This is VERY basic.

Status
Not open for further replies.
lia41985

lia41985

New member
1.) The leading edge of the club is not the face. To determine where the face is really pointing, the "true face", you will need a lie angle tool. I have yet to find someone who has superimposed one of those onto a two-dimensional video.

2.) Gear effect! It will affect the look of what some term closure and is something I have yet to see measured from two-dimensional video.

3.) Toe hits will "slow" the look of closure; heel hits will "speed" the look of closure.

4.) The face-to-path relationship is crucial. It's the huge dictator of ball flight. We know from 1.) that we don't know where the face points and certainly you cannot tell from video what the path is but Trackman can, Luddites! The only "closure" that matters is the open-ness or closed-ness of the face to the path. If you're playing a push or pull-fade there will be a look of "slow closure." If you're playing a slight push-draw there will be a slightly "faster" look of "closure". If you're playing a huge push draw there will be an even faster "look" of "closure".

This is VERY basic.
 
B

birly-shirly

New
I liked the alliteration in the first line.

I liked the rhyme scheme in the second.

I got a bit lost in the middle.

But I liked the conclusion. Very clearly stated.
 
coach

coach

New
If you're playing a push or pull-fade there will be a look of "slow closure." If you're playing a slight push-draw there will be a slightly "faster" look of "closure". If you're playing a huge push draw there will be an even faster "look" of "closure".

Just curious, how would a person look hitting those three shots. What i mean is would there be a different look to their release, their path, the stance, their hands ???
 
magicmarker

magicmarker

New
Coach, they could be similarly different but that would be more of a correlation than a cause-effect relationship.
 
coach

coach

New
Just trying to wrap my brain around all this rate of closure/release stuff.
Assuming path is same but face is say 4 degrees open entering and at impact and say if face is closed 4 degrees entering and at impact, I assume the hands would look different . To me that would look like one is holding off while the other is rolling. Like I said not arguing any point trying to understand what both forums are arguing...if that makes sense
 
lia41985

lia41985

New member
More clues....

Most better players swing too far inside-out. Meaning, for the right-handed golfer, the path strays too far to the right. If you can consistently produce this path with a consistent face, thereby constantly producing a push draw, straight push, or push fade, there's nothing I see that would need messing with because "golf is what the ball does" and if the ball is consistently doing the same thing, you should heed the words of Bill Tilden and "never change a winning game."

However, if you're prone to inconsistency or would like your ball to start in a different direction, you need to swing less inside-out. This is why "swinging left" can be desirable. Swinging less inside-out can be accomplished by "the carry" and/or "going normal", which is partly effectuated via "the business."

Another reason you may be hitting the ball poorly is because you "tug", lose width, and have to "flip" to garner some width so you don't top the ball--that, of course, will create inconsistency. The solution? The idea of an "out toss." Many amateurs, and even some professionals (for example, Natalie Gulbis), lose too much "width" at the top. However, every good swing exhibits "tangential" motion from the top of the backswing, through the transition, into the early stages of the downswing. This gives the needed width that allows for there to be "useable lag." If you "tug" and "drag the handle"--best of luck. If you don't top the ball completely, you won't have enough "width." You're spin loft will suffer which will adversely affect your distance control. Once you're frustrated with that, you'll start "backing out of it" or "flip" and inconsistency will result again. So if you "tug" and "drag" the idea of an "out toss" and a "well-timed release" which emphasizes hand action in the flexion-extension plane will help. I would bet a pretty penny that almost all double digit handicappers suffer from the "tugs" and is a completely undiagnosed reason for why they "flip." Teaching these people to achieve maximum "lag" will mostly just make them "tug" more. Rare is the amateur golfer who has a flexible enough spine and the overall athleticism to achieve the proper tangential motion through lateral bend alone. And even many better golfers can overdo lateral bend and start swinging too far out and get back on the "crazy train" once more.

Of course, this all depends. Be wise and always heed those words: "it depends." Try your best to understand and ask questions. There are people here who are willing to help. Of course, those that are writing can always do better to communicate more clearly. Enough negativity, let's get everyone playing better golf.
 
Last edited:
B

bax1865

New
"Many amateurs, and even some professionals (for example, Natalie Gulbis), lose too much "width" at the top."



Really? You don't feel she has enough width at the top?
 
lia41985

lia41985

New member
bax1865 said:
Really? You don't feel she has enough width at the top?
Click to expand...
Really. Compare these two:
insl05_gulbis.jpg

insl04_swing_schwartzel.jpg

Also, see: http://www.brianmanzella.com/golfin...bis-swing-many-other-things-9.html#post189422

I can explain "width" further. I think it's an incredibly important if increasingly overlooked aspect of current instruction, Butch Harmon excluded.
 
Last edited:
Dariusz J.

Dariusz J.

New member
Hmmm...when he lowers or raises the handle we can clearily see that the leading edge does not remain square but closes/opens together with the clubface. What's the point of this video then ?

Cheers
 
Dariusz J.

Dariusz J.

New member
Bigwill said:
Get those lie angles checked...
Click to expand...

If the purpose is to show how loft influences the change he should mention it in video. A driver face/edge correlation is not equal to a PW face/edge one.
It reminds me a story from Tom Wishon's book when he told a trick-shot artist to hit a 9 iron from the hip height ROFL. But what is shown here does not matter. We can easily see that e.g. Furyk's clubface remains square (is more staggered in time) to the arc longer than e.g. Mickelson's judging from leading edge only.

Cheers
 
C

cwdlaw223

New
I think the leading edge points in the exact same horizontal direction of the face at all times. However, the vertical aspect of the clubface (i.e., loft) might point higher or lower, but that doesn't mean the horizontal direction of the face and leading edge don't match.

The key is square to "what"! The swing arc/elipse or the target line.
 
S

SteveT

Guest
walther said:

w
Click to expand...

This message is misleading because it doesn't take into account the clubhead DYNAMIC state when the shaft tip droops and the clubhead flaps around indeterminately. The video only shows the STATIC state of the clubhead.... notice that.. :confused:
 
drewyallop

drewyallop

New
lia41985 said:
Really. Compare these two:
insl05_gulbis.jpg

insl04_swing_schwartzel.jpg

Also, see: http://www.brianmanzella.com/golfin...bis-swing-many-other-things-9.html#post189422

I can explain "width" further. I think it's an incredibly important if increasingly overlooked aspect of current instruction, Butch Harmon excluded.
Click to expand...

If I correctly interpreted Nesbit's presentation at ASII, clubhead speed is determined by amount of work generated in the downswing. Work is equal to force*displacement. More displacement (distance/width?), more work. Maximum work, all other things being equal, is achieved when the golfer is able to apply force over the entire displacement.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top