Analyse my driver trackman numbers pls experts

[mc2]

Carry 200m

Total 215m

Ball Speed 139mph

Club Speed 93mph

Launch Angle 11.5

Spin 3630

Smash 1.51

Attack -3.2

Face To Path 1.3

Club Path -1.2

 

This was a good driver shot on a Trackman session today, all other good shots were similar in stats.

 

Is that spin too high? Anything else stick out here?

 

I clearly need to work on my angle of attack. 
 

Im using an 11 degree TSR2 set at 10.25

 

Cheers 🤝

 

 

 

Edited November 17, 2023 by mc2

[GolfTurkey]

Were you indoors or outdoors and using range balls or premium balls?

 

If it was outdoors with range rocks or indoors without metal stickers on the ball or RCT balls  and spin was italicised, then I would be highly suspicious of the spin numbers.

 

If that spin was in an accurate environment then yes it looks too high.

[js707]

With that smash factor I’d think that if you could sort out your AoA (get it into positive territory at least) that the spin and launch angle would become much more optimal. Looks like you’d probably gain 20+ meters of carry distance.

[BdaGolfer]

Smash factor seems high for an out-to-in negative attack angle with an open face. What is your peak height?

[mc2]

6 hours ago, GolfTurkey said:

Were you indoors or outdoors and using range balls or premium balls?

 

If it was outdoors with range rocks or indoors without metal stickers on the ball or RCT balls  and spin was italicised, then I would be highly suspicious of the spin numbers.

 

If that spin was in an accurate environment then yes it looks too high.

Indoors using my gamer ball Bridgestone B X. No metal stickers. Can't remember if the spin was italicised or not (sorta rings a bell now you say it). Sounds like I can't really trust these spin numbers then!

[mc2]

3 hours ago, js707 said:

With that smash factor I’d think that if you could sort out your AoA (get it into positive territory at least) that the spin and launch angle would become much more optimal. Looks like you’d probably gain 20+ meters of carry distance.

What's a good launch angle to be aiming for? I might head back to this place soon and work on AOA and launch. Looks like spin numbers may have been unreliable though (see above post).

 

Is there any merit in cranking up the loft on my driver in the mean time?

 

I was fit into the head at 11, but been playing it 10.25 lately. I could go back to 11 or even higher 

[mc2]

1 hour ago, BdaGolfer said:

Smash factor seems high for an out-to-in negative attack angle with an open face. What is your peak height?

Peak height on that shot was 25.9 metres, but the average of the shots from this session was more like 28-29m

[js707]

I like to use this chart from Trackman courtesy of Tom Wishon:

 

https://wishongolf.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/TrackMan-Driver-Optimization_2010.pdf

 

Optimizing for carry (more consistent imo as not reliant on fairway conditions), your numbers above are not too far off. Looks like you only really need a degree or two more of launch. Going back to 11 degrees could do it but keep in mind that can affect other factors in how you deliver the club face to the ball, so you might need to do some experimentation.

 

 

Edited November 17, 2023 by js707

[Valtiel]

On 11/17/2023 at 2:41 AM, mc2 said:

Carry 200m

Total 215m

Ball Speed 139mph

Club Speed 93mph

Launch Angle 11.5

Spin 3630

Smash 1.51

Attack -3.2

Face To Path 1.3

Club Path -1.2

 

This was a good driver shot on a Trackman session today, all other good shots were similar in stats.

 

Is that spin too high? Anything else stick out here?

 

I clearly need to work on my angle of attack. 
 

Im using an 11 degree TSR2 set at 10.25

 

Cheers 🤝

 

 

 

EDITED for accuracy based on the comments below:

@GolfTurkey Is right about the spin measurement concerns, but i'd imagine they're not too far off. Here is the story told by these numbers and what to parse. 

This all comes back to a loft issue and i'll explain why you *don't* want to approach this as "I need to work on my angle of attack".

Since you're using an 11* head (ignoring the 10.25* loft down for a second, i'll explain), your launch is roughly the same as your head loft, your attack angle is -3.2* down, your smash factor indicates a solid strike, and your face and path numbers indicate managing some face to path issues, we can derive some estimations as to where the inefficiencies are coming from.



His Club Path is more left than yours, BUT his Face Angle is very very close to that, resulting in a Face to Path that is only +0.4, which results in that baby fade.
As I mentioned above you have a Face to Path that appears to be 1.3R despite having a Club Path that is -1.2L, hence your clubface is a bit open. A left path and and right face is a recipe for a weaker, higher spin delivery because this often adds loft. A 1.51 Smash Factor indicates a very good strike, and if that was a little bit high toe then that would have canceled a little bit of the more face spin that having the face open to the path at impact would create. Ironically the amount that you have opened the face by decreasing the loft (1.5*) might be contributing to this, hence why I wanted to ignore that 10.25* number here specifically because that loft is *only* realized if you return the face square to the path. By leaving the face open relative to your path you're both *not* realizing that 10.25* you've delofted the head too AND adding more loft on top of that. This btw is why prominent faders of the ball often prefer slightly *shut* clubface angles. Both DJ and Morikawa do the opposite with their drivers (loft them up, closing the face) to help create this tight Face to Path relationship. 

So in summary the first thing you need to worry about is your dynamic loft. In all likelihood you have some swing flaws that are contributing to this delivery, a slight over the top and steeper pattern being the common one, and addressing those issues would naturally resolve both the Face to Path and AoA numbers. The things that get people coming in steeper and from the outside create the numbers, resolve the things and the numbers will change. Chasing AoA almost always screws people up because they aren't addressing the swing flaws and are often introducing new ones to create a positive AoA. *Sometimes* those new introductions resolve elements of the underlying flaws, but that is rare and should never be counted on to be the case. Negative AoA alone does NOT increase spin, it's the common companions of that AoA that do, and that is the final note I want to make here. Given your swing speed, low spin won't help much. 93mph needs high 2,000's to balance carry and roll, anything sub 2,500 won't be beneficial, so you're not that far off. 

Edited November 23, 2023 by Valtiel

[mc2]

On 11/18/2023 at 11:11 AM, Valtiel said:

@GolfTurkey Is right about the spin measurement concerns, but i'd imagine they're not too far off. Here is the story told by these numbers and what to parse. 

This all comes back to a loft issue and i'll explain why you *don't* want to approach this as "I need to work on my angle of attack".

Since you're using an 11* head (ignoring the 10.25* loft down for a second, i'll explain), your launch is roughly the same as your head loft, your attack angle is -3.2* down, your smash factor indicates a solid strike, and your face and path numbers indicate managing some face to path issues, we can derive some estimations as to where the inefficiencies are coming from. In order to produce a Face to Path of 1.3 open when your club path was -1.2, your Face Angle would have be 2.5 open. Lets look at DJ as a good example:



His Club Path is more left than yours, BUT his Face Angle is very very close to that, resulting in a Face to Path that is only +0.4, which results in that baby fade. As I mentioned above you have a Face to Path that appears to be 1.3R despite having a Club Path that is -1.2L, hence the 2.5R Face Angle we can derive from  that. A left path and and right face is a recipe for a weaker, higher spin delivery because this often adds loft. A 1.51 Smash Factor indicates a very good strike, and if that was a little bit high toe then that would have canceled a little bit of the more face spin that having a face 2.5* open at impact would create. Ironically the amount that you have opened the face by decreasing the loft (1.5*) might be contributing to this, hence why I wanted to ignore that 10.25* number here specifically because that loft is *only* realized if you return the face square to the path. By leaving the face open 2.5* relative to your path you're both *not* realizing that 10.25* you've delofted the head too AND adding more loft on top of that. This btw is why prominent faders of the ball often prefer slightly *shut* clubface angles. Both DJ and Morikawa do the opposite with their drivers (loft them up, closing the face) to help create this tight Face to Path relationship. 

So in summary the first thing you need to worry about is that Face to Path relationship and what is causing it. In all likelihood you have some swing flaws that are contributing to this delivery, a slight over the top and steeper pattern being the common one, and addressing those issues would naturally resolve both the Face to Path and AoA numbers. The things that get people coming in steeper and from the outside create the numbers, resolve the things and the numbers will change. Chasing AoA almost always screws people up because they aren't addressing the swing flaws and are often introducing new ones to create a positive AoA. *Sometimes* those new introductions resolve elements of the underlying flaws, but that is rare and should never be counted on to be the case. Negative AoA alone does NOT increase spin, it's the common companions of that AoA that do, and that is the final note I want to make here. Given your swing speed, low spin won't help much. 93mph needs high 2,000's to balance carry and roll, anything sub 2,500 won't be beneficial, so you're not that far off. 

Thank you so much for your thought out response. It's people like you that make the world a better place ☺️

I'm going to do some more trackman sessions in the near future and try to tighten that face to path ratio. 

[betarhoalphadelta]

On 11/17/2023 at 4:11 PM, Valtiel said:

@GolfTurkey Is right about the spin measurement concerns, but i'd imagine they're not too far off. Here is the story told by these numbers and what to parse. 

This all comes back to a loft issue and i'll explain why you *don't* want to approach this as "I need to work on my angle of attack".

Since you're using an 11* head (ignoring the 10.25* loft down for a second, i'll explain), your launch is roughly the same as your head loft, your attack angle is -3.2* down, your smash factor indicates a solid strike, and your face and path numbers indicate managing some face to path issues, we can derive some estimations as to where the inefficiencies are coming from. In order to produce a Face to Path of 1.3 open when your club path was -1.2, your Face Angle would have be 2.5 open. Lets look at DJ as a good example:



His Club Path is more left than yours, BUT his Face Angle is very very close to that, resulting in a Face to Path that is only +0.4, which results in that baby fade. As I mentioned above you have a Face to Path that appears to be 1.3R despite having a Club Path that is -1.2L, hence the 2.5R Face Angle we can derive from  that. A left path and and right face is a recipe for a weaker, higher spin delivery because this often adds loft. A 1.51 Smash Factor indicates a very good strike, and if that was a little bit high toe then that would have canceled a little bit of the more face spin that having a face 2.5* open at impact would create. Ironically the amount that you have opened the face by decreasing the loft (1.5*) might be contributing to this, hence why I wanted to ignore that 10.25* number here specifically because that loft is *only* realized if you return the face square to the path. By leaving the face open 2.5* relative to your path you're both *not* realizing that 10.25* you've delofted the head too AND adding more loft on top of that. This btw is why prominent faders of the ball often prefer slightly *shut* clubface angles. Both DJ and Morikawa do the opposite with their drivers (loft them up, closing the face) to help create this tight Face to Path relationship. 

So in summary the first thing you need to worry about is that Face to Path relationship and what is causing it. In all likelihood you have some swing flaws that are contributing to this delivery, a slight over the top and steeper pattern being the common one, and addressing those issues would naturally resolve both the Face to Path and AoA numbers. The things that get people coming in steeper and from the outside create the numbers, resolve the things and the numbers will change. Chasing AoA almost always screws people up because they aren't addressing the swing flaws and are often introducing new ones to create a positive AoA. *Sometimes* those new introductions resolve elements of the underlying flaws, but that is rare and should never be counted on to be the case. Negative AoA alone does NOT increase spin, it's the common companions of that AoA that do, and that is the final note I want to make here. Given your swing speed, low spin won't help much. 93mph needs high 2,000's to balance carry and roll, anything sub 2,500 won't be beneficial, so you're not that far off. 

 

I think there's something missing there. If path was -1.2 (or 1.2 Left) and face to path was 1.3, then the actual face angle would be 0.1 right of square (-1.2 + 1.3 = 0.1). Ball should start almost dead straight and fall off right a bit. @mc2 does that align with your normal ballflight? 

 

[Valtiel]

On 11/21/2023 at 3:38 PM, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

I think there's something missing there. If path was -1.2 (or 1.2 Left) and face to path was 1.3, then the actual face angle would be 0.1 right of square (-1.2 + 1.3 = 0.1). Ball should start almost dead straight and fall off right a bit. @mc2 does that align with your normal ballflight? 

 

-1.2 and +1.3 are on opposite sides of "0" though. In order for what you said to be true the face to path would have to be -1.3, not +1.3.

[betarhoalphadelta]

1 hour ago, Valtiel said:

-1.2 and +1.3 are on opposite sides of "0" though. In order for what you said to be true the face to path would have to be -1.3, not +1.3.

Face angle of +1.3 with path -1.2 would be a face to path angle of +2.5. 

 

Face to path of +1.3 when path is -1.2 is a net face angle of +0.1 to square. 

 

Or am I missing something?

[Valtiel]

32 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

Face angle of +1.3 with path -1.2 would be a face to path angle of +2.5. 

 

Face to path of +1.3 when path is -1.2 is a net face angle of +0.1 to square. 

 

Or am I missing something?

Nope you're right, in attempting to show my work I realized where I messed up (mixing up Face angle and Face to Path) and i'll edit the posts above.

For everyone else:

Face to Path describes the relationship of the face to the path (sorry if that sounds obvious), therefore in order for Face to Path to be 0*, Face angle has to align with the club path. 0* isn't in relation to the target, it's in relation to the direction the club is traveling and the direction the face is pointing. His path is -1.2*, so to achieve a Face To Path of 0* the face angle would also have to be -1.2* also (face point the same direction as the path). But the face to path isn't 0*, it's actually +1.3* to the right. The only way to get that number is to have a face angle that is open. If we move increments:

Club Path -1.2* / Face to Path 0* = Face Angle -1.2*
Club Path -1.2* / Face to Path +0.7* = Face Angle -0.5*
Club Path -1.2* / Face to Path +1.3* = Face Angle +0.1*

@mc2 Please see the edits above, because of the corrections there is a little less emphasis on face angle (you're less open than I initially stated) and more emphasis on overall dynamic loft. Addressing the swing elements causing this is still the same recommendation however.

Edited November 23, 2023 by Valtiel