Hitting Up or Down with the Driver in an Inline Pattern

[mvmac]

Originally Posted by Fearlessgolfer

Question though, between CP fade with the ball forward as OP vs. CF draw, which is longer when measured?

From what I've been told and seen on video, Mac never CP'd the driver.  CP is down and across, no bueno for driver.

[Gaber]

From what I've been told and seen on video, Mac never CP'd the driver.  CP is down and across, no bueno for driver.

Hey guys can you tell me what those abbreviations mean? (CP/OP/CF etc) thanks noob to abbreviations here!

[mvmac]

Originally Posted by Gaber

Hey guys can you tell me what those abbreviations mean? (CP/OP/CF etc) thanks noob to abbreviations here!

Not something you really need to know about CP/CF are terms Mac O'Grady uses to describe swing direction and they are also patterns.  Can get confusing because people can have their own interpretations of these terms.  We've(5SK) have evolved from that and now have these clearly defined terms.

http://thesandtrap.com/a/big-list-of-golf-terminology

Swing directions describe the orientation of the baseline of the swing plane (also called the "horizontal swing plane" or HSP).

INward - For a right-handed player, an HSP oriented to the left. At A6 the clubhead is often right of the hands when viewed DL.

ONline - For a right-handed player, an HSP oriented relatively square to the stance. At A6 the clubhead is often covering the hands viewed DL.

OUTward - For a right-handed player, an HSP oriented to the right. At A6 the clubhead is often left of the hands viewed DL.

[madolive3]

I've been playing less than a year without lessons. I went from hitting up with my driver to hitting down with my driver. I hit the ball straighter and farther hitting down.

I've read three books, the last two, Hogans five and Bobby Clampet's strike zone. After reading Clampets book it took awhile to be able to apply his aim point principal to the driver, but the better I get at it the better and more consist ant my drives are getting.

I went from a long of 240 up to a long of 300. I am sold of hitting down with the driver. Even on short fairways when I shorten my swing I hit longer which tells me that armatures with slower swing speeds would benefit from striking the ball of the down swing.

I know my distance gains are more from increasingly more efficient lag than from hitting down but i'm also hitting a much higher % of fairways and I'm also begging to be able to shape my drives a bit. Also, I just can't get away from the thought, If hitting up with the driver is better, why don't the pros do it?

I'm 49 and my swing speed is low 100s. I don't have a handy cap yet but when I break 100 I'll celebrate.

Just trying to add to the discussion, I know just enough about golf to know that I don't know too much about golf.

[mvmac]

Gotta go to bed but I'll answer this part and ask you a question

Originally Posted by madolive3

I know my distance gains are more from increasingly more efficient lag than from hitting down but i'm also hitting a much higher % of fairways and I'm also begging to be able to shape my drives a bit. Also, I just can't get away from the thought, If hitting up with the driver is better, why don't the pros do it?

They do, Bubba and Rory def have positive AoA's.  Tour average is probably pretty close to level to slightly up now.  Wasn't a big deal before because they didn't know any better and they could get away with it.

Originally Posted by madolive3

I've been playing less than a year without lessons. I went from hitting up with my driver to hitting down with my driver. I hit the ball straighter and farther hitting down.

Do you know for sure that you're hitting down with the driver?  In other words have you been on Trackman/Flightscope?

[madolive3]

Originally Posted by mvmac

Gotta go to bed but I'll answer this part and ask you a question

They do, Bubba and Rory def have positive AoA's.  Tour average is probably pretty close to level to slightly up now.  Wasn't a big deal before because they didn't know any better and they could get away with it.

Do you know for sure that you're hitting down with the driver?  In other words have you been on Trackman/Flightscope?

No trackman, I had my swing analyzed but that was before I changed it. My ball flight is a low line drive that slowly elevates and roles forever. There are times when I hit a high drive and I know I caught the ball on the upswing. Interestingly there is little difference in the total distance between a high or a lower trajectory on my drives. I don't know what my average would be but I realize that it's wind aided or elevation aided drives that account for most of my 300 + or - yard drives. But today with no wind on a level 288 yard par 4, I hit one even with the pin about 4 feet left. It was a low liner that bounced and rolled 30 yards, and on a down hill 366 yd par 4, I hit a ball 35 yards from the center of the green with a stiff breeze in my face..

It just seems that hitting down with my hands ahead of the ball gives me more ball speed and induces less side spin for me. When I miss a fairway, it's more of a push or a pull than a slice or hook. I'm just so much better trying to hit down.

[colin007]

^^^ You can hit the ball with the hands ahead of the ball and still up on it.

[iacas]

No trackman ....... It just seems that hitting down with my hands ahead of the ball gives me more ball speed and induces less side spin for me.

The first part means you really don't know. No Trackman. You could be hitting up already. Or your high ones might still be hitting down. And make no mistake about it: hitting up does not mean flipping. Your hands should still be leading. It's just that they're leading an ascending clubhead.

[mvmac]

^^^

You can hit the ball with the hands ahead of the ball and still up on it.

Originally Posted by iacas

And make no mistake about it: hitting up does not mean flipping. Your hands should still be leading. It's just that they're leading an ascending clubhead.

Yep

[madolive3]

I have read and reread Clampet's strike zone, It took me awhile to successfully apply the aim point dynamic to my driver swing. The results have been nothing short of spectacular for me, that and my low trajectory are what lead me to suspect that I'm striking the ball on the down swing, that being said I have been hoping to get back to Kepler's golf and take some time on their swing analyzer. Maybe later this week I can put this to rest., I can likely give some launch angle and spin numbers as well.

I'll keep you posted

[iacas]

Before I ask... know that the golf ball doesn't really "compress" - it "deforms" - but we know what we mean when we say "compression" or "man you really compressed that one!" Those really mean "deformed" so that's what I'm going to use here - "deform" or "deformation" instead of "compression."

Question for the rest of the group:

Which ball has more "deformation" or which ball is "deformed" more (i.e. "hit more solidly ")? Center face contact, everything else not listed the same (clubhead speed, etc.):

Ball A: AoA: -2.7°, Club Path +1.3°, Clubface +0.7°, Delivered Loft: 9.7°.

Ball B: AoA: +3.6, Club Path -1.5, Clubface -0.8°, Delivered Loft 14.1°.

So:

1) For a RHG, which ball fades? Which draws?

2) Which ball is "compressed" or "deformed" more?

3) Which ball will go farther (assuming a driver clubhead speed between 90 and 120 MPH, reasonably fitted shaft, etc.)?

[saevel25]

1) A draws, B fades

2) A deforms more, less angle between clubface to clubpath, so the blow is less glancing

3) B will go farther, positive angle of attack, outweights the slight squarer clubface to clubpath of A

[jamo]

1) A draws, B fades. 2) My thinking is that A deforms more because there is less difference between the club path and clubface. The higher spin loft on A gives me slight pause though. 3) B goes farther. Higher launch due to the positive AoA and higher delivered loft, lower spin loft.

[Mr. Desmond]

I'll go with their answers ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Seriously.

[iacas]

1) A Draws. B Fades.

2) B is compressed or deformed a good bit more.

3) B goes farther.

Why is B deformed more? Because "spin loft" is a three dimensional concept. Imagine a club with 0° loft struck with 0° face angle and 0° AoA and a path of 0°. You'd deform that ball the most, right? Now imagine we make the path 10° right or left (doesn't matter in this case) with everything else the same: that ball is deformed let's say 90% as much, right? So why does it matter if that 10° shift in path is from the lateral path (i.e. draws and fades) or the vertical path (AoA)?

Ball A: AoA: -2.7°, Club Path +1.3°, Clubface +0.7°, Delivered Loft: 9.7°.

Ball B: AoA: +3.6, Club Path -1.5, Clubface -0.8°, Delivered Loft 14.1°.

A has a lateral difference in path to face of 0.6° but a vertical differential of 9.7 + 2.7 = 12.4°.

B has a lateral difference in path to face of 0.7° but a vertical differential of 14.1 - 3.6 = 10.5°.

The most deformation would occur at 0° for everything - a perfectly "square" hit - and the wider the separation in the two vectors - the 3D club path (both AoA and "club path" or the lateral component) and the clubface normal (i.e. where the clubface is pointing), the wider the separation the more glancing the blow to the golf ball. The less "square" that contact is.

So hitting up can actually lead to MORE deformation, more "compression," and "more solid" hits because the blow is less glancing.

Think of it this way (another way): spin is caused by a glancing blow - so the more spin you get, the more glancing the blow.

[jamo]

Why is B deformed more? Because "spin loft" is a three dimensional concept. Imagine a club with 0° loft struck with 0° face angle and 0° AoA and a path of 0°. You'd deform that ball the most, right? Now imagine we make the path 10° right or left (doesn't matter in this case) with everything else the same: that ball is deformed let's say 90% as much, right? So why does it matter if that 10° shift in path is from the lateral path (i.e. draws and fades) or the vertical path (AoA)? A has a lateral difference in path to face of 0.6° but a vertical differential of 9.7 + 2.7 = 12.4°. B has a lateral difference in path to face of 0.7° but a vertical differential of 14.1 - 3.6 = 10.5°. The most deformation would occur at 0° for everything - a perfectly "square" hit - and the wider the separation in the two vectors - the 3D club path (both AoA and "club path" or the lateral component) and the clubface normal (i.e. where the clubface is pointing), the wider the separation the more glancing the blow to the golf ball. The less "square" that contact is. So hitting up can actually lead to MORE deformation, more "compression," and "more solid" hits because the blow is less glancing. Think of it this way (another way): spin is caused by a glancing blow - so the more spin you get, the more glancing the blow.

Ahhh, that makes sense. I was venturing down that path with the little addendum I put at the end of my answer to 2), and I did that math out with the spin lofts, but for some reason I thought that wouldn't matter compared to the horizontal factors (which was stupid, in retrospect).

[colin007]

Originally Posted by iacas

1) A Draws. B Fades.

2) B is compressed or deformed a good bit more.

3) B goes farther.

Why is B deformed more? Because "spin loft" is a three dimensional concept. Imagine a club with 0° loft struck with 0° face angle and 0° AoA and a path of 0°. You'd deform that ball the most, right? Now imagine we make the path 10° right or left (doesn't matter in this case) with everything else the same: that ball is deformed let's say 90% as much, right? So why does it matter if that 10° shift in path is from the lateral path (i.e. draws and fades) or the vertical path (AoA)?

Ball A: AoA: -2.7°, Club Path +1.3°, Clubface +0.7°, Delivered Loft: 9.7°.

Ball B: AoA: +3.6, Club Path -1.5, Clubface -0.8°, Delivered Loft 14.1°.

A has a lateral difference in path to face of 0.6° but a vertical differential of 9.7 + 2.7 = 12.4°.

B has a lateral difference in path to face of 0.7° but a vertical differential of 14.1 - 3.6 = 10.5°.

The most deformation would occur at 0° for everything - a perfectly "square" hit - and the wider the separation in the two vectors - the 3D club path (both AoA and "club path" or the lateral component) and the clubface normal (i.e. where the clubface is pointing), the wider the separation the more glancing the blow to the golf ball. The less "square" that contact is.

So hitting up can actually lead to MORE deformation, more "compression," and "more solid" hits because the blow is less glancing.

Think of it this way (another way): spin is caused by a glancing blow - so the more spin you get, the more glancing the blow.

[3Woodster]

I’ve been reading a lot on the hitting up +5 degrees with the driver.

I have watched Joseph Mayo's video….

It all makes sense using a rotational swing, however, I use a ¾ Vertical swing

Per Don Trahan.  If my ball position is one inch left of center and a driver with a 15* loft, club face square to the target, swing plane is on before, during impact and after impact, are the results different from those of a rotational swing.  I am 74 yrs. old and have a club speed of around 85 mph….You can go deep in the answer, for I am a numbers man....

Cordially