After a range session with tour striker...

[Lifter]

I'm having trouble seeing exactly what dbl and I disagree about. I recognize that hitting driver off the deck requires a steeper plane than driver off the tee. However, a 9-iron still requires a much steeper plane than a driver off the deck. More importantly, dbl cites the following quote, which I assume was written by Kevin:

Underplane shows up worse with the irons because you need to have a higher VSP to hit solid iron shots and you need to be swinging further left. With the driver you can swing further right and hit good shots

So Kevin said that a golfer should swing more to the left with his irons than he does with his driver. Similarly, I originally told jenhaoyen that whereas he can get away with in-to-out with his woods, he can't with his irons. I'm not seeing any difference there.

 

[Lifter]

What I used to think too, but if that 6 iron you talked about had a path straight at the target with a negative AA (evidenced by the described divot), the plane would be to the left or out-to-in relative to the target line. The true definition of "swinging left".

Yes, there could be exceptions. For example, the golfer could have the ball way back in his stance so that the 6-iron reaches its lowest vertical point way way way way ahead of the ball. In that case, then yes, maybe the path at the lowest vertical point would be pointing at or even left of the target (and the ballflight would be extremely low).

Ah reckon that that's an exception, though. For the vast majority of golfers that are "zeroed out," I imagine that their 6-iron divots need to be pointing slightly left of the target. If I'm wrong, I'd be happy to be corrected, though.

 

[mgranato]

Yes, there could be exceptions. For example, the golfer could have the ball way back in his stance so that the 6-iron reaches its lowest vertical point way way way way ahead of the ball. In that case, then yes, maybe the path at the lowest vertical point would be pointing at or even left of the target (and the ballflight would be extremely low).

Ah reckon that that's an exception, though. For the vast majority of golfers that are "zeroed out," I imagine that their 6-iron divots need to be pointing slightly left of the target. If I'm wrong, I'd be happy to be corrected, though.

Nope, not an exception at all. For a standard plane Jane run of the mill 6 iron, or any iron for that matter.

Anytime the club is going down an inclined plane it is going out to the right (right handed golfer). So if you want a zeroed out path (directly at the target) on a downward strike (for any club with the ball sitting on the ground), you must have the plane left of the path. Keep in mind, path and plane are not the same thing.

 

[Lifter]

Nope, not an exception at all. For a standard plane Jane run of the mill 6 iron, or any iron for that matter.

Anytime the club is going down an inclined plane it is going out to the right (right handed golfer). So if you want a zeroed out path (directly at the target) on a downward strike (for any club with the ball sitting on the ground), you must have the plane left of the path. Keep in mind, path and plane are not the same thing.

In my mind, "path" is the horizontal direction that the club is moving in when it reaches its lowest vertical point along the arc of the plane. Does that differ with most experts' conception of "path."

 

[mgranato]

Slightly. The "path" is the measured direction the head is moving at impact. If it was measured at it's lowest vertical point, wouldn't it always be the same direction as the plane? The club path's directional influence on the ball happens at impact, before it reaches its lowest point, and that's the point where zeros matter.

 

[Lifter]

Slightly. The "path" is the measured direction the head is moving at impact. If it was measured at it's lowest vertical point, wouldn't it always be the same direction as the plane? The club path's directional influence on the ball happens at impact, before it reaches its lowest point, and that's the point where zeros matter.

Ah, I see. So I just had the wrong definition in my head. Here's an attempt at using your definition. Let's see if I get this right.

Golfer is trying to zero out his 6-iron. So he aims his plane slightly left of the target. At impact, the "path" is more or less directly at the target. But the divot and lowest vertical point are created ahead of the ball. This results in a divot that points slightly left of the target. Is that the formula for zeroing out a 6-iron?

 

[faux_maestro]

Ah, I see. So I just had the wrong definition in my head. Here's an attempt at using your definition. Let's see if I get this right.

Golfer is trying to zero out his 6-iron. So he aims his plane slightly left of the target. At impact, the "path" is more or less directly at the target. But the divot and lowest vertical point are created ahead of the ball. This results in a divot that points slightly left of the target. Is that the formula for zeroing out a 6-iron?

Sounds about right to me. When the path is zero the diviot will point slightly left.

 

[mgranato]

Not my definition.

Golfer is trying to zero out his 6-iron.

Okay.

So he aims his plane slightly left of the target.

Not real comfortable with "slightly" because it's sooo vague. I think I'm slightly over wieght, but I bet you might describe me differently. But okay, I'm with you so far.

At impact, the "path" is more or less directly at the target.

Okay.

But the divot and lowest vertical point are created ahead of the ball.

Okay.

This results in a divot that points slightly left of the target.

If the club is still going down, it is still going out or right, not in or left. When the club is traveling up, it is going in or left.

Is that the formula for zeroing out a 6-iron?

A path at 0 and a face at 0 is the formula, the divot however, is not part of the equation.

 

[Lifter]

If the club is still going down, it is still going out or right, not in or left. When the club is traveling up, it is going in or left.

A path at 0 and a face at 0 is the formula, the divot however, is not part of the equation.

Well, what does the ideal zeroed out 6-iron divot look like? I've heard that the forward portion of the best divots point significantly to the left of the back portion. Which I think fits in with all of this stuff.

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

There's the HSP
There's the Face
There's the AOA

And there is the TRUE PATH...when you are speaking about path please define if you are speaking of HSP (horizontal swing plane or "swing direction in 2D space) or the true path (adjusted for AOA or how much "down" you were hitting it).

Remember folks, swing left enough to counter how much down you are hitting it the ball to hit it straight.

 

[mgranato]

I think I know the genesis of this question.

You can have a zeroed 6 iron with a descending blow with a forward leaning shaft and no divot. Saying there's an ideal divot is like saying there's an ideal forearm position relative to the shaft.

What was the reasoning you heard for why the best divots point significantly left (have a significant curve to them)? Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[dschultz6072]

Want to test your alignment? Get the TSP off the ground w/out taking a divot at all. Max "lean" with minimal "down."

Never tried the TS off grass. Always off super hard mats. It's fine to take a divot with one? For some reason I thought the TS was supposed to let you learn how to get forward lean without digging trenches on the range.

 

[dbl]

I'm having trouble seeing exactly what dbl and I disagree about. I recognize that hitting driver off the deck requires a steeper plane than driver off the tee. However, a 9-iron still requires a much steeper plane than a driver off the deck. More importantly, dbl cites the following quote, which I assume was written by Kevin:

..

So Kevin said that a golfer should swing more to the left with his irons than he does with his driver. Similarly, I originally told jenhaoyen that whereas he can get away with in-to-out with his woods, he can't with his irons. I'm not seeing any difference there.

Lifter, in the original post, you cited rightwardness on the driver as underplane, and that isn't the case for most people, since from dplane and hitting up one has to aim right. So there is no automatic presumption of underplane. Jen's comment is a bit unusual to me, but I'd say short irons don't get one in as much trouble with underplane since the VSP is steep anyway. As JimK has said, one needs less tilt with them too. However, I don't know his exact root problem, but perhaps it is opposite - too steep of path down in general. If you saw his videos before Marbella, actually, I recall that fits him - very steep (at least in the BS) as I recall.

 

[Lifter]

Lifter, in the original post, you cited rightwardness on the driver as underplane, and that isn't the case for most people, since from dplane and hitting up one has to aim right. So there is no automatic presumption of underplane. Jen's comment is a bit unusual to me, but I'd say short irons don't get one in as much trouble with underplane since the VSP is steep anyway. As JimK has said, one needs less tilt with them too. However, I don't know his exact root problem, but perhaps it is opposite - too steep of path down in general. If you saw his videos before Marbella, actually, I recall that fits him - very steep (at least in the BS) as I recall.

Interesting. I didn't know there were any videos available of Jen's swing. If there are, I'd love to see them. For me, a golfer with steep impacts that hits his woods well but has trouble with his irons is counter-intuitive, to say the least.

 

[dbl]

On this page, after his Manella lesson - is the new swing which is presumably the one he was referring this thread's comments about fairways versus short irons
http://www.brianmanzella.com/golfin...marbella-ca-brian-yesterday-3.html#post198436

Page 1 he says PRIOR he was both too steep in BS and laid off.

here's a before video of his (9 months ago)
jenhaoyen's Channel - YouTube