Hitting Up or Down with the Driver in an Inline Pattern

[cipher]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

You are correct, you have no experience with TrackMan or understanding the D-Plane model. I see those numbers on a daily basis, the extremes coming from typical amateur handicaps. I'm not pointing out any 'flaws', I actually stated the information is good from a mathmatical standpoint. If you've seen any of Joe's videos, as well as the recent post, you'd know that the explaination of how AoA affects club path assumes a face angle square to the target. One scenario, -4* AoA at a given 45* swingplane with a resultant path of +4* and the other +4* AoA with a resultant path of -4*. I doubt you are conceptualizing this clearly, but essentially both swing scenarios deliver the clubface square to the target from two different locations on the arc of the golf swing. The first swing is well before the low point or horizontal swing plane and the second swing is well after. When you make contact with the ball that far forward it is quite easy to have closed the face down to some extent. There's a whole different argument about how much the face rotation through impact affects the balls spin axis, but I highly doubt you could conceptualize what i'm saying in a golf forum.

Please use quotes.  Don't assume that I do not understand have any understanding the D-Plane. It is very difficult to understand though how it can be down and out and up and in though.  I am not sure I get it.  Must be an entire dissertation I need to read on it somewhere  What I am saying is that I have never seen a player consistently hit the ball with the driver face square in relation to the path.  And I can imagine it is not square to the target the majority of the time either.  Slightly one way or another. If I set up square and hit up on the ball the face is slightly left of the target and cuts back to it.  Maybe the model assumes a square face to the target, but that is not reality most of the time in a real swing.  I know that some players have fast closure rates, but I still think that is an issue that should be corrected and not covered up by changing AoA to fit the rate.  They are still going to be inconsistent at best.  I understand what you are saying about face rotation through impact very well and how it could affect spin, you are assuming I can't understand so we will let that be.  It is not what is being discussed here anyway . I may not have experience running a TrackMan but I have seen plenty of the number and charts and other evidence to support that hitting up on the ball is better for most players with low, average and above average swing speeds. As for this type of who doesn't understand rhetoric, I am no longer interested, I said what I have to say and I am out.

Quote:

many if not most amateurs acheive their best launch conditions with a slightly negative angle of attack

Quote:

I'm not saying most golfers will benefit, most golfers who already have a steep AoA will benefit if they can shallow it out to some extent.

When you figure out what you are trying to say about most golfer's let me know.  It must be a "conceptualization" issue.

Quote:

I'm just curious, how do you even know what your AoA is? In earlier posts you make reference to changing your AoA by a degree and what affect does that have? Unless you've got a TrackMan or Flightscope behind you at all times, you'd have absolutely zero idea.

Yes I have been on a TrackMan but this thread is not about my numbers.  I was essentially trying to asking how much additional left curvature the path an extra degree to the right in relation to the face brings.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

My only point here is we're not talking about elite level players , your site and this board is primarily typical amateur players.

Yes, players who will benefit the most from hitting up, generally speaking.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

What's the real translation to all these numbers? Simple. Higher handicap amateurs who are steep, across and swipe at the ball are going to lose valuable carry yards, most likely get some degree of vertical gear, and not get ideal launch conditions. Fix the swing and the 'AoA, path, sometimes but not always face ange tend to fix themselves.

You do realize that the title of this thread includes the words "in an inline pattern," right?

And hitting DOWN on the ball tends to go along with a pattern that's "steep" and "across" the ball. There are a lot of pull-slicers that hit the ball pretty low (especially given their lack of weight forward, secondary axis tilt, etc.).

Of course not everyone benefits, but again, the title says "INLINE" pattern. This isn't an all-purpose thread. The steep, fall-back, pull-slicer probably doesn't want to move the ball forward, no. But he's not got an inline pattern. He has other priorities.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

The model also fails to account for face rotation along the swing arc and through impact. -4* down to +4* up is significantly further in the swing arc and the toe tends to follow the path along the arc.

It's not that much farther forward. It's a few inches. The clubface is not rotating THAT fast.

And that ignores the very simple fact that the solution is: set the clubface where you want it AT THE BALL. Don't set it where you want it where you'd be hitting -4°. If the ball's forward, set the face there. It'll still be more open back in your stance, and return to where you want it when you get to +4°.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

I see more players bring left into play by going after high AoA numbers because they close down the face as the path moves leftward. This is by no means the 'standard' but I see it consistently as ball positition moves forward and spine tilt increases.

That's a player who hasn't been taught the basics and who is just doing it on his own. Easiest problem in the world to fix.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

There's no cookie cutter, one-size-fits-all approach toward golf. Some golfers benefit from hitting up, some don't.

Agreed, and have never said differently. However, hitting up benefits more than hitting down, and THIS thread, which you don't seem to have actually read, talks about how you can hit UP from an inline pattern and gain the distance that it provides through improved launch conditions.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

IMO, more important than angle of attack is ball speed and the only way to get the maximum ball speed for any given swing style is to catch the sweetspot.

You keep going on and on about this, but the problem with it is that you seem to have people who can't catch the sweet spot hitting up, while I will often have people MORE likely to hit the sweet spot (or closer to it consistently) hitting up.

Hitting down with the driver leads to pop-ups and catching the ball high on the face for a lot of players.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

Obviously others disagree with my statements, but coming from someone who teachs and fits on TrackMan daily and has played at a high level, i'm not convinced that angle of attack is all that critical to getting distance out of the driver unless your numbers are on the extreme. Sweetspot contact and ball speed are more important to me than launch angle.

You keep posing this as an either/or situation. Either you can hit it on the sweetspot (and down) or hit up and miss the sweetspot.

That's not accurate.

[mchepp]

I've just personally seen many golfers ruin their swings by simply moving the ball forward, swinging out to the right and pulling up on the handle.

I don't want to start a fight but this borders on a bit of hyperbole. Meaning that your definition of "many" is vague, and a golfer can "ruin" their swing in a number of ways. If moving the ball forward causes them so many problems, just move it back. We all are experimenting to some degree everyday. Trying different things to get better. I would venture a guess that is how about 80% of the people found this site, trying to find a way to get better. I understand your point about looking at all the variables, but lets agree not to use extremes like "many golfers ruining their swings". [quote name="RadarNinja" url="/t/44307/hitting-up-or-down-with-the-driver-in-an-inline-pattern/90#post_848199"]My experience has been alot of people talk TrackMan numbers like golf is played in a vacuum, but really don't understand the variables that come into play.[/quote] I don't think anyone would disagree with your comment. Trackman, FlightScope, whatever is a tool, and a good teacher can use the tool to help them improve their students. I don't go on Trackman to diagnose myself, I let the teacher tell me how to improve from the knowledge that this tool provides.

[RadarNinja]

Never said hitting down is how to play the driver. I am with Stretch, I find if you focus more on path, swing sequence, shoulder tilt, and ball position as well as tee height, the AoA problem tends to improve. What I said is focusing on AoA as the 'goal' isn't necessarily going to fix ball flight distance or direction challenges. The truth is, you guys don't know what you're attack angle is on any given swing and don't need to. A guys that is slightly down and acheiving good ball numbers doesn't need to change his swing if he's consistently finding fairways and happy with the ball flight.

I rarely post on this site because A) i'm not in the SnT fanboy club B) not everything Iacas says is written in stone nor is his franchise as successful as he leads people to believe.

You can systematically take my posts, which don't follow the 'yes man' mentality you're used to, and interpret them to make yourself look better. I really could could care less. If anyone in the So. Cal area would like to check out the geometry of their swing in the real world i'd be more than happy to show you how the variables change as the swing changes. If you can control your face angle, path, direction and AoA by making set-up changes I'll comp the entire TrackMan session for free:)

[iacas]

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

A guys that is slightly down and acheiving good ball numbers doesn't need to change his swing if he's consistently finding fairways and happy with the ball flight.

You act like I'd jump in and make that guy hit up. Two things:

1) That guy ain't very common. They exist on the PGA Tour (though Brian Gay was one of them, and he switched to hitting up a bit more and gained 25 yards or so and won on the PGA Tour again), but not in the regular world of golf.

2) I wouldn't change a thing. If the guy was happy and was scoring like he wanted and his ball flight was good, it's silly to think I'd change something. I'd put him on SAM, or look at his pitching, or bunker play, etc.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

I rarely post on this site because A) i'm not in the SnT fanboy club B) not everything Iacas says is written in stone nor is his franchise as successful as he leads people to believe.

The first point shows how little you know about me, what I teach, etc. The second is just plain silly.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

You can systematically take my posts, which don't follow the 'yes man' mentality you're used to, and interpret them to make yourself look better. I really could could care less. If anyone in the So. Cal area would like to check out the geometry of their swing in the real world i'd be more than happy to show you how the variables change as the swing changes. If you can control your face angle, path, direction and AoA by making set-up changes I'll comp the entire TrackMan session for free:)

You do realize that we have a FlightScope X2, had a Trackman before that (the X2 is not only more accurate but works with the ball being hit off the ground, too), etc.? I'd happily put my understanding of not only teaching but the D-Plane, ball flight, etc. up against you (or virtually anyone else in the world). You don't have the market cornered on "science" here, and you definitely don't have it cornered on teaching people to play better golf.

I've made no absolute comments here. I feel you've made more comments that approach absolutes than I have - comments about how people seem to become unable to find the clubface when they try to hit up, and how that change will ruin sixteen other things in their golf swing.

I've given you the benefit of the doubt in a lot of ways, and spoken only of generalizations to this point, while you've meanwhile ignored the title and topic of this thread, made weird comments like the one just above, and so on. If you want to talk specifics I'm game, but you seem to like to live in the vague and general, because that's where you can make comments like yours.

Do I care if a guy is hitting up or down when he's swinging 15° left across the ball? Nope. But for players who have swings within a reasonable range, generally speaking , they're often better off hitting slightly up on the golf ball to gain the distance advantages it provides (which it does, more often than not, and again, often with increased accuracy). And I haven't seen a decrease in strike quality when they make that change, either.

I have my own ideas about why you rarely post on this site, and it has more to do with being called out on things, being asked to explain yourself, and so on than any sort of "fanboy" behavior. Seriously… you're only about four years late on that one.

[Mr. Desmond]

All I will say is that I made the adjustments that Erik, Mike and James (most recently) suggested - off the toe, slightly closed stance, etc. and they do produce a nice push draw with good height. Admittedly, I was inconsistent over the first 5 swings, but that's the "getting comfortable and processing" stage. After getting comfortable with a setup, I was able to concentrate on fundamentals like swing path and a nice jump.

[mvmac]

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

I rarely post on this site because A) i'm not in the SnT fanboy club

Uhhhh dude, kind of revealed your ignorance there http://thesandtrap.com/t/65681/s-t-2-0-dvds-and-pressure-weight-forward-an-examination

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

Based on the thousands of swings I've seen TrackMan, many if not most amateurs acheive their best launch conditions with a slightly negative angle of attack. But again, the parameter is very unique to each invidual golfer.

Sounds like Andy Plummer to me...you know the S&T; guy, they like hitting down on the driver.

Quote:

I really could could care less. If anyone in the So. Cal area would like to check out the geometry of their swing in the real world i'd be more than happy to show you how the variables change as the swing changes. If you can control your face angle, path, direction and AoA by making set-up changes I'll comp the entire TrackMan session for free:)

You keep throwing out that you work with high level players, like we don't.  I helped a player who has played in the PGA Championship the last two years go from 2-3 down to 2 up and hitting the driver much straighter.  I did this this initially without radar and later confirmed it on his Trackman.

[RadarNinja]

LOL. Last comment, then i'm done. I'm sure you guys are great guys outside of this silly hierarchal golf forum sphere. I don't think anything said in this thread has proven anything either way. I made the comments I made based on the real world conditions I see on a day-to-day basis. If everyone could effective;u just 'hit up' on their driver we'd all be long drive champions and 'maxing out' our carry yardages. I never disagreed with you guys on that one, simply stated that when you change one variable often others change as well. I've got players who get better numbers by being down. I'm not talking -5 down, but +- close to level. As you agreed, being severly down usually always relates to a negative path. When amateurs get the swing working better the numbers naturally get better. Regarding your comments about TrackMan vs. Flightscope I doubt many will take that  seriously. You guys make reference to Joe and Grant's videos, I wonder what they feel about that statement? I use TrackMan off the ground all day long and only miss club delivery info if the speed is too slow, but to say Flightscope is more accurate is laughable. I demo'd both units extensively before ultimately bying a TrackMan because the club info was far more consistent (AoA, head speed). TrackMan doesn't register data is can't read, Flightscope will read data no matter what the situation.  Not to mention the newer TPS software is much simpler to use. Either way, both units are at the top in the spectrum hands down.  The video posted in this thread was claimed to be an elaboration to Joe's original video, which, as informative as it was, failed to account for the realities of face angle changes. Face angle doesn't stay consistent along the path. Even if the distance is only 3" between -4 and +4, the face angle changes along the swing path if you're naturally releasing the clubhead. I know you know this. You can't keep the horizontal swing plane or baseline consisent, change the AoA, and maintain the same face angle without some compensatory move.  Nor will every player maintain the same smash factor and ball speeds by changing AoA. I've seen it time and time again. I'm not saying it can't be done, it certainly can....but amateurs and pros alike need to be careful when assuming that they'll simply pick up extra distance by hitting up. You say i've been called out on this site but I havent' seen any comments made that disprove anything I'm saying? Like I said, i'll happily work with any sand trap members in the so. cal to show them these concepts are more dynamic than most realize. I'll even give a free clinic specifically for Sand Trap members to demonstrate. Iacas, we'll then get into the "specifics" you mention and verfiy who's AoA is best and who's getting the best launch conditions with what type of swing. There's nothing vague or general about that right? I'm actually hosting a TrackMan clinic on June 29th in San Diego. Mike, you otta come down and get schooled up and get a new perspectice that's not rooted in any particular swing theory. Might be good for you...

[cipher]

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

LOL. Last comment, then i'm done. I'm sure you guys are great guys outside of this silly hierarchal golf forum sphere. I don't think anything said in this thread has proven anything either way. I made the comments I made based on the real world conditions I see on a day-to-day basis. If everyone could effective;u just 'hit up' on their driver we'd all be long drive champions and 'maxing out' our carry yardages. I never disagreed with you guys on that one, simply stated that when you change one variable often others change as well. I've got players who get better numbers by being down. I'm not talking -5 down, but +- close to level. As you agreed, being severly down usually always relates to a negative path. When amateurs get the swing working better the numbers naturally get better. Regarding your comments about TrackMan vs. Flightscope I doubt many will take that  seriously. You guys make reference to Joe and Grant's videos, I wonder what they feel about that statement? I use TrackMan off the ground all day long and only miss club delivery info if the speed is too slow, but to say Flightscope is more accurate is laughable. I demo'd both units extensively before ultimately bying a TrackMan because the club info was far more consistent (AoA, head speed). TrackMan doesn't register data is can't read, Flightscope will read data no matter what the situation.  Not to mention the newer TPS software is much simpler to use. Either way, both units are at the top in the spectrum hands down.  The video posted in this thread was claimed to be an elaboration to Joe's original video, which, as informative as it was, failed to account for the realities of face angle changes. Face angle doesn't stay consistent along the path. Even if the distance is only 3" between -4 and +4, the face angle changes along the swing path if you're naturally releasing the clubhead. I know you know this. You can't keep the horizontal swing plane or baseline consisent, change the AoA, and maintain the same face angle without some compensatory move.  Nor will every player maintain the same smash factor and ball speeds by changing AoA. I've seen it time and time again. I'm not saying it can't be done, it certainly can....but amateurs and pros alike need to be careful when assuming that they'll simply pick up extra distance by hitting up. You say i've been called out on this site but I havent' seen any comments made that disprove anything I'm saying? Like I said, i'll happily work with any sand trap members in the so. cal to show them these concepts are more dynamic than most realize. I'll even give a free clinic specifically for Sand Trap members to demonstrate. Iacas, we'll then get into the "specifics" you mention and verfiy who's AoA is best and who's getting the best launch conditions with what type of swing. There's nothing vague or general about that right? I'm actually hosting a TrackMan clinic on June 29th in San Diego. Mike, you otta come down and get schooled up and get a new perspectice that's not rooted in any particular swing theory. Might be good for you...

Showing even more you don't actually read much of anything that has been discussed here.  I am sure a ton of Golf Evolution students like myself are going to jump ship and come over to you who forms his conclusions so eloquently based on all the information provided to him with the data to back it up.  You apparently think 5SK is a swing theory and that Erik and Mike have not provided any evidence to support their claims.  Mike, make sure you get over there to get schooled up in that new "perspectice".  I wish I lived there so I could get schooled, I am not not happy with the extra 20+ yards and 65% fairways I am hitting after switching to hitting up on the ball.

[iacas]

Damon Brossard…

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

I made the comments I made based on the real world conditions I see on a day-to-day basis.

So did we.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

If everyone could effective;u just 'hit up' on their driver we'd all be long drive champions and 'maxing out' our carry yardages.

Hitting up doesn't change someone's swing speed, so no, we wouldn't all be long drive champions. But long drive champs DO happen to hit up.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

I never disagreed with you guys on that one, simply stated that when you change one variable often others change as well. I've got players who get better numbers by being down.

We agreed with that. And we have some players who get better numbers down, too. They're in the minority, and by minority, I mean

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

I'm not talking -5 down, but +- close to level.

"level" is not "down." Sorry. We disallow redefining words to suit your point of view.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

Regarding your comments about TrackMan vs. Flightscope I doubt many will take that  seriously.

I don't care what you take seriously. You've apparently not done the side-by-side comparison testing with the Phantom camera, run all of the math, etc. We have.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

The video posted in this thread was claimed to be an elaboration to Joe's original video, which, as informative as it was, failed to account for the realities of face angle changes.

I already addressed that point.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

You can't keep the horizontal swing plane or baseline consisent, change the AoA, and maintain the same face angle without some compensatory move.

Uhm, yeah. Which is why I already addressed this above: you "compensate" by gripping the club at the ball, not at the point "back" three or four inches or whatever.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

Nor will every player maintain the same smash factor and ball speeds by changing AoA. I've seen it time and time again.

And we almost always see those numbers improve. Maybe we're just better instructors.

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

Mike, you otta come down and get schooled up and get a new perspectice that's not rooted in any particular swing theory. Might be good for you...

[saevel25]

Originally Posted by RadarNinja

Regarding your comments about TrackMan vs. Flightscope I doubt many will take that  seriously. You guys make reference to Joe and Grant's videos, I wonder what they feel about that statement? I use TrackMan off the ground all day long and only miss club delivery info if the speed is too slow, but to say Flightscope is more accurate is laughable. I demo'd both units extensively before ultimately bying a TrackMan because the club info was far more consistent (AoA, head speed). TrackMan doesn't register data is can't read, Flightscope will read data no matter what the situation.  Not to mention the newer TPS software is much simpler to use. Either way, both units are at the top in the spectrum hands down.

this is an example of why your arguements are mute, and why your just a person who will not be open to any sort of rational discussion.

First you say the comments can't be taken seriously. Then you say flightscope is laughable. This line of talk is very defensive, trying to separate you from Golf Evolution based on the technology you buy. Your basically saying, "I'm better because i bought the better equipment". yet then you go in after and say, that both units are top in the spectrum hands down. This tells me that you actually regard Flightscope as something very comparable to trackman. This sudden 180 in change of perspective and direction of thought tells me that you know flightscope is good, but you rather say its bad for your own purpose of looking better than others.

to me your just a person who doesn't like to admit they are wrong, even when they are. instead of posting numbers, instead of posting research, you just make claims. All we have to go by is by your word, and your so called experience. If your going to come in here and discuss logically as a fellow student of the game, be open to other people's opinions, and if you differ in opinion, than back it up. You've done none of that. I could care less if you worked with trackman daily, doesn't matter. That means nothing.

[inthecup]

I have a question that is more on topic.  I recently hit my driver on trackman, I was hitting up 3 degrees on the ball which makes sense.  I have a very high ball flight with a 8.5 degree driver. My swing speed is in the 95 mile per hour range (with driver).    I am wondering if I would get more benefit/distance from roll.  A reasonably struck drive goes 235.  My miss is a slight right push with a straight ball flight.  My normal drive is straight with a slight fade or draw.

Interesting that I don't have to justify my distance but for internet distance sake I have hit a couple 290 recently gps verified.  I won't mention the wind or terrain. ;)

What would be a good strategy to get the flight down and is that a sound plan.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by inthecup

I have a question that is more on topic.  I recently hit my driver on trackman, I was hitting up 3 degrees on the ball which makes sense.  I have a very high ball flight with a 8.5 degree driver.  My swing speed is in the 95 mile per hour range (with driver).    I am wondering if I would get more benefit/distance from roll.  A reasonably struck drive goes 235.  My miss is a slight right push with a straight ball flight.  My normal drive is straight with a slight fade or draw.

You will not benefit from "more roll" and the proper height and launch angle is almost always higher than people think. If you're carrying the ball 230 or so, then that's about right for 95 MPH.

[dtb300]

Originally Posted by inthecup

....... My swing speed is in the 95 mile per hour range (with driver)......

I have similar swing speed and the chart Iacas posted falls right in line with my numbers when getting fit for a driver:

ClubSpeed	Ball Velocity	Launch Angle	Ball Spin	Carry Distance	Total Distance	Angle of Attack
93.8645871	137.7493304	15.26484375	2315.478795	220.0897321	243.1845982

5.215625

These numbers were near the end of last year and I plan on going back and seeing where I am at this year as I work on my swing/game.

[rehmwa]

It's a very good chart.  I'm at 105 head speed.  When i get my spin down, I'm dead on that chart for carry and total (in typ conditions).

[Stretch]

Here's another one from TrackMan that breaks it down by 5 mph increments and also details carry vs. total distance.

[fersman4]

I thought I'd give this "hitting up" thing a try. I'm a 17 handicap after 14 years playing. I haven't had any instruction in the past 6 years, so for now all my improvement efforts are based upon "self-teaching". Well I've only hit 22 drives in 2 rounds with this "hitting up" idea, and no range practice. Anyway, I noticed significant increase in distance on my average drive, perhaps 30 yards. But in my case I cannot give credit to better ball dynamics. See when I say "average drive", I'm talking about a shot that leaks left or right into the trees, or if I'm lucky, just the rough. So for such a shot, with the ball flying through the air more and rolling less, trees and rough have less impact on my total distance.

Oh, I didn't hit any more or fewer fairways, by the way. The first round I was hitting a mix of slices and hooks (notice I didn't say fades and draws). The second round most of my misses were slices. My swing is as close to an inline path as I can get without professional instruction, so I have to blame either poor release, or a too weak grip. Toward the end of the round I gripped fairly strongly and started hitting straight slight fades. Not push-fades or pull-fades, but straight fades. Is that even possible with the swing you described?

[Stretch]

Originally Posted by fersman4

My swing is as close to an inline path as I can get without professional instruction, so I have to blame either poor release, or a too weak grip. Toward the end of the round I gripped fairly strongly and started hitting straight slight fades. Not push-fades or pull-fades, but straight fades. Is that even possible with the swing you described?

It's not only possible, but inevitable -- if you really are swinging straight at the target.

If your club face is dead square at impact and your swing direction is straight down the target line and you are hitting up on the golf ball, then your club path must be to the left of that target line. This is because -- in order to be hitting up -- the club head has to have already passed the low point of the swing arc and it will now be moving both upwards and inwards along that arc. The practical result is that the ball starts very straight (because the club face was square) and then curves to the right (because the club face was open to the club path).

In practical terms, this just means you have to learn to adjust your aim at setup slightly to accommodate this type of shot pattern. If you go back to the first posts in this thread Erik lays out the geometry very nicely.