a handicap floor and realize my swing is holding me back. Thus the original thread and the question that got me thinking.
After evaluating all the aspects of my homemade swing, reading old Sandtrap threads on the two types, researching websites and old magazines I've come to a conclusion. I believe the majority of my swing, when I'm striking the ball well, is more in line with the two plane theory.

I do not wish to rehash the entire OPS vs. TPS debate. I also hope, (and how to put this diplomatically?) no one tries to "convert me" to the one-plane swing. Trust me guys, I'd love for my swing to be that simple. I am aware it might benefit me more. I envy you guys. I may even end up with a one plane swing after I'm more informed.

I am just looking for advice from some other two-plane swingers (or those well informed on TPS) as to how they came to that swing. I can later list the aspects of my swing that leads me to believe that this is the path for me. But first I'd like to open the floor to others. Also if there is anyone willing to give input on a "checklist" of sorts that would help me determine if I am on the right path, that would be awesome. By that I mean things like...is your spine angle more upright or tilted, are you a hitter or swinger....things like that.

Thanks for the input guys. After researching the web, I had to ask my community for their advice.

[uttexas]

Have you read Hank Haney's book? He discusses both swing methods. http://www.amazon.com/Only-Golf-Less.../dp/0062702378

IMO, his book breaks little new ground and is heavily influenced by John Jacobs "Practical Golf" http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Golf.../dp/155821738X

You are on a similar thought pattern to these guys thinking. Let the ball flight guide you to better ball striking. Don't worry too much about positions.

The quicker way to lower scores is to forget about the long game for a while and focus on short game, bunker play, and putting.

[Stacey_E]

You are on a similar thought pattern to these guys thinking. Let the ball flight guide you to better ball striking. Don't worry too much about positions.

Thanks so much for the links!

I totally agree that lower scores come from the short game. I hope to use the 1/3 putting, 1/3 short game, 1/3 power swing, practice idea this year.

[Guinness23]

I went to the two plane after needing to simplify my game due to lack of practice time (young kids). Once I got it down, I hardly practice it anymore and for some strange reason I shoot more consistently that I ever have. I just work on getting my feel for putting and chipping before a round and it works. My shots can be ugly and all over the place at times, but the scores are better than when I worked my tail off. I imagine when I can put some effort into it I will be quite happy. My major swing thought is keep my arms in front of my body. Hope that helps.

[Blades4me]

"The quicker to lower scores is to forget about the long game and concentrate on your short game, bunker play and putting."

Amen!

[Stacey_E]

Now what if I was to tell you guys that I was a 13 handicap BECAUSE of my shortgame, not in spite of it? I'm really interested in improving my score and I appreciate that advice. But I know my game and more importantly I've seen my swing. Improving my swing is not the entirety of my improvement plan. It just happens to be the the part that needs the most advice.

[wachesawgolfer]

To me the "two Plane" swing is nothing more than a steepening arm raise at the top which is really a bad move requiring lots of compensations throughout the whole swing. Most tour players are simply turning their shoulders to the top now without any independent arm rise and this has started to eliminate the bad steepening move from most players and shortened their swings with no loss of power. We all would do well to forget the notion of two plane or one plane swings and rather work on a good backswing which puts us in good position at the top to swing down.

[RC]

I've yet to see a one plane swinger in person, on the golf channel or any of the professional tours, and maybe have seen only one on video tape in my whole life -- Moe Norman. At least this is true if what I think is a one plane swing is correct, namely that the club stays on one plane. Everyone else is on some combination of planes, perhaps tending one way or another. I've read about the one plane swing, and studied images, etc., but it like the golf swing is on a number scale of 1 to 10 and 1 is a pure one plane and 10 is a two plane. It seem to me people who are 3 and 4 call it one plane, and people who are 6 and 7 call it two plane. I need help understanding this whole area of discussion. There are parallel planes on a greater or lesser degree and some "interesting" non-plane" swings that look weird with the club above the ball or below it, but I don't see one plane swings -- or I don't understand what is meant by a one plane swing.

[Stacey_E]

We all would do well to forget the notion of two plane or one plane swings and rather work on a good backswing which puts us in good position at the top to swing down.

I agree with that. And thanks for the advice. I have been a back and through player for a while. I had very few moving parts with almost no wrist hinge. I had/have an extremely laid off look but that never really bothered me. What does bother me, is the fact that try as I might I never get the club even up to my shoulders on the backswing. So to get the club back on plane from that flat position, of course there was only one thing to do - come over the top.

I've tried adjusting my posture with more spine tilt and knee flex. I can make myself look at address like the prototypical one plane pics. When I turn back the club looks to be right on plane as well. My problem with this is, at address my club's toe is so far off the ground I can't even imagine hitting the ball! I am 5'9" and have slightly long arms for my height. I realize that a flatter lie and/or shorter shaft could help with this. But really guys, it's ridiculous. I would need 1" or more shorter and 6 or 8* flat. I also realize the club toe will be more flat at impact than it is at address. But for example, the only way I can make a 7 iron of standard length and lie sit close to flush at address is to 1.) choke down to the steel with my LEFT hand and have the whole of my right hand on the shaft or... 2) stand so far from the ball I look like I'm reaching more than Moe Norman. When I naturally setup, I have a slight knee flex and a spine tilt probably around 15-20*. From this position the club looks to be sitting well to me. As for the rhythm and timing of a 2 plane swing, I'm not sure it will be a huge issue to me. I just ended 20 years as a gigging and recording musician. I always played the rhythm instruments quite well and did have impecable timing. The first thing that everyone new seeing my swing says (from hackers to scratch golfers) is that they like my slow easy take away and the rhythm of my swing. I'm not saying that is enough in itself for a solid swing. I only make mention of it because it has probably been the best aspect of my swing from day one. THANKS WACHES! And sorry if I went on too long. Just trying to sound off a little and reason this outloud.

[mm6840]

I've yet to see a one plane swinger in person, on the golf channel or any of the professional tours, and maybe have seen only one on video tape in my whole life -- Moe Norman. At least this is true if what I think is a one plane swing is correct, namely that the club stays on one plane. Everyone else is on some combination of planes, perhaps tending one way or another. I've read about the one plane swing, and studied images, etc., but it like the golf swing is on a number scale of 1 to 10 and 1 is a pure one plane and 10 is a two plane. It seem to me people who are 3 and 4 call it one plane, and people who are 6 and 7 call it two plane. I need help understanding this whole area of discussion. There are parallel planes on a greater or lesser degree and some "interesting" non-plane" swings that look weird with the club above the ball or below it, but I don't see one plane swings -- or I don't understand what is meant by a one plane swing.

I agree with yours expalanation (1-10

) ... " info : What does happen in a correct one-plane swing is that the arms are hanging under the shoulder plane at address and from there they swing UP AND AROUND YOUR TORSO ONTO SOMEWHAT THE SAME PLANE AS THE SHOULDERS TURN. My definition of the one-plane swing admits the arms and the shoulders are not on the same plane at address but that they achieve that one-plane union by the top of the backswing " regards,

[mm6840]

I've yet to see a one plane swinger in person, on the golf channel or any of the professional tours, and maybe have seen only one on video tape in my whole life -- Moe Norman. At least this is true if what I think is a one plane swing is correct, namely that the club stays on one plane. Everyone else is on some combination of planes, perhaps tending one way or another. I've read about the one plane swing, and studied images, etc., but it like the golf swing is on a number scale of 1 to 10 and 1 is a pure one plane and 10 is a two plane. It seem to me people who are 3 and 4 call it one plane, and people who are 6 and 7 call it two plane. I need help understanding this whole area of discussion. There are parallel planes on a greater or lesser degree and some "interesting" non-plane" swings that look weird with the club above the ball or below it, but I don't see one plane swings -- or I don't understand what is meant by a one plane swing.

Jim Hardy said :

" I believe that much of the confusion about my ideas are probably my fault. My fault, in that I on purpose, do not narrowly and strickly define the one and two-plane swing. I don't think that it serves any purpose to take away a golfer's athleticism and replace it with a confining set of moves and positions. I believe that in a general sence, the one-planer is swinging his/her arms around their body (which is bent over somewhat depending on their height, the club they are using and a forgiving 48"zone) while their body turns and that a two-planer is swinging their arms up and down infront of their body in time with the body turn. Now having said that, a pure one-planer would generally swing their arms around their body as the body turns in both the backswing and the downswing/followthrough. The same goes with a two-planer, they would want to strive to keep the arms infront of them as they turn the body in time with the arm swing through-out the swing. So in that sence, you could argue that there are one-plane and two-plane "pure" positions through-out the swing and I would agree with you. On the other hand, I point out a number of times, that the best place to generally view the differences between the one and two-plane swings is at the top of the backswing. There you can most easily see if the golfer has "swung his/her arms up from address and onto somewhat the same plane as their body turn (one-plane) or have swung their arms up and onto a different plane than the body turn (two-plane)". This is certainly the place where I first look to generally define a one or a two-planer. If they are somewhat on their shoulder plane, then I term them a one-planer. And if they are not close to the shoulder plane I call them a two-planer. They may be a very good one or two-planer or a very bad one. For instance, they might be a one-planer but with very level shoulders and a right elbow pointed infront of them. They are in big trouble, but they are still a one-planer. Likewise a two-planer could turn his shoulders straight into the ball from the top of the backswing and have a steep chop at the ball and still be a two-planer, just not a good one. In both these cases, I have put elements of the other method into their swings. the one-planer has level shoulders and a right elbow like a two-planer (it won't work) and the two-plane example has a hard shoulder move at the start of the downswing which doesn't match his swing type. So here we have examples of identifying one and two-plane swings by their positions relative to the top of the backswing but can also further identify them by movements through-out the swing. It is why I say there are hy-breds. In fact I just gave an excellent hy-bred a lesson at the Hope; Jeff Sluman. A two-plane swing by definition of the top of backswing, but when playing well, like Jim Furyk, get his arms tied into his body turn in a beautiful one-plane impact position. So instead of making it easier for all of you, I've probably made this seem more complicated. It is complicated, once you leave a "pure" swing and start to introduce cross elements. That is why I advise golfers to try to simplify their swings to just the elements of their type. On the other hand, I see great athletic swings that can accommodate the issues of some cross-overs and I see no reason to change them unless their athletic ability to make them happen is waning. Then and only then do I suggust changes. For the rest of us, we don't have the athleticism to make such cross-over elements work and be repetitive so we must strive for the elements that make it the easiest. In the meanwhile it is necessary, when looking and understanding swings, to recognize them first, as one or two-planers from a top of swing position, and then to understand their positions/movements relative to the ideal one or two-plane elements through-out the swing. It is fine with me to use the terms one or two-plane swings based on the top of swing. It is also fine with me to identify hy-bred swings (like Furyk, John Daly, Couples, Sluman) that can change swing types in mid-stream and call them hy-breds or one-plane impact players, etc. " regards

[wachesawgolfer]

I've yet to see a one plane swinger in person, on the golf channel or any of the professional tours, and maybe have seen only one on video tape in my whole life -- Moe Norman. At least this is true if what I think is a one plane swing is correct, namely that the club stays on one plane. Everyone else is on some combination of planes, perhaps tending one way or another. I've read about the one plane swing, and studied images, etc., but it like the golf swing is on a number scale of 1 to 10 and 1 is a pure one plane and 10 is a two plane. It seem to me people who are 3 and 4 call it one plane, and people who are 6 and 7 call it two plane. I need help understanding this whole area of discussion. There are parallel planes on a greater or lesser degree and some "interesting" non-plane" swings that look weird with the club above the ball or below it, but I don't see one plane swings -- or I don't understand what is meant by a one plane swing.

Do not confuse the fact the some people swing the club flatter as Moe Norman did that they are making a one plane swing, as Hogan who was steeper was also termed a one plane swinger. It all comes down to whether the arms are just turned by the shoulders or they rise up independently of the shoulder turn. Hogan called the latter a "false backswing" It is not if you still make a full shoulder turn, but most amateurs rise the arms but do not turn the shoulders to a complete coiled turn at the top. This is why Jim Hardy is so popular. His one plane swing setup enables the average golfer to make a fuller shoulder turn and not loose the coil simply raising the arms. Look at VJ who is a one plane swinger and he does the same without the exaggerated Hardy setup. As I said I think the terms are unimportant as the ideal golf swing is compact and is simply a shoulder turn to the top which puts the club in the ideal position to swing down without any compensation.

[RC]

I agree with mm6840 and feel like he has described the situation well as swings tend toward being one or the other, but in both there are minor departures from true one or two plane swings. I like Hardy's comments as well. From a physical space point of view, i.e., a rotating and tilted body with levers hinged from different points, there almost has to be some departures. Otherwise, you would have to begin the swing from your impact position with precisely extended wrists, stretched tendons, the shaft having the same distortions it has when moving 120 mph, etc. That is not feasible.

Ben Hogan certainly was not a pure one plane swinger. He had elements of both in his swing, so the sliding scale idea of tending to one or the other seems useful to me. Hogan loaded heavily on his right leg, and kept it flexed with the knee generally pointing to the ball. He tried to keep the weight on the inside of his right foot, while coiling behind the ball. His club traveled around his body but raised onto plane at the top with more lift than current modern rotational swingers who tend to keep the club above and outside their hands a bit more. A. Kim is not a one plane swinger for sure, although he has elements of what is taught in a one plane swing.

These are just my unqualified opinions, submitted to spur discussion. The golf swing is a very complex set of motions on a rotating and tilted platform with lever arms and joints that change length -- the body is not inelastic. I agree fully with the concept that positions of the club being on plane at many check points will produce more reliable results than positions that change planes all over the place. It is logical to say that great ball strikers get into very similar positions just as impact happens, so it makes sense that the least amount of compensating one has to do to get there should be easier. Two planers do it with more timing, one planers do it with shorter or fewer corrective motions.

So, I am not disagreeing with anyone about theoretical aspects of swinging or that any particular swing will have more of one character or the other, only with the idea that there is a true one plane swing in every aspect. I don't think the human body with two legs, two arms, two hands, and an articulating spine (and a host of other things) can make a perfect one plane swing. I know the golf shaft doesn't since it deflects down and forward just before impact. After saying that, I admit I sure want to swing so the corrections are minor, the big muscles do most of the timing, and the rotating body provides most of the power.

This stuff is so interesting, so hard, and so complex. It is sort of like asking can a swing produce the exact same result every time. In my own case, chaos theory rules... everything and every outcome is possible sooner or later. But how much fun would the game be with precise air canons with artillery controls and air pressure choices -- well, actually, that might be fun to try, but we would still have to roll the putts, ha ha.

p.s. In my own swing, I try to keep the club in the space in front of me so that the shoulder turn is the key to the backswing. I want a big shoulder turn and as little hip turn as I am strong enough to hold. From there, uncoiling the lower body is my only downswing thought.

[yygolfnb]

I went to the two plane after needing to simplify my game due to lack of practice time (young kids). Once I got it down, I hardly practice it anymore and for some strange reason I shoot more consistently that I ever have. I just work on getting my feel for putting and chipping before a round and it works. My shots can be ugly and all over the place at times, but the scores are better than when I worked my tail off. I imagine when I can put some effort into it I will be quite happy. My major swing thought is keep my arms in front of my body. Hope that helps.

That is what I call talent!

[JackLee]

Yes, I'm out here doing quite well with a two plane swing. I'm not sure if a one plane swing is possible, but with a very flat swing, it seems to me that your clubhead path would be limited to inside-to-inside or outside-in. I prefer slightly inside-out for my normal shot (more room for error). I also like to work the ball left or right as needed.

[Stacey_E]

Yes, I'm out here doing quite well with a two plane swing. I'm not sure if a one plane swing is possible, but with a very flat swing, it seems to me that your clubhead path would be limited to inside-to-inside or outside-in. I prefer slightly inside-out for my normal shot (more room for error). I also like to work the ball left or right as needed.

Any tips, swing thoughts or wisdom you'd care to impart? When I make a conscious effort to lift the club (about halfway back) it seems that I have to pause at the top a little longer. I try not to have any swing thoughts coming down other than to get my right elbow tight against my hip. But It also seems, if I strike the ball this way, that I am coming in shallow and finishing with my hands quite low (like ribcage high) and around my body. Does that sound right? Please tell me if it doesn't.

Before, when I brought the club back flat, I had to come over the top to get back to the impact zone. I always had a whippy finish where the club was bouncing off my back and there was no way I could hold that finish. It seemed like I was just lashing at the ball. If I hit it flush that was great. If not, it was fat or skull city.

[JackLee]

Any tips, swing thoughts or wisdom you'd care to impart? When I make a conscious effort to lift the club (about halfway back) it seems that I have to pause at the top a little longer. I try not to have any swing thoughts coming down other than to get my right elbow tight against my hip. But It also seems, if I strike the ball this way, that I am coming in shallow and finishing with my hands quite low (like ribcage high) and around my body. Does that sound right? Please tell me if it doesn't.

Well, I am not much of a teacher. I only became a good ball striker last May after reading "The Golf Swing and Its Master Key Explained" by Noel Thomas. This is the body powered swing that is used by most pros with lead shoulder control making it easy, at least for me.

I have mentioned this $6.00 ebook several times in this forum, but only one or two others have said anything about it. So, maybe it does not help others as much as it has helped me. However, I learned about it in another forum where there was a long thread about it, mostly positive. That thread is gone now after that forum had some server problems. Anyway, if you want to try it, just Google the title.

[mm6840]

Well, I am not much of a teacher. I only became a good ball striker last May after reading "The Golf Swing and Its Master Key Explained" by Noel Thomas. This is the body powered swing that is used by most pros with lead shoulder control making it easy, at least for me.

Hi

I bought it and read it ! And they're very good/simple/compact instructions. I try it and was worked for me too (getting quickly better regulary '90 per 18 ). However I decided to go 1 plane route.. mostly for the reason i'm extremly right side oriented and have trouble with left side leading everything. (At first 1plane was confusion, but now i'm in the progress again ) regards,