Lie angle for super tall golfer with short arms?

[SamParker]

Hi. 6ft 5 with a wtf of 39.5. What loft and lie angles should I be looking at?

 

Ive read on gere alot recently that changing lie angles for a tall golfer can be a big mistake, but surely if I dont change the lie angle then the toe will always be catching the ground and the heel will be off the ground? 

 

🫠

 

 

[ShortGolfer]

The advantage of playing irons is that the loft and lie angles can be easily changed.  Maybe you can find a fitter with the right equipment to bend your irons and measure the result?

[Howard_Jones]

1 hour ago, SamParker said:

Hi. 6ft 5 with a wtf of 39.5. What loft and lie angles should I be looking at?

 

Ive read on gere alot recently that changing lie angles for a tall golfer can be a big mistake, but surely if I dont change the lie angle then the toe will always be catching the ground and the heel will be off the ground? 

 

🫠

 

 

We always need a dynamic lie angle test. its no way around that, the same with lofts.

Use the ballmarker test (a vertical "Putterline" on the ball with a dry erase marker)
Compare it to this label (no you DONT need the label), adjust like the label suggest, try again.

If the suggestion is more than 2 upright, we should look at play length
who then is shorter than it should be, so this is not about lie angles isolated, but how lenght and lie combined works.

If you feel the need for a starting point, i suggest you look at how PING would make this with your wrist to floor measurements.

https://ping.com/en-us/fitting/our-process/irons



PINGs suggestion seems to be +1.0" for PL and 3* upright

Edited July 25 by Howard_Jones

[Drivingrangehero]

Ping has a static fitting chart which would put you in +1.5” and upright 4°

 

that is a static baseline, but that may not be best for you. 
 

I would suggest buying a cheap forged  iron head (Maltby has some cheap ones that are great, forged, so you can bend the lie angle more than cast) 

 

https://www.golfworks.com/maltby-te-v4-forged-pearl-chrome-iron-heads/p/ma0360/

 

 

And I would by a single iron shaft in an iron shaft you like ……… (Worthy of Note Steelfiber i110’s swingweight very light which are great for over length builds)  have it put in the forged head at 2” over, then choke down incrementally until you find which playing length is best, all while using the lie angle test that Howard has provided to adjust lie as needed. From there you can dial in the swingweight via Howard’s DIY tune up ….. it applies to all clubs not just Drivers 

 

 

.

Edited July 25 by Drivingrangehero
.

[rsballer10]

1 minute ago, Drivingrangehero said:

Ping has a static fitting chart which would put you in +1.5” and upright 4°

 

that is a static baseline, but that may not be best for you. 
 

I would suggest buying a cheap forged  iron head (Maltby has some cheap ones that are great, forged, so you can bend the lie angle more than cast) 

 

https://www.golfworks.com/maltby-te-v4-forged-pearl-chrome-iron-heads/p/ma0360/

 

 

And I would by a single iron shaft in an iron shaft you like ……… Worthy of Note Steelfiber i110’s swingweight very light which are great for over length builds)  have it put in the forged head at 2” over, then choke down incrementally until you find which playing length is best, all while using the lie angle test that Howard has provided to adjust lie as needed. From there you can dial in the swingweight via Howard’s DIY tune up ….. it applies to all clubs not just Drivers 

 

 

Id also add OP should fit at a minimum a mid irons and wedge length. The shorter the club, the more the extra length becomes imperative for good posture.

[Howard_Jones]

2 minutes ago, Drivingrangehero said:

Ping has a static fitting chart which would put you in +1.5” and upright 4°

 

that is a static baseline, but that may not be best for you. 
 

I would suggest buying a cheap forged  iron head (Maltby has some cheap ones that are great, forged, so you can bend the lie angle more than cast) 

 

https://www.golfworks.com/maltby-te-v4-forged-pearl-chrome-iron-heads/p/ma0360/

 

 

And I would by a single iron shaft in an iron shaft you like ……… Worthy of Note Steelfiber i110’s swingweight very light which are great for over length builds)  have it put in the forged head at 2” over, then choke down incrementally until you find which playing length is best, all while using the lie angle test that Howard has provided to adjust lie as needed. From there you can dial in the swingweight via Howard’s DIY tune up ….. it applies to all clubs not just Drivers 

 

 

i read the PING chart im linking to as plus 1.0" and 3* upright (white dot) ?
(6 feets 5 inch - 39.5 WTF)

[Drivingrangehero]

2 minutes ago, Howard_Jones said:

i read the PING chart im linking to as plus 1.0" and 3* upright (white dot) ?
(6 feets 5 inch - 39.5 WTF)

Honestly I just typed in the numbers and that is what it spit out.

 

https://ping.com/en-us/misc/stash/fitting/iron-color-code-chart

[Drivingrangehero]

9 minutes ago, rsballer10 said:

Id also add OP should fit at a minimum a mid irons and wedge length. The shorter the club, the more the extra length becomes imperative for good posture.

Good point!
 

The 3/8” increments seems to work well for tall guys from short iron to long

[Howard_Jones]

7 minutes ago, Drivingrangehero said:

Honestly I just typed in the numbers and that is what it spit out.

 

https://ping.com/en-us/misc/stash/fitting/iron-color-code-chart

,
I added some helping lines to the chart they have on their web, and then it shows plus 1.0" and 4 upright. I really think 4 up is to much, but longer than 1.0 might also cause issues, so its a compromize anyway, and its not that far into the grey dot.

[Jayjay_theweim_guy]

Tbf, I typed in the numbers given at Ping's color code site, fat-fingered 39.25 vs 39.5, and got 1" 3° and 1.5" 4° for results.  (I'm similar, on the borderline between Blue and Green, and std or +1/2", on their old chart.)  So there's a bit of slop, but as Howard's said, it's a starting point only. 

 

The line on ball test is absolutely eyeopening.  It shouldn't be as accurate as it is, but it works.

[SamParker]

Thanks for the prompt responses guys. Going to re read them a few times for now 👍

[SamParker]

4 hours ago, Howard_Jones said:

We always need a dynamic lie angle test. its no way around that, the same with lofts.

Use the ballmarker test (a vertical "Putterline" on the ball with a dry erase marker)
Compare it to this label (no you DONT need the label), adjust like the label suggest, try again.

If the suggestion is more than 2 upright, we should look at play length
who then is shorter than it should be, so this is not about lie angles isolated, but how lenght and lie combined works.

If you feel the need for a starting point, i suggest you look at how PING would make this with your wrist to floor measurements.

https://ping.com/en-us/fitting/our-process/irons



PINGs suggestion seems to be +1.0" for PL and 3* upright

What is the advantage the marker on the ball test compared to the test where you put a sticker on the bottom of the club and see where it marks?

 

Thats what they did on my last fitting over 10 years ago.

 

Cheers!

[grochol17]

48 minutes ago, SamParker said:

What is the advantage the marker on the ball test compared to the test where you put a sticker on the bottom of the club and see where it marks?

 

Thats what they did on my last fitting over 10 years ago.

 

Cheers!

 

Howard can give you a more complete answer, but one issue is that it can be tough to disentangle lie angle issues from face angle issues when using the lie boards.  There's also the aspect that some people worry they are going to hurt something when they hit off a plastic board and might flinch a little going into impact, giving bad results.  The marker on the ball test is just you hitting off of (hopefully) grass, so more like what you'll experience on course.

[Howard_Jones]

19 hours ago, SamParker said:

What is the advantage the marker on the ball test compared to the test where you put a sticker on the bottom of the club and see where it marks?

 

Thats what they did on my last fitting over 10 years ago.

 

Cheers!

Its hard to make a short reply to that, but ill try...

Impact marks on the sole, move both on the heel to toe axis, and the leading edge to trailing edge axis, all depending on path and face angle.

To use the lie board "correct" we need to know path and face angle to judge them, but most often, ONLY the lie board is in action, but we actually need a Trackman or similar behind, so we have control of path and face angle at impact.

Even when we do have a launch monitor (and for that reason dont need the lie board at all, if we KNOW how we can use it for lie angles), we still have to be able to "translate" 29 different impact pattern from the sole, so even with "the chart", AND a launch monitor, its still guess work...since that chart dont tell "how much"

If that was not bad enough, we know that most golfers, "adjust" their natural swing from the course on attack angle, vs when they are hitting off a hard mat on the range....what do you think might happen when we move to a stone hard lie board?

Impact time is BEFORE the ball reach to the lieboard, and toe will drop during impact (causing marks to move against the toe)

What we like to know is Lie angle during compression of the ball, NOT what happens AFTER the ball is long gone on its way to the target.

Summary....a quite hopless task to make right

With the dry erase marker, you both can and should hit the balls from TURF on the range, so there is no reason for you to tweak your swing for comfort reasons.

The ballmarker test, dont care about path or face angle (unless its extreme and a pure crap shot, but those shots shall never count, no matter test, they should be ignored)

The line will be printed from the TIME of impact (the centerpart of the line), to the TiME for full compression of the ball (top and bottom of that line) thats the TIME frame we like to know lie angles for. (what was lie when we delivered the club head to the ball and to full compression of it, thats what matters for ball flight (tilt on spin axis due to lie angle).

How that looks like when the ball is gone, like the lie board measure it, has zero influence on ball flight.

With the ballmarker method, Its NO guesswork, and we dont need a launch montitor, and we know how much we have to adjust by using a trend from 4-5 strokes. (use your mobile, take photos, if in doubt, uppload and ill measure them for you)

Adding a photo who shows 27 different SOLE IMPACT MARKS from a lieboard, all depending on path and face angle. The way the lie board MOST OFTEN is used, will make a error in 8 out of 9 of this scenarios for sole marks, since they are all CORRECT ON LIE (No adjustment needed), so this is how it should look like with this path and face angle.(lest 9) 
- Most lieboard users is not even aware of that, so they will adjust 8 out of 9 = WRONG LIE, and they will not be able to judge the others correct either

Here is the complete 27 "Hieroglyf" system, the 9 to the left is all Correct, but most often, only one of them is identified as correct lie.



TRENDS on the lie boad
We can clearly see that 2 axises is in play at the same time

- OPEN face angle (vs path), moves impact both back against the trailing edge, and against the heel side at the same time. Most will judge this as if lie angle is too upright, since impact mark is heel side of the center.

- CLOSED face angle moves impact forward against the leading edge and toe side at the same time. Most will judge that as a lie angle too flat, since impact is against the toe side.

If they knew what im writhing here, impact against the leading edge, or traling edge, would have told them if face angle was open or closed, and by that, if the natural trend will be against the heel or toe, still with correct lie.

Most users think center of the sole (heel to toe) means lie angles is good, but even that is WRONG in 3 out of 6 scenarios. (GREEN = Good to go, RED = Adjustment needed) 



Lie board plus judgements of impact marks, most often delivers " a lie".

So we dont need a liaboard at all, only a whiteboard pen (Dry erase marker) and the cam on your mobile. and the photo of the label i posted. The RATIO is crazy 10:1 (10* on the label = 1* on lie angle, so eyballing is actually good enoght, but upload photos of impact lines if you need a second opinion.

Edited July 26 by Howard_Jones

[SamParker]

Amazing thank you so much. Will go get that done today!

[Howard_Jones]

3 hours ago, SamParker said:

Amazing thank you so much. Will go get that done today!

Lead tape for tuning, and a whiteboard pen to check lie at impact (all clubs, even the driver), is IMO obligatory in every golf bag, just like tees and a pitchfork is. Both of them is fantastic "tools" for us, and cost next to nothing, and dont fill a lot of space in the bag either, so the label was developed so every golfer should be able to check his own clubs at anytime he liked.

A related subject is re-fitting /DIY tune up in general, so if you start by getting a roll of lead tape and a white board pen, you actually have the tools needed for a really good DIY fitting, and there is no need for pre-knowledge of fitting or club tech to make it. Most who follows it, is not only able to make it, but make it better than most fitting places they have access to, and the cost is a roll of lead tape, a whiteboard pen, and some time spent on the range, The proven knowledge of how to, is served you all for free.

Read and bookmark it, it will become handy, and there is links to related topics in the bottom of the tread. Its written with a focus on drivers (since they dont work like other clubs - the head and gear effects is larger, and we always use a tee), but the methods is the same for all clubs except the putter who is post #8