Jump to content
IGNORED

Is There Any Non-Anecdotal AimPoint Data?


Recommended Posts

  • Administrator
22 minutes ago, scvbrent said:

Can anyone share what the DVD gives you that the basic information found on YouTube or internet doesn't? Not opposed to paying for it, but just curious what it covers that isn't publicly available.

Trying to learn from the Internet isn't really going to cut it. You're going to have some questions, and it's worth your time to find an instructor nearby.

Even people who have the DVD recommend seeing an instructor, not because the DVD is bad, but because there's a lot more subtle stuff than you'd think, and having someone to ask questions of is important.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 hours ago, iacas said:

Trying to learn from the Internet isn't really going to cut it. You're going to have some questions, and it's worth your time to find an instructor nearby.

Even people who have the DVD recommend seeing an instructor, not because the DVD is bad, but because there's a lot more subtle stuff than you'd think, and having someone to ask questions of is important.

True!  I took a class for midreads then wanted to learn the express,  so I got the DVD which gives you the framework, but I can't get a read using my hip perpendicular to the line (I can't feel when my hip is adjusting to slope) so I just point my feet into the slope to get a kind of misread but still use the express figures (works pretty well).  

My point is...if I ever take the express class I'm sure they could teach me to better feel the slope through my hip.

Also, someone said green maps aren't allowed (I think on the first or second page).  Just wanted to point out that they are allowed in tournament play as well..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 2 years later...

Ok, brand new member, going to most likely start off abrasive based on the love for Aimpoint.  For the record, never had a class, only have limited exposure to what has been posted on youtube, etc. and watching professional golfers.  I'm not saying it doesn't work for some, but no way it is the panacea for all golfers.

Here would be the model:  Ten putts, randomly picked in a 360 circle around the hole, starting at 5 feet and ending at 15 feet.

The Golfers:

1.  Aimpoint's best

2. Any other golfer(s) best from another marketed method.

3. The best of any random method.

At the pro level, they are all making putts and getting hot at different times.  Aimpoint clearly does not dominate.

This is obviously at the professional level and wouldn't mean much statistically to the amateur golfer, so let's bring in more diversity to assess at the amateur level.

Aimpoint golfers vs. Non-aimpoint golfer(s). 

Now this is where it becomes interesting. I don't think we should just select the best aimpoint golfer vs. non-aimpoint golfer.  Indeed, let's select the scratch aimpoint vs, non-aimpoint golfer, the 5 cap aimpoint vs. non-aimpoint golfer and the 10 cap aimpoint vs. non-aimpoint golfer. 

Where's the data?  Does Aimpoint have it?  Doubt it.  Never seen it published.  A 10 might putt as well as a 5 on any given day, no matter the method.  Go ahead, google it, if they had winners, it would be all over the place.

*Note:  Scott McCarron on the Champions Tour is the first google hit.  Ouch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator

We moved your post here @Alfonso. You can read back through it.

In my last AimPoint class, on a 25-foot putt that broke 86 inches, I had four reads of 10, 12, 16, and the “crazy” read was 28”.

You could barely get the ball to touch any part of the cup at 28”… and that required rolling the ball over 15’ past the hole (we have a wall 8’ behind so that’s an estimate — it hit the wall while still traveling at a decent speed).

That class was not super atypical. The golfers were all better than bogey golfers.

  • Thumbs Up 2

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Welcome to TST @Alfonso.  We're glad you've joined.   

I can only speak for myself as a before and after Aimpoint.   I'm a bogie golfer.    I had significant trouble reading greens before Aimpoint and decided to buy the DVD.   The DVD was enlightening but not enough for me to really get a feel that I could put into practice.   My problems  with reading greens was always missing on the low side by a significant amount.    I took a class at MSU and it was the best $$ I've spent on golf.   I'm not a professional golfer but my putting stats have significantly improved.   I've kept strokes gained putting since August '21.   I used a scratch golfer as a comparison.   I've been as poor as -4.8 and played to a 5.4.   Does this prove anything?  Probably not to somebody else but I'm averaging +0.2 strokes per game over almost 2 years and to me, that is significant improvement.  Could I have improved another way?  Possibly, but this was learned one afternoon and easy to understand.

  • Thumbs Up 2

From the land of perpetual cloudiness.   I'm Denny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
5 hours ago, Alfonso said:

no way it is the panacea for all golfers

Of course not. Green reading is only one piece of putting. Still have to hit the putt.

AimPoint makes one a better green reader but that alone doesn’t necessarily mean a better putter. Plenty of people under-read breaks and subconsciously compensate for it. If you have them the correct line they’d likely miss. There can be a bit of an adjustment period when one first learns it.

5 hours ago, Alfonso said:

Here would be the model:  Ten putts, randomly picked in a 360 circle around the hole, starting at 5 feet and ending at 15 feet.

The flaw I can see in your experiment is that it just doesn’t isolate AimPoint as a single variable. Again, green reading is only one part of making successful putts. Someone who uses AimPoint could simply be a worse putter than someone else who doesn’t. It wouldn’t be a useful experiment for drawing conclusions.

 

5 hours ago, Alfonso said:

Go ahead, google it, if they had winners, it would be all over the place.

It’s right on the front page of their website? 

aimpointgolf.com

Quote

Five world number one players have worked with Mark Sweeney and use AimPoint. They have won numerous titles while using AimPoint and have credited AimPoint for much of their putting success.


 

Quote

Over 65 Professional Tour Wins. Used by the US Amateur Champion and over 200 tour pros worldwide. Winners of countless college and junior titles also used AimPoint Express.

Just off the top of my head, Dustin Johnson and his brother Austin use AimPoint, and he won two majors with Austin as his caddy.

  • Like 2
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Upvote 1

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

5 hours ago, Alfonso said:

I'm not saying it doesn't work for some, but no way it is the panacea for all golfers.

Has anyone said that on here? I've seen people say it has worked for them or helped them or given examples for how it has helped a lot of students they've coached, but I can't remember anyone stating that it is the end all be all solution for green reading for every golfer.

5 hours ago, Alfonso said:

Here would be the model:  Ten putts, randomly picked in a 360 circle around the hole, starting at 5 feet and ending at 15 feet.

I have a couple rebuttals here.

First, I have numerous issues with how you presented your hypothetical study. I'd argue that 10 putts per golfer might not be a statistically significant sample size. I also think doing the putts in a perfect 360 circle isn't ideal either because after one or two of those and figuring out where the straight putt is it become fairly easy to read the entire way around that hole no matter what green reading method you use. Random putts to random holes from random distances would be better IMO. Making sure of course that there are an equal or similar number of left to right, right to left, uphill, downhill, etc direction of breaks. 

Second, why did you limit your hypothetical study to just 5-15 feet? Green reading is important on longer putts too. Sure you could argue that as the putts get longer that speed becomes "more" important than the read, but the read is still quite important on putts outside 15 feet too.

Third, you stated 10 putts, IMO it should be "reads", not "putts" if you're truly going to gauge the success of a green reading method. What if one player (pro or am) reads it perfect for their intended speed but leaves a couple short, pushes a couple, and has 2 lip outs? But then another player under reads the putt for the intended speed but hits it firmer, pulls a couple, and has 2 lip ins? You'd be more likely to say that the second player was the better putter, but what if the second player was the one who used Aimpoint and the first player read the green with his eyes? And the higher the handicap, the more variability you'll see if you relied on the make/miss rate to be your gauge, because on average a 90s golfer only makes 11% of their 15 footers and 20% of their 10 footers. Even pros miss over half of their 10 footers so there is simply too much variability in putting to base a green reading study on whether or not the putt goes in.

IMO a better way to do it would be to ask each player (both Aimpoint and non Aimpoint) to read the putt and then use one of the devices where you release the ball onto the ramp and it rolls the same start line and same speed each time. You'd even have to be careful with that because after just a couple rolls on the same line the green can start to develop channels in the grass. Or utilize something that uses a computer to show the "perfect" line but have each player read the putt with their preferred method and then chart how far their intended start line was from the ideal start line. (Like PuttView P7 is what I am referring to here)

5 hours ago, Alfonso said:

Go ahead, google it, if they had winners, it would be all over the place.

Come on man, if you're going to make claims, at least make sure they're accurate.

I did google it and the first two articles that came up talk about how Jordan Spieth's caddie, Dustin Johnson's caddie, and Brooks Koepka have all used Aimpoint. Literally the first two articles. Did you google it?

If you watch any PGA tour event you'll see plenty of players using it. Max Homa, Adam Scott, Keegan Bradley, Will Zalatoris, Justin Rose, plus Lydia Ko and Michelle Wie West on the LPGA side are all players I know just off the top of my head who use AimPoint.

Plus this is on the homepage of their website

image.png

  • Like 2
  • Thumbs Up 1

Driver: :callaway: Rogue Max ST LS
Woods:  :cobra: Darkspeed LS 3Wood
Irons: :titleist: U505 (3)  :tmade: P770 (4-PW)
Wedges: :callaway: MD3 50   MD5 54 58 degree  
Putter: :odyssey:  White Hot RX #1
Ball: :titleist: ProV1x Left Dash

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

@jshots I think this is more about what part of your game needs more help? I just finished reading “Every Shot Counts” and there is a ton of data and comparison that puts to rest the old “drive for show putt for dough” adage. 
 

Anyway, if it were me I’d be comparing how another 10-15 yards (conservative?) off the tee would benefit my game vs my average number of putts / round. 

Driver: :taylormade-small: Stealth2+

3W: :taylormade-small: Stealth2

4H: :taylormade-small: Stealth 2

Irons 4I-9I:  :titleist-small: T200

Wedges P, 48: :titleist-small: T200

Wedges 54, 58: :titleist-small: Vokey SM9

Putter:  :odyssey-small: O Works #1 Black

Link to comment
Share on other sites


6 hours ago, Alfonso said:

At the pro level, they are all making putts and getting hot at different times.  Aimpoint clearly does not dominate.

No, but at the Pro level, a slight advantage on the average over time will win out. Let's say it lets you make 20 extra putts over the course of a season. For a Pro, that could mean making more cuts (getting paid), or being in contention more often. At Augusta, what if one putt gets you into the final group on Sunday. That is HUGE. The winner most of the time comes from the final group. 

6 hours ago, Alfonso said:

Where's the data?  Does Aimpoint have it?  Doubt it.  Never seen it published.  A 10 might putt as well as a 5 on any given day, no matter the method.  Go ahead, google it, if they had winners, it would be all over the place.

Go to a group class then. You will see like 99% of golfers under read putts. Now, they might make an adjustment in the stroke to compensate, like push the putt way right and end up on the correct line. They still misread the putt. 

Here is where I see advantages for Aimpoint over Traditional methods. 

1. Longer putts - Aimpoint just crushes it. You can take multiple reads along the path and have a very good sense about the total break. This plus speed control will just nearly eliminate 3-putting. 
2. Any putt outside of 5-FT. You will just not misread a putt by that much. Golf course architects can absolutely design greens that mess with your eyes. They cannot mess with your feat. Any putt outside of 5-FT, you will start seeing break that isn't there. I have heard people say, "That broke up hill!!!" I am like, no it didn't. The edges of the green are tricking your eyes. 

In the end, putting is three things. Getting a correct start line, hitting that start line, and having correct speed. Green reading effects how you perceive the amount of speed you need to hit a putt. This will allow Aimpoint to have an advantage on traditional green reading because you will end up with more tap ins. Your speed control will improve. 

Aimpoint has added so much confidence to my putting. I feel like I never have to worry about misreading a green ever again. Even crazy greens, I can work out something that is pretty close. 

To me, Aimpoint is the most simple green reading method ever created that actually gets you on the starting line using a process backed by data. It isn't a hunch, or some old adage like, "Everything breaks towards the creek". 

  • Like 2

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
4 hours ago, ChiTown said:

@jshots I think this is more about what part of your game needs more help? I just finished reading “Every Shot Counts” and there is a ton of data and comparison that puts to rest the old “drive for show putt for dough” adage.

There’s another book out there that talks about this stuff too. Name escapes me at the moment… 😉

  • Funny 2

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I can't speak for all golfers nor can I offer firm statistics but my personal experience is that before I took an AimPoint class I would, on occasion, completely mis-read a putt expecting it to break right only to have it break left.  That is the extreme in mis-reading a green and for them that has become so rare I do not recall the last time I was that wrong on a read, easily it was before I began using AimPoint.

Also, AimPoint makes no claim that you are going to sink every putt, and I am proof of that.  But if I can get my first putt closer for an easy two-putt that will help my score by reducing 3-Putts and in my personal experience it has taken strokes off my rounds.

I suggest people to actually take a lesson and then apply it consistently for a full season then offer critique.  One lesson, one day on the practice green will be meaningless.  But over the course of a season you may see if it helps you or not.

  • Thumbs Up 2

Stuart M.
 

I am a "SCRATCH GOLFER".  I hit ball, Ball hits Tree, I scratch my head. 😜

Driver: Ping G410 Plus 10.5* +1* / 3 Hybrid: Cleveland HIBORE XLS / 4,5 & 6 Hybrids: Mizuno JP FLI-HI / Irons/Wedges 7-8-9-P-G: Mizuno JPX800 HD / Sand Wedge: Mizuno JPX 800 / Lob Wedge: Cleveland CBX 60* / Putter: Odyssey White Hot OG 7S / Balls: Srixon Soft / Beer: Labatt Blue (or anything nice & cold) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

3 hours ago, billchao said:

The flaw I can see in your experiment is that it just doesn’t isolate AimPoint as a single variable. Again, green reading is only one part of making successful putts. Someone who uses AimPoint could simply be a worse putter than someone else who doesn’t. It wouldn’t be a useful experiment for drawing conclusions.

I've never done AimPoint but generally buy into how it would make you a better reader of greens. I've just never invested the time to learn it. Point being, I'm not anti-AimPoint partisan...

...just a statistician who can't let this point go :-D You're right that if you take, as Alfonso pointed to, a bunch of 5 cappers, half who use AimPoint and half who don't, and test them on a bunch of angles and distances to a hole on a slope that AimPoint won't be the only factor that affects performance. It's even true that there could be confounding in that even if you only take folks who use fancy trackers like Arccos and have the ~same strokes gained putting, things like components of a person's skill and mindset might affect both their performance on the test and how likely they are to take up AimPoint. In which case you could attribute to AimPoint an effect really caused by some unmeasured factor.

But if you assume no meaningful confounding factors, the proposed test is absolutely a legit test of AimPoint, at least for the putting context covered by the test. The other relevant factors will vary similarly among the AimPoint and non groups. More other factors will just increase the variance of performance and increase the sample size (number of different players) needed.

Matt

Mid-Weight Heavy Putter
Cleveland Tour Action 60˚
Cleveland CG15 54˚
Nike Vapor Pro Combo, 4i-GW
Titleist 585h 19˚
Tour Edge Exotics XCG 15˚ 3 Wood
Taylormade R7 Quad 9.5˚

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

15 hours ago, Alfonso said:

This is obviously at the professional level and wouldn't mean much statistically to the amateur golfer, so let's bring in more diversity to assess at the amateur level.

So obviously the point that green reading is only part of putting rather dismantles your experiment. However, it also means that using pros is actually better for your experiment nonetheless as they are all good essential putters. So, you’re much more likely to have less variance in ‘putting stroke quality’ so that green reading skill could actually be the differentiator. Too much variance would exist among amateur golfers beyond just green reading .

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
23 minutes ago, mdl said:

I've never done AimPoint but generally buy into how it would make you a better reader of greens. I've just never invested the time to learn it. Point being, I'm not anti-AimPoint partisan...

...just a statistician who can't let this point go :-D You're right that if you take, as Alfonso pointed to, a bunch of 5 cappers, half who use AimPoint and half who don't, and test them on a bunch of angles and distances to a hole on a slope that AimPoint won't be the only factor that affects performance. It's even true that there could be confounding in that even if you only take folks who use fancy trackers like Arccos and have the ~same strokes gained putting, things like components of a person's skill and mindset might affect both their performance on the test and how likely they are to take up AimPoint. In which case you could attribute to AimPoint an effect really caused by some unmeasured factor.

But if you assume no meaningful confounding factors, the proposed test is absolutely a legit test of AimPoint, at least for the putting context covered by the test. The other relevant factors will vary similarly among the AimPoint and non groups. More other factors will just increase the variance of performance and increase the sample size (number of different players) needed.

Thing is… if they had the same SG:P… then the 5s might actually be 7s without AimPoint, but maybe their speed control or ability to hit start-lines is worse, and offsets their better green reading. 😄

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

19 minutes ago, iacas said:

Thing is… if they had the same SG:P… then the 5s might actually be 7s without AimPoint, but maybe their speed control or ability to hit start-lines is worse, and offsets their better green reading. 😄

Yeah fair enough. The more I think about it the harder it seems it would be to confidently test AimPoint's effectiveness without a prospective test. And even there it would be tricky.

Matt

Mid-Weight Heavy Putter
Cleveland Tour Action 60˚
Cleveland CG15 54˚
Nike Vapor Pro Combo, 4i-GW
Titleist 585h 19˚
Tour Edge Exotics XCG 15˚ 3 Wood
Taylormade R7 Quad 9.5˚

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
1 minute ago, mdl said:

Yeah fair enough. The more I think about it the harder it seems it would be to confidently test AimPoint's effectiveness without a prospective test. And even there it would be tricky.

I think the best test would simply be green reading period, not anything to do with actually hitting putts (you'd roll putts down a Perfect Putter or something to determine the "correct" read).

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
2 hours ago, mdl said:

But if you assume no meaningful confounding factors, the proposed test is absolutely a legit test of AimPoint, at least for the putting context covered by the test. The other relevant factors will vary similarly among the AimPoint and non groups. More other factors will just increase the variance of performance and increase the sample size (number of different players) needed.

No, it’s really not. As @klineka pointed out, it’s just not a good setup to test the effect of green reading on putting.

We could do an experiment, let’s say with @iacas putting without using AimPoint and myself putting with AimPoint. I can tell you who’s going to make more putts, and it will have nothing to do with AimPoint.

  • Funny 1

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

How about this: I read the green and @iacas makes the putt using my read. I then take Aimpoint and we repeat the session for comparison. 😃

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • We are not playing Northstar.  We are playing Eaglesticks & Virtues.
    • Wordle 1,076 4/6* ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟨⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜🟨🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Question: Last year I did not post any scores to GHIN due to an injury.  I have not yet posted this year. i reactivated my GHIN membership today.  I have my. scorecards for all rounds this year going back to April 16th. i know we are to post immediately, but I did not. should I post my rounds from earlier this year or just start posting going forward?
    • That is true. If you watch Kyle Berkshire swing at full speed, his clubhead speed at P2 is probably higher than mine at impact. He really whips it back fast. In theory though, assuming that you can apply the same force towards the ball as you can away from it, if you start at zero, accelerate it away for half the backswing and then towards the ball for the other half, you should hit zero at about the right spot (assuming gravity is effectively negligible given the size of the forces otherwise applying). I think the biggest issue is you can't switch from fully in one direction to fully in another instantaneously, so that change has to happen over a period of time. The faster the club is going, the longer that period will need to be in terms of distance of the club travelled. So in retrospect it could very well be that they need to start to switch at P2 to get that to happen. So in terms of Ps, we'd have max acceleration away from the ball from P1 to P2, then it would start to switch at P2, hit basically zero at around P2.5, then hit max acceleration towards the ball about P3, so the club comes to a stop at P4, before then accelerating down towards the ball all the way to P7. The effort towards the ball I'd think probably actually stops or slows down around P6 when the hands start to really slow down and then the levers apply that speed to the clubhead between P6 and P7 without a huge amount more effort from the player towards the ball at least. I think the hand forces are basically applying straight back up towards the player's center at that point and that force causes the club to rotate down towards the ball. Fun thing is at that point, the hands can be moving up and in while the clubhead is moving down and out, so your hand path can be well left and still generate a club path that is square or to the right.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...