or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › Ball flight laws and misinformation
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ball flight laws and misinformation - Page 4

post #55 of 97

in over simplified terms...path controls starting direction and face controls curve, right?  And yes, I know they each have a part in both facets but..like I said, simple.

post #56 of 97
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradox View Post

in over simplified terms...path controls starting direction and face controls curve, right?  And yes, I know they each have a part in both facets but..like I said, simple.


Nope, the opposite.

 

http://thesandtrap.com/b/playing_tips/ball_flight_laws

post #57 of 97

shoot..I always get them backwards! 

post #58 of 97

Anyone catch this in the latest GD?  Foley on ball flight laws.  This is the first I have seen this presented to the masses.  He talks about forward hip slide as well in it.  Ha ha. 

1000

post #59 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by cipher View Post

Anyone catch this in the latest GD?  Foley on ball flight laws.  This is the first I have seen this presented to the masses.  He talks about forward hip slide as well in it.  Ha ha. 

 

 

Yeah good stuff.  A couple weeks ago during the golf telecast, Frank Nobilo gave a little ball flight laws tutorial saying face is major contributor to start line.  

post #60 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvmac View Post

 

Yeah good stuff.  A couple weeks ago during the golf telecast, Frank Nobilo gave a little ball flight laws tutorial saying face is major contributor to start line.  

 

Didn't he just go to a clinic with Grant and Joe? ;)

 

I think you just have to try to bring people along at the pace they'll comfortably come.

post #61 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stretch View Post

 

Didn't he just go to a clinic with Grant and Joe? ;)

 

I think you just have to try to bring people along at the pace they'll comfortably come.

 

Yeah he's buddies with Grant and stopped in to see part of the presentation.  They've shared some knowledge with Frank.

post #62 of 97

Here's an easy way to help see that the face contributes to the start line:

You will need a pencil, pen, or marker, as well as a golf ball and a table.

 

Set the golf ball at one end of the table, and use a pencil to make "strokes" through the ball. You will notice that the ball will start in almost the exact direction that the pencil is facing, regardless of the "swingpath" used.

 

Alternatively, you can go to the practice green or your carpet, and try putting the golf ball with different face angles. A closed face gives you pulled putts, and an open face pushes them. Again, the line of the ball's roll will almost exactly mirror the angle of the clubface, regardless of swingpath.

 

However, this overlooks the slight effect of swingpath on the starting direction of the ball, but you can see that effect if you make the difference between clubface and swingpath extreme. If you have a dramatically different angle, it then becomes apparent that the swingpath has slight control over the starting direction of the ball, but not much when you have a fairly straight swingpath.

post #63 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by cipher View Post

Anyone catch this in the latest GD?  Foley on ball flight laws.  This is the first I have seen this presented to the masses.  He talks about forward hip slide as well in it.  Ha ha. 

1000

 

A massive breathe of fresh air....

post #64 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by cipher View Post

Anyone catch this in the latest GD?  Foley on ball flight laws.  This is the first I have seen this presented to the masses.  He talks about forward hip slide as well in it.  Ha ha. 

1000

I need to pick up this issue. Good graphic.

post #65 of 97
Sorry to rehash an old post, but the details in this thread make this all sound like it's rocket science... I agree with one of the earlier posts in that the "old" and "new" ball flight rules are very much the same. The error in the old rule was to tell the golfer the club face should be square to the end target at impact.

I am intrigued, though, when folks talk about swing path in relation to body alignment. Barring outside entities interfering with your swing (I.e. tree branches), wouldn't altering your swing path add another element for a golfer to mess up (purposely trying to have an outside to in swing, for example)?

If I can -wishful thinking - develop a repeatable swing in which a square club face at impact starts the ball on a consistent line, I wouldn't want to change anything about my stance or swing path. I would simply adjust my aim accordingly, pick a target somewhere between that aiming point and my end target to choose my club face angle at address, and then attempt to make a normal swing.
post #66 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by boil3rmak3r View Post

Sorry to rehash an old post, but the details in this thread make this all sound like it's rocket science... I agree with one of the earlier posts in that the "old" and "new" ball flight rules are very much the same. The error in the old rule was to tell the golfer the club face should be square to the end target at impact.
 
 

No they aren't very much the same.  The incorrect laws say the ball starts primarily in the direction of the path and ends up where the face is pointing.  Why is this important?  Let's say you have a golfer that is hitting pull hook, starting five yards left of the target and curving more left.  The incorrect way says the golfer's path is 5 yards left of the target and the face is even more left.  In reality, assuming center contact, the face is 5 yards left of the target and the path is probably somewhere right of the target.  No similarities, especially with the fix.  The incorrect old ball flight laws would say to fix it, you would need to swing MORE out to the right.  So if the face stays about the same the golfer is going to be curving the ball MORE to the left.

 

The correct fix can vary from player to player, but there is a good chance the golfer is already swinging too far out to the right, which increases the rate the club face closes.  So the outward path is influencing the angle of the face.  The correction would be to add some body rotation, make sure the head stays on the wall, with the weight going forward.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by boil3rmak3r View Post

If I can -wishful thinking - develop a repeatable swing in which a square club face at impact starts the ball on a consistent line, I wouldn't want to change anything about my stance or swing path. I would simply adjust my aim accordingly, pick a target somewhere between that aiming point and my end target to choose my club face angle at address, and then attempt to make a normal swing.

 

Here's the thing, the best players in the world don't have a square club face at impact.  Either aimed right or left of the target.  And they all have a particular swing path, a pattern.  Most guys hit out at the ball because they have a flat lead wrist, creates an outward swing path.  Most amateurs have a cupped left wrist, path is across the ball.  Aiming the club face at the target brings in a two way miss into play.

post #67 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvmac View Post

 

Aiming the club face at the target brings in a two way miss into play.

 

 

Hey!  That's what I have!!

post #68 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by colin007 View Post

 

 

Hey!  That's what I have!!

 

lol yeah it's all about developing a pattern

post #69 of 97
That's really something i wish i could develop...sometimes i stand on the tee and have no idea where the ball is going to go...
post #70 of 97

"new" ball spin rules don't work?

Well, yes they indeed "do" work.

 

I had been reading several posts about how even some of the pro golfers "feel" one thing and do quite another. The one article that caught my interest was Sir Nick Faldo's explanation of how he hit around the tree.

 

I have always been able to hit a fade fairly well without even thinking about it. I wanted to try and follow the "new" rules to the letter. I was set up about 20 yards away. I set up with open stance, open club face, swinging along the stance line. I happened to have a seven iron. Now unless I had interpreted the rules incorrectly, the ball should have curved back towards "0", but instead it looked like a dead pull. I suppose several things could account for this. One being that the swing path I "felt" I was on was not really what happened, or somehow the face angle changed prior to impact.  Then I tried the same thing with a pitching wedge and "voila" the ball did as it was supposed to.  This leads me to believe that the distance I was hitting from was not along enough with the seven iron to notice the curve back.

 

I sincerely believe the new laws are correct in all aspects, and although in the past I was more than likely following them without even knowing it. My fade has always been my go to shot. Lately, I am drawing the ball more, maybe because of paying attention to swing mechanics learned on this forum, I don't really know.

 

I know this is an old worn out thread topic, but I just wanted to point out how our "feel" can "fool" us.  Unless, of course, I missed something or my understanding is flawed.

post #71 of 97

Even understanding the ball flight laws I still struggle to hit a push draw, particularly with fairway woods/driver. My understanding to hit a push draw is to have an in-to-out swing path with the face closed to the path.  My miss is most often a block to the right so that tells me I have the swing path correct.  I suppose club face control is still my weakness!
 

post #72 of 97

Yep, I just try and simplify it by saying to myself  "open or closed relative to the swing path".  At home practice I have this plush little hitting mat which I can turn right or left of the target and line my toes up on that to create my path and stance line.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Golf Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › Ball flight laws and misinformation