Investigating steep Angle of Attack Pitch Shots (while taking a deep look at the D-Plane & Spin Loft)

[Brian Manzella]

 

 

At the 2024 Open Forum, Fredrik Tuxen, Joe Mayo, and Jon Sinclair gave a presentation on steep angle of attack, steep swing plane, pitch shots.

 

Tuxen gave the TrackMan part, Joe showed a before and after of his former student Viktor Hovland. Sinclair added some data. The "slides" included video and TrackMan numbers. And a graphic done by Adam Young.

 

Immediately following the presentation, Parker McLachlin (short game chef) and James Ridyard joined them for a panel discussion and Q &A.

 

Shortly before the panel assembled, Ridyard questioned Mayo on whether the 3D arc of the clubhead would be similar on both shots, Mayo wasn't entirely sure and Ridyard assured him that they wouldn't be the same. I clapped, very much agreeing with James' take, thinking a few others might as well.

 

I was the only one.

 

Mayo quickly, and angrily blurted out that the clapping must be "Manzella" even though he couldn't see me from his seat on stage. I was sitting next to a good friend and he and others around us were equally surprised by Joe's aggressive tone.

 

At some point in the presentation, Mayo told the audience that a 10° or more downward angle of attack would produce "more solid shots" for pretty much any cross section of golfers (paraphrasing). I held my arms above my head forming a big "X." Chris Como, one of the event organizers saw me, gave me a mic and told me he would call on me for the first question of the panel.

 

So, a few minutes later, when Ridyard and McLachlin took the stage, I was directed to speak by Chris.

 

I thought that Joe had perhaps misspoke about the 10° down or more would produce "more solid shots" for all, and he didn't really mean more flush contact (and assumed less bad contact) and I asked him, "I'm going to give yourself a chance to bail yourself out here, you really didn't mean better for all, did you?" (not an exact quote but close).

 

He assured me and the audience he did. I disagreed. 

 

Then, I tried to get him to answer yes or no to a question which he didn't, and we sparred back and forth before I got out my second point, that the 10°or more down has nothing—by itself—to do with spin. The same club delivery relative to the ground would produce the same result "aimed" anywhere. Tuxen shook his head in agreement and eventually Joe agreed.

 

It wasn't an elegant exchange for sure, but obviously you can see from the videos making the rounds that there has to be be something more behind Joe's aggressive first comment and me coming at him like a freight train.

 

There absolutely is. It's not really pertinent to wedge play, though. 😉

 

Joe and I later debated again because he wanted another shot at me when the panelist were ask if they wanted to ask each other anything.

 

"I want Manzella," blurted Mayo.

 

"You got me Joe," I responded quickly.

 

This exchange was tamer but the opinions and facts remained the same.

 

Joe advocated a shot with about 47° of Dynamic Loft and 10° downward Angle of Attack, producing 8000+ spin with a Launch Angle of 27°.

 

Even the "after shot" presented was really nowhere near those numbers. They were 41.9° of Dynamic Loft and 9.8° downward Angle of Attack, producing 6595 spin with a Launch Angle of 24.4°.

 

When I returned home after the PGA Show, I started hitting tons of shots trying to duplicate the 47/10/27 shot. 750 balls later I never did get a really close attempt but I learn a TON about how to do it and what I had correct teaching over the years and what I didn't.

 

Long story short, I was 100% correct on aiming the same D-pLane anywhere and I can only tell you that I hit more bad shots from 30ish yards trying to do the 47/10/27 shot than if I would have hit them cross handed.

 

BUT!!

 

There is ABSOLUTELY too much shallow and wide being taught in the marketplace and hopefully Joe's undeniable success with Hovland and his promotion of this idea and maybe even the "big debate" will shine a light on this important discussion.

 

I worked really hard on the video posted above. 

 

It is long and complex, butt if you are up for the deep dive, I promise you will learn something worthwhile.

 

 

Edited February 9 by Brian Manzella

[iacas]

I don’t have 33 minutes tonight but I’ll watch this in the morning.

 

Thanks for putting it together.

 

Edited February 9 by iacas

[baudi]

11 hours ago, Brian Manzella said:

 

I worked really hard on the video posted above. 

VERY WELL DONE. Thank you Sir. 

[cav5]

Does this conversation assume ball first contact?

[GungHoGolf]

15 hours ago, Brian Manzella said:

 

 

At the 2024 Open Forum, Fredrik Tuxen, Joe Mayo, and Jon Sinclair gave a presentation on steep angle of attack, steep swing plane, pitch shots.

 

Tuxen gave the TrackMan part, Joe showed a before and after of his former student Viktor Hovland. Sinclair added some data. The "slides" included video and TrackMan numbers. And a graphic done by Adam Young.

 

Immediately following the presentation, Parker McLachlin (short game chef) and James Ridyard joined them for a panel discussion and Q &A.

 

Shortly before the panel assembled, Ridyard questioned Mayo on whether the 3D arc of the clubhead would be similar on both shots, Mayo wasn't entirely sure and Ridyard assured him that they wouldn't be the same. I clapped, very much agreeing with James' take, thinking a few others might as well.

 

I was the only one.

 

Mayo quickly, and angrily blurted out that the clapping must be "Manzella" even though he couldn't see me from his seat on stage. I was sitting next to a good friend and he and others around us were equally surprised by Joe's aggressive tone.

 

At some point in the presentation, Mayo told the audience that a 10° or more downward angle of attack would produce "more solid shots" for pretty much any cross section of golfers (paraphrasing). I held my arms above my head forming a big "X." Chris Como, one of the event organizers saw me, gave me a mic and told me he would call on me for the first question of the panel.

 

So, a few minutes later, when Ridyard and McLachlin took the stage, I was directed to speak by Chris.

 

I thought that Joe had perhaps misspoke about the 10° down or more would produce "more solid shots" for all, and he didn't really mean more flush contact (and assumed less bad contact) and I asked him, "I'm going to give yourself a chance to bail yourself out here, you really didn't mean better for all, did you?" (not an exact quote but close).

 

He assured me and the audience he did. I disagreed. 

 

Then, I tried to get him to answer yes or no to a question which he didn't, and we sparred back and forth before I got out my second point, that the 10°or more down has nothing—by itself—to do with spin. The same club delivery relative to the ground would produce the same result "aimed" anywhere. Tuxen shook his head in agreement and eventually Joe agreed.

 

It wasn't an elegant exchange for sure, but obviously you can see from the videos making the rounds that there has to be be something more behind Joe's aggressive first comment and me coming at him like a freight train.

 

There absolutely is. It's not really pertinent to wedge play, though. 😉

 

Joe and I later debated again because he wanted another shot at me when the panelist were ask if they wanted to ask each other anything.

 

"I want Manzella," blurted Mayo.

 

"You got me Joe," I responded quickly.

 

This exchange was tamer but the opinions and facts remained the same.

 

Joe advocated a shot with about 47° of Dynamic Loft and 10° downward Angle of Attack, producing 8000+ spin with a Launch Angle of 27°.

 

Even the "after shot" presented was really nowhere near those numbers. They were 41.9° of Dynamic Loft and 9.8° downward Angle of Attack, producing 6595 spin with a Launch Angle of 24.4°.

 

When I returned home after the PGA Show, I started hitting tons of shots trying to duplicate the 47/10/27 shot. 750 balls later I never did get a really close attempt but I learn a TON about how to do it and what I had correct teaching over the years and what I didn't.

 

Long story short, I was 100% correct on aiming the same D-pLane anywhere and I can only tell you that I hit more bad shots from 30ish yards trying to do the 47/10/27 shot than if I would have hit them cross handed.

 

BUT!!

 

There is ABSOLUTELY too much shallow and wide being taught in the marketplace and hopefully Joe's undeniable success with Hovland and his promotion of this idea and maybe even the "big debate" will shine a light on this important discussion.

 

I worked really hard on the video posted above. 

 

It is long and complex, butt if you are up for the deep dive, I promise you will learn something worthwhile.

 

 

That was a nice technical deep-dive on the numbers, but what I was hoping for was some discussion of which method leads to better contact and results off turf for average “good” golfers (let’s say scratch to 5 index or so) who don’t have the precise low point control of elite players.

 

For me, playing on bermuda here in Texas, a -10 to -12 AoA gets a little scary with a partial lob wedge shot. That leading edge better hit *exactly* where intended. I do much better with the “no-wrist torso-powered” shot you briefly demonstrated, pre-setting the shaft lean, and coming into it around -3 to -5 AoA with about 50° dyn loft. Still launches around 30-33, leaves a short shallow divot, and has enough spin though perhaps not maxed-out spin. If I add more wrist set on the backswing, with the ball further back, my variance goes way up. 

 

Brian, I’d love to see you give a lesson to a player in that 0-5 range with the TrackMan where he gives both methods a workout on real turf.

 

 

[DaveGoodrich]

To a certain extent, I think a lot of this is a false controversy.  The more I have played with this, since Mayo's ideas first got brought up here recently, the more I realize that there really is a continuum between the extremes of "use the bounce" and the "low spinner."  

 

If you understand and practice both extremes, then most shots on the course will fall somewhere in between, and you will eventually understand, instinctively, which factors (ball position, weight/pressure distribution, AOA, amount of wrist set, etc.) "add up" to the shot you need at the moment.  

 

Mayo has shown that if you want low and spinny, then you will need a downward AOA, that's really it.  Whether that is the shot we should be attempting most of the time is a different question.  And whether steep or shallow is "better" in a given situation will depend on the lie, and the shot that is needed.  I don't think there are universal truths about which is "better" or which is more likely to produce clean contact for a given handicap level, etc.  

 

[Brian Manzella]

Trust me, Dave....it's real controversy.

 

You say, "Mayo has shown that if you want low and spinny, then you will need a downward AOA, that's really it." The problem with that is you DON'T NEED 10° down at all to get a high spinning, ~27° launch shot.

 

And NOBODY with a clue thinks that >10° down will produce more solid shots and less bad ones.

 

con·tro·ver·sy

/ˈkäntrəˌvərsē/

noun

 

1. disagreement, typically when prolonged, public, and heated.

    

Sound about right.

[Chunkitgood]

As far as I can tell the D plane is nothing more than a conceptualization of four material aspects of the behavior of the club at the moment of impact (leaving aside any question of how those aspects might change during impact).  That visualization is of a segment of a plane lying between and defined by two line segments or I guess recalling my geometry rays that form an angle.  Those rays or directions are, to quote Dennis Clark on the Golf WRX website:

1. The club head direction, which is a combination of the path AND the angle of attack; and
2. The club face orientation, which is a combination of dynamic loft and face angle.

It is these factors which affect behavior of the ball after contact.

It would seem to follow that if you change any of them, you have necessarily created a new D plane.  If you change the angle of attack, you have a different D plane.  Hence I cannot understand what you mean by “aiming the same D plane anywhere.”  Any D plane is moving more than a set of various aiming (directions), and the very concept of aiming a plane seems superfluous at best and incoherent at worst.

[Chunkitgood]

As far as I can tell the D plane is nothing more than a conceptualization of four material aspects of the behavior of the club at the moment of impact (leaving aside any question of how those aspects might change during impact).  That visualization is of a segment of a plane lying between and defined by two line segments or I guess recalling my geometry rays that form an angle.  Those rays or directions are, to quote Dennis Clark on the Golf WRX website:

1. The club head direction, which is a combination of the path AND the angle of attack; and
2. The club face orientation, which is a combination of dynamic loft and face angle.

It is these factors which affect behavior of the ball after contact.

It would seem to follow that if you change any of them, you have necessarily created a new D plane.  If you change the angle of attack, you have a different D plane.  Hence I cannot understand what you mean by “aiming the same D plane anywhere.”  Any D plane is moving more than a set of various aiming (directions), and the very concept of aiming a plane seems superfluous at best and incoherent at worst.

[Brian Manzella]

Ole Chunk,

 

Never has really liked anything I do or say.

 

Meanwhile, a Hall of Fame Instructor, a Major Winner (not born in the US), and a National Teacher of the Year all sent me messages on how good the video was.

 

Listen ole Chunkn, you can literally "aim a D-Plane."

 

A GIVEN D-Plane.

 

And if you can see how that is not only possible, but sometimes even practical, then you ought to have to change your screenname to chunkinitbad.

 

Or your actual damn name.

 

 

[Doodlebug87]

Is it fair to say that you agree with Mayo in that a negative AOA, some shaft lean and sufficient loft will provide a controllable, low launching, high spin shot, but you disagree that it needs to be 10 down and that thought may be detrimental to most players bar the absolute elite? Your highest spinning shots were more in the 5-6 range from what I recall of the video. Have you and Mayo had a constructive conversation offline and hit shots together to prove the arguments? As a mid handicap my main comment is that the technique is much less forgiving than using the bounce, but the end result is addictive when it's executed well (irrespective of whether 5 or 10 down). My main challenge is ending up too steep and launching maybe 10 degrees like a rocket!

[Hawkeye77]

Good video! Engaging and no yelling!

 

What’s disappointing is someone originally posting a snippet of the exchange at the Q&A to push a little drama and the point gets lost in the “loud” between yourself and Mayo (and there’s now been some context supplied most of us wouldn’t have known anything about - context is good). 
 

I’m not a numbers geek, but respect those that understand them and their applications. Other than a pressure mat conversation a few years ago, when I’ve had lessons with Monte I’ve never seen numbers or felt the need to - now, at a club fitting I’m interested to a point and have learned a lot by asking questions. But I expect an instructor to understand them if they are using them to help me. 
 

Learning that a shallow (using in a relative way, some seem to turn the term into an absolute) delivery can produce plenty of spin and be very efficient was a huge short game eye opener years ago (and game in general) - but when you’ve ingrained a shaft steepening transition over 40 years of golf …….
 

Sounds like Mayo was definitely overselling, but outside the academic debates, maybe in a very general way most of us should subscribe to Monte’s notions of “some” vs. absolutes or overdoing? Just using Monte as a point of reference because that’s mine - I’d guess rational instructors would agree with that. 
 

 

 

[MPStrat]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye77 said:

What’s disappointing is someone originally posting a snippet of the exchange at the Q&A to push a little drama

Was absolutely not intending to “push drama”

 

I like both Mayo and Manzella. I admire Brian’s passion for teaching. We can learn from their differences of opinion and form our own preferences based on good information and our own experience.

 

The real drama is in forum politics. The teams and the groupies for each team who see themselves as soldiers for their leaders.

[Hawkeye77]

1 hour ago, MPStrat said:

Was absolutely not intending to “push drama”

 

I like both Mayo and Manzella. I admire Brian’s passion for teaching. We can learn from their differences of opinion and form our own preferences based on good information and our own experience.

 

The real drama is in forum politics. The teams and the groupies for each team who see themselves as soldiers for their leaders.

I’ll take your word for it. 
 

On the other, the whole “groupies” bit is an exaggeration - not sure who these “leaders” are, lol. People here just aren’t that one dimensional. 
 

Folks with points of view get argued with and often intense, lol, from any angle. Folks trolling other folks or just in general by and large don’t last long - but because they aren’t genuine to start with. 

Edited February 10 by Hawkeye77

[PedronNiall]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but part of Mayo's contention recently was to show 1) -10* or so AoA is optimum and 2) that players shouldn't be scared of more forward shaft lean when executing chips/pitches. From what's in this video it seems that when really pursuing a steeper AoA, more shaft lean is very much something to be cautious of as the launch angle relative to the ground--not the face--can become unwieldy very quickly. Either that, or the norm for all short game shots hit this way is going to be opening up the face to ensure enough dynamic loft.

 

Most ams aren't going to have the time or need to learn how to push spin number high enough to compensate for the decreased launch angle, nor are they going to play green complexes big enough to give those kinds of shots time to bite. Most probably aren't going to take well to trying to always play with the face well outside of square for every shot either.

 

I can't recall anyone of note saying that players at all levels shouldn't hit down on short game shots. Most playing & teaching pros emphasize remaining conscious to do so in the short game to achieve the desired results. What's been taught as the general ideals for chipping and pitching certainly aligns with what's in this video, a negative AoA, simply not one approaching -10*. Most don't emphasize technique that requires so much face manipulation at address to maintain a viable dynamic loft with the amount of shaft lean that AoA is going to encourage.

 

I'd like to see video of players consistently employing what Mayo teaches. From the videos I've seen of Hovland with that focus, he starts open and intentionally opens the face even more in the backswing. He also has a lot more body action than the average player is probably going to be comfortable with. Most aren't going to go after it like this around the green.

 

 

 

That's going to be a lot for the average player to take on while trying to be consistent. From this video, at least, it doesn't seem like the ideal launch angles Mayo has referenced in his videos are easy to come by when trying to have a -10* or so AoA.

 

If I'm misunderstanding what I've seen I'm happy to be corrected. Happy to see more discussion around what techniques will work best near the green and potentially where certain ones might be better to consider than others depending on the shot being faced.

[virtuoso]

Some of this head toward the target is just caused by a narrow stance with hip turn.

…but, who cares, here we go—all caps.

 

ITS NOT LIKE PEOPLE HAVENT TRIED 10 DOWN BEFORE MAYO TURNED ON HIS TRACKMAN.

 

Lots of guys have tried trapping the pee out of it. Some guys like it, some guys lay sod and hit squirters.

 

Is that method universally optimum for everyone? Almost certainly not.

 

[cav5]

Slightest mishit on a stock chip. Black swan lingers!

 

 

 

[cav5]

I wonder how this can happen? Wouldn’t know someone deleted my how-to thread lol. Is this enough height and spin for 20 yards. Hmm positive AoA. Hmm…

 

[cav5]

On 2/9/2024 at 2:34 PM, DaveGoodrich said:

To a certain extent, I think a lot of this is a false controversy.  The more I have played with this, since Mayo's ideas first got brought up here recently, the more I realize that there really is a continuum between the extremes of "use the bounce" and the "low spinner."  

 

If you understand and practice both extremes, then most shots on the course will fall somewhere in between, and you will eventually understand, instinctively, which factors (ball position, weight/pressure distribution, AOA, amount of wrist set, etc.) "add up" to the shot you need at the moment.  

 

Mayo has shown that if you want low and spinny, then you will need a downward AOA, that's really it.  Whether that is the shot we should be attempting most of the time is a different question.  And whether steep or shallow is "better" in a given situation will depend on the lie, and the shot that is needed.  I don't think there are universal truths about which is "better" or which is more likely to produce clean contact for a given handicap level, etc.  

 

 

Mayos is a double motion. Think of an airplane coming into landing. Strikes it down then reroutes linear. The lean, plus the low point, plus an awkard shoulder motion related to LP location bails him out. Its like stretching a rubber band taunt, then stretching it to its max and hitting it back at taunt, but if it comes back to its noodly normal you're F'd. I think you will find over time that your mind will fight linear feeling motions.

 

You are 100% correct on the false controversy as we are discussing the best way to hit wedges like irons without messing it up.

Edited February 10 by cav5

[iacas]

1 hour ago, PedronNiall said:

Most ams aren't going to have the time or need to learn how to push spin number high enough to compensate for the decreased launch angle, nor are they going to play green complexes big enough to give those kinds of shots time to bite.

 

I don't know about that. Here's a pair of videos and a photo. Very short shot. Three yards of carry.

 

1 hour ago, PedronNiall said:

Most probably aren't going to take well to trying to always play with the face well outside of square for every shot either.

 

Opening the face like that doesn't move the face right as much as it looks. Not when you have a higher lofted club.

 

1 hour ago, PedronNiall said:

I can't recall anyone of note saying that players at all levels shouldn't hit down on short game shots. Most playing & teaching pros emphasize remaining conscious to do so in the short game to achieve the desired results.

 

I generally like Joe, and think that he's often doing good work, but I'd also say to him that he likes to go overboard and in doing so, often "invents" opposition to what he's going on about at that moment.

 

I think he did so here. Nobody's telling people to hit level or 2° down with every shot. I don't even think 10° is that steep. My flop shots are -4 to -6°.

[PedronNiall]

2 hours ago, iacas said:

I don't know about that. Here's a pair of videos and a photo. Very short shot. Three yards of carry.

My comment on having room to get it to stop was referring to the launch angle with lower dynamic loft. Looks like he was slightly open and maintained the face angle really well through the strike to get the optimum launch angle for all three. Not going to be the easiest for everyone to pull off consistently, but def would offer an additional option if someone short sides themselves and needs to stop it quickly.

 

The more info the better. Still iffy on everyone needing to add it to the bag, but maybe there are lies where it really shines. I agree that it probably would have been a much more chill situation had it been presented a little differently to start. 

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, PedronNiall said:

The more info the better. Still iffy on everyone needing to add it to the bag, but maybe there are lies where it really shines. I agree that it probably would have been a much more chill situation had it been presented a little differently to start. 

 

Agree there… except that I think most better players should experiment with it. Just add another tool to the toolbox, even if you rarely need to pull it out.

[GungHoGolf]

3 hours ago, Chainlinks said:

I don’t know but trackman was measuring a blob years ago, do they know where the sweet spot is nowadays? 

Not sure what “blob” is in reference to, but for the last few years the TM4 has been measuring impact position in two dimensions from the center of the face to mm precision with a high degree of accuracy, as long as you have sufficient light on the hitting area (its built-in camera plays a role in this measurement).

[Santiago Golf]

I think golf has gotten fun when people are debating how to hit 15 yard shots 

 

Brian and Joe are both really smart people 

 

There is a video of Luke Donald hitting a 20 yard shot off a putting green with a 60* ... mid flight draws landing at 18 and stoping at 20 ... would love to see the numbers on those swings

 

There is a video of Seve hitting 30 yard pitches with Mac O Grady filming everying shot from a variety of angles ... Seve was hitting ball then ground on every shot

 

 

I do agree that bounce doesn't matter if you are hitting ball first ... that being said, most ams should play a wedge with more bounce because they often don't hit ball first. 

 

If you want to have alot shaft lean, your Chest better be leaning forward and down ... if you catch a little behind it, it still get in the air and go towards your target

 

If you want no shaft lean, then you want to be more balanced at impact when chipping

 

The only thing I think worth arguing is that its easier to chip with a 6-8iron versus a SW ... that is not true, SW should be almost every recreational players go to club around the green

 

I teach every player how to hit a mid flight pitch and also how big of swing for 10, 20, 30 yards (carry)

If they can do that, I teach them how to hit a slightly higher shot that carry 7, 14, 21 yards

If they can do that, that is all they will ever need

if they want to hit low, use a hybrid or putt it 

 

Idk ... maybe i know nothing

[PracticeSwinger]

Really interesting; thanks for the detailed explanations. Quite the newbie on this but interested in hearing about the 63% launch toward the face - I get the idea of low 90% for putters, 80s for driver and lower for middle irons and so on. If my understanding is correct, then the ball launches approximatively 2/3 of the spin loft from AoA (and not the ground) for high lofted wedges (and I’m guessing that the point here that it launches too low even though spin numbers might be good; skidding on the green)…

 

Wondering if that 2/3 is relatively constant? Or if different deliveries would reduce/increase this?… if we imagine a ridiculous shot with extreme shaft lean and very high negative AoA / in effect just lifting the club and chopping at the ball with hands way forward - would the ball still launch at 60% or so of the ‘AoA line’ ?

 

my name is Jay (if required!)

[iacas]

It’s low 60s when friction is highest and speeds are lower. At higher speeds less friction it’s closer to the face.

[doctor220]

22 hours ago, PedronNiall said:

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but part of Mayo's contention recently was to show 1) -10* or so AoA is optimum and 2) that players shouldn't be scared of more forward shaft lean when executing chips/pitches. From what's in this video it seems that when really pursuing a steeper AoA, more shaft lean is very much something to be cautious of as the launch angle relative to the ground--not the face--can become unwieldy very quickly. Either that, or the norm for all short game shots hit this way is going to be opening up the face to ensure enough dynamic loft.

 

Most ams aren't going to have the time or need to learn how to push spin number high enough to compensate for the decreased launch angle, nor are they going to play green complexes big enough to give those kinds of shots time to bite. Most probably aren't going to take well to trying to always play with the face well outside of square for every shot either.

 

I can't recall anyone of note saying that players at all levels shouldn't hit down on short game shots. Most playing & teaching pros emphasize remaining conscious to do so in the short game to achieve the desired results. What's been taught as the general ideals for chipping and pitching certainly aligns with what's in this video, a negative AoA, simply not one approaching -10*. Most don't emphasize technique that requires so much face manipulation at address to maintain a viable dynamic loft with the amount of shaft lean that AoA is going to encourage.

 

I'd like to see video of players consistently employing what Mayo teaches. From the videos I've seen of Hovland with that focus, he starts open and intentionally opens the face even more in the backswing. He also has a lot more body action than the average player is probably going to be comfortable with. Most aren't going to go after it like this around the green.

 

 

 

That's going to be a lot for the average player to take on while trying to be consistent. From this video, at least, it doesn't seem like the ideal launch angles Mayo has referenced in his videos are easy to come by when trying to have a -10* or so AoA.

 

If I'm misunderstanding what I've seen I'm happy to be corrected. Happy to see more discussion around what techniques will work best near the green and potentially where certain ones might be better to consider than others depending on the shot being faced.

Big enough to bite? We’re talking about short game shots, how far do you think the ball bounces on the first bounce? That isn’t a concern at all.

[GungHoGolf]

4 hours ago, Chainlinks said:

And the center of the face is the sweet spot?

Not always. But unless you’ve independently figured out the exact sweet spot, the center is a good reference point.

[PedronNiall]

7 hours ago, doctor220 said:

Big enough to bite? We’re talking about short game shots, how far do you think the ball bounces on the first bounce? That isn’t a concern at all.

If you go back and watch the video you'll come across exactly the shots I'm referring to that approach -10* AoA but don't get above a 26* launch angle and skip through the green before they can bite. You'll see that a slightly open face maintained through contact is pretty much a necessity to get the 30ish optimum launch window as the dynamic loft caused by reasonable shaft lean is too low otherwise. It's either that or dropping the club on it so there's almost no lean at impact. 

[GolfTurkey]

When I've seen Mayo post numbers of ~10 down shots, dynamic loft is usually 45-47 from memory.

 

I noticed Brian was 40-41 dynamic when hitting 10-ish down, which caused the ball to launch too low. I would like to see Mayo respond to the video and what he tells his players to keep more loft on the face (is it simply opening it more or something else to prevent dynamically tilting the loft down too much while hitting down).