TrackMan is going to make a lot of teachers I know very unhappy!

[The_Pharaoh]

[threejack]

whats wrong with the picture?

[visiondr]

It looks like an accurate representation of the expected ball flight given the swing path and club face angle.

In other words, I don't see anything wrong with the picture either.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by visiondr

It looks like an accurate representation of the expected ball flight given the swing path and club face angle.

In other words, I don't see anything wrong with the picture either.

Who said there was something wrong with the picture? I was thinking of all the pros out there that refuse to accept the correct ball flight laws. They are now going to have to learn them and change their way of teaching the golf swing.

This feature has finally been added to TrackMan Range.

[newtogolf]

I'd guess that most of the instructors that don't accept the "correct" ball flight laws aren't big on technology like TrackMan or video swing analysis.

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

Who said there was something wrong with the picture? I was thinking of all the pros out there that refuse to accept the correct ball flight laws. They are now going to have to learn them and change their way of teaching the golf swing.

This feature has finally been added to TrackMan Range.

[mymizunosrock]

If the path is outside in, I dont know how that is a push. So if the face was closed, same path, would that be a push draw?? Nope.....

[shortstop20]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

Who said there was something wrong with the picture? I was thinking of all the pros out there that refuse to accept the correct ball flight laws. They are now going to have to learn them and change their way of teaching the golf swing.

This feature has finally been added to TrackMan Range.

A person should have been able to do realize the difference between reality and the old laws before this graphic was available.

There's even a video somewhere out there of a guy who returned his TrackMan a couple days after buying it because he thought it was broken. He wouldn't believe the data that it was putting out because he believed the old ball flight laws.

[shortstop20]

Originally Posted by mymizunosrock

If the path is outside in, I dont know how that is a push. So if the face was closed, same path, would that be a push draw?? Nope.....

Path has much less to do with launch direction than the face does. Face accounts for 70-90%(or so) of the launch direction depending on club, swing speed, etc. Path curves the ball.

[mymizunosrock]

Originally Posted by shortstop20

Path has much less to do with launch direction than the face does. Face accounts for 70-90%(or so) of the launch direction depending on club, swing speed, etc. Path curves the ball.

Yeah I get that bit. Im not talking about the ball flight exactly. Im referring to the use of "Push" in the shot description. Ignoring the resulting ball flight for a second, I was under the impression that a push was an "inside out" swing path, "Pull" the opposite. To me that diagram is more of a "pull" across the target line. I agree with the path/face angle/ball flight result of this example, I dont agree that this is a push.  Unless they now disregard the swing path as either a push or a pull and base it on the direction of the ball off the face. Its fine if they want to rewrite the "ball flight laws" based on computer simulation but I dont agree with changing the meaning of a push or pull based on the initial ball path with no regard to the swing path.

If I hit this shot above, I would never say "gee, I pushed that". No, I cut the ears off it. Thats fine if they want to call it a push. In my head I'll agree with the flight, not the description....

[shortstop20]

Originally Posted by mymizunosrock

Yeah I get that bit. Im not talking about the ball flight exactly. Im referring to the use of "Push" in the shot description. Ignoring the resulting ball flight for a second, I was under the impression that a push was an "inside out" swing path, "Pull" the opposite. To me that diagram is more of a "pull" across the target line. I agree with the path/face angle/ball flight result of this example, I dont agree that this is a push.  Unless they now disregard the swing path as either a push or a pull and base it on the direction of the ball off the face. Its fine if they want to rewrite the "ball flight laws" based on computer simulation but I dont agree with changing the meaning of a push or pull based on the initial ball path with no regard to the swing path.

Push and Pull has always been in regards to where the ball leaves the face in relation to the target line. Why would it be any different?

You would call that shot a pull fade?

[JetFan1983]

Originally Posted by mymizunosrock

Yeah I get that bit. Im not talking about the ball flight exactly. Im referring to the use of "Push" in the shot description. Ignoring the resulting ball flight for a second, I was under the impression that a push was an "inside out" swing path

19 times out of 20 (maybe more), a push-related ball flight results from an inside out path. But you can hit a push fade with an over-the-top swing path. You can't hit a straight push.

If you're coming 5 degrees over the top with a face angle that's open relative to the swing path and at least one degree open relative to the target line, boom, push fade.

It's a very rare miss that really only very poor players make. Those who have that miss usually learn pretty quickly to "roll their hands more" through impact to shut the face so they can start their fade to the left.

The OP never said this was a straight push. He said it was a "push-fade." You can't hit a straight push coming over the top, just in the same way you can't hit a straight pull coming from inside out.

[shortstop20]

It'd be like calling a ball that starts directly on target and draws(ending up left of target) a push-draw.

Because for the ball to curve left if the face is pointing directly at the target at impact would require an in-out path.

Going back to his example though, a proper and more powerful "push-fade" would be hit with an inside-out path and a clubface open to the path.

[mymizunosrock]

Originally Posted by shortstop20

Push and Pull has always been in regards to where the ball leaves the face in relation to the target line. Why would it be any different?

You would call that shot a pull fade?

I guess, maybe a pull slice or just a nasty cut. In my own mind, Id still call that a pull (in relation to the swing path, not ball path) because the swing is a pull motion. Inside out is more a pushing motion. In theory, I accept that the way I look at it (what I was told) is not right and that ANY ball that starts to the right, regardless of swing path and face angle, is a push and the opposite for a pull. To the eye this shot would have been interpreted differently years ago. I'll continue to live by the flight laws, I'll just ignore the actual descriptions. Thanks for clearing that up.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

I'd guess that most of the instructors that don't accept the "correct" ball flight laws aren't big on technology like TrackMan or video swing analysis.

Scares the hell out of them. They'd actually have to learn how to teach the golf swing properly, rather than fob the masses off with "keep your head down", "slower", "strengthen your grip" etc.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by mymizunosrock

I guess, maybe a pull slice or just a nasty cut. In my own mind, Id still call that a pull (in relation to the swing path, not ball path) because the swing is a pull motion. Inside out is more a pushing motion. In theory, I accept that the way I look at it (what I was told) is not right and that ANY ball that starts to the right, regardless of swing path and face angle, is a push and the opposite for a pull. To the eye this shot would have been interpreted differently years ago. I'll continue to live by the flight laws, I'll just ignore the actual descriptions. Thanks for clearing that up.

The text bolded above is exactly why TrackMan and video cameras are so important when it comes to teaching the golf swing. Without assistance from one of these devices, a lot of pros would simply assume the player had come from the inside and gone about getting the player to come more from the outside and asking them to turn their hands over more aggressively through impact!!

[Harmonious]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

The text bolded above is exactly why TrackMan and video cameras are so important when it comes to teaching the golf swing. Without assistance from one of these devices, a lot of pros would simply assume the player had come from the inside and gone about getting the player to come more from the outside and asking them to turn their hands over more aggressively through impact!!

Surely you are not saying that you cannot teach the golf swing without possessing the trackman equipment, are you?  And I find it interesting that you know so many pros who are terrified of this machine.  Have there been discussions among your non-trackman peers that they have lost all their students to trackman-using pros?

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

Surely you are not saying that you cannot teach the golf swing without possessing the trackman equipment, are you?  And I find it interesting that you know so many pros who are terrified of this machine.  Have there been discussions among your non-trackman peers that they have lost all their students to trackman-using pros?

No I'm not saying that. I am saying it removes all doubt. No one is losing their students to TrackMan-using pros as only about 1% of teaching pros in Spain use TrackMan. If that. Also, I reckon only about 2% use a camera. But as TrackMan and camera become more widespread, they will start losing their students imho.

[carrero77]

I wish mor spanish teachers usted trackman

How much does it cost?