Why don't we hit the ball at the low point?

[TheCityGame]

It seems to me that if you showed a smart person with no knowledge of golf an image of the path the club head travels and asked that person, "where do you think a good golfer hits the ball in that path?" that person would answer, "well, right there at the low point. The face is square at that point, and it's the lowest point, so that's where the club should contact the ball."

 

You could easily convince that person the benefits of hitting UP on a driver, but what would you say to convince this person that the low point should actually be in front of the ball?

 

If you google around on this topic, you get a lot of writing and videos of people explaining that you don't need to be STEEP or take a huge divot, but as far as I can find, no one really gives a reason for why the low point is in front of the ball.

 

FTR, yes, I have my own explanations but thought I'd hear opinions first, and I thought this might be of use to people who struggle with ball striking.

[Z1ggy16]

Needs to be in front of the ball so you you can strike the ball up high enough on the club face to launch adequately and get good ball speed. Hitting too far in front or behind can result in thin contact (to low on face) which kills ball speed, spin, launch.

 

Saw a youtube lesson recently about this. If you put a dot in the center of the club face where you'd want to strike and just set the club behind the ball, the dot would not be in the right place..This would be like swinging with flat or even maybe up on the ball. If you add some forward press and imagine striking a bit downward on the ball, you can see how this dot would meet up nicely with the back of the ball.

[TheCityGame]

Needs to be in front of the ball so you you can strike the ball up high enough on the club face to launch adequately and get good ball speed. Hitting too far in front or behind can result in thin contact (to low on face) which kills ball speed, spin, launch.

But whether I'm hitting down on the ball, or I'm flat at the ball, as long as my swing arc is at the same height at the ball (say the bottom of the club is just touching the turf), it's hitting the ball in the same place on the club face.

[Z1ggy16]

Needs to be in front of the ball so you you can strike the ball up high enough on the club face to launch adequately and get good ball speed. Hitting too far in front or behind can result in thin contact (to low on face) which kills ball speed, spin, launch.

But whether I'm hitting down on the ball, or I'm flat at the ball, as long as my swing arc is at the same height at the ball (say the bottom of the club is just touching the turf), it's hitting the ball in the same place on the club face.

 

I think I'd need to make a sketch or something, but I think that'd only be true if the exact low point of both swings is right at the ball.

 

Here... This is the video I was talking about. Not sure if my explanation is in line with the video as it was a few months ago that I first saw it.

 

[Nard_S]

Because the club is decelerating at the low point. Impact further decelerates things. Club needs to be in state of acceleration at impact. Tour level swings bottom out 4" in front of ball.

[TheCityGame]

Because the club is decelerating at the low point. Impact further decelerates things. Club needs to be in state of acceleration at impact. Tour level swings bottom out 4" in front of ball.

Club is not decelerating at low point. It's neither accelerating or decelerating. It should be at its maximum speed at the low point.

[SNIPERBBB]

Have them read Clampette's Impact Zone

[ts511]

Got to hit the small ball first to be consistent. If you hit the earth first it will slow down club and open or shut face.

[BrianMcG]

Because you need to hit the little ball first.

[TheCityGame]

Because you need to hit the little ball first.

The ball is at the LOW POINT of the swing. I'm not going to hit the BIG BALL first if I hit the little ball at the low point.

[Nard_S]

Because the club is decelerating at the low point. Impact further decelerates things. Club needs to be in state of acceleration at impact. Tour level swings bottom out 4" in front of ball.

Club is not decelerating at low point. It's neither accelerating or decelerating. It should be at its maximum speed at the low point.

 

If the club is at same exact speed it is accelerating because their are forces acting on it. We do not swing or exist in a vacuum.

[TheCityGame]

Needs to be in front of the ball so you you can strike the ball up high enough on the club face to launch adequately and get good ball speed. Hitting too far in front or behind can result in thin contact (to low on face) which kills ball speed, spin, launch.

But whether I'm hitting down on the ball, or I'm flat at the ball, as long as my swing arc is at the same height at the ball (say the bottom of the club is just touching the turf), it's hitting the ball in the same place on the club face.

 

I think I'd need to make a sketch or something, but I think that'd only be true if the exact low point of both swings is right at the ball.

 

Here... This is the video I was talking about. Not sure if my explanation is in line with the video as it was a few months ago that I first saw it.

 

This is a good video. Around the 7 minute mark, he gets into a little. He is saying that forward shaft lean is necessary for center face contact, and if you have forward shaft lean, then your low point has to move forward.

 

I'd still argue that. You can still lean the shaft forward and have a low point at the ball. It doesn't just follow perfectly logically from "forward shaft lean".

[BrianMcG]

Because you need to hit the little ball first.

The ball is at the LOW POINT of the swing. I'm not going to hit the BIG BALL first if I hit the little ball at the low point.

 

The low point of your swing would be in the middle of your divot.

 

If you put the ball there, you would hit the ground first.

[TheCityGame]

Because the club is decelerating at the low point. Impact further decelerates things. Club needs to be in state of acceleration at impact. Tour level swings bottom out 4" in front of ball.

Club is not decelerating at low point. It's neither accelerating or decelerating. It should be at its maximum speed at the low point.

 

If the club is at same exact speed it is accelerating because their are forces acting on it. We do not swing or exist in a vacuum.

What?

 

There is a point at which the club is neither accelerating or decelerating. It is at the precise point at which it is going from accelerating to decelerating. That's true in a vacuum, on Jupiter, or on Earth. That's at the low point. That would make the low point the point at which the club is travelling the fastest. Why wouldn't you want to hit the ball at that point?

[BrianMcG]

Because the club is decelerating at the low point. Impact further decelerates things. Club needs to be in state of acceleration at impact. Tour level swings bottom out 4" in front of ball.

Club is not decelerating at low point. It's neither accelerating or decelerating. It should be at its maximum speed at the low point.

 

If the club is at same exact speed it is accelerating because their are forces acting on it. We do not swing or exist in a vacuum.

What?

 

There is a point at which the club is neither accelerating or decelerating. It is at the precise point at which it is going from accelerating to decelerating. That's true in a vacuum, on Jupiter, or on Earth. That's at the low point. That would make the low point the point at which the club is travelling the fastest. Why wouldn't you want to hit the ball at that point?

 

Ok then. So, your wanting to hit everything thin?

 

You should write a book. You could make tens of dollars.

[TheCityGame]

Sorry, MCG. . .my "quotes" got out of whack and I edited out this part. . .

 

Because you need to hit the little ball first.

The ball is at the LOW POINT of the swing. I'm not going to hit the BIG BALL first if I hit the little ball at the low point.

 

The low point of your swing would be in the middle of your divot.

 

If you put the ball there, you would hit the ground first.

I'm not taking a divot. I'm hitting the ball at the low point. There is no divot.

[Poser]

You can be very shallow and get an angle of attack of zero or even positive with your irons but, it's alot harder to control distance, curve, and compression isn't near as good. I struggled with actually never really taking divots and angle of attack was sometimes zero with irons. I could hit these like low spin flyer shots and the ball curved alot more. Hitting down more gives me more backspin and less side curve and better contact.

[Nard_S]

Because the club is decelerating at the low point. Impact further decelerates things. Club needs to be in state of acceleration at impact. Tour level swings bottom out 4" in front of ball.

Club is not decelerating at low point. It's neither accelerating or decelerating. It should be at its maximum speed at the low point.

 

If the club is at same exact speed it is accelerating because their are forces acting on it. We do not swing or exist in a vacuum.

What?

 

There is a point at which the club is neither accelerating or decelerating. It is at the precise point at which it is going from accelerating to decelerating. That's true in a vacuum, on Jupiter, or on Earth. That's at the low point. That would make the low point the point at which the club is travelling the fastest. Why wouldn't you want to hit the ball at that point?

 

Why not ask every touring pro that? Their bottom i.e. low point comes on average 3"-4" in front of ball. Good luck with the intent of maxing low point at the ball. It's misconceptions like this that enslave people to dufferdom forever.

[TheCityGame]

Because the club is decelerating at the low point. Impact further decelerates things. Club needs to be in state of acceleration at impact. Tour level swings bottom out 4" in front of ball.

Club is not decelerating at low point. It's neither accelerating or decelerating. It should be at its maximum speed at the low point.

 

If the club is at same exact speed it is accelerating because their are forces acting on it. We do not swing or exist in a vacuum.

What?

 

There is a point at which the club is neither accelerating or decelerating. It is at the precise point at which it is going from accelerating to decelerating. That's true in a vacuum, on Jupiter, or on Earth. That's at the low point. That would make the low point the point at which the club is travelling the fastest. Why wouldn't you want to hit the ball at that point?

 

Why not ask every touring pro that? Their bottom i.e. low point comes on average 3"-4" in front of ball. Good luck with the intent of maxing low point at the ball. It's misconceptions like this that enslave people to dufferdom forever.

Right. The pros have a low point 3-4 inches in front of the ball. I'm asking why.

 

Do you seriously think I'm advocating doing this? I'm trying to have a conversation in hopes that I (and maybe others) can learn something. But it doesn't help to have misconceptions out there like "the club is decelerating at the low point."

[davep043]

Simple answer, to me, is that its more difficult to swing absolutely tangent to the ground, and small differences will exaggerate the effects of being slightly higher than the surface (thin) or slightly lower (fat). A slightly downward angle of attack, in my mind, decreases the consequences of those slight "mistakes."

 

And while I agree that there's some point where acceleration turns to deceleration, there's no guarantee that this occurs at the low point of the swing. Those who cast the club, the early extenders, almost certainly reach this point before the low point, so that they're decelerating at impact.

[Z1ggy16]

Needs to be in front of the ball so you you can strike the ball up high enough on the club face to launch adequately and get good ball speed. Hitting too far in front or behind can result in thin contact (to low on face) which kills ball speed, spin, launch.

But whether I'm hitting down on the ball, or I'm flat at the ball, as long as my swing arc is at the same height at the ball (say the bottom of the club is just touching the turf), it's hitting the ball in the same place on the club face.

 

I think I'd need to make a sketch or something, but I think that'd only be true if the exact low point of both swings is right at the ball.

 

Here... This is the video I was talking about. Not sure if my explanation is in line with the video as it was a few months ago that I first saw it.

 

This is a good video. Around the 7 minute mark, he gets into a little. He is saying that forward shaft lean is necessary for center face contact, and if you have forward shaft lean, then your low point has to move forward.

 

I'd still argue that. You can still lean the shaft forward and have a low point at the ball. It doesn't just follow perfectly logically from "forward shaft lean".

Yeah I don't think that shaft lean != low point moves forward... I think though that body pressure forward does, which usually also comes with shaft lean. How many guys can hit off the back foot, causing a low point to move back, but also give shaft lean? None, or an extremely small amount.

 

Generally, the more over your front leg/foot you are, the more steep you get. So I guess my whole point generally speaking was that you can tend to compress/cover the ball more and hit in a more desirable areamore easily if you have a more descending blow than if you did not.

 

The best way to test this would be with GC Quad. A good golfer could take a 7i and hit 10 shots with very low AoA, then hit 10 shots with a higher AoA. Compare ball strike locations... compare launch angle, spin, distance, ball speed, etc. Not that it's the best or right way, but most PGA pro's hit down on the 7i around 4.5*. With enough golfers/data, you could say with a decent amount of back up, that -4.5* for PGA swing speeds is probably close to ideal. For LPGA women it's about 2.5*, which is probably close to what it should be for most amateur men, too (maybe not your high speed WRXer though).

[TheCityGame]

Simple answer, to me, is that its more difficult to swing absolutely tangent to the ground, and small differences will exaggerate the effects of being slightly higher than the surface (thin) or slightly lower (fat). A slightly downward angle of attack, in my mind, decreases the consequences of those slight "mistakes."

THIS is what I was meant in the OP when I said, "I have my own explanations". I don't know if it's correct, but it's kind of what I think.

 

I think a big factor with a forward low point is providing the golfer a greater MARGIN OF ERROR in the golf swing. This, coupled with the video that Ziggy shared earlier (that you need forward shaft lean and that sort of goes hand in hand with a forward low point).

 

With a downward blow (catching the ball before the low point), the low point can move around a little (up and down AND fore and aft) and still provide a reasonable golf shot. If you try to swing with the low point right at the golf ball, you produce a much worse shot. E.g, for a "low point at ball shot" a .5 inch raising of the low point would produce a shot that is half inch lower on the face. But, for a properly struck golf shot, raising the low point by a half inch wouldn't move the strike point by as much (does this make sense?)

 

Anywy now my idea is out there for others to pick apart if they wish.

 

If this idea of margin of error is valid, I wonder if one could compute an optimal angle of attack combined with depth/distance of low point that provides the greatest margin of error. I would suspect that at the end of the day, it would look like the best professional ball striker's divots, but it might be interesting.

[MrJones]

Simple answer, to me, is that its more difficult to swing absolutely tangent to the ground, and small differences will exaggerate the effects of being slightly higher than the surface (thin) or slightly lower (fat). A slightly downward angle of attack, in my mind, decreases the consequences of those slight "mistakes."

Right. The pros have a low point 3-4 inches in front of the ball. I'm asking why.

 

Do you seriously think I'm advocating doing this? I'm trying to have a conversation in hopes that I (and maybe others) can learn something. But it doesn't help to have misconceptions out there like "the club is decelerating at the low point."

 

Just me pondering your question and thinking out loud...

 

I would say it has a lot to do with the bold portion. I imagine the margin for error with a downward (and more shallow) angle of attack would be better and have a longer zone in which good contact could be made. While a strike that must hit an exact point in the swing, exactly at the ball would be much more difficult. And, as I think another poster alluded to, the fact that clubs are now designed to be struck with a certain amount of forward shaft lean. Probably by finding ideal impact position of better golfers in the past.

 

Haha you beat me to it.

[KMeloney]

Needs to be in front of the ball so you you can strike the ball up high enough on the club face to launch adequately and get good ball speed. Hitting too far in front or behind can result in thin contact (to low on face) which kills ball speed, spin, launch.

 

Isn't this THE answer?

 

With the ball on a tee, I suppose you could get the sweet spot of the club on the ball at the lowest point of the swing without contacting any of the ground and get the "most" out of the club (forgetting about the notion that pros et al really get the most out of their clubs by delofting the club at impact). Otherwise, I don't see how you get the sweet spot of the club on the ball without hitting the ground first.

[Nard_S]

 

 

Why not ask every touring pro that? Their bottom i.e. low point comes on average 3"-4" in front of ball. Good luck with the intent of maxing low point at the ball. It's misconceptions like this that enslave people to dufferdom forever.

Right. The pros have a low point 3-4 inches in front of the ball. I'm asking why.

 

Do you seriously think I'm advocating doing this? I'm trying to have a conversation in hopes that I (and maybe others) can learn something. But it doesn't help to have misconceptions out there like "the club is decelerating at the low point."

 

Once the hands pass the trail elbow and the bottom of the swing cannot happen without hands doing so, they are in a state deceleration. Loss of momentum there translates to loss of momentum at the club head.

[SNIPERBBB]

From the Impact Zone:

[TheCityGame]

That's good, SNIPER.

 

I'm definitely in that 0-3 inches range. I've been working on moving it forward a little and I've been trying to figure out a good reason for it beyond, "because that's what the pros do." But, I'm also getting more of those pure butter shots with the sound and the feel and the ball flight and the distance so there's something to it.

 

Adam Young talks a lot about "shallowing moves" that the pro's do (but oddly doesn't talk about the reasoning behind it so much. I wonder if he thinks it's self evident). There seems to be some sort of combination of how steep you are and where the low point should be. . .but I can't seem to find too many people talking about it.

[iteachgolf]

 

 

Why not ask every touring pro that? Their bottom i.e. low point comes on average 3"-4" in front of ball. Good luck with the intent of maxing low point at the ball. It's misconceptions like this that enslave people to dufferdom forever.

Right. The pros have a low point 3-4 inches in front of the ball. I'm asking why.

 

Do you seriously think I'm advocating doing this? I'm trying to have a conversation in hopes that I (and maybe others) can learn something. But it doesn't help to have misconceptions out there like "the club is decelerating at the low point."

 

Once the hands pass the trail elbow and the bottom of the swing cannot happen without hands doing so, they are in a state deceleration. Loss of momentum there translates to loss of momentum at the club head.

No it doesn’t. The club head is accelerating with applies a force in the opposite direction on the hands which slows them down. The hands slowing down does not slow down the clubhead.

[Albatross85]

Loft. A 46* pw is not meant to be struck at 46* dynamic loft. That ball would go no where and a mile in the air. Lowpoint is forward of the ball b/c you need shaft lean and a dynamic loft of around 30* to hit that PW properly.

[GMR]

It's all to do with margin of error. If you swing your irons with 0* AoA and no shaft lean, you will impact the ball very low on the face.

 

Let's say you make contact second groove on this type of swing. If you swing 1 groove high you hit it very thin on the bottom groove (ok but suboptimal). 2 grooves high you knife it (very bad). Swing 1 groove low and you're fat (bad), and 2 grooves low you're REALLY fat (very bad). So the window you have to deliver the club is minimal.

 

Now look at the way the clubs are meant to be hit: say you are contacting the ball on the 5th groove on a "perfect" strike due to the forward shaft lean. Basically now you have 5 grooves to miss on before you knife it, or more than 2x what you had with the 0* AoA swing.

 

Also note that due to the way clubs are designed the hottest part of the face is up toward the middle of the face generally, not down near the leading edge. If people swung with low point at the ball the clubs would need a serious redesign to hit the ball efficiently.

 

Fairway woods, on the other hand, are meant to be hit with the ball basically at the low point. The reason they can work that way is because 1) they have less loft so the ball naturally makes contact higher on the face in the absence of shaft lean (so more margin for error when missing "high") and 2) they flat wide sole on the club that allows for you to miss "low" without digging into the ground, unlike an iron...