Clampett: The Impact Zone

[Trad1]

I recently read Bobby Clampett’s new golf instruction book, “The Impact Zone”. There is one major concept in the book that has me a bit confused.

I have always thought the ideal impact angle of attack for a driver had the driver traveling level to the ground. Clampett insists the angle of attack should be slightly downward. In fact, he advocates the low point in the swing should be approximately 4 inches past the ball. I have never heard this advice before. Clampett cites his work with the ultra slow motion cameras they use during the CBS broadcasts as the reason for this recommendation.

I have taken a look at a dozen swing sequences of top players and don’t get the impression of a downward strike with the driver.

Next I pulled up some video on YouTube of swings from CBS telecasts. I’m unsure of what I’m seeing. It looks to me like the driver is moving level until contact and then the club moves downward in response to impact and seems to be as a result of the loft on the club.

I use a Titleist 983E driver because I like the penetrating ball flight it gives me. When I hit a drive with what I believe is a very slight downward angle of attack the ball balloons on me.

So what is the latest science on this subject?

Trad1

[ubizmo]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

I suppose it depends on what ball flight you want. According to Joe Hagen in the 3 Skills book, the driver should strike horizontally, therefore at the low point of the swing arc. I've seen many other sources that suggest a slight upward strike, so that impact occurs just after the bottom of the swing arc. Clearly, which way you do it will affect the ball flight. Doing it Clampett's way would tend to de-loft the club face, resulting in a lower ball flight. It seems to me that this is only useful for those who generate high swing speeds that can keep the ball in the air long enough to get distance that way.

[bill reed]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

hi
if you use the driver then you come into the ball on a flatter plane and a driver with say 9% of loft will meet the ball just below the equator line, if tee'd up then most plays come into the ball level or just at the start of the upswing and that 9% will change to maybe 10% or 11%. if you hit down then you will apply more backspin and you don't want that with a driver and you will take off a little of the loft too.
why tee the ball forward if your trying to hit down on the ball why not play it back in your stance as you would do with an iron, don't get his reasoning on it at all.
i don't agree with Clampett view and agree with Joe hagen in trying to get the club face to come in horizontally and use the loft of the club as it was meant to be used.
bill

[BrianW]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

I think Bill is spot on here. A steep downswing will catch the ball high on the drivers face and create high ball flight with high spin, this will lose distance. Maximum power will be produced when the ball's core is fully compressed onto the drivers face and this can only happen with a horizontal strike, the more oblique the strike the less the ball will be compressed. If more height is required then use a driver with more loft.

[Trad1]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

Brian,

I agree with everything in your post.

Clampett insists that based on his examination of impact using the super slow motion camera, todays golfing greats have the club swing down slightly through impact when hitting all of their clubs including the driver.

I have looked at video available on YouTube and I just don't see what he says he's seeing. I don't see the club swinging up on the ball, but it also does not look like a slightly downward blow.

If Clampett is wrong on this point, his book is headed to the rubbish heap because he makes this a center piece rather than a side issue.

The other day I tried hitting some drives with what I think was a slight downward blow and my 9.5 driver produced ballon balls that were at the mercy of the wind. That's not a shot shape I want to develop.

Trad1

[bill reed]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

hi Trad
there was a great clip of tiger driving the ball with one of the very high speed cameras and it was so slow you could see the ball compress on the club face and he came in level to the ball and in now way did he hit down, the clip was from the 2005 buick open.
have tried to upload it but it fails.
bill

[oldwease]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

I've seen a couple of very slow motion swings on You Tube, one of Woods and the other of Daly. The close-ups on the ball at impact are extraordinary. If I remember correctly, Tiger's impact is slightly above the dead centre of the club. Daly appears to be dead centre with the ball compressing like a flattened egg.

I agree the clubhead should be moving essentially parallel to the ground at impact. If there's any deviation on this from the pros I suspect it is so minor as to be pratically irrelevant. I think there's generally a problem with super slow motion shots - everything tends to get exaggerated visually.

[bill reed]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

hi oldwease
yes thats the same clip i think I'm on about, tiger hits the ball with the upper 3/4 of the driver face, but there no way he hits down if anything the clubs starting to rise.
bill

[oldwease]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

Absolutely, Bill - aren't they amazing sequences.....

[BrianW]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

I think this guy Tang is wrong, there are also flaws in what the guy says as well as the voice-over on the video.


Tang quotes Newtons 3rd law Incorrectly and out of context. it should say "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction" He then says that this explains why hitting down on a ball sends it up and hitting up sends it down.

Hitting down on a ball allows the sweetspot of a lofted club to make optimum contact with the balls core thus transferring maximum force from the clubface to the ball, the loft of the club will create backspin which along with the clubface direction will decide the balls initial trajectory.
Any oblique blow will loose velocity, whether it is from the loft or the angle of the clubface at impact. Maximum velocity would be created with a non-lofted clubface striking a ball at a given speed directly into the balls equator and subsequent core. The problem would be that the lack of backspin would create a low flight and distance.

Physics show me very clearly that striking a ball so that it's core receives the maximum compression will produce optimum power. However, as gravity influences the distance the ball will fly it will need to gain height thus allowing it's trajectory to create maximum carry. Tests have shown that a launch angle of around 10 deg will give the best carry, to achieve this you will need to hit level with a 10 deg driver or slightly upwards with a lower loft.

The videos showing a fairway wood being hit down on a tee'd ball are misleading. The persons hands are ahead of the ball at impact thus delofting the club and creating less of an oblique blow, the same could have been achieved with a shallower angle of attack and less loft.

Lets just think about long irons, why do you hit down less than a wedge? It's due to the lower loft allowing you to strike the balls core with the sweetspot on a lower approach angle.

[bill reed]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

hi
i agree with Brian as what he says makes so much more sense, with every club apart from the putter you hit the ball upward. you do swing the shorter irons downward but the loft of the club makes contact with the lower 3/4 of the ball and that transfers into an upward shot as the force of impact is about 50+ degrees on a wedge. with say a 1 iron the face is about 15% and you make contact just below the equator and the 15% give the ball an upward force due to being struck by at 15% face and hitting just below the equator line same with a 9% driver, your just below the equator line but the 9% makes the face of the club below that line, if the face was square ie 0% then you would make contact with the equator line.
Clampett cant hit down on the ball with a drive as he will always hit the ball just below the equator line. he can swing more steeply but that will only make the timing of meeting the ball with a square face that much harder and i dont see how it would do anything other than impart more backspin into the ball.
bill

[BrianW]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

Absolutely and the shaft of a driver is designed such that your hands should be level with the clubface at impact, this shows us that the clubface should be hitting level at the ball.

[bill reed]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

hi cmays
don't think i understand you fully. are you saying that the lean of the shaft if soled correctly on say a 9 iron will lean forward say 5% and the face of the club is say 47% then you make contact with the ball still having that 5% lean on the shaft or are you saying you come in with the shaft almost straight up and down, would this not add loft to the face .
i have always believed in making the club work as it was made to be used and to me that means using the lean of the short irons to keep my hands ahead of the club face and with the driver almost in line with the face.
maybe i have misunderstood you.
cheers
bill

[bill reed]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

hi cmays
i think whats confusing me is you talking about the backward lean of the shaft. backward as in away from the target????.

if you hit all your club with the club sole flat then your shaft will lean forward a lot with a wedge and back till you get to a driver which will be almost level and if you hit say a 56% wedge 75 yards on a full shot then thats your distance, if you want to hit lower flight but that distance then use a less lofted club and use the club as its meant to be used and don't try and use your hard to add or take loft off the club.
i do find the game easer if i pick the club i know will work using just one swing. i do realize that the longer the shaft the more flatter the swing and so the swing does change some, but it does let you repeat the ball flight if you don't change your swing but just change your club.
i know there are lots of played that use say a 7 iron all the time for chipping and pitching and this works great for them but i find it easer to use Pelz's system and use the club for the job and not change the swing to match the club.
cheers bill

[BrianW]

Re: Clampett: The Impact Zone

Many people do not understand how the golf ball works or the laws of ballistics applied.

If you squirt water from a hosepipe and raise it slowly up you will notice at 45 deg you will gain the furthest distance, as you raise higher the jet will start to land back towards you. This would also hold true for a ball hit in a vacuum or without spin. The creation of lift by means of spin greatly changes this situation.

With spin the ball can stay in the air longer without using it's initial energy from impact to climb high. The ball can therefore be set off at a shallower angle, in other words the horizontal component of velocity can be increased.

Lift always works at right angles to the direction of flight at any moment. Another advantage of sending the ball off at a lower angle is that all the time the ball is climbing to it's highest point in it's trajectory, lift will to some extent be working against the balls forward movement as well as working to keep the ball in the air: but the shallower the angle at which the ball is climbing the less lift will work against the forward flight. Scientific tests have shown that the optimum launch angle for a driver to be around 10 degrees. In saying this many players will get better results with a launch angle nearing 20 deg as the higher spin rate will negate some sidespin.

There are some equations that can be used to fairly accurately calculate carry and carry+roll in ideal conditions at a 10 deg launch angle..

carry = 1.5v-103

carry+roll = 1.25v-25

Where v= the speed in feet per second