Wednesday
Aug082012
Foley Says Kostis Mangled Tiger Swing Analysis
Pete McDaniel talks to instructor Sean Foley, who explains how CBS on-course reporter Peter Kostis got it wrong in breaking down Tiger's swing last weekend when he described Tiger's clubface as being "toed-in'' when it really was the opposite.
Foley went on to explain that the shot was actually executed with an open clubface. Through body rotation Tiger imparted right-to-left spin on the ball and that's what made it curve.
"His clubface was open say three degrees and his body rotation amounted to four degrees. That's what produced the draw.''
Wednesday, August 8, 2012 at 09:13 AM
Reader Comments (46)
This is what happens when one ignores the laws of physics and embraces theories of neuroplasticity.
Foley seems to be arguing that because of Tiger's over-rotation, the clubface is open relative to Tiger's shoulders. But that is not the common definition of an 'open clubface.'
This is not so much about club positions as it is about Sean Foley's hyper-sensitivity.
I'll admit that I'm no expert in biomangalactical neuroplastic scientigombopaladensical scientificity like Mr. Foley, but I'd like to see how you draw the ball when the face is open at the moment of impact.
Foley would be better to keep the degree of closedness of his mouth at 100 % or in other words the amount of openess of his mouth at 0%.
Better to stay silent and have some believe you are an idiot, than to speak up and confirm it for all.
Essentially ball flight is controlled by the relationship between face angle and path. All this stuff about closing the clubface at impact is nonsense.
Anyone who believes something to the contrary (most likely because that's what we were taught...and sadly it's what is still being taught by many), should probably google "Trackman Maestro" and watch a video or two. They're real eye-openers.
The clubface points right of the target at impact for EVERY GOOD DRAW hit by a right-handed player.
The ball starts roughly where the clubface is pointing and curves away from the path.
Clubface 3° right ("open" if you want that term), path 4° right, producing a face that's both "open" to the target and closed to the path.
If you want to hit a draw that starts right of your intended target, you better have a clubface that is open in relation to your target too. I am a recent convert to this and can't stress enough how great it is to finally understand the TRUE ball flight laws. Instructors should only use Trackman and not video. I have students playing the golf of their life...as well as I am.
Enter with an open mind. You will be better for it!
Will be interested to see if Peter Kostis back from the dead responds here on this.
If all that Foley and tracking Maestro man are saying is that there are some misconceptions with respect to the club face being shut relative to the *target* line, then yes, I fully agree. I haven't seen the Kostis piece...if he truly says that Tiger's club face was pointing to the left of the target, then yes, he's an idiot. But if he was simply implying that the face was shut relative to the direction the club was moving in, I don't think he should be made fun of.
sometimes he says some seriously questionable stuff.
I don't watch Tiger, it hurts to watch him swing. He has no joy playing the game. Pity.
p.s. Take "Field" v. Tiger this week. Bet the house and put up the life insurance, too. No chance in that wind.
anyone got details on kostis'?
and NC Phyllis...don't you know about golf student/teacher confidentiality! IT'S SO SACRED!!! they can't let us unwashed masses know what they're working on!
/heavy sarcasm
Your comments on this issue couldn't be more wrong.
Use Wood's chicken stick 2 iron as an example. If he is going to hit a 250 yard shot with 12 yards of draw (half the width of a normal fairway), Wood's initial target "line" would be about 3 degrees to the right of his actual target is still conditions (calculated by (250 x 2 x Pi) / 360). As a result, if his face is 3 degrees open relative to the initial target "line," it is now 6 degrees open to the eventual target. There is just no way the "path" of the club can compensate for 6 degrees. The groves are no help in this since they run horizontal and the in-to-out path is also horizontal.
Can't be done. Your comment is bunk.
It is a lie to suggest that one can move the golf ball by using the path of of a golf club.
Huh??
Have you ever been analyzed with Trackman? Have you ever seen the results of one?
If so, you'd know your comments are wrong.
It's been proven time and again that a slight draw that starts right of the target line and finishes on the target line is hit with a club path that is 4-6 degrees to the right of the target line with a club face that is 2-3 degrees open to the target. The face is slightly closed to the path but still open in relation to the target. At impact, the ball is only on the face of the club for a small fraction of a second. That's the moment of truth for the shot. All the hand manipulation in the world during that split second of impact won't change a thing.
You mention Bubba...all that hand action you see after the fact is just a result of how he's come through the ball to hit the shot he wants. The rolling or holding off of the hands through impact is the byproduct of his club path. A good player knows how to get the face on the ball in relation to the path to hit the shot he wants. They cannot manipulate the face to make a difference in ballflight during the split second of impact. Path and face angle at impact create the shot.
Since we're all offering an opinion. I feel Tiger has neglected the intrinsic art of scoring and replaced it with the total conscienceness of seeking the perfect swing. Mr. Hogan reminded us many times that he hit maybe two shots per round exactly like he wanted. When your mind is consumed with golf swing there is no room for playing golf and concentrating on just scoring to exist. You heard it here first, Tiger doesn't win another major until he learns to focus solely on scoring.
If you watch the above video and disagree with the findings, then to understand better where you are coming from, please tell me your theory on if you were to hit a slight draw (starting right of target, finishing on target) with an 8-iron (left or right of target) where the following should be at impact:
Clubface
Base of Plane
Angle of Attack (herein lies the secret, btw)
Path
The ball starts basically where the face is pointed and curves away from the path.
Foley is an incredibly insecure douche bag for feeling the need to call out Kostis on this, he probably banked it away and made a point of talking about it as soon as he had the chance. "Look at me, Look at me, I may be a little over 4 feet tall, but I'm really smart"
I'm surprised he didn't say it was neuroplasticity that made the ball draw.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Physics-Golf-Theodore-Jorgensen/dp/038798691X
Sort of.
The ball flight laws aren't a way to teach. They are simply the science of how impact conditions affect initial direction and curvature. Ernie may "swing to the right", but if he hits a draw that starts right of his target line and draws back to his target, his club face is open to his target line and closed to his path at impact no matter what Harmon teaches, no matter if he sees one knuckle or four knuckles at address, one-planes it or two-planes it, swings the handle, swings the club head, wags the dog, wags the tail, flips it, compresses it, stack and tilts it or square-to-squares it. Facts are facts. They aren't up for debate.
It doesn't matter where you went to school, it doesn't matter the level of your play, it just takes knowledge and understanding.
You don't have to be a tour player to understand the golf swing, the principles of ball flight or to teach golf. There are absolutes that make the ball do what it does in the air. There are many various ways to get to impact but the factors that affect the flight of the ball don't change.