Is chasing tour launch numbers as bad as chasing aesthetics?

[Shupe]

8 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

" Those guys have to build their launch conditions for tournament play.  "

 

Pretty clear to me what you are implyin, you even doubled down and said it was due to the firm tournament conditions they play in, as if those numbers wont work elsewhere. Feel free to revise if that is not what you are implying.

No it isn’t clear what you think I’m I’m implying... I’m saying most Ams don’t play in PGA tour conditions. You don’t need to chase those averages.   If you can achieve them GREAT! You are talented.  Where is the problem?

 

Also the random pro has different numbers than the average trackman data.  There is a lot of variance on the PGA tour.  
 

I don’t see where the world you get Ams shouldn’t “ever” have PGA tour averages...

Edited January 20, 2021 by Shupe

[pinhigh27]

17 minutes ago, Shupe said:

No it isn’t clear what you think I’m I’m implying... I’m saying most Ams don’t play in PGA tour conditions. You don’t need to chase those averages.   If you can achieve them GREAT! You are talented.  Where is the problem?

 

Also the random pro has different numbers than the average trackman data.  There is a lot of variance on the PGA tour.  
 

I don’t see where the world you get Ams shouldn’t “ever” have PGA tour averages...

But I don’t understand why you think pga tour numbers wouldn’t work at the local muni or CC. It’s not like you’re going to rip it off every green or bounce over greens . They’re generally good for playing golf  

 

I agree with most of the other stuff you said in the original post so maybe it’s nitpicky on my part but if people get reliable numbers ( like you said off mat generally isn’t reliable ) and they have speed similar to pga pros, it’s probably a decent place to compare. Better ams(even with tour speed) generally launch ball too high with too little spin with irons in my experience, so it is helpful to see a pro launches their 7 iron 3 degrees lower but with 1500 more spin , etc . Again this is a generalization 

 

agree chasing numbers isn’t goal just serves as a checkpoint. If you’re doing what you should be doing you will generally trend towards them unless on an extreme speed wise 

Edited January 20, 2021 by pinhigh27
Typos

[Shupe]

6 minutes ago, pinhigh27 said:

But I don’t understand why you think pga tour numbers wouldn’t work at the local muni or CC. It’s not like you’re going to rip it off every green or bounce over greens . They’re generally good for playing golf  

 

I agree with most of the other stuff you said in the original post so maybe it’s nitpicky on my part but if people get reliable numbers ( like you said off mat generally isn’t reliable ) and they have speed similar to pga pros, it’s probably a decent place to compare. Better ams(even with tour speed) generally launch ball too high with too little spin with irons in my experience, so it is helpful to see a pro launches their 7 iron 3 degrees lower but with 1500 more spin , etc . Again this is a generalization 

 

agree chasing numbers isn’t goal just serves as a checkpoint. If you’re doing what you should be doing you will generally trend towards them unless on an extreme speed wise 

Where have I said they won’t work?  This whole thread is about chasing after them.  If your launch numbers are PGA tour average, why in the world do you guys think anything I’ve said relates to “Ams shouldn’t have PGA tour average because it wont work on the average golf course.”  My numbers are faster speed and similar launch conditions to tour.  I don’t change my numbers when I go to play with some Ams.

[Krt22]

8 minutes ago, Shupe said:

Where have I said they won’t work?  This whole thread is about chasing after them.  If your launch numbers are PGA tour average, why in the world do you guys think anything I’ve said relates to “Ams shouldn’t have PGA tour average because it wont work on the average golf course.”  My numbers are faster speed and similar launch conditions to tour.  I don’t change my numbers when I go to play with some Ams.

But do you change them when you play a muni? Do pros change theirs when conditions are soft?I think the main point is ideal numbers have less to do with conditions and more to do with your speed and impact conditions, in order to maximize distance and control. I am the exact golfer @pinhigh27 speaks of, PGA tour level speed but launch irons too high with not enough spin, which ultimately reduces consistency. I don't chase numbers, but I do reference them as I work on my mechanics

Edited January 20, 2021 by Krt22

[hoselpalooza]

another vote for using trackman #'s as a general guide.

 

if you're hitting off of a mat indoors i would be skeptical of the numbers and wouldn't put a lot of stock into them. at higher speeds i suspect the launch and spin can be off enough that it makes carry/total distance unreliable. 

 

e.g. last weekend i spent 1.5 hrs on trackman indoors with premium balls and then immediately afterward spent a couple of hours at an outdoor range hitting 💩 balls into the wind. carry distances were farther outdoors into the wind with 💩 balls across the bag. i was astonished. 

 

so for me at least, i plan to use indoor trackman to make relative comparisons for changes i'm working on instead of really dialing anything in, if that makes sense.

Edited January 20, 2021 by hoselpalooza
words

[bonvivantva]

3 hours ago, MonteScheinblum said:

You don’t chase numbers, you use them as a guideline and a measure of improvement.

 

 

I imagine the OP was not referring to mid-higher handicappers like myself, but I think what I have to say can be generalized to most golfers anyway.  I've looked at the trackman averages just because I'm curious about the averages and because I was interested to know what was possible.  I'm in my mid-30s, so there is no physical reason I shouldn't be able to hit a 300 yard drive, or achieve a tour average swing speed.  It's just technique that limits me.  What I found out is that my swing speeds per club are much closer to that of the LPGA averages.  I actually posted a topic about using LPGA numbers as a reference and got a lot of comments similar to what we've seen so far here.  

 

I think Monte's quote above is just about all you can say with certainty here.  Certain the data is useful.  You can use the data effectively as a guide or benchmark, or you can try to, "chase" the numbers, which when you lose sight of your overall goal, becomes a fools errand.

[Shupe]

18 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

But do you change them when you play a muni? Do pros change theirs when conditions are soft?I think the main point is ideal numbers have less to do with conditions and more to do with your speed and impact conditions, in order to maximize distance and control. I am the exact golfer @pinhigh27 speaks of, PGA tour level speed but launch irons too high with not enough spin, which ultimately reduces consistency. I don't chase numbers, but I do reference them as I work on my mechanics

I'm going to clear this up cause I kinda see where the issue is between us.

 

A) My original comment, (I wouldn't go off tour averages/they build their game for firmer tougher courses).  If you are an Am and don't currently need to play tough firm, fast courses with tucked pins (which most Ams do not), then I would ignore pga tour averages and work on fundamentals and a whole list of other stuff.  If you want to use them as a "VERY broad" guideline as to what is acceptable, sure go ahead.  But, I wouldn't make it a gameplan to reach those averages unless you need to.  Even then in my opinion this will cause you to get lost in the weeds and not focus on things that will make you better faster.  If you work on your face control and swing dynamics and reach those numbers, Great, you probably won't (BECAUSE THEY ARE AVERAGES).

 

B) Many pros do not fit into those averages.  If you would show a random pro who doesn't have these average numbers this sheet on the range, they wouldn't give a ****.  This one seems like it needs no clarification.

 

C) If you launch the ball with pga tour averages, there should be no need to change your launch conditions to go play a normal golf course.  NOTE: Your average launch conditions... Not in terms of a particular shot ex. hitting a wedge into a soft green.

[pinhigh27]

Good swing dynamics will result in similar numbers to the averages . Obviously if you swing faster you will hit it further and likely spin it more than their average 

 

I don’t agree their numbers are set up for firm conditions . Their numbers are simply the result of good impact conditions with reasonable speed. 
 

most pros are going to be pretty close to those numbers , especially people with similar speeds. It’s not like someone is out there spinning their 6 iron 8000, it doesn’t really happen 

[pinhigh27]

An amateur shouldn’t chase the numbers as an endpoint but if they improve their swing theyre probably going to get closer to the numbers rather than further , which is why I mentioned the high launch low spin iron stuff. 

[MonteScheinblum]

1 hour ago, pinhigh27 said:

An amateur shouldn’t chase the numbers as an endpoint but if they improve their swing theyre probably going to get closer to the numbers rather than further , which is why I mentioned the high launch low spin iron stuff. 

and Bingo was his name-o

[Shupe]

1 hour ago, pinhigh27 said:

Good swing dynamics will result in similar numbers to the averages . Obviously if you swing faster you will hit it further and likely spin it more than their average 

 

I don’t agree their numbers are set up for firm conditions . Their numbers are simply the result of good impact conditions with reasonable speed. 
 

most pros are going to be pretty close to those numbers , especially people with similar speeds. It’s not like someone is out there spinning their 6 iron 8000, it doesn’t really happen 

Yes.  Most pros are going to be close to average numbers.  I'm talking in terms of 500-1000rpm at the high end and a couple degrees of variance on launch.  You would be surprised how focused tour pros are on their launch conditions being set for tournament conditions.  Sit in on a fitting and all you will hear over and over again is spin, land angle, and launch... 

[hoselpalooza]

1 hour ago, Shupe said:

Yes.  Most pros are going to be close to average numbers.  I'm talking in terms of 500-1000rpm at the high end and a couple degrees of variance on launch.  You would be surprised how focused tour pros are on their launch conditions being set for tournament conditions.  Sit in on a fitting and all you will hear over and over again is spin, land angle, and launch... 

 

are you saying pros try to alter their launch conditions based on the course they're playing any given week?

[pinhigh27]

1 hour ago, Shupe said:

ou would be surprised how focused tour pros are on their launch conditions being set for tournament conditions.  Sit in on a fitting and all you will hear over and over again is spin, land angle, and launch... 

This is where our disconnect is. In a fitting they talk about those things because they're important for stopping the ball and hitting the appropriate heights, etc but it's not like justin thomas is going into the week saying " wow the greens are gonna be really firm at riviera this week, I need 400 more rpm spin" 

 

They're focused on having good numbers because they're good numbers for playing golf. I don't really think you see guys making many equipment changes to suit the course. Maybe they add some a fairway wood instead of a long iron or hybrid, it seems like a lot of people did that at harding park, but overall they're not bending their lofts or playing different shafts because of courses 

[Shupe]

6 minutes ago, pinhigh27 said:

This is where our disconnect is. In a fitting they talk about those things because they're important for stopping the ball and hitting the appropriate heights, etc but it's not like justin thomas is going into the week saying " wow the greens are gonna be really firm at riviera this week, I need 400 more rpm spin" 

 

They're focused on having good numbers because they're good numbers for playing golf. I don't really think you see guys making many equipment changes to suit the course. Maybe they add some a fairway wood instead of a long iron or hybrid, it seems like a lot of people did that at harding park, but overall they're not bending their lofts or playing different shafts because of courses 

I agree with you.  They rarely change anything week to week.

They, in general, focus on having their average launch numbers/spin numbers in a place Ams typically don’t need.  

[Shupe]

29 minutes ago, hoselpalooza said:

 

are you saying pros try to alter their launch conditions based on the course they're playing any given week?

No.  They rarely change anything week to week.

[hoselpalooza]

9 minutes ago, Shupe said:

No.  They rarely change anything week to week.

 

then what do "tournament conditions" have to do with anything? they play in a variety of different tournament conditions. so if the tournament conditions change but their launch conditions remain the same it's really pointless to even mention tournament conditions. 

[Shupe]

2 minutes ago, hoselpalooza said:

 

then what do "tournament conditions" have to do with anything? they play in a variety of different tournament conditions. so if the tournament conditions change but their launch conditions remain the same it's really pointless to even mention tournament conditions. 

This reply makes no sense.  

PGA tour pros play on firmer set ups than the average golfer.  Therefore, PGA tour players launch condition averages are going to be typically more specific to those setups than what is necessary of the average Am on normal random courses around the world.

 

 

[RichieHunt]

I don't think it's as bad as blindly chasing aesthetics without focusing on functionality.  But, it can be very problematic.

 

For example, if a player generates 100 mph club speed with the driver,chasing the tour averages is a bad idea.  Most teachers believe a 100 mph driver should try and hit up on the ball and create a higher launch and lower spin that the Tour average.  I think it's worth a shot, but some golfers may not be able to make it work.

I think there are guidelines to keep in mind and understanding how speed plays a role.  But also understand that trying to live by those guidelines may not work best for you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

RH

[iteachgolf]

1 hour ago, Shupe said:

I agree with you.  They rarely change anything week to week.

They, in general, focus on having their average launch numbers/spin numbers in a place Ams typically don’t need.  

Actually the tour averages spin rates are fairly typical.  What they are really targeting is land angle.  And Ams need the exact same thing to perform at a high level.  Just because most ams aren’t highly skilled and might not THINK they need to hold a green doesn’t meant they don’t actually need it.   Their launch angles/spin rates/ land angles/ and peak heights are attainable by most post puberty non senior male golfers. 

[Shupe]

1 minute ago, iteachgolf said:

Actually the tour averages spin rates are fairly typical.  What they are really targeting is land angle.  And Ams need the exact same thing to perform at a high level.  Just because most ams aren’t highly skilled and might not THINK they need to hold a green doesn’t meant they don’t actually need it.   Their launch angles/spin rates/ land angles/ and peak heights are attainable by most post puberty non senior male golfers. 

Launch + spin = land angle 

 

This has already been talked about earlier in the thread.  I agree, they are attainable but not necessary for most.  I would focus on fundamentals before worrying about chasing PGA tour averages.  If you work on fundamentals and get to tour averages.  Congratulations. 

[hoselpalooza]

2 hours ago, Shupe said:

This reply makes no sense.  

PGA tour pros play on firmer set ups than the average golfer.  Therefore, PGA tour players launch condition averages are going to be typically more specific to those setups than what is necessary of the average Am on normal random courses around the world.

 

 

 

i'm not surprised it doesn't make sense to you based on your arguments in this thread...

 

all other things being equal, what happens to scores when tournament conditions are soft? that's right, they go down. they attack the pins when greens are super receptive. 

 

but if PGA tour pros optimize their launch conditions for firmer course setups like you're trying to argue, wouldn't the opposite be true? wouldn't their scores be lower on firmer setups? 

 

i'm not even sure what you're arguing at this point but keep going if you feel like it...

[iteachgolf]

8 hours ago, Shupe said:

Launch + spin = land angle 

 

This has already been talked about earlier in the thread.  I agree, they are attainable but not necessary for most.  I would focus on fundamentals before worrying about chasing PGA tour averages.  If you work on fundamentals and get to tour averages.  Congratulations. 

I’m well aware of how launch and spin work.  There’s a reason I’m on the advisory board of one of the major launch monitor companies. I also work with tour players and ams of all levels on a regular basis including fitting my tour players.  You don’t seem to understand the point I was making and certainly aren’t open to other ideas so I’m out. 

[AcesAndHoles]

19 hours ago, Fairways_and_Greens said:

In this case Monte, my ball speeds are at or slightly above tour average, which is why I was using them. Absolutely there has to v

Be variances. Heck none of us are perfect shot-to-shot, and club/shaft/ball combos can make a difference too.

 

After reading Dan's post I found this on Trackman's website. The difference for a scratch golfer was 2k of spin and a club or so of launch. 

 

Regardless, there are feels I'm chasing in my golf swing for more shaft lean that are doing the exact opposite.

 

Where did you find that data? Looks pretty interesting. 

[Shupe]

1 hour ago, iteachgolf said:

I’m well aware of how launch and spin work.  There’s a reason I’m on the advisory board of one of the major launch monitor companies. I also work with tour players and ams of all levels on a regular basis including fitting my tour players.  You don’t seem to understand the point I was making and certainly aren’t open to other ideas so I’m out. 

I say I agree with you and respond that I get there in a different valid way and then you send this message like you are all high and mighty... lol, give me a break.  Get ignored.

[Shupe]

9 hours ago, hoselpalooza said:

 

i'm not surprised it doesn't make sense to you based on your arguments in this thread...

 

all other things being equal, what happens to scores when tournament conditions are soft? that's right, they go down. they attack the pins when greens are super receptive. 

 

but if PGA tour pros optimize their launch conditions for firmer course setups like you're trying to argue, wouldn't the opposite be true? wouldn't their scores be lower on firmer setups? 

 

i'm not even sure what you're arguing at this point but keep going if you feel like it...

Weird conclusion aside, so you don’t believe tour pros optimize their performance for the fact that they play in firmer conditions on average?

[pinhigh27]

4 minutes ago, Shupe said:

Weird conclusion aside, so you don’t believe tour pros optimize their performance for the fact that they play in firmer conditions on average?

I don’t necessarily think that is true. Maybe mildly but it’s not like every week is the us open. 
 

I don’t know what conclusion you’re trying to make . So if we say pros play in firmer conditions what would they change that an am wouldn’t have to, spin it more ? So you’re suggesting ams to have less iron spin ? I don’t understand. 
 

the numbers pros have are good for playing golf , in any condition. Most people would do well to get closer to them . 
 

 

[Fairways_and_Greens]

1 hour ago, AcesAndHoles said:

Where did you find that data? Looks pretty interesting. 

 I found it here: https://blog.trackmangolf.com/mats-vs-grass-whats-difference/

 

I'm hitting off a TrueStrike mat which is supposed to give truer spin numbers. Clearly it isn't. 

 

My theory is that even with ball first contact, the ball deforms into the mat, and the mat pushes back launching the ball higher with less spin.

 

Also, since the mat is pushing back on the club, it can't hit through the ball as much lowering the spin additionally. At my 8 iron swing speed I'm guessing the ball is on the face for an inch or so. If the club stopped and rebounded by that time it would cause a further lowering of spin. But I can't see that happening that fast 

 

I think this probably gets worse with higher club speeds and higher angles of attack since the ball would be on the club face longer and more deformed...

 

In the Trackman article there was a 1 degree increase of dynamic loft as well. It would be interesting to know if experts like @iteachgolf think this is due to the impact dynamics caused by the mat or natural swing variation.

 

[Krt22]

1 hour ago, Shupe said:

Weird conclusion aside, so you don’t believe tour pros optimize their performance for the fact that they play in firmer conditions on average?

No, I do not believe that is the case. Their numbers are the byproduct of great impact conditions and are what they are to optimize distance and consistency (ie spin), such that they can count on their carry number for a stock shot, you hear these guys getting down to the single yard from 160+ out. The conditions they play changes every week and they adjust the shot accordingly. Some shots they are trying to knock off spin/LA, sometimes they are trying to add it. When things are really firm, the avg tour player with a 90' apex probably isn't even in contention unless his putter is on fire.

 

There are plenty of ams who play on tough tracks that are quite firm, so having those numbers is very helpful just to play good golf. My home course is pretty tough and where you land the ball is pretty important, otherwise you can take bogey on an otherwise decent shot(multi tier greens, run off areas, sticky bermuda collars, etc). Some of the older guys literally have no chance on certain holes because they can't stop the ball anywhere near the hole and thus have to rely on their shot game just to scrape away a par. And there are also plenty of HS kids out there flag hunting because they have the speed (and land angle) to do so. 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Krt22

[Stuart_G]

18 minutes ago, Fairways_and_Greens said:

 

My theory is that even with ball first contact, the ball deforms into the mat, and the mat pushes back launching the ball higher with less spin.

 

Only my perspective of the theory and interpretations of the various high speed video  but ...

 

I would contend it's much more the interaction between the club and the mat instead of the ball and the mat.  If the mat were able to contribute to some deformation of the ball - that would also mean a larger normal force between the ball and the club - which should increase spin, not decrease it.

 

On the other hand, impact between the head and the ball results in a downward force on the head (opposite of the upward force on the ball).  

 

https://www.tutelman.com/golf/ballflight/downdeflect.php

 

From gear effect we know that lateral motion of the face can have a big effect on the spin.   So if the downward motion of the ball is restricted by the mat in any way, that would potentially result in less spin added to the ball.

 

[virtuoso]

Irons shots off mats are generally miniature drop-kicks.

 

Pro's will sometimes work with their instructors to "neutralize" their AOA and shaft lean (dynamic loft) to get to a place more in the middle of the bell curve of launch and spin, but they usually don't have to change it much. They will fine tune those numbers with more or less spiny versions of tour balls, and tweak the iron lofts some. They can also do a tiny amount with shaft experimentation, but shafts are very overrated in terms of how much they can actually affect spin. They do not try to change their launch conditions based on playing conditions...unless you mean throwing out the driving iron one week in exchange for 5wood or hybrid.

Edited January 21, 2021 by virtuoso