• Announcements

    • iacas

      GAME GOLF Ryder Cup Contest   09/22/2016

      Join our GAME GOLF Ryder Cup Challenge to win an autographed GAME GOLF, a Pebble Steel watch, and many more great prizes!
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
JetFan1983

Handle at Impact -- Shaft Angle at Impact vs. Address from DTL

13 posts in this topic

I'm not talking about forward shaft lean at impact.

I'm talking about returning the shaft close to or at the same angle it had at address at impact from a down-the-line perspective. Here are some examples of good players doing this (It's important to note that not everyone good does this):

You'll notice its really close -- 46 degrees according to Analyzr (that's Sergio by the way).

Here's Rory with some kind of a mid-iron I think. He gets pretty close.

I've noticed that a lot of really, really good ball strikers do this, or at least, come close. They tend to stand closer to the ball than most amateurs, and as a result, they have a downswing hand path that is much closer to their bodies. Am I on the right track that this effectively lowers the golfer's handle, and would thus allow the golfer to hit the ball "straighter" more consistently?

Sorry if I tend to use myself as an example, but I struggle with this and realized this last night during my video film study session (Yea, I do that now ).

This shot actually went straight, but I normally hook or push the ball on a miss. I'm extending early a bit, but hopefully that's not the issue here. You can clearly see how much my handle has raised and how far away the handle and my hands are from my body relative to Sergio and Rory. And it might be the camera angle, but you can see both of my forearms, but you can't see Rory's or Sergio's.

Here's a Ben Hogan example: Just to preface this, I'm not a crazy Hogan fan. I've read Five Lessons and his wikipedia page a few times, but that's about it.

I apologize in advance if this Hogan swing was when he was old/post-car accident, or whatever, so please correct me there if this is a horrible example of Hogan. But, he does the same thing as Sergio with his downswing hand path being quite close to the body and the shaft angle lining up and matching its address angle:

Sorry for using my swing as an example here again -- and Erik, if you'd prefer to merge this into my swing thread because of this, I understand -- but I'm planning on standing closer to the ball and having a "tighter" hand path (meaning closer to my body) on the downswing so my handle doesn't raise so much.

What's the significance of all this stuff? Is this a really important aspect to solid ball striking? Through my studies here over the years, I've learned extensively about hip slide, forward shaft lean, a steady head, and a whole warehouse's worth of other awesome things that pertain to this crazy game.

When you take lessons with an authorized Stack and Tilt instructor (I've had quite a few) -- if you are a slicer like I was in the beginning -- what they do is give you a ton of draw pieces -- maybe some wrist bowing, hips preset forward at address, maybe some axis tilt preset at address... and maybe a raised handle. If you're like me, over time, you've tended to overdo some of these pieces, and as a result, began to hit some unwanted hooks and blocks out of the course. I desperately need my handle to not raise so much. I suspect that standing a bit too far from the ball at set-up contributes to the issue; and the subsequent downswing hand path I use exacerbates the issue futher -- hence my theorized fix. I'm using these analyzr photos to support my hypothesis.

What do you guys think of this topic here?

Here a few more pros I found who do this really well. Like I said, not everyone does this, but a lot of really, really good players do it. I'll test it out tomorrow at the range to see what happens.

Vijay

Sean O'Hair gets pretty close.

Moe Norman

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

So does Natalie Gulbis in some videos I have.

Point being... 90% of this measurement is simply a measure of how much the wrists have uncocked. Setup is largely irrelevant when it comes to ballstriking, and you'll find a lot of golfers will return the shaft steeper at impact than it was at setup.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

OK, I appreciate the response, Erik.

What are your thoughts on the problem of having a handle the raises too much at impact? Common faults and such.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by JetFan1983

What are your thoughts on the problem of having a handle the raises too much at impact? Common faults and such.

Sorry, not trying to be... anything... but define "raises too much." :)

if the handle is too high you've probably swung on a steep plane and likely too far left, which can come from a whole bunch of issues.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetFan1983

What are your thoughts on the problem of having a handle the raises too much at impact? Common faults and such.

Sorry, not trying to be... anything... but define "raises too much." :)

if the handle is too high you've probably swung on a steep plane and likely too far left, which can come from a whole bunch of issues.

You're not being anything . Trust me, I've been around here long enough to know how to read your posts and not assume anything about your tone. I know you're a good guy. So don't worry about that when dealing with me!

I figured the problem out. I was in something of the right neighborhood with my OP, but missed a fundamental issue that needed to be addressed first.

I actually swing way too much to the right, with shoulders and hips that are too closed, for reasons which no longer pertain to this original topic, which you've sorted me out on. So I apologize for the thread since I am now aware of the issue.

I'm early extending with not enough rotation. I have so many hook pieces installed in my swing, I need to feel some high handicapper stuff now.

More rotation in my hips and shoulders = more flexion, lower exit point, and a lower handle from DTL.

I think though with my OP, that standing closer to the ball and having a hand path on the downswing closer to my body is a useable piece here to reduce draw curve, but probably isn't necessary.

Sorry for the original question as I should've just bumped my swing thread with this question and a clip of my swing.

Thank you for pointing out how the amount the wrists uncock affects most of how this looks on video.

PS- Everyone should grab analyzr. So fun to tool around with that program.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by JetFan1983

I actually swing way too much to the right, with shoulders and hips that are too closed, for reasons which no longer pertain to this original topic, which you've sorted me out on. So I apologize for the thread since I am now aware of the issue.

I'm early extending with not enough rotation. I have so many hook pieces installed in my swing, I need to feel some high handicapper stuff now.

More rotation in my hips and shoulders = more flexion, lower exit point, and a lower handle from DTL.

Yeah, can sometimes see the BOC (butt of the club) aligned too high with guys that early extend/head comes off the wall.  Too high with not every much shaft lean.  Good feeling is just to have the elbows stay closer together on the downswing.  Helps you, some even say forces you to regain some flexion.  Good pic of Mike Weir working on something very similar.  Notice his his torso would be very similar to his address inclination.  When the elbows bend, wrists uncock too soon, the hands can't get down fast enough.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

To me, a good impact position is going to include some ulner deviation, which will raise the handle DTL. I think Hogan is a really bad example because at set-up he set his hands unusually high. If you watch his swing including pre-shot routine he would often lift the hands right before he started the swing. As a point of understanding for myself regarding the term "raising the handle", I have always though that was going to be discussed in terms of a Face On view where you measured the handle from A6 to A8. Is there another name for this kind of handle raising?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

This thread is eerily similar to the things I'm working on now in my swing.  The handle raising for me is an issue that was identified as something I have to fix to play better golf.  JetFan as Mvmac stated, and I'm sure you know... The golf swing is basically:

1.) address - flexion,

2.) back swing extension

3.) down swing pre-impact - regain flexion

4.) follow through impact - post impact - extension

The 3rd piece - regaining flexion is where an issue could lie... At least for me it was identified as an area I need to work on.

A few drills to help with it are:

a.) The head on the wall drill will help ensure you are regaining proper flexion on the down swing.

b.) The tee or glove under the armpits drill will help ensure tight elbow spacing on the back swing.

- For me this really helps ensure my right elbow isn't getting stuck on my right side - if it is stuck on the right side - or bunched - then you have to raise the handle to get the club to make impact

Look at Tiger Woods in this sequence....

See how much he regains flexion on his downswing?  And how his right elbow has room to pass from A5 into A7 impact?  I called this the 'Power Slot' (represented by the yellow lines) in a thread awhile back in another thread (could be myswing thread - I can't remember??).

Anyway, this is my favorite thing about Tiger Woods golf swing - how he regains flexion - and gets himself into a power position or Power Slot... Basically, Tiger gives himself the space/area to make a powerful move with his arms and hands so they can fly through the impact area without any interference or delay.

From what I have learned from Mvmac and Dana is that when the golfers right elbow gets behind the shirt seam in the back swing (A4 checkpoint - see the orange angle) - it becomes difficult to properly regain flexion.  Without properly regaining flexion, it is going to be more and more difficult to have the proper spacing to enable the club head, shaft, hands and arms to pass through without some sort of breakdown (handle raising).  This would be a failure or breakdown of the 'Power Slot'.  Keeping the right elbow below the left - and ensuring they are tight will help.

Notice how the upper horizontal green line intersects with Tigers left elbow - and the lower horizontal green line intersects with the right elbow.  The red vertical line shows how Tiger gets his right elbow in position to make a powerful move into the ball - setting up the Power Slot.  His right elbow is not behind his shirt seam, near the upper thigh and right pants pocket.  This is an excellent checkpoint to reference in the downswing - and will immediately tell you if your elbows are too far apart.

Another checkpoint to look at is the angle between the right bicep and forearm at A6.  If the arm is overflexed - the angle will be less than 90*.  The proper right arm angle between the bicep and forearm should be greater than 90*.  I don't have analyzer to get some references, of good angles for the right arm at A6 - but know that if you don't have the proper angle here - the handle will raise as your hands will come into impact higher.

You can see Tiger given his Power Slot move - gives himself plenty of spacing to get the right arm extended and through from A5+ into A7.

JetFan, thanks for making this thread... I love this topic and I hope more intelligent discussions follow as I'm eager to learn.

Best,

Beach

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by mchepp

To me, a good impact position is going to include some ulner deviation, which will raise the handle DTL. I think Hogan is a really bad example because at set-up he set his hands unusually high. If you watch his swing including pre-shot routine he would often lift the hands right before he started the swing.

As a point of understanding for myself regarding the term "raising the handle", I have always though that was going to be discussed in terms of a Face On view where you measured the handle from A6 to A8. Is there another name for this kind of handle raising?

Yeah, handle raising would be the handle ascending from A6-8, slows the rate of closure of the face, gets the club out of the ground.  The issue dtl that we're talking about imo, are the wrist alignments at impact due to early extending or staying closed for too long.  So maybe too much ulnar deviation at impact.  I can see how it can be confusing when there isn't that much distinction with the wording.  The ascent from A6-8 is coming from the legs and hips, which is hard to do when you early extend which leads to over-flex the right knee (speaking from personal experience lol)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by JetFan1983

OK, I appreciate the response, Erik.

What are your thoughts on the problem of having a handle the raises too much at impact? Common faults and such.


it begins at address...the modern light upright clubs, designed by "engineers" for the masses, for the masses main problem...out to in swing.

when at address the brain registers everything, and there lies the first problem, not the only one, but the cause of all the other effects.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, I think this is a key fundamental of a good golf swing that I had to learn on my on to become a better iron player. Until I learned to regain the proper shaft angle to have the club head return to impact level (like you have at set up), I could not strike the ball well. Of course, I also hand to understand that the swing path and face angle and angle of attack required that I be open on my irons to hit it straight.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, JetFan1983. I think you have hit on something that is vital to great ball contact with irons. That is my opinion and I shot in the low eighties and high seventies - so - I'm not a pro.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • I like it. Especially compared to nearly all past US Ryder Cup kits. Actually before I dish out too much praise, do they have a huge Stars and Stripes flag emblazoned on the back?
    • I would say it depends on what club you're talking about. For drivers I would say that the best performing drivers of all time have been made within the last five years. Aerodynamics, material science, and the proliferation of launch monitors and data driven design have resulted in improvements across the board in distance and forgiveness as of late. I know that I personally saw a decent improvement on my G10 when I switched to a G30, in that I gained between 10 and 15 yards without sacrificing accuracy. This is on the high end of what aerodynamics can provide though, simply because higher swing speeds receive a greater benefit from decreased drag. Depending on the individual you may not see much difference so long as the driver itself was made within the last ten years or so. For irons I would be inclined to say that the main difference in the irons of yesteryear and the irons of today is forgiveness. The irons made today are much easier to hit than previous irons, simply because they aren't as drastically punishing on mis-hits as the old blades. The PING Eye2 irons seemed to be the first "widespread" GI iron that sparked the trend towards irons that were easier for the layman to hit. That being said, I found my s55 irons (their "blade" from several years ago) to be more forgiving than the Eye2's. Based on that and observations from other clubs I have hit I would say the average golfer would be best suited by irons made within the last 10 to 15 years that are in good condition with sharp grooves. If you play muscleback irons though, there's pretty much zero difference between modern "true" musclebacks and those of yore, though the current muscle-cavity irons (like the iBlade and MP-15) will likely be at least a bit easier to hit than the older blades while maintaining a similar style.  Wedges are the only thing that I would argue the "latest and greatest" provides a tangible benefit for. The reasoning for this is entirely different however, in that it's based solely off the condition of the grooves in older wedges. As wedges grow old, and get used, the grooves wear to the point that there becomes a noticeable performance difference - especially when playing out of the rough. For this reason alone do I say that the average golfer (assuming they golf at least once a week during the golfing season) is best suited by wedges no older than two or three years old.  Putters are the odd man out here. I don't think it matters in the slightest when your putter was manufactured, so long as you keep a reasonable grip on it so that it doesn't slip out of your hands. I personally am a fan of the newer milled putters for the feel they provide, but it doesn't mean I couldn't probably putt nearly as well with an original Anser putter in the same style. I think the average golfer is best suited by whatever putter style and features allow them to consistently roll the ball along their target line, with no age requirement. In summary, considering the advancement of technology, I would feel comfortable putting these "maximum age caps" on equipment for the average weekend golfer to get the most out of his/her game: Drivers: ~10 years old or newer Irons: ~15 years old or newer Wedges: ~3 years old or newer Putter: Whatever works best for you That being said, you may still enjoy the game with any kind of equipment out there. I just think that equipment that follows these guidelines will let the average weekend golfer get about as much as they can out of their game without necessarily breaking the bank. Like @iacas said, you may find incremental improvements by purchasing the R1 over an old G5 but the question then becomes whether or not this improvement is worth the price difference. This question can only be answered by the person buying the club. It can't be denied, however, that a driver from the 1960's will be severely outclassed by the G5 and the R1, making either of them a much better choice than the 1960's driver. Interestingly enough, I have had the desire to go the opposite way for a while now. I bought the s55's my last go around, and I'm thinking that my next set of irons will be a more "traditional" muscleback iron (since the s55 is mostly a CB), along the likes of the MP-4 irons by Mizuno. I hit the ball consistently enough that I don't care about the lack of forgiveness, and I believe that the wonderful look and feel of those irons, along with the little bit of extra vertical control (can thin it slightly to make punch shots even easier) would offset whatever I lose in forgiveness. I know that I would most certainly never go to an iron like the AP2, the G, or the M2. The chunky look of the club (along with the offset) gets into my head nowadays and makes me feel uncomfortable standing over the ball in a manner similar to how I used to be intimidated by the look of blades at address. I would gain forgiveness, but at the price of distance and trajectory control - an unacceptable trade for me considering I value distance and trajectory control much more highly than forgiveness.
    • My newest clubs are pretty old. Maybe 2006? I don't really remember. The other day, just for the heck of it,  I played using my old Bazooka Iron Woods. (2i-LW) Shot my normal score. Those Ironwoods are probably 15-16 years old. I don't think at this stage of my life, that a new set would make that much difference. 
    • My irons are from 1978, driver and woods from 2004 (same G5 as you)....at my current playing level, I don't feel like my clubs are holding my scores back. I will be updating my wedges to something designed this century in the near future but I'll probably regrip and keep playing my grandfather's old Eye irons a couple more years. There's something to be said about being familiar with your equipment too. The control you talk about with your driver comes from hitting a lot of balls with it and getting to know how it responds to different things. That's tough to give up considering that it could take weeks to develop that relationship with a new driver...at least that helps me cure the new toy bug and keep the wallet closed. :)
    • Hah, I was thinking the same thing when I saw that pic go up on the landing page.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. mahariji_slice
      mahariji_slice
      (35 years old)
  • Blog Entries