Gotcha. I don't see a face open to target at impact as weak. Big old bombing draws touch the ball with open faces. With that being said, I would agree with you that better players aren't hitting wedges with open faces and rotating to straighten the "push". I see it as only getting pushed if you catch the inside of the ball, and when better players hit short irons, they hit down and control trajectory and spin.........and they swing left of target nearly always to produce this and balance out the angle of attack, because alot of down and right leads to the dirty "s" word!
Yup agreed but if Im understanding the procedure above correctly the face is opened to the plane line. In the draw scenario you describe the face is closed to the plane line (but open to the target) .... a nuked , low lofted , draw shot resulting.
Going back to the video's logic if you were to keep rolling the face open to the plane line you could lay the club right on its back like for a lob shot say. Turn your 60 degree lob wedge into an 80 degree or whatever.
I know thats not the way the video describes things as its not a cut shot procedure (using common golf speak) but you are adding some loft when the face is open to the plane. To me it sounds like taking a straight push shot and rotating the plane so you hit the push shot at the hole. A floater depending on how much loft you've added.
Maybe the Arcs curve is so slight that the amount of opening is slight and the whole thing is negligible ? The hula hoop exaggerates things as the scale is so wrong. I dunno.
All big draws (tee balls especially) I see are hit with open faces; open to the plane line and target.....but closed to the path. Very rarely do I see better players hitting straight or pull draws. Not intentionally. Most always would be a double cross.
Regarding the video, the face wouldn't have to be open just because he is hitting down. Even at that, if it were open, the amount of down would still determine trajectory. It won't be a floater with a face thats a few degrees open if really down. If we're giving him that downward blows create path to the right, then an equal face (as you mentioned) would be a straight push, a more square face produces a push draw, a square face produces a straight draw/hook, and a closed face produces a pull hook. A lot of factors from the golfer jump into the mix to get these numbers though, and I think that's what often gets left out. Everything is crystal clear for the hoola hoop machine.
Anyway, the suggestion would be that a fix by closing the face at addres would just hit a straight draw, still no straight away ball flight (though most will unknowingly change path from this visual). Or that a fix from rotating (as he showed I would argue) would increase attack angle, and we're right back to where we started.
**THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH THESE HOOLA HOOP VIDEOS ABOUT THIS, IS THEY DRAW THE TANGENT FROM ONE ATTACK ANGLE, THEN INCREASE THAT ATTACK ANGLE BY ROTATING THE WHOLE HOOLA HOOP LEFT WHILE LEAVING THE TANGENT MARKER ON THE SAME SPOT OF THE HOOLA HOOP ***
Yup agreed but if Im understanding the procedure above correctly the face is opened to the plane line. In the draw scenario you describe the face is closed to the plane line (but open to the target) .... a nuked , low lofted , draw shot resulting.
Going back to the video's logic if you were to keep rolling the face open to the plane line you could lay the club right on its back like for a lob shot say. Turn your 60 degree lob wedge into an 80 degree or whatever.
I know thats not the way the video describes things as its not a cut shot procedure (using common golf speak) but you are adding some loft when the face is open to the plane. To me it sounds like taking a straight push shot and rotating the plane so you hit the push shot at the hole. A floater depending on how much loft you've added.
Maybe the Arcs curve is so slight that the amount of opening is slight and the whole thing is negligible ? The hula hoop exaggerates things as the scale is so wrong. I dunno.
Nice talking to you JT.
Because we are expecting [finally] not a baby but our first baby snowfall of the winter, I find my ever wandering mind thinking of Moe Norman. Just for yucks a couple of days back when we had a 52 degree day, I found myself thinking of Lee Westwood, Moe, and what I think they have in common which is a little chicken wing! Talk about an open face and square to the target line for a long time
Moe said he played "through the middle of the golf course" and controlled his trajectory by his ball position in his stance. Anyway, not completely on the topic, and not germane to the forward swivel I hope to master, but sometimes opposites inform as well as correct guided practice (a little teaching lingo there).
It is fun being able to control the ball in different ways! It is good to be a golfer on the LBG golf forum and I suppose, It is good to be the king.
Yes, I have thread jacked this a bit, but it was for the sake of humor and no harm was done to any living creature during this thread jacking. Anyway, it seemed like you guys were finished and I enjoyed the well-written concepts and wanted to show my fondness of the whole concept you know? "I am verifiably non-belligerent!"
__________________
HP, grant me the serenity to accept what I cannot change, the courage to change what I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. Progress and not perfection is the goal every day!
Last edited by innercityteacher : 01-21-2012 at 03:07 AM.
Because we are expecting [finally] not a baby but our first baby snowfall of the winter, I find my ever wandering mind thinking of Moe Norman. Just for yucks a couple of days back when we had a 52 degree day, I found myself thinking of Lee Westwood, Moe, and what I think they have in common which is a little chicken wing! Talk about an open face and square to the target line for a long time
Moe said he played "through the middle of the golf course" and controlled his trajectory by his ball position in his stance. Anyway, not completely on the topic, and not germane to the forward swivel I hope to master, but sometimes opposites inform as well as correct guided practice (a little teaching lingo there).
It is fun being able to control the ball in different ways! It is good to be a golfer on the LBG golf forum and I suppose, It is good to be the king.
Yes, I have thread jacked this a bit, but it was for the sake of humor and no harm was done to any living creature during this thread jacking. Anyway, it seemed like you guys were finished and I enjoyed the well-written concepts and wanted to show my fondness of the whole concept you know? "I am verifiably non-belligerent!"
We're old enough to appreciate experience and talent. Every time I see these scientists with expensive calculators and pocket protectors disrespecting the legends, players and teachers, I cringe. Things always need to move forward, but there were lots of greats with lots of solid information that will stand the test of time.
Kevin
__________________
I could be wrong. I have been before, and will be again.
We're old enough to appreciate experience and talent. Every time I see these scientists with expensive calculators and pocket protectors disrespecting the legends, players and teachers, I cringe. Things always need to move forward, but there were lots of greats with lots of solid information that will stand the test of time.
Kevin
I dont see why there has to be so much acrimony with Trackman. To me, it supports the idea of the plane being the boss and fits very well with TGM. The idea of where the club is and how it is moving when on plane through the ball to low point seems spot on. Couldnt we agree that the steeper the angle of attack down plane before low point with a wedge means there is more out remaining to account for? With a driver, arent we striking the ball closer to the bottom of the plane when there is not as much out, if any left to go? If we hit the driver slight up, isnt the outward part of the plane motion over? The first time I saw an explanation of the so called D plane, I experimented on a homemade plane board. My first thought was: Cool, those machine guys have always known this.
I dont see why there has to be so much acrimony with Trackman. To me, it supports the idea of the plane being the boss and fits very well with TGM. The idea of where the club is and how it is moving when on plane through the ball to low point seems spot on. Couldnt we agree that the steeper the angle of attack down plane before low point with a wedge means there is more out remaining to account for? With a driver, arent we striking the ball closer to the bottom of the plane when there is not as much out, if any left to go? If we hit the driver slight up, isnt the outward part of the plane motion over? The first time I saw an explanation of the so called D plane, I experimented on a homemade plane board. My first thought was: Cool, those machine guys have always known this.
No acrimony with TrackMan here. My problem is with the way some are interpreting the data and misrepresenting the numbers to further their agendas while bashing others.
Kevin
__________________
I could be wrong. I have been before, and will be again.
I dont see why there has to be so much acrimony with Trackman.
I think Homer would have loved to have a Trackman in his garage. He might not have agreed with some of the "deductions" though. Thats normal though right? Sorta like a bunch of doctors looking at a radiology report . You get different opinions. Then you got your bartender looking at the report and giving you his opinion.
Got be careful with who's opinion your trusting. You're insurance salesman is trying to sell you more life . Your barber thinks you need a shave. You trainer thinks you need to work out more etc.
I think Homer would have loved to have a Trackman in his garage. He might not have agreed with some of the "deductions" though. Thats normal though right? Sorta like a bunch of doctors looking at a radiology report . You get different opinions. Then you got your bartender looking at the report and giving you his opinion.
Got be careful with who's opinion your trusting. You're insurance salesman is trying to sell you more life . Your barber thinks you need a shave. You trainer thinks you need to work out more etc.
Nothing wrong with the machine though.
Homer would have used the Trackman gismo as a door stop. It's a poor substitute for understanding the geometry of the Golf Swing. Knowing how poorly your stroke performs is not the first step to correcting it.
I wouldn't spend a nickle on a teacher who bought and/or uses Trackman. They should have named it the "ACME Golf Swing Fixer-upper".
So if you use a forty year old book as your only resource, you have all the answers, but any current technology you aren't any good??? A guy that wrote and re-wrote a book seven times was obviously interested in getting it right. Do you seriously think he wouldn't use every resource possible if alive today?
Homer would have used the Trackman gismo as a door stop. It's a poor substitute for understanding the geometry of the Golf Swing. Knowing how poorly your stroke performs is not the first step to correcting it.
I wouldn't spend a nickle on a teacher who bought and/or uses Trackman. They should have named it the "ACME Golf Swing Fixer-upper".
Do you think the data it is able to collect is inaccurate? That would sway me.
Talk about an open face and square to the target line for a long time
Hybrid Mode
