• Announcements

    • iacas

      Create a Signature!   02/05/2016

      Everyone, go here and edit your signature this week: http://thesandtrap.com/settings/signature/.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
superfly777

56 v 60 from greenside bunker

14 posts in this topic

56 degrees seems to be the standard for a sand wedge although plenty of people have other lofts (54 seems to be popular). Most teaching I've seen shows how you should take your 56 degree, open your stance, open your clubface and use this added loft to give you more height out of the greenside bunkers. Fair enough.

Thing is, if I open my 56 the loft would probably become about 60 degrees, and I have a 60 degree lob wedge anyway. Wouldn't it be easier to just use the 60 degree lob wedge and hit it with a square stance and square clubface? This would give me the same height/trajectory and give me a larger club face to hit whilst allowing more room for error? Also the grooves of the club would be straight on allowing more backspin once it hits the green.

Is there some benefit to opening a 56 degree that I am not aware of?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

Opening the club adds bounce, and bounce is your friend.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Ok I get that as I like bounce in my wedges. I have Cleveland 588 RTX wedges in 56/14 and 60/12.

12 degrees is the standard bounce for Cleveland's 60 degree wedge although the average bounce for other companies seems to be about 8 degrees in their 60s. Seems then that my 60/12 is a higher bounce than other lob wedges.

If I hit the 60 degree square then would you think my 12 degrees of bounce is about right or is that still not enough for a greenside bunker shot?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As seen in the video above Not only does opening the face expose bounce it also helps promote spin. But i think this video will help describe the reasons of why it would be beneficial to use more loft in a green side bunker.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used my 48 degree on short bunker shots simply because I didn't feel like switching. I've used my 3 iron opened way up to try and splash it out on a shallow escape. If you use the right technique, and the shot isn't too demanding, you can use anything.

I suggest you consider the fact that almost no manufacturers make sand wedges in random lofts; it may not indicate that's the best design, but you get the best selection among lofts 54-56.

There are some who use a higher loft like a 58 or 60 on their sand club, but I prefer my highest lofted club to have low bounce for specialty shots where you need the most height, around the green. I have no trouble generating height when I need it out of sand.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

The consistancy of bunker sand varies considerably and shouldn't be overlooked.  The fluffier it is, the more bounce you will likely want to keep from digging too deep.  In a trap with moist compacted sand the higher loft / lower bounce lob wedge is probably just the ticket.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me it depends on what the shot calls for. If you are short sided, you want to pop the ball up fast and high to land soft, and that's the lob wedge's job. But if the pin is at the back and you need to fly it 25 yards onto the green, I'd rather have less loft because I don't want to have to hit it too hard. With decent bunker technique, a 2 degree difference in bounce angle shouldn't be make or break and 14/12 is a sensible setup. Now, if you were one of those hairy-chested fellows who insist on 60 with 4 degrees of bounce ...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Honestly you can use as much bounce as you want on a hard pan lie, doesn't matter. You could take a high bounce sandwedge and not have a problem hitting it off a cart path.

For me it depends on the shot. I honestly like trying to fly the ball to the flag, i am not a big fan of having the ball roll out, unless i have the green running away from me. So i'll either use my sandwedge or pitching wedge. Have them really open or square, and vary how far back behind the ball i hit it. But i never try to chunk and run the ball. i always try to slide the club under the ball, hearing that thump sound.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Sounds to me that if we assume a 56 degree opened is about 60 and my other club is a 60 degree wedge, then it comes down to a battle (for my personal playing style) of more bounce v more clubface to hit. So if I find that if the 12 degrees of bounce in my lob wedge is enough bounce for greenside sand shots then if I want a high trajectory then the lob wedge is the way to go.

Better go and experiment.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I more or less employ the Stan Utley method in my short game so my SW is 58* with 12* of bounce. I use it for most basic greenside sand shots or if I have short sided myself to the pin. Utley suggests using the 58* for about all short game shots but for basic chip shots I prefer my 52* with 8* of bounce gap wedge.

Keep in mind that there is no true standard of what a sand wedge or gap wedge has to be as far as loft or bounce. I do believe it's smart to match your bounce with your normal course conditions in that in soft fairways or fluffy sand it is better to use higher bounce versus harder fairways and firmer sand requiring less bounce.  Following these basic guidelines just make the short game easier.

As far as your initial question of just using a 60* with a square face as others stated your not utilizing the bounce to it's maximum effect and you would tend to dig into the sand to deep leaving the ball either in the bunker or well short of the pin.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like using my 60 from the sand for most bunker shots. One of the biggest reasons I went with the 60 years ago was that it I could swing a little harder. I had a tendency to decelerate especially with the short shots. Years later, I don't often decelerate, but I am used to the 60 so I keep it as the primary. If there is a shot over 15 yards, I will pull out the 54.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many years ago I read an article that interviewed Greg Norman, he had a theory that hacks like us should use a 60 with as much bounce as they could find and use that for getting out of sand.  And I could see that, along with what TourSpoon said, swing hard.

Personally, I don't find that to work for me in the kind of sand I play, it's not the white powdery stuff like you see in FL, it's river bottom sand and it can pack down and bake out and be pretty much like concrete.  In that sand, I like very little bounce.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by LuciusWooding

I've used my 3 iron opened way up to try and splash it out on a shallow escape.

Hold the presses.  Whaaat?  A 3i opened up?  That sounds crazy.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by bplewis24

Hold the presses.  Whaaat?  A 3i opened up?  That sounds crazy.

Got it to stay on the green because there was a bit of green to work with and a low lip. I don't recommend it. I did it because I'm a fairly good sand player but I've lacked bunker practice this winter. Needed to exaggerate my bunker setup by opening the face and slicing/splashing it out to get the feel of the proper technique. But I can hit most of my greenside bunker shots with any of my 3 wedges I prefer, almost never failing to get within 10 feet. Only a few will actually require the bounce of the SW or the loft of the LW. It's mostly technique and a little bit of lies/conditions.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      No problem.  I'm not tired of responding to sincere and thoughtful posts, like yours, even if it rehashes stuff from before because OF COURSE it is unrealistic to expect people to read 3000 posts before commenting.  In any case I have that quote in a file and it was simple to post it - much simpler and politer than saying "go find it , it's here."  I DO think that one should maybe at least read a smattering of such a big thread before jumping in,   But I have no patience whatsoever with the "I saw Jack play" and "he was nice at a clinic" type posts or posts by people who try to claim some special credibility because of some entirely personal subjective connection.  But that isn't you. As to the rest, you asked for the exact quote and I gave it to you.  If you want to argue with what he said, that is another matter and does not concern me, since my position is that even if we, arguendo, say that the field strengths did NOT get better, Tiger's career was so much more dominant than Jack's that it doesn't matter.  I don't NEED to make a stronger field argument to make the case that Tiger dominated golf in a way and to an extent that no other golfer has ever dominated golf.  And he did it for 15 years (after an absolutely unprecedented career as an amateur) which, IMO, is long enough that it no longevity argument could overcome the sheer dominance advantage his career embodied.   The fact that all that is true in the face of field strength increasing is just icing on the cake.   
    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      Excellent. Thank you for re-posting that quote. Sorry to hear you're tired of rehashing. Why not just let the thread die then? Is the expectation that folks will read all 272 pages before making a comment? That strikes me as an unrealistic expectation.. I agree the tour is tougher than it used to be. I consider the differences more incremental than astronomical...not the 'order of magnitude' range that seems to come through in some comments. I think Jack is both being accurate in assessing his perception of a shift in quality, but also exaggerating for effect or experiencing present-day myopia at the very least about the money. $100 in 1962 money would be ~ $800 dollars today. Not exactly what I would call bus fare. The 'paltry' $100,000 had the buying power of about $800,000 in today's dollars, which is ~ 60% of today's average purse and ~ 30% of the Players' purse).. Most Americans would happily take an annual salary like that today. They weren't getting ditch digger wages. The prize money even then definitely attracted keen competitive interest. Clearly purses have also grown more than inflation and even journeyman make more in a year than the top 10 in 1962 (below), but it seems about in line with the growth of the population of golfers in the U.S. itself - about triple since Jack's day, Endorsement money has definitely gotten bigger, as the tour and the golf marketplace have developed and expanded over time.   Rank       Player                  1962 $                   2015 $ 1            Arnold Palmer        $81,448                 $639,223 2            Gene Littler           $66,201                 $519,562 3            Jack Nicklaus         $61,869                 $485,563 4            Billy Casper            $61,842                 $485,351 5            Bob Goalby            $46,241                 $362,910 6            Gary Player            $45,838                 $359,748 7            Doug Sanders        $43,340                 $340,143 8            Dave Ragan          $37,327                 $292,951 9            Bobby Nichols       $34,312                 $269,288 10          Phil Rodgers          $32,182                 $252,572  
    • Claim Your Achievements Here!
      Broke par, Lowest Score Wins. 
    • Disadvantage of too stiff a flex?
      I've often thought about going with an X flex driver shaft.  I may get an adapter from My Titleist 910 and experiment.
    • Claim Your Achievements Here!
      I'd like to claim the "Broke 80" award, as I managed this for the first time December 28th last year.   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 OUT Gross 5 4 4 5 5 3 5 5 5 41(41) Par 4 4 3 5 4 3 4 4 5 36 Distance 353 357 168 465 312 142 389 339 492 3017 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 IN TOTAL 5 4 4 4 5 3 5 4 4 38(38) 79 (79) 5 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 35 71 479 356 323 355 396 185 309 136 365 2904 5921               Thanks!        
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. TessaEdin
      TessaEdin
      (24 years old)
  • Blog Entries