Measuring Rate of Closure

[GolfHappy]

If you saw a 3D representation of the WHOLE SWING of ANY GOLFER, you'd be surprised at what the face is doing.

Does it matter what/where it goes provided it's at the right place at impact and arriving with the right impact speed for the required shot? You could swing it through your legs if it produced the requred result....

or even this way if you were consistent with it.... [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wz7Yx2xczE4[/media]

So, some golfers NEED more closure. And it more than you think for almost anybody.

Anyone who spins the clubface open is going to need to close it again.

In my opinion most people spin/twist/roll the club open because they set up with it too closed in the first place.

 

[cmartingolf]

How would you go about changing your closure rate even if you knew what it was?


Poor golfers worry about closing the clubface, better golfers worry about keeping it open.

If you take the example above Chopra has the clubface open at the top because his left wrist is cupped, he flattens it on the way down which squares up the face for him, nothing more. He tries not to CLOSE the face at all by chasing the clubface down the line.... only problem is that if he rolls just a fraction that ball is going bigtime left. He's basically trying NOT to close the clubface.

Golf,

Poor golfers have both issues and you can modify the closure rate many ways; grip, path, all of which effect sequence and clubface rotation.

Another "wonderful" comment from Kostis...and no wonder why Chopra hasn't been seen for a while...

 

[Todd Dugan]

The rate of clubface closure through the impact zone will be most affected by the amount of clubface opening. While it would seem, in theory, that a lower rate of closure would produce greater consistency, the techniques of great players simply doesn't bear that out. Hogan, Nicklaus, and Woods all roll the clubface open 90-ish degrees to the arc, the traditional "sqaure" position. There's way more pros who do it this way than the Trevinos and Duvals who roll much less.

 

[SteveT]

"Closure should be involuntary."

 

[gmbtempe]

Does it have anything to do with the club shaft plane angle at impact?

And then does that angle have anything to do with the uncocking of the left wrist?

Does the uncocking of the left wrist have anything to do with rates of closure?

Does the horizontal swing plane have anything to do with closure?

Thanks for your help,

gmb

 

[SteveT]

........ Thanks for your help, gmb

Does it have anything to do with the club shaft plane angle at impact? >>Yes.

And then does that angle have anything to do with the uncocking of the left wrist? >> Yes.

Does the uncocking of the left wrist have anything to do with rates of closure? >> Yes.

Does the horizontal swing plane have anything to do with closure? >> Maybe.


And a lot more .....

 

[ej20]

It's pretty simple folks and I'm surprised no one has talked about it since the twist away is one of Brian's most famous moves.

The more you arch the left wrist on the downswing the slower the rate of closure is required.The more cupped requires a greater rate.If you can't handle a high rate then you may need to twist away and hold the twist coming down.If you can handle a higher rate then by all means bend away.I know which I prefer.

Here is Dustin Johnson with perhaps the slowest rate of closure in golf history.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CHUR7Skava8?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CHUR7Skava8?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[gmbtempe]

Does it have anything to do with the club shaft plane angle at impact? >>Yes.

And then does that angle have anything to do with the uncocking of the left wrist? >> Yes.

Does the uncocking of the left wrist have anything to do with rates of closure? >> Yes.

Does the horizontal swing plane have anything to do with closure? >> Maybe.


And a lot more .....

I think the last one is yes as well..........what I don't understand completely is why on the questions.

 

[SteveT]

How about a "Square-to-Square" golfswing by Dick Aultman ... and that solves the rate of closure confusion??

Here's a testimonial on the book from Amazon.com:

By shootingfor3 "gogolfing":

This review is from: The Square-to-Square Golf Swing: Modern Method for the Modern Player by Dick Aultman.

I know that no one reading this review will believe it, but it is completely true. I promise. I took a 30 minute lesson from the pro who now (not then) is the oldest living PGA professional (you can look up his name with that information). This occurred in the mid 1970s in the Philadelphia area. You will be able to figure out exactly where, if interested. At the time of my lesson, I had played a hundred (or more?) rounds of golf, had broken 100 only once (a 96), and generally was a double-triple bogey player. My putting was not all that bad, but my ball-striking was atrocious if not downright ugly. My handicap at the time was 27 or 28, and that was the lowest handicap I had ever had up to that time. For me to shoot 110-115 was not at all unusual. A good day would be where I hoped to have a chance to break 100, which as I said had happened only once. The Pro taught me square-to-square (to the extent such can be done in 30 minutes). He weakened my grip, closed my club face at address, had me take it back square, maintain a flat (square) wrist at the top of the backswing, and then just let it go. At the end of that 30 minute lesson, I had in fact been transformed into a 14-15 handicap. Yes, in 30 minutes. That same day, playing the same home course I almost always played, I shot an 85. I hit the first three greens in regulation. It was not a fluke. On the basis of only one 30-minute lesson, my game became one where thereafter I played consistently in the mid 80s.

Go figure ...

 

[GolfHappy]

^
^
^
Is that Steve Stricker's memoires?

 

[SteveT]

^
^
^
Is that Steve Stricker's memoires?

Maybe ... and this has got to be the "silly season" on the forum .. hic ...

 

[Todd Dugan]

The confusion is that what we term "sqaure" at the top is not sqaure at all, but parallel, 90* open on the plane. This should be the extreme end of clubface rotation. The other end is Dustin Johnson, who comes down the plane only about 45* open. One isn't better than the other, and this is why Butch Harmon isn't changing DJ's bowed left wrist. But most mortals slice. Moving them closer to DJ's end cures the slice. Twistaway does that.

 

[mjstrong]

The more you arch the left wrist on the downswing the slower the rate of closure is required.The more cupped requires a greater rate.

I would think that the correlation would be between the rate of closure and the clubface itself, not the wrist. A stronger grip, even with a cupped wrist, could require less "closing" than a weaker grip with a arched left wrist.

 

[SteveT]

Perhaps the answer lies in 'science' ... and applying first principles on how the arms, hands, and wrist joints function anatomically when subject to dynamic forces flowing through ... instead of looking at golfswing vids and trying to puzzle things out superficially.

At least Homer made an attempt at that, notwithstanding that he was wrong scientifically but he did offer some new insights into golfswing methodology.

All you guys are doing is flapping about trying to solve things with nothing more than pictures and your own feel ... which is sorta primitive ... wouldn't you say???

 

[ekennedy]

I like the use of video and pictures as not necessarily showing someone how to ideally swing the club, but to show students that there are literally an infinite way to swing the club and play well.

I never understood the Jim McClain "Death-moves" because, someone, somewhere made a "death-move" work. If you fan it open, you must fan it closed. If you hood it, you must hold it off. Does it work and is it consistent, probably not.

I think teacher's need to take a student's move (especially if its a consistent move) and make it work with a compensatory move. I hate hearing you "can't" do something.

 

[ej20]

I would think that the correlation would be between the rate of closure and the clubface itself, not the wrist. A stronger grip, even with a cupped wrist, could require less "closing" than a weaker grip with a arched left wrist.

Yes ultimately it is rate of forearm rotation that is going to have a direct bearing on the rate of closure of the clubface.

Generally the more you twistaway the more arched the left wrist will be so there is a correlation between the two.

 

[drewyallop]

Question

Is the rate of closure for a wedge less than for a 5 iron, all else being equal except club head velocity?

Drew

 

[ej20]

Perhaps the answer lies in 'science' ... and applying first principles on how the arms, hands, and wrist joints function anatomically when subject to dynamic forces flowing through ... instead of looking at golfswing vids and trying to puzzle things out superficially.

At least Homer made an attempt at that, notwithstanding that he was wrong scientifically but he did offer some new insights into golfswing methodology.

All you guys are doing is flapping about trying to solve things with nothing more than pictures and your own feel ... which is sorta primitive ... wouldn't you say???

Flapping about is all we can do right now.Science and golf science are still worlds apart and Project 1.68 will not be comprehensive or complete.These are Brian's own words.The final word in golf science may be decades or hundreds of years from now.Until that day comes we will all be flapping about,you included.

There are certain stuff in the golf swing that doesn't require science to figure out.Just a good eye,a dollop of common sense and a little bit of imperical eveidence.God knows how the players in the past managed to keep the ball in play.

Science is going to always be a small part in golf.Having the knowledge is one thing.Applying it succesfully to the student and yourself is the hard part and the part where science ends and art starts.

 

[softconsult]

My Regional Manager once asked me this question concerning my tendency to over analyze, "Now that you have all that data, please tell me what you are going to do differently than you would have with less data." Most of the time the answer was that
I already knew what action to take. Sometimes the answer was do nothing.

This is how I see many of these topics. Let's say we obtain data on closure rate. How do I apply that knowledge in more than a general way, given that I have no access to the high tech machine that provides the feedback. Someone says they are now hitting X degrees inside out and doesn't have Trackman or Flightscope. They may think they are, but they have no way of knowing with any precision.

On this closure rate topic, strictly my experience, I'm certain I knew long ago that depending on how much roll ( didn't know the terminology back then ) and how fast I apply it influences the shot shape. I can't see this precise data is going to help me hit it better, but I will keep an open mind.

 

[cwdlaw223]

Because those that want to take their game to the next level need proper/detailed feedback to change their games. I'm sure that some can eyeball their errors, however, why waste time with such a slow method of change. Trackman is incredible and has changed my game for the better. It's all about feedback and I want more!!!!