limoric

Moe Norman -25 Francis Ouimet -25 Bobby Jones -25

Yes, I saw it and I just now followed the link. Very cool! I'm going to play around with it when I get to a pc. Also I know a pilot who's brain I'm going to pick, he flies small planes. I'll ask him if there's areas of the lower main land that consistently have Lower or higher air density... Thanks!

Why have you narrowed it down to these two drivers? I've hit them both on a launch monitor and played my buddy's D2 along mine on the course. My 4 year old FT-iZ was longer than both. Between the 2, I liked the D2 much more, but launch quite high. The D3 should get you more distance if you're not needing that extra forgiveness in a driver, I'm looking forward to giving it a go this summer, might knock the FT-iZ out of the bag...

Hey, I'm not too far from you, just across the border; will be playing North Bellingham tomorrow. Stretch the Hips man, do a quick walk around the block to warm up and then attack those hips. I stretch the hips 2X per day. Find the Youtube vids for titleist fitness, you'll find some great stretching routines!!

Sorry to say, you waisted your time when you suggested a calculation that would see air pressure fall to a level that is not possible. You could have chosen to put what I was trying to say into context or ask for clarification if you really wanted to be helpful; instead of trying to teach me how to calculate a percentage which was irrelevant to the query. Nope, you'd rather argue, adamantly state I'm wrong and then offer no evidence to the contrary. Your departure will not be missed...cheers.

I dropped my $120 package down to $30, essentially losing most channels. I got Netfix which I really love. I had also planned to get an entena for OTA HD, but found out I'd only get a couple channels. The plan was to get rid of cable all together. After a month I was dying to watch the golf channel. I cave in and all of a sudden I don't have Boomberg anymore. Buggers took it away, even though I pay more. I really, really hate the cable company!!!

The percentage change doesn't matter and I don't care what it is. I'm after the percentage change in air density or the percentage change that an object is affected by when passing through that air density. It's the point of the whole thread, you could have chosen to look at it a different way, despite how you understood my description..

It might very well, but I would be very surprised if the effect on air density was just 0.9% and that's what this thread is about. The physics professor in the link I posted previously made reference to a 10% change in air pressure and the influence on golf ball distance (a 240 yard drive would be 267). He also made references to change in air pressure not being more than 5-10% usually. Since it is impossible for the air pressure to drop 10% by the way you are calculating it, he must be talking about a different unit of measure. The lowest recorded non-hurricane barometric pressure in the lower 48 is 95.6 and it most certainly did not get to that value overnight.

So I played in an event today at Swan-E-Set Golf course just north of Pitt Meadows BC, this is about 30 minutes north east of Vancouver. Even though the course is around a 1 hour drive from the nearest coastline, the area is below sea level. It's a place where golfers now their ball is not going to fly as far, the same goes for Golden Eagle golf course which is 10 minutes from it. I played with 7 cap, an 8 cap and of course I'm a 6 for this course. Where I was hitting wedge 135 just 2 days ago (10 minutes from the coastline, but a few feet above sea level), today I was lucky to hit a wedge 115 and my playing partners were no different, we were all talking about loss of distance. 160 approach shots required 5 iron; even in the winter, 5 iron goes about 170-175 for me at most Vancouver courses. The temperature was exactly the same today as Sunday. The humidity was roughly the same, 93% in the nearest town, 10 minutes away. Sunday it was 88-90% in North Vancouver. I don't know what the barometric pressure was, since I was not carrying a barometer, but in the nearest town it was 100.2 today, which is lower than normal, we are in the middle of a low pressure system which started Sunday. Since the course is below sea level and sea level pressure in 101.34, I can only imagine the pressure was higher, perhaps 2 points higher than Sunday's 99.4. For those who have participated in this thread, and those who will. It's a fact that air pressure fluctuate greatly in some areas of the planet and very little in others. If you don't see a significant change in golf ball distance from one week to the next, it's very likely the air pressure in your area does not change much. If on the other hand, you wonder why the ball just doesn't fly sometimes, it may be the air pressure, but as others have already said, temperature and humidity can be influencers. I'm more interested in ball flight distance changes when the temp and humidity are constant

Wow, awesome info...thanks.

Please prove this. Your stock example was an attempt to make me understand how to calculate percentage, but clearly, even in your example, the math would not be possible. Air Pressure can change 5-10%, the professor of physics I linked to said as much, but if I apply your math to this change, you get a number that isn't even possible. So where my math is clearly not correct and I said it wasn't from the start, your math is absurd and your posts have done absolutely nothing to explain the effects of Air Pressure on golf ball flight. I fully expect to get an arguement from you without a single attempt to prove your possition...

Since my last post, some people have added to the actual theme of the thread; it was my intention to draw these smart people in. Yes, it's said it went the way it did. I did not start this thread to Argue, I made it very clear I was no expert from the beginning. Some have also pointed out the rudeness of just a few posters, (they are not referring to me). Please re-read this thread and consider who was actually being the jerk. If the "owner" and "moderator" of this board will not defend those who would try to have civil conversation, then they have no choice but to defend themselves in whatever fashion they feel effective. I'll admit ignored the moronic behavior might have been more effective...these guys are still auguring moot points which have nothing to do with the subject matter. Mod Edit: Parts where you call other people "jackasses" have been removed. Behave maturely.

The funny thing is, we are agreeing with the process more than we are disagreeing. My very first post stated very clearly that when I draw the ball, my face starts open and right to the target, the opposite is true for a fade. It was a later post in which I stated I disagreed that you cannot start the ball right with a closed face (closed to what is the question, I did not elaborate). So at the end of the day, you explained the process by which I work the ball, I've managed to feel my way into the correct position, I'm only one of many examples who figured it out this way. I will agree with you that for some and I wouldn't know the ratio, they need a more technical understanding. I have a friend who's like this, he's anal about the technical side and I don't know that he'll ever be better than a 25 handicap, it takes him literally 30 seconds to hit every shot... BTW, the reference to Faldo was for you, not the OP. You see, I actually followed the link you provided and references were made, I thought you'd pick up on it. Where I do disagree with you; is that Faldo and the the other greats of the game have had it wrong all along. I think their explanation could be technically wrong, put the reasoning was and still is correct; otherwise, Faldo, Seve, etc, would not have been amazingly creative ball strikers. Their methodology did not prevent their students from learning. Is your way better? Perhaps. I and likely a few others don't care as much how it works, as long as it does work...(I know, I come across as a dinosaur) Now Myrtle, I never once said the face was closed to the target line. Another poster (scratch handicap), picked up that I meant closed to the swing path and Erik has acknowledged that is possible, as he picked up on it too. You still think I'm wrong, when I'm actually in agreement. They picked up on it, because they are good players, regardless of their understanding of the fundamentals. In a year I'll be near scratch as I'll be taking my first lessons ever with an ex-tour player; I've taken my game as far as it will go without a coach. I don't say this to brag, I actually think I'm a poor player, as I compare my game to the lower handicap players I compete against. What's worse, a mid handicap understanding the ball flight laws better or a "pretty good" player understanding the technical science worse? I think the answer to that question lies in your index. I don't say this to put you down, but ask yourself another question. What do you think the ratio is in understanding the technical side of the ball flight laws between low handicaps and mid handicaps? In my experience, the good players just play, the mid handicaps just won't shut up about why such and such happened the way it did. Go play a few Pepsi Tour events, you'll see what I mean...

Wrong about what? So you are not agreeing with me that it is not possible for barometric pressure to fall from 101.34 (standard) to 91.2, 10% as you would calculate percentages. You are not agreeing with me, even though the lowest non hurricane barometric pressure recorded in the lower 48 is 95.6. OK, thanks for the arguement.

You're telling me that everyone thread jacks on every thread. Listen, only A$$ holes posts stupid comments just to pad their thread count or start arguments just to argue; the glass is always half empty with you guys. With 1,800 posts in less than a year, I can see that you've been busy posting a lot about nothing. Where do you find the time to golf, let alone look after your family...my God man! Now as to your comment about calculating percentages; it has nothing to do with the expression of change in air pressure or drag. Clearly you have not read the entire thread; a 10% change in Air pressure as Sacm is calculating is not physically possible outside of a hurricane, yet he does not dispute the effects of a 10% change on the flight of a golf ball. LOL, I'm glad you agree with him... Now before you reply, I'm fairly certain the thread jacking rules have not changed in the 5 years I've been a member here, kindly buzz off so that I don't have to get moderators involved. I won't $hit on your threads either...

I did not say he was Nick Faldo and your quoting me was not in reference to the OP. You'd know that if you read the entire thread. All this said, I've been reading the OP's other posts; keep up with the lessons and don't worry about shaping the ball at this point. Good luck

LOL! I just realized you're not David in FL. So you replied just to make an argument and then you say you undertood me from the start. Do that in many threads??

Nice to see a Cunuck top the list and another one in the top 10!

For the air pressure to drop 10% from standard (101.34) as you calculate it, you'd have a barometric pressure of 91.2. The lowest ever recorded non hurricane barometric pressure in the lower 48 is 95.6. It's not possible to have a 10% change in atmospheric pressure the way you are calculating it and expressing it, it's not even possible to have a 5% change. Further, your stock can fall 25% as you calculate it, atmospheric pressure cannot (well actually it can, but you'd have to be on the wing of a plane). If on the planet earth, you would most certainly die from decompression sickness, even 10% as you calculate it would make you sick, if not kill you. So when a professor of physics or a meteorologist is describing the air pressure as changing 5 or 10%, they are not likely calculating it the way you are, since it has never happened in modern human civilization. They may also not be calculating it as I was, I already stated my math was not perfect, I'm not a meteorologist. So it's also unlikely that a change of air pressure from 102 to 101 will only have an effect of 2% drag on an object passing through it. I'm of course not a scientist, so I can't give you definitive proof. Get my picture now? Maybe someone who actually knows what they are talking about can fill in the blanks...

4 strokes a side and it would be at least 5 a side if I could putt worth a $hit. His index would make him a 14 handicap at my home course playing from the proper tees. Hole 8 is a 205 yard par 3 from an elevated tee. You're blocked out from the right (the mountain side gets in the way) and to the left is a gorge; you can only see the right 3rd of the green. Guess where you need to take the ball to land it on the green? over the gorge. It's a fun hole! You are right, for some it's a feel game and for other it's mechanics. Erik is obviously right about the 85/15 principle, you can't argue with science, but how you get the ball into impact position will be debated for another 500 years! How much do you think Charles Barkely cares about impact with the face

2%? You are not even close in your thinking, though I can understand how you did the math. I think a lot of people would make the same mistake. Normal barometric pressure ranges from 98 to 105 (the siberian high) (or 29 to 31) for 98% of the inhabited areas of the planet; so in order to calculate the change in pressure, one would have to calculate the percentage between these values. For example, should the Barometric pressure be 101 on monday and change to 102 on tuesday, the value would have changed by about 14%. My math isn't perfect, but I'm in the ball park. Now when the barometric pressure changes, air temperature and humidity usually also change, so the air density may not change as much. All this said, should the temp and humidity remain constant, then you have a significant difference in air pressure. As I understand it, significant drops in air pressure usually signal a storm. You could hit a golf ball 500 yards in the eye of a tropical storm... If you followed my link, which was written by a Professor of physics, you would have seen the example whereby a golf ball would travel 10% further, given 10% lower air pressure. Most areas of the planet do not see fluctuations of more than 5-10%, but some regions do have significantly greater swings. Again, I'm no expert at this stuff. Yesterday was an anomaly and from time to time, I notice significant differences in ball distance, but it's usually the other way, way short. I'm talking about less than 5% of the time. I do know that since I've been following the barometric pressure, I have noticed I hit the ball further and shorter on extreme ends of the spectrum; a club lenght is extreme from monday to tuesday of the same week, it just doesn't happen often... If it was a gust of wind following me all day, I'm going to church tomorrow for the first time in 20 years...

Thanks for the schooling there Myrtle; If we ever play together, I'll still give you 8 strokes...

I'm not going to disagree with you, but I will disagree with the assertion that one cannot start the ball right with a closed club face; at least the perception (or past preconception) that it's closed and that is what I'm really talking about. As you can see by the way I wrote my original reply to the OP, to me it's about feel, the perception created by the brain and the exact same thing can be said about the conventional thinking, despite the fact that scientifically something else is happening. The club face may very well account for 85% of the balls direction at impact, but try to convince Nick Faldo of this; you may be right and he may admit that you're right, but he is not going to stop thinking swing path. Of course you will agree that it is impossible to work the ball without any account for swing path. Although the science says it accounts for 15%, I'll argue that it accounts for far greater percentage of swing thought. For the record, I'm not back peddling, I did follow your link and was very surprised to learn about the 85/15 principle. I was also not surprised that pros like Butch Harmon and Nick Faldo subscribe to the old methodology, as does the majority of the golf world today. It seems to me that this science has been around a while, yet very smart hall of fame pros have not adopted the new thinking. Maybe feel is still more important to good players than mechanics??? I think we can also agree that the vast majority of tour pros are going to take a lesson from Butch or Nick before they do from some excited young guy who subscribes to the new science. This said, Sean Foley is making a name for himself and it's not without merit Again, I'm not saying that the 85/15 principle is not fact, I'm saying that it doesn't matter to me and the majority of the golf world. I also don't think all golfers, regardless of talent can wrap their heads around it. But certainly, those who can put themselves in the write frame of mind would most likely benefit. So now that the OP knows 85% of the swing accounts for ball direction, he should hopefully be able to work the ball left and right at will within a few weeks.

Of course I do, but when the humidity is a constant, it's irrelevant. You can have high humidity and denser air than you would for the same level of humidity in a different region of the world and vise verse. Standard barometric pressure is 29.92 at 15C. I don't pretend to be an expert on barometric pressure. All I know is that in the winter, in Vancouver the Barometric pressure is usually between 101.5 and 102 (30.11) and the humidity averages 80%, 90% in my part of the lower mainland as I live at the bottom of the North shore mountains, we get twice the rain of Richmond which is only 20 miles south. The Humidity is currently 86%. When the humidity reaches 100% I often see the barometric pressure near 101, but I have never seen it at 99.4 (not that I've noticed). Yesterday the Humidity was 90% and the barometric pressure was an abnormally low 99.4 (29.35); the ball was consistently a full club length longer than what I've come to expect playing the exact same course (and same ball) once a week during the winter. Today the Barometric pressure reached 101.5, which is a significant swing. I was playing at 5-10 feet above sea level. Standard Barometric pressure at sea level and at 15C is 101.34 (29.92) The only thing that could explain the extreme difference in ball flight was barometric pressure, as the humidity is typically the same during the 4 rainy months of the year. If anything, I struggle to get all the way to the pin on approach shots in the winter, I'm not expecting to airmail greens and usually don't.