|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 25, 2012 13:27:44 GMT -5
Consider a situation where you want to hit a ball toward a distant target that is 200 yards away. One could land the ball near the target using a straight ball flight, a push-draw ball flight or a pull-fade ball flight? cwdlaw223 implied that he thinks that a straight ball flight is the hardest approach. Why? I think that a straight ball flight approach is the easiest approach because one simply has to zero-out the clubhead path and clubface angle through the immediate impact zone (between P6.9 and P7.1). Here is Tiger Woods generating a zeroed-out clubhead path and clubface angle through the immediate impact zone. Note how ke keeps the back of his FLW facing the target from P6.9 to P7.1. That's an easy approach? How can one consistently get a repeatable ball flight result towards a distant target when using a push-draw or pull-fade ball flight pattern - when one has to to repeatedly achieve a consistent degree of divergence between the clubhead path and clubface angle at impact? Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 25, 2012 21:21:16 GMT -5
You have no idea if he zeroed out that shot or if he hit it square on the face. If so, how far did the shot go and how far left or right from the target line?
You should ask Bruce Litskie why he prefers a fade. Or Nicklaus as well with those fades off the tee. There is no one ballflight that is optimal for everyone unless we all had the same body and internal timing. What you can do repeatedly under pressure is optimal in my book. (I mainly play pull draws for the record. That allows me to clear my mind under pressure).
You also need to square pin point size COGs for a straight shot Jeff. Nobody hits perfectly straight shots (within a couple feet of the target). Even Hogan said he only hit 4-5 perfect shots per round.
I'm not convinced you understand how difficult it is to "zero out." Tell you what, if you find a Tman in your area I'll pay for the use (up to $150) if you post all of your shots. I'll pay you another $150 if you can get a normal driver shot with a zero face and zero path (0.0).
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Dec 26, 2012 0:07:35 GMT -5
Having hit 30 shots or so on Tman a few weeks ago I only had a couple shots if any that zero'd out, but I hit lots of quality shots.
I am interested to see all the numbers, I had three drives inside of yards of straight, all with 105+ clubhead speed but I dont believe any said zero's. They were all a collection of slightly off zero and slightly off center contact.
This is one of my contentions with Trackman, I am not sure anyone can change the number so slight that it will override the slightly off center contact, its chasing an illusion. You could get zero's on Tman only to have the ball off target because the contact was not centered, then what do you do, do Tman spit out "not centered contact, hit again"?
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 0:39:20 GMT -5
cwdlaw223,
You obviously don't understand what I mean by the term "zero-out" when it comes to clubhead path and clubface angle. It doesn't refer to any TM readings, and it only means that I move the back of the functionally flat left wrist straight towards the target between P6.9 and P7.2, so that it produces a straight ball flight towards my target. I am only interested in generating a straight ball flight towards my desired target, and I have no idea what type of TM readings will be generated if I was using a TM device. If the TM device didn't generate any path/face numbers close to zero (within 1-2 degrees of zero) when I hit the ball with the center of the clubface, then the problem would be with TM and not my swing biomechanics - because my ball would be going straight towards the target.
I often hit 2-5 perfectly straight shots per round - using your "tight" definition of straight (where the ball lands within a few feet, rather than a few yards of my desired target). Using my definition of straight (which is within a few yards left-or-right of my desired target), the number of straight shots can be >5 per round.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 0:50:35 GMT -5
Greg,
If your ball went straight towards your target and landed within a few yards of the target on those three shots, then I regard that as a "straight shot". I don't know how you intentionally produce that type of straight shot, but I can only deliberately produce it when I move the back of my functionally flat left wrist straight towards the target between P6.9 and P7.1 (presuming a level strike in the center of the face). I can get non-deliberate straight shots with off-center strikes, but they presumably happen due to the chance combination of a particular path/face divergence that interacts fruitfully with the degree of off-center strike. I can obviously not intentionally produce those types of non-deliberate straight shots.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 26, 2012 8:48:55 GMT -5
Jeff -
You have no idea if Tiger hit that shot straight. None! Pure guess from a picture.
You still haven't explained why a straight shot is easiest. The easiest shot for the golfer is the one they can execute and not your preferred shot.
I'm not sure why you even started this thread. A draw, fade or straight shot is dependent upon what the golfer can consistently execute and neither one is right or wrong (excluding hole design).
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 10:07:38 GMT -5
I believe that the straight shot is potentially the easiest to execute because there are specific guidelines that one can follow - i) first trace the straight-plane-line of the ball-target line so that the clubshaft travels parallel to the inclined plane between P6 and P7.5; ii) secondly, time the club release phenomenon so that the clubshaft catches up to the straight left arm by low point and then ensure that the clubhead path is directed at the target by moving the intact LAFW/FLW straight towards the target while maintaining a FLW and while avoiding any flipping motion; iii) thirdly, complete the release of PA#3 by P6.9 and then ensure that the clubface continues to face the target between P6.9 and P7.2 by moving the intact LAFW/FLW straight towards the target.
I have no idea how one can consistently hit a push-draw shot or pull-fade shot of an exact magnitude so that the ball consistently lands at the target. What guidelines do you use for creating the exact degree of divergence between the clubface and clubhead path at impact that is required to perfect the degree of ball flight curvacture and secondly how do you get the clubface to be pointing in exactly the correct starting alignment at impact?
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 26, 2012 10:23:54 GMT -5
It's about timing. The same logic that you use against executing a draw/fade applies to your thinking. There is no one perfect ballflight pattern. The best pattern is one that fits your game. If you think there is one perfect pattern then you should use Moe Norman as your model because he was the straightest hitter ever in the history of golf. Sounds like you should use Tman to find out your exact path. I do. Face angle is timing.
I don't play in such a technical world as you do. In the end, I just hit it and know from experience where the ball is going based upon feel and experience. How do you even know that you're aimed correctly? We aren't robots.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 11:07:44 GMT -5
cwdlaw223,
All golfers who use a neutral left hand grip are going to have to time their release of PA#2 and PA#3 - whether they hit a straight shot or curved shot. However, there are guidelines for hitting a straight shot - because by moving the FLW/intact LAFW straight towards the target between P6.9 and P7.2, one is moving both the clubface and clubhead path straight towards the target and there is no diverence in path/face alignment through the immediate impact zone. A golfer who creates a divergence between the path and face at impact has to base it on "feel", which has no precise mechanical basis.
You ask - how to does one aim one's FLW and therefore clubface at the target when hitting a straight shot? By aiming one's FLW in that direction - if the FLW is aimed at the target during its passage through the immediate impact zone, then the face/path must also be facing the target. A golfer who uses a curved ball flight also has to aim his FLW in a very precise direction so that his clubface is specifically aimed in a precise direction relative to the target at impact - but he has the additional problem of creating a precise degree of divergence between the face and path at impact. How is that problem solved? By "feel"? How does "feel" create consistent mechanics/biomechanics?
I agree that Moe Norman is the most perfect model - because he swung on a single plane (tracing the SPL of the ball-target line) between P6 and P7.5 and because he eliminated his accumulator #3 angle through impact thereby allowing for a very precise PA#3 release action. I am not surprised that he was the most accurate straight-ball flight striker of a golf ball in the history of golf.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 26, 2012 13:07:22 GMT -5
So if someone consistently executes a fade under pressure they should try to hit a straight shot for the sake of what? Every ballflight has a divergence issue, including a straight shot. Precision is relative to each golfer and not an absolute. It seems like you play swing and not golf. If you have no feel do you even know how you are swinging bio mechanically?
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 13:26:22 GMT -5
cwdlaw223,
Your argument is getting increasingly desperate.
If a golfer can consistently hit a fade shot of precise magnitude, then he obviously will not benefit by hitting a straight shot because he can already land the ball consistently at his desired target. Lee Trevino manifested this consistent mini-fade pattern - because he consistently used sound biomechanics by swinging his FLW/intact LAFW towards the target while maintaining a consistently open clubface of exact magnitude (relative to the back of his FLW).
My "feel" is based on a precise mental image of precision golf biomechanics/mechanics, while you seemingly do not have a precise mental image of how to perform a golf swing biomechanically/mechanically/geometrically. That's a major difference!
Take an example of a golfer who follows BM's pinata-release action of flipping the left wrist horizontally soon after impact. How does he prevent pre-impact or through-impact flipping - if BM has never explained how to consistently flip post-impact (and never pre-impact or through-impact)?
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 26, 2012 13:46:45 GMT -5
Jeff -
You were asserting that the straight ball flight was the easiest, not me. That was the point of your thread without any real support. You talk about your pattern as if it is less timing dependent and yet every person has their own unique timing.
I don't believe any ball flight is the best. I don't use precise mental images as my feel, I just do it. I just hit it and try not to get so mechanical. It seems like in your swing there are many mechanical thoughts going on at one time which is very destructive for executing a mechanical motion under pressure.
How this gets back to Brian's release makes no sense and doesn't warrant further discussion.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 14:02:12 GMT -5
cwdlaw23,
You have partially misunderstood me when I stated that a straight ball flight is easiest. What is easiest is the idea of tracing a SPL and maintaining an intact FLW/LAFW through the immediate impact zone. However, that idea can also be used to create a mini-fade or mini-draw by simply adopting an open clubface (relative to the back of the FLW) of finite amount for a mini-fade and a closed clubface (relative to the back of the FLW) of finite amount for a mini-draw. That would allow a golfer to consistently play a mini-fade (or mini-draw) while still tracing a SPL and while still maintaining a FLW/intact LAFW from P6.9 to P7.2+. Lee Trevino uses that type of swing action to consistently play a mini-fade - because the technique produces a consistent degree of divergence between clubhead path and clubface angle through impact. I brought up BM's pinata-release action - because I cannot fathom how any golfer can achieve a consistent clubface/clubhead divergence through impact using that unreliable technique.
You are wrong about too many mechanical thoughts being a problem - because once one has mentally understood the "intact LAFW/FLW through the immediate impact zone" concept, then it can become automatic after it becomes ingrained as a "feel" action.
Jeff.
|
|