"Your Short Game Solution" by James Sieckmann

[natureboy]

On 11/7/2015, 11:14:54, Mr. Desmond said:

Can't answer that yet ... but if you own the DVD's, I think it helps if you speak "golf."

You can find him on TPI:

http://www.mytpi.com/exercises#between_the_knees

Thanks. Watched the video. I had heard that lowering the handle like that actually closed the face a bit so his alignment suggestion was surprising.

[Mr. Desmond]

1 hour ago, natureboy said:

Thanks. Watched the video. I had heard that lowering the handle like that actually closed the face a bit so his alignment suggestion was surprising.

I have not found that lowering hands closes the face but your mileage may vary -- as always, experimenting is best. In fact, I was practicing this shot today - it is similar I believe, to what Erik and Mike teach.

[iacas]

39 minutes ago, Mr. Desmond said:

I have not found that lowering hands closes the face but your mileage may vary -- as always, experimenting is best. In fact, I was practicing this shot today - it is similar I believe, to what Erik and Mike teach.

It closes the face. It's just like a ball above your feet. You have to slightly open the face to offset it.

Consider if you made the handle horizontal: the club would be pointing as far left as the loft on the clubhead.

[Mr. Desmond]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

It closes the face. It's just like a ball above your feet. You have to slightly open the face to offset it.

Consider if you made the handle horizontal: the club would be pointing as far left as the loft on the clubhead.

Thanks for the clarification. Think I was setting my hands slightly behind the shaft to counteract the closing of the face when I lowered the handle/and or opening the face without realizing it. It works well - thanks.

Edited November 9, 2015 by Mr. Desmond

[natureboy]

14 hours ago, iacas said:

It closes the face. It's just like a ball above your feet. You have to slightly open the face to offset it.

Consider if you made the handle horizontal: the club would be pointing as far left as the loft on the clubhead.

My experience with flops in general is that since the loft (face angle) is nearly perpendicular to the ground that the path ultimately dictates most of the direction, but some small adjustment with face angle is helpful for precision, I guess. I've heard this advice (aim a bit more to R with low hands) as advice for high - soft bunker shots.

[iacas]

5 hours ago, natureboy said:

My experience with flops in general is that since the loft (face angle) is nearly perpendicular to the ground that the path ultimately dictates most of the direction, but some small adjustment with face angle is helpful for precision, I guess. I've heard this advice (aim a bit more to R with low hands) as advice for high - soft bunker shots.

The path does not influence most of the direction*. The closest it gets is around 60/40 face to path, and that's when the club can grip the ball a bit more. The club can grip the ball a bit more when:

• Grass or sand acts as a proxy to help grab the ball. The club grabs grass/sand, the grass/sand grabs the ball. You could probably create situations where the path is > 50% of the determinant, but as a general rule, those are some generally bad conditions and/or you haven't hit the ball cleanly at all.
• The corners of the grooves interact a lot, which we see at around 45° spin loft.

* See the above first bullet point about thick lies and the grass/sand.

[natureboy]

6 hours ago, iacas said:

The path does not influence most of the direction*. The closest it gets is around 60/40 face to path, and that's when the club can grip the ball a bit more. The club can grip the ball a bit more when:

• Grass or sand acts as a proxy to help grab the ball. The club grabs grass/sand, the grass/sand grabs the ball. You could probably create situations where the path is > 50% of the determinant, but as a general rule, those are some generally bad conditions and/or you haven't hit the ball cleanly at all.
• The corners of the grooves interact a lot, which we see at around 45° spin loft.

* See the above first bullet point about thick lies and the grass/sand.

I'm expect you are assuming I am arguing for the old ball flight laws. I'm not. I'm suggesting a special case of the new flight laws.

My experience with flops using full swing mechanics (vs. quickie pitch) with weight left and descending AoA was that the resultant ball flight along the ground toward the target was inevitably shifted slightly to the left of where a wide open club face (60*) was pointing. Didn't have a flight monitor, but spin axis on landing seemed about horizontal. Handle position was high so face was not 'closed' per the above posts. Low point was ahead of (sometimes under) ball.

My thinking is that when I hit these shots, the ball flight is indeed 60% toward the face angle. Only that face angle (where the loft is pointing) is nearly straight up when the club is positioned wide open so the 40% contribution from the path has much more effective influence on the direction of the shot relative to the target line. As Mr. Desmond says, though - individual mileage may vary and it may just be my swing. I can hit my other irons along the target line with much greater frequency, though.

Try it out sometime and see what you get with a wide open 60*-64* clubface and a regular full swing along an open stance line (to point the opened face at the target). Will defer to your assertion if you don't notice any effect or if you can post a Trackman study link that specifically mentions wide open lob wedges relative to face / path ratio.

@iacas Above post is OT and I forgot to 'hide' it so feel free to do so.

Spoiler

Wanted to add to the point - just think about the D-plane vectors with the top vector nearly vertical. Which vector is going to influence the resultant's direction (relative to the target line along the ground) more? Could be wrong, but that's my thinking anyway.

 

Edited November 10, 2015 by natureboy

[iacas]

3 hours ago, natureboy said:

I'm expect you are assuming I am arguing for the old ball flight laws. I'm not. I'm suggesting a special case of the new flight laws.

I wasn't. You've been here long enough to know the right stuff.

3 hours ago, natureboy said:

My experience with flops using full swing mechanics (vs. quickie pitch) with weight left and descending AoA was that the resultant ball flight along the ground toward the target was inevitably shifted slightly to the left of where a wide open club face (60*) was pointing. Didn't have a flight monitor, but spin axis on landing seemed about horizontal. Handle position was high so face was not 'closed' per the above posts. Low point was ahead of (sometimes under) ball.

Full swing or "pitching" mechanics are not important. Whatever the impact conditions were, it's irrelevant how they arrived at that point.

And the spin axis is NOT horizontal. Well, the axis is, but I'm assuming you meant the spin direction was horizontal (i.e. a vertical spin axis).

3 hours ago, natureboy said:

My thinking is that when I hit these shots, the ball flight is indeed 60% toward the face angle. Only that face angle (where the loft is pointing) is nearly straight up when the club is positioned wide open so the 40% contribution from the path has much more effective influence on the direction of the shot relative to the target line. As Mr. Desmond says, though - individual mileage may vary and it may just be my swing. I can hit my other irons along the target line with much greater frequency, though.

It's not "just your swing." Physics are not different depending on who hit the ball.

The club is not positioned as "wide open" so that the loft is as vertical as you think.

And by "40% contribution" I meant just that. The "40% contribution" cannot contribute "more effective influence" or it wouldn't be 40%. It would be more.

3 hours ago, natureboy said:

Try it out sometime and see what you get with a wide open 60*-64* clubface and a regular full swing along an open stance line (to point the opened face at the target). Will defer to your assertion if you don't notice any effect or if you can post a Trackman study link that specifically mentions wide open lob wedges relative to face / path ratio.

I've tried it for myself plenty of times. I hit flop and pitch shots all the time. They're fun. I've hit them on the FlightScope, on the Trackman, etc. I've shot them with the Phantom camera at 12,000 frames per second. I've talked to others who have measured them.

And so we aren't going to get caught up addressing it later, I'll again point out that I mentioned that if the grass or sand catches the club, and the grass or sand then catches the ball, the physics can be sufficiently disrupted to where the path has more influence than the face angle.

2 hours ago, natureboy said:

Wanted to add to the point - just think about the D-plane vectors with the top vector nearly vertical. Which vector is going to influence the resultant's direction (relative to the target line along the ground) more? Could be wrong, but that's my thinking anyway.

You're wrong, yes. It gets to about 60% face, 40% path. The ball launches at over 45°. Even if the face was 85° (which is incredibly difficult to achieve), the ball would have to launch below 42.5° for the "path" to have more influence than the face (if the AoA is 0°). That doesn't happen.

And if the face was truly horizontal… with a level AoA you wouldn't hit the ball anywhere. It would basically be a whiff. Virtually no energy would be transferred to the ball at all. And yes, we've hit that shot too, on the Phantom camera.

2 hours ago, natureboy said:

@iacas Above post is OT and I forgot to 'hide' it so feel free to do so.

How about we just realize it's OT and stop talking about it here? Spoiler tags are fine for a quick departure, but given your history, "quick" is unlikely.

Start a new thread if you want. But you're right: it's  .

[pumaAttack]

I just picked up this book and I am excited to try out the techniques.  I have never been a great wedge player and from the first few chapters it appears I have had the wrong "fundamentals" for the get go.

My friend was really struggling with his short game and said this book really improved his game.  

[WildTurkey]

Well I went in with both his books and the DVD's.  I am having great success with this and it has lowered the number of putt per round because the ball is ending up much closer to the hole. Shorter putts = fewer putts.  The best benefit comes from when I use the "system" during practice.  I have had to make practice on and around the greens a much more regular thing than ever had.  I am not as consistent in bunkers.  This is because most ranges near do not have them and those that do seem to be in use when I need them.  Perhaps someone here knows some bunker techniques that can be practiced without a bunker?