or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Practice Range › Instruction and Playing Tips › Hitting Up or Down with the Driver in an Inline Pattern
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hitting Up or Down with the Driver in an Inline Pattern

post #1 of 238
Thread Starter 

Just over a year ago I posted a thread and suggested everyone re-evaluate "hitting up with the driver."

 

I take my own advice to all of you to heart, and I've spent - off and on - the past year re-evaluating this advice myself. And after a year more of instruction, consideration, and thought, earlier this week I proposed to Dave that we stop teaching people to hit draws with the driver and allow for perhaps a bit more of a fade pattern - a straight fade pattern.

 

I know I've helped make popular these charts showing that the average PGA Tour player hits down on the driver 1.3°, but the average PGA Tour player hits the ball 285 yards or so. The average golfer doesn't, and the numbers are undeniable - players who swing up slightly hit the ball farther with the driver. Their launch conditions - both launch angle and backspin rate - tends to improve.

 

Now, many of you know that the stock shot from a neutral alignment and a swing that's perfectly on-plane (this isn't just S&T here) with an iron is a push-draw stroke (or a push stroke) because when a ball is struck before low point, the clubhead is still moving slightly outward. That's why S&T prescribes a "push-draw" from a perfectly neutral setup - if the club is swung perfectly on plane, or "in-line," and the baseline of the plane is pointed directly at the flag, and you catch the ball before low point, then the path will be forward (duh), down (duh again), and slightly outward.

 

If you're having trouble imagining this, imagine holding a plate on about a 45 degree angle. The low point is where the plate sits on the table. That's the deepest part of your divot. Notice that any tangent prior to this low point is still traveling outward, and any tangent afterwards is traveling inward.

 

Anyway, the takeaway is this: for any swing, any ball struck before low point will be struck with a club traveling outward relative to the base line of the plane, and any ball struck after low point will be struck with a club traveling inward relative to the base line of the plane. Thus, for a base line oriented at the target, any downward angle of attack will result in a clubhead path to the right, and any struck upwards will result in a clubhead path to the left (that's a good chunk the entire D-Plane concept in 10 seconds, by the way).

 

Now, you can manipulate things, of course. If you orient the base line five degrees right, you can swing up on the ball five degrees and still have a clubhead path that's roughly 2.5 degrees right (the clubhead path is roughly 1/2 the angle of attack). And you can play a fade by shifting the baseline eight degrees left and coming down on the ball eight degrees too (clubheadpath would be four degrees right of baseline, so still four degrees left of target). But that's neither here nor there... I want to talk about an inline or on-plane swing.

 

Here's a picture of Charlie Wi (I could have used virtually anyone, but he illustrates my first point as he draws every driver he hits).

 

Ball Position S_T Fade.jpg

What you'll see in this image are three lines.

 

The red line shows his ball position.

The blue line shows the center of his swing arc, or the low point in his swing.

The green line shows a point at which he could position the golf ball to catch it slightly on the upstroke.

 

Note: low point can be anywhere in a golf swing, but to keep things simple low point is going to be shown off the left shoulder, as it's almost always really close to the left shoulder in a good golf swing. It can move a little forward or back, but for all intents and purposes, "low point is straight down from the left armpit or shoulder socket" isn't going to get you into any trouble as a general rule of thumb.

 

If Charlie swings perfectly on-plane, with this ball position, he'll be swinging ever so slightly to the right. If his clubface is slightly open to the target and closed to the path, he'll hit his stock push-draw. If it's square to the path, a straight push, and open to the path a push-fade.

 

If Charlie's ball was teed up at the blue line, he'd be hitting the ball perfectly level. A clubface pointed directly at the target would result in an awfully straight shot.

 

If Charlie's ball was teed up at the green line - just inside his toes or his left heel - Charlie would be sending the driver slightly to the left. A clubface closed to the target and open to the path would produce a pull-fade. A clubface square to the target and thus open to the path would produce a straight-fade. And the third, a push-fade, you can figure out.

 

Here's a circle that illustrates this further. Let's consider that the clubhead swings in a circle (it doesn't - wrist cock/hinge changes the radius) with the center point being the left shoulder. The dots in this image correspond to the image above of Charlie:

 

circle.jpg

 

Note that this diagram serves a double function. We can consider this as an overhead view OR a face-on view. In either view, the blue dot is the low point (face-on) as well as the outermost point (overhead) on the circle. The red point is prior to low point (like an iron shot), and you can see it's struck while the clubhead is still descending to low point (face-on) and moving outward (overhead). Conversely, the green point is struck while the clubhead is ascending (face-on) and moving to the left, or inward (overhead).

 

So, circling back (no pun intended) to our students, two things are true.

 

1. We don't want to teach two wildly different swings to people. The conditions are different for each - a ball on a tee versus a ball on the ground - but if the swings are really different, we want to avoid doing that.

 

2. Our students - and all of us - aren't on the PGA Tour. Distance is perhaps the biggest advantage you can have in golf, and we want to do all that we can to maximize driver distance for our students.

 

So What are we going to do? We're going to start teaching students to hit the ball on the upswing.

 

::shock:: ! ::horror:: !!!

 

How? Simple. Same swing - ideally an inline, on-plane swing - with a ball position that's slightly forward. This will produce an angle of attack into the ball that's level, +1, or +2 degrees. Maybe +3 (shoulder width, width of stance, any upper-body movement in the swing, etc. all play a role).

 

Since this means the clubhead will be moving roughly 0 to 1.5 degrees left at impact, the stock driver shot we'll teach will be a straight fade or a push-fade (the path is going so little to the left that we'll likely default to a push-fade, because a straight fade aimed up the left side won't take a clubface more than one degree too closed to produce a baby pull or pull-draw).

 

Now, it's important to note that this is a very slight change. People who talk about "staying behind the ball" and "hitting up on the ball" and all that tend to do a few things that are bad for their swing. First, and foremost, they'll drop their head down and backwards. This will lead to a number of problems, including a path that's too far left and too far up (ever drop-kick a driver?). Players will tend to flip and have a higher rate of closure, which will make the shot tough to time. This faking of the secondary axis tilt will prevent their weight from going forward, which can double up on these issues.

 

No need for that - you can still pre-set the hips a little farther forward, your chest can still be roughly in the center of your stance, the ball can be inside your left toes and near or just forward of your left heel (your left arch, roughly), and you can push the hips forward, keep the head stable, catch the ball on a +1 or +2 degree upswing, achieve great launch conditions, and play a nice tight fade with the driver.

 

If you want to hit a draw, by all means, move the ball back to Charlie's position.

 

P.S. Not that he's the best example of anything relating to the driver, particularly back when this video was filmed when he was hitting down three degrees with the driver... but consider this image:

Ball Position S_T Fade_TW.jpg

 

P.P.S. Was I wrong? Sure, if you want to say so, I was. I consider this more an adaptation to how I teach, how we teach, but if you want to think I'm wrong, go for it. I never want "admitting I was wrong" to hold me back from changing something for the better. Nothing changed about my geometry... I just think that, for the average golfer, we can allow for a slight upswing contact and a fade rather than a slight downward angle and a draw with the driver, because distance is so important in the game and if this gives someone another 5 or 10 yards, so be it.

post #2 of 238

Wow, can I ever identify with this post. When I say I try to stay behind the ball hitting driver, as opposed to irons, I mean head behind the ball, slight spinal tilt away from the target, right shoulder slightly down--which I think is exactly what you see in the second set of pictures. With regard to hitting the red or blue ball with an in-out swing and slightly rising club face, that is why I use the open stance in the Trevino method of hitting a push fade. The ball is contacted before the club face gets to close. I have been working on all of this for the past year. Now I can drive the ball 230-250 reasonably accurately with only a 3/4 backswing, which at 67 puts me ahead of most guys 10-15 years younger than I am.

 

But this methodology does not work for my irons. I pretty much use S&T with my head directly over the ball. I get much more consistent contact. The planes of my two swings are reasonably similar single-plane, but the two swings are different. In a former life, I could never hit driver and irons well at the same time. Realizing that, at least for me, I had to have two different swings has made me a much better golfer. If I could just improve my short game, I just may be able to get my handicap to single digits before I turn 70.

post #3 of 238

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

And after a year more of instruction, consideration, and thought, earlier this week I proposed to Dave that we stop teaching people to hit draws with the driver and allow for perhaps a bit more of a fade pattern - a straight fade pattern.

 

If you want to hit a draw, by all means, move the ball back to Charlie's position.

 

First...this is something we have discussed at length this week and I commend Erik on this post. Well thought out and well stated and since I have spent time considering it and helping work it out, I agree...with an optional modification included here. It would be:


A second option to hit the ball on the upstroke with the altered ball position would be to simply aim slightly right and hit a pull-draw. This shot may go a bit lower than the straight-fade but if you want to play a draw (or if the hole calls for it) instead of a fade this is a good option (change of attachment/grip may be necessary which is one reason why this may not be the best option).

Also... quickly... love the plate analogy! And it's ok (in fact honest) for instructors to say they teach things "differently" with the driver than the irons. There is a difference after all...one has the ball on the ground and the other 2" or so in the air. Why such fear of this... is it impossible to believe we are not capable of modifying things with the driver? It is fairly common to hear how a player is a great iron player but not-so-good driver or vice-versa. Trying to make the "same" swing is part of the problem.

post #4 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by david_wedzik View Post
Also...quickly...love the plate analogy! And it's ok (in fact honest) for instructors to say they teach things "differently" with the driver than the irons. There is a difference after all...one has the ball on the ground and the other 2" or so in the air. Why such fear of this...is it impossible to believe we are not capable of modifying things with the driver? It is fairly common to hear how a player is a great iron player but not-so-good driver or vice-versa. Trying to make the "same" swing is part of the problem.

Dave

 

I know Foley teaches a different swing for driver to hit on the upswing. I think its slightly more weight on the backfoot during swing (45/55), what do you think of this method and have you seen his teaching on this?

 

post #5 of 238
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedFox999 View Post

I know Foley teaches a different swing for driver to hit on the upswing. I think its slightly more weight on the backfoot during swing (45/55), what do you think of this method and have you seen his teaching on this?


It's not a bad adaptation. He just presets the weight more 50/50 instead of 55/45 (left/right). Left shoulder (and the rest of the upper body) moves back a little bit, pre-sets a little bit more axis tilt. It's a very subtle change. I'm good with it.

post #6 of 238
Interesting stuff. What's the reaction been from your peers in the S&T teaching community? I know you all swap ideas quite a bit.
post #7 of 238

I must say, I don't mind hitting a slight cut with my driver as my miss tends to be a pull hook and coming way to far from the inside. Seems to be far more easier to control and less damage if i hit a 'bad' shot(slight over fade).  Recently I have been teeing the ball up off my left heel and aiming my feet left and just basically hitting a straight push which goes nice and high. Today i was cutting it about 2-3 yards, hardly anything really and only missed one fairway the whole day. I still never hit a shot which starts left of my stance line, hitting either a push-draw or push-fade. What I love most about S&T is the use of geometry and simple math/science to explain the way the ball moves, and I firmly believe it much easier to drive the golf ball with S&T as opposed to a 'conventional' swing. Consistency, once you sort out your action, becomes second nature with S&T.

post #8 of 238

So the idea is essentially to tee the ball up a bit more forward? That is funny, because I moved my ball position forward some time ago. When I started getting the S&T pattern working on my driver, I was launching it at 6-9º, resulting in poor distance. So I moved the ball forward to the inside of my left foot, and things started working better again. Never paid a lot of attention to my ball position, but once I looked at it, I realized it was closer to my left ear before I moved it. Using driveway sticks or something can help making sure you position it correctly.

 

It's also a good idea to experiment with tee height, since where you strike the ball on the clubface affects the launch angle and amount of spin.

I agree that a straight fade is a good shot with the driver. I've used to aim left and fade it onto the fairway with the driver, feels more comfortable.

 

You still want the same driving force on PP3 right? Is it possible to drive PP3 and hold the lag so much that you hit the ball on the lowpoint or slightly descending with the ball position inside the left foot, or will it at that point most of the time have started ascending? I'm asking because I'm working on PP3 at the moment and would like to know if there is any difference on that part when it comes to the driver.

 

You mentioned the chart showing distances and angles from the PGA and LPGA Tour, what is interesting to notice (which people pointed out when it was posted) is that the LPGA players on average swing +3.0 degrees up with the driver, and they average 220 yards carry, which is closer to what the average player hit it. I know part of the reason you made the last post about hitting down was to prevent people from conciously hitting up, leading to flipping and keeping the weight back.

 

With this post, you keep some of the same feelings, but get a higher launch angle because of the club hitting the ball on the upswing. I like the part about the club moving left 0 to 1.5 degrees at impact, which can give a fade spin without trying to cut across the ball. A small fade is on my opinion better than a big fade, it's the shot I prefer with the driver. Aiming at the left side of the fairway and fading it a couple of yards to the middle.

 

Is that video of Charlie in green on Youtube btw?

post #9 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

 


It's not a bad adaptation. He just presets the weight more 50/50 instead of 55/45 (left/right). Left shoulder (and the rest of the upper body) moves back a little bit, pre-sets a little bit more axis tilt. It's a very subtle change. I'm good with it.



...though I would go with the smaller modification above (and of course so would Erik and he wouldn't have written the post).  Also I'm not crazy about anything that "artificially" adds axis tilt in this manner.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Stretch View Post

Interesting stuff. What's the reaction been from your peers in the S&T teaching community? I know you all swap ideas quite a bit.


Hi Stretch! This has only been shared with a couple people and either full agreement or makes sense type conversations. Will be with Mike and Andy in the near future and get their thoughts...honestly the point isn't really to "be right" in the end (though I think we are here)...it's to get everyone thinking that there are ways to continue doing things better.

 

*** MOST importantly there isn't much modification from the pattern here at all...more than anything it is an altered ball position and slight change of aim...always a work in progress :-)

 

Dave

post #10 of 238

Is it still possible or a good idea to hit a push draw while hitting on the up swing with the driver? This would require a more inside to out path to still have the driver moving out during the intial upswing, correct? I do swing my driver much different than my irons and I'm getting a push draw most of the time. I'm not sure though if I'm actually striking the ball on a + angle of attack. My swing speed with driver is 110. Does this still warrant a - attack angle? Thanks, Dale

post #11 of 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by david_wedzik View Post


Hi Stretch! This has only been shared with a couple people and either full agreement or makes sense type conversations. Will be with Mike and Andy in the near future and get their thoughts...honestly the point isn't really to "be right" in the end (though I think we are here)...it's to get everyone thinking that there are ways to continue doing things better.


Well, if you are going to call your school Golf Evolution, then you'd better display some incremental changes over time I guess! wink.png

 

Please let us know how those discussions go. There's been enough smack talked about how "S&T doesn't work with the driver" that any modifications to the pattern in that area will probably draw quite a bit of attention. 

post #12 of 238
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stretch View Post

Interesting stuff. What's the reaction been from your peers in the S&T teaching community? I know you all swap ideas quite a bit.


As Dave said we haven't done a bunch of that yet. Thus far I've discussed it with Dave and James. I may have mentioned it to Mike M as well. If I haven't by before, I have now. :-)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeljames92 View Post

What I love most about S&T is the use of geometry and simple math/science to explain the way the ball moves, and I firmly believe it much easier to drive the golf ball with S&T as opposed to a 'conventional' swing. Consistency, once you sort out your action, becomes second nature with S&T.


Sure. And S&T isn't taking credit for the geometry or math... it just conforms to math and geometry and so on that already existed, and makes it - in my opinion - fairly easy to apply.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeph View Post

It's also a good idea to experiment with tee height, since where you strike the ball on the clubface affects the launch angle and amount of spin.

 

Indeed. If low point is behind the ball you don't really want the ball sitting close to the ground or you'll either drop-kick some or catch the ball low on the clubface a lot.

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeph View Post

You still want the same driving force on PP3 right? Is it possible to drive PP3 and hold the lag so much that you hit the ball on the lowpoint or slightly descending with the ball position inside the left foot, or will it at that point most of the time have started ascending? I'm asking because I'm working on PP3 at the moment and would like to know if there is any difference on that part when it comes to the driver.

 

You still want to have a driving force, yes... both PP1 and PP3. You'll still catch the ball on the upswing if you continue to drive. Even if there's an angle between your left arm and the clubshaft, that radius is going to be lowest approximately below your left armpit or thereabouts. If it's not slightly upward it'll be pretty level.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeph View Post

You mentioned the chart showing distances and angles from the PGA and LPGA Tour, what is interesting to notice (which people pointed out when it was posted) is that the LPGA players on average swing +3.0 degrees up with the driver, and they average 220 yards carry, which is closer to what the average player hit it. I know part of the reason you made the last post about hitting down was to prevent people from conciously hitting up, leading to flipping and keeping the weight back.


Sure, yes. But they swing like girls... (seriously). :-D Imagine how far they'd hit it if they swung down.

 

Frankly, Dave and I have talked, and we think we could raise the driving average of the average LPGA Tour player 10% if they'd come to us for ten hours of lessons. But that's a discussion for another time. They average 220 or 230 or whatever yards of carry, but the average male golfer swings faster.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by david_wedzik View Post

...though I would go with the smaller modification above (and of course so would Erik and he wouldn't have written the post).  Also I'm not crazy about anything that "artificially" adds axis tilt in this manner.

 

Yeah, I could have been clearer there. I might be more okay with it than Dave, so long as the change in axis tilt is minimal (5 degrees - about the same as we'd prescribe when we pre-set our hips a little farther forward) AND the student was able to properly slide forward from there without the head going backwards at all. In other words, an inch is fine. Three wouldn't be. Foley's setup would have the ball a bit farther back because your left shoulder has moved back a touch.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by david_wedzik View Post

MOST importantly there isn't much modification from the pattern here at all...more than anything it is an altered ball position and slight change of aim...always a work in progress :-)


Yeah, that's the thing. It's basically a ball position change as well as an understanding that you're playing a different shot (not a push draw) with the driver to maximize distance within the pattern.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by granitegolf View Post

Is it still possible or a good idea to hit a push draw while hitting on the up swing with the driver? This would require a more inside to out path to still have the driver moving out during the intial upswing, correct?


If you understand the geometry, and can repeat it, we'd be fine with whatever you do. I'll post a bit more below about the "CP release" and the "CF release" below. Read those things.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stretch View Post

Well, if you are going to call your school Golf Evolution, then you'd better display some incremental changes over time I guess! wink.png

 

Please let us know how those discussions go. There's been enough smack talked about how "S&T doesn't work with the driver" that any modifications to the pattern in that area will probably draw quite a bit of attention. 


We'll let you know. :-) And yes, we're trying to live up to our name! :-D

 

CP vs. CF Release

 

Note that the "CP pattern" is a full-on MORAD pattern that involves a LOT of pieces - left arm out at P5, upper center going forward, etc. That's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about the "release" only.

 

Here's a depiction of the CP release versus CF release (it may not be a perfect example, but it's a quickie one):

cp_vs_cf.jpg

 

Red arrows show clubhead position on downswing, green arrows post-impact. Orange lines show shaft/clubface at P6. Purple shows base line of the plane (kinda - it doesn't really translate to 2D very well). Blue lines are shaft and elbow planes. Yellow arrow shows the armpit connection (what we'd call "pressure point 5" which is a MORAD term - it's not in TGM and doesn't have an accompanying power accumulator).

 

On the left we see what's really close to a CP release. A CP release is called "swinging left" and comes from "centripetal" or "pulling inward" (let's avoid discussions of whether there are actual centrifugal forces, etc. That's what they're called, so for our purposes, they're just names.). Note how quickly the handle disappears and how much of the clubhead and shaft are still visible.

 

On the right we see something close to a CF release. CF is for centrifugal, or forces outward from the center rather than inward like the CP release. This image (Lucas Glover) isn't the best one but it's the one I could think of most quickly. Notice a few things - the base line is shifted well left, the clubhead is under the plane and then swings out to the right more, and comes through above the plane, pressure point 5 is lost, the clubface has rotated past toe-up already by about 30 degrees, the hands are well above their plane at both P6 and impact (i.e. "handle raised" instead of "low and left"), etc. Note that the hands are still visible and the clubhead will disappear at about the same time.

 

You'll be more "CP release" if you maintain PP5, keep the rotation of the body up, maintain the flying wedge, and angled hinge. CF swingers tend to slow the body a little, their arms fly off their chest, PP5 is lost quickly, and they will tend to lose the wedge quickly, and roll 3 through impact (horizontal hinging).

 

I don't want to get into a whole big thing about CP release vs. CF release, but here's the take-away as far as "hitting up and playing a draw" goes.

 

  1. In an inline pattern (a "CP release" or one very close to it), hitting up on the ball will be done while the clubhead is moving left relative to baseline. With a clubface square to the target at impact, that's a fade when baseline is pointed at the target.
  2. You can hit a draw on the upswing one of two ways. This is the first: from a parallel left stance, you can hit a CF fade. I'm not a big fan of going CF because it's a different swing, rate of closure goes up, your arms leave your body and things can get out of sync, etc. Basically, you can swing like Lucas Glover - manually forcing the path further out to the right.
  3. You can aim farther right and hit a little pull draw. This isn't as problematic as with the irons because you are catching the ball on the upswing, so any loss of loft from hitting the ball with a slightly closed clubface can be made up for a little bit with the positive angle of attack. Still, you might want a driver with a little bit more loft, and you have to be really diligent in not aiming right for any club but your driver, and you have to be comfortable aligning right with your driver... me, I feel a little weird doing that. Remember, too, if you swing up four degrees the clubhead path is about two degrees left, so you'll be aiming six degrees or so to the right. That's more than you think (the below shows three degrees open - consider what 4 to 6 degrees closed or right would feel like...):

 

3degrees.jpg

post #13 of 238

Great example using the idea of the plate and the 3 lines/dots.  Very easy to understand the geometry.  I'll get out and try this today, see which one goes further.  

 

Handle location stays the same?  Or is it more neutral due the ball being more forward?

post #14 of 238
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mvmac View Post

Handle location stays the same?  Or is it more neutral due the ball being more forward?


I don't know that I'd call it "back" but you don't want it excessively forward, as you could guess, Mike. :-) The farthest forward would probably be so the shaft had no shaft lean left or right, and the farthest back would be a few degrees of shaft lean away from the target.

post #15 of 238

I like what Tom Wishon had to say

 

http://www.iseekgolf.com/clubfittingandrepairs/7313-angle-of-attack-its-role-in-fitting

 

A few selected charts from the article (since pasting the entire article isn't cool):

 

 

Quote (Tom Wishon article linked above):

Player Ball Speed Launch Angle Spin Rate Angle of Attack Driver Loft Carry Distance
Charles Howell III 172mph 7.0° 2800rpm -5° 11.5° 278yds
Charles Howell III 174mph 12.8° 2100rpm +5° 8.0° 306yds
 

 

 

Quote (Tom Wishon article linked above):

Optimal Driver Launch Parameters for Maximum Carry Distance

 

Clubhead Speed (mph) Angle of Attack (degrees) Ball Speed (mph) Launch Angle (degrees) Spin at Launch (rpm) Carry Distance (yards) Dynamic Loft at Impact (degrees) Probable Driver Loft
75 -5° Down 105 14.1 3170 145 17.1 23
75 0° Level 107 16.1 2690 156 18.6 19
75 +5° Upward 109 18.9 2310 167 21 15
90 -5° Down 129 10.6 3130 195 13.1 19.5
90 0° Level 131 13.4 2700 208 15.4 15.5
90 +5° Upward 132 16.0 2210 221 17.7 11.5
105 -5° Down 153 8.0 3060 243 10.1 14.5
105 0° Level 155 10.7 2520 259 12.3 12
105 +5° Upward 156 13.8 2070 274 15.2 10
120 -5° Down 177 5.7 2880 291 7.4 12
120 0° Level 178 9.0 2430 309 10.4 10
120 +5° Upward 179 12.1 1910 326 13.2 8
post #16 of 238

The longest drivers on the PGA tour hit up on the ball with the driver with fades (JB and Bubba)  Good info and illustrations on hitting up on the ball with the driver.  Mvmac touched on it earlier; could someone please discuss maintaining flying wedge and pressure point #3 trailing forefinger on grip with no forward shaft lean at impact (if hitting up on the ball)?  I've read Clampett's Impact Zone a few times; he'd say that there will be loss of accuracy if hitting up on the ball due to more difficulty maintaining shaft plane with initial target line at impact.

post #17 of 238
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by uttexas View Post

The longest drivers on the PGA tour hit up on the ball with the driver with fades (JB and Bubba)  Good info and illustrations on hitting up on the ball with the driver.  Mvmac touched on it earlier; could someone please discuss maintaining flying wedge and pressure point #3 trailing forefinger on grip with no forward shaft lean at impact (if hitting up on the ball)?  I've read Clampett's Impact Zone a few times; he'd say that there will be loss of accuracy if hitting up on the ball due to more difficulty maintaining shaft plane with initial target line at impact.


We're talking about a level or two degree upward strike. If you've maintained the flying wedge, you can still have a little forward shaft lean and strike upwards.

 

Clampett is correct if you fail to maintain any flying wedge and flip the club which, as we all know, a lot of people do with an iron and which is even easier with a driver. Not a necessity though.

post #18 of 238

But for Charlie, how can he get to that +5, that might mean teeing the ball up past his front foot, so it might not be feasable. 

 

How do you determine your own angle of attack if you don't have a camera, or is a camera pretty much required? 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Instruction and Playing Tips
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Practice Range › Instruction and Playing Tips › Hitting Up or Down with the Driver in an Inline Pattern