Ball Flight Laws Poll - Who Disagrees?

[JPGolf FL]

[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390778928' post='8538837']
[quote name='Hstead' timestamp='1390776162' post='8538459']
[quote name='buckeyefl' timestamp='1390775836' post='8538417']
[quote name='JPGolf FL' timestamp='1390698313' post='8532791']
People learned to play well back then despite the old laws, not because they knew them. Now that we know what is actually happening, it is much easier to diagnose and self diagnose problems with ball flight.
[/quote]

And yet handicaps remain stagnant. Why would that be?
[/quote]

I would say the majority of golfers do not really have the intestinal fortitude to do what it takes to become better. That is what Is see mostly where I am anyway. Most of the guys I see at clubs around here just want to go play, have fun, drink a few beers, spend time with their pals, and play golf. They complain about not being good, but they do not put much time at all trying to really improve. There are only a handful of guys you will ever find at our club on the practice greens. At our club, the practice green is mostly used for guys getting ready to tee off and they are going to hit 15 putts real quick to get the speed down. You won't find many there for an hour working on their short game. The range is used to hit 20 balls to get loose for the round they are getting ready to play. I would bet, even though this thread shows 95% of WRX members know the ball flight laws, it is opposite at my club, 98% do not.

We are enthusiasts and want to get better for the most part around here. Most other golfers idea of "improving" is buying a new TM driver to gain 17n yards.

Not to mention, when guys to take a lesson, I hear "well that doesn't feel comfortable" and they never put any time in trying to actually change their swings. That is what I see anyway.
[/quote]


AMEN! My club is mostly older gentlemen and a handful of juniors. Granted its a small club in a vacation town, but you wouldn't believe how vacant the practice area usually is. I have a reputation for practicing a ton and hitting lots of balls, and being on the practice green until I can't see anymore. You're right, the folks here on WRX are a different breed of golfer. What's that saying, "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results"
[/quote]
Exactly.... I offer to help my friends who are hackers all the time. I tell them to come to the range and I will give them a couple of things and they start to hit it much better. Then they expect that its done and wonder why they are still hacking two weeks later. I have been to the range 5 times since then and they have not been back at all. Golf takes a level of dedication that most in the human race do not possess. That will never change. It has nothing to do with ball flight or instruction.

[Finbarr Saunders]

I wonder what kind of numbers you would have to put up on trackman that makes the ball fall left or right at the end of its flight, would they differ with a ball from the 70s and a modern ball

[Forged_Irons]

[quote name='shortstop20' timestamp='1390693225' post='8532259']
Do these people believe the Earth is flat too?
[/quote]
Terrible analogy. There are two basic flaws to the "new ball flight laws":
1) They are based on a club face that is not releasing properly though the ball. I concede, the ball WILL travel predominantly in the direction of the face angle if the player tries to hold the club square, open, or closed through impact. This won't happen if the club head releases and the toe moves properly relative to the heel.
2) they assume that the swing is circular but, when done properly, it isn't. The club when swung and released properly will travel on the target line much longer relative to the turn style swing which has one point of ideal impact and your club face damn well better be "square" right at that moment cuz, in this case, the new rules are going to "rule" (unfortunately).

Can some one tell me how one would hit a push draw with the new rules? (Without hand and arm rolling or manipulation through impact that is). I've tried to picture hitting a draw with these rules and there seems to be no set up that would allow me it just swing normally and produce this shot.

Also, I'm watching a replay of the Australian Open Tennis Tournament, and I can't figure out, according to the new rules, how Roger Federer (among many others) can get the ball traveling up over the net with an ascending swing path and a racquet face that points directly into the net or even lower. Shouldn't, according to the TM and the new physics, the ball go into the net every time?

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='butch33611' timestamp='1390776759' post='8538551']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1390774725' post='8538309']
[quote name='butch33611' timestamp='1390771365' post='8537851']
I would think the only people ball flight laws would effect are the players who hit the ball in the center of the club face every time in order to get the desired effect or shot. Players who have that little dime size wear mark on the center of the irons. I submit the number of golfers who can do this are small to the extreme. Even the pros like tiger will what they call over cook a draw or fade on a given shot and miss the green.

You can study ball flight laws till the cows come home, buy your own trackman, Hit a million balls but in the end the player still has to execute his swing perfectly to get the desired effect or result and there's the rub. If we all could swing a club like the iron Byron machine this discussion would be very helpful and we would be hitting flags with draws and fades all day long but alas were'er all just taking our best shot and dealing with the results.

Having the know how is still a far cry from being able to execute it perfectly.
[/quote]

It's not about perfect. By that logic, then literally no one in the world should worry about it....... Don't get that at all. No one fix their swing ever, just work on your contact.
[/quote]

Im not saying that at all. But your contact better be spot on before any of this makes a spit of difference. Get the ball flight laws exactly right but hit it too far twards the toe and your still in the water. Perfect swing with perfect ball contact using this information and its in the hole. Its just a small matter of execution. Then somehow you have incorporate the ball flight laws into your particular swing style to make it work properly. I just don't think that many players can pull it off with any regularity or success.
[/quote]

Really really disagree... If someone is a 10 handicap, they can definitely hit it pure enough to worry about their swing dynamics. I'd say the same thing for a 20. Maybe once we get near 30 it's more advantageous to just get some consistent contact, but what you are asking is unreasonable. Not to mention the fact that problems with path can lead to contact issues, or I guess rely on them so that the issue is minimized. Rory is a perfect example of this.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390785321' post='8539541']
[quote name='shortstop20' timestamp='1390693225' post='8532259']
Do these people believe the Earth is flat too?
[/quote]
Terrible analogy. There are two basic flaws to the "new ball flight laws":
1) They are based on a club face that is not releasing properly though the ball. I concede, the ball WILL travel predominantly in the direction of the face angle if the player tries to hold the club square, open, or closed through impact. This won't happen if the club head releases and the toe moves properly relative to the heel.
2) they assume that the swing is circular but, when done properly, it isn't. The club when swung and released properly will travel on the target line much longer relative to the turn style swing which has one point of ideal impact and your club face damn well better be "square" right at that moment cuz, in this case, the new rules are going to "rule" (unfortunately).

Can some one tell me how one would hit a push draw with the new rules? (Without hand and arm rolling or manipulation through impact that is). I've tried to picture hitting a draw with these rules and there seems to be no set up that would allow me it just swing normally and produce this shot.

Also, I'm watching a replay of the Australian Open Tennis Tournament, and I can't figure out, according to the new rules, how Roger Federer (among many others) can get the ball traveling up over the net with an ascending swing path and a racquet face that points directly into the net or even lower. Shouldn't, according to the TM and the new physics, the ball go into the net every time?
[/quote]

1. What does 1 even mean? You think the duration of impact is significantly long enough to allow your clubhead rotation to affect it? Do you really think that? The concept of whether the face is rotating or not doesn't matter. It's literally just whatever position the face is in when its in contact with the ball.

Perfect recipe for push draw: Face 2 open, path 4 out. (we will ignore D-plane for now)

With regards to Tennis, did you notice the poll said mostly? Path still affects starting direction, its just not the primary determinant. As club loft changes, so does the percentage of start direction caused by the face angle.
Not to mention the tennis ball is significantly in the air which helps him to miss the net. Anyway, you could aim the face towards the net, and then swing up, and it's going to raise the launch of the ball compared to if you had a path parallel to the ground(which also makes it spin more, since the path to face differential is increasing). For people that truly want to understand this stuff, I'd look at ping pong videos. Since the ball moves way slower, it seems like it would be an easier way to understand the dynamics. Same concepts of course.

[Forged_Irons]

[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390693817' post='8532327']
I call them the "new" laws because I'm an old fart, and was taught the "old" incorrect version my whole life. Anyone refuting the "new" laws is not paying attention.

I understand the argument that the greatest players in history did just fine with the "old"laws, but they simply had the talent to develop "feels" that wouldn't stand the test of today's "science", but got them around the golf course.
[/quote]

Tell me how to hit a right to left shot with the "new" laws. (Without changing your swing entirely or using inconsistent manipulations.)

[KevCarter]

[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390786947' post='8539723']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390693817' post='8532327']
I call them the "new" laws because I'm an old fart, and was taught the "old" incorrect version my whole life. Anyone refuting the "new" laws is not paying attention.

I understand the argument that the greatest players in history did just fine with the "old"laws, but they simply had the talent to develop "feels" that wouldn't stand the test of today's "science", but got them around the golf course.
[/quote]

Tell me how to hit a right to left shot with the "new" laws. (Without changing your swing entirely or using inconsistent manipulations.)
[/quote]

Clubface 2 degrees open to target, swing path 4 degrees right of target. Not the whole story, but answers your question to the best of my ability. I'm not a scientist, don't own a trackman, but pay attention to those in the know, until they start talking about preferences and unproven theory...

[TRoc9892]

[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390785321' post='8539541']
[quote name='shortstop20' timestamp='1390693225' post='8532259']
Do these people believe the Earth is flat too?
[/quote]
Terrible analogy. There are two basic flaws to the "new ball flight laws":
1) They are based on a club face that is not releasing properly though the ball. I concede, the ball WILL travel predominantly in the direction of the face angle if the player tries to hold the club square, open, or closed through impact. This won't happen if the club head releases and the toe moves properly relative to the heel.
2) they assume that the swing is circular but, when done properly, it isn't. The club when swung and released properly will travel on the target line much longer relative to the turn style swing which has one point of ideal impact and your club face damn well better be "square" right at that moment cuz, in this case, the new rules are going to "rule" (unfortunately).

Can some one tell me how one would hit a push draw with the new rules? (Without hand and arm rolling or manipulation through impact that is). I've tried to picture hitting a draw with these rules and there seems to be no set up that would allow me it just swing normally and produce this shot.

Also, I'm watching a replay of the Australian Open Tennis Tournament, and I can't figure out, according to the new rules, how Roger Federer (among many others) can get the ball traveling up over the net with an ascending swing path and a racquet face that points directly into the net or even lower. Shouldn't, according to the TM and the new physics, the ball go into the net every time?
[/quote]
Sorry but the first one is not true and the second doesn't conflict anything.

The ball curves, assuming center contact, from the relationship of the path and face. If we have a dead straight path and dead square face we get a straight ball. Same applies with a path 2 degrees out to the right and a face 2 degrees open. We call a push. No curve. Straight out to the right. When path starts moving farther right than the face is aimed, the ball will curve left. Example: Path 4 degrees right, face 2 degrees open. Ball more or less starts where the face is aimed, right, and curves back because the path is farther right. There's your push draw. Opposite for a fade. The farther apart those numbers are, the more the curve. The ball doesn't know where the target is so a path that's coming 2 degrees right with a square face will curve the same amount as a path that's square with a face aimed two degrees left, but have two different starting and ending point. Same ball just pointed in a different direction.

[Forged_Irons]

[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1390786800' post='8539707']
[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390785321' post='8539541']
[quote name='shortstop20' timestamp='1390693225' post='8532259']
Do these people believe the Earth is flat too?
[/quote]
Terrible analogy. There are two basic flaws to the "new ball flight laws":
1) They are based on a club face that is not releasing properly though the ball. I concede, the ball WILL travel predominantly in the direction of the face angle if the player tries to hold the club square, open, or closed through impact. This won't happen if the club head releases and the toe moves properly relative to the heel.
2) they assume that the swing is circular but, when done properly, it isn't. The club when swung and released properly will travel on the target line much longer relative to the turn style swing which has one point of ideal impact and your club face damn well better be "square" right at that moment cuz, in this case, the new rules are going to "rule" (unfortunately).

Can some one tell me how one would hit a push draw with the new rules? (Without hand and arm rolling or manipulation through impact that is). I've tried to picture hitting a draw with these rules and there seems to be no set up that would allow me it just swing normally and produce this shot.

Also, I'm watching a replay of the Australian Open Tennis Tournament, and I can't figure out, according to the new rules, how Roger Federer (among many others) can get the ball traveling up over the net with an ascending swing path and a racquet face that points directly into the net or even lower. Shouldn't, according to the TM and the new physics, the ball go into the net every time?
[/quote]

1. What does 1 even mean? You think the duration of impact is significantly long enough to allow your clubhead rotation to affect it? Do you really think that? The concept of whether the face is rotating or not doesn't matter. It's literally just whatever position the face is in when its in contact with the ball.

Perfect recipe for push draw: Face 2 open, path 4 out. (we will ignore D-plane for now)

With regards to Tennis, did you notice the poll said mostly? Path still affects starting direction, its just not the primary determinant. As club loft changes, so does the percentage of start direction caused by the face angle.
Not to mention the tennis ball is significantly in the air which helps him to miss the net. Anyway, you could aim the face towards the net, and then swing up, and it's going to raise the launch of the ball compared to if you had a path parallel to the ground(which also makes it spin more, since the path to face differential is increasing). For people that truly want to understand this stuff, I'd look at ping pong videos. Since the ball moves way slower, it seems like it would be an easier way to understand the dynamics. Same concepts of course.
[/quote]
Even mostly would put the tennis ball in the net! What if the ball is by his knees? Same swing. Doesn't pass the smell test. Calling bs on this.

[Golfrnut]

[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390787212' post='8539771']
[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390786947' post='8539723']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390693817' post='8532327']
I call them the "new" laws because I'm an old fart, and was taught the "old" incorrect version my whole life. Anyone refuting the "new" laws is not paying attention.

I understand the argument that the greatest players in history did just fine with the "old"laws, but they simply had the talent to develop "feels" that wouldn't stand the test of today's "science", but got them around the golf course.
[/quote]

Tell me how to hit a right to left shot with the "new" laws. (Without changing your swing entirely or using inconsistent manipulations.)
[/quote]

Clubface 2 degrees open to target, swing path 4 degrees right of target. Not the whole story, but answers your question to the best of my ability. I'm not a scientist, don't own a trackman, but pay attention to those in the know, until they start talking about preferences and unproven theory...
[/quote]


I just showed up to this thread, but even I can tell that you shouldn't let yourself get sucked into that trap....

[KevCarter]

[quote name='Golfrnut' timestamp='1390787476' post='8539831']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390787212' post='8539771']
[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390786947' post='8539723']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390693817' post='8532327']
I call them the "new" laws because I'm an old fart, and was taught the "old" incorrect version my whole life. Anyone refuting the "new" laws is not paying attention.

I understand the argument that the greatest players in history did just fine with the "old"laws, but they simply had the talent to develop "feels" that wouldn't stand the test of today's "science", but got them around the golf course.
[/quote]

Tell me how to hit a right to left shot with the "new" laws. (Without changing your swing entirely or using inconsistent manipulations.)
[/quote]

Clubface 2 degrees open to target, swing path 4 degrees right of target. Not the whole story, but answers your question to the best of my ability. I'm not a scientist, don't own a trackman, but pay attention to those in the know, until they start talking about preferences and unproven theory...
[/quote]


I just showed up to this thread, but even I can tell that you shouldn't let yourself get sucked into that trap....
[/quote]

I guess I'm pretty slow, what trap is that?

[Schnee]

We interrupt your regularly scheduled program to bring you coverage of the 1,639,288th debate on the ball flight laws. We hope you enjoy it.

[Forged_Irons]

[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1390786800' post='8539707']
[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390785321' post='8539541']
[quote name='shortstop20' timestamp='1390693225' post='8532259']
Do these people believe the Earth is flat too?
[/quote]
Terrible analogy. There are two basic flaws to the "new ball flight laws":
1) They are based on a club face that is not releasing properly though the ball. I concede, the ball WILL travel predominantly in the direction of the face angle if the player tries to hold the club square, open, or closed through impact. This won't happen if the club head releases and the toe moves properly relative to the heel.
2) they assume that the swing is circular but, when done properly, it isn't. The club when swung and released properly will travel on the target line much longer relative to the turn style swing which has one point of ideal impact and your club face damn well better be "square" right at that moment cuz, in this case, the new rules are going to "rule" (unfortunately).

Can some one tell me how one would hit a push draw with the new rules? (Without hand and arm rolling or manipulation through impact that is). I've tried to picture hitting a draw with these rules and there seems to be no set up that would allow me it just swing normally and produce this shot.

Also, I'm watching a replay of the Australian Open Tennis Tournament, and I can't figure out, according to the new rules, how Roger Federer (among many others) can get the ball traveling up over the net with an ascending swing path and a racquet face that points directly into the net or even lower. Shouldn't, according to the TM and the new physics, the ball go into the net every time?
[/quote]

1. What does 1 even mean? You think the duration of impact is significantly long enough to allow your clubhead rotation to affect it? Do you really think that? The concept of whether the face is rotating or not doesn't matter. It's literally just whatever position the face is in when its in contact with the ball.

Perfect recipe for push draw: Face 2 open, path 4 out. (we will ignore D-plane for now)

With regards to Tennis, did you notice the poll said mostly? Path still affects starting direction, its just not the primary determinant. As club loft changes, so does the percentage of start direction caused by the face angle.
Not to mention the tennis ball is significantly in the air which helps him to miss the net. Anyway, you could aim the face towards the net, and then swing up, and it's going to raise the launch of the ball compared to if you had a path parallel to the ground(which also makes it spin more, since the path to face differential is increasing). For people that truly want to understand this stuff, I'd look at ping pong videos. Since the ball moves way slower, it seems like it would be an easier way to understand the dynamics. Same concepts of course.
[/quote]
Number 1 means you release the club head with the body in a proper swing, the club stays in center all the time. In a proper swing you do not turn or rotate the club head at any time . So you just haven't the knowledge of a proper swing and that would take a year in this forum to clear up. I suggest you just grip it and rip it!

[TRoc9892]

[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390787458' post='8539829']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1390786800' post='8539707']
[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390785321' post='8539541']
[quote name='shortstop20' timestamp='1390693225' post='8532259']
Do these people believe the Earth is flat too?
[/quote]
Terrible analogy. There are two basic flaws to the "new ball flight laws":
1) They are based on a club face that is not releasing properly though the ball. I concede, the ball WILL travel predominantly in the direction of the face angle if the player tries to hold the club square, open, or closed through impact. This won't happen if the club head releases and the toe moves properly relative to the heel.
2) they assume that the swing is circular but, when done properly, it isn't. The club when swung and released properly will travel on the target line much longer relative to the turn style swing which has one point of ideal impact and your club face damn well better be "square" right at that moment cuz, in this case, the new rules are going to "rule" (unfortunately).

Can some one tell me how one would hit a push draw with the new rules? (Without hand and arm rolling or manipulation through impact that is). I've tried to picture hitting a draw with these rules and there seems to be no set up that would allow me it just swing normally and produce this shot.

Also, I'm watching a replay of the Australian Open Tennis Tournament, and I can't figure out, according to the new rules, how Roger Federer (among many others) can get the ball traveling up over the net with an ascending swing path and a racquet face that points directly into the net or even lower. Shouldn't, according to the TM and the new physics, the ball go into the net every time?
[/quote]

1. What does 1 even mean? You think the duration of impact is significantly long enough to allow your clubhead rotation to affect it? Do you really think that? The concept of whether the face is rotating or not doesn't matter. It's literally just whatever position the face is in when its in contact with the ball.

Perfect recipe for push draw: Face 2 open, path 4 out. (we will ignore D-plane for now)

With regards to Tennis, did you notice the poll said mostly? Path still affects starting direction, its just not the primary determinant. As club loft changes, so does the percentage of start direction caused by the face angle.
Not to mention the tennis ball is significantly in the air which helps him to miss the net. Anyway, you could aim the face towards the net, and then swing up, and it's going to raise the launch of the ball compared to if you had a path parallel to the ground(which also makes it spin more, since the path to face differential is increasing). For people that truly want to understand this stuff, I'd look at ping pong videos. Since the ball moves way slower, it seems like it would be an easier way to understand the dynamics. Same concepts of course.
[/quote]
Even mostly would put the tennis ball in the net! What if the ball is by his knees? Same swing. Doesn't pass the smell test. Calling bs on this.
[/quote]
I will say that impact happens at around 4 ten-thousandths of a second. That's how long the ball stays on the face. Faster than the time it takes you to blink. How many degrees do you think in that time you think you can rotate the face of a golf club?

[KevCarter]

[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390787669' post='8539857']
We interrupt your regularly scheduled program to bring you coverage of the 1,639,288th debate on the ball flight laws. We hope you enjoy it.
[/quote]

Very helpful post. Maybe the people who run the site could have a title listed for each thread in big, bold letters so nobody will be surprised at what is being discussed in each thread. Would that save you some frustration? If you read the title would you realize that if you weren't interested in the content you could just skip over it?

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390787458' post='8539829']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1390786800' post='8539707']
[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390785321' post='8539541']
[quote name='shortstop20' timestamp='1390693225' post='8532259']
Do these people believe the Earth is flat too?
[/quote]
Terrible analogy. There are two basic flaws to the "new ball flight laws":
1) They are based on a club face that is not releasing properly though the ball. I concede, the ball WILL travel predominantly in the direction of the face angle if the player tries to hold the club square, open, or closed through impact. This won't happen if the club head releases and the toe moves properly relative to the heel.
2) they assume that the swing is circular but, when done properly, it isn't. The club when swung and released properly will travel on the target line much longer relative to the turn style swing which has one point of ideal impact and your club face damn well better be "square" right at that moment cuz, in this case, the new rules are going to "rule" (unfortunately).

Can some one tell me how one would hit a push draw with the new rules? (Without hand and arm rolling or manipulation through impact that is). I've tried to picture hitting a draw with these rules and there seems to be no set up that would allow me it just swing normally and produce this shot.

Also, I'm watching a replay of the Australian Open Tennis Tournament, and I can't figure out, according to the new rules, how Roger Federer (among many others) can get the ball traveling up over the net with an ascending swing path and a racquet face that points directly into the net or even lower. Shouldn't, according to the TM and the new physics, the ball go into the net every time?
[/quote]

1. What does 1 even mean? You think the duration of impact is significantly long enough to allow your clubhead rotation to affect it? Do you really think that? The concept of whether the face is rotating or not doesn't matter. It's literally just whatever position the face is in when its in contact with the ball.

Perfect recipe for push draw: Face 2 open, path 4 out. (we will ignore D-plane for now)

With regards to Tennis, did you notice the poll said mostly? Path still affects starting direction, its just not the primary determinant. As club loft changes, so does the percentage of start direction caused by the face angle.
Not to mention the tennis ball is significantly in the air which helps him to miss the net. Anyway, you could aim the face towards the net, and then swing up, and it's going to raise the launch of the ball compared to if you had a path parallel to the ground(which also makes it spin more, since the path to face differential is increasing). For people that truly want to understand this stuff, I'd look at ping pong videos. Since the ball moves way slower, it seems like it would be an easier way to understand the dynamics. Same concepts of course.
[/quote]
Even mostly would put the tennis ball in the net! What if the ball is by his knees? Same swing. Doesn't pass the smell test. Calling bs on this.
[/quote]

Different face angle. Just because the swing looks the same doesn't mean it is. I play ping pong 5 times a week. If you have the path really shifted up, it's going to raise the launch a bit.
Just because face is the primary determinant doesn't mean that an exaggeration in path wouldn't make a big change in the initial direction. I think this is where i'll lose you...
If you had the pointed at the net and then swing 30 degrees up of that, it's going to move the launch up and make a ton of spin. And 30 degrees wouldn't even be a lot honestly for tennis/ping pong.

Just like how can I hit a chop into the net really easily? By making my path too far down for a given angle. The face is pointed 45 degrees up in the air, yet the crazy differential of swinging nearly straight down lowers launch enough to possibly hit it too low if you swing down too much. You'll probably say this support your theories, but it really doesn't at all.

[pinhigh27]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7DlijPvZmU


Watch that video. Look where the face is pointed. Probably between 0-45 degrees above parallel at impact. Path is nearly straight down. If path controlled starting direction, why does the ball go up still? If the only thing that mattered was face, why doesn't the ball go much higher? The huge path differential lowers the launch.

[KevCarter]

[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1390788236' post='8539935']
Different face angle. Just because the swing looks the same doesn't mean it is. I play ping pong 5 times a week. If you have the path really shifted up, it's going to raise the launch a bit.
Just because face is the primary determinant doesn't mean that an exaggeration in path wouldn't make a big change in the initial direction. I think this is where i'll lose you...
If you had the pointed at the net and then swing 30 degrees up of that, it's going to move the launch up and make a ton of spin. And 30 degrees wouldn't even be a lot honestly for tennis/ping pong.

Just like how can I hit a chop into the net really easily? By making my path too far down for a given angle. The face is pointed 45 degrees up in the air, yet the crazy differential of swinging nearly straight down lowers launch enough to possibly hit it too low if you swing down too much. [b]You'll probably say this support your theories, but it really doesn't at all[/b].
[/quote]

Unless we want to compare apples to cumquats. :-)

[Golfrnut]

[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390787554' post='8539841']
[quote name='Golfrnut' timestamp='1390787476' post='8539831']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390787212' post='8539771']
[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390786947' post='8539723']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390693817' post='8532327']
I call them the "new" laws because I'm an old fart, and was taught the "old" incorrect version my whole life. Anyone refuting the "new" laws is not paying attention.

I understand the argument that the greatest players in history did just fine with the "old"laws, but they simply had the talent to develop "feels" that wouldn't stand the test of today's "science", but got them around the golf course.
[/quote]

Tell me how to hit a right to left shot with the "new" laws. (Without changing your swing entirely or using inconsistent manipulations.)
[/quote]

Clubface 2 degrees open to target, swing path 4 degrees right of target. Not the whole story, but answers your question to the best of my ability. I'm not a scientist, don't own a trackman, but pay attention to those in the know, until they start talking about preferences and unproven theory...
[/quote]


I just showed up to this thread, but even I can tell that you shouldn't let yourself get sucked into that trap....
[/quote]

I guess I'm pretty slow, what trap is that?
[/quote]

It was a shot at a lighthearted joke.

Just based upon some of the prior comments by the OP that you quoted, it just seems you will have a long uphill battle to climb in order to get your point across.

[KevCarter]

[quote name='Golfrnut' timestamp='1390788995' post='8540015']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390787554' post='8539841']
[quote name='Golfrnut' timestamp='1390787476' post='8539831']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390787212' post='8539771']
[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390786947' post='8539723']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390693817' post='8532327']
I call them the "new" laws because I'm an old fart, and was taught the "old" incorrect version my whole life. Anyone refuting the "new" laws is not paying attention.

I understand the argument that the greatest players in history did just fine with the "old"laws, but they simply had the talent to develop "feels" that wouldn't stand the test of today's "science", but got them around the golf course.
[/quote]

Tell me how to hit a right to left shot with the "new" laws. (Without changing your swing entirely or using inconsistent manipulations.)
[/quote]

Clubface 2 degrees open to target, swing path 4 degrees right of target. Not the whole story, but answers your question to the best of my ability. I'm not a scientist, don't own a trackman, but pay attention to those in the know, until they start talking about preferences and unproven theory...
[/quote]


I just showed up to this thread, but even I can tell that you shouldn't let yourself get sucked into that trap....
[/quote]

I guess I'm pretty slow, what trap is that?
[/quote]

It was a shot at a lighthearted joke.

Just based upon some of the prior comments by the OP that you wuoted, it just seems you will have a long uphill battle to climb in order to get your point across.
[/quote]

Got it, and I agree. It's not worth the time, effort, or trouble. Some people refuse to move forward.

[SPIF]

[quote name='Forged_Irons' timestamp='1390785321' post='8539541']
[quote name='shortstop20' timestamp='1390693225' post='8532259']
Do these people believe the Earth is flat too?
[/quote]
Terrible analogy. There are two basic flaws to the "new ball flight laws":
1) They are based on a club face that is not releasing properly though the ball. I concede, the ball WILL travel predominantly in the direction of the face angle if the player tries to hold the club square, open, or closed through impact. This won't happen if the club head releases and the toe moves properly relative to the heel.
2) they assume that the swing is circular but, when done properly, it isn't. The club when swung and released properly will travel on the target line much longer relative to the turn style swing which has one point of ideal impact and your club face damn well better be "square" right at that moment cuz, in this case, the new rules are going to "rule" (unfortunately).

Can some one tell me how one would hit a push draw with the new rules? (Without hand and arm rolling or manipulation through impact that is). I've tried to picture hitting a draw with these rules and there seems to be no set up that would allow me it just swing normally and produce this shot.

Also, I'm watching a replay of the Australian Open Tennis Tournament, and I can't figure out, according to the new rules, how Roger Federer (among many others) can get the ball traveling up over the net with an ascending swing path and a racquet face that points directly into the net or even lower. Shouldn't, according to the TM and the new physics, the ball go into the net every time?
[/quote]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtNHuqHWefU

[Schnee]

[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390788140' post='8539923']
[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390787669' post='8539857']
We interrupt your regularly scheduled program to bring you coverage of the 1,639,288th debate on the ball flight laws. We hope you enjoy it.
[/quote]

Very helpful post. Maybe the people who run the site could have a title listed for each thread in big, bold letters so nobody will be surprised at what is being discussed in each thread. Would that save you some frustration? If you read the title would you realize that if you weren't interested in the content you could just skip over it?
[/quote]

Wow kev cabin fever is hitting you hard this year huh? It's called a joke. It was getting a little serious up in here so I thought I'd throw in a quip. I think it's a good topic. If you read the whole thing you'll see that I participated earlier.

[KevCarter]

[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390791191' post='8540269']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390788140' post='8539923']
[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390787669' post='8539857']
We interrupt your regularly scheduled program to bring you coverage of the 1,639,288th debate on the ball flight laws. We hope you enjoy it.
[/quote]

Very helpful post. Maybe the people who run the site could have a title listed for each thread in big, bold letters so nobody will be surprised at what is being discussed in each thread. Would that save you some frustration? If you read the title would you realize that if you weren't interested in the content you could just skip over it?
[/quote]

Wow kev cabin fever is hitting you hard this year huh? It's called a joke. It was getting a little serious up in here so I thought I'd throw in a quip. I think it's a good topic. If you read the whole thing you'll see that I participated earlier.
[/quote]

My apologies.

[Schnee]

[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390791314' post='8540277']
[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390791191' post='8540269']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390788140' post='8539923']
[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390787669' post='8539857']
We interrupt your regularly scheduled program to bring you coverage of the 1,639,288th debate on the ball flight laws. We hope you enjoy it.
[/quote]

Very helpful post. Maybe the people who run the site could have a title listed for each thread in big, bold letters so nobody will be surprised at what is being discussed in each thread. Would that save you some frustration? If you read the title would you realize that if you weren't interested in the content you could just skip over it?
[/quote]

Wow kev cabin fever is hitting you hard this year huh? It's called a joke. It was getting a little serious up in here so I thought I'd throw in a quip. I think it's a good topic. If you read the whole thing you'll see that I participated earlier.
[/quote]

My apologies.
[/quote]

Friends again?

[KevCarter]

[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390791391' post='8540285']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390791314' post='8540277']
[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390791191' post='8540269']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390788140' post='8539923']
[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390787669' post='8539857']
We interrupt your regularly scheduled program to bring you coverage of the 1,639,288th debate on the ball flight laws. We hope you enjoy it.
[/quote]

Very helpful post. Maybe the people who run the site could have a title listed for each thread in big, bold letters so nobody will be surprised at what is being discussed in each thread. Would that save you some frustration? If you read the title would you realize that if you weren't interested in the content you could just skip over it?
[/quote]

Wow kev cabin fever is hitting you hard this year huh? It's called a joke. It was getting a little serious up in here so I thought I'd throw in a quip. I think it's a good topic. If you read the whole thing you'll see that I participated earlier.
[/quote]

My apologies.
[/quote]

Friends again?
[/quote]

Always Man, people are just getting to me. My apology was sincere, complete mis-read of your post.

[Schnee]

[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390791481' post='8540295']
[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390791391' post='8540285']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390791314' post='8540277']
[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390791191' post='8540269']
[quote name='kevcarter' timestamp='1390788140' post='8539923']
[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390787669' post='8539857']
We interrupt your regularly scheduled program to bring you coverage of the 1,639,288th debate on the ball flight laws. We hope you enjoy it.
[/quote]

Very helpful post. Maybe the people who run the site could have a title listed for each thread in big, bold letters so nobody will be surprised at what is being discussed in each thread. Would that save you some frustration? If you read the title would you realize that if you weren't interested in the content you could just skip over it?
[/quote]

Wow kev cabin fever is hitting you hard this year huh? It's called a joke. It was getting a little serious up in here so I thought I'd throw in a quip. I think it's a good topic. If you read the whole thing you'll see that I participated earlier.
[/quote]

My apologies.
[/quote]

Friends again?
[/quote]

Always Man, people are just getting to me. My apology was sincere, complete mis-read of your post.
[/quote]

It's all good. I appreciate the apology. Back to the debate!

[SurfinTurf]

^^^^

This is mid winter. Please stop being civil. I'm am not entertained by this in the least.

[KevCarter]

[quote name='SurfinTurf' timestamp='1390793483' post='8540549']
^^^^

This is mid winter. Please stop being civil. I'm am not entertained by this in the least.
[/quote]

LOL

[Schnee]

[quote name='SurfinTurf' timestamp='1390793483' post='8540549']
^^^^

This is mid winter. Please stop being civil. I'm am not entertained by this in the least.
[/quote]

We can always be civil, just ask Sean2!

[SurfinTurf]

[quote name='CSchnee' timestamp='1390794431' post='8540655']
[quote name='SurfinTurf' timestamp='1390793483' post='8540549']
^^^^

This is mid winter. Please stop being civil. I'm am not entertained by this in the least.
[/quote]

We can always be civil, just ask Sean2!
[/quote]

I've been trying to pick a fight with that guy for ages!!! LOL

I kid.