Chasing distance

[golfarb1]

3 hours ago, me05501 said:

 

 

Seems like when most handicap players give their "average distance" they're actually providing their "solid drive in the fairway" distance. They're not counting the ones that miss the fairway and come to rest at their carry distance, which are certainly part of their overall average. 

 

I use Garmin club sensors so I end up with reliable data. The app tells me my average drive is 243 but I'd much rather talk about the ones that land in the middle of the fairway and roll out to 255. 🙂 

I am basing my information on the joint USGA/RA report on driving distance that was published in GOLF in 3/22. Table below . 
It is to be expected that posters on GOLFWRX are more likely to be better than average golfers and have lower handicaps than the average golfer. 

[me05501]

17 minutes ago, golfarb1 said:

I am basing my information on the joint USGA/RA report on driving distance that was published in GOLF in 3/22. Table below . 
It is to be expected that posters on GOLFWRX are more likely to be better than average golfers and have lower handicaps than the average golfer. 

 

Yes, yes. I wasn't disagreeing with your point from earlier. Just saying that I trust the Champion's Tour's measured "average" data more than the average player's perception of his own average.  

[betarhoalphadelta]

32 minutes ago, golfarb1 said:

A significant difference between PGA and LPGA pros is their AOA  with a driver 
I am suggesting that most average golfers emulate the LPGA positive AOA ~+3 to +3.5 . Much above that number is doable but can create problems which require compensations  and make the swing more complicated. 

. 
 

 

Ok, if the idea is that due to lower distances they should look into a positive AoA with driver like the LPGA to maximize distance, I understand that. Although you could also say that they should look into a positive AoA with driver like Rory or Bryson 😉 

 

 

[SNIPERBBB]

4 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

Ok, if the idea is that due to lower distances they should look into a positive AoA with driver like the LPGA to maximize distance, I understand that. Although you could also say that they should look into a positive AoA with driver like Rory or Bryson 😉 

 

 

Think you missed the warning about what that much AoA can due to your swing if your  not careful. Think many people trying to do that would end up near whiffing the ball or snap hooking the crap out of it. 

[ac6]

42 minutes ago, golfarb1 said:

A significant difference between PGA and LPGA pros is their AOA  with a driver 
I am suggesting that most average golfers emulate the LPGA positive AOA ~+3 to +3.5 . Much above that number is doable but can create problems which require compensations  and make the swing more complicated. 

. 
 

 

I think just telling the average player to just hit up on it is kind of putting the cart before the horse. PGA Tour players and recreational players hit down on the ball for completely different reasons. The former do it because they have plenty of speed and a neutral or negative delivery gives them more control. The latter do it because they have swing flaws. 

[golfarb1]

2 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

Ok, if the idea is that due to lower distances they should look into a positive AoA with driver like the LPGA to maximize distance, I understand that. Although you could also say that they should look into a positive AoA with driver like Rory or Bryson 😉 

 

 

I do not know if this information is accurate , but I have read that Rory

‘AOA is above+5 while Bryson is +6,numbers which requires compensations to efficiently  utilize . It can be done as they have obviously demonstrated . Among  the issues that happen with such high  positive AOA , is the more the swing is outside -in.

Bryson with an AOA similar to LD competitors also has among lowest smash factors on the PGA tour . 
 

[golfarb1]

19 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

Ok, if the idea is that due to lower distances they should look into a positive AoA with driver like the LPGA to maximize distance, I understand that. Although you could also say that they should look into a positive AoA with driver like Rory or Bryson 😉 

 

 

Higher than 3-3.5+ AOA starts creating the problems that I referenced .

I suggest that you read Andrew Rice. He has written extensively on the benefits of a positive AOA.

[golfarb1]

15 minutes ago, ac6 said:

 

I think just telling the average player to just hit up on it is kind of putting the cart before the horse. PGA Tour players and recreational players hit down on the ball for completely different reasons. The former do it because they have plenty of speed and a neutral or negative delivery gives them more control. The latter do it because they have swing flaws. 

A number of swing flaws that recreational players can be directly traced to setup problems . And some of these setup problems result in problematic AOA. 

[betarhoalphadelta]

8 minutes ago, golfarb1 said:

Higher than 3-3.5+ AOA starts creating the problems that I referenced .

I suggest that you read Andrew Rice. He has written extensively on the benefits of a positive AOA.

 

Sorry, I was trying to make a joke. Maybe it didn't land. 

 

On this forum I rarely see people say "I'm trying to hit driver longer, how can I have a -3.7 degree AoA like Brooks?" No, the posts I constantly see are about positive AoA. I think that message has been heard, loud and clear, and to an extent the threat is that too many people will OVERDO the AoA rather than trying to hit down on it because PGAT averages are negative AoA on driver. 

 

My point is that I don't understand the argument that male ams should use the LPGA as a template. Especially compared to the Champions Tour.

 

A healthy adult male aged 18-45 should be physically capable of doing this:

 

 

That guy is 8th on the Champions Tour in driving distance. 

 

I'm not sure they'll have the flexibility and range of motion to do this:

 

 

She's currently 8th on the list of average driver distance on the LPGA. Good luck making that your template if you're not a Gumby. 

 

So if the point is SO narrow that the average male am should likely consider higher AoA with driver, I get it. But I hardly think the explanation for WHY is that it's what the LPGA ladies do. 

[SNIPERBBB]

Is anyone really telling ams to hit down with driver? 

[phizzy30]

17 hours ago, SNIPERBBB said:

Is anyone really telling ams to hit down with driver? 

I would hope not.  Most ams don't generate enough speed in their swing where hitting down with driver would be beneficial.  Most are better off hitting up on it slightly 1-3* IMO to maintain consistent contact and to get higher launch while keeping back spin manageable.

Edited June 23, 2023 by phizzy30

[doctor220]

17 hours ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

Sorry, I was trying to make a joke. Maybe it didn't land. 

 

On this forum I rarely see people say "I'm trying to hit driver longer, how can I have a -3.7 degree AoA like Brooks?" No, the posts I constantly see are about positive AoA. I think that message has been heard, loud and clear, and to an extent the threat is that too many people will OVERDO the AoA rather than trying to hit down on it because PGAT averages are negative AoA on driver. 

 

My point is that I don't understand the argument that male ams should use the LPGA as a template. Especially compared to the Champions Tour.

 

A healthy adult male aged 18-45 should be physically capable of doing this:

 

 

That guy is 8th on the Champions Tour in driving distance. 

 

I'm not sure they'll have the flexibility and range of motion to do this:

 

 

She's currently 8th on the list of average driver distance on the LPGA. Good luck making that your template if you're not a Gumby. 

 

So if the point is SO narrow that the average male am should likely consider higher AoA with driver, I get it. But I hardly think the explanation for WHY is that it's what the LPGA ladies do. 

Ya I don’t really get the copying lpga tour players either. If you’re a healthy 30-50 year old guy there’s really no reason you can’t hit it 250-275. 
 

AoA stuff hugely overblown. Can play really good golf and hit it plenty far with negative AoA on driver. Vertical gear effect basically counteracts any AoA effects , people with negative AoAs tend to hit driver high off face and get higher launch and lower spin that way. Conversely, lots of people chase very positive AoAs and hit the ball low on the face , negating any benefits and probably net doing harm because they now have a driver swing that doesn’t transfer well to the rest of the bag.

 

People with reasonable swings have reasonable launch stats, no need to pursue a specific AoA or etc. swing reasonably fast with a decent swing and ball will go decently far. 

Edited June 23, 2023 by doctor220

[phizzy30]

45 minutes ago, doctor220 said:

Ya I don’t really get the copying lpga tour players either. If you’re a healthy 30-50 year old guy there’s really no reason you can’t hit it 250-275. 
 

AoA stuff hugely overblown. Can play really good golf and hit it plenty far with negative AoA on driver. Vertical gear effect basically counteracts any AoA effects , people with negative AoAs tend to hit driver high off face and get higher launch and lower spin that way. Conversely, lots of people chase very positive AoAs and hit the ball low on the face , negating any benefits and probably net doing harm because they now have a driver swing that doesn’t transfer well to the rest of the bag.

 

People with reasonable swings have reasonable launch stats, no need to pursue a specific AoA or etc. swing reasonably fast with a decent swing and ball will go decently far. 

Plenty of males in that range group your talking about that can't even sniff 260, even on their best day.  Most don't have the flexibility or mobility to do so and their swings are too inefficient.  Also, I'll agree to disagree about your view on AoA and leave it at that. 

Edited June 23, 2023 by phizzy30

[doctor220]

20 minutes ago, phizzy30 said:

Plenty of males in that range group your talking about that can't even sniff 260, even on their best day.  Most don't have the flexibility or mobility to do so and their swings are too inefficient.  Also, I'll agree to disagree about your view on AoA and leave it at that. 

There are 30-50 year old healthy guys without the mobility to hit it 250? Strongly disagree. 
 

in reality there are a lot of 30-50 year old golfers with bad golf swings. Saying they hit it short bc of body limitations is just making excuses. Can they all hit it 300? Maybe not 

 

the AoA stuff is a fact. Chasing positive AoA has hurt more people than it has helped. Improve your swing  and reasonable AoA will come.  I wouldn’t have a 90 mph swinger hit 5 down on driver but the same things they need to fix to not be 5 down would passively result in the AoA not being there, it isn’t an end goal , it’s a side effect. 

[phizzy30]

Just now, doctor220 said:

There are 30-50 year old healthy guys without the mobility to hit it 250? Strongly disagree. 
 

in reality there are a lot of 30-50 year old golfers with bad golf swings. Saying they hit it short bc of body limitations is just making excuses. Can they all hit it 300? Maybe not 

 

the AoA stuff is a fact. Chasing positive AoA has hurt more people than it has helped. Improve your swing  and reasonable AoA will come.  I wouldn’t have a 90 mph swinger hit 5 down on driver but the same things they need to fix to not be 5 down would passively result in the AoA not being there, it isn’t an end goal , it’s a side effect. 

Yes, there are males in that age group that are healthy that don't have the mobility necessary to hit it that far.  I'm a personal trainer and own my own business and I work with a lot of clients right in that age group.  It's not until I help them increase their flexibility and mobility that they can utilize it for sports including golf.  Chasing ridiculously positive AoA is harmful so I agree with you there.  However, there is nothing wrong with having a +1-3* AoA.  The opposite is true as well.  Having excess negative AoA(more than -2*) doesn't do any favors for an average am.

[betarhoalphadelta]

23 minutes ago, phizzy30 said:

Yes, there are males in that age group that are healthy that don't have the mobility necessary to hit it that far.  I'm a personal trainer and own my own business and I work with a lot of clients right in that age group.  It's not until I help them increase their flexibility and mobility that they can utilize it for sports including golf.  Chasing ridiculously positive AoA is harmful so I agree with you there.  However, there is nothing wrong with having a +1-3* AoA.  The opposite is true as well.  Having excess negative AoA(more than -2*) doesn't do any favors for an average am.

 

I think to an extent we might be talking past each other. 

 

I'm guessing there ARE a lot of males in that age group who have done no strength or mobility training in their entire lives, and are working sedentary desk jobs so their core is weak. To an extent I'm not that far off, as I did a ton of strength and mobility training in my teens, and have largely been coasting on the effects of that and natural athleticism as I've deteriorated from spending the last two decades+ working a sedentary desk job. I'm trying to fix that now, but I realize I should have been doing something more than I did to maintain my body for those two decades. 

 

So it wouldn't surprise me if those folks TODAY can't hit it 260. However, IMHO the physical limitation is self-imposed, and correctable. And that correcting it is an important and probably necessary piece of the puzzle. 

 

But I also suspect that most male 30-50 year old recreational golfers are limited as much, if not MORE, by their swing mechanics than their mobility. Especially those, like the OP, who are relatively new to golf. 

 

So I think my argument is that most healthy male 30-50 year old golfers absolutely CAN achieve distances of 250-270, and shouldn't act like it is out of their reach, and that for most of them their mechanics are poor. And your argument is also correct that for many of them, they won't get anywhere near it if they don't fix their physical limitations, no matter what they do with mechanics.

 

But I think we might both agree that if they fix their mechanics AND improve their physical mobility/flexibility/strength, it's not like a healthy 30-50 year old male should ever look at 250-270 as unattainable. 

[Nard_S]

I play with guys who have been playing 20 plus years, they thin a shot and say "I didn't get under it", I stopped correcting them years ago. Most able bodied adults in that "average" category could gain 25 yards with a few months of effort.

[phizzy30]

54 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

I think to an extent we might be talking past each other. 

 

I'm guessing there ARE a lot of males in that age group who have done no strength or mobility training in their entire lives, and are working sedentary desk jobs so their core is weak. To an extent I'm not that far off, as I did a ton of strength and mobility training in my teens, and have largely been coasting on the effects of that and natural athleticism as I've deteriorated from spending the last two decades+ working a sedentary desk job. I'm trying to fix that now, but I realize I should have been doing something more than I did to maintain my body for those two decades. 

 

So it wouldn't surprise me if those folks TODAY can't hit it 260. However, IMHO the physical limitation is self-imposed, and correctable. And that correcting it is an important and probably necessary piece of the puzzle. 

 

But I also suspect that most male 30-50 year old recreational golfers are limited as much, if not MORE, by their swing mechanics than their mobility. Especially those, like the OP, who are relatively new to golf. 

 

So I think my argument is that most healthy male 30-50 year old golfers absolutely CAN achieve distances of 250-270, and shouldn't act like it is out of their reach, and that for most of them their mechanics are poor. And your argument is also correct that for many of them, they won't get anywhere near it if they don't fix their physical limitations, no matter what they do with mechanics.

 

But I think we might both agree that if they fix their mechanics AND improve their physical mobility/flexibility/strength, it's not like a healthy 30-50 year old male should ever look at 250-270 as unattainable. 

I totally agree that healthy males in that age group are capable of hitting the ball 250-270 provided they work on their flexibility and mobility along with some strength training.  The other guy was claiming that males in this age group without mobility can hit it 250 which I find mostly untrue especially since I work in the fitness industry and have spent a good chunk of my career specifically working with this group.  I was an intern for the strength and conditioning coach for one of the Dodgers minor league teams for a couple years back in my mid 20's and learned a lot from that experience.  I've also played golf with plenty of guys in this age group as well over many years and have made my observations regarding this. 

Edited June 23, 2023 by phizzy30