Importance of Strike on Distance

[Don Golfo]

47 minutes ago, klineka said:

Someone who has a 94 mph swing speed and a total distance of 208 and have been golfing for a while is likely NEVER going to develop enough skill to hit the ball 245 yds with the 94 mph swing speed, that's a 35+ yd increase based on strike alone

Possibly, but most recreational golfers either a) Don’t realise the way in which they deliver the club is poor or b) Don’t want to work on their swings and would prefer to believe that another $500 spent on a new driver is the answer to their problems 

51 minutes ago, klineka said:

Do you have a source that backs this up or is just your opinion?

Have you ever watched long drive? The inconsistency between shots is massive?  Half the time the shots aren’t even the same shape, far less consistent in terms of length or direction?

[Don Golfo]

39 minutes ago, Lihu said:

I don’t understand why swinging faster always involves swinging out of your shoes?

It doesn’t necessarily. However, I’m contrasting the challenge of trying to increase driving distance by increasing swing speed versus improving strike and launch. Eventually most people will reach a point where swinging much faster than they currently do  takes a lot of physical effort and results in a poor quality strike. Everyone has their physical limits? 

44 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Most people I watch with slow swing speeds look so inefficient that I can’t help but think they could increase their SS more easily that hitting the center of the face every time

Possibly. I’m not talking about only hitting the centre of the club each time, very few people can get close to that. I’m talking about delivering the club with a good angle of attack that promotes a good launch without masses of back spin or side spin. That will drastically improve distance. 

[Don Golfo]

15 hours ago, Lihu said:

I think distance is mainly swing speed and path to face related? Solidness or center strike might be important, but newer driver designs seem to have mitigated some of that requirement?

Not sure. Hit a ball towards the heel or low on the face with a downward angle of attack and I don’t think any driver, even an ultra forgiving one, would give you a terribly great outcome? Face to path alignment is primarily going to influence initial direction and side spin?

[klineka]

8 minutes ago, Don Golfo said:

The inconsistency between shots is massive? 

Same can be said to the majority of amateur golfers (52% of all amateurs are 14+ handicap)

13 minutes ago, Don Golfo said:

Half the time the shots aren’t even the same shape

Same can be said for a decent number of amateurs, especially 20+ handicap golfers (20% of all amateurs are 20+ handicap)

15 minutes ago, Don Golfo said:

far less consistent in terms of length or direction?

Again, same thing can be said for a large number of amateurs.

That person with the 94 mph swing speed and driving it 208 is likely going to be inaccurate and inconsistent as well, and they swing it way slower than long drive guys do. Based on your logic, the amateurs should be much more consistent and accurate because they are swinging slower. That simply isnt true.

 

3 minutes ago, Don Golfo said:

Possibly. I’m not talking about only hitting the centre of the club each time, very few people can get close to that. 

If you acknowledge that very few people can get close to that, then why are you making it seem like every person that has a 94 mph swing speed should be able to hit the ball 245yds just with a couple lessons??? (which is what LPGA players do, and they are better ball strikers than pretty much all amateurs) 

[Don Golfo]

1 minute ago, klineka said:

Same can be said to the majority of amateur golfers (52% of all amateurs are 14+ handicap)

Same can be said for a decent number of amateurs, especially 20+ handicap golfers (20% of all amateurs are 20+ handicap)

Again, same thing can be said for a large number of amateurs.

That person with the 94 mph swing speed and driving it 208 is likely going to be inaccurate and inconsistent as well, and they swing it way slower than long drive guys do. Based on your logic, the amateurs should be much more consistent and accurate because they are swinging slower. That simply isnt true.

 

If you acknowledge that very few people can get close to that, then why are you making it seem like every person that has a 94 mph swing speed should be able to hit the ball 245yds just with a couple lessons??? (which is what LPGA players do, and they are better ball strikers than pretty much all amateurs) 

I agree with a lot of what you are saying above. My point is that many people would see greater benefit from delivering the club better by improving their swing through instruction rather than spending $500-$1000 bucks every two years on a new driver with a custom shaft. Delivering the club better is not just about hitting the middle each time? It’s hitting around the middle with a good angle of attack, in the correct direction with face and path aligned?  Everyone can get a lot better at that with instruction and practise?

[iacas]

36 minutes ago, Don Golfo said:

Have you ever watched long drive? The inconsistency between shots is massive?  Half the time the shots aren’t even the same shape, far less consistent in terms of length or direction?

That's an incredibly bad way to judge average golfer. Long drive has completely different goals, scoring, etc.

18 minutes ago, Don Golfo said:

It doesn’t necessarily. However, I’m contrasting the challenge of trying to increase driving distance by increasing swing speed versus improving strike and launch.

Good golfers can do both: work on strike and speed.

And buying new equipment can help a golfer with better launch conditions, more speed, etc. too.

Just now, Don Golfo said:

I agree with a lot of what you are saying above. My point is that many people would see greater benefit from delivering the club better by improving their swing through instruction rather than spending $500-$1000 bucks every two years on a new driver with a custom shaft. Delivering the club better is not just about hitting the middle each time? It’s hitting around the middle with a good angle of attack, in the correct direction with face and path aligned?  Everyone can get a lot better at that with instruction and practise?

It's a straw man argument, though - who is here arguing that players should just buy equipment?

Nobody.

And a different club can help some golfers achieve better launch conditions and/or more speed.

[Don Golfo]

1 hour ago, Lihu said:

Unless, you train for speed with SS or a similar product. Then more

Sounds horrific; A great way to go to accident and emergency!

[klineka]

8 minutes ago, Don Golfo said:

Sounds horrific; A great way to go to accident and emergency!

Tell that to the 350+ professional golfers who train for more speed using the SuperSpeed golf system.

Speed can be taught just like strike can be taught

[Lihu]

9 minutes ago, Don Golfo said:

Sounds horrific; A great way to go to accident and emergency!

There’s entire training programs to follow that are pretty safe and gradual. It’s not like you’re going to get better is a couple weeks of dangerous practice?

16 minutes ago, Don Golfo said:

Sounds horrific; A great way to go to accident and emergency!

Unless you thought I meant “Schutzstaffel”, then yes, that’s horrifying 😂

[Dean Walker]

On 12/9/2018 at 4:01 AM, Don Golfo said:

Many golfers appear to be obsessed with driving distance.  In the drive to increase distance they focus on new drivers, custom shafts and increasing their swing speed. I’d contend that the best way to increase the consistency and length of the tee actually involves improving the way in which they strike the ball.  Average golfers have a swingspeed between 85-95mph.  An averagely poor strike (off centre with a slightly glancing blow) at 85 mph results in a carry of 180-185 yards and barely runs out 195-200 yards in good conditions.  In contrast a pure strike might carry 205 yards and run out past 220 yards. At 95 mph, taking the same approach total driving distance will vary from 230-265 yards. That’s a prize of between 25-35 yards.  Could all the money spent on drivers and shafts be better invested in lessons and understanding how to improve strike and launch conditions?

I just don't get this illusion that most golfers believe that a driver or a shaft is the main ingredient to more distance. In the main - the golfers I meet aren't that stupid that they think a club is going to change them from Joe Bloggs to Dustin Johnsen. They realise it may only help a bit, which an upgrade or a properly fitted driver will do (obviously there are some exceptions).

I think the problem is, changing ones technique, takes a fair bit of commitment and time which lots of people haven't got. People may disagree, but if you only get one (or less) practice sessions a week then it's going to be tough to see quick substantial improvements in your technique, so this often makes golfers bail out and go for a new club. And in some golfers, a new club can make a big difference, especially if they have been using a club which is 10 years old and setup for someone else.

In a perfect world - you're right, focusing on impact factors, strike patterns, is in lots of cases, the optimal thing to do but lots of people haven't got the time to allocate to this and I think this is where the manufacturers win. Some of course are totally warped by equipment, but I don't think this is a high percentage and these guys get on my tits frankly. 

For the golfers with more time and commitment to put on golf, then I think all bases should be covered. Technique, strike pattern, ways of increasing speed and a properly fitted driver. And it comes down to the what the person specifically needs. If a guy is swinging at 95mph with optimal launch conditions and a good strike pattern, then finding ways of increasing his speed will be something to focus on. If a guy is swinging at 95mph with horrible impact factors and a strike pattern which is littered across the face, then adding more speed probably shouldn't be his main concern.

Edited December 11, 2018 by iacas
removed 10 blank lines at the end

[Righty to Lefty]

13 hours ago, klineka said:

This is horribly flawed logic and would mean that 98%+ of all golfers on this planet arent truly playing golf

OHHHH MYYY GOOODNESSS!! That is not what I said at all...There has to be a reasonable expectation on ALL shots hit that you are going to hit the ball inline with the center of gravity of the club. The better you are at the game, the more often you strike the ball inline with your intentions. Show me where a pro golfer is going through their routine with their caddie and says "you know what I'm gonna strike this one bad though so lets account for that also!" Pros and good golfers are so confident that they will strike the ball purely, through repetition and experience, that it doesn't enter their mind, they are probably surprised when they miss the middle of the face, so they are playing golf and are are only focused on getting the ball to do what they intend.

Poor golfers are so worried about hitting the ball solid that they often lose track of the goal of the game until they reach a point where they can reasonably hit the ball, at which time their priorities will shift.  We are all playing golf off of what we have come to expect on a centered strike any shot struck elsewhere on the face is not going to end up exactly where the golfer intends.  I'm not saying it's not playable, I'm saying that the expectation must be to strike the shot purely. You are not playing golf in my opinion until you can strike the ball reasonably well and your focus moves away from simply hitting the ball. 

[Righty to Lefty]

14 hours ago, iacas said:

1)You must have a different definition of “solid” than me because I shoot 70 hitting two solid shots the whole round.

2) Also in your quest for “solid,” @Righty to Lefty, you’ve made compensations in your golf swing to accommodate flaws that are capping your true potential. (Ball way back in your stance.)

3)That said, strike and speed are important to distance, and I don't necessarily agree with "first you get strike, then you get speed." Speed is important too, and if you're slowing down in order to try to chase "strike" then you might be striking it worse, too. I don't want my students "guiding" or "steering" it either, and many golfers actually hit the ball more solidly when they swing at a good pace, with speed.

"Swinging out of your shoes" is not the same as "as swing speed increases."

1) Your definition of solid is much different that a 36 handicapper I assure you.  By solid you mean perfect and inline with your intentions...a 36 handicapper is just trying to hit it out the middle...somewhere...anywhere..on the planet! You aren't consistently shooting in the 70's without hitting most all of your shots in a given round within reason of your expectations.  What you consider a bad miss is much different than mine at a 5 handicap...and WAY different than a bad miss for a 36 handicap. You haven't swung and missed a ball in probably decades where as a 36 handicap does it regularly. 

2) This thread is not about my swing but I will go off on a temporary tangent. So what should I do then...move the ball position...give away my strike and my ability to predict preshot what my ball will do?  I never said I was unwilling to try to move the ball forward in my stance and note the results...but I wasn't able to find a solid strike with what I currently bring to the table physically so I moved it back to a location where I can play the game. I am not playing pretty golf swing...I'm trying to score the best I can today with what I got while keeping in mind that adjustments can be made along the way that can provide some improvement as my physical ability changes.  

3) I agree that strike and speed are important but strike is something that everyone can work on and the parameters are the same for everyone. Speed is not universal and we all bring different amounts of speed to the table.  I never said anything about guiding or steering shots or trying to slow anything down (that is why I position the ball in my stance they way I do.) I know this first hand as I am a high speed player left handed and an average speed player right handed. Speed can't bet taught...strike can, therefore strike is a fundamental because we are all subject to the same rules regardless of skill level so in my opinion strike more important than speed.    

[iacas]

Speed can be taught.

Everyone has a different upper limit but almost nobody is at theirs.

And I said both are important.

[ncates00]

8 hours ago, iacas said:

Speed can be taught.

Everyone has a different upper limit but almost nobody is at theirs.

And I said both are important.

I agree.  But when does one know if they've reached that limit?  Get on GEARS or something after doing TPI stuff to see if you're 100% efficient?  Otherwise, it's just an endless pursuit like most things- playing golf, playing guitar, etc.  Always something you can do better, but hard to tell if you've actually arrived or not.  One can see an increase in ball speed or clubhead speed or other data.  You can see the progress easily, but I'm questioning whether or not you can know if you've actually reached your limit.  Is that even measurable?

[iacas]

Beside the point.

[Don Golfo]

8 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

I agree that strike and speed are important but strike is something that everyone can work on and the parameters are the same for everyone.

Completely agree. That’s really the essence of my point. 

[GolfLug]

I want more of both more times. Anyway who is going to disagree that center contact is good? 

If you are saying that white knuckle swinging is detrimental to strike quality then again, no argument here.

9 minutes ago, Don Golfo said:

Completely agree. That’s really the essence of my point. 

I think where you got off rails is saying speed is inversely proportional to center strike.

I have gone from a SS of 91-92 to 98-99 in last 3 years. My FIR has improved greatly and rarely hit OB on the same courses I was good for at least 2 a round. I admit this is anecdotal but I suspect fairly common occurrence for those who do focused work on proper swing speed training.

Edited December 12, 2018 by GolfLug

[Don Golfo]

21 hours ago, klineka said:

Speed can be taught just like strike can be taught

I’m sure it can be improved by training, but most people can’t swing a club at 110 or 120 mph whatever type of training they take on?  A good analogy is sprinting. Very few people can run 100m in sub 11 seconds? No matter how dedicated their training, the average person simply couldn’t get there. That’s down to physiology and is determined primarily by the proportion of fast twitch fibres the individual possesses. Swinging a golf club is a comparable anaerobic activity. By contrast most able bodied people could learn to swing a golf club in a way that optimises launch conditions.