Shaping the Ball

[DaveP043]

10 minutes ago, Killa said:

So assuming (yeah I know what ass - u - me means :) ) that I'm correct in the above, there should be no way for a player to hit a "correct" fade with an iron unless he is coming over the top with his swing (or by changing his setup thereby losing distance since he has to open the club face to shape the ball). Am I correct in my thoughts?

What you're saying, if I have it right, is that the only way for a player to fade an iron, given an initial alignment directly at the target and normal ball position, is to come over the top.  That makes sense.  I don't see a value judgement as to what a "correct" fade is.  If he needs to open his stance, and open the clubface, or move the ball forward in his stance, and produces the fade that he wants, that's plenty "correct" enough for me.  

Where I disagree is that you seem to be trying to define a "correct" way of doing something, when there are lots of workable solutions that you might find "incorrect".  To me, if you can do something consistently, get the  distance, height, and curve that you need, however you do it is "correct."

 

[Killa]

45 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

What you're saying, if I have it right, is that the only way for a player to fade an iron, given an initial alignment directly at the target and normal ball position, is to come over the top.  That makes sense.  I don't see a value judgement as to what a "correct" fade is.  If he needs to open his stance, and open the clubface, or move the ball forward in his stance, and produces the fade that he wants, that's plenty "correct" enough for me.  

Where I disagree is that you seem to be trying to define a "correct" way of doing something, when there are lots of workable solutions that you might find "incorrect".  To me, if you can do something consistently, get the  distance, height, and curve that you need, however you do it is "correct."

 

I'm not actually trying to say a way is correct and a way is wrong. Let's say in theory that's the most efficient way to transfer energy from the club to the ball - am I right or wrong?

[rehmwa]

11 minutes ago, Killa said:

I'm not actually trying to say a way is correct and a way is wrong. Let's say in theory that's the most efficient way to transfer energy from the club to the ball - am I right or wrong?

You're just saying that if you fade the ball by adjusting only path and not also face, then you don't have to uploft the shot.  Nothing odd there.  Fade is just out-in path relative to face angle - you can get there by adjusting either or both. 

I don't think there's an efficiency aspect to energy transfer here - the ball doesn't know which input you're tweaking (or both), it just knows the moment of contact, not how you got there....  Heck, it doesn't even know if you're fading or drawing - contact doesn't tell it if you're right or left handed....

For small fades, I try to do it only with path - but if I need a more pronounced fade, I'll also open the face too as I don't want to be swing path so far from my baseline that I have to swing it like I'm chopping wood.  If I overdo either aspect, it's just asking for dramatic failure.

 

(yes, I like to pretend I can shape shots.....it's fun....sometime I even succeed)

Edited June 13, 2017 by rehmwa

[billchao]

54 minutes ago, Killa said:

I'm not actually trying to say a way is correct and a way is wrong. Let's say in theory that's the most efficient way to transfer energy from the club to the ball - am I right or wrong?

I think too many people get stuck on this idea of an "ideal" or "optimal" path/face relationship. Efficient energy transfer has to do with centered strikes and good body movements, but I don't believe they hinge on your swing arc being along the target line. What matters more is having a reliable pattern that you know how to aim. Lots of major winners played fades.

[mdl]

1 hour ago, Killa said:

I'm not actually trying to say a way is correct and a way is wrong. Let's say in theory that's the most efficient way to transfer energy from the club to the ball - am I right or wrong?

As far as I understand, fade/draw doesn't have any noticeable impact on energy transfer.  Yes, you'll tend to get more distance on irons with draws because the typical draw pattern is delofted compared to the typical fade pattern.  But that affects distance but not energy transfer relative to dynamic loft.  Heck, Bubba hits almost controlled slices with his driver and doesn't seem to have any problem with energy transfer.

You're right that to line up square to the target, the only way to hit a fade on target is to swing out to in, with the face pointing in between the swing path and target line at impact.  Although many players, including tour pros past and present, find their most reliable fade comes with lining up left of target (for a righty), which is neither "incorrect" nor necessarily less efficient.

[Jack Watson]

I like what Nicklaus did.  He said he was not necessarily trying to fade but his mechanics had a fade tendency.  So catching it perfect he's right online and missing some causes a bit of fade.

The hard left turning shot or big pull left is the one to avoid imo if you are that type.  This way you can aim all your shots every time with the same concept.  Leave room right and go ahead and swing and don't sweat the left side too much.

Conversely some guys are opposite.  A lot depends on your mechanics as far as this goes.

I don't believe in trying to shape the ball different on each shot imo that's a recipe for high scores.

[saevel25]

1 hour ago, mdl said:

As far as I understand, fade/draw doesn't have any noticeable impact on energy transfer.  Yes, you'll tend to get more distance on irons with draws because the typical draw pattern is delofted compared to the typical fade pattern.  

It depends on the type of draw and fade. A pull fade will present less loft at impact than a push draw .

---

I am off the opinion, keep it simple. Good swings have neutral ball flights. Slight fades or draws. You really don't need to shape the ball from left to right unless you have an obstruction. 

[Killa]

Thing is that I find myself inconsistent with straight shots. I'd rather have a "predictable" curve to my shots because then I can aim at one side and have the ball come in at an angle. And even if I miss and the shot goes straight I can account for that. Right now I'm just all over the place. Most of my shots are straight with some push/pull. But then I get the occasional pull draw that just screams OB or hazard. 

[Killa]

Oh and I got another question. I hear all the time that pros prefer fades to draws because they are easier to control? Why would there be any difference between a fade and a draw?

[Alx]

 

Just now, Killa said:

Oh and I got another question. I hear all the time that pros prefer fades to draws because they are easier to control? Why would there be any difference between a fade and a draw?

Fade is generally higher and probably a little more spinny so it doesnt land as hot.

[p1n9183]

@iacas read about playing a stock shot 95% of the times this year. Used to have a fade stock shot, outside to inside but this year I changed it for a draw stock shot inside to outside.

The problem is that when OB or water it´s rigth of my shot zone I can´t trust my swing and it´s hard for me to let go my hand to the outside as i regulary do. Sometimes i pool hook it because of fear and sometimes i block it and hit it in the water/OB. This never happens if the penalty hazards are on the left.  

Because of that I decided i needed 2 stock shots, one with a path inside to outside to use when penalty hazards are on the left and one outside to inside when the penalty hazards are on the rigth.

I tryied it for 3 rounds (2 of them in a mid-am) and it really allow me to swing freelly away from the penalty hazards. Stroke Gained driving where 1 stroke better each round than my average. 

Should I keep practicing 2 stock shots of the tee or it´s not possible and I´l be better with only one?
In that case how i can overcome my fear of swinging towards a penalty hazard ? 

[rehmwa]

Just to be obnoxious - This is shaping the ball

But I'm sure the thread is about shaping the shot....

Or, the "Golf shot" if PGA announcers are talking about it.

(I just wanted an excuse to post the pics)

Edited June 14, 2017 by rehmwa

[takemoney]

lotta of useful information here in this forum... defo becoming tiger woods lol

[mvmac]

From Bill Harmon,

Quote

Was talking to Butch this morning about Dustin Johnson and how getting him to buy into hitting fades off the tee has helped him. He mentioned that many of the longer hitters are going this route to make their ball flight more predictable. We never really talked about the "mechanics" of the fade but more about the comfort a player has knowing he has a pattern and eliminates one side of the course. There is more to being a good teacher than just knowing the mechanics. We had the benefit of having a father, who not only was a good teacher but an expert "player". He learned lots of golf course management from playing with Ben Hogan. They used to play a game where every time you missed a fairway or green it cost you $10. May not sound like much but it was in the 1940's and when you played against Hogan you better know where your ball was going.

Oddly enough we talk less about mechanics and the science of the swing and more about the human element. My dad used to say "anyone can draw a perfect swing on a piece of paper but I never saw a piece of paper propel a golf ball, people play golf". Thanks for the compliment, we have been blessed beyond comprehension.,

Hogan practiced at Seminole for quite some time each year before the Masters. My dad was the pro there. The year my dad won the Masters he beat Ben more than Ben beat him that winter. Dad said it gave him an extra boost of confidence because he was in awe of Hogan and his ability to control the ball. Hogan told him "good players control the ball, everyone else the ball controls them".

[iacas]

On 8/14/2012 at 2:04 PM, iacas said:

A Quick Word on Shaping the Ball

95% of the shots a pro plays (Tiger Woods may be one of a group of very small exceptions, and even he isn't as different as many think) are their stock shot. They don't curve much, but if a player is a drawer of the golf ball, 95% of their shots draw. It's the most reliable, dependable way to play - with a pattern.

Kenny Perry (a pronounced drawer) was playing at Doral a few years ago and someone asked him what he does with a pin on the right side of the green. He said he aimed at the flag and if his ball didn't draw, he got lucky, but otherwise he was content to have a 25-footer for birdie.

Then the person asked him what he did when the pin was on the left side of the green. "I make birdie" he said. 🙂

You'll get better, faster if you develop a pattern. Shaping the ball is over-rated - not even the pros do it all that often. Shaping the ball can get you out of trouble. It can be a good shot when the ball needs to be worked around an obstacle (reaching a par five in two, the tee shot on a dogleg, etc.). But if you've got a look at the flag, take the Kenny Perry approach: aim for your shot cone and play your pattern.

 

[p1n9183]

Really like that guy videos.

[Buckeyebowman]

On 10/29/2017 at 4:55 PM, mvmac said:

From Bill Harmon,

Good grief! This is as old as Chi Chi Rodriguez, Jack Nicklaus, and Lee Trevino! Like Trevino said, "You can talk to a fade, but a hook won't listen!" These guys, and many other pros, hit the ball far enough that they are willing to sacrifice a few yards in order to keep the ball in play. 

[David Lake]

I agree with Moe Norman on this: "The closest distance between two points is a straight line".  Consequently, I do not try to "shape" a shot but aim straight at the pin.