Connect with us

Instruction

The ‘arc’ vs. ‘square-to-square’ putting method: Either or neither?

Published

on

There’s hundreds of different golfers try to putt, but putting really just boils down to two schools of thought. There are those who try to move the putter head “straight back and straight through” along the target line, and those who try to move the putter head on an arc.

Dave Pelz focuses his time and energy on the square-to-square (StS) method, while StanUtley espouses the arc stroke (AS). So which one of these heavyweight short game gurus is right ? Well, there are the positives and negatives to each method, and professional golfers have used both methods successfully.

There are two high-tech tools I use at my putting academy to examine these type of strokes on a biomechanical level: Advanced Motion Measurement’s 3D Motion Analysis System, and the SAM Puttlab by Science & Motion Sports. My putting research data has also been coordinated with the putting data derived from Lanny L. Johnson, M.D. and PGA Tour player Howard Twitty, who have tested more than 150 Tour professionals’ putting strokes during the previous several years. Together, the information we have merged contains the most accurate data to date on square-to-square and arc strokes.

It is my goal within this article to only point out the pros and cons of these strokes based on the data that was uncovered through our putting research. It is your job to decide what stroke works the best for you through experimentation on the putting green.

1

AMM’s 3D system measures the body’s motions during the putting stroke.

 

2

The Sam Putt Lab measures more than 28 different factors of your individual putting stroke.

The pros of each stroke

The square-to-square putting stroke: This stroke has also been called the “pure in-line putting stroke,” which leads one to believe that it is the easiest to use and the most consistent. And if you watch Loren Roberts or George Archer putt, you might believe this to be true.

The square-to-sqaure stroke focuses on making sure the setup is sound, with a golfer’s hands under his shoulders and a body and putter head that is square to the target line at address. From there, the stroke simply moves back and through along the lines established at address.

As that happens, the face of the putter will stay 90 degrees to the target line (or square to your line during the total stroke), thus making the StS stroke very simple for one to conceptualize. Golfers who use the StS stroke are seen on the putting green constantly working on their alignments at address, and putting along a chalk-line or between club shafts in order to audit their path and club face. Mentally, this style makes the 3-foot knee-knockers much easier to digest.

3

This stroke is virtually straight back and straight through with a square face throughout.

The arc putting stroke: The theory of an arc stroke is to allow golfers to naturally match the motions of their full swing with their putting stroke. Instructors who espouse the arc stroke believe that the inclined nature of the putter shaft, by design, necessitates the inside-square-inside movement of the putter head. As the stroke works into the backswing, the putter head tends to rotate open (as in the full swing), and at impact it returns to square. After impact, it moves back to the inside and begins to close.

The key to this motion is to keep the putter face 90 degrees (perpendicular) to the path of the arc itself. If that sounds difficult, consider this. In the uncompensated arc stroke, the shoulder motion returns the face to square as long as there is no rotation of the putter face in relation to the arc. That’s because the area of the upper back between the shoulder blades is an anatomical arc.

When the shoulder blades move back and forth on the back of the chest, a unique arc is created. This is a result of the geometry of the golfer’s posterior thorax (medical term for upper back of chest), and its movement necessitates little manipulation from the hands and forearms during the stroke. When this occurs, the rotation of the putter head matches the natural arc a golfer possess in the full swing. Thus the full swing and putting stroke are merged as one feeling. Ben Crenshaw and Tiger Woods exemplify this motion beautifully.

4

This example stroke has a slight arc with a square face. There are many influences of the shape of the arc, which are determined by setup and clubfitting

The controversy regarding these two putting strokes

  • StS theory states that the shaft angle at address does not affect the motion of the putter head, and goes on to say that if the hands hang directly under the shoulders, then the path will always tend to be StS.
  • AS theory states that the angle of the club shaft by design innately causes the putter head to move in a slight arc just as your full swing does.
  • StS theory states that the face should remain square to the target line naturally, with no physical manipulation of the hands. And if the path is StS, then this will happen naturally.
  • AS theory states that the club face cannot stay square to the target line during the entire putting stroke because the putter head works in an arc. Try to keep the path and club head square to the target line, as the StS players try to do, requires a physiological manipulation of your hands, wrists and forearms in order to do so.
  • StS theory states that with no putter-head rotation back and through, controlling the ball’s direction will become much easier as ball position is not as crucial.
  • AS theory states that strokes with face rotations that match up are 90 degree to the arc’s direction at all times and require no physical manipulations. They are a natural result of the inclined nature of the club shaft at address; thus, directional control will be much easier.
  • StS theory states that the putter should be face balanced and have around 2 degrees of loft to make the ball roll and not skid quite as quickly off the start. It must be noted that all balls “skid” off the start. The key is to eliminate as much unnecessary skid as possible.
  • AS theory wants a golfer to use some type of toe-hang putter with around 5 degrees of loft. Using an AS stroke is the best solution for someone who wants to get the ball on top of the grass much quicker.

What the data says

Angle of the shaft v. hand position: Testing with the 3D Motion Analysis System has shown that the angle of the shaft, coupled with the player’s physiology, does indeed cause the putter to work on a slight arc very naturally. However, this can be altered greatly by changing one’s set-up posture and putter lie angle, thus placing the hands more under the shoulders. In fact, the more the player bends over at the waist, the flatter the arc and the less putter-head rotation occurs.

The player who stands in a more upright posture will produce a more curved arc, and usually will have more putter-head rotation. The more upright the putter’s lie angle and the more the putter is in the lifeline of the top hand, the less curved its path will be. If the player’s back was 90 degrees to the ground, it would be very possible for his arc to be almost straight back and straight through with no manipulations necessary.

5

The amount of forward bending at address for most players is between 35 to 40 degrees with the lie of the putter being somewhere around 70 to 72 degrees at a 34-inch length.

The conclusion: Every natural, non-manipulated putting stroke has some degree of arc.  The only way to eliminate this arc would be to set the body in a very bent-over posture and/or make a stroke manipulation during the transition period of the stroke. The key is to minimize the amount of arc that you have within your own putting stroke. To do so, you must assume an address position that places your eyes over the ball, your hands under your shoulders, as well as one that set you up with the proper amount of forward bending when you approach the ball with a properly fit putter.

Square to Square vs. Arc Stroke dynamics

In biomechanical testing, the StS stroke is much more difficult to perform than originally thought. It requires intentional rotation of the putter face to take it away closed on the back swing and open after impact to stay square on the follow through. It is, in fact, a reverse parabolic curve that looks like the inside of a saucer. However, some elite putters achieve a straight putter path on the forward swing by looping the putter head to the inside and then at the end of the backswing bringing it down over the top to accommodate a straight path to the ball.

Minimizing the magnitude of the arc would provide a better opportunity to deliver the putter head to square at impact. And the Sam Putt Lab has shown that a “straight-back-and-straight-though” putter-head path is possible, but it requires a manipulation of the putter as discussed above. Biomechanical studies have recently shown that no PGA Tour player recorded has a putter path that was exactly straight back and straight through. Thus, it is natural to have a slight arc to the putter-head path due to the inclined nature of the putter shaft by design. However, a very important negative of the arc stroke to consider is that this arc can be over exaggerated very easily with a poor putter fit, additional hand action and/or extreme shoulder rotation during the stroke. You must remember that this over rotation stems from overactive forearm rotation.

Biomechanical 3D Motion Analysis studies have shown that when you form a triangle with your arms and the putter grip, it is impossible to rotate the putter face with your glenohumeral joint (upper arm) or the scapula independently or together. If you allow any of these things to happen your arc stroke will implode!

6

With a path manipulation, the putter can stay StS. Note the over-the-top transition.

7

A poorly fit putter, coupled with poor posture and excessive forearm rotation action, can cause an over-exaggerated arc stroke with a ton of face rotation.

The conclusion: The less curvature a stroke has, the easier it is to control the putter. But in all players, there is naturally some type of arc to the stroke unless a manipulation is made during the transition. Use your set-up posture, putter fit and putter type help to determine the shape of your stroke innately.

No face rotation vs. natural face rotation

SAM shows that it is more effective to minimize the amount of putter-head rotation you have naturally and to keep your putter head perpendicular to the arc you are using. Simply stated, the more manipulations you possess within your stroke the more the inconsistencies you will have to overcome in the end. This is not to say that you cannot putt well with either stroke type, but you must make the proper compensations in order to make them work.

The rotation of the putter head is measured relative to the player’s arc. Zero rotation is when the putter face remains square to the arc at any given point throughout the swing. In other words, the rotation is measured at any given point on the arc and should remain perpendicular to the tangent of the arc. The elite PGA Tour putters have minimal rotation of the putter path. Most will open the putter face less than 6 degrees on the back stroke and close less than 6 degrees on the follow through. The very best putters have less than 1 degree of rotation in both directions. To reemphasize, this is independent of the nature of their arc.

StS putters come over the top during their transitions to put the putter head on a straight through line and tend to “hang on” through impact to reduce the natural actions of the putter head wanting to close through impact. This is the reason why a face-balanced putter tends to work best for these types of players, due to its aversion to closing through impact. AS putters must make sure that within their strokes their hands and forearm rotation do not take over (as we see in the example below), or over-rotation of the putter head will result making it harder to control the ball’s starting direction.

The face alignment at impact transmits 83 percent of error to the ball and is five times more important than your stroke’s path while putting.

8

StS shows “holding on” through the impact zone
4 inches to impact -0.1 degree of rotation
4 inches after impact -0.8 degrees of rotation

9

AS shows that added hand action through the impact zone can make it hard to control the ball’s starting direction
4 inches to impact 2.5 degrees of rotation
4 inches after impact 2.9 degrees of rotation

2 degrees of loft vs. 5 degrees of loft

The most important discovery within the last few years within the ranks of putting lies within the ability for us to track the ball’s skid and roll just after impact. Golfers can do everything just right with either stroke type, but if they have the wrong rise angle and/or dynamic putter loft at impact they will NEVER be a good putter. The final key is to have the ball leaving the face correctly and rolling very quickly after impact. And this fact is controlled by the rise angle of your putter head and the dynamic loft of your putter at impact.

Rise angle shows how much the putter is moving up or down through the ball in relation to the bottom of its vertical arc as viewed from the side of the ball.

Dynamic loft is measured by taking the factory loft of your putter plus/minus the shaft angle at impact. Example 1 (pictured below) shows a TaylorMade Rossa being used that is designed with 4 degrees of loft, and the player returns it to impact with + 0 degrees of added/reduced loft, thus the putter maintains its original 4 degrees of loft. And when it comes to the loft of your putter, several things must be taken into account: your spine angle (side to side), your center of gravity, the amount of hand action you have and the center of gravity of the putter you currently use.

In a perfect world, with greens running about 10 to 11 on the stimpmeter, the data suggests that your dynamic loft should be around 2-to-3 degrees and your rise angle should be about 3-to-4 degrees in order to give you the best roll possible. When the rise angle is slightly greater than the dynamic loft of the putter, the ball will begin to roll very quickly off the start as shown below.

Example 1

10

Tour professionals show a rise angle of 3-to-4 degrees and dynamic Lofts of two to three degrees.

Example 2

11

The average amateur adds loft at impact by flipping his hands through impact.

In Example 2 (above), the TMAG putter used had 4 degrees of static loft and the player added 3.1 degrees of loft at impact for a total dynamic loft of 7.1 degrees. When the rise angle (6.4) is lower than your dynamic loft at impact (7.1), the ball will jump into the air just after impact, bounce, skid and the begin to roll. This lowers your consistency. The key is to match your putter’s static loft to your stroke type for the greens you normally play.

The Conclusion

Whether you use a StS or an AS is of no consequence as it pertains to the ball’s skid and roll. The determining factor of your ball’s actions just after impact are 100 percent determined by your set-up fundamentals, which influence your impact alignments. Matching the putter’s static loft and center of gravity (by design) at address with your impact shaft angle during impact is the key to making the ball roll just after impact.

All these factors considered, the bottom line for direction remains to be able to answer this question in the affirmative, “Was the putter square to the target at impact?”

Your Reaction?
  • 139
  • LEGIT11
  • WOW32
  • LOL5
  • IDHT3
  • FLOP5
  • OB5
  • SHANK6

Tom F. Stickney II is the Director of Instruction and Business Development at Punta Mita, in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico (www.puntamita.com) He is a Golf Magazine Top 100 Teacher, and has been honored as a Golf Digest Best Teacher and a Golf Tips Top-25 Instructor. Tom is also a Trackman University Master/Partner, a distinction held by less than 15 people in the world. Punta Mita is a 1500 acre Golf and Beach Resort located just 45 minuted from Puerto Vallarta on a beautiful peninsula surrounded by the Bay of Banderas on three sides. Amenities include two Nicklaus Signature Golf Courses- with 14 holes directly on the water, a Golf Academy, four private Beach Clubs, a Four Seasons Hotel, a St. Regis Hotel, as well as, multiple private Villas and Homesites available. For more information regarding Punta Mita, golf outings, golf schools and private lessons, please email: tom.stickney@puntamita.com

12 Comments

12 Comments

  1. gallas2

    Oct 7, 2015 at 2:38 pm

    The last few pictures clearly show it is a Yes! Callie F (in the diagram upper left) but are referred to as a Taylor Made Ghost in the commentary…..interesting only because the roll grooves on the Yes! are pointed 20 deg upward to assist in getting the ball rolling quickly. I believe the factory standard is 2* of loft on Yes! putters….

  2. James72

    Apr 14, 2014 at 12:48 pm

    This was a very interesting article. I found the information about the relationship between the dynamic angle and the rise angle espcially interesting. I began to think…what would be the average radius of a putting arc for the average american male who is 5″9′? What is the static loft of the average putter and how much loft does the average player add at impact. If we know these we can figure where the ball should be placed relative to the arcs vertical bottom optimal roll.

  3. Mark Vitter

    Nov 19, 2013 at 11:55 pm

    How does Stockton’s technique figure into these two patterns? Arc on the backswing and straight thru on the forward swing.

  4. Jeff Borders

    Nov 1, 2013 at 11:17 am

    This is the kind of article I like to read. I’ve read books on both sides From Pelz and Utley and found the best for me is somewhere in the middle of StS and AS. I guess “slight arc”, but ball position is what’s really going to determine dynamic loft. Great stuff.

  5. Tom Stickney

    Oct 30, 2013 at 2:11 am

    Thank you ALL for the comments. Hope you learned something…

    🙂

  6. WMAO

    Oct 29, 2013 at 2:47 pm

    So what you’re saying is… Michelle Wie is a genius?

  7. hebron1427

    Oct 29, 2013 at 12:57 pm

    This is a great article that brings some data to some of the disputes that have been going on in the putter forum for years. That said, Glenn Coombe has profiled the “SBSTOP” stroke a number of times as being the ideal, and it seems that this analysis supports that.

  8. Castle24rd

    Oct 29, 2013 at 8:12 am

    Great article! I was really interested in dynamic loft of the putter and getting the ball effectively rolling. I would love to read more about that and techniques on how you can measure that with out the super coll systems you have! Does that Ping App measure that?

    • Tom Stickney

      Oct 30, 2013 at 2:13 am

      Ping’s app does not. A simple colored ball and a video camera will show you skid/roll simply.

  9. OhBee

    Oct 29, 2013 at 12:00 am

    Great article. Most informative, data based article I’ve ever read on this site. Add good grammar, and a professional/factual approach, has me begging for more articles written by Tom. It’s like night and day compared to other recent articles/reviews.

    • Tom Stickney

      Oct 30, 2013 at 2:14 am

      Thank you…I always try hard to give you my best- for what it’s worth.

  10. AkingsOMG

    Oct 28, 2013 at 11:39 pm

    This has to be one of the most informative articles on the mechanics of putting that I have ever read. An extremely well thought-out and articulated article on a topic that deserves a lot of discussion!

    Very nicely done, Tom.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Instruction

Clement: Best drill for weight shift and clearing hips (bonus on direction too)

Published

on

This is, by far, one of the most essential drills for your golf swing development. To throw the club well is a liberating experience! Here we catch Munashe up with how important the exercise is not only in the movement pattern but also in the realization that the side vision is viciously trying to get you to make sure you don’t throw the golf club in the wrong direction. Which, in essence, is the wrong direction to start with!

This drill is also a cure for your weight shift problems and clearing your body issues during the swing which makes this an awesome all-around golf swing drill beauty! Stay with us as we take you through, step by step, how this excellent drill of discovery will set you straight; pardon the pun!

Your Reaction?
  • 2
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP2
  • OB2
  • SHANK11

Continue Reading

Instruction

Confessions of a hacker: Chipping yips and equipment fixes

Published

on

There’s a saying in golf that, paraphrasing here, it’s the person holding the weapon, not the weapon. Basically, if you hit a bad shot, it’s almost certain that it was your fault, not the fault of the golf club. It has a better design than your swing. And while that truism is often correct, it ain’t necessarily so.

For example, if I were to try to hit one of those long drive drivers, I’d probably mis-hit it so badly that the ball might not be findable. That stick is way too long, stiff, and heavy for me. Similarly, if I were to use one of those senior flex drivers, I’d probably hit it badly, because it would be too floppy for my swing. It’s clear that there are arrows that this Indian can’t shoot well. Maybe a pro could adapt to whatever club you put in his hand, but there’s no reason he would accept less than a perfect fit. And there’s little reason why any amateur ought to accept less than a good fit.

I was never a competitive athlete, although I’m a competitive person. My path led a different direction, and as my medical career reached its mature years, I was introduced to our wonderful and frustrating game.

Being one who hates playing poorly, I immediately sought instruction. After fifteen years, multiple instructors, a wallet full of videos, and a wall full of clubs, I am finally learning how to do one particularly vexing part of the game reasonable well. I can chip! But as you may have guessed, the largest part of this journey has to do with the arrow, not the Indian.

We may immediately dismiss the golf shaft as a significant issue since chipping generally involves a low-speed movement. And as long as the grip is a reasonable fit for the hands, it’s not a big deal either. The rubber meets the road at the clubhead.

Manufacturers have worked hard to get the best ball spin out of the grooves. Their shape is precisely milled, and then smaller grooves and roughness are added to the exact maximum allowed under the rules. Various weighting schemes have been tried, with some success in tailoring wedges to players. And some manufacturers market the “newest” designs to make it impossible to screw up wedge shots. And yet, nothing seemed to solve my yips.

So I went on a mission. I studied all sorts of chipping techniques. Some advocate placing the ball far back to strike a descending blow. Others place it near the center of the stance. The swing must have no wrist hinge. The swing must have a hinge that is held. It should be a short swing. It should be a long swing. The face should be square. The face should be open. There should be a “pop.” There should be no power added.

If you are confused, join my club. So I went on a different mission. I started looking at sole construction. Ever since Gene Sarazen popularized a sole with bounce for use in the sand, manufacturers have been creating massive numbers of “different” sand wedges. They have one thing in common. They are generally all built to 55 or 56-degrees of loft.

The basic design feature of the sand wedge is that the sole extends down and aft from the leading edge at some angle. This generally ranges from 6 to 18-degrees. Its purpose is to allow the wedge to dig into the sand, but not too far. As the club goes down into the sand, the “bounce” pushes it back up.

 

One problem with having a lot of bounce on the wedge is that it can’t be opened up to allow certain specialty shots or have a higher effective loft. When the player does that, the leading edge lifts, resulting in thin shots. So manufacturers do various things to make the wedge more versatile, typically by removing bounce in the heel area.

At my last count, I have eight 56-degree wedges in my collection. Each one was thought to be a solution to my yips. Yet, until I listened to an interview with Dave Edel, I had almost no real understanding of why I was laying sod over a lot of my chips. Since gardening did not reduce my scores, I had to find another solution.

My first step was to look at the effective loft of a wedge in various ball positions. (Pictures were shot with the butt of the club at the left hip, in a recommended forward lean position. Since the protractor is not exactly lined up with the face, the angles are approximate.)

I had no idea that there was so much forward lean with a simple chip. If I were to use the most extreme rearward position, I would have to have 21-degrees of bounce just to keep the leading edge from digging in at impact. If there were the slightest error in my swing, I would be auditioning for greenskeeper.

My appreciation for the pros who can chip from this position suddenly became immense. For an amateur like me, the complete lack of forgiveness in this technique suddenly removed it from my alleged repertoire.

My next step was to look at bounce. As I commented before, bounce on sand wedges ranges between 6 and 18-degrees. As the drawing above shows, that’s a simple angle measurement. If I were to chip from the forward position, a 6-degree bounce sand wedge would have an effective bounce of 1-degree. That’s only fractionally better than the impossible chip behind my right foot. So I went to my local PGA Superstore to look at wedges with my Maltby Triangle Gauge in hand.

As you can see from the photos, there is a wide variation in wedges. What’s most curious, however, is that this variation is between two designs that are within one degree of the same nominal bounce. Could it be that “bounce is not bounce is not bounce?” Or should I say that “12-degrees is not 12-degrees is not 12-degrees?” If one looks below the name on the gauge, a curious bit of text appears. “Measuring effective bounce on wedges.” Hmmm… What is “effective bounce?”

The Maltby Triangle Gauge allows you to measure three things: leading-edge height, sole tangent point, and leading-edge sharpness. The last is the most obvious. If I’m chipping at the hairy edge of an adequate bounce, a sharp leading edge will dig in more easily than a blunt one. So if I’m using that far back ball position, I’ll need the 1OutPlus for safety, since its leading edge is the bluntest of the blunt. Even in that position, its 11-degree bounce keeps the leading edge an eighth of an inch up.

Wait a minute! How can that be? In the back position, the wedge is at 35-degrees effective loft, and 11-degrees of bounce ought to be 10-degrees less than we need. The difference here is found in combining all three parameters measured by the gauge, and not just the angle of the bounce.

The 1OutPlus is a very wide sole wedge. Its tangent point is a massive 1.7″ back. The leading edge rises .36″ off the ground and is very blunt. In other words, it has every possible design feature to create safety in case the chip from back in the stance isn’t as perfect as it might be. Since a golf ball is 1.68″ in diameter, that’s still less than halfway up to the center of the ball. But if you play the ball forward, this may not be the wedge for you.

Here are the measurements for the eight sand wedges that happen to be in my garage. All are either 56-degrees from the factory or bent to 56-degrees.

A couple of things jump out from this table. The Callaway PM Grind at 13-degrees has a lower leading edge (.26 inches) than the 11-degree Bazooka 1OutPlus (.36 inches). How can a lower bounce have a higher leading edge? Simple geometry suggests that if you want a higher leading edge, you will need a higher bounce angle. But it gets worse. The Wishon WS (wide sole) at 6-degrees (55-degree wedge bent to 56-degrees) has a leading-edge height of .28 inches, higher than the Callaway which has over twice the nominal bounce angle!

One thing is missing from this simple discussion of angles.

If I place one line at 34-degrees above the horizontal (loft is measured from the vertical), and then extend another at some angle below horizontal, the height above ground where the two join depends on how long the lower line is. This means that an 18-degree bounce with a narrow “C” grind will raise the leading edge a little bit. A 6-degree bounce on a wide sole may raise it more because the end of the bounce on the first wedge is so close to the leading edge.

 

Let’s look at this in the picture. If the red line of the bounce is very short, it doesn’t get far below the black ground line. But if it goes further, it gets lower. This is the difference between narrow and wide soles.

This diagram describes the mathematical description of these relationships.

Our first task is to realize that the angle 0 in this diagram is the complement of the 56-degree loft of the wedge, or 90 – 56 = 34-degrees since loft is measured from vertical, not horizontal. But the angle 0 in the bounce equation is just that, the bounce value. These two angles will now allow us to calculate the theoretical values of various parts of the wedge, and then compare them to our real-world examples.

My PM Grind Callaway wedge has its 3rd groove, the supposed “perfect” impact point, 0.54 inches above the leading edge. This should put it 0.8 inches back from the leading edge, roughly matching the measured 0.82 inches. So far, so good. (I’m using the gauge correctly!)

The 13-degree bounce at 1.14″ calculates out to 0.284″ of leading-edge rise. I measured 0.26″, so Callaway seems to be doing the numbers properly, until I realize that the leading edge is already .45″ back, given a real tangent of .69″. Something is out of whack. Re-doing the math suggests that the real bounce is 20-degrees, 40 min. Hmmm…

Maybe that bounce angle measurement isn’t such a good number to look at. Without digging through all the different wedges (which would make you cross-eyed), we should go back to basics. What is it that we really need?

Most instructors will suggest that striking the ball on about the third groove will give the best results. It will put the ball close to the center of mass (sweet spot) of the wedge and give the best spin action. If my wedge is at an effective 45-degree angle (about my right big toe), it will strike the ball about half-way up to its equator. It will also be close to the third groove. But to make that strike with minimal risk of gardening, I have to enough protection to keep the edge out of the turf if I mis-hit the ball by a little bit. That can be determined by the leading edge height! The higher the edge, the more forgiveness there is on a mis-hit.

Now this is an incomplete answer. If the bounce is short, with a sharp back side, it will tend to dig into the turf a bit. It may not do it a lot, but it will have more resistance than a wider, smoother bounce. In the extreme case, the 1OutPlus will simply glide over the ground on anything less than a ridiculous angle.

The amount of leading-edge height you need will depend on your style. If you play the ball forward, you may not need much. But as you move the ball back, you’ll need to increase it. And if you are still inconsistent, a wider sole with a smooth contour will help you avoid episodes of extreme gardening. A blunt leading edge will also help. It may slow your club in the sand, but it will protect your chips.

There is no substitute for practice, but if you’re practicing chips from behind your right foot using a wedge with a sharp, low leading edge, you’re asking for frustration. If you’re chipping from a forward position with a blunt, wide sole wedge, you’ll be blading a lot of balls. So look at your chipping style and find a leading-edge height and profile that match your technique. Forget about the “high bounce” and “low bounce” wedges. That language doesn’t answer the right question.

Get a wedge that presents the club to the ball with the leading edge far enough off the ground to provide you with some forgiveness. Then knock ’em stiff!

Your Reaction?
  • 10
  • LEGIT8
  • WOW2
  • LOL4
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP3
  • OB1
  • SHANK9

Continue Reading

Instruction

Golf 101: What is a strong grip?

Published

on

What is a strong grip? Before we answer that, consider this: How you grip it might be the first thing you learn, and arguably the first foundation you adapt—and it can form the DNA for your whole golf swing.

The proper way to hold a golf club has many variables: hand size, finger size, sports you play, where you feel strength, etc. It’s not an exact science. However, when you begin, you will get introduced to the common terminology for describing a grip—strong, weak, and neutral.

Let’s focus on the strong grip as it is, in my opinion, the best way to hold a club when you are young as it puts the clubface in a stronger position at the top and instinctively encourages a fair bit of rotation to not only hit it solid but straight.

The list of players on tour with strong grips is long: Dustin Johnson, Zach Johnson, Bubba Watson, Fred Couples, David Duval, and Bernhard Langer all play with a strong grip.

But what is a strong grip? Well like my first teacher Mike Montgomery (Director of Golf at Glendale CC in Seattle) used to say to me, “it looks like you are revving up a Harley with that grip”. Point is the knuckles on my left hand were pointing to the sky and my right palm was facing the same way.

Something like this:

Of course, there are variations to it, but that is your run of the mill, monkey wrench strong grip. Players typically will start there when they are young and tweak as they gain more experience. The right hand might make it’s way more on top, left-hand knuckles might show two instead of three, and the club may move its way out of the palms and further down into the fingers.

Good golf can be played from any position you find comfortable, especially when you find the body matchup to go with it.

Watch this great vid from @JakeHuttGolf

In very simple terms, here are 3 pros and 3 cons of a strong grip.

Pros

  1. Encourages a closed clubface which helps deloft the club at impact and helps you hit further
  2. It’s an athletic position which encourages rotation
  3. Players with strong grips tend to strike it solidly

Cons

  1. Encourages a closed clubface which helps deloft the club at impact and can cause you to hit it low and left
  2. If you don’t learn to rotate you could be in for a long career of ducks and trees
  3. Players with strong grips tend to fight a hook and getting the ball in the air

 

Make Sense?

 

Your Reaction?
  • 29
  • LEGIT1
  • WOW2
  • LOL4
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP3
  • OB2
  • SHANK4

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending