Why tee up the ball at all?
 

2-J-2 INSIDE-OUT IMPACT ...
The ball should always be struck prior to the low point of the Downstroke, even when using the Driver, except under special conditions or to produce a special effect, which is a separate area of consideration.

When I see the pros hit drivers they leave the wooden tee in the ground undisturbed. So if the bottom of the ball is level with the bottom of the driver at impact, why tee the ball up at all? I can understand that if the teebox surface is irregular it might be necessary to tee the ball up a little, to clear the irregularities.

Also, I often see players using long wooden tees of 4" or more, so are we no longer concerned with the lie angle of the clubhead when hitting the driver?

I don't think most pro hit their drivers on the downstroke, maybe level and more up.

I see plenty of flying tees when the pros tee off. When the tee is left I think they have hit a touch thin.

CW

"prior to the low point of the Downstroke" can be regarded as "prior to the shaft being in-line with the leading arm", which also means "prior to release (throwaway)" when the pivot is vertical to the ground.

The clubhead can pass the low point and start to move upward (relative to the level ground) at impact "prior to the shaft being in-line with the leading arm" or "prior to release (throwaway)" when the pivot is tilted away from the target. The ball needs to be teed up to allow the above to happen without hitting it fat.

Hackers usually hit the ball "after the shaft passing the in-line condition with the leading arm" or "after release (throwaway)", regardless of pivot position.

Thanks for the replies, but I've just "seen the light". The ball is teed up so that low point occurs above ground, thus allowing "The ball should always be struck prior to the low point of the Downstroke, even when using the Driver" without hitting the ground or "hitting it fat". I can be so dumb some days :confused1

Excellent post! :)

Deck
 

Some of the newer BIG HEADED DRIVERS do not look to me as if they are designed to hit the ball off the ground. Some look better than others for this.

Ken Venturi used to not ever use a tee with the driver. Of course he was using a shallower wooden-wood.
Jack Nicklaus uses a tee when ever he can, even with irons on par threes.
The LONG DRIVE guys usually tee the ball very high!
Do what works well for you.

I may be sticking my neck out here, especially after seeing the renowned EdZ praise your post, but quite honestly I don't understand your reply.

(1)"prior to the low point of the downstroke"
- means only one thing to me, exactly what it says.

(2)"The clubhead can pass the low point and start to move upward (relative to the level ground) at impact"
- suggests that impact occurs after low point, which is totally contrary to Homer's writings.

(3)"when the pivot is tilted away from the target"
- although Homer speaks of "the Pivot" most of his descriptions refer to the pivot as a motion. With a (near) stationary head, the body at impact somewhat resembles a letter "C" with the hips turned facing the target and most of body weight on the left side . If this is the "tilt" you are describing, the thrust is still downwards.

Little threadjack that I could not resist - sorry.

No, but a Draw is a Slice of good fortune. :exclaim:

Thanks, I'll add it to my collection:eyes:

In order to achieve maximum distance, you need high launch and (appropriately)low spin. A lot of pros, and long drive pros in particular, position the ball in such a way that they can contact the ball on the upswing, in order to produce this condition. Could that be a "special effect" that Homer is referring to?

Good point! Let's wait and see what the experts say.

Because the sweetspot is higher up the clubface on a driver at impact point than the ball sitting on the ground..ie like an iron would be designed....

Those that think most pros hit on the upstroke should watch the swing visions on youtube without listening to the commentary and use their own eyes to see....

Heres some pics for you

These photos seem subjective to me in that the camera angle must play a part in the relative motion. Scott pic looks deceiving (maybe just me)

Seems to me that this should or could be proven empirically with swing machines like PING MAN or similar. Dispersion rates either increase or decrease depending on stroke.

CW

Thanks Mathew! Except for Phil's they show that the clubhead is moving slightly downwards and that it is the face of the club that is causing the ball to rise, as in "let the club do the work". So there is no need to hit the ball on the upswing, and that Homer's statement "The ball should always be struck prior to the low point of the Downstroke, even when using the Driver" is not in dispute. Am I imagining it, in seeing some evidence of ball deformation?

As Milrat has said the camera angle can play tricks, but nevertheless we are that much further ahead than simply opinions and/or the written word. I wonder what sort of camera speed and setup is required (and I wonder who has those resources) to set the record straight once and for all.

Thanks Weightshift - cos Phil Mickelson is a left hander and thus hitting the other way - its still downwards....

Millrat - Whilst I can agree that perspective can play tricks on particular things (ie side view and inclined plane) - I can't see how any illusion that could be present to decieve the viewer. Because we can be pretty positive that the camera view is taken at a parallel plane to the horizontal ground at approximately ball height. Whilst the camera may or may not be rotated away and thus not nessesarily be absolutely dead square on to the inclined plane, it will do nothing to decieve on the clubhead going downplane. You can see clearly that the clubhead is getting closer to the ground - no camera deceptions are going on.

A Ball cant fly if it does not have backspin how can you impart back spin if you hit the ball with the clubhead travelling upwards.

On another note in practical terms for a golfer engineering his address. When the ball is teed higher than the sweetspot on the club - which can be desirable, the adjustment is made in the secondary hinge which lifts the primary lever assembly up and down whist staying in the vertical plane of the primary hinge in a circular motion around the left shoulder, so in effect you tee it slightly off the toe of the club by means of adjusting the secondary hinge...

Bigwill wins the Bigprize
 

Bigwill wins the Bigprize!:)

Left hander! Of course! I can be so dumb at times.

I don't think so :)

\

I guess we're left to make assumptions in this case about the camera position and angle. I'm not so much disputing it as trying to understand it.

Any comment on the PING MAN question?

Great conversation!

Matthew - please dont take this the wrong way - and I admire and salute your effort in posting the pics, but in my humble opinion (yeah yeah, I know, opinions are like...:))

The pics to me, are inconclusive. Retief looks like his might be up, Scott's looks like a 3 wood (versus driver), Vijay's looks like its on the upswing, and Phil's (in the background) looks like the camera is not level at all (assuming it would be level with the ground - again, see behind Phil's driver). Again, I applaud your effort, but feel they may be inconclusive.

My understanding is Homer certainly knew that Pro's can and do (no percentage's) hit the ball with their driver on the upswing - thus maximising roll.

Great conversation and I look forward to seeing more comments - if I get the chance I will try to post some pics as well.

Patrick

"up" can still be "down"
 

I think a lot of confusion is that most relate everything to the ground.

If the swing is always moving "down" until the shaft is in line with the lead arm, the one can still be swinging "down" yet with the proper axis tilt, can be swinging level or even "up" in relation to the ground.

I would even venture to say with an iron swing, low point is not at the bottom of the divot, but at the point where the shaft lines up with the lead arm (low point could even be after the club has left the divot and is above ground.

Bruce

I most certainly agree. Perhaps it is more useful to think of 'low point' as the point farthest away from 'center', rather than it having any relationship to the ground.

There is a difference in perspective between the low point of 'force' (both arms straight) and the low point of the clubhead (at left shoulder, relative to ground, right arm stil bent).

This, IMO is the core reason for 1-L-15.

Fog warning!
 

Are we seriously considering that the in-line condition (arm and clubshaft), no matter where achieved, is low point?

We intend to strike a ball that lies on the ground, or on a tee that lies on the ground. Low point must IMO be in relation to the ground. Although I must admit I've more to :read: but I understood Low Point to be the lowest point (elevation) in the clubhead's orbit.

CW

There are two perspectives, one of force, and one of the clubhead.

That's exactly right, of course, EdZ.

"The THRUST continues downplane during the Follow Through." (I-L...item #15)

...

Retief's moving up doesn't surprise me with that bending left wrist and pull draw of his.

I have some good video on my home cpu. (not at work)

Both ways are options I'd say.....a Bent left wrist is never really recommended tho.....I know we could get into all this about Retief and etc. etc. but he's an exception and plays a pull draw.

Tiger's swing with an impact closeup
 

Mathew, I was puzzled by the VJ's picture you posted as to why he was hitting the ball so high on the clubface. Here's Tiger's swing in slow motion which includes a closeup of impact and where the speaker says that he hits the ball high on the clubface for a high launch angle and low spin.
http://www.golfdiscussions.com/yabbs...p?topic=8246.0
You'll notice (in the clip that follows the swing) that although the clubhead is moving approximately horizontal to the ground prior to impact, the loft of clubface, with the ball high on the clubface, is actually hitting the ball up!

I forgot to ask.. Does this mean that his sweetspot is high on the clubface?

Part of the reason, according to Tom Wishon, that many drivers have better results higher up on the face is that many/most are still designed with bulge and roll in the face (a curved surface). This results in the upper part of the face producing a higher launch angle, which when combined with the fact that most folks are not using enough loft on the driver, tends to produce better trajectory and distance than a 'center' face contact.

I've always read you get higher launch along with lower spin up there.

Thought it had to do with CG and not bulge and roll.

Yes it does.

Chapter 4 of Hebron's Secrets and Lies book goes into this in great detail. Bob Bush, former Titleist designer responds to a Q&A from Hebron.

It feels like you're hitting "up" but that's because of how the weight is distributed in the clubface. Mike Tait of SMT says the sweet spot is a smidge up and in from the center of the club. No one has remembered in this thread that the ball moves while on the club face, inside quadrant and all that good stuff, so sweet spot being up and in makes sense to me...Watch Yoda's video with Brian G for good practical driver technique.

Here's the link:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1Aj22YYI1-Q

Bunch of vids on the right sidebar.

Shows closeups of impact.

+ these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrXIT...elated&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBosT...elated&search=

One point about the closeups...
 

I don't have a dog in this fight, just making observations. But besides Phil's shot (Phil says that he hits the driver on the downswing and it's very obvious on film), it almost appears (on video)that the clubhead is being "driven down" by the collision with the ball, as opposed to moving down through the ball. In other words, the club looks to be moving down after impact, but not necessarily before.

That's a pretty good observation....I see it.

The only clip I see where the head moves up some is the first Tiger vid.

Do you have a link for a slow motion video of Phil? It may appear the way you describe but if you consider the considerable momentum of the clubface at impact, you know it can't be true. Here's a video of one of his team mates :eyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy9GTAENiJA

http://sonicboomgolf.com/PowerGolfSpeedSwingVideos.php

This has Phil's swing, and a few others.

About the collision at impact, if you watch the videos that show closeups at impact, you can clearly see the direction of the club being altered. One of the benefits of sustaining the lag through impact is to try to offset the affects of the impact collision. If impact with the ball is capable of caving in or cracking a clubface, or snapping off the clubhead at the hosel, then surely the force at impact is sufficient enough to alter the path of the club through impact, especially since it is essentially a glancing blow (given that the club has loft).

Thanks for the link but I see no such evidence here: http://sonicboomgolf.com/PhilMickels...eSwingKeys.php
No evidence here of what you speak.

Breakdown of the materials of the clubhead is more likely to be due to faulty components of same. Do you remember when John Daly first appeared on the scene and talked of the number of clubheads that he had broken, and the move to Kelvar if memory serves me correctly. None of that today. Maybe someone here with math/physics can calculate the effective momentum of the clubhead at impact and compare it to the mass of the golfball (it has no momentum, being stationary) and show just how wrong your claim is.