Draw and Fade

[Neil18]

I have a question to all for discussion. I'm interested to hear different schools of thought. The question is this:

When playing a fade or a draw, do you look to start the ball left/right of your stance line and curve it back (this could be termed a push draw/pull fade), or do you look to start it on the line your aiming and curve it away from that line? What's your preference and why?

[BrianW]

Re: Draw and Fade

Hi Neil,

Ideally you want the ball to push draw or pull fade for a right hander. Push fades and pull draws just get the ball into the rough or trees. You want the ball to pull back onto the target.

The ball will start off mainly in the direction of the clubface at impact and the swingpath will influence the sidespin. Swingpath outside clubface direction for a draw and swingpath left for a fade.

[Neil18]

Re: Draw and Fade

See, I used to visualise shapes like that until I toyed with the notion that if I start the ball where I'm aiming and fade or draw off of that start line it de-complicates (is that a word?) things. I got confused as to why I'd aim in one direction and try to start the ball in another. So nowadays I like to think of hitting every ball with a straight starting flight path and curve off of said starting line.

For my tiny mind it saves trying to worry about swingpath. Whether or not that's what actually happens, I can't say! It's producing much more fun golf shots though.

[BrianW]

Re: Draw and Fade

Many Pros teach you to point the clubface where you want the ball to finish and swing in the direction you want the ball to start. This just does not work and defies the laws of physics. For anyone interested then look up 'D' Plane and the 'New ball flight laws.

[Neil18]

Re: Draw and Fade

OK I've watched a couple of videos on D plane. This seems to miss one key point. The clubhead in a good golf swing doesn't follow a perfect circle. The ideal contact point is just as the clubhead is approaching moving dead along the aiming line, so that the inch or so that the ball spends on the clubface is the beginning of when the clubhead is actually on the aiming line and moving straight down the aiming line. Otherwise what's the point in aiming?

If we spend all that time on aim and alignment only to then get the ball started on a completely different line, we've wasted time and effort and we're not swinging our arms and moving our body in harmony. We'll have aligned our body and then try to set about swinging the arms and hands along a different line to start the ball either left or right of where we've aimed, wont we? If we aim and swing to start the ball down that line the only variable is how closed or open the clubface has to be to curve the ball away from the aiming line as desired. This is based on what I'm about to type below:

When swinging the club, what the lines and circles these folk draw don't take into consideration is that the extension of the right arm through and after impact along with continuing to shift the weight towards the target creates a flat spot in the clubhead path where impact is occurring with a slightly downward blow. I don't know how long this 'flat spot' lasts. It's longer than the duration of impact, but still brief.

If hitting good golf shots depended on pinpointing the precise moment in a perfect circle when path and plane were married, nobody would be able to break 100. It's too much of a lottery to hit milliseconds worth of a pefect circle. You wouldn't know whether the ball was going to start right or left.

No doubt there are an almost infinite number of slightly in-out/slightly out-in/slightly downward angle combinations that will produce slightly different things. That's why you can't land the ball in dead calm conditions in exactly the same spot every time.

NB - I specifically call what a lot of people refer to as the target line the aiming line. My approach to shaping shots means that there is no target line. Just an aiming line. The target is going to be off the aiming line because I'm looking to bend it there from my initial aiming point, or I take dead aim if I want to hit straight. This approach takes out moving the ball around in the stance as well. *One ball position, one swing down the aiming line, vary the face angle for curve, hold off the release for low, let it out more for high. If all of these* are done at the correct point in the swing (the bit where the right handers right arm extends and the path flattens out) then the detail for developing a good swing is greatly reduced.

[BrianW]

Re: Draw and Fade

The ball sits on the face for around 6 milliseconds, that aint long. it is possible to direct the swingpath in to out or out to in, it is also possible to direct the clubface open or closed. I agree it is not possible to control this to a very small and precise degree but it is possible to control it enough to make you a fair shaper of the ball. 'D' plane has been proven with high speed cameras and the use of radar technology like 'Trackman'

[Neil18]

Re: Draw and Fade

The ball sits on the face for around 6 milliseconds, that aint long. it is possible to direct the swingpath in to out or out to in, it is also possible to direct the clubface open or closed. I agree it is not possible to control this to a very small and precise degree but it is possible to control it enough to make you a fair shaper of the ball. 'D' plane has been proven with high speed cameras and the use of radar technology like 'Trackman'

Understand all of this. But the model doesn't appear to me to take into account the flattening out of the swing. If we are to look at numbers (a practice which I don't believe helps anyone play better golf) then surely the most important numbers are the ones between 0 and 6 milliseconds when impact is actually occurring. To all intents and purposes, the distance will be a straight line lasting however long the clubhead can travel in 6 milliseconds. If that straight line lasting 6 milliseconds is in-out the ball will start right, if it's out-in it will start left, if it's straight it will start straight.

As far as the ball is concerned, when it gets hit it's getting hit by something moving in a straight line (the clubhead passing through the brief flattened out part of the circle if done correctly).

With all this said, the only variance between players will be whether or not you swing out-in/in-out to produce push draws or pull fades (assuming the clubface is pointing the right way!) or whether you hit the back of the ball square with an open or shut face to curve it away from the aiming line.

If one of the all time greats at the game hits a fade that starts on the aiming line (OK it's off a tee but it's clearly how he visualises it otherwise it wouldn't be a 'tee picker-upper' for him, let alone anyone else), then I'll stand by my visualisation and theory until convinced othewise.

The frozen image below shows the ball starting parallel to the aim line (I've added the green lines in for help with perspective).

The irony is that this video is entitled 'D Plane Pull Fade', when it's not. The ball started along his aim line and faded away from it.

Sometimes I think 'science' can be over-used to fit any argument when certain portions are selectively omitted. The only way I'll be convinced otherwise is someone analysing what happens between the start and end of the 0-6 milliseconds of impact. To a brain trying to play the game simply, I cannot understand why I would aim in one direction and try to start the ball in another.

To use another sport as an example - a footballer curling a shot can't aim to start the ball at the top corner. He has to aim to start it outside the goal and curl it in away from where he's aiming. He knows how to angle his foot to produce the required amount of curl to get it to the correct corner of the goal. If he aimed at the top corner and tried to curl it further outside the post from there the result would most likely be that he'd kick his own standing ankle.

[BrianW]

Re: Draw and Fade

Neil,

It's the direction the clubface is pointing that decides the initial direction the ball takes off. The swingpath will effect how the balls axis of rotation tilts and creates right or left sidespin.

Take a look at this video: Ball Flight Laws from Golf Evolution - YouTube

[Neil18]

Re: Draw and Fade

There we go! Why are there other video's going on and on about D plane when 1 min 17 seconds explains it all!

Intriguing. Thanks.

[GBergstrom]

Re: Draw and Fade

Love it. A current post on what you visualize when creating a draw or fade. I'm definetly in the "start it straight and move it left/right from there" camp. I know that it won't go straight for long and need to plan accordingly (playing around trees, etc.). It seems to me a swing plane or ball position change (or both) is what one would do when visualizing a fade/draw that starts on a line different from the stance line. Naturally there's more than one way to get the job done.

The next question is what to change in your swing to generate a fade or draw. There are those who change their grips (weak/strong). those who change their stance (open/closed or narrow/wide), those who change their clubface relative to square (open/closed to the target line), those who change their ball position (forward/back) and of course those who change their swing plane (more vertical/flat, over the top/inside out). Did I miss any?

Some variable adjustments are easier than others for folks to wrap their heads around, and a lot of it has to do with the nature of their current swing (flaws) and the way they visualize their swing. What I think a lot of folks lose track of is the subtlety of adjustment required to generate a fade or draw. One tick of the clock is six degrees.

Cheers, GB

[BrianW]

Re: Draw and Fade

Love it. A current post on what you visualize when creating a draw or fade. I'm definetly in the "start it straight and move it left/right from there" camp. I know that it won't go straight for long and need to plan accordingly (playing around trees, etc.). It seems to me a swing plane or ball position change (or both) is what one would do when visualizing a fade/draw that starts on a line different from the stance line. Naturally there's more than one way to get the job done.

The next question is what to change in your swing to generate a fade or draw. There are those who change their grips (weak/strong). those who change their stance (open/closed or narrow/wide), those who change their clubface relative to square (open/closed to the target line), those who change their ball position (forward/back) and of course those who change their swing plane (more vertical/flat, over the top/inside out). Did I miss any?

Some variable adjustments are easier than others for folks to wrap their heads around, and a lot of it has to do with the nature of their current swing (flaws) and the way they visualize their swing. What I think a lot of folks lose track of is the subtlety of adjustment required to generate a fade or draw. One tick of the clock is six degrees.

Cheers, GB

Ball position has a big influence on ball shaping. On the downswing you are hitting i to out and on the upswing out to in. Placing the ball back will encourage a draw.

[BrianW]

Re: Draw and Fade

Simply moving the ball back, all other things being unchaged, will more likely result in a push fade or, at the least, a straght push . A push, obviously, the club is still moving out to the target line. If you have a square (to the stance) face at impact with a neutral ball position, most people will have a slighlty open face before the neutral ball position (ball moved back in stance). Depending on how open, a fade, a slice or maybe a maybe a straight push if you are square with the path. Most people will not have a clubface closed to the path before their neutral ball position.

To answer Niel's question, and to expand on what has been said, it depends on the shot shape and trajectory. For instance, if you want hit a high draw with the driver, you will almost certainly have to play the ball forward to hit it on the upswing and as a result your clubhead will be moving left of the stance line at that point... a pull. If the face is closed (relative to path), you will be pull hooking it. If the face is open, pull fading. If you want to hit a low punch draw with an iron, you likely have to play the ball back in the stance to hit it on the downward part of the arc, which will also deloft the club. At that point, the arc is moving outward toward the target line.....a push. If the face is a bit closed, push hook. A bit open, push fade.



This "old" SETUP PROCESS most certainly DOES work for many people and has for years. Jack Nicklaus, for one. He sets up the shot the "old" way and the ball goes where he wants it to, therefore it ABSOLUTELY works for him. Not only that, his ballflight will and ABSOLUTELY MUST conform to the laws of physics, D-plane, and it always does. Jack's PROCESS and his PERCEPTION of what is happening ABSOLUTELY does not have to conform to anything, as long as it works.

Physics would imply that Jack's method will overhook a hook, for instance. But it doesn't, for him, obviously. Just because you set the club in one direction, does not guarantee it will return that way, especially when you alter the grip strength which will affect the balance of the club, it's rotational intertia, and our bodies reaction to this change in balance. If the ball flight is what he wants, then obviously the physics of the impact were satisfied. (He may have had a natural tendency to return the club slightly less closed than it was at setup, as an example)

This is a long way of saying, many great golfers have had a process that "overcooked" or "undercooked" the SETUP in order to achieve the proper physics at impact. Not the way I would do it, but the proof is in the pudding for some of the greats.

Jack didnt do what he said he did. The method he teaches will not work and that is physics. You do not seem to understand the ball flight laws so are speaking from a position of ignorance.

[kbp]

Re: Draw and Fade

I most certainly DO understand the ball flight laws, the so-called "new" ball flight rules, D-plane, however you wish to describe it. The fact that Jack may or may not have understood them does not negate the success of his method of AIMING the clubface and SETTING UP the stance that obviously DID achieve the results he wanted.

If he said he was going to hit a fade to the flag, and then he actually did hit a fade to the flag, his method to do so obviously worked, whatever that method was. Since the ball did what he wanted it to do, his method produced the impact conditions required to achieve the result he wanted. The ball flight absolutely must have conformed to physics (the "new" ball flight rules, if you prefer). How could it not?

Please note that the method says NOTHING about where the clubface will ultimately be pointing at IMPACT, nor does it say ANYTHING about what the actual relative clubhead path will be at impact. ADDRESS does not equal IMPACT.

The ball did not care how Jack aimed, how he set his feet, how he set the club face at address, what he was thinking in his mind, what he wrote in his books or anything else. The ball only cared what impact conditions his PROCESS produced. And it obviously produced....repeatedly.

Jack Nicklaus explains how he fades the ball - YouTube

[BrianW]

Re: Draw and Fade

I repeat. Jack didn't do what he said he did. What he explained will not work so he was teaching something that is incorrect, he was not beyond getting the theory wrong. Actually the US PGA still teaches the incorrect method of shaping ball flight to this day.

The ball will take off between the clubface direction and swingpath at impact but mainly in the direction of the clubface. The swingpath if not in line with the clubface will create side spin. This is not what Jack taught and it is not what he meant to do, what he and so many other top golfers and coaches taught was just wrong and created much confusion and poor shots for so many golfers.

I agree he could shape the ball but he didn't know what was doing it.

What he shows in that video would send the ball into the right rough.