new ball flight laws - question

[onesome]

  xmanhockey7 said:

Originally Posted by xmanhockey7

That's how Nicklaus thought he did it. I know a pro who still uses the old train of thought "club path determines where the ball starts and face where it ends up". He is a good player and knows that it is no longer true but for him, when he plays, that's how he thinks of it.

So he actually would come more outside in than along his feet alignment and the face would be square with the alignment.

[808hacker]

That 2nd youtube video I posted pretty much explains the new ball flight laws.

[luu5]

I thought the "new ball flight laws" were old news by this time?

[iacas]

  808hacker said:

Originally Posted by 808hacker

All I am saying is that just because it's a law and it makes sense (after studying and studying) doesn't mean it's easy to understand or apply. If this is so easy, why do we have to watch youtube videos and do all this when it's so easy? If it's transforming players, why isn't the info drawn out in an easy to understand way? Why not sell it since everyone else seems to sell the same tips over and over? Maybe....

Here are the ball flight laws in a sentence: The ball starts generally where the face is pointed at impact and curves away from the path. They're not difficult to understand.

There's nothing to sell. It's a simple, easy sentence that's easy to apply. It's equally as easy to understand and to apply as the "old" ball flight "lies" - but has the benefit of being CORRECT.

  808hacker said:

Originally Posted by 808hacker

1: People enjoy being the only ones that know and enjoy telling others that they are wrong and the usual answer - go figure it out yourself applies.

2: It's not that easy to apply or understand and maybe the old way although theoretically wrong - did work _seem_ to work - even though it's technically incorrect.

3: Some people want to make money - the same people that keep on saying golf is easy - or that all you have to do is this or that - and it will happen.

4: insert your own.

None of those apply.

1. The information is widely available, including http://thesandtrap.com/b/playing_tips/ball_flight_laws and all throughout this site.

2. It's perfectly easy to apply. As "easy" as the old stuff, and again, has the benefit of being correct.

3. By giving better instruction to people in person? Sure. That's not what's happening here. It's not super secret information.

  808hacker said:

Originally Posted by 808hacker

If all of this were so easy we would all be great players.

You still have to hit the ball. Knowledge doesn't make someone a good player. The correct knowledge removes roadblocks that must be overcome, but that's it.

  808hacker said:

Originally Posted by 808hacker

Does it really matter which way you do it if it works for you?

Yes. Only one way is correct.

Why is important?

You have a right-handed golfer who starts the at the target and slices it 40 yards right of the target. The "fix" for that guy is entirely different than what's correct if you think the "old ball flight lies" are the truth. The old rules said the guy's face was pointing 40 yards right and he was swinging at the target.

In reality the guy's clubface is pointing pretty much at the target and his swing path is WELL to the left.

This golfer can get better faster with the correct information because he's not going to spend time trying to "square up the clubface" - it's already pretty square to the target!

  808hacker said:

Originally Posted by 808hacker

Here's a 40 minute explanation of the new ball flight laws. 40 minutes to explain this subject.

Calling that an "explanation" is disingenuous. That video is geared towards advanced golfers and mostly towards golf instructors looking to understand things to a very fine degree.

Here are the ball flight laws in a sentence: The ball starts generally where the face is pointed at impact and curves away from the path. They're not difficult to understand.

[onesome]

Let me make sure I get this right,so if a player would swing the club on an outside in path 10 degrees off the target line and had the club angle at open 2 degrees the ball would land close to target right?

[iacas]

  onesome said:

Originally Posted by onesome

Let me make sure I get this right,so if a player would swing the club on an outside in path 10 degrees off the target line and had the club angle at open 2 degrees the ball would land close to target right?

No. If by "open" you mean 2° right of the target with a path that's 10° left of the target, the ball would START at the target, then slice pretty far to the right (how much depends on a lot of things).

So the ball still started generally (within 2° or so) of the face, and curved away (to the right) of the path (which is to the left).

[NM Golf]

  iacas said:

Originally Posted by iacas

Here are the ball flight laws in a sentence: The ball starts generally where the face is pointed at impact and curves away from the path. They're not difficult to understand.

Very nice, I still have arguments with people about this and this sentence will hopefully make my explanation easier for them to understand.

[onesome]

  iacas said:

Originally Posted by iacas

No. If by "open" you mean 2° right of the target with a path that's 10° left of the target, the ball would START at the target, then slice pretty far to the right (how much depends on a lot of things).

So the ball still started generally (within 2° or so) of the face, and curved away (to the right) of the path (which is to the left).

I think I meant 8 degrees closed,and the reason I'm using the large numbers is just to simplify the 20% that swing path influences the shot shape right? Sorry for the error.

[onesome]

  onesome said:

Originally Posted by onesome

I think I meant 8 degrees closed,and the reason I'm using the large numbers is just to simplify the 20% that swing path influences the shot shape right? Sorry for the error.

Aw crap......it should 2 degrees closed. LOL I know this is simple but I'm just over thinking it.

[iacas]

  onesome said:

Originally Posted by onesome

Aw crap......it should 2 degrees closed. LOL I know this is simple but I'm just over thinking it.

It depends. For a driver a face that's 2 degrees right and a path that's 3 degrees right will end up at the target, but for a 9I with a face 2 right, the path has to get to 6 or 7 out to end up at the target. And when you throw in  point of contact and other things, it starts to get complex if you want balls to end up exactly on the target.

[celticstanger]

I'm not clear on what's really new, other than the correction for initial alignment.  It sounds like the old SHAPE message is correct - face angle relative to path causes shape - but the old alignment message was wrong (or, perhaps is, if you need to get around a tree, for example).

In other words, if you want to shape a shot, your alignment needs to better account for what you're about to do with the clubhead.  When you hit the shot, the ball will head off more in the direction in which the club was pointing than the path of the swing, then turn further in that direction.

It sounds like the key thought for the ley-person is: account for the initial "jump" toward the face angle?

I haven't read all of the data, but would love to know if the ball actually ends up where the face was pointing?  I hit a lot of draws and they seem to go where I want (within a given extent of tolerance - I aint a pro, so when the ball draws to within 10', I feel like I nailed it!), but with so many variables, I'd like to know if I should modify my aim to make my best shots come closer?

[celticstanger]

  iacas said:

Originally Posted by iacas

It depends. For a driver a face that's 2 degrees right and a path that's 3 degrees right will end up at the target, but for a 9I with a face 2 right, the path has to get to 6 or 7 out to end up at the target. And when you throw in  point of contact and other things, it starts to get complex if you want balls to end up exactly on the target.

That makes complete sense, to me.  Ball will start, say, at 2.30 degrees right due to face-angle at impact, then draw back to the left due to spin caused by "closed-to-path club face"...

[Righty to Lefty]

  celticstanger said:

Originally Posted by celticstanger

I'm not clear on what's really new, other than the correction for initial alignment.  It sounds like the old SHAPE message is correct - face angle relative to path causes shape - but the old alignment message was wrong (or, perhaps is, if you need to get around a tree, for example).

In other words, if you want to shape a shot, your alignment needs to better account for what you're about to do with the clubhead.  When you hit the shot, the ball will head off more in the direction in which the club was pointing than the path of the swing, then turn further in that direction.

It sounds like the key thought for the ley-person is: account for the initial "jump" toward the face angle?

I haven't read all of the data, but would love to know if the ball actually ends up where the face was pointing?  I hit a lot of draws and they seem to go where I want (within a given extent of tolerance - I aint a pro, so when the ball draws to within 10', I feel like I nailed it!), but with so many variables, I'd like to know if I should modify my aim to make my best shots come closer?

The  main problem with the old BFL's is point the clubhead to where you want he ball to end up because the shot will never stay on the target line.  Also the ball will in no way start where your stance is aligned.  That is the main rub why some will still say the old BFL's are correct because they will create the desired shot shape, but they will not stay on target.

The face angle determine the path that the ball launches on and the the clubpath determines how close the ball will stay to the line that the face lauched the ball on.  To get the ball to land near the target line the clubface and clubpath relationship must be proportioned correctly, for instance:

Small draw that lands near the target line (New BFL's ):

1. Clubface 4 yards right of target at impact

2. Clubpath 7 yards right of target at impact

3. Result = 3 yard draw landing 1 yard right of target moving toward it

Big Draw landing near the target line ( New BFL's )

1. Clubface 8 yards right of target at impact

2. Clubpath 14 yards right of target at impact

3. Result = 6 yard draw landing 2 yard right of target moving toward it

Small draw ( Old BFL's ):

1. Clubface 0 yards right of target at impact

2. Clubpath 4 yards right of target at impact

3. Result = 4 yard draw landing 4 yard left of target and moving away from it

Big Draw landing near the target line ( Old BFL's )

1. Clubface 0 yards right of target at impact

2. Clubpath 14 yards right of target at impact

3. Result = 14 yard draw landing 14 yards left of target and moving away from it

From this you can see that the only way that the old BFL's work is by knowingly or unknowingly adjusting your clubface to point right of the target at impact otherwise you will continue to make the shot shape more and more exaggerated.

[mvmac]

  Righty to Lefty said:

Originally Posted by Righty to Lefty

From this you can see that the only way that the old BFL's work is by knowingly or unknowingly adjusting your clubface to point right of the target at impact otherwise you will continue to make the shot shape more and more exaggerated.

Yes obviously the "old" ball flight laws work for curving the ball but you end up hitting deflected cuts and hooks.  Because if the face is aimed at the target, what they proscribe, the ball will start straight and curve away from the target.

And the biggest problem is when you run into faults and fixes, as Erik explains:

  iacas said:

Originally Posted by iacas

Why is important?

You have a right-handed golfer who starts the at the target and slices it 40 yards right of the target. The "fix" for that guy is entirely different than what's correct if you think the "old ball flight lies" are the truth. The old rules said the guy's face was pointing 40 yards right and he was swinging at the target.

In reality the guy's clubface is pointing pretty much at the target and his swing path is WELL to the left.

This golfer can get better faster with the correct information because he's not going to spend time trying to "square up the clubface" - it's already pretty square to the target!

And for the record I absolutely hate the terms "old" and "new" ball flight laws.  It almost infers that something changed in the past several years to physics.  The ball has always started primarily where the face is pointing and curved away from the path

[teamroper60]

This past weekend, I was hitting a bunch of push fades and while I was on the course, had some sort of mental block on what to do to correct it.  After the round was over, it dawns on me that I had the ball further back in my stance than normal.........   So today, I hit the range to do a little practicing and of course, I made sure I had the ball more forward..     Most of my shots were straight, straight draws, or, if I got it a little too far forward, pull fades but I had a couple which perplexed me a little as I look at the ball flight laws..    I have to call them pull fades because of how they started out (left) but the strange thing was, they would start left but when they got out about 5 yds left, they would straighten out (relative to the target) continue straight from there, landing about 5 yds left of the target........   So my question is, what combination of face/path creates a ball that starts left of the target, then straightens out?

[brettski01]

  teamroper60 said:

Originally Posted by teamroper60

This past weekend, I was hitting a bunch of push fades and while I was on the course, had some sort of mental block on what to do to correct it.  After the round was over, it dawns on me that I had the ball further back in my stance than normal.........   So today, I hit the range to do a little practicing and of course, I made sure I had the ball more forward..     Most of my shots were straight, straight draws, or, if I got it a little too far forward, pull fades but I had a couple which perplexed me a little as I look at the ball flight laws..    I have to call them pull fades because of how they started out (left) but the strange thing was, they would start left but when they got out about 5 yds left, they would straighten out (relative to the target) continue straight from there, landing about 5 yds left of the target........   So my question is, what combination of face/path creates a ball that starts left of the target, then straightens out?

Out to in with a slightly closed face that matches your out to in path i believe

[nevets88]

  mvmac said:

Originally Posted by mvmac

And for the record I absolutely hate the terms "old" and "new" ball flight laws.  It almost infers that something changed in the past several years to physics.  The ball has always started primarily where the face is pointing and curved away from the path

I always thought this was a misnomer too. How about...

Realized ball flight laws

De facto ball flight laws

True ball flight laws

[iacas]

  celticstanger said:

Originally Posted by celticstanger

I'm not clear on what's really new, other than the correction for initial alignment. It sounds like the old SHAPE message is correct - face angle relative to path causes shape - but the old alignment message was wrong (or, perhaps is, if you need to get around a tree, for example).

Yes, the shape (curve) is the same.

What changed is what determines the starting direction of the ball. The "old (wrong) lies" said it was the path. In reality it's far more the clubface.

  celticstanger said:

Originally Posted by celticstanger

That makes complete sense, to me.  Ball will start, say, at 2.30 degrees right due to face-angle at impact, then draw back to the left due to spin caused by "closed-to-path club face"...

Yes. It's not always 85%, but it's never less than 55% or so (and on a full swing it's never less than about 75%), so you can just say "the ball starts where the face is pointing and curves away from the path" (unless they match, in which case there's no curve).

(Note for the pedantic: this is in 2D with no regard for the third dimension [vertical]. The path and face never match on a good golf shot because the path is down slightly and the clubface has loft. Simply put, we're not getting into D-Plane here - it's just "the ball flight laws" which are essentially a 2D description that talks about sideways curve only.)

  nevets88 said:

Originally Posted by nevets88

I always thought this was a misnomer too. How about...

Realized ball flight laws

De facto ball flight laws

True ball flight laws

I like these...

Ball flight lies

Ball flight laws

... but they're too subtle to be all that useful.