Driver into the wind

[Asics10]

When hitting driver into a strong wind (15mph or more), is it still optimal to hit up with a positive angle of attack and low spin?   Or it it better to hit it more level (obviously lower)? 

Thanks 

[MonteScheinblum]

How much up?

[Valtiel]

IMO it's best to do *nothing different at all* because the first thing that screws people up when hitting into the wind is trying to manufacture a different shot. 

The absolute best thing you CAN do though is whatever is necessary and practical to keep spin low e.g. avoiding the bottom of the face and favoring the upper half. If that involves feeling like you're hitting more level or slightly down to achieve this then do that, otherwise try to avoid changing your base delivery. 

[Nickb333]

When it’s breezy swing it easy. 

[Scottbox]

You might tee it up lower and consider hitting the low draw. This is a pretty cool vid that's helped me:

 

 

[LukeDonaldsTiger]

I‘ve developed a low launching shot by simply doing the Tiger thing to tee it low, left glove logo points to the ground. He said that in that cool American Express sponsored video where the set up bleachers on a driving range and he explained some things. 
This is all very unscientific, obviously, and I‘m a 10 hcp, but it works for me. 
 

I fiddled around with a driving iron and hitting 3W lower, but ultimately, the driver provides the longest carry so I just try to lower the launch and spin, and swing a little easier. 

Driving iron into the wind was magic in Scotland, though, it just kept bouncing forward and I had way more total distance than with driver, due to the very flat descent angle and roll. 

[Asics10]

10 hours ago, MonteScheinblum said:

How much up?

+2.5 ish  according to trackman

[Asics10]

What I'm asking is... what does the science say?  I'm not asking how to hit it lower.  What I want to know is which is more efficient into the wind?  

[joedizzy1978]

Science says for faster swingers where optimization is 12 launch and 2400 spin, that a reduction of launch to 10 with spin 2100-2200 will yield similar distances into the wind. Slower speed players, add 2 degrees of launch and 400 rpms of spin.  It cant be simplified to up better than down more so the numbers produced.  

Edited May 16 by joedizzy1978

[MonteScheinblum]

4 hours ago, Asics10 said:

+2.5 ish  according to trackman

Then I wouldn’t change anything

[rsballer10]

I just hit a fairway finder into the wind. Basically lower tee height, neutral delivery. I basically hit a stock shot, as most my drives are attempts at fairway finders.

 

Edited May 16 by rsballer10

[badpokerbadgolf]

17 hours ago, Valtiel said:

IMO it's best to do *nothing different at all* because the first thing that screws people up when hitting into the wind is trying to manufacture a different shot. 

The absolute best thing you CAN do though is whatever is necessary and practical to keep spin low e.g. avoiding the bottom of the face and favoring the upper half. If that involves feeling like you're hitting more level or slightly down to achieve this then do that, otherwise try to avoid changing your base delivery. 

 

Isn't teeing it up lower going to tighten up the dispersion which is needed since hitting into the wind makes the ball curve more?     Aren't we going to hit it more toward the bottom of the face by default if the ball is teed up very low?

[Valtiel]

7 hours ago, badpokerbadgolf said:

 

Isn't teeing it up lower going to tighten up the dispersion which is needed since hitting into the wind makes the ball curve more?     Aren't we going to hit it more toward the bottom of the face by default if the ball is teed up very low?

Not sure if you meant to quote me or not, but I never said anything about teeing it lower. But no, teeing the ball lower doesn't have any direct correlation to "tighter dispersion", it's completely case dependent. Reducing left/right has everything to do with either correcting heel/toe strike tendency (gear effect curve) or correcting delivery issues related to face to path, and what causes them. Teeing the ball lower doesn't guarantee anything here, other than a tendency to strike lower on the face which will kick up spin which is *bad* in the wind. The wind also doesn't make the ball curve more necessarily, it will accentuate whatever curve is already there (which is maybe what you meant). And a ball that spins more will want to climb and stay in the air longer, increasing the time wind has to move it. But back to the tee height point...

If teeing it down results in you delivering the club in a more consistent and predictable way then that's great. Other folks will be hurt by this as they manufacture something in their swing that makes them *less* consistent. It's completely individual.

Ultimately the best wind ball off the tee is one with lower low spin and a very neutral delivery/ball flight to minimize curve. However, if someone can hit a super consistent low cut when teeing the ball down and that has the best chance of getting in the fairway then great....it's just not going to suffer more in terms of total distance on average. 

[badpokerbadgolf]

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/higher-and-lower-tee-distance-and-accuracy-tee-height-golf-digest-mythbusters

 

This data set begs to differ re: tee height and dispersion in general.  Would be interesting to see results if there was data filtered for shots into a head wind.

 

 

[onehopstopt]

Lower tee -> lower strike on the face -> more spin at a lower launch -> tighter dispersion.

 

My personal experience is that launch angle is much more important than spin when it comes to hitting into wind, so IMO you are probably better off with a slightly lower tee. Ideal would be higher on the face with less dynamic loft, but that requires a lot more changes to setup and swing, so if you don't have that shot well practiced best off just lowering the tee a little and taking your normal swing.

[Valtiel]

On 5/17/2025 at 1:27 AM, badpokerbadgolf said:

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/higher-and-lower-tee-distance-and-accuracy-tee-height-golf-digest-mythbusters

 

This data set begs to differ re: tee height and dispersion in general.  Would be interesting to see results if there was data filtered for shots into a head wind.

 

 

That's one guy....probably shouldn't have to state how that makes this pretty useless from a sample size standpoint. 
 

15 hours ago, onehopstopt said:

Lower tee -> lower strike on the face -> more spin at a lower launch -> tighter dispersion.

 

My personal experience is that launch angle is much more important than spin when it comes to hitting into wind, so IMO you are probably better off with a slightly lower tee. Ideal would be higher on the face with less dynamic loft, but that requires a lot more changes to setup and swing, so if you don't have that shot well practiced best off just lowering the tee a little and taking your normal swing.

That's what I was arguing before though....why does lower launch + more spin = tighter dispersion? Especially into the wind. More spin gives the ball more time in the air and thus more time to be impacted by the wind which will not only potentially create greater dispersion left/right but also front/back as well. And regarding what does or doesn't require "a lot more changes to setup", why does hitting it higher on the face with less loft qualify for that but hitting lower on the face with a low tee not? Plenty of people used to a higher tee will likely see just as many setup/swing changes with a lower one, and obviously vice versa. So i'll double down on my original point; DON'T do anything much different than you normally do. If you're used to a low tee/higher spinning shot then don't deviate from that simply because a higher strike with lower spin is better in the wind, but if you're used to a higher tee then don't just tee it down thinking that will be better or have "tighter dispersion" because if it changed anything about your delivery then it absolutely won't on average. 
 

The only thing I want to harp on are these binaries/absolutes about dispersion. Nothing inherently tightens it for everyone other than the simple rule of NOT trying to do things you aren't used to or consistent at, and teeing the ball lower isn't some dispersion guarantee. Pros often talking about doing it to hit fairway finders, but that is because they don't have the the variability in their mechanics that makes this an additional variable like the rest of us do. And even then plenty of pros DON'T do this because it doesn't suit them. It's all case dependent. 

[onehopstopt]

19 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

...why does lower launch + more spin = tighter dispersion? Especially into the wind. More spin gives the ball more time in the air and thus more time to be impacted by the wind...

 

Well the biggest reason it's going to reduce dispersion is that it just won't go as far. Also a low face strike like that will spend less time in the air, even into the wind. Launch angle is much more important than spin for determining that. On top of all that, you get a reduction in curvature from gyroscopic stability.

 

You also might end up putting a steeper swing on a teed down ball to still find the middle of the face. That's going to be more accurate mainly by virtue of lower launch so less time spent in the air, and reduced distance.

 

Like you said though, these are general trends, not universal laws. That said I would really encourage anyone and everyone to experiment with low tee driver both for fairway finding and into wind. I think it's a good idea for most players. But like everything, get comfy with it on the range before you bring it to the course!

[Valtiel]

1 hour ago, onehopstopt said:

 

Well the biggest reason it's going to reduce dispersion is that it just won't go as far. Also a low face strike like that will spend less time in the air, even into the wind. Launch angle is much more important than spin for determining that. On top of all that, you get a reduction in curvature from gyroscopic stability.

 

You also might end up putting a steeper swing on a teed down ball to still find the middle of the face. That's going to be more accurate mainly by virtue of lower launch so less time spent in the air, and reduced distance.

 

Like you said though, these are general trends, not universal laws. That said I would really encourage anyone and everyone to experiment with low tee driver both for fairway finding and into wind. I think it's a good idea for most players. But like everything, get comfy with it on the range before you bring it to the course!

I'm not qualified enough to dive into this, but i'm reasonably sure that the concept of gyroscopic stability doesn't really factor into this situation. I want to ping @Stuart_G for that one though for a potential assist. My understanding though is more spin = more wind influence = worse outcome if the wind does something you don't want. 

I agree that launch angle does indeed matter, and this probably depends a lot on speed, because the higher speed player that sees a big increase in spin with the low strike would be more impacted than the lower speed one. 

Regarding a steeper swing though, frankly I think it's quite uncommon for that to just be a thing that the average golfer can just do without also losing control of the face or the path. Lots of folks will mess up path in the downswing in an effort to get steeper if they aren't used to it, and those that are already steeper....well stick with that then hah. 

Agreed on the "comfy" part though, *whatever* is comfortable is best. I tried really hard to practice what I was preaching after my first post because I played my first competitive round of the season a few days after. It was quite windy at times and I had a really solid day off the tee, including driving a pair of Par 4's that were into and down wind respectively. My only thought was "adjust your aim accordingly and don't do anything different" and I won't be deviating from that strategy anytime soon, hah. 

[onehopstopt]

27 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

I'm not qualified enough to dive into this, but i'm reasonably sure that the concept of gyroscopic stability doesn't really factor into this situation. I want to ping @Stuart_G for that one though for a potential assist. My understanding though is more spin = more wind influence = worse outcome if the wind does something you don't want. 

I agree that launch angle does indeed matter, and this probably depends a lot on speed, because the higher speed player that sees a big increase in spin with the low strike would be more impacted than the lower speed one. 

Regarding a steeper swing though, frankly I think it's quite uncommon for that to just be a thing that the average golfer can just do without also losing control of the face or the path. Lots of folks will mess up path in the downswing in an effort to get steeper if they aren't used to it, and those that are already steeper....well stick with that then hah. 

Agreed on the "comfy" part though, *whatever* is comfortable is best. I tried really hard to practice what I was preaching after my first post because I played my first competitive round of the season a few days after. It was quite windy at times and I had a really solid day off the tee, including driving a pair of Par 4's that were into and down wind respectively. My only thought was "adjust your aim accordingly and don't do anything different" and I won't be deviating from that strategy anytime soon, hah. 

 

I think I might be using the term gyroscopic stability incorrectly here- what I meant to say is that the low face strike will have a less tilted spin axis, and that more spin would resist changes to that axis more. The more I'm thinking about it the less I'm convinced that's going to matter, since if you break the spin into components, the horizontal component of the spin would be the same. Initially I was thinking that headwinds cause further tilting of the spin axis, but I'm not sure that's true, they might just be exaggerating the acceleration due to tilted spin axis. I'd have to think more about that one, but that might not be true.

 

But yeah, lower launch is really great for wind. Almost without exception a low face strike will fly and apex lower than a high faced one, and if anything that difference is going to be more pronounced into the wind.

 

Agree that most golfers won't get steeper with a lower tee. My point was simply that even if you adjust to the lower tee in order to not strike it low on the face, that steepening of AoA will still result in a lower flight, which is going to tend to reduce your dispersion.

 

Yeah I think it's just going to come down to what you are comfortable with. Coincidentally just this weekend I played in a tournament in extreme wind conditions, and had great success with my low tee drive into wind. But that's a drive I practice and hit all the time, not some specialty thing I only bring out on occasion! I would say that if you're going to tee down you ought to be at least as confident, if not more confident, hitting that than hitting a high tee ball. But I really do think most players should practice a low tee ball to get to that point. It's just a really valuable shot, and you don't even have to change your swing at all!

Edited May 19 by onehopstopt

[Valtiel]

53 minutes ago, onehopstopt said:

I think I might be using the term gyroscopic stability incorrectly here- what I meant to say is that the low face strike will have a less tilted spin axis. The more I'm thinking about it the less I'm convinced that's going to matter, since if you break the spin into components, the horizontal component of the spin would be the same. I'd have to think more about that one.

This is actually a topic that has been delved into a few times as it relates to this concept of spin and stability and it's one I know @Stuart_G who I tagged earlier and I have kicked around, without a completely satisfying conclusion IIRC. Directly correlating spin with stability is leaving out the variable(s) of what cause variations in spin. People often talk about the "higher spinning, more stable/accurate" driver setup vs. the "lower spinning, more wild/unstable" one and they make the mistake of assigning that stability to the amount of spin. What I do remember being discussed was that in terms of physics, a golf ball spinning at 3,000rpm isn't any more or less "stable" than one spinning half that, not inherently anyway. Neither one will deviate from it's flight or "become unstable" like a yawing bullet or something just due to spin. There IS a point where the ball won't want to stay airborne (we've all seen that with worn out driving range balls), but that isn't something we ever see in all but the nastiest of toe hooks, which conveniently brings us too...

The environment that creates that spin is where the stability comes from, that being the MOI of the driver head. Of those two driver archetypes mentioned, the stable one is always higher MOI and the wild one is always lower. Vertical CG location also plays a role, but overall the "stability" we associate with higher spin has nothing to do with the spin, but the higher MOI driver that itself is more "stable" in that it doesn't twist as rapidly on off-center hits and therefore imparts less gear effect on the ball which means less axis tilt and less curve e.g. more "stability". The wild low spin head is volatile for the all the opposite reasons. It produces stronger gear effect everywhere. More hook from the toe, slice from the heel, knuckleballs from the top, and floaty spinners from the bottom. Ironically this makes the "low spin wild driver" actually the spinniest if you strike it wrong (low). 

So does the low strike have a less tilted spin axis? This is partially what I remember discussing previously, but as a function of higher static loft instead of strike location and without a clear conclusion as it's above my pay grade. The question being "does a higher backspin environment inherently resist the influences that create axis tilt?". Anecdotally I know that the low toe strike (my most common miss) certainly doesn't seem to snap as inconsiderately and violently left as the high toe.....and two seasons worth of wear shows that not only am I the president, I am a client!....



...but I don't know if the exact same strike but equally above the sweetspot would curve the same, and if it didn't whether that was a function of spin, loft, gear effect, or swamp gas reflecting the light from Venus. 

Edited May 19 by Valtiel

[onehopstopt]

3 hours ago, Valtiel said:

This is actually a topic that has been delved into a few times as it relates to this concept of spin and stability and it's one I know @Stuart_G who I tagged earlier and I have kicked around, without a completely satisfying conclusion IIRC. Directly correlating spin with stability is leaving out the variable(s) of what cause variations in spin. People often talk about the "higher spinning, more stable/accurate" driver setup vs. the "lower spinning, more wild/unstable" one and they make the mistake of assigning that stability to the amount of spin. What I do remember being discussed was that in terms of physics, a golf ball spinning at 3,000rpm isn't any more or less "stable" than one spinning half that, not inherently anyway. Neither one will deviate from it's flight or "become unstable" like a yawing bullet or something just due to spin. There IS a point where the ball won't want to stay airborne (we've all seen that with worn out driving range balls), but that isn't something we ever see in all but the nastiest of toe hooks, which conveniently brings us too...

The environment that creates that spin is where the stability comes from, that being the MOI of the driver head. Of those two driver archetypes mentioned, the stable one is always higher MOI and the wild one is always lower. Vertical CG location also plays a role, but overall the "stability" we associate with higher spin has nothing to do with the spin, but the higher MOI driver that itself is more "stable" in that it doesn't twist as rapidly on off-center hits and therefore imparts less gear effect on the ball which means less axis tilt and less curve e.g. more "stability". The wild low spin head is volatile for the all the opposite reasons. It produces stronger gear effect everywhere. More hook from the toe, slice from the heel, knuckleballs from the top, and floaty spinners from the bottom. Ironically this makes the "low spin wild driver" actually the spinniest if you strike it wrong (low). 

So does the low strike have a less tilted spin axis? This is partially what I remember discussing previously, but as a function of higher static loft instead of strike location and without a clear conclusion as it's above my pay grade. The question being "does a higher backspin environment inherently resist the influences that create axis tilt?". Anecdotally I know that the low toe strike (my most common miss) certainly doesn't seem to snap as inconsiderately and violently left as the high toe.....and two seasons worth of wear shows that not only am I the president, I am a client!....



...but I don't know if the exact same strike but equally above the sweetspot would curve the same, and if it didn't whether that was a function of spin, loft, gear effect, or swamp gas reflecting the light from Venus. 

 

Yeah I would love to see some research on this, or at least have a an aerodynamics expert weigh in. A low face strike should have a less tilted spin axis because of having "more backspin." Like if you break the spin down into components, the more you increase backspin component without adding to the sidespin component, the less tilted the angle of the spin axis becomes. But will that result in a straighter shot? I guess I don't really know. Maybe not, since the "sidespin component" of spin is roughly the same as it was before. Like you said, some of the reasons that spinnier shots go straight aren't actually a result of the spin (eg: more loft applies more spin, but it also decreases the effect of face angle on horizontal launch angle).

 

Certainly a lower/spinnier low face strike reduces distance and apex, which will in turn reduce dispersion as well as the effects of wind on the ball so you should get dispersion gains from that. There is way too much smoke for there not to be fire with low tee tightening dispersion. Again, robust testing would be great to figure out what that effect size is and what the cause is.

 

Regardless, I would definitely encourage anyone and everyone to experiment with tee height! It's a great way to fiddle with trajectory without needing to mess with your swing.

[DaveGoodrich]

Even if you believe higher backspin means less axis tilt, that tilt will produce more curvature, because of the aerodynamic effect resulting from the faster spin.  Less spin means whatever tilt you have will have less aerodynamic effect, especially into the wind, keeping the ball flight straighter.  So, into the wind, low spin is the goal, and center-face contact (minimal gear effect) with a face that is pointing close to the direction it is going (low spin-loft), is the way. 

 

Into the wind, I don't tee it lower, because I don't want the spin from a low-face impact.  And I don't try to "hit down," by moving it back in my stance, etc.  I basically "flight it down" by thinking about keeping my hands a little more forward through impact to reduce the loft, which lowers the launch angle and the spin-loft.  But it's a pretty minor adjustment.  Mostly, hitting into the wind is about making solid contact.  

[Stuart_G]

12 hours ago, onehopstopt said:

 

Yeah I would love to see some research on this, or at least have a an aerodynamics expert weigh in. A low face strike should have a less tilted spin axis because of having "more backspin." Like if you break the spin down into components, the more you increase backspin component without adding to the sidespin component, the less tilted the angle of the spin axis becomes. But will that result in a straighter shot? I guess I don't really know. Maybe not, since the "sidespin component" of spin is roughly the same as it was before. Like you said, some of the reasons that spinnier shots go straight aren't actually a result of the spin (eg: more loft applies more spin, but it also decreases the effect of face angle on horizontal launch angle).

 

The math isn't all that high level.   Higher than most might get in High School but something a first or second year engineering or physics major can handle.   Looking at the spin axis tilt is one of the reasons people have a hard time understanding this question.  When one looks at the spin axis, one would naturally think that more tilt means more curvature - but that's just not true

and where most of the confusion and misunderstandings come from.

 

Your question of looking at the different components of the spin is the right approach and is much more informative.   Yes, it is the side spin that defines the rate of horizontal (offline) curvature that the ball will have.   The main contribution of the backspin (along with things like ball speed and launch angle) is to determine how long the ball is in the air and able to continue to curve offline - or more simply the hang time.  Or if you want to simplify it a bit more (assuming some what reasonably launch conditions) that hang time can be equated with distance.

 

So if you really want to generalize it - how far offline the ball will travel is really just a factor of:

1) side spin  (face-to-path and horizontal gear effect)

2) distance  (loft and vertical gear effect)

 

So when asking the question whether more loft (or spin) will help with accuracy - it really comes down to how much distance to you want to sacrifice to get more accuracy.    A degree or two (or three) of loft generally isn't going to be that significant in terms of what you might save.   If your really want to increase accuracy on a particular tee box, use the 3wd (assuming wind isn't the issue).

 

Now of course it's really a bit more complex than that but it's still a good characterization of the problem.

 

Now all that is not considering the wind.   For that it's better to consider the direct effect on hang time instead of simply looking at distance.  Hitting into the wind means that the backspin has a greater effect on hang time.  More airspeed for the same ball speed means more lift and increases the effect of a given amount of side spin.   So into the head wind increases both the curvature and the time in the air it can curve.  A double whammy so to speak.   A change in loft wont necessarily change the increased curvature, you'd need to actually change the face-path (or gear effect) for that.  But it can still effect the hang time.    That's also the same reason why in the opposite situation (downwind)  sometimes one can actually get as much or even more distance hitting a 3wd than driver.

 

Edited May 20 by Stuart_G

[iacas]

8 hours ago, DaveGoodrich said:

Even if you believe higher backspin means less axis tilt, that tilt will produce more curvature, because of the aerodynamic effect resulting from the faster spin.

 

 

[DaveGoodrich]

46 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

 

 

Interesting.  I stand corrected.  Based on this, it seems that the spin rate has less effect on either total distance, or lateral dispersion than I have believed.  It is also interesting to see that lowering the launch angle doesn't really change that much either, although the combo of lower launch and lower spin (difficult to achieve, I understand) does produce the best results:

 

 

 

 

So is it your recommendation for driving into the wind the same as @Valtiel - essentially don't try to do anything different from a "normal" driver swing?

 

 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, DaveGoodrich said:

So is it your recommendation for driving into the wind the same as @Valtiel - essentially don't try to do anything different from a "normal" driver swing?

Optimal lunch conditions are optimal across a really wide range of conditions. Every fitter I’ve ever talked to including some of the highest level ones have all said that. And that’s before you even factor in someone trying to do something differently than normal and probably not doing it nearly as well.

 

The line is somewhere near the middle of the PGA Tour. Some of those guys are better off doing different things but that often has as much to do with their need to scratch their creativity itch than anything technical.

[Stuart_G]

27 minutes ago, iacas said:

Optimal lunch conditions are optimal across a really wide range of conditions. Every fitter I’ve ever talked to including some of the highest level ones have all said that. And that’s before you even factor in someone trying to do something differently than normal and probably not doing it nearly as well.

 

Even if you assume that's true - it's not taking into consideration the increase of the left/right movement that happens into the wind.  Some people with larger left/right motion may not want optimal distance into the wind as it can result in a much bigger lateral miss.

[iacas]

30 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

Even if you assume that's true - it's not taking into consideration the increase of the left/right movement that happens into the wind.  Some people with larger left/right motion may not want optimal distance into the wind as it can result in a much bigger lateral miss.

 

And as I said then you get into the idea that they're trying to hit a different shot, when they're probably better served to hit their normal shot. And in their off time, better served working to reduce the curve on their stock shot.

[DaveGoodrich]

53 minutes ago, iacas said:

Optimal lunch conditions are optimal across a really wide range of conditions. Every fitter I’ve ever talked to including some of the highest level ones have all said that. And that’s before you even factor in someone trying to do something differently than normal and probably not doing it nearly as well.

 

The line is somewhere near the middle of the PGA Tour. Some of those guys are better off doing different things but that often has as much to do with their need to scratch their creativity itch than anything technical.

 

Thanks, this is really interesting.  I get the "creativity itch" thing.  Its hard to stand on the tee box with a 20 mph headwind and not think that I need to "do something" about it.  But it sounds like, if you can hit it reasonably straight, just do that, and don't try to do anything else different.   

 

 

[Stuart_G]

38 minutes ago, iacas said:

when they're probably better served to hit their normal shot.

 

That's completely depends on what their normal shot happens to be (and what's in front of them on the tee box).   e.g. for the OP it certainly might be the best way to proceed.  That doesn't mean it will be for everyone.  

 

38 minutes ago, iacas said:

And in their off time, better served working to reduce the curve on their stock shot.

 

I wouldn't disagree in an ideal world - and certainly a good goal for those that do have the time and inclination to make the improvements.  But that's far from the reality of what fits into most am's lives.

Edited May 20 by Stuart_G