FLighting technique

[EdZ]

So why is it then, that I can hit a draw, then, changing nothing in my setup or alignment, hit a big hook, which starts on the same line as the draw, and the ONLY thing I change is to add harder forearm rotation?

By your view, I would have to alter the swingpath to do this?

And to keep us all on the same page, I am refering to the targetline when I speak of 'open' or 'closed', or 'inside' or 'outside'.

Brian's 'way' includes compensations, per his post.

And why do I know I put it in the same place - because I can feel my hands, I can feel the back of my left, and the right hand/palm/forearm.

Why is it then, that at least three of the best ball strikers in history agree with my approach? (Jack, Pavin, Annika)

Would you argue then, that the same applies in tennis?

 

[EdZ]

I don't disagree that the clubface 'can' have more 'relative' effect than path, but that depends on speed/compression/angle/center contact. The slower the contact, the more the face controls initial direction. The faster the contact, the more path controls initial direction.

I can hit a putt with a 'very' closed face, and still have it go along the path line (Locke)

I do agree that the starting direction of a putt is more face than path however.... but if you try to hit a 100 yard putt, it is more path to start off.

 

[cherrybarry]

quote:Originally posted by EdZ

I don't disagree that the clubface 'can' have more 'relative' effect than path, but that depends on speed/compression/angle/center contact. The slower the contact, the more the face controls initial direction. The faster the contact, the more path controls initial direction.

I can hit a putt with a 'very' closed face, and still have it go along the path line (Locke)

I do agree that the starting direction of a putt is more face than path however.... but if you try to hit a 100 yard putt, it is more path to start off.

OK, do we agree that we set-up in a way that assumes we will recreate this alignments at impact?

You say path controls direction more at higher speeds, more compression, etc. Therefore, you will set-up for the path to where you want the ball to start.

It becomes a debate on the ball flight laws again when we determine how we set-up to play the draw and fade.

Basically everyone but the PGA has said the face controls the initial direction more, even at higher speeds. (TGM, In Search of the Perfect Swing, Golftek, Kuykendall).

And lOcke didn't putt with a closed face to the target. It was closed to the path.

His path was in-out, with a square face to the target, making it look closed, but only closed to the path. His stroke is consistent with the REAL ball flight laws.

 

[ragman]

Locke came "OVER THE TOP" with a CLOSED FACE...brilliant putter...probably the most under-rated golfer ever.....

 

[EdZ]

Well then we agree to a point..... that the face 'can' be more influence than path. In reality, you will never see a ball have 'pure' face' or 'pure' path initial direction unless you have a perfect shot (in which case, both answers are correct!).

Think of it this way.... the path, and the face in a sense create a "V", or an angle (where the open end of the "V" points to the actual starting direction, a point between the face angle, and the path (or 'force') angle. The ball 'must' start somewhere between these two, but not on either one unless both are exactly the same.

When the force is stronger, the ball starts more to path (or when the "V" angle is smaller) when the force is less or the angle is larger, then the face will have more effect. Either way, it will somewhere 'between' the face and the path.

It is a combination of factors, and I disagree with anyone who says it is 'only' face, or 'only' path. From a practical standpoint, I still find it more useful to teach working the ball via the 'pga' view, and in any case, setting up for the shot, and making the same swing.

 

[Brian Manzella]

EDz...

You just can't bear to say the PGA is wrong.

Here you go I will say it....

"The PGA for years promoted a swing 'model' in which ball flight was proported to occur exacly like a 'model' called "the Ball Flight Laws"...They later softened their official stance but did not abandon the Model"

BRIAN MANZELLA, Golf Swing RESEARCHER and Teacher claims near the opposite of the model is true."

 

[bcoak]

(insert Jeopardy theme)
any way I can get my original question answered?

 

[EdZ]

Brian, you missed the point entirely.

Neither one of you is right, and neither one is wrong. The initial ball flight depends on a number of factors.

You claim it "is" the clubface only.

I never claimed it was the path "only"..... but that it depends on a number of factors, and asked you to prove to me otherwise, which you still have not.

I also never claimed the PGA was 100% correct, but I find it more useful to teach people to work the ball using that model, as do many of the best ball strikers in the modern day.

So I'm still waiting for 'proof' that it is the clubface, which you claimed you would post.

Give me some evidence. This is now my third (at least) request.

I'm waiting.....

And I'd love to hear you explain why I can hit a draw, then change nothing but forearm rotation (i.e. clubface), hit a hook that starts on the same line as the draw, but bends more.

The PGA model explains this.... how does your model? (please keep references to the target line)

 

[benhogan54]

"And I'd love to hear you explain why I can hit a draw, then change nothing but forearm rotation (i.e. clubface), hit a hook that starts on the same line as the draw, but bends more.

The PGA model explains this.... how does your model? (please keep references to the target line)"

Assume you have a square path and a square clubface. Straight golf shot. Now, assume you maintain the square path, use more forarm roll, and have a shut clubface. Will you draw the ball? Yes. Will the ball start straight and draw? No. It will be a pull draw. It take off where the FACE is pointing and draws because the PATH was CLOSED in relation to the face. The PGA would say that the ball would start off straight because of the path and draw because of the face. The ball doesn't start straight. It starts left and draws more left. The closed path in relation to the face is what caused the draw, not the face.

 

[EdZ]

And what I am saying is that it will start neither on the path, nor on the clubface line, but at a point in between. That point is much 'closer' to the path, than it is to the clubface for a full shot, but closer to the face for a putt.

The degree to which it starts 'straight' (i.e. along the path) depends on the amount of force/compression/center contact, and how large the angle between the path and clubface.

i.e. - it depends on 'multiple' factors, not just clubface. If it were just the clubface, the shot described above would start WAY left, and hook farther left, and in my experience, it is very slightly left, and not enough to discount the usefullness of teaching according to the pga approach, or to even notice, on a full swing.

I'd still like to see what evidence Brian is basing his statements on, but he has yet to post it.

 

[rosser]

Question, can one set-up square stance to his target, and in the swinging players backswing, another person calls out to the player swinging, Low draw, high fade, low hook, high slice, straight low , straight high, low slice, high hook and with each swing perform perfectly struck shot, with these flight patterns. And I might add keep all but the low hook or low slice in play?

2 cents

 

[cherrybarry]

quote:Originally posted by rosser

Question, can one set-up square stance to his target, and in the swinging players backswing, another person calls out to the player swinging, Low draw, high fade, low hook, high slice, straight low , straight high, low slice, high hook and with each swing perform perfectly struck shot, with these flight patterns. And I might add keep all but the low hook or low slice in play?

2 cents

Yes. You can make an infinite number of compensations during the swing.

 

[efnef]

quote:Originally posted by bcoak

(insert Jeopardy theme)
any way I can get my original question answered?

Rotsa ruck pal. You've been left in the dust. That's one of the problems with this forum. Ego central.

 

[Michael Finney]

who were you on the other forum, efnef?

i forgot...refresh my memory

 

[efnef]

Mike--

I am efnef at FGI and at GO. To understand my response, go back and read this thread again from the beginning. While the responders are engaged in a "spirited debate" over whose method is right or wrong, the original poster has yet to have his question answered. I sympathize with him, because I too, would like for Brian to clarify his original answer. But alas, once again, his ego, his Achilles Heel if you will, has gotten in the way, and he engages in pointless battles of the Titans with the other golf gods, while we mere mortals wait with baited breath for the clarification of his original post.

Brian is an entertaining guy, but when the ego gets in the way of the instruction, no one really benefits. That's why his articles are the most useful section of this forum. There, he can instruct without any distractions. I'll bet he's good in private lessons, too, because it's one-on-one with someone who wants to learn. Too bad this doen't come through in the threads here. It's just the same old rehash. Disappointing, and not a good way to grow a forum.

 

[benhogan54]

He did answer the question in the second post:

QUESTION:

I was hoping a TGM'er could explain how you flight the ball differently for hi/low/fades/draws as well as the "stinger"

ANSWER:

High...stand farther away/ add axis tilt and lob face impact as needed.
Low...stand closer/ arch left wrist as needed...more stance Up only if needed.
Fade...aim well left...hit the insdie of the ball (normally) don't allow normal roll...reverse roll as needed...ball will "push fade"
Darw...aim RIGHT!/ swing under the stick...over roll as needed...set up with face closed as needed...ball will "pull draw"

 

[efnef]

quote:Originally posted by benhogan54

He did answer the question in the second post:

QUESTION:

I was hoping a TGM'er could explain how you flight the ball differently for hi/low/fades/draws as well as the "stinger"

ANSWER:

High...stand farther away/ add axis tilt and lob face impact as needed.
Low...stand closer/ arch left wrist as needed...more stance Up only if needed.
Fade...aim well left...hit the insdie of the ball (normally) don't allow normal roll...reverse roll as needed...ball will "push fade"
Darw...aim RIGHT!/ swing under the stick...over roll as needed...set up with face closed as needed...ball will "pull draw"

Once again, please go back to the beginning and read the entire thread. The original poster, bcoak, asked for a clarification of Brian's original response and was ignored during the ensuing p*ssing contest. Please reread my response to mikestloc. This was the entire point of my response and my original post. We are still awaiting a clarification of Brian's original response.

Brian, if you read this, please clarify your original response. It would really help many of us to understand your intent.

 

[Brian Manzella]

OK....

I want to hit a 20yd draw right down the MIDDLE of the fairway.

I SHOULD aim about 40 yards to the right/ swing along my address line with a couple of degree closed to the path clubface, aiming (at separation) about at the spot I wanrt the ball to START.

Ball will start 20 yards to the left of address line and draw to the middle.

Proof will come early next week when I hit balls on video with my PLANE TRUTH foam board.

 

[efnef]

Thank you.

 

[Brian Manzella]

You are welcome...

Let me say this about what I will show on video about BALL FLIGHT PHYSICS...

I will show how with a plane board RIGHT BY MY CLUB, where i can NOT FUDGE the swing, I can close the clubface a bit and swing on the palne LINE of the PLANE board and the ball HITS THE BOARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!