Swing path question

[Canary_Yellow]

I've read on here a couple of times when there have been comments on a swing video that it might be an "in-to-in" swing.

Until reading that suggestion, I had assumed that in-to-in would defy physics, assuming the club is being swung hard and not steered gently. If you swing from the inside, how can you then be inside again on the way through? Surely momentum dictates that the path would be out beyond impact?

Or, is the way that you get an in-to-in path a flip of the hands? Would be a pretty tough move to pull off I would have thought, and even then, not sure how a flip would really change the path, wouldn't it just change the club face angle?

 

[Maninblack4612]

If you think of a swing on two planes the horizontal plane, looking from above, works around the body. Before impact it's on the inside, at impact it's square & immediately after impact it's inside again. If you watch any slow motion down the line video of a pro swinging with anything but a very upright swing you should see this.

 

[Orikoru]

The way I'm picturing that is almost like a baseball bat swing. I imagine it would produce a hook?

 

[Canary_Yellow]

Thank you - that's interesting.

I was thinking of it differently, i.e. the explanar / hula hoop idea of the swing. Therefore, what I mean when I say inside is if the hula hoop is tilted such that it's higher on the left than it is on the right (for a right handed golfer). So the hands come down below a neutral plane, and exit above a neutral plane.

So on my thinking, inside to inside would mean below a neutral plane before and after impact, which would be physically impossible at speed, wouldn't it?!

I see what you're saying though, that a neutral plane means your hands are inside before and after impact.

 

[jim8flog]

Shortly before and after impact the body (particularly the hips) would have opened up to allow this to happen.

When you look at swing training gadgets like Explanar this is the way the swing is developed.

 

[Maninblack4612]

Thank you - that's interesting.

I was thinking of it differently, i.e. the explanar / hula hoop idea of the swing. Therefore, what I mean when I say inside is if the hula hoop is tilted such that it's higher on the left than it is on the right (for a right handed golfer). So the hands come down below a neutral plane, and exit above a neutral plane.

So on my thinking, inside to inside would mean below a neutral plane before and after impact, which would be physically impossible at speed, wouldn't it?!

I see what you're saying though, that a neutral plane means your hands are inside before and after impact.

I think that's one of the problems with the Explanar, it doesn't allow the follow through to go left as it would naturally if the hoop wasn't there. I like it for training the backswing. When I try it, I look at the plane it describes & I can't believe that's the way the club is going when I go on it. Feels to me as if the club is rising vertically when it clearly isn't.

 

[Canary_Yellow]

I've tried to pen an answer to your original post about 5 times, but I just don't get what you don't get ?
Imagine a line going from the target and extending through the ball, the club is inside it before impact, reaches the edge of the arc and momentarily moves along the line at impact, then swings back inside after impact.
That's in-square-in, if the face is at the target it will be a straight shot. Don't overcomplicated it ?

How is what you're describing different to a neutral on plane swing path? (Rhetorical question)

To me, describing something as inside is to say that it's not on the neutral on plane swing path, it's inside it. Therefore, using your target line description, I would think that if you are inside the neutral arc, it would be very difficult to stop the club crossing over the line on the outside after it's hit the ball.

I now understand what inside to inside is describing though, thank you!