Quick ball flight law question

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Adam Young

You have never been to Austria then.

The land of Patrick57!

No, I haven't. There must be something very odd in the water there.

Most slicers know that to have any chance the clubface had better be left of the target when they make contact. People who have a face right of target and a path left of the face quit the game pretty quickly (or figure out to at least get the face left somehow). :-P

Originally Posted by Adam Young

Almost every one of them feels some sort of extra clubface rotation to hit a shot that draws, usually accompanied by a definite swing direction change (and usually a ball position change to complement to swing direction change. I have never ever in my life heard a good quality player say they use rotation of the hands/clubhead to hit a fade.

I hit draws with a very low rate of closure.

And you're putting words in my mouth by saying that a good player "uses rotation" to hit a fade. I never said that. I simply said that a good player who kicks 3 hard, late can send the path left. It's a miss that leads to pulls and cuts and not the cleanest contact.

This video doesn't explain what we're talking about perfectly but it touches at the edge of it:

Originally Posted by Adam Young

Almost every one of them feels some sort of extra clubface rotation to hit a shot that draws, usually accompanied by a definite swing direction change (and usually a ball position change to complement to swing direction change. I have never ever in my life heard a good quality player say they use rotation of the hands/clubhead to hit a fade.

BTW, a clubface closing through impact imparts a teeny tiny bit of fade spin on the golf ball.

Originally Posted by Adam Young

So if someone has a good grip, a good (slightly inside) path through impact but is straight blocking it... would you not suggest clubhead rotation then?

In a word, no. A slower rate of closure is better than a faster rate of closure.

I'd look at the player's grip (a degree or two stronger isn't much), setup (again, a degree or two less to the right isn't much), etc. I'd look at 30 things before I suggested "more clubhead rotation," and since I've never had to look at more than about six or seven things (I'm trying to be generous here), suffice to say I wouldn't expect I'd get to #30 with a golfer any time soon.

Originally Posted by Adam Young

maybe I should have added one more stipulation. Your player has a good grip, clubface is square to target at address and has a slightly in to out swing and is blocking it right.

Would you shut the face to the left of the target or use the clubhead rotation?

I'm not likely to do either.

If they're lined up with the face square at setup but it's returning wide open (so they can push the ball), then something is wrong. It's highly unlikely I'll have a player who wants to play a draw aim the face left of the target at setup.

And I think my record with players stands quite well. The range (when we were at the range) at which we taught probably had one of the top ten highest percentage of drawers of the golf ball anywhere in the world. We're very good at that. And we don't do it with clubface rotation.

[mvmac]

So if someone has a good grip, a good (slightly inside) path through impact but is straight blocking it... would you not suggest clubhead rotation then?

There would be a reason the face is so open or the face is good and the path just isn't out enough but that wouldn't result in a block. IMO it would be bad sequencing,  the weight could be too far back, left should elevating at too fast a rate, rear elbow location, handle not raising at all.  I saw an instructor deal with just this last week.  Club head was waay in on the downswing A6( clubshaft parallel to the ground) and could hit anything but push cuts.  The club was so far in that he couldn't do anything wipe across it.  He needed to feel like the right elbow stayed flex longer in the downswing and like he added some rotation to the pivot.  Instructor's name is Dana Dahlquist.

Absolutely 100% the extra rolling of the face and rolling of the forearms can change path.  It changes our low point location.  Since you know Trackman, Swing Direction (formerly known as HSP) is the direction of the swing at low point, it is a line tangent to the arc at low point.  The further back that handle gets the more low point moves back. When low point goes back the path moves to the left.

Here are two great examples of players rolling the face, which leads to dorsi flexing (cupping) the left wrist and rotating the path to the left.  Look where the face is pointing with the guy on the left (obviously could also be an off center hit).  These guys have zero chance of  hitting a draw.  The dorsi flexion also keep the face from closing like crazy.  The guy on the right hits draws now though ;-)

Compared to this player who hits this shot with the handle forward, before the point of tangency

[Patrick57]

Originally Posted by Zeph

Still, the natural tendency for someone with an out to in path is to close the clubface, not open it.

I'm with Adam, I must be watching golfers who are an exception to the rule. If a player has a natural tendency to swing out to in, then surely his hands would protect this flight by keepng the clubface open at impact. Out to in with a closed clubface would create a quick hook, you wouldn't want to be hitting too many of them. The opposite is true for the in to out path.

It's simple logic or am I missing something here?

I bet you are all refering to clubface relative to the target and not to path and thus it is actually open at impact.

[mvmac]

Originally Posted by Patrick57

I'm with Adam, I must be watching golfers who are an exception to the rule. If a player has a natural tendency to swing out to in, then surely his hands would protect this flight by keepng the clubface open at impact. Out to in with a closed clubface would create a quick hook, you wouldn't want to be hitting too many of them. The opposite is true for the in to out path. I bet you are all refering to clubface relative to the target and not to path and thus it is actually open at impact.

This isn't very hard to understand, most golfer that hit slices or cuts have a face that is aimed LEFT of the target at impact.  Path is  4 to 5 degrees left with a face 1 or 2 degrees left (just an example).  Slicers START THE BALL LEFT, therefore the face has to be aimed left at impact.  To hit a quick hook with the same path numbers, the face would have to be 8 to 10 degrees left.  Very tough to do when the lead wrist is dorsi flexed.

We're not making this stuff up guys, in fact we almost shouldn't be sharing this considering how valuable understanding how the wrist conditions affect path/rate of closure can be.

[Patrick57]

This isn't very hard to understand, most golfer that hit slices or cuts have a face that is aimed LEFT of the target at impact.  Path is  4 to 5 degrees left with a face 1 or 2 degrees left (just an example).  Slicers START THE BALL LEFT, therefore the face has to be aimed left at impact.  To hit a quick hook with the same path numbers, the face would have to be 8 to 10 degrees left.  Very tough to do when the lead wrist is dorsi flexed. We're not making this stuff up guys, in fact we almost shouldn't be sharing this considering how valuable understanding how the wrist conditions effect path/rate of closure can be.

So the face is open to the path. So, closed to target can cause a cut but closed to path can't. I would guess that Chuck Evans can count on one hand how many golfers who could hit a fade with face closed to path.

[iacas]

So the face is open to the path. So, closed to target can cause a cut but closed to path can't. I would guess that Chuck Evans can count on one hand how many golfers who could hit a fade with face closed to path.

We never said any differently Patrick. Your continued willful ignorance does not wear well.

The point is virtually all golfers who slice the ball have a clubface pointing left of the target (for righties) at impact. Right of the path, but left of the target.

Adam said: "But a slicer who is hitting hit with trackman stats of -8 path +4 clubface would be greatly benefited from the net gain of rotation". In Trackman terms, everything is relative to the target, so that's a path that's eight degrees LEFT of the target and a clubface that's 4 degrees RIGHT of the target. That's a situation which almost NEVER happens among golfers who have been playing for more than a month or so.

[Adam Young]

The land of Patrick57!

No, I haven't. There must be something very odd in the water there.

Most slicers know that to have any chance the clubface had better be left of the target when they make contact. People who have a face right of target and a path left of the face quit the game pretty quickly (or figure out to at least get the face left somehow). :-P

I hit draws with a very low rate of closure.

And you're putting words in my mouth by saying that a good player "uses rotation" to hit a fade. I never said that. I simply said that a good player who kicks 3 hard, late can send the path left. It's a miss that leads to pulls and cuts and not the cleanest contact.

This video doesn't explain what we're talking about perfectly but it touches at the edge of it:

BTW, a clubface closing through impact imparts a teeny tiny bit of fade spin on the golf ball.

In a word, no. A slower rate of closure is better than a faster rate of closure.

I'd look at the player's grip (a degree or two stronger isn't much), setup (again, a degree or two less to the right isn't much), etc. I'd look at 30 things before I suggested "more clubhead rotation," and since I've never had to look at more than about six or seven things (I'm trying to be generous here), suffice to say I wouldn't expect I'd get to #30 with a golfer any time soon.

I'm not likely to do either.

If they're lined up with the face square at setup but it's returning wide open (so they can push the ball), then something is wrong. It's highly unlikely I'll have a player who wants to play a draw aim the face left of the target at setup.

And I think my record with players stands quite well. The range (when we were at the range) at which we taught probably had one of the top ten highest percentage of drawers of the golf ball anywhere in the world. We're very good at that. And we don't do it with clubface rotation.

Yes there must be something odd in the water. We have a lot of very unathletic people who have never played any ball sport in their life, at best they are skiers with dodgy knees. For whatever reason, the amount of Push slicer's here is huge. Even when given a strong grip and a closed face throughout the swing they manage to manipulate the clubface wide open at impact so it push slices. In fact, the stronger the grip the more they attempt to steer it open again through impact as if it is some kind of reflex to find an open face position. i am not averse to slamming the face 60 degrees shut and letting them hit a massive pull hook for a few shots so they can feel what a closed face at impact feels like (relaive to body line and path) so then they at least have some experience in that.

As far as rotation is concerned, I agree with a lot of it. I myself hit a draw shot with little rotation (although use more if I need more curvature). But with someone who has an abnormal rate of closure - as in none, or reverse closure-, I don't think it is bad for them to feel like they are rotating the clubhead through impact until they have found a level which looks at least normal on a camera. and when I talk about rotation of the clubhead, I would never teach it like that video you linked- that is not rotating the face about itself (as Brian Manzella would say), that is throwing the club overplane. I can achieve a 25 degree face variance through varying clubface rotation without so much as a 2 degree move in path. If I put the ball a bit further back in the stance It negates the path variance easily.

I am in no way arguing that 'your way' of doing things is wrong, I agree fully with it. And yes, face rotation is usually one of the last things I hit, but I still see it as a viable tool in order to bring someone back within normal ranges (not to do it to the point that it is excessive, unless warranted for certain reasons)

and the bit about a closing face at impact imparting a teeny tiny bit of fade spin - we both know that is erroneous.

We never said any differently Patrick. Your continued willful ignorance does not wear well.

The point is virtually all golfers who slice the ball have a clubface pointing left of the target (for righties) at impact. Right of the path, but left of the target.

Adam said: "But a slicer who is hitting hit with trackman stats of -8 path +4 clubface would be greatly benefited from the net gain of rotation". In Trackman terms, everything is relative to the target, so that's a path that's eight degrees LEFT of the target and a clubface that's 4 degrees RIGHT of the target. That's a situation which almost NEVER happens among golfers who have been playing for more than a month or so.

Again, please come to Austria/germany and teach for a month. I don't think you will change how you teach your current clients, but maybe you will have more empathy for what we come into contact with on a day to day business. Maybe it is the lack of any type of ball sport throughout life (one story is when I was trying to teach a guy 'feel' on the green and said it is as if we were playing a game of catch. After throwing him a ball - and him dropping it - then asking him to throw it back, he proceeded to lob it 30 yards over my head onto the first tee. I was 15 yards away from him. :).

I have often seen paths of minus 8 with balls starting to the right and going further right. When they have a decent grip, a decent face throughout the swing but are actually opening the face through impact (yes, it is actually rotating open) I am not averse to suggesting the feeling of rotation of the clubhead (taught correctly - not like the stack and tilt video) in order to bring the ball into playable range. I would rather see a player go from path -5 face +5 to path -7 face -3 as now it is a playable fade/slice 10 yards from the target rather than 30 yards right with added distance. As the path is brought back to neutral (by whatever means, the face wil come wih it a little eventually neutralising both, but it is mentally easier as the ball is not hurtling ff to the right causing the 'swing left' reflex from the subconscious.

And my track record isn't bad for turning slicers into drawers either.... although I certainly don't consider that the pinnacle of golf coaching

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Adam Young

For whatever reason, the amount of Push slicer's here is huge. Even when given a strong grip and a closed face throughout the swing they manage to manipulate the clubface wide open at impact so it push slices.

Fair enough. If that's true - and I believe you when you say that - it's not like anything we see with any regularity here, so I guess we don't really have a lot to talk about when it comes to this topic.

You said in your second paragraph something about reverse closure, and yeah, I'm fairly certain I've never seen that.

Originally Posted by Adam Young

and the bit about a closing face at impact imparting a teeny tiny bit of fade spin - we both know that is erroneous.

It's true actually. I'm not yanking your leg. Consider the gear effect. Note too that I'm being very specific: I said closing the face while the ball is on the face ("through impact").

Originally Posted by Adam Young

I have often seen paths of minus 8 with balls starting to the right and going further right. When they have a decent grip, a decent face throughout the swing but are actually opening the face through impact (yes, it is actually rotating open) I am not averse to suggesting the feeling of rotation of the clubhead (taught correctly - not like the stack and tilt video) in order to bring the ball into playable range. I would rather see a player go from path -5 face +5 to path -7 face -3 as now it is a playable fade/slice 10 yards from the target rather than 30 yards right with added distance.

I agree with that. We just never see path -5 face +5. We see golfers all the time who are path -7 face -3, definitely.

Originally Posted by Adam Young

And my track record isn't bad for turning slicers into drawers either.... although I certainly don't consider that the pinnacle of golf coaching

Nor do I.

[Adam Young]

Originally Posted by iacas

You said in your second paragraph something about reverse closure, and yeah, I'm fairly certain I've never seen that.

It's true actually. I'm not yanking your leg. Consider the gear effect. Note too that I'm being very specific: I said closing the face while the ball is on the face ("through impact").

Maybe I could find a video of reverse closure and post the pics. We have a tab we call x-files here for some of the weirdest looking swings, often puts us in a good mood over the morning coffee.

With the closure thing, the reason I called it erroneous is because, although I understand gear effect, the effect from actually closing the face manually is negligible compared to gear effect. The rate of closure at impact is not the thing that helps a player - it's the position it puts the club in at impact relative to the path. Although I did wonder this at first when studying gear effect and thinking maybe it applies to it - but again it is one of those 'give and take' things, kind of like my breakfast/metabolism analogy. The extra fade spin caused by the clubface closing at a more rapid rate is greatly nullified by the fact the clubface is more closed at impact.

This is why the feeling of closing the face through impact to apply hookpsin has worked so well for many pros throughout the years. even though not technically true, it did the job of getting the face closed to the path.

I'll see if i can get some anti-releasers up (technically they should be drawing the ball with the clubface opening out through impact ;)

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Adam Young

With the closure thing, the reason I called it erroneous is because, although I understand gear effect, the effect from actually closing the face manually is negligible compared to gear effect. The rate of closure at impact is not the thing that helps a player - it's the position it puts the club in at impact relative to the path. Although I did wonder this at first when studying gear effect and thinking maybe it applies to it - but again it is one of those 'give and take' things, kind of like my breakfast/metabolism analogy. The extra fade spin caused by the clubface closing at a more rapid rate is greatly nullified by the fact the clubface is more closed at impact.

To put some numbers to it, a really high rate of closure which closes the face 1.5 degrees while the ball is touching it would need to be hit with a face 0.4 degrees open at initial impact, -1.1 degrees at separation, -0.35 degrees at moment of maximum deformation. Thus ever so slightly closed, with a path 0.35 degrees out to counter the cut. But that's with a really high rate of closure. Most players are have slower rates than that, which is almost a theoretical max.

But anyway... :-)

[Adam Young]

Originally Posted by iacas

To put some numbers to it, a really high rate of closure which closes the face 1.5 degrees while the ball is touching it would need to be hit with a face 0.4 degrees open at initial impact, -1.1 degrees at separation, -0.35 degrees at moment of maximum deformation. Thus ever so slightly closed, with a path 0.35 degrees out to counter the cut. But that's with a really high rate of closure. Most players are have slower rates than that, which is almost a theoretical max.

But anyway... :-)

Interesting. I've always said my low rate of closure is the reason I am straight as an arrow. Just need some distance on my ball and I'll be laughing. More coffee should do the trick