CalBoomer

What you describe is a classic Donald Ross green. They are hard--intentionally. And give even the pros fits. It's like playing miniature golf on a real course. This was what gave the pros fits during the US Open on the 14th at Pebble Beach. I occasionally play a very hard course on which I always shoot at least ten shots over my handicap. When some aspects of a given course are designed to challenge the skills of pros, it is a given that they will give us amateurs fits.

As some folks have noted, there is no one correct ball position for the wedge--nor for any other club for that matter. It all depends on what kind of shot you are trying to hit. Back in the stance delofts the clubface and keeps the ball lower than it would other wise be. The opposite tends to occur with the ball more forward--and you have to be very careful not to skull it, especially with a wedge. So, you need to ask yourself what kind of ball trajectory are you trying to create.

I think this response goes to the heart of the problem here. In another thread, there is some debate about what is a chip and what is a pitch. A pitch is a high shot which rolls little after landing. A chip is a low shot which rolls significantly after landing. And they require different techniques. For what you describe--a significantly elevated green, the proper shot is a short pitch not a chip. Hitting short pitches is not easy and requires a fair amount of practice. Dave Peltz has said that the 40-yard pitch is one of the hardest shots in golf. Shots shorter than that--which still have to go high-- are getting into "flop shot" territory, which requires a third technique and even more practice.

What he said exactly. There is a limit to how much distance you can get from a typical sand wedge (54-58* with bounce) when in the sand. If I have to hit a sand shot 30-50 yards or more, I'll go to an open PW or 9i.

I find the whole premise at the start of this thread preposterous. At any reasonable swing speed, the amount of time that the hands could do anything to affect something as delicate as the angle of the club face has to be minuscule. The idea of being able to also sense and react by changing the hands in that minuscule time frame is really a non-starter. Trying to do something with your hands, beyond holding on to the club, usually just screws up shots.

I would only say that a 60 degree wedge is almost never used for "full swing" shots. Its main utility is for control over relatively short pitches from 20 to 60 yards.

I have been working on SnT with my irons (big improvement) and driver (some improvement). Is it my imagination or does SnT significantly inhibit hooking? When I am emphasizing weight on my left leg, it feels very difficult to be able to close the clubface at contact--which I consider a good thing. Most of the time my flight is straight or slight push/fade and only rarely a mild draw. No bad hooks. So I aim my flight "cone" dead straight or very slightly left.

On the other hand, let's not forget about definitions. Here are two which I think are accurate: Chip shot: A shot typically played from very close to the green, usually within a few yards of the putting surface, in which the ball is struck using a club (usually 6-iron to PW) played back in the player's stance. Such a combination produces a shot that is in the air very briefly before settling to the putting surface and rolling toward the cup. Chip shots are usually played with a 6-, 7-, 8- or 9-iron or pitching wedge. Chip shots differ from pitch shots in that pitch shots are meant to have a higher trajectory that results in a shot landing closer to the pin and rolling just a bit. Pitch shots are typically played from farther off the green than chip shots. Pitch shot: a shot played with a highly lofted club that is designed to go a short distance with a high trajectory. Pitch shots are usually played into the green, typically from 40-50 yards and closer. It's easy to picture a pitch shot when it is contrasted with the chip or chip shot. A chip shot is played from much closer to the green and the ball is in the air only a short amount of time; the point is to get the ball onto the surface of the green and let it roll toward the cup. Most of a chip shot is roll. A pitch shot, on the other hand, is in the air for most of its distance, with much less roll once it hits the ground.

Ok let's forget about definitions. Whenever I hit a chip (let's say 7 low yards in the air, 5 yards roll) or a 20 yard pitch, I always work to keep my hands well ahead of the club face to avoid skulling the ball. With the chip, I never break my wrists--all arms. I absolutely never hit a putt with my hands well ahead of the clubface. Using a 5 iron to hit a ball with a putting stroke is one very specialized type of chip. But I still maintain that the vast majority of chips are not hit with anything resembling a putting stroke.

I had never read this full thread before, but certainly found it interesting. I had been having the usual iron problems and eventually gravitated to using many of the basic principles of SnT. Not surprisingly, it has made my iron play much more consistent, especially in terms of good contact. I am now working on trying to apply some of the same principles to my driving. For a long time I have worked on hitting my drives on the upswing and keeping my weight back slightly. Intermittently I hit the ball too high which costs me distance. There is a good video on youtube about hitting the driver with SnT, but they advocate contact with 1-2 degree downward movement of the clubhead. I can't say that appeals to me. I am going to try the SnT swing with the ball extremely forward to get it on the upswing. What I am mainly looking for is consistency. Any thoughts out there on applying SnT to the driver?

As a "common hack," I would say that the basic components of SnT have been very helpful to my iron play.

I certainly agree with both of your points, especially one person having the "best" swing. I was more interested in engendering some discussion about the one-plane swing for amateurs. If you were teaching someone from absolute scratch, with no previous habits of any kind, how would you feel about one-plane vs. two plane?

Didn't you ever hear the quote that "Only God and Jack Nicklaus can hit a 1 iron?" Nicklaus once hit a fabulous and important 1 iron to win a major (can't remember which one) which is a part of golf legend. I can't remember any pro in the last 20 years using a 1 iron for anything. The concept of an amateur using one (pun intended) is ludicrous.

This is not a simple question to answer. For one thing, I consider 20 yards a very short pitch. 5 yards is definitely a chip. And they are just not the same shot. Chips which need to go 7-10 yards in the air cannot be hit with a typical putting stroke. Putting stroke chips are usually a few yards off the green in relatively low fringe grass and are minimally airborne, if at all. So, if you are trying to do all these things with one basic technique, it ain't gonna work well for many of them.

In the latest issue of Golf magazine, the top 100 teachers allegedly voted Steve Stricker as having the best overall swing and the one best suited for amateurs to copy. His swing is then analyzed in more detail and praised for being an almost perfect one-plane swing. Elsewhere they recommend what I would call a 3/4 backswing for control and power. Finally, stack and tilt is recommended as a cure for chunked irons. Kinda weird for me since I had incorporated all of these things into my game for just those reasons over the past 2 years. And I have improved a lot (about 8 on the index). I'd be interested what other people think.

Although people typically try to have a ball always move one way or the other, having a ball that goes straight a lot and sometime fades or draws slightly is actually quite good. The so-called "power fade" frequently goes straight and even occasionally draws slightly. What it does not do is hook or slice uncontrollably. So with what you describe, just aim down the middle of the fairway. Neither a mild fade or draw should have you far off the short grass.

For starters, I would suggest that you stop thinking about "compression." It has nothing to do with hitting down on the ball. If you have ever watched some of those close-ups on TV when they analyze the swings of various pros, pay attention to the shots of the clubhead striking the ball. The first thing you will notice is that the clubhead hits the ball just before it contacts the turf. The ball is then off the clubface, not being compressed against anything, while the clubface starts to dig into the turf. This is the basis of the very old adage: "hit the little ball before the big ball (the earth)." Take your usual set-up and practice swinging the club (with hands forward like a hockey stick shot or a punch shot as others have recommended) so that you take a shallow divot every time. See where the beginning of the divot is in your stance. Now place the ball so that it aligns just before the divot begins. Now hit the ball with the same swing creating the same divot.

Sorry but I don't agree with some of the advice you've been given here. What I do agree with is that these clubs should be hit with a downward strike like all irons. I do not agree that you use the same technique as with a 7 iron. The longer irons are better played with a slightly flatter swing plane. The fact that you hit a lot of slices strongly suggests that your swing plane is too vertical with the longer irons.

Presumably the cone should be as narrow as your skill permits. Although the original post is clear and nicely illustrated, I am surprised that this concept seems new or novel to most golfers at an intermediate or better level. My "cone" is the right two-thirds of the fairway, so I aim the ball slightly to the right of the midline. I try to hit a power fade. If I do fade it properly, I am on the right side of the fairway. If I get a slight draw, I am on the left side. Relatively straight is somewhere in between. I really don't think this is rocket science.

It's a classic one-plane swing with some elements of S and T.

Appreciated the interview with Ben Hogan. When he talks about his plan for the full 72 holes, I couldn't help but think of the great anecdote about him during the Open at Merion when reporters asked him why there was no 7 iron in his bag. His answer was that "there were no 7-iron shots at Merion." Tell me another pro who would think or do something like that?

It was an interesting interview. Johnny Miller said to him, "You have one of the flattest swings I've seen on a tall man." And then they got into the discussion of it being a one plane swing followed by the comment above. All the comments above aside, those pictures clearly show that Kuchar has a flatter swing than most of his fellow pros.

What does it say that you are using Charlie Hoffman's swing as an example of almost perfect form? A guy who had previously won one professional tournament. It says to me that the ranks of professional golfers are full of extremely talented guys who can beat anybody if they can keep it all together for four days.

Louie Oosterheuzen smokes the Open field and Charlie Hoffman smokes the Deutsche Bank field. There are all kinds of unknowns out there who can get really hot for 4 days. Phil and Tiger and Els and Stricker are just not going to beat these random supernovas with their B games. And there a lot more of these guys out there than there used to be. It just makes winning Majors--or any golf tournament--a lot harder than it used to be, even only 10 or 15 years ago.

I'm surprised other people don't find this kind of result very interesting. A Charlie Hoffman, certainly a very dark horse, comes out and absolutely smokes a very good field by a whole lot. If Tiger or Phil had done this, everybody would be crowing about how dominant they were. The fact is that nowadays, there are a whole lot of guys out there who can do this on a totally random basis. If they are going to consistently beat these random supernovas, Tiger and Phil had beeter bring their A games, because the B game won't cut it in this situation.