Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWOAT  I dont get the one-plane vs two plane thing... You could have a an upright, two plane, setup, then drop your arms in the transition to more of a one plane impact... Or you could use a more "Big Muscle" swing from either setup position, or be a more Armsy swing, from either position. You could have an armsy, upright, One plane swing, or a rotary swing, hunched over setup, and have a two plane swing... too many exceptions to this "plane truth" deal. |
All in all, I agree with this sentiment. Firstly, there are almost no pure one-planers or pure two-planers, most have mixed aspects of both. Secondly, Hardy's books are gross misrepresentations of some aspects of the swings. I only know the 1-p half of the texts well, but there are some blatantly wrong pieces of information in there, about Hogan's swing and the like.
All that said, however, I think that in the whole, Hardy's books have been a good thing for the golf community. Hardy didn't discover the differences in the swings, but he brought attention back to it again, and got people talking and thinking about it. I think that it did re-awaken many people to the risk of 'cherry-picking' the tip-of-the-day and trying to patch it into their swing -- that is, that the tip-of-the-day may be the complete opposite of what they are (or should be) trying to do with their swing. That there are some fundamentals in setup and the like that are better for each flavor of swing.
But, it is undeniable that there are more commonalities between the two than differences. Both, when done right, are still driven by the large muscles and a weight transition, just different in the degree. The only way to hit powerful straight shots is to have the club on plane and hand ahead of the ball at impact, and both swings, again when done right, deliver that exact same thing.