Thoughts On The Anchored Putting Situation...

---

Currently the R&A is reviewing the legality of ‘anchored’ putting methods. This is a bit different from saying that long putters and belly putters would be banned because the idea is more about the putting technique of anchoring the putter against your body. Superstar amateur Beau Hossler was using a belly putter at this year’s US Open, which he borrowed from a member at his club, but was putting with it in a non-anchored fashion. So what the R&A (not the USGA) would be ruling upon would not affect a player like Hossler who doesn’t anchor the belly putter across his body.

First, let’s get some things about of the way that are of lesser importance. The USGA is not ruling on anchored putters at this time. The R&A covers most of the rest of the world when it comes to the rules governing golf. However, more often than not the R&A and USGA work in conjunction with each other. Years ago the R&A allowed for a smaller sized golf ball which would allow the ball to travel further. That’s one reason why international golfers often struggled playing in the US, they had to get used to the shorter flying golf ball.

Also, the R&A used to allow for drivers with a higher COR. The COR is essentially the ‘trampoline effect’ or ‘hotness’ of the driver face. The USGA has set it at 0.830. The R&A allowed the COR to go as high as 0.900. This higher COR means that the ball will fly at a higher speed when hit directly on the sweetspot. Eventually the R&A decided to put the COR limit at 0.830 as well. Thus, the real importance of this ruling is that if the R&A bans anchored style putting, odds are that the USGA will follow.

One of the other things to get out of the way is the R&A’s concern about a golfer using a long putter as the club for drops from hazards, ground under repair, etc. in the ‘2 club length process.’ The fix for that is simple, change the rule to you cannot use a putter for the ‘2 club length drop.’



To me, the crux of making a piece of equipment legal or illegal comes down to ‘is it in the best interest of the game.’ This is where I do not envy the R&A and USGA for having to determine this because that’s such an ambiguous concept to attack. And often times what happens is some people are going to place a great importance on certain aspects as being ‘good for the game’ than others.

One of the big questions I would ask is ‘will it hurt the popularity of the game and if so, is it worth hurting the popularity of the game in the long run?’

I’ve heard the claim that people will quit the game quite a bit if they have to go back to playing with the yips. That’s something that should be addressed, but that does not necessarily mean that a piece of equipment should be made legal in fear of people quitting the game. Imagine there was a putter that had some sort of device that made putting virtually automatic, but cost $10,000 for the putter. Thus, the wealthy could now become world class putters without having any skill. The governing bodies would have to rule against that even if those who could afford the putter claimed that they would quit the game. In that situation, it is worth making illegal in spite of hypothetically losing players.

However, the real crux of the situation is that the reality is that golf will probably not lose 0.5% of its players if the anchored putting style is illegal. For starters, the overwhelming majority of golfers do not have the yips. And a good percentage of anchored putting style golfers use the style because they essentially feel that will work for them in the meantime and then a few months down the road they will probably try a ‘standard’ putter with a ‘standard’ putting stroke because that’s what they will believe works for them in the end. Lastly, many players who have the yips don’t even really know it. The higher handicaps who have the yips just think they are terrible putters and often don’t care about it because they view it as their own lack of talent.

That leaves us with the lower handicap players who use the anchored style to combat the yips. And personally I view their talk about ‘quitting the game’ as an empty threat. Why? Because they love the game so much to begin with that they probably will not leave the game because they cannot putt as well anymore.

Where I have almost exclusively heard talk about golfers leaving the game and seen actual golfers leave the game is usually due to the point where their ballstriking regresses so much that they cannot fix those issues and no longer enjoy the game. While I have my complaints about titanium drivers from a competitive perspective and how they have changed the game, I think in the end they did get more golfers into the game because the experience of hitting the ball further with much more forgiveness has made the game much more enjoyable for them. Ballstriking tends to have a much bigger impact on the level of a golfer’s enjoyment in almost every golfer I’ve ever encountered.



Another question the governing bodies need to ask is ‘what’s the situation of anchored style putter manufacturer’s and the impact it would have if we essentially banned these putters?’

This is something to account for since it led to a huge lawsuit by PING back in the 80’s and the only reason it didn’t lead to one with the new grooves rule a few years ago is that they tweaked the rules and in the end, it worked out in the OEM’s favor, financially.

While I’m not a big fan of PING, I do agree with their side back in the square grooves rule in the 80’s. The USGA made the grooves legal and when PING’s sales sky-rocketed and they stockpiled their inventory to meet those sales, the USGA wanted to suddenly ban square grooves. Furthermore, their actual impact on performance was never really determined as good, bad or indifferent. So I can side with OEM’s in that regard.

With the latest grooves rule, I was against it for the fact that it would mean many golfers would wind up having to purchase new equipment. Particularly in a time when the economy was in extremely rough shape. In the end, none of the statistics back what the USGA claimed would happen once the U-Grooves were banned. But, they did offer an option that was not completely unfair to the manufacturers as well.

I don’t see that situation here with the anchored putters. First, I believe the inventory is far, far less. Secondly, the option is there to either trim down the shafts to make them into a ‘normal putter’ or remove the shafts and replace them with different shafts to make them more like a ‘normal putter.’

Eventually I get to asking myself ‘is there a clear hypocrisy in banning the anchored putting style versus other styles that are currently legal to use?’

I usually hear this complaint from pro-anchored style golfers about the cross handed grip. In general, I disagree with them because the typical cross handed grip is not anchored or held against something at all. In fact, there are many golfers who just happened to grow up thinking that the lead hand should be the lowest on the grip. I don’t find the typical cross handed grip to be out of the ordinary in ‘what a swing should look like.’

However, it does negate things like Bernhard Langer’s original cross handed grip, where he used his right hand to clutch the left wrist and make a stroke. Here’s a diagram below of that.



Nor do I find grips and putting motions like ‘the claw’ or the ‘saw grip’ to be a ‘normal swing motion.’



So in that sense, I feel the pro-anchored putter people have a point.

Then we get down to the biggie ‘does the anchored putting style increase performance despite not increasing talent and skill?’

Here I can see both sides of the argument. For the anti-anchored putter side, my statistical research has shown that in general, the PGA Tour players who have gone to the long putter have improved their putting using the Putts Gained formula.

I can also see the point that part of the game is about the ability of the golfer to handle their nerves. If it weren’t, we wouldn’t hold somebody like Jack Nicklaus as all that special and the Ryder Cup would just be another pro event.

But in my opinion, putting is much much more about having a good speed/touch, good aim and the ability to read greens far more than it is about stroke mechanics. It’s not even that close of a contest, IMO.

One of the all-time great putters, Loren Roberts, utilizes a bit of a ‘cut-across’ stroke according to SAM Puttlab data. Yet, he’s the ‘Boss of the Moss.’ His great putting has to do more with getting the putter face square to the target at impact consistently, having a great touch on the greens and being able to read those greens.

When I think of the truly greatest putters on the PGA Tour over the years, I think of Luke Donald, Greg Chalmers, Aaron Baddeley, Tiger Woods and Brian Gay….all using standard putters with a standard putting style.

And for all of the talk of Adam Scott’s putting, he finished 144th in Putts Gained last year. This year he’s currently tied for 78th. However, what people do not realize is that Scott was ranked FIRST in putts gained back in 2004, when he had a standard style putter.

I also look at some of the best anchored putters on Tour and I think of Scott McCarron who went from an above average putter with the long stick to one of the best on Tour. But that didn’t happen until he and his caddy started to learn AimPoint’s system of reading greens. The same has happened for Bo Van Pelt, who now utilizes AimPoint and has went from a mediocre putter to a top-10 putter, while still using a ‘standard putter.’


FINAL CONCLUSION

Currently, I am considering a belly putter myself. Although I would like to wait and see what the governing bodies decide on the matter. My feeling is that if I can find a belly putter that I aim well like my current putter and I can automate the putting stroke to a degree, that may help in the end. However, I am looking for that possible infinitesimal improvement and I have no idea whether or not that will happen.

And that’s why I tend to lean towards keeping the anchored putting style. I think a lot of it is more of a psychosomatic deal than anything else. I don’t think it’s worth the hassle and possible uproar to ban something that we have no unearthly idea if it’s truly in the best interest of the game.





3JACK

3Jack Round 7.31.12 FSGA Amateur Qualifier

Course: Metrowest GC
Stimp: 10.5
Ball: Titleist Pro V1x

Driver: Wishon 919THI 10* loft, UST Mamiya ProForce VTS Silver 6x shaft
3-wood: Wishon 949MC 15* loft, UST Mamiya ProForce VTS Red 7x shaft
Hybrid: Wishon 775HS, 18* loft, Wishon Gold Tour Hybrid shaft (stiff)
4-iron: Wishon 555C, standard loft, Wishon Stepless Steel shaft (stiff)
5-AW: Wishon 555M, standard loft, Wishon Stepless Steel shaft (stiff)
SW: Cleveland Reg. 588, 55* loft, 16* bounce, Tour Concept Wedge shaft
LW: Edel Gold Digger Grind, 60* loft, 27* bounce, True Temper Dynamic Gold SL shaft

Going into the qualifier I thought that under part at Metrowest would probably qualify. I had played Metrowest about 8 different times and struggled on 7 of the rounds, but managed to keep the scores between 74-78. In the month leading to the qualifier I started to hit the irons superbly. I was flagging about 3-4 shots a round, coming very close to making a hole-in-one or jarring an eagle on multiple occasions.

What was killing me was the driver, but I was more inconsistent than anything. I would have a lot of times where the front 9 would be a disaster driving the ball, then I would start to 'get it' on the back nine and think I was cured, only to repeat the same sequence in the next round. Or I would go to the range thinking I had resolved the issue and sometimes I would hit the driver great and other rounds it would be a nightmare.

My putting really started to come around, in particular with the use of the AimPoint bubble which really helped diagnose where I make mistakes (reading too much break and too much slope). And the short game was getting really good in the last 2 weeks.

I knew going into the tournament my success was going to come down to how well I hit the driver and the long irons.

#10 - Nervous, I snap hook a driver so bad that it was easily my worst drive all year long. I then just hacked a 7-iron out of the deep rough about 100 yards or so. I then was thinking about trying to get the ball in range to make bogey. I tried hitting a hybrid around the oak tree, but it caught the tree and kicked out sideways.

Now, I figured I might as well get as close to the green as I could and I hit a 3-wood from a lie below my feet. This one cuts and goes into the bunker well away from the green. Now I have a terrible lie in the bunker and can only manage to hit the ball into the other bunker.

I then blast a bunker shot to 10-feet. I had the read at 3-inches and had the line, but left it 6-inches short and make triple (+3)


#11 - I hit a ugly low draw that finds the fairway bunker. I hit a good fairway bunker shot with a SW to 25 feet. I had the read at 14-inches right and I just burned the edge and tapped in for par (+3)


#12 - I tried to aim more down the right side to play for my left driver. Again, I hit a low pull-draw type of driver. I had a very difficult shot as the 8-iron was a tough lie and I would have to draw it around a tree. Instead, I decided to play for the right side of the green and I missed a little right and a little short. That was more of the line of thinking I should have had on #10.

Even though I had a lot of green in front of me, I hit a nice PW chip to about 3-feet and drained the par putt (+3)


#13 - New hole, same song. This time I find another left fairway bunker. I had a tough shot and a tough lie and hit a really good 5-iron out of there, but it found the greenside bunker. There was not much room to work with and the lie in the greenside bunker was crap, so I hit it pretty well but it rolled past the pin and 2-putted for bogey (+4)


#14 - Ugly driver that cut a little, but found the fairway. Decided to lay up since I couldn't get there and flushed a 5-iron to 110 yards. Hit a SW to about 30-feet on a difficult shot to the green. I then had the read at 0 and the read was true, I just missed by about 2-inches short and made par (+4)


#15 - When your +4 and you can't hit your driver, but hit your irons well, I started to think about going for flags on the par-3's, regardless of pin location. I flushed an 8-iron to 15-feet. This was a putt that was at 60* up and then flattened out. I over-read the 2nd part of the putt and missed high and made par (+4)


#16 - Another low pull draw into a left fairway bunker. I hit a very good 7-iron that drew just left of the green. I hit a Rule of 12 chip (9-iron) perfectly to 2-feet and tapped in for par (+4)


#17 - Again, I was thinking about going for the flag. I hit the 5-iron well, a little left, but it went long of the green anyway. I then hit a SW chip to about 4-feet and saved par (+4)


#18 - This was an ugly hook, but it found the fairway and was in good shape. Here I bailed on a PW and found the left greenside bunker. I hit a good blast to 6-feet and had the read, but left the putt short (bad stroke). And made a bogey (+5)


#1 - I knew at the turn I was not looking good. The real killer is that I couldn't hit the driver, so my odds of making birdie were really lowered. When you can hit the driver, you can start to put yourself in position to do some things. When you can't hit the driver, par-5's become almost impossible.

Here I snap-hooked a driver that found the fairway. However, I had 180 yards into a green that usually is meant for a wedge into it. I flushed a 7-iron onto the green. Even my playing partner mentioned how difficult it is to find the green from 100 yards, much less 180 yards. I then had a 30-footer that I think I would have made if I didn't hit it off the toe and I made par (+5)


#2 - Another snap hook driver. What was difficult was I was trying everything I could think of in order to not shut the face and I didn't have this issue with any irons. I then tried to see if the attack angle was too steep and that didn't work. Then I tried to prevent from swinging too far out to the right and that didn't work. I just couldn't stop snap hooking the driver.

I wound up with a bad lie and to work some trees. I hit the shot pretty well, but I wound up in the right greenside bunker. I blasted to 5-feet and I had the read at 1-inch and I think it broke about 4-inches. Must have mis-read the % of slope. (+6)


#3 - Flushed a 4-iron to 18-feet. Probably had a decent read, but hit it too softly and made par (+6)


#4 - didn't quite pull or low hook this one and found the fairway. But, now I'm deathly scared of the 3-wood which I don't hit well. Now I have a 6-iron into this green, which isn't good. I flush the 6-iron into the wall of the greenside bunker which plugged. Metrowest is notorious for their bunkers needing repair and since they have been taken over by the Hilton Resorts, they plan to make it the #1 priority to re-do the bunkers. Well, that doesn't work for me here.

I swing as hard as I can just to get it out. Then I chip on to 5-feet and save bogey (+7)


#5 - I finally said to myself 'lets hold the face off as much as you can with the driver.' And voila...I bomb a driver that just find the right rough, but a good driver nonetheless. I had the distance, but the tough lie put me pin high and just off the green. Metrowest didn't really have a 'fringe', so you wound up chipping on the fringe because the grass was too long. I just missed my 12-foot chip and tapped in for par (+7)


#6 - I thought about 'holding the face off' again and crushed this one about 310 yards. Both of the golfers I played with were former collegiate golfers and that was the first time we all hit pretty good or better drives and I just smoked it about 25 yards past them. I then have PW into the green and I'm about 1-yard from perfect....but, it hits the wall of the bunker and plugs again. This time it actually strained my groine a little just to blast it out of there. I only got it to move about a foot or so. I chipped on to 5-feet and to wound up in an old cup placement that wasn't filled very well and it just broke way left and I made double (+9)


#7 - This drive was hit well, but I pushed it and it over-cut too much into the right fairway bunker. I hit a good 9-iron out of there. Then I flushed a 7-iron, hitting it as high as I could at the flag. I then lipped out a 15-footer for birdie and made par (+9)


#8 - Flushed an 8-iron to 15-feet. I had the read at 3-inches. I lipped out, but it was a low-side lip out...meaning if I had hit it harder it would have gone in.


#9 - Smoked another driver down the middle. Too bad it took 14 holes to figure it out. I was gutless here and bailed out right to avoid the water. My first putt from 45 feet went about 8-feet short. But, I snuck in the 8-footer so I didn't 3-putt all day long.

40-41=81 (+9)
6/14 fairways
7/18 GIR
31 putts
10 impeded shots

THOUGHTS: Obviously, that was very disappointing as for the 2nd tournament in a row, my worst round of the year occurred. And I haven't hit the driver that bad since 2009.

I think therein lies part of the issue. My practice sessions have been consumed with looking and analyzing iron swings and ignoring the driver swing for too long. As far as I'm concerned, the driver is the only think on my game that I have zero reliance on.

I didn't think the course was overly difficult either, although the scores were high and to my surprise, 75 qualified. I think the difficulty was that the fairway grass was real long and caused a lot of fliers. I was expecting that though, but still difficult to get used to hitting your irons 1/2 club to a full club longer than normal. And I could see a golfer having a good round ruined by just missing an approach shot and it burying into the wall of the bunker. Hell, I almost injured myself from one of them.

I was happy with the fact that I putted well and my short game was pretty sharp despite the fact I don't practice them a lot. That shows to me that my thinking was right...I can get those up to snuff with less work in a shorter amount of time.

So for now, it's back to the drawing board and try to get ready for FSGA Mid-Am qualifying in September. And on a final note, I just want to thank the FSGA for once again running a classy tournament.










3JACK

Thoughts On Hitting Up On The Driver...

One of the concepts that often bandied about in golf instruction recently is hitting up versus hitting down with the driver.

For those who don’t understand ‘attack angle’, it’s actually measured from the caddy view as shown in the diagram below.



Many people confuse this with ‘coming in too steep’, which would be viewed from the Down The Line perspective, such as this player coming over the top.



A steep or shallow attack angle is not the same as a coming over the top or getting below plane concepts. Furthermore, they are not mutually exclusive either. There’s a tendency for them to go hand-in-hand. The extreme over the top player may have a tendency to have a steep attack angle as well. But, that’s not always the case.

WHY HIT UP WITH THE DRIVER?

This concept was popularized by Trackman when they discovered that not only could one hit upward with the driver, that all things being equal the ball would go further as the attack angle got shallower or went upward. The ball will carry further and will spin less, thus meaning a long carrying shot that rolled more.

However, ‘that is all’ that hitting up does. It will allow the golfer to hit the ball further provided everything else is the same.

Obviously, hitting the ball further has an advantage. My statistical research on Tour shows that the expected score values go down as the Tour player gets his approach shot 25 yards closer to the hole. Meaning, if a Tour player were to play 2 balls and hit his first drive to 175 yards to the flag and the 2nd drive to 150 yards to the flag, on average the expected score value starts to noticeably get better on the 2nd drive which is 25 yards closer to the flag. Using that example, the 1st drive (175 yards to flag) may mean that on average the expected score value for the golfer on that hole may be 4.1 strokes. But the 2nd drive (150 yards to flag) may have an expected score value of 3.8 strokes. And while 0.3 strokes may not seem like a big deal, do that around the course for an entire round, it certainly adds up.

All of that being said, hitting up with the driver does not equate to any benefit as far as accuracy or consistency.


POSSIBLE DANGERS WITH HITTING UPWARD

I asked a few of my sources who own either a Trackman or the FlightScope X2 model launch monitor to get their thoughts on hitting up. These sources included 4 current PGA Tour players and 4 current Nationwide Tour players. Along with 5 Trackman owner golf instructors, some of whom teach the Tour players and a few LPGA players (I didn't speak to the LPGA players).

A few of these sources were very much for hitting upward on the driver. But, the majority found some pitfalls with trying to hit up on the driver.

One of the common complaints was the fear of losing clubhead speed with the driver. Most of the sources claimed that they felt that there was a point of diminishing returns with trying to hit up and getting distance because they felt that any distance derived from hitting it more upward could be offset by distance lost thru lower clubhead speed.

Currently, there are 139 golfers on Tour who have driver clubhead speed measurements from Trackman in both 2012 and 2011. Two of the sources that I know have changed their attack angle in order to hit upward are in the top-10 largest drops in clubhead speed. And 2 of the sources who have stopped trying to hit up so much on the driver are in the top-10 in increased clubhead speed.

From talking to these sources and observing some clubhead speed data, I do believe that one can hit down too much and lose clubhead speed. However, I think those are situations where the golfer is just swinging poorly to begin with. So as far as hitting up and distance goes, there appears to be a situation where the golfer needs to understand that hitting up does not always equate to hitting it further if their clubhead and ball speed drops. Thus, they will need to determine if the distance gained from hitting upward can counter any possible distance lost from a lower clubhead speed.

Another common complaint was that hitting upward required a very different swing from hitting irons or even fairway woods. We know from the Geometry of the Circle that if you want to hit down and have a square path, the swing direction has to go left. But if you want a square path and hit up, the swing direction has to be pointing out to the right. Thus, the common complaint was making the switch from those different swing directions was often too difficult for the player to make.

There were other complaints as well as not feeling comfortable with the trajectory windows being hit on upward strikes versus their ‘normal’ downward or ‘flat’ strike (0.0° attack angle).

ADVANCED TOTAL DRIVING AND HITTING UPWARD

I utilize a metric called Advanced Total Driving that is a proprietary formula to help determine effectiveness off the tee for golfers on Tour. Advanced Total Driving consists of the following metrics:

Driving Distance
Fairway Percentage
Distance To Edge of Fairway (on shots that miss the fairway)

I have found that these metrics encompass the main attributes we look for in driving skill…distance, accuracy and precision.



From what I have observed, there is no real statistical correlation that can be draw with attack angle and Advanced Total Driving. Part of the problem is that there is a small sample size that I’m working with since I only have about 25 PGA Tour player’s attack angle recordings via Trackman.

However, the only correlation I tend to see is in golfers that hit more than -4.5° down with the driver. The correlation there is to perform poorly in Advanced Total Driving. But again, it appears that those are issues with the golfer just swinging poorly period. These golfers almost exclusively play poorly in each of the Zones (Birdie Zone, Safe Zone and Danger Zone) as well.

Boo Weekley ranked #1 in Advanced Total Driving in 2011 and is currently ranked #2 this year and he hits -3.5°. However, Bo Van Pelt is one of the better drivers on Tour year in and year out, ranked 10th in 2011 and currently ranked 26th and hits up about +2° to +5°.

CURRENT CONCLUSIONS

The end game in driving the ball is about being able to hit the ball as well as you can from the perspective of distance, accuracy and precision. We want to blend all of those together. Obviously, there can be situations where a golfer may increase power but lose some accuracy or precision off the tee. It then becomes the golfer’s duty to be able to gauge whether the trade-off will be more effective in lowering their scores.

I do not think there’s anything wrong with hitting up on the driver if the golfer can execute it well enough to where they are more effective off the tee in doing so. However, the same goes for hitting down with the driver.

I have concluded that a golfer needs to understand that hitting up on the driver is not mandatory in any way, shape or form as shown by golfers like Boo Weekley and Hunter Mahan. Furthermore, the golfer should understand the potential dangers of hitting up on the ball versus the potential dangers of hitting down on the ball.

I think that all serious Long Distance driving competitors MUST hit up on the driver in order to succeed. But, those golfers are far more worried about optimizing the parts of impact that optimize distance rather than worrying about accuracy and precision as they are given 6 shots to hit the ball as far as they can and still find a grid that is 40 yards wide.

But for the average golfer, I think there are many factors to consider and hitting up on the driver is nowhere near being mandatory. There are some people who believe that the driver is ‘designed to hit upward on’, but I actually think that the driver is more designed for a ‘flat’ attack angle (0.0°) and the average attack angle on Tour is about -1° downward (measured by Trackman).

I think that closer to a flat attack angle probably works better for most golfers in terms of generating clubhead speed, accuracy, consistency and being able to transition better to swinging the other clubs as well. Obviously, some exceptions apply.




3JACK

Upcoming Equipment Experimentation

Next week I will be playing my qualifier for the Florida state amateur at Metrowest. If I qualify, the state amateur match-play championship will be from August 9 thru the 12th. If I don’t qualify, I will likely try out for the state mid-amateur, which doesn’t take place until October (qualifier in September).

With that, I have some upcoming experiments I want to try with equipment.



First, I am in the process of being fitted for TrueAim. I should have a review of their product in the next week or so. I do plan on using their product on my driver for the qualifier as so far, so good. I’m still tweaking the decals on the driver and now want to try it with my 3-wood.



I am also going to experiment with a driver that will optimize carry distance. I will do this by altering the loft of the driver. I’m thinking that a 12° loft or so could optimize carry distance with the same shaft, shaft length, etc. I could then use this in several different situations, like on soft, wet courses or downwind tee shots and since I can already hit my 10° loft driver off the deck well, I can still use the 12° off the deck as my ‘3-wood.’



I’m also interested in trying a belly putter. Statistically, the Tour really hasn’t seen a big improvement in golfers switching to the belly putter. However, we have seen over time golfers greatly improve their putting going to the long putter. But, the long putter has a much larger ‘sample size’ than the belly putter. Personally, I like the idea of being able to ‘automate’ your stroke a little more with the belly putter. I think if you can get the aim down, the feel for the putter and know how to read greens, there’s no reason to not greatly improve. I think the biggie for me is finding a belly putter that I can aim well. I will have to get together with Edel Golf and see what they are doing in this area of putters.



I’m also interested in experimenting with a graphite iron shaft. My thinking here is that with what we know about shaft bend profiles along with MOI matching, I don’t foresee any reason why we cannot have a graphite shaft that is the same MOI and launches the ball just like steel shaft and we don’t have to add length to the club either. The advantages would be the potential for a lighter static weight, which could add clubhead speed along with the vibration dampening attributes that graphite shafts have which can be more friendly on the hands and wrists. The goal here is simple, if I can hit graphite 1-2 clubs longer, but keep the trajectory, accuracy and consistency the same it may be worth the extra dollars to shoot lower scores and better avoid potential injury.

I will experiment with the Wishon Black Series graphite iron shaft. This shaft weights 85 grams compared to the Wishon Stepless Steel (which is performing great) at 115 grams. My only concern is I may wind up having to add too much weight to the head in order to match the MOI. So I will experiment with a 6-iron and see how it works from there.





3JACK

Mis-Hits and Ball Flight Video w/John Graham

Here’s a great video done by 3Jack Top-20 Golf Instructor, John Graham, showing how ball flight can sometimes be deceptive it what is actually going on at impact.


One thing…1-dimple on a golf ball is supposed to be roughly 0.14 inches. In the video, Graham clearly can tell that he hit the ball off the toe. He estimates that he missed the sweetspot by about ½-inch. Now remember, the sweetspot is about the size of a needle point. It is NOT an ‘area’ around the center of the club. It is extremely minute in size.

So when John misses by roughly ½-inch, he’s missing by roughly 3.5 dimples. Where ball flight can confuse golfers even more is when the golfer misses by less than 3.5 dimples because they tend to not even feel that mis-hit. It doesn’t mean you can’t hit great shots, but it can help explain some things more clearly about your swing and you can use that knowledge and work on your mechanics and/or change your equipment specs to start hitting the ball on the sweetspot. Of course, you could run into an issue of now hitting the ball on the sweetspot due to changing your specs, but hitting more inaccurate shots because your impact conditions are designed to hit that push-cut that John shows in the video.

In that sense, it’s much like fixing your aim in putting. One can certainly be a great putter despite mis-aiming their putter at address. But, it requires compensatory moves to consistently get that putter face pointing at the target at impact. And if they don’t, that can cause a myriad of other problems like hitting the ball harder or softer to get the ball into the cup. And from there, it can snowball into some awful putting.

Lastly, impact tape/spray is good to have and test out what is going on at impact from time to time. When I fit golfers for clubs, the last thing we fit is the lie angle.

The reason being is that there are many factors that go into fitting the lie angle that can alter where you strike the ball on the clubface. Typically we find the head, shaft and shaft length first. Then we figure out the MOI using a 6-iron and trying to find their approximate fitted lie angle for that 6-iron.

I’ve had golfers, including myself, mis-hit the 6-iron towards one part of the clubhead and start to think the club is too flat for them. But as we add weight and get their optimal MOI, they not only see their impact dispersion get smaller, but they start finding the sweetspot as well. So sometimes it’s not a lie angle issue, but a weight/MOI issue.

After we get the head, shaft, shaft length, grip and MOI fitted and I get the clubs, I then assemble the club and I instruct the customer to get the impact tape/spray out with each iron and hit 3-5 shots. The good part of the MOI fitting is that it will keep the impact dispersion small and in one area. So the golfer should not be too confused as to where they are striking the ball on the face. You won’t see them hit 3 shots towards the toe and 1 towards the heel. Generally if they are hitting a shot off the toe, they will now hit every shot off the toe. And we now know that they have to bend the lie angle upright to some degree.

I’ve also found that impact tape/spray is very helpful when you mis-hit a shot and miss the sweetspot low or high. Sometimes a shot can FEEL like a toe hit when instead you hit it up too high on the face, even off the heel.

So not only can a Trackman and some impact tape/spray help your swing, but it can help you find the right equipment for your game. You can find John at www.johngrahamgolf.com




3JACK

Ben Hogan's True Equipment Specifications

Recently, Jeff Martin over at www.jeffygolf.com, was able to get the measurements of Ben Hogan's irons from the USGA House. In particular a set of 1953 irons Hogan used and a ‘practice’ set that he also used. You can follow the thread at this link:

http://jeffygolf.com/showthread.php?398-Ben-Hogan-s-iron-specs-some-myths-busted&p=3967#post3967

His 1953 set had different lie angles than his ‘practice’ set. We don’t have the measurement of the 1953 iron lengths. However, I will assume that Hogan used the same length irons as his practice set.

Here’s a look at the lie angle specs:

1-iron: 54.6°
2-iron: 55.6°
3-iron: 57.2°
4-iron: not available
5-iron: 59.3°
6-iron: 60.2°
7-iron: 61.7°
8-iron: 61.7°
9-iron: 62.6°
PW: 62.5°
SW: not available

Here’s the lengths (based off the practice set):

1-iron: not available
2-iron: 38-1/2”
3-iron: 38-0”
4-iron: 37-1/2”
5-iron: 37-0”
6-iron: 36-3/8”
7-iron: 36-0”
8-iron: 35-3/8”
9-iron: 35-1/4”
PW: not available
SW: 34-7/8”

And here are the swingweights (based off the practice set):

1-iron: not available
2-iron: C8
3-iron: C7
4-iron: C7
5-iron: C9
6-iron: C8
7-iron: C8
8-iron: C7
9-iron: D2
PW: not available
SW: D5




So, what do we see?

His clubs were very short in length. Hogan was only about 5’6” tall, but he had no problem with making his clubs rather short in length. Even back then, they were about ½” shorter than vintage iron standards.

His lie angles were fairly flat. But, we have to understand that for every ½” difference in shaft length. That equates to 1° in effective lie angle. So, Hogan’s clubs with relation to today’s standard were more like this (rough approximation):

1-iron: 7° flat
2-iron: 6° flat
3-iron: 5.5° flat
4-iron: 5.5° flat
5-iron: 4° flat
6-iron: 4° flat
7-iron: 3° flat
8-iron: 3.5° flat
9-iron: 2.5° flat
PW: 3° flat
SW: 1.5° flat

His clubs also had a very light swingweight to them. However, we would need to get a better idea of the total weight of the club and the MOI to understand more. That’s part of the problem with swingweight, Hogan may have had very heavy static weight clubs that would be difficult to swing with any real velocity. But if the weight was primarily located towards the butt end of the club, the swingweight will drop.

I have been told by people who have hit his irons how stiff and difficult they were to hit. Give this information, I think it is within reason that Hogan may have put an inordinate amount of weight on the butt end of his clubs.

Once again, thanks to Jeff Martin and the USGA people for putting this together.










3JACK

3Jack Golf's PGA Tour Rundown - Week 28

Zach Johnson wins the John Deere Classic:



Here’s how my John Deere Classic picks finished, with me correctly predicting my 4th winner this year in Johnson:

Zach Johnson: 12/1 (1st)
Ryan Palmer: 25/1 (Missed Cut)
Brendon de Jonge: 33/1 (19th)
John Senden: 40/1 (4th)
Carl Pettersson: 40/1 (36th)
Ken Duke: 50/1 (Missed Cut)
Daniel Summerhays: 66/1 (Missed Cut)
Brian Davis: 66/1 (Missed Cut)
Kevin Stadler: 80/1 (Missed Cut)

Value Pick: Chris Stroud-100/1 (68th)


Here are the updated rankings:


ADVANCED TOTAL DRIVING



1. Bubba Watson
2. Boo Weekley
3. John Rollins
4. Charlie Beljan
5. Hunter Mahan
6. Jason Dufner
7. Graham DeLaet
8. Kyle Stanley
9. Roberto Castro
10. Brandt Jobe


179. Aaron Baddeley
180. Tommy Biershenk
181. Matt Bettencourt
182. Nick O'Hern
183. Stephen Gangluff
184. Tom Pernice Jr.
185. Derek Lamely
186. Michael Bradley
187. Ryuji Imada
188. Joe Ogilvie

Most Improved: Steve Wheatcroft
Biggest Decline: Colt Knost

PUTTS GAINED (VIA PGATOUR.COM)

1. Zach Johnson
2. Aaron Baddeley
3. Ben Curtis
4. Luke Donald
5. Brandt Snedeker
6. Martin Flores
7. Bo Van Pelt
8. Bryce Molder
9. Derek Lamely
10. Carl Pettersson
10. James Driscoll


179. Greg Owen
180. Kris Blanks
181. D.J. Trahan
182. Ricky Barnes
183. Vijay Singh
184. Kyle Stanley
185. Alexandre Rocha
186. Scott Brown
187. Scott Stallings
188. Boo Weekley

Most Improved: Troy Matteson
Biggest Decline: Edward Loar

SHORT GAME PLAY

1. Ian Poulter
2. Jerry Kelly
3. Jason Dufner
4. K.J. Choi
5. Justin Rose
6. Bubba Watson
7. Brian Gay
8. Jonas Blixt
9. Bob Estes
10. Greg Owen

179. Gary Woodland
180. Hunter Mahan
181. Kyle Reifers
182. Michael Thompson
183. Steve Wheatcroft
184. Sang-Moon Bae
185. Harris English
186. Billy Horschel
187. Cameron Beckman
188. Edward Loar

Most Improved: Jamie Lovemark
Biggest Decline: Edward Loar


BIRDIE ZONE PLAY



1. Steve Stricker
2. Padraig Harrington
3. Jason Bohn
4. Garth Mulroy
5. Henrik Stenson
6. Webb Simpson
7. Brendon de Jonge
8. Jeff Maggert
9. Sergio Garcia
10. Roland Thatcher


179. Jhonattan Vegas
180. Jonas Blixt
181. D.J. Trahan
182. Scott Stallings
183. Aaron Baddeley
184. Brandt Jobe
185. Miguel Angel Carballo
186. Billy Hurley III
187. Edward Loar
188. Jamie Lovemark

Most Improved: Ben Crane
Biggest Decline: Nathan Green

SAFE ZONE PLAY



1. Lee Westwood
2. Graeme McDowell
3. Nick O'Hern
4. Ian Poulter
5. Gavin Coles
6. Webb Simpson
7. Jason Dufner
8. Ted Potter, Jr.
9. Louis Oosthuizen
10. Boo Weekley


179. Charles Howell III
180. Edward Loar
181. Troy Kelly
182. Henrik Stenson
183. Scott Stallings
184. J.J. Killeen
185. Jamie Lovemark
186. Matt Jones
187. Briny Baird
188. Mark Anderson

Most Improved: Marco Dawson
Biggest Decline: Zach Johnson



DANGER ZONE



1. Steve Stricker
2. Chad Campbell
3. Bubba Watson
4. Bo Van Pelt
5. Justin Rose
6. Louis Oosthuizen
7. Daniel Summerhays
8. Webb Simpson
9. John Senden
10. Brandt Jobe


179. Lee Westwood
180. Sung Kang
181. Ted Potter, Jr.
182. Sang-Moon Bae
183. J.J. Killeen
184. Stephen Gangluff
185. Edward Loar
186. Joe Ogilvie
187. Derek Lamely
188. Nick O'Hern

Most Improved: Scott Brown
Biggest Decline: Garth Mulroy





3JACK