Prince Edward Island started last week and this weeks episode showed me something interesting. They brought out the draw/fade wall and guys had to hit 200 and keep it in the fairway and the girls 170 and in the fairway.

You had to hit 3 shots. One draw, one fade, and one of your choice.

All of the guys chose a fade for their shot of choice and all of the women chose a draw for their shot of choice.

Is there any significance to this? I have a strong grip so I get a natural baby draw on my shots. Does a fade go further? Is it a harder shot to hit? Accuracy?

Draws always go further due to basic physics. A draw de-lofts the club, and contributes to a lower roll. A fade is more controlable because a higher lofted club (which is the open face here) puts more backspin, and therefore less sidespin on a ball.

Lower roll??

Im hoping he meant more roll. I think that hole set up better for a draw for righties anyways.

I think it was a majority, not everyone. Eugene chose a draw on his option shot and nailed it, identical to his forced draw shot. At only 200 yards I was surprised the other guys weren't using hybrids for the draw, as Eugene did.

There is an old adage in golf: "You can talk to a slice, but a hook won't listen." Meaning that the slice (or fade) tends to be an easier shot to control. Add to that the fact that more golfers hit a natural fade than hit a natural draw, and it it seems logical that you might see a lot of fades hit in that sort of contest. Some of the women had trouble hitting far enough (there was a comment that it was cool, and the breeze was against them), so the draw might have been necessary just to get the distance from a club that they felt comfortable with.

"lower roll" meant a "lower" shot that "rolled" instead of stopping. When I hit a good sized fade (with the driver), it doesn't even roll. My drives climb when they fade.

Your physics are wrong. A pull cut uses more negative loft than a push draw. All about D plane. For a push draw path is more shallow with face more open. Pull cut is a steeper swing with a more closed clubface in relation to the target line. A fade has higher spin because the steeper angle of attack which makes it more controllable.

You're adding in a whole lot of variables. I'm simply refering to open vs closed face.

The angle of attack and the loft angle are two different things. Angle of attack is relative to the force exerted on the ball, where as loft is relative to the spin of the ball (in this context, obviously).

I'm talking face angle too. A proper draw, one that doesn't over draw will go higher than a cut that doesn't over cut. This is because to start left the clubface must be closed and to start right the clubface must be open to the target line.

Just... nevermind.

This is the reason.

Also, the guys don't need the distance a draw would produce as much as the ladies do. The guys can sacrifice a few yards to have more control.

there were several of the ladies who didn't make the necessary distance to get the points, so I can see why they would hit a draw to get a little more distance.

I am predicting a female winner for this season. My money is on Caroline. The guys have some really good game, but they all seem a little loose between the ears. It seems like the guys with the best looking games will let their egos knock them out. Probably why several of the aren't on the big boy tour.

. I was thinking the same thing. Not the nevermind part. The

"i'm so confused part". . The pic. says it perfect.

iteachgolf is positively correct, and if you are truly interested in understanding the physics of path and clubface angle as they relate to ball flight and trajectory, it is explained in easy to understand language in the book "The Negotiable Golf Swing".

iteachgolf is correct guys. A proper draw (assuming it isn't a massive hook which obviously changes the physics) actually has the club hitting the ball with an open clubface. The clubface should be about half the amount open that the club path is on. For example, if my swing path is 4 degrees in-to-out, my clubface should be 2 degrees open. This is because the swing path affects ball flight more then the clubface. Similarly, the clubface will be slightly closed at impact when hitting a fade. So if I cut across the ball at 6 degrees, the clubface should be closed 3 degrees. These numbers assure the clubface will work with the swing path to achieve a ball flight that ends up straight. These numbers only apply to a "straight" flight though. If you want to hit a 20 yard hook, the face will need to be closed more. Bottom line is that the club face is actually open when hitting a draw and closed when hitting a fade. To what degree depends on swing path and desired severity, if you will, of ball flight.

There are biomechanical differences b/w men and women that may make it slightly more beneficial to play a slight draw (proportionate strength of lower body vs upper, lateral hip mobility, COG).

It's much more likely that they were just playing the hole. Maybe there's a lot of room to the left at ~170 and a lot of room to the right at ~200.

What shocked me is that a lot of the gals were hitting drivers and still ending up short of the 170 marker. Can they really not hit it any further than that?

They did say that the wind was blowing pretty hard into their face. I'm just glad that they got people that look like they know what they are doing. I have watched all the other Big Breaks and there were some real hacks on those ones. Swings that would make Jim Furyk's look normal.

+2

iteachgolf is correct.

However when you talk about in to out swing and open face producing a draw, it is confusing because people are talking about the face being open to the TARGET LINE, not the SWING PATH.

A 4° in to out swing with a club 2° open to the target line is the same thing as a 4° in to out swing with the club 2° closed to the swing path.

The old ball flight laws, as always relayed to me were path in relation to target line and face angle in relation to swing path. The were also incorrect as to inter-relation of the line the ball starts on compared to path and face (e.g. the old "point the face at the target and swing along the line you want the ball to start on.)

The ball will NEVER move right to left with a clubface open to swingpath no matter if you swing out to in, down the line (in to in), or in to out. The ball will always curve right as the face is open to the path. The same holds true for a face closed to swingpath.

While I am not an expert on women's golf, I have played with a few very good female golfers and in two Futures Tour Pro-Ams. In fact, I met Caroline who is an awesome lady. In person, she is specatular in looks and personality.

From what I have seen, their decision to favor a draw was not surprising.
1. All of the good female golfers have awesome tempo. Watching them swing, they are smooth like butter. Even PGA Tour pros I have seen are not that smooth.
2. Unfortunately, they lack the power that a male swing (fortified with muscle and pure body mass) can generate. Based upon my observation, the shorter hitters carry it 210-220 and the average 220-235. Almost all the "big" hitters are tall, thin girls like Michelle Wie who get a a lot of leverage from long, flowing swings.
3. In summary, the girls don't have a lot of power but they have a lot of control. The last woman I played with hit every single fairway. She hit a low draw about 225-235 every time.

I think you all missed my point. Iteachgolf was blabbing on about the actual path of the club, not the basic laws of physics.

The path the club is moving is immaterial, it is the baseline of the physical constant. The line the golfer is aimed to is what you call "who cares?" You don't calculate the trajectory of a spaceship by asking what the color of the planet it's going to is.

Do this, have an iron byron swing a club, once with the face 2° open, and once with it 2° closed.

On the same path, the closed face delofts the club. This is physics 101 in its esscence, but you're all thinking of it from the point of view of golf, not science. Obviously, if you want to hit a draw, you're going to start the ball to the right, but it's not à propos to the point I was making.

It's somewhat akin to my explaining progressive scan vs interlace broadcasting, and you explaining that "Two and a Half Men" is broadcast on Progressive scan, so progressive must be better. Even if it's true, it's besides the point of the discussion.

I don't get your point. Basically you said I was wrong for thinking about it in the context of golf? In the real world cuts are hit across the ball and draws from the inside. All I'm describing is D plane. There are 3 variables, path angle of attack and clubface, that control ball flight primarily. How can disregard all but one?

Stick with words that you understand how to use. Iteachgolf was blabbing on about one of the 3 things that actually matter in determining ball flight- it's not immaterial. In fact, one of the few things in ballflight that aren't immaterial. The path of the club also, is not a "basic physical constant"- in fact, it's a very normal physical variable. Also, it's not "obvious" that you'll start a draw to the right (or a fade to the right) depending on what kind of draw or fade you play. Yes, he is thinking in terms of golf- because if you're thinking in terms of science (real science, not what you're talking about) without considering golf, you'd be considering every single possible (useless) shot- studying a 50 yard dead push as if it has the same relevance as an actual playable shot shape.

As for your two and a half men analogy, your way of thinking would be like saying - lets just cut it down to 2 men, because the son doesn't seem that important- immaterial, as it were- and then claiming you understand what's going on.

No, you were right all along, there are variables, but that wasn't my point.


The poster had asked if a draw went farther than a fade, and I answered by saying that, yes, if you held that the clubface was traveling the same direction each time, a draw would indeed go farther, as more energy is delivered forward than up. That is all. I made no promise that this had any bearing to the real world shots hit day to day.

http://lectureonline.cl.msu.edu/~mmp//kap4/cd095a.htm