Jump to content
IGNORED

Zeroing Out Hurting Your Game?


mvmac
Note: This thread is 2904 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

 

5 hours ago, natureboy said:

What if they get opposite curve? I accept it's a less likely error given the intended shot shape, but still possible especially for higher HCPs with more variable swings.

I'm repeating what others have said, but this is why you develop a pattern. If you don't have a reliable pattern, you need to develop one, most likely with an instructor. Aiming is kind of hard if you don't have any clue where the ball is likely to start and curve away from. 

Are you going to succeed at it every time, even if you're a world class player? No. But you will succeed enough times that it would detrimental to one's score if they tried to do anything else. You're playing the odds. 

3 hours ago, natureboy said:

My point is that it's the core variability / consistency in the swing that really matters.

Exactly. You need a pattern in order to predict your ball flight and thus pick where to aim. 

 

3 hours ago, natureboy said:

Higher HCPs will be more prone to these 'outside the lines' errors.

Right, they need a reliable pattern. They need to improve their golf swings. And once they do, they can then reap the rewards of having a predictable ball flight. 

  • Upvote 2

Constantine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 hours ago, mvmac said:

Then it's in the bunker or in the woods. You shouldn't go against your pattern just because you "might" hit a bad shot, there is no way to plan for that. You plan for your typical pattern/shot zone.

Well yeah, bad shots happen, if we could predict the shot shape every time golf would be a much easier game.

Right, which is why it's important for them to get some education on shot zones/patterns and work on mechanics and tighten up their shot zones. If a higher handicapper typically hits a 10-15 yard fade, they should stop planning to hit it straight and work on mechanics so the fade curves less and to hit the ball more solid more often.

You and @JetFan1983 both seem to be talking about say a 2-sigma distribution (lateral dispersion) pattern no matter what you shot shape is, yes? The shot shape is just whatever your 'natural' or preferred swing pattern is (fade, draw, or straight) that you then groove so your 2-sigma shot dispersion pattern becomes tighter and more consistent.

That seems to be more fundamentally about training your swing consistency than training to have 'a shape'.
 

1 hour ago, JetFan1983 said:

I'm repeating what others have said, but this is why you develop a pattern. If you don't have a reliable pattern, you need to develop one, most likely with an instructor. Aiming is kind of hard if you don't have any clue where the ball is likely to start and curve away from. 

What I'm emphasizing is that the variability to a target - not your start line is going to be the same for a certain player's skill level. Same variance to target whether they start the ball intentionally left and shape it intentionally right to a target, but under-fade it versus start the ball on target intending a straight shot and accidentally shape the ball a little left. It's the consistent swing that matters not how or that you shape it.

You can have consistent swing with an intended straight target too. If your variability right or left (& long / short too) of target is tighter when attempting to hit a straight ball than with a draw or fade, that's a better approach than trying to shape it. Finding out what your 'naturally' tightest pattern is relative to the intended target is worthwhile, I don't think per the article on the Trackman blog that attempting to 'zero out' is necessarily a bad idea unless you've already grooved a consistent swing that has a built-in shot shape and you end up fighting that and increasing your dispersion pattern.
 

1 hour ago, JetFan1983 said:

Are you going to succeed at it every time, even if you're a world class player? No. But you will succeed enough times that it would detrimental to one's score if they tried to do anything else. You're playing the odds. 

Exactly. You need a pattern in order to predict your ball flight and thus pick where to aim. 

But it doesn't follow that the pattern has to be a draw or fade shape. New golfers may have a wide open field of choice. Instructor preferences may narrow those down quickly if they have a bias toward a shaped shot or playing 'one side of the course'. Nicklaus developed a slight cut because that's what he came up with after grooving a swing that let him hit it as far as he possibly could with his musculature and nervous system.

1 hour ago, JetFan1983 said:

Right, they need a reliable pattern. They need to improve their golf swings. 

Amen to that.

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator

Straight is not a pattern. I don't care if the distribution is smaller (I've never seen that happen either); it's not good for your confidence to always feel like your ball is curving away from the target.

And dude, enough with the sigmas and so on. We get it, but we aren't gonna respond in kind.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I also like knowing you are curving the ball away from trouble. If there is OB right and water left I like knowing I can aim and down one side and not have to worry about it curving towards a hazard. It gets a little scary having to aim down the center and not know if you are going to hit it left or right. I like know it's going one way or the other. 

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Don't know if this is relevant, but I've read or heard the expression "my natural shot is a..."(insert "draw" or "fade"). Is there such a thing? How would someone know whether a fade is "natural" or just a result of poor mechanics?

Jon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

16 minutes ago, JonMA1 said:

Don't know if this is relevant, but I've read or heard the expression "my natural shot is a..."(insert "draw" or "fade"). Is there such a thing? How would someone know whether a fade is "natural" or just a result of poor mechanics?

When people say that they usually saying their very best shots have that shape and/or they happen to find that shape more appealing to the eye.

:callaway: Big Bertha Alpha 815 DBD  :bridgestone: TD-03 Putter   
:tmade: 300 Tour 3W                 :true_linkswear: Motion Shoes
:titleist: 585H Hybrid                       
:tmade: TP MC irons                 
:ping: Glide 54             
:ping: Glide 58
:cleveland: 588 RTX 62

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

30 minutes ago, SavvySwede said:

When people say that they usually saying their very best shots have that shape and/or they happen to find that shape more appealing to the eye.

Ok. Thanks for the explanation. I thought there may have been some physical reason for better players to choose a fade over a draw.

Jon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
11 hours ago, JonMA1 said:

Ok. Thanks for the explanation. I thought there may have been some physical reason for better players to choose a fade over a draw.

There are plenty of better players who prefer draws, and plenty who favor fades, and I'm not sure that its generally related to either the golfer's physical attributes or the desirability of one shape versus the other.  For me, the choice is based on experience, which pattern can I repeat most reliably.  If I put in the work to change my swing, maybe looking for more consistent contact or more distance, I might find out that my "new" natural shot is different from my old one.  I don't really have a strong preference for a fade or a draw, I'm happy with any shape I can consistently produce.  On the other hand, another player might simply prefer the look of a draw instead of a fade, for instance, and work to change his swing to produce a consistent draw.  I guess what I'm saying is that you can arrive at your "stock shot shape" as either a by-product of what you do or what you change, or as a desired end result of specific changes.

 

  • Upvote 1

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

15 hours ago, natureboy said:

You and @JetFan1983 both seem to be talking about say a 2-sigma distribution (lateral dispersion) pattern no matter what you shot shape is, yes?

Um, yea I guess you could say that. If you're playing the odds and throwing out the outliers, and you know you hit, say for example, some kind of a pull-fade 95% of the time, then yea.

 

15 hours ago, natureboy said:

 

You can have consistent swing with an intended straight target too. If your variability right or left (& long / short too) of target is tighter when attempting to hit a straight ball than with a draw or fade, that's a better approach than trying to shape it. Finding out what your 'naturally' tightest pattern is relative to the intended target is worthwhile, I don't think per the article on the Trackman blog that attempting to 'zero out' is necessarily a bad idea unless you've already grooved a consistent swing that has a built-in shot shape and you end up fighting that and increasing your dispersion pattern.

I don't know anyone who can consistently hit the ball at zero 95% of the time. And if you do, you need to have the face at zero 95% of the time as well because if you don't the ball will always be moving away from your target. 

But certainly, if your path is ridiculously left or right, you should work on "zeroing" that out, but you're not trying to get at exactly zero. There's a lot of leeway here on either side of it. The article is basically trying to tell people that being obsessed with a dead straight ball is a mistake, and that you're better off not striving for it. If you already do have it though, then fine. Keep at it, but again, I don't really know anyone who can consistently hit the ball at zero. 

 

15 hours ago, natureboy said:

But it doesn't follow that the pattern has to be a draw or fade shape. 

It's just unrealistic to think you can hit it at zero consistently. It's much, much easier to have a pattern. I don't think anyone on this planet has a swing path that is consistently at zero. 

And even if you're that guy who has a zero path, if your club face control is off at all, the ball will always curve away from your target. 

15 hours ago, natureboy said:

 New golfers may have a wide open field of choice.

New golfers are horrible at golf and have no clue what's going on. We've all been there of course, but they're still too new to the game to know what's going on. 

15 hours ago, natureboy said:

Nicklaus developed a slight cut because that's what he came up with after grooving a swing that let him hit it as far as he possibly could with his musculature and nervous system.

I'll let the "nervous system" comment slide lol. 

But yea, Nicklaus had a pattern. 

Constantine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 hours ago, JetFan1983 said:

I don't know anyone who can consistently hit the ball at zero 95% of the time. And if you do, you need to have the face at zero 95% of the time as well because if you don't the ball will always be moving away from your target.

I'm saying the whole 'have a shape' over 'zero out the numbers' is the wrong question.

To absolutely be on target with a 'straight shot' you have to zero out your numbers. To hit a fade or a draw exactly on target you have to have a precise face / pat relationship. Otherwise they will both be off target. Neither golfer will be perfect with their swing intentions and it's the resulting tightness of the shot pattern relative to the target that matters. If attempting to hit a straight shot gives you a tighter dispersion pattern around your target you are better off and vice versa. If the resulting pattern around the target of the attempted straight shot is tighter it doesn't really matter if shots curve both a little left and a little right of target. The same thing will happen with a 'shaped' shot.

Quote

The article is basically trying to tell people that being obsessed with a dead straight ball is a mistake, and that you're better off not striving for it. If you already do have it though, then fine. Keep at it, but again, I don't really know anyone who can consistently hit the ball at zero.

I don't think they've made the case unless the attempt to 'zero out their numbers' leads to a wider shot dispersion. It depends on what works for the individual player's swing and shot visualization.

Quote

It's just unrealistic to think you can hit it at zero consistently. It's much, much easier to have a pattern. I don't think anyone on this planet has a swing path that is consistently at zero.

It's just as unrealistic to think you can be perfectly on target with a shot shape. Any shot shape is going to have variance in dispersion around the intended target.

Quote

And even if you're that guy who has a zero path, if your club face control is off at all, the ball will always curve away from your target. 

The same is true for a player who intends to shape the ball but does not achieve the perfect face/path/AoA relationship to hit their intended target. The swing approach for the individual player that results in the tighter resulting dispersion is what matters. There's no magic in a shape over 'straight', except maybe if you are trying to fight an already well-ingrained swing that had a shape bias.

A new golfer can build their swing variance / consistency improvements just as easily around a 'zeroing out the numbers' straight ball approach as 'a shape' if there is no particular dispersion improvement from attempting a shape.

Edited by natureboy

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


54 minutes ago, natureboy said:

 If attempting to hit a straight shot gives you a tighter dispersion pattern around your target you are better off and vice versa. If the resulting pattern around the target of the attempted straight shot is tighter it doesn't really matter if shots curve both a little left and a little right of target. The same thing will happen with a 'shaped' shot.

I still contest if this is even viable to learn how to do. To that that it produces a tighter dispersion than having the ball curve consistently one way. 

Even though you can hypothetically claim that a tighter dispersion is all that matters. I contest that you wouldn't get that to being with due to the complexity of trying to achieve a consistent key 4 and 5 relationship because the path fluctuates from one side to the other. 

Yes, in the realm of hypothetical it is possible. That does not mean it's actually applicable to golf. 

 

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

@natureboy, why are you hung up on hitting it straight? Trying to do that would be so much harder than just sticking with a pattern/shape and just working in narrowing your cone. It's just easier to hit a shape. 

Colin P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, natureboy said:

If attempting to hit a straight shot gives you a tighter dispersion pattern around your target you are better off and vice versa. If the resulting pattern around the target of the attempted straight shot is tighter it doesn't really matter if shots curve both a little left and a little right of target. The same thing will happen with a 'shaped' shot.

I actually agree with you here.  If it's all about getting as close to the hole as possible then, naturally, anything that gives tighter dispersion is better.  The question would then become, though, how would you be able to achieve that?  And to that, I think @saevel25 is right about it not really being viable.  If a golfer has the ability to get "X" dispersion when playing a draw or a fade, then why would that same golfer, all of a sudden magically be able to have "X-Y" dispersion when trying to "zero out" and hit it straight?  I believe the answer is that he wouldn't.

I do question, though, why it's necessarily a big deal if the ball is sometimes curving away from the target.  If you plan for a 8 yard push draw and draw it 4 yards and I try to hit it straight and fade it 4 yards, we're both in the same boat.  Who cares how we got there?

I'm sure the reason I'm confused is that I just need to brush up on some other ideas.  Such as: 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
1 hour ago, natureboy said:

If attempting to hit a straight shot gives you a tighter dispersion pattern around your target you are better off and vice versa.

Contrary to what some of the others have said, I agree completely with this.  If you get the best results by trying to hit it dead straight, then that's the best choice for you.  

However, even the finest players throughout the history of golf have found that they could get better results by intentionally playing some kind of curving shot.  I know that's the case for me, and I'm far from one of the finest players.  

4 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

I do question, though, why it's necessarily a big deal if the ball is sometimes curving away from the target.  If you plan for a 8 yard push draw and draw it 4 yards and I try to hit it straight and fade it 4 yards, we're both in the same boat.  Who cares how we got there?

I commonly hit shots that end up curving away from the hole, on purpose.  Specifically, if I have a tight right hand pin, and my stock iron shape is a draw, I'll aim at the right edge or even at the pin, and my shot will (hopefully) finish around the center of the green, curving away from the pin.  Now if I'm trying to get close, I want the ball landing a pace or two right of it, and spinning/bounding closer to the hole.

  • Upvote 1

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

20 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

I commonly hit shots that end up curving away from the hole, on purpose.  Specifically, if I have a tight right hand pin, and my stock iron shape is a draw, I'll aim at the right edge or even at the pin, and my shot will (hopefully) finish around the center of the green, curving away from the pin.  Now if I'm trying to get close, I want the ball landing a pace or two right of it, and spinning/bounding closer to the hole.

Right, but it's not intentionally curving away from your target, you used good game management to pick a different target besides the pin.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
4 hours ago, natureboy said:

I'm saying the whole 'have a shape' over 'zero out the numbers' is the wrong question.

Why? People play better golf with a pattern. A "straight shot" is not a pattern.

I haven't seen anyone disagree with you that you should play the shape that has a smaller distribution… but in my time teaching, distributions are smaller when players play a pattern (curve), not when they try to hit a straight shot.

4 hours ago, natureboy said:

To absolutely be on target with a 'straight shot' you have to zero out your numbers. To hit a fade or a draw exactly on target you have to have a precise face / pat relationship. Otherwise they will both be off target. Neither golfer will be perfect with their swing intentions and it's the resulting tightness of the shot pattern relative to the target that matters.

I agree. But, as I've said now, two things:

  • Players far and away typically have tighter patterns playing a shape.
  • The confidence of the player is increased, too, because their ball is working toward the target, always, if it's within the cone. You can't aim a "straight ball cone" so the ball is always going to be working toward the target.
4 hours ago, natureboy said:

If attempting to hit a straight shot gives you a tighter dispersion pattern around your target you are better off and vice versa.

Attempting to hit a straight shot rarely results in a tighter dispersion pattern.

4 hours ago, natureboy said:

I don't think they've made the case unless the attempt to 'zero out their numbers' leads to a wider shot dispersion. It depends on what works for the individual player's swing and shot visualization.

That is one of two main reasons why it's generally a bad idea.

4 hours ago, natureboy said:

A new golfer can build their swing variance / consistency improvements just as easily around a 'zeroing out the numbers' straight ball approach as 'a shape' if there is no particular dispersion improvement from attempting a shape.

There is a dispersion improvement most of the time.

And a psychological one, too.

Now, remember, we're talking about pretty small curves most of the time at the upper levels. Unless you wanna go with Billy Casper or Paul Goydos.

2 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I commonly hit shots that end up curving away from the hole, on purpose.  Specifically, if I have a tight right hand pin, and my stock iron shape is a draw, I'll aim at the right edge or even at the pin, and my shot will (hopefully) finish around the center of the green, curving away from the pin.  Now if I'm trying to get close, I want the ball landing a pace or two right of it, and spinning/bounding closer to the hole.

@Golfingdad nailed it:

2 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

Right, but it's not intentionally curving away from your target, you used good game management to pick a different target besides the pin.

Your target isn't the hole.

  • Upvote 1

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

9 minutes ago, iacas said:

There is a dispersion improvement most of the time.

And a psychological one, too.

I'm curious - is there a technical/mechanical reason for the tighter dispersion?  Or is this just observational? 

- John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

8 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

There are plenty of better players who prefer draws, and plenty who favor fades, and I'm not sure that its generally related to either the golfer's physical attributes or the desirability of one shape versus the other.  For me, the choice is based on experience, which pattern can I repeat most reliably.  If I put in the work to change my swing, maybe looking for more consistent contact or more distance, I might find out that my "new" natural shot is different from my old one.  I don't really have a strong preference for a fade or a draw, I'm happy with any shape I can consistently produce.  On the other hand, another player might simply prefer the look of a draw instead of a fade, for instance, and work to change his swing to produce a consistent draw.  I guess what I'm saying is that you can arrive at your "stock shot shape" as either a by-product of what you do or what you change, or as a desired end result of specific changes.

 

This is really interesting. It's from a perspective that I can't completely relate to because of where I'm at in the learning process, but it makes a certain amount of sense just the same. 

My take on this may be completely wrong, but at this point I'm interested in a resulting ball flight because it indicates whether or not I'm not getting my weight and hands forward. A resulting left to right flight - especially if it starts left - is an indication that I'm not hitting through on an in to out path. In other words, I'm just spinning on my back foot and coming across the ball. But when the ball starts just right of the target and stays somewhat straight or draws slightly, I feel like some of the other parts of my swing (keys 2 and 3) are closer to being correct.

Anyway, my swing flaws are off-topic. Thanks for the explanation Dave.

Jon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 2904 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...