or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by JoePete

Thanks for defining his short-hand. Yes, I agree that will result in a draw. The point I raised, has to deal with what happens at impact on any draw, fade, low shot, high shot, etc. between the ball and the clubface. In order to vary the corresponding spin, you are changing where the clubhead meets the ball. On just this point alone, I return to my statement to the original poster - that feel of where you are hitting the ball becomes integral to developing the muscle...
 I will just offer some points of reference:Google "presumptive fallacy"  -  any time someone starts "as you know" "as we all know" etc. it engenders a logical fallacy. As to our differing definitions of mis-hits - it is again employing the presumptive fallacy to say "nobody" uses my terminology. Moreover whether I say intentional mishit, and you say draw, does it really matter? As far as "center of gravity projecting through the club face" thing, I think I politely asked...
I agree the design of a clubhead has no bearing on the physics. However, it can have a bearing on someone learning how to use those physics. We are not Iron Byron. If I am trying to get a sense of what I have to do with my swing to draw a ball 10, 20, and 30 yards, the feedback off the clubface (i.e. feel) is important to my being able to dial in those differences. "If you hit a shot, center contact, with a face 2* right, path 4* right," Two degrees open to swing path,...
Quote:You are only dealing with half the equation. The sweet spot (center of percussion) is only half the issue. It depends where on the ball you hit (left or right of vertical axis). Ultimately what you are trying to do is impart a predictable degree of spin on the ball. Now if you prefer to change your swing path to a degree where you hit the ball flush (i.e. on the sweet spot) just the right amount left or right of the ball's axis, fine. But you can also maintain a...
Allow me to clarify: I was responding @mvmac's statement "As you know and as we've said before GI irons are no more difficult to "shape" when hit on the sweet spot than the most blade-like of clubs." I'll skip over the presumptive nature of the statement and point out that "when hit on the sweet spot" is passive - we don't know what or who is doing the hitting. If you are are talking a machine, then yes, there is no difference in shot shaping capability, as the design of...
Good points. He dislodged something that he believes could physically interfere with his swing - a mental distraction only because of its potential for physical interference.
I am not so sure. If you look at 13-2/23 - just shaking water off the leaves on a tree can be a penalty. Note especially the use of the word "distraction," which to me implies the USGA recognizes that even if an improvement is made mostly for mental benefit, it could be a rule violation. Of course where do you draw the line? If there is a divot off to the side and you replace it because it was annoying you, is that a rule violation? Hardly, but again, the rule of thumb I...
Yes and no. If you consider feel an important component of practicing and shaping a shot, a typical blade offers slight more feedback than something oversized and perimeter weighted. Part of this also depends on how you shape those shots etc. A draw, a fade, a low shot, etc. is technically a mishit when you compare the angle of the clubface to swingpath and target line; they are slight "mishits." It is not about the executing the shot you have, but how you practiced it. On...
 My comment was mostly in reference to the original post and trying to understand why typically it is not a penalty if you fix a ball mark in the area where, although it is in your line of play, you would not intentionally hit your ball in that manner (you're not trying skull the ball 150 yards, but even if you do and it hits the repaired area it is not a penalty). Similarly, with D13-2/24 it is a penalty to improve your lie (e.g. breaking branches, even accidentally on a...
I think this is one of the areas of the rules where intent is critical. It is interesting that the Rules of Golf do inject intent into the rules (definition of a stroke is best example, accidentally hitting the ball is not a stroke per se - it is a penalty and you have to replace). If the affected repair is in the player's intended line of play, then it is a violation. If it ends up being accidental (he tops the ball) no penalty. If after making the repair, the player...
New Posts  All Forums: