Teaching D-Plane in 3D

[CanadianAMFTeachPro]

This question is for Brian and any other Teachers out there.

Until Trackman and D-Plane, golf instruction has been taught in only 2 dimensions with Path and Face ignoring exactness of the vital component of angle of attack. To really get people striking the ball better, we MUST be able to teach them to create a consistent angle of attack.

What are your thoughts about teaching proper angle of attack and what types of drills would you promote? Is there an ideal depth of divot which would ensure ideal angles of attack?

Would you monitor horizontal swing plane and then adjust attack angle or adjust horizontal swing plane for angle of attack? Would you see which value is more consistent and then adjust the other? All without altering square clubface?

With Trackman, has anyone found a pattern which has a more consistent (accurate) dispersion pattern than another. Baby Fade, Soft Draw, Pattern 13?

Lots of questions.

 

[Kevin Shields]

For one of your questions, I have found that building blocks (4 barrell max) and NSA put up the best numbers for my students.

I have not seen a direct correllation betwwen vert sw plane and attack angle/divots. I have some 46 degree 6 iron swingers that have too much down and some 66 degree 6 irons that dont have enough.

 

[CanadianAMFTeachPro]

Kevin,

My error. I meant the correlation between adjusting HORIZONTAL swing plane and angle of attack not vertical.

 

[Brian Manzella]

WILL ANSWER THIS TONIGHT!!!

Great Question.

 

[CanadianAMFTeachPro]

3 three sided Rubiks Cube and Poor Equipment Design?

As we manage a player's face, path and angle of attack, the relationship between the pieces is like a 3 sided Rubiks Cube. As you improve one of the aspects, it is difficult to not change the other two.

The question is what is the most important of the 3 features? My belief is that angle of attack may actually be most important because it is the most difficult to co-ordinate. (weight shift, forward shaft lean, ball position, head position, etc) From there, I would shift to face angle as this represents 70-85% of initial direction and finally path.

If we have face and path but a poor angle of attack (too positive or negative) we will sacrifice compression, trajectory and distance. As golf is a range game first (no pun intended!) then a line game it is crucial for all players to compress the ball properly off the ground first and then dial in accuracy. This leads to my second question which is optimal club design.

Is it easier to manipulate our grip to "fit" each one of our clubs due to the differences in angle of attack? Stronger grip positions for the wedges and heavy forward shaft leaning clubs and less strong on the fairway/hybrids to weakest on driver OR should we grip the same and have the equipment do the work for us?

Recently, I have been using my Flightscope in my lessons and found that the current batch of drivers (R9, etc) with adjustable hosel configurations, an open driver setup (2 degrees) combined with a "normal" (neutral) grip position with a good path and upward angle of attack provided the best results. Here is my hypothesis on how to manage the angle of attack/clubface dilemma. Secondly, most hooked (closed) setup drivers may actually hinder long term improvement because they do not allow you to create a positive attack angle with square face and square path. In fact, they will "work" with a downward blow with square path and face or a positive attack angle, square face and inside path (big draw)

***Keeping Grip the same with all clubs, no excessive rolling, twisting manipulations, consistent ball positioning.

Rule 1 - As Angle of Attack becomes negative = face angle orientation and path become more to the right.

Rule 2 - As Angle of Attack becomes positive = face angle orientation and path become more to the left

Hypothetical "Ideal" Numbers for club

Driver 2 degree positive angle of attack + square face + square path

Face needs to be open to true path (reverse hooded) to accomplish this

6 iron 3 degree negative angle of attack + square face + square path

Face needs to be slightly hooked (hooded) to accomplish this

SW 8 degree negative angle of attack + square face + square path

Face needs to more hooked (hooded) than other two scenarios.

Can we accomplish through equipment modifications versus teaching multiple grip positions?

This stuff keeps me up at night!

 

[ggsjpc]

Recently, I have been using my Flightscope in my lessons and found that the current batch of drivers (R9, etc) with adjustable hosel configurations, an open driver setup (2 degrees) combined with a "normal" (neutral) grip position with a good path and upward angle of attack provided the best results.
Derek,

I've been thinking about this point myself. Depending on the angle of attack, a player needs to completely change when they get the clubface square. Later the more up and earlier the more down. It's no wonder many tour pro's have drivers with open faces. It helps prevent the face from closing so much after low point causing big pulls/hooks.

I think you have an intersting hypothesis and I'll be curious to see how imput comes in.

 

[ssssc]

hey amft ...

great post, with alot of good useful real world examples...


duane

 

[dannyc]

This stuff keeps me up at night!

great, now it's gonna keep me up all night too! lol

 

[Brian Manzella]

Here's is my take on a great post...

As we manage a player's face, path and angle of attack, the relationship between the pieces is like a 3 sided Rubiks Cube. As you improve one of the aspects, it is difficult to not change the other two.

The question is what is the most important of the 3 features? My belief is that angle of attack may actually be most important because it is the most difficult to co-ordinate. (weight shift, forward shaft lean, ball position, head position, etc) From there, I would shift to face angle as this represents 70-85% of initial direction and finally path.

In my experience manipulating the D-Plane with decent players (single digit 'cappers) to PGA TOUR players, the bottom of the D-Plane, which is of course is the TRUE PATH, which is born of the 2D club path, and the angle of attack, is BY FAR more important than the face.

No contest.

If we have face and path but a poor angle of attack (too positive or negative) we will sacrifice compression, trajectory and distance. As golf is a range game first (no pun intended!) then a line game it is crucial for all players to compress the ball properly off the ground first and then dial in accuracy. This leads to my second question which is optimal club design.

Is it easier to manipulate our grip to "fit" each one of our clubs due to the differences in angle of attack? Stronger grip positions for the wedges and heavy forward shaft leaning clubs and less strong on the fairway/hybrids to weakest on driver OR should we grip the same and have the equipment do the work for us?

Believe it or not, Henry, I am experimenting successfully with the OPPOSITE—weaker grips with the wedges and stronger with the Driver.

The reasoning here is that the clubface much be more OPEN TO THE PLANE LINE with the more lofted, more upright clubs.

Recently, I have been using my Flightscope in my lessons and found that the current batch of drivers (R9, etc) with adjustable hosel configurations, an open driver setup (2 degrees) combined with a "normal" (neutral) grip position with a good path and upward angle of attack provided the best results.

I have found the EXCAT same thing.

Here is my hypothesis on how to manage the angle of attack/clubface dilemma....

Hypothetical "Ideal" Numbers for club

Driver 2 degree positive angle of attack + square face + square path

Face needs to be open to true path (reverse hooded) to accomplish this

6 iron 3 degree negative angle of attack + square face + square path

Face needs to be slightly hooked (hooded) to accomplish this

SW 8 degree negative angle of attack + square face + square path

Face needs to more hooked (hooded) than other two scenarios.

Can we accomplish through equipment modifications versus teaching multiple grip positions?

This stuff keeps me up at night!

This is VERY IMPORTANT STUFF!!!

I feel that with a strong grip and a short iron, it was almost impossible for me to control my forward lean and clubface.

I could get one or the other.

With the Driver, aiming 24 yards right, to get my 5° upward strike not to land on Interstate 265, I needed a strong grip.

I understand your thinking on open to the path with the driver, but I am getting better results myself with ADJUSTING to the plane line.

The equipment companies could SURELY help out the golfer, and maybe with a little consulting with the right folks, they might.

 

[ggsjpc]

Wow. Very interesting that you(Brian) are having better results adjusting to the plane line. This will be the next great debate. In my head I would of thought for sure, like the poster, that it would be adjusting to impact and not the plane line. The sooner I hit the ball, the faster I have to get the face correct? Right?

Yet, relative to the plane line, I have to feel like I keep the face open. This is going to get interesting

 

[mb6606]

Recently, I have been using my Flightscope in my lessons and found that the current batch of drivers (R9, etc) with adjustable hosel configurations, an open driver setup (2 degrees) combined with a "normal" (neutral) grip position with a good path and upward angle of attack provided the best results.

My son with the Taylormade rep found exactly the same setup with the R9 worked best. 2 Degrees open. Also more weight in the toe to prevent an early closing clubface . I think if you work enough with a good radar device Trackman, Flightscope you can watch the setup, swing and ball flight and figure out what is going on. I am amazed that Brian aims 24.5 yds right. The D plane is pretty cool - thanks Brian!

Canadien how does the forward leaning shaft fit into your post??

 

[welshdentist]

My son with the Taylormade rep found exactly the same setup with the R9 worked best. 2 Degrees open. Also more weight in the toe to prevent an early closing clubface . I think if you work enough with a good radar device Trackman, Flightscope you can watch the setup, swing and ball flight and figure out what is going on. I am amazed that Brian aims 24.5 yds right. The D plane is pretty cool - thanks Brian!

Canadien how does the forward leaning shaft fit into your post??

mb,

Are you basically setting up a driver to work in knowledge of D-Plane rules so that you can aim straight?

 

[Jim Kobylinski]

My son with the Taylormade rep found exactly the same setup with the R9 worked best. 2 Degrees open. Also more weight in the toe to prevent an early closing clubface . I think if you work enough with a good radar device Trackman, Flightscope you can watch the setup, swing and ball flight and figure out what is going on. I am amazed that Brian aims 24.5 yds right. The D plane is pretty cool - thanks Brian!

Canadien how does the forward leaning shaft fit into your post??

24.5 yards to the right isn't that far to the right when you are almost 300 yards away from your target. It will look just BARELY to the right of your target.

 

[CanadianAMFTeachPro]

First of all, I met Brian at last year's AMF summit in Pinehurst and he mentioned that I should join the forum for some interesting topics. WOW was he bang on correct! The scope of information here has been astounding and certainly eye-opening and entertaining.
I am not either Derek or Henry (I am Scott) but thanks as they are 2 excellent CPGA AMF teachers like myself who use Flightscope and Trackman here in the frosty north.

Brian, my understanding is that with the shorter clubs you would need a stronger grip due to the increase in forward shaft lean and negative attack angle. With a weaker grip, wouldn't you need to bow the left wrist to create optimal compression with some forward shaft lean?

Also, instead of aiming 24 yards right, would another alternative be to keep the aim square and open the face to correct the upward attack angle and change driver setup with more spinal tilt away from the target to adjust path more to the right? Wouldn't this still give a PATH and FACE orientation of square?

On shorter irons setting the body more on top of the ball would create a more downward attack angle and path going more left which would offset the forward shaft lean and hooded face of the wedge.

Brian, I do agree that the FACE is OPEN to the TRUE PATH on a wedge and CLOSED to the TRUE PATH on the driver.

Are these compensations mentioned above the same as aiming more left or right with the same setup.

Thanks for the great responses guys as I think we are really pushing the envelope on something very big. Congrats to Brian and the forum.

 

[mb6606]

mb,

Are you basically setting up a driver to work in knowledge of D-Plane rules so that you can aim straight?

Not actually trying to aim straight but if one aimed straight as traditonal golf has taught the club setup allowed the ball to go straight.

 

[mb6606]

24.5 yards to the right isn't that far to the right when you are almost 300 yards away from your target. It will look just BARELY to the right of your target.

24.5 does not seem like a lot but it does mean aiming at a water hazard in order to hit the middle of the fairway - not easy to fathom and tough on the nerves.

 

[Kevin Shields]

I am getting the best results with a grip weaker as the clubs get shorter. The more lean i get the more roll of the left wrist is needed hence the weaker grip. Unless the face is unworkably open, I too have adjusted the plane line first.

 

[dbl]

24.5 yards to the right isn't that far to the right when you are almost 300 yards away from your target. It will look just BARELY to the right of your target.

For the others complaining about the above: come on guys, get your arc tangents in gear. This is only aiming 5 degrees to the right.

 

[dbl]

24.5 does not seem like a lot but it does mean aiming at a water hazard in order to hit the middle of the fairway - not easy to fathom and tough on the nerves.

Check out that one pic at Pebble Beach's 9th or 10th hole that's flaoting around here. Aim was significantly to the right (like near crest of cliff) but the ball drew back.