Am.i the only one who thinks launch angles, spin, AoA, etc for chips is overkill info?

[doctor220]

3 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

Shouldn’t we distinguish between chipping and pitching? Pitching is much more difficult than chipping.

Yes true, I would say the LM stuff is prob more beneficial for pitching than chipping with an 8 iron. Though I contend vast majority of short game shots at high level are pitches of varying degrees and it’s extremely rare for a good player to hit an 8 iron or PW around the green where it flies 25% of distance and rolls the rest 

[virtuoso]

Just now, doctor220 said:

Yes true, I would say the LM stuff is prob more beneficial for pitching than chipping with an 8 iron. Though I contend vast majority of short game shots at high level are pitches of varying degrees and it’s extremely rare for a good player to hit an 8 iron or PW around the green where it flies 25% of distance and rolls the rest 

Yeah, that’s my contention.

[SNIPERBBB]

Where id really like to see spin numbers for chipping is at what point can spin effect rollout distances on different green conditions(grass types, stimp speeds, firm or soft greens,  up/down/cross grain  etc). 

 

See so many guys trying to stop the ball with spin on greens or distances that even the most illegal wedge and call couldn't stop it within 7ft

[getitdaily]

14 minutes ago, doctor220 said:

That’s nonsense. You can be a proficient chipper but still work on stuff/make changes  
 

it’s really really weird and nonsensical  to say you think SAM is invaluable but that LMs can’t help at all with the short game. 

I didn't say SAM was invaluable. I said it measures something that had A TON more impact than what LM data will show and be helpful for an avg golfer.

 

Open/close the putter face 1 degree from 10 feet and you miss. That's very easy to understand. Having face angle data can help.

 

Launching the ball at 25* instead of 40* (or whatever is optimal)...not valuable when you can simply see how far you landed the ball and how far it ran out. The best data you can have for chipping is ho2 far you need to land the ball so it runs out to the hole. In your practice you stick a tee in the ground at your landing spot and validate if your perspective is true. That's how I adjust for faster or slower greens. LM data for chipping is overkill.

[doctor220]

1 minute ago, getitdaily said:

I didn't say SAM was invaluable. I said it measures something that had A TON more impact than what LM data will show and be helpful for an avg golfer.

 

Open/close the putter face 1 degree from 10 feet and you miss. That's very easy to understand. Having face angle data can help.

 

Launching the ball at 25* instead of 40* (or whatever is optimal)...not valuable when you can simply see how far you landed the ball and how far it ran out. The best data you can have for chipping is ho2 far you need to land the ball so it runs out to the hole. In your practice you stick a tee in the ground at your landing spot and validate if your perspective is true. That's how I adjust for faster or slower greens. LM data for chipping is overkill.

If only tour pros knew this! 
 

If they could just dig it out of the dirt like hogan did. 
 

A+ 

[getitdaily]

13 minutes ago, virtuoso said:

Yeah, that’s my contention.

I could mildly concede your point of pitching. For a high level, non collegiate amateur, I could see having spin data for 30, 40, 50 yard pitches helping to validate how quickly the ball will stop.  

 

But even then, it's not that difficult for that type of player to learn that in casual rounds and have a basic idea of how far they need to hit those shots.

 

Outside of a highly skilled amateur, every other golfer simply needs to have a basic idea of technique on those pitches and an idea of where to land it. Those folks are just trying to have a chance at a putt...usually from 20+ feet after the chip. Knowing launch and spin data for that shot, for these folks, wouldn't do squat for helping them hit it closer...because their technique is wrong...almost always. 

[getitdaily]

7 minutes ago, doctor220 said:

If only tour pros knew this! 
 

If they could just dig it out of the dirt like hogan did. 
 

A+ 

First page of this thread, I noted that top level collegiate ams and tour pros can benefit from the data. 

 

So, do you contend that weekend ams, even those who play really good am golf, should be working with a launch monitor while chipping?

[Zitlow]

I borrowed this from @Woahnelly98. Richard Bland giving a practical Chipping Masterclass at the LIV in Vegas with Rachel Drummond.

 

At about 3:30 in he plays the ball way back with his hands forward on an uphill lie leans back and chunks it. Even the best make bad contact at times. 

 

 

Edited February 10 by Zitlow

[virtuoso]

16 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

I could mildly concede your point of pitching. For a high level, non collegiate amateur, I could see having spin data for 30, 40, 50 yard pitches helping to validate how quickly the ball will stop.  

 

But even then, it's not that difficult for that type of player to learn that in casual rounds and have a basic idea of how far they need to hit those shots.

 

Outside of a highly skilled amateur, every other golfer simply needs to have a basic idea of technique on those pitches and an idea of where to land it. Those folks are just trying to have a chance at a putt...usually from 20+ feet after the chip. Knowing launch and spin data for that shot, for these folks, wouldn't do squat for helping them hit it closer...because their technique is wrong...almost always. 

Well my point was that if we are going to talk about anything, the pitch is more interesting than the chip…but the real mystery hides in the conditions, and how technique should be subservient to that.

 

In fact, I don’t think you will start to solve the “10 Degree Down Affair” until the conditions are plugged in a variable.

Edited February 10 by virtuoso

[virtuoso]

Here is how I see it. Where I live there are a lot of courses with built up green complexes and fairly high bunker lips, and usually not a lot of green to work with because of subtle ledges, etc.

 

…..which would be not a big deal if the lie was dry and perchy. It is not. The lie is tight, but soft, and the ball finds the lowest resting point so it’s sitting down slightly. And the conditions are asking me to clip that puppy perfect, get it up in the air a decent amount, and also have a fairly high amount of spin.

 

No one in social media is going to do a tutorial for those conditions because they would embarrass themselves.

 

If data can help me with that, I’m all ears.

 

But if I going to go over the mountain to la Quinta and hit little bumpers, I probably don’t need the data.

 

 

[doctor220]

36 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

First page of this thread, I noted that top level collegiate ams and tour pros can benefit from the data. 

 

So, do you contend that weekend ams, even those who play really good am golf, should be working with a launch monitor while chipping?

What does really good mean, like contend in state ams, moderately deep + ? I don’t think they need to be practicing their pitching every week with a trackman, but if they were having issues and specifically wanted to improve it, it would not be unreasonable for them to look at their launch, spin and AoA numbers to get more data behind why they are struggling.
 

for a 10 handicap who plays 18 holes a week, no I don’t think they really need to look at LM numbers for pitching  

[getitdaily]

Just now, doctor220 said:

What does really good mean, like contend in state ams, moderately deep + ? I don’t think they need to be practicing their pitching every week with a trackman, but if they were having issues and specifically wanted to improve it, it would not be unreasonable for them to look at their launch, spin and AoA numbers to get more data behind why they are struggling.
 

for a 10 handicap who plays 18 holes a week, no I don’t think they really need to look at LM numbers for pitching  

I've already noted that definition...

 

Tour and top level collegiate players. 

[doctor220]

Just now, getitdaily said:

I've already noted that definition...

 

Tour and top level collegiate players. 

Sure then why would they not look at the data ? These level players are doing every little possible for a tenth of a shot. 

[PedronNiall]

Next time just title your thread something along the lines of "Here's what I think. Please only comment if you agree." Would save everyone a whole lot of time since you have no interest in good faith discussion, trying to remotely understand anyone else's point of view, or accepting anything that doesn't align with you feelings on the matter.

[Pepperturbo]

Data for certain aspects of the game can be helpful to both mechanical and feel players, but zero value around the green, except to disrupt the mind's ability to interpret what is seen, and translate it to instinctual feel. 

 

Then there's the other problem: Most golfers do NOT have any idea what their ball does under various circumstances.  So, such data feeds a blank stare.

[getitdaily]

1 minute ago, PedronNiall said:

Next time just title your thread something along the lines of "Here's what I think. Please only comment if you agree." Would save everyone a whole lot of time since you have no interest in good faith discussion, trying to remotely understand anyone else's point of view, or accepting anything that doesn't align with you feelings on the matter.

Go to a course. Take a launch monitor. Approach people chipping. Find someone who says yes when you ask them if they'd like to chip better by using a launch monitor. 

 

Quantity results with weekend players and then come tell me about it. If you can provide proof that launch monitor data is useful for improving chipping rather than technique and setup then I'll chnage my mind....for weekend golfers.

 

But if you go tell any...ANY weekend golfer that they launched the ball too low (when only compared to data, not visual feedback) and expect them to be able to improve because you gave them data then I'll make a post saying you're the best instructor in the world. 

 

There's already about 100 years of proof that setup and technique provide all that's necessary to get good, even really good at chipping. 

 

Your idea of good faith discussion being tied to trying to understand your perspective is bunk. History says I'm right. I understand your perspective. I just don't agree with it. 

 

Show me data and then I'll understand. But anecdotal "it's good to have data" isn't good faith...it's just hyperbole. 

[Nels55]

@getitdaily  have you ever used a launch monitor while practicing chipping and pitching?

[getitdaily]

3 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

@getitdaily  have you ever used a launch monitor while practicing chipping and pitching?

Nope. I strongly feel it's not useful for all but tour pros and high collegiate ams. 

 

I have a mevo+, i could use it. Just think it would be menial in impact. For reasons I've laid out already. 

[Nels55]

5 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

Nope. I strongly feel it's not useful for all but tour pros and high collegiate ams. 

 

I have a mevo+, i could use it. Just think it would be menial in impact. For reasons I've laid out already. 

If you have not done it then you don't know if it will be of any use to you.

[getitdaily]

4 minutes ago, Nels55 said:

If you have not done it then you don't know if it will be of any use to you.

Sure I do. 

 

If I can hit my landing spot then everything else is taken care of.

 

All the data I need, chipping, is whether I'm hitting my landing spot or not.

 

Edited February 10 by getitdaily

[Nels55]

11 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

Sure I do. 

 

If I can hit my landing spot then everything else is taken care of.

 

All the data I need, chipping, is whether I'm hitting my landing spot or not.

 

It's a nice theory on you part but it is not conclusive in any way.  Until you do it you don't know.

[getitdaily]

1 minute ago, Nels55 said:

It's a nice theory on you part but it is not conclusive in any way.  Until you do it you don't know.

Will agree to disagree. 100+ years of chipping history says setup and technique. 

 

For instructors, knowing what data certain technique produces has value. But only in how well they can get a student to execute technique that has been the same for a really long time. 

 

It didn't take a launch monitor for someone to realize that having more loft would improve short game as greens started to get better and faster (introduction of the 60* and 64* wedges).

[Nels55]

5 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

Will agree to disagree. 100+ years of chipping history says setup and technique. 

 

For instructors, knowing what data certain technique produces has value. But only in how well they can get a student to execute technique that has been the same for a really long time. 

 

It didn't take a launch monitor for someone to realize that having more loft would improve short game as greens started to get better and faster (introduction of the 60* and 64* wedges).

Holy smokes you have been chipping and pitching for 100 years?!!!

 

All kidding aside I did not say that it would work.  But you are a really good golfer and you might actually find value in using a launch monitor to practice chipping and pitching for reasons that you are not currently aware.  LOL this sort of thing has happened to me many times during my life where I have been so sure of something only to try it and find out the truth is opposite of what I previously believed.

[getitdaily]

1 minute ago, Nels55 said:

Holy smokes you have been chipping and pitching for 100 years?!!!

 

All kidding aside I did not say that it would work.  But you are a really good golfer and you might actually find value in using a launch monitor to practice chipping and pitching for reasons that you are not currently aware.  LOL this sort of thing has happened to me many times during my life where I have been so sure of something only to try it and find out the truth is opposite of what I previously believed.

Oh I've been there too....when I bought....

 

My launch monitor...lol. 

 

I thought my issues were path. Nope, I path numbers were really consistent. I needed better face control.

 

Maybe 1 day I'll take my mevo+ when I practice short game...maybe. Just can't see how it'll help.

 

Oh, that came up short. Launch monitor says it launched high and didn't have much spin. Well, yeah, I half fatted it...

[nsxguy]

On 2/9/2024 at 12:29 PM, iacas said:

Is GEARS, force plates, launch monitors in general, video, nearly every training aid, etc. overkill?

 

Everything has its place. And just because people are talking about it and learning about it doesn’t mean you have to think about it when you’re hitting a shot on the golf course.

 

1 hour ago, getitdaily said:

I've already noted that definition...

 

Tour and top level collegiate players. 

 

So lookee here, you and iacas agree after all.

 

To your question the obvious answer, as you already know, is "No".

 

But I feel compelled to point out that you think LM data is useful for every phase of the game from putting to driving EXCEPT for chipping.

 

Say what ? Do you not realize how incredibly inconsistent that is ?

 

And then you come along and agree that it might be useful for tour and top-level collegians.

 

But it's NOT useful for + cappers, scratch, and possibly even low single digits ?

 

You really don't realize how incredibly inconsistent that is ?

 

And yes, I realize that the better the player the more useful these tools/measurements are but where do you draw the line ? (That's rhetorical btw. Clearly, you draw the line at chipping and top collegians)

[doctor220]

21 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

Will agree to disagree. 100+ years of chipping history says setup and technique. 

 

For instructors, knowing what data certain technique produces has value. But only in how well they can get a student to execute technique that has been the same for a really long time. 

 

It didn't take a launch monitor for someone to realize that having more loft would improve short game as greens started to get better and faster (introduction of the 60* and 64* wedges).

What does this mean? How does the way golf was taught before LM were invented matter at all?

 

for decades coaches said that path primarily determines start direction and face primarily determines curve and had the relationship totally backward. With modern LM it basically proved this was wrong. 
 

it’s weird you post a ton of swing videos and talk about changing stuff in your swing but somehow can’t appreciate the same benefits for the short game. Just a really weird nonsensical point of view. 

 

[doctor220]

1 hour ago, Pepperturbo said:

Data for certain aspects of the game can be helpful to both mechanical and feel players, but zero value around the green, except to disrupt the mind's ability to interpret what is seen, and translate it to instinctual feel. 

 

Then there's the other problem: Most golfers do NOT have any idea what their ball does under various circumstances.  So, such data feeds a blank stare.

Says the so called 3 handicap or whatever. Idk it’s just strange you guys think you have a monopoly on what is helpful or not. You have elite players choosing to use this info. Do you think they know more about if it’s beneficial for them or you? I’ll take hovlands opinion. 
 

the short game is not instinctual at all, especially as the motions for good full swings and hitting soft pitch shots are basically totally opposite so I don’t get this garbage about it being intuitive or that good players can somehow figure it out. 
 

Sure maybe if you’re used to dumping the club at impact and hitting weak bloopers then hitting soft pitches may be totally natural but it’s not really common for good players to hit full shots like that

Edited February 10 by doctor220

[doctor220]

This thread is basically “ elite players tend to do xyz and I don’t see how that’s beneficial for me so it’s useless and stupid “ 

 

can say this for speed training, working out, using putting start line guides , alignment aids and any number of other stuff that elite players commonly use that casuals don’t 

[getitdaily]

1 minute ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

So lookee here, you and iacas agree after all.

 

To your question the obvious answer, as you already know, is "No".

 

But I feel compelled to point out that you think LM data is useful for every phase of the game from putting to driving EXCEPT for chipping.

 

Say what ? Do you not realize how incredibly inconsistent that is ?

 

And then you come along and agree that it might be useful for tour and top-level collegians.

 

But it's NOT useful for + cappers, scratch, and possibly even low single digits ?

 

You really don't realize how incredibly inconsistent that is ?

 

And yes, I realize that the better the player the more useful these tools/measurements are but where do you draw the line ? (That's rhetorical btw. Clearly, you draw the line at chipping and top collegians)

Well, here's why I draw the line at top collegiate ams and tour pros....

 

Those guys already have impeccable technique (let's leave viktor "no hands" hovland out for now). They also travel around and play multiple surfaces...varying surfaces, often. It can pay for those guys to understand how much they spin certain pitches (and some chips). It can help then know whether they can pull off a certain difficult shot. 

 

But even those guys...know. They practice enough that they know how to impart more spin. Some.of those guys are "show me" guys. Show them the data and they trust what you tell them more. 

 

For everyone else, just focus on landing spot and trial and error on different setups. Hit the same chip with different clubs. Just rep out. If you don't chip well, get a lesson.

[getitdaily]

4 minutes ago, doctor220 said:

This thread is basically “ elite players tend to do xyz and I don’t see how that’s beneficial for me so it’s useless and stupid “ 

 

can say this for speed training, working out, using putting start line guides , alignment aids and any number of other stuff that elite players commonly use that casuals don’t 

Do you use a launch monitor for chipping practice?