Note: This thread is 2485 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!
How do you prefer your toast cut?
22 members have voted
-
Topics Being Discussed Right Now on The Sand Trap
-
- 4 replies
- 169 views
-
- 214 replies
- 60,082 views
-
- 90 replies
- 62,526 views
-
- 8,146 replies
- 349,779 views
-
- 22 replies
- 1,073 views
-
-
TST Partners
Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.
Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code). -
Posts
-
By dkjestrup ·
To answer "so what?", it's to make it easier to diagnose swing problems. As you describe, the current ball flight laws are perfect, if you're trying to model ball flight in a simulator. Ironically the old ball flight laws, while wrong, did a better job of explaining how ball flight feels relative to a golfer's swing. Essentially all I've done is explain the ball flight laws relative to the golfers swing, instead of relative to the target. Following this actually gives pretty different results: For example, following the modified ball flight laws I mentioned above, a slice is caused by an open clubface (relative to the golfer) and a pull is caused by an out-to-in swing path. You will never slice the ball if you have a closed clubface relative to you as the golfer. This is the same in the new ball flight laws, but is less obvious. It's also not obvious the role of your swing path. The reason an in-to-out path is desirable if you want to hit a draw, is that it's the only way to get the ball to start right of target without slicing it (i.e. open clubface). As for this being complicated, I disagree: Current laws: Start direction = absolute clubface direction Spin = relative clubface direction My version: Start direction = relative clubface direction + path Spin = relative clubface direction As above, all I'm doing is explaining the ball flight laws in terms relative to the golfer's swing instead of relative to the target. But doing this makes it way clearer what part of the swing is causing what movement. -
-
By iacas ·
@Jim Venetos is not worth the time. He plays 142 x 3 shots with his pitching wedge? Okay, what's the technique difference between his 125-yard shot and his 124-yard shot and his 126-yard shot? Oh, there is none, and he's nowhere near precise enough to hit those carry yardages to ± 0.5 yards anyway? So you play 142 x 3 = 426 shots with your pitching wedge but only four with your driver, Jim? That's the critique: not worth the time. -
-
By iacas ·
You did a poor job of explaining that, then. But also… so what? I agree that if someone delivers delivers a straight path and a 5° right-pointing face, they're going to start to swing left some amount, and that the face will "travel" with that. Not 1:1, as in if they swing 10° left the face will be 5° left, but it's often not far off from 1:1. The relationship isn't perfectly steady, but it's somewhat steady, generally. But… so what? That's not the ball flight laws. Those are what they are, and your version simply complicated what can be a pretty simple way of understanding it. You're talking about instruction, or how you go about fixing a ball flight, not the actual physics itself. Not necessarily, given that you can do a lot of things in the swing to change that relationship. I get what you're saying, though, I just don't agree that I'd call them the "ball flight laws." The ball flight laws are not "misleading" at all and you've failed to demonstrate the title of your topic. Let's stipulate that we're all capable of doing basic math. 😄 That's why I said this just above: But… so what? That's not the ball flight laws. Those are what they are, and your version simply complicated what can be a pretty simple way of understanding it. You're talking about instruction, or how you go about fixing a ball flight, not the actual physics itself. And… I disagree that "fixing the face" first isn't always the way to go. It might be most of the time, but it's not over 80% if I had to put a number on it. There's nothing wrong with the "ball flight laws" and I try to, at some point, make sure every student is aware of it, as well as being aware of their clubface and their start lines, as that's a big part of self-solving some things when they arise. "Coach, I'm missing everything right." "Okay, what's the start line?" Big question, and the answer changes quite a bit based on the response. Sometimes it's the face (most of the time, probably), but sometimes it's a path change, particularly as players get better.
-
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now