Flat vs Upright Swing Plane(s)

[One Planer]

A lot of folk on here who have seen my swing videos know I have a very flat swing plane.

Over the winter I'm looking to move to a more upright swing. I'm not taking extremes such as Kuchar (Flat) to Furyk (Steep), but I would like something less flat.

Obviously I'll have less coil in my upper body and hands would be higher but are there and real advantages to having a more upright swing?

 

[Maninblack4612]

Depends how you achieve it. I'm a firm believer in the view that the shoulders must rotate at right angles to the spine. If you get a steeper plane by tilting the shoulders, which is always a risk, you destroy your swing. My swing is very flat & is a combination of very short legs & long arms, combined with very quiet hands throughout the swing. If you steepen your swing by putting your arms on a steeper plane than the shoulders you are likely to improve the striking of your medium & short irons & add some power. However, your timing will need to be good because, with the shoulders & arms swinging on different planes, it is easier to come over the top or leave the club behind.

With the handle of "One Planer" you may be familiar with Jim Hardy's "The Plane Truth". He explains in this book the difference between flat & upright planes. And, by the way, Kutcher steepened his plane some time ago, although not too noticeably. I know someone who has had a coaching session with him & he said that he was an incredible striker.

 

[the_coach]

whatever the current swing motions folks have the real ways forwards is looking to improve that existing motion by ideally going back to the first link in the chain that initiates the whole swing subsequent problem issues - the outcome, goal, always looking for sound impact conditions that can be a ways better repeated

think often times folks maybes get a little ways hung up on 1 or 2 plane, flat or upright swing descriptions when for good bunch of folks that isn't what is actually going on through the motions anyways

- 'one plane' 'A swing' etc all kinda marketing gambits - the hook line - by whichever particular teacher to get their own 'swing model' in the market to try to make it stand out so their stuff gains some traction

having a lead arm plane on a similar plane to the shoulder plane - or having a lead arm plane little ways higher than the shoulder plane - either - still means the body pivot, coil, has to be there just the same ways

so look at where would it be beneficial for a particular golfers motion to be from set-up, through the backswing to give the optimum opportunity from atop the swing to then have a good functional downswing to have real sound impact conditions
(taking in any physicality issues folks may have)

{would say to what you looking to do through a change that some set-up adjustments plus a little ways different takeback to the top of the swing - mostly based on what the right arm/shoulder are at address & then what happens through this movement back to the top
- looking to change this would have a very marked improvement on the subsequent motion to impact, so impact & the shot outcomes as a norm

- looking to change this would for sure but just as a by-product give a lead arm position that was a little ways higher than the shoulder plane (so not under the shoulder plane as currently is) but that would come about by a little ways better right arm/shoulder movement back & not just by looking for a more upright top position

but bunch more important would mean having the right arm/shoulder motion through the backswing to atop the swing that could then function a good ways better to deliver some real sound impact conditions}

 

[Maninblack4612]

whatever the current swing motions folks have the real ways forwards is looking to improve that existing motion by ideally going back to the first link in the chain that initiates the whole swing subsequent problem issues - the outcome, goal, always looking for sound impact conditions that can be a ways better repeated

think often times folks maybes get a little ways hung up on 1 or 2 plane, flat or upright swing descriptions when for good bunch of folks that isn't what is actually going on through the motions anyways

- 'one plane' 'A swing' etc all kinda marketing gambits - the hook line - by whichever particular teacher to get their own 'swing model' in the market to try to make it stand out so their stuff gains some traction

having a lead arm plane on a similar plane to the shoulder plane - or having a lead arm plane little ways higher than the shoulder plane - either - still means the body pivot, coil, has to be there just the same ways

so look at where would it be beneficial for a particular golfers motion to be from set-up, through the backswing to give the optimum opportunity from atop the swing to then have a good functional downswing to have real sound impact conditions
(taking in any physicality issues folks may have)

{would say to what you looking to do through a change that some set-up adjustments plus a little ways different takeback to the top of the swing - mostly based on what the right arm/shoulder are at address & then what happens through this movement back to the top
- looking to change this would have a very marked improvement on the subsequent motion to impact, so impact & the shot outcomes as a norm

- looking to change this would for sure but just as a by-product give a lead arm position that was a little ways higher than the shoulder plane (so not under the shoulder plane as currently is) but that would come about by a little ways better right arm/shoulder movement back & not just by looking for a more upright top position

but bunch more important would mean having the right arm/shoulder motion through the backswing to atop the swing that could then function a good ways better to deliver some real sound impact conditions}

I don't understand any of this.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Depends how you achieve it. I'm a firm believer in the view that the shoulders must rotate at right angles to the spine. If you get a steeper plane by tilting the shoulders, which is always a risk, you destroy your swing. My swing is very flat & is a combination of very short legs & long arms, combined with very quiet hands throughout the swing. If you steepen your swing by putting your arms on a steeper plane than the shoulders you are likely to improve the striking of your medium & short irons & add some power. However, your timing will need to be good because, with the shoulders & arms swinging on different planes, it is easier to come over the top or leave the club behind.

With the handle of "One Planer" you may be familiar with Jim Hardy's "The Plane Truth". He explains in this book the difference between flat & upright planes. And, by the way, Kutcher steepened his plane some time ago, although not too noticeably. I know someone who has had a coaching session with him & he said that he was an incredible striker.

The Plane Truth book is a very good starting point. Breaks it down very simply. Is the OP going to do it under professional guidance or on his own?

 

[the_coach]

I don't understand any of this.

the piece at the end of the post in brackets is to the op - speaking to the op's current swing motion

the rest, generally if you look to improve - what you're looking to improve are impact conditions, & the ability to reproduce those better impact conditions the majority of the time you play

to do that you should look at the first point that's causing the issue - where is it? even if it's a combination of a bunch of stuff there will be some 'root' causes - grip, set-up, or within the motion itself, that is leading to difficulties in that particular golfers motion

you need a sound pivot, coil, whether or not the lead arm matches the shoulder plane or is higher than the shoulder plane, whether hands 'lower' or 'higher' at the top of the backswing position makes no difference to having a sound coil
it's a misconception to think otherwise

flat or upright in general isn't a particular issue

 

[One Planer]

The Plane Truth book is a very good starting point. Breaks it down very simply. Is the OP going to do it under professional guidance or on his own?

Professional guidance Martin.

And only if he thinks it will help.

 

[patricks148]

it will be worth a try Gaz.

Ive gone from being flat to more upright in the last year and a half and it has made a huge difference to my iron striking and distance.

the driver has proved a little harder to master though, but gained at least 10 yards with each club.

 

[NWJocko]

A lot of folk on here who have seen my swing videos know I have a very flat swing plane.

Over the winter I'm looking to move to a more upright swing. I'm not taking extremes such as Kuchar (Flat) to Furyk (Steep), but I would like something less flat.

Obviously I'll have less coil in my upper body and hands would be higher but are there and real advantages to having a more upright swing?

Not sure I understand this.

Why are you looking to change swing plane if you don't know what the advantages are!?

 

[Maninblack4612]

flat or upright in general isn't a particular issue

But Jim Hardy would say that, depending on how the arm plane relates to the shoulder plane, the fundamentals of the swing are very different.

 

[the_coach]

But Jim Hardy would say that, depending on how the arm plane relates to the shoulder plane, the fundamentals of the swing are very different.

bubba or hunter will use the same (fundamental) sequence from the top to get into their optimum impact conditions

 

[the_coach]

something maybes worth considering to investigate & look at with a PGA Pro is how the trail arm works best through the backswing to the top

how the condition & shape of the trail shoulder in the set-up address posture & how the trail arm hangs influences how the trail arm works (orientation of how the trail elbow hinges & how the upper part of the trail arm (humerus) externally rotates some)

[video=youtube;H1MWKlIJEUw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1MWKlIJEUw[/video]

 

[tsped83]

I understand the OPs question, but the solutions provided here are bonkers crazy and for your average handicap golfer, I would wager, impossible to understand!

Keep It Simple Stupid.

 

[Maninblack4612]

bubba or hunter will use the same (fundamental) sequence from the top to get into their optimum impact conditions

I have a lot of faith in Jim Hardy's analysis and from personal experience I think theres a fundamental difference between the downswing of a flat (one plane) & upright (two plane) swinger.

I've tried both. In the one plane swing, the main downswing move is to turn the upper body & shoulders as hard as possible towards the hole. This works for me. If I do this from the top of a two plane backswing I come right over the top & hit a huge pull or banana slice. If I do what JH says and start the downswing with a slide of the hips and move the arms quickly into the body I sometimes, but not often enough, get an acceptable shot. The two downswings feel completely different, although they may look similar.

I think the two types of swing identified by Jim Hardy are the reason why, when you read instruction articles in magazines, there appears to be lots of conflicting advice. The writers are describing two distinct types of swing.

 

[Maninblack4612]

I understand the OPs question, but the solutions provided here are bonkers crazy and for your average handicap golfer, I would wager, impossible to understand!

Keep It Simple Stupid.

I agree. When you look at a good golfer's swing it's a simple movement. You've got time for one thought on the backswing & one on the downswing. any more than that and you're lost. I would agree with the coach that if you start with the correct grip, stance & alingment you've got a much better chance of carrying out the swing properly.

 

[the_coach]

I have a lot of faith in Jim Hardy's analysis and from personal experience I think theres a fundamental difference between the downswing of a flat (one plane) & upright (two plane) swinger.

I've tried both. In the one plane swing, the main downswing move is to turn the upper body & shoulders as hard as possible towards the hole. This works for me. If I do this from the top of a two plane backswing I come right over the top & hit a huge pull or banana slice. If I do what JH says and start the downswing with a slide of the hips and move the arms quickly into the body I sometimes, but not often enough, get an acceptable shot. The two downswings feel completely different, although they may look similar.

I think the two types of swing identified by Jim Hardy are the reason why, when you read instruction articles in magazines, there appears to be lots of conflicting advice. The writers are describing two distinct types of swing.

whatever feel to real that works for any folks to play to their potential is all good - you have done a great job, excuse me saying, to reach back to the standard of game & index you have done given the good young age you reached.

whatever 'planes' a swing works on - there are several - everyone has the same basic 'fundamental' that in a backswing the section above the belt line starts the motion against some resistance of the section below the belt line until a sound rotation is made to the top
in the downswing the opposite happens as the section below the belt line starts the motion from the top & the section above the belt line follows in rotation to impact & continues to rotate through to the finish

{real key to how any individuals motion finds the optimum plane in the backswing is how the right arm hinges/folds in conjunction with how the upper right arm externally rotates some}

[video]http://blog.trackmangolf.com/113-mph-club-speed-with-a-7-iron/[/video]

 

[Maninblack4612]

whatever feel to real that works for any folks to play to their potential is all good

This is true. It amazes me that I can make what feels like huge changes to the way I swing & when I see the video it looks exactly like the old swing. This is why I think it's extremely difficult for most people to look at a swing that has produced a bad shot & say what has caused it. It's often easier to feel what you have done wrong yourself than for someone else to diagnose it. There's such a small margin between a good & bad shot that the difference is often not noticeable to most people.