The concept of "who" is tilting at windmills is a personal opinion.
Telling a person that he must not express his opinion because "enough is enough" is equivalent to censorship.
I don't censor anybody in this forum as long as they express their opinions decorously in their post. I expect to be treated in a like manner.
I agree with Yoda when he states that a golfer swings the clubhead. I will even partially accept the idea that he specifically swings the sweetspot of the clubhead. However, where I differ from the majority viewpoint is that I believe that a golfer must swing the clubhead along the clubshaft plane, and not sweetspot plane 2, in order to get the sole of the club to be parallel to the ground, and along the surface of the ground, at impact. Yodas Luke's demonstration with a big club provides experimental proof that supports my belief.
In the backswing, he took his clubshaft up the clubshaft plane (not sweetspot plane 2) and during the downswing he took his clubshaft down the clubshaft plane (and not the sweetspot 2 plane). From its address position on the sweetspot plane to its end-backswing position on the clubshaft plane, the sweetspot rotated away from sweetspot plane 2 to get to the clubshaft plane by the end of his backswing. From the delivery position to impact, the sweetspot rotated away from the clubshaft plane to get to the sweetspot plane 2 by impact.
This exactly what I predicted when I wrote in post #165 that a golfer would always have to swing his clubshaft along the clubshaft plane, but he would have to make an accomodation for a greater hosel-sweetspot distance not by altering his on-plane swing (as he would perform it with a clubshaft that lacked a clubhead), but by simply standing the appropriate distance away from the ball.
In other words, I believe that the experimental evidence from Yodas Luke's demonstration swing with a big club supports my belief that the sweetspot rotates away from, and to, the clubshaft plane - and that the hosel doesn't rotate away from, and to, the sweetspot plane.
You are free to disagree with me, and harbor a contrary belief, but you have no "right" to attempt to censor my opinion (by stating "enough is enough") because my opinion conflicts with your opinion.
Threaded Mode
