Is chasing tour launch numbers as bad as chasing aesthetics?

[Fairways_and_Greens]

14 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. 

Ballspeed + launch + spin + ball aerodynamics = land angle

[virtuoso]

You absolutely can make a 5 hdcp a better golfer by steepening his land angle.....but the irons you fit him for will go at least 10 yards shorter, probably 15. Good luck with that conversation.

[Krt22]

9 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

You absolutely can make a 5 hdcp a better golfer by steepening his land angle.....but the irons you fit him for will go at least 10 yards shorter, probably 15. Good luck with that conversation.

No way, 200yrd 6i's that spin 4000 is awesome

[virtuoso]

Just now, Krt22 said:

No way, 200yrd 6i's that spin 4000 is awesome

Exactly.

[Fairways_and_Greens]

1 hour ago, Stuart_G said:

 

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).  

 

 

 

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.

 

 

Interesting article it; makes sense off a tee. I'm not sure how to apply it to turf v mats though. To launch higher than a tee, wouldn't the rebound vector need to be more down than normal? How would the mat facilitate that, or do I have something backwards?

[virtuoso]

Lets not make it more complicated than it is. A lot of shots off the mat are basically drop kicks, but they don't feel that bad, so people look at the data. Many of those shots would have been fat outside on the grass.

[Stuart_G]

31 minutes ago, Fairways_and_Greens said:

 

Interesting article it; makes sense off a tee. I'm not sure how to apply it to turf v mats though. To launch higher than a tee, wouldn't the rebound vector need to be more down than normal? How would the mat facilitate that, or do I have something backwards?

 

Not sure I understand the question but with respect to the general concept of the club reaction (thanks to the loft of the club), the tee doesn't really change the force vectors or the reaction force - assuming two identical swings and deliveries into the ball.

 

As far as the increase in launch angle goes here is my thoughts.  Impact results in the ball going up and the club going down.  This gives a relative delta for the difference in those vertical components.   If the downward motion of the head is restricted but the relative delta remains the same, then that would result in more upward motion of the ball and therefore a higher launch angle.

 

 

 

26 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

Lets not make it more complicated than it is. A lot of shots off the mat are basically drop kicks, but they don't feel that bad, so people look at the data. Many of those shots would have been fat outside on the grass.

 

First of all, the test referenced above that was published on TM site used a +2 handicap player.  I don't think you'll have a lot of success convincing people he was hitting it fat that consistently.

 

Fat shots will generally be very noticeable on TM by the drop in club head speed - even if the user doesn't feel it.  Although it's really not that hard to feel (or hear) a fat shot off of a mat.   If the impact with the mat isn't significant enough to register a change in club head speed then there's no real basis for suggesting it will effect the launch or spin.

 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Stuart_G

[virtuoso]

3 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

 

Not sure I understand the question but with respect to the general concept of the club reaction (thanks to the loft of the club), the tee doesn't really change the force vectors or the reaction force - assuming two identical swings and deliveries into the ball.

 

As far as the increase in launch angle goes here is my thoughts.  Impact results in the ball going up and the club going down.  This gives a relative delta for the difference in those vertical components.   If the downward motion of the head is restricted but the relative delta remains the same, then that would result in more upward motion of the ball and therefore a higher launch angle.

 

 

 

 

Fat shots will generally be very noticeable on TM by the drop in club head speed - even if the user doesn't feel it.  Although it's really not that hard to feel (or hear) a fat shot off of a mat.   If the impact with the mat isn't significant enough to register a change in club head speed then there's no real basis for suggesting it will effect the launch or spin.

 

Ok man

[Shupe]

3 hours ago, hoselpalooza said:

 

oh, i'm sorry -- i didn't mean "keep going" as in respond to me. i meant keep going until you're the only one left in this thread. you know, after everyone else leaves because they agree with you. 😉

 

your flawless logic and superior knowledge has clearly made this a wonderful thread. thanks for taking it over. 👍

Way to be the guy that walks in to a legit discussion and is completely toxic.  I hope you enjoyed yourself.

[Krt22]

3 minutes ago, Shupe said:

Way to be the guy that walks in to a legit discussion and is completely toxic.  I hope you enjoyed yourself.

Except it's not really a legit discussion. A bunch of people (some being LM experts who teach PGA pros) have said your assertion about "tour conditions" just isn't correct, you pretend to agree with them, then end up going right back to your original assertion. It's borderline absurd.

[Shupe]

2 hours ago, Krt22 said:

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. 

 

4 hours ago, pinhigh27 said:

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 . 
 

 

 

Ok, fair point. We are just going to have to disagree with this one because I connections to guys that play professional golf and they are very concerned with their land angle on a consistent basis.  Sure they get there by having good mechanics, but it isn’t like they Willy milky go play and pray their games fit the courses they are playing for the season.

 

In summary for Ams all I am saying is there is way more that I would consider than just focusing on being PGA tour average in terms of launch conditions.  I also believe that Ams can get away with lower launch conditions for the average course that an Am plays. 
 

I don’t understand how people think these two concepts are so revolutionary. 

[Shupe]

15 hours 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. 

 

6 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

Except it's not really a legit discussion. A bunch of people (some being LM experts who teach PGA pros) have said your assertion about "tour conditions" just isn't correct, you pretend to agree with them, then end up going right back to your original assertion. It's borderline absurd.

There isn’t a word I disagreed with in this and the guy told me that I disagree and then left...

[pinhigh27]

Most ams who are decent probably launch it too high and spin it too little relative to pga tour if they err to one side and if they hit it too low it’s a result of CHS being too low. Someone who swings driver 80 mph is rarely going to be able to stop an iron fast on any kind of course with fast or firm greens obviously. 
 

Decent ams who have too low dynamic loft is way rarer than ones with too much IMO. 

you keep flip flopping . Yes they are obviously concerned about their land angle but again they are not tailoring it week to week. No one says I’m at Torrey this week I need to hit it softer. 

[Shupe]

3 minutes ago, pinhigh27 said:

Most ams who are decent probably launch it too high and spin it too little relative to pga tour if they err to one side and if they hit it too low it’s a result of CHS being too low. Someone who swings driver 80 mph is rarely going to be able to stop an iron fast on any kind of course with fast or firm greens obviously. 
 

Decent ams who have too low dynamic loft is way rarer than ones with too much IMO. 

you keep flip flopping . Yes they are obviously concerned about their land angle but again they are not tailoring it week to week. No one says I’m at Torrey this week I need to hit it softer. 

I have yet to say they tailor it week to week.  I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS.  Why do you keep bringing this up.  I’m trying to find common ground here.  I believe pros have to focus more than Ams on land angle in general because of the courses they play week to week.  The average am can get away with a lower launch because the average course they play on will be softer and set up easier.

[virtuoso]

5 minutes ago, pinhigh27 said:

Most ams who are decent probably launch it too high and spin it too little relative to pga tour if they err to one side and if they hit it too low it’s a result of CHS being too low. Someone who swings driver 80 mph is rarely going to be able to stop an iron fast on any kind of course with fast or firm greens obviously. 
 

Decent ams who have too low dynamic loft is way rarer than ones with too much IMO. 

you keep flip flopping . Yes they are obviously concerned about their land angle but again they are not tailoring it week to week. No one says I’m at Torrey this week I need to hit it softer. 

nailed it

[virtuoso]

...also, don't believe everything you hear form tour pro's...half the time, they don't even know what they're trying to do...even if they sound like they believe it.

 

...suddenly, 95% of the golfwrx audience gasped...

Edited January 21, 2021 by virtuoso

[MonteScheinblum]

1 hour ago, Krt22 said:

No way, 200yrd 6i's that spin 4000 is awesome

You mean the 3 iron that has a 6 stamped on it?

[virtuoso]

3 minutes ago, MonteScheinblum said:

You mean the 3 iron that has a 6 stamped on it?

Indeed.....and another reason why it is hard for an amateur to meet tour launch parameters with a 7 iron. His distance 7 iron (loft 30 ish) is not a tour 7 iron (loft 34 ish), which is perfectly fine as long as that is considered in the equation.

[Krt22]

10 minutes ago, Shupe said:

 

There isn’t a word I disagreed with in this and the guy told me that I disagree and then left...

You  claim to agree with the facts, then double back that it's really only needed if you are playing in tour conditions, that really isn't the case. It really has nothing to do with "tour conditions", it has everything to do with controlling distance (which includes roll out), which is important to anyone who wants to play decent golf. We aren't talking about the old guys who play flat munis, there are plenty of ams with good speed that would benefit from taking a closer look at their launch conditions. As pinhigh27 and virtuoso have said, most are the opposite and launch it too high and lack enough spin (myself included). 

[Shupe]

1 minute ago, Krt22 said:

You  claim to agree with the facts, then double back that it's really only needed if you are playing in tour conditions, that really isn't the case. It really has nothing to do with "tour conditions", it has everything to do with controlling distance (which includes roll out), which is important to anyone who wants to play decent golf. We aren't talking about the old guys who play flat munis, there are plenty of ams with good speed that would benefit from taking a closer look at their launch conditions. As pinhigh27 and virtuoso have said, most are the opposite and launch it too high and lack enough spin (myself included). 

I don’t believe that it is only needed for tour conditions. If Ams have those conditions, awesome.  If they don’t have those conditions and don’t need them, awesome.
 

 Where I disagree is chasing tour averages instead of just ending up their through good fundamentals which I’ve stated before.  As for the opposite being true which I have no issue with.
 

People keep putting words in my mouth and then every reply cascades off of that... this whole thing has been blown way out of proportion... 

[hoselpalooza]

1 hour ago, pinhigh27 said:

Most ams who are decent probably launch it too high and spin it too little relative to pga tour if they err to one side and if they hit it too low it’s a result of CHS being too low. Someone who swings driver 80 mph is rarely going to be able to stop an iron fast on any kind of course with fast or firm greens obviously. 
 

Decent ams who have too low dynamic loft is way rarer than ones with too much IMO. 

you keep flip flopping . Yes they are obviously concerned about their land angle but again they are not tailoring it week to week. No one says I’m at Torrey this week I need to hit it softer. 

 

yup. i don't personally know any ams with tour speed who struggle with launching the ball too low. it's usually just the opposite. and improving launch also improves things like low point control, distance and dispersion control, and spin control. it produces more consistency on any track.

 

this other guy should just change his argument to "ams (with tour speed) can get away with lower launch conditions because their livelihood doesn't depend on golf." 

 

i think (except for this other doofus) we can all agree that if an am has tour speed and wants to be the best possible golfer they can be, their launch conditions are going to fall in line with tour pros. but if they have tour speed without tour launch, their game is probably going to suffer through a lack of low point control, distance or dispersion control, or spin control. 

Edited January 21, 2021 by hoselpalooza
words

[Shupe]

2 minutes ago, hoselpalooza said:

 

yup. i don't personally know any ams with tour speed who struggle with launching the ball too low. it's usually just the opposite. and improving launch also improves things like low point control, distance and dispersion control, and spin control. it produces more consistency on any track.

 

this other guy should just change his argument to "ams can get away with lower launch conditions because their livelihood doesn't depend on golf." 

 

i think (except for this other doofus) we can all agree that if an am has tour speed and wants to be the best possible golfer they can be, their launch conditions are going to fall in line with tour pros. but if they have tour speed without tour launch, their game is probably going to suffer through a lack of low point control, distance or dispersion control, or spin control. 

I don’t disagree with a word you said and you are still being toxic...  I don’t get it. 

[Krt22]

2 minutes ago, Shupe said:

I don’t believe that it is only needed for tour conditions. If Ams have those conditions, awesome.  If they don’t have those conditions and don’t need them, awesome.
 

 Where I disagree is chasing tour averages instead of just ending up their through good fundamentals which I’ve stated before.  As for the opposite being true which I have no issue with.
 

People keep putting words in my mouth and then every reply cascades off of that... this whole thing has been blown way out of proportion... 

Again you continue to miss my point, it has nothing to do with the conditions, period .Even if an am plays a boring flat muni, he would be better off with a good mixture of height and spin for his speed. It has everything to do with distance control, regardless of what conditions you play in. Every amateur would benefit from controlling their distance better, for most that would be accepting that each club will go a shorter distance. 

And not a single person has advocated to chase those numbers, instead simply to use them as a guideline as you improve your swing.  There is no reason to not attempt to get closer to what the best do, unless you are content playing your same exact game, but I'd like to think 99% of the ams in this forum are here because they are looking to improve.

[Shupe]

6 minutes ago, Krt22 said:

Again you continue to miss my point, it has nothing to do with the conditions, period .Even if an am plays a boring flat muni, he would be better off with a good mixture of height and spin for his speed. It has everything to do with distance control, regardless of what conditions you play in. Every amateur would benefit from controlling their distance better, for most that would be accepting that each club will go a shorter distance. 

And not a single person has advocated to chase those numbers, instead simply to use them as a guideline as you improve your swing.  There is no reason to not attempt to get closer to what the best do, unless you are content playing your same exact game, but I'd like to think 99% of the ams in this forum are here because they are looking to improve.

Totally agree with someone that has tour speed, but the average Am will get lost in the weeds chasing a 50 degree land angle with a 7iron etc.

 

I think we agree on 90% of stuff,  things have just been without enough context on my end.  I apologize. 
 

This is the only time I’ve ever argued with anyone on this forum (other than the guy that said we should all swing like Lee Trevino).  
 

I am done here, see you around on other threads.

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Shupe

[Fairways_and_Greens]

Dang it guys, I'm trying to get better at golf. Can you guys DM each other into oblivion?

 

[Shupe]

9 minutes ago, Fairways_and_Greens said:

Dang it guys, I'm trying to get better at golf. Can you guys DM each other into oblivion?

 

I apologize, good luck on your journey.

[virtuoso]

10 minutes ago, Fairways_and_Greens said:

Dang it guys, I'm trying to get better at golf. Can you guys DM each other into oblivion?

 

 You've lost the Golf WRX plot entirely. We don't come here to have discussions. We come here to have people watch us have discussions and be impressed by us. Can't do that over DM.

[Krt22]

23 minutes ago, Fairways_and_Greens said:

Dang it guys, I'm trying to get better at golf. Can you guys DM each other into oblivion?

 

You have really good speed but likely just presenting too much loft at impact, especially if you are backing up 8 irons while playing all very low spin gear. Not a straight forward fix

[bonvivantva]

5 hours ago, virtuoso said:

Indeed.....and another reason why it is hard for an amateur to meet tour launch parameters with a 7 iron. His distance 7 iron (loft 30 ish) is not a tour 7 iron (loft 34 ish), which is perfectly fine as long as that is considered in the equation.

 

But a lot of the LPGA players are playing similarly lofted (to men's GI irons) cavity backs at slower swing speeds.  Which is why if most ams are looking for a reference point, LPGA data might be more beneficial... 

[Fairways_and_Greens]

16 hours ago, Krt22 said:

You have really good speed but likely just presenting too much loft at impact, especially if you are backing up 8 irons while playing all very low spin gear. Not a straight forward fix

I've started working with @iteachgolf. So far he has me working on more foundational stuff. I think we will get to it after we address some of these root causes.

 

In addition I've been working with the Planemate and watching some AMG videos and have come to realize this "passive hands though impact" is either this fake news that everyone is talking about, or its just a horrible feel for me.

 

After 14 years of playing golf I have just learned that handle forward opens the club face, and that without more release through the hitting zone all I'm going to do is slice it more by getting the handle forward.

 

I'm having to go slow. At full swing speed my left wrist isn't used to moving like that and can get sore, but the shots feel much more compressed.

 

I'm going on vacation next week and plan on trying it out on the course and taking some video. I'll see if I've made enough progress on Dan's suggestions, which I've been working on twice a day. If so ill send in another video for him to check out... But I'm sure it will fall apart on the course. 🙂