My Study of OBFL versus NBFL

[JustOne]

As interesting these allegorical examples are none of them have a property similar to sidespin. The bullet rises and falls like a golfball, as does the dart but neither turns sideways in flight while rising and falling..

Not sure what point our new found golf coach is trying to make by taking clay pigeon shooting and substituting it with darts... seeing as it's exactly the same principle as mine

Weird!



Socket, the point I was trying to make is nothing to do with golfballs or clay pigeons or even the ball flight laws, just a point about learning/teaching and knowing the facts in order to do so.

If someone can get by without knowing the facts or being instructed in some way by somebody who DOES know the facts then good for them... for all others it would be advisable NOT to learn (or take advise) from someone who just says "point the club and hit it, that's what I do", and even worse by someone who knows the WRONG facts and teaches those!

 

[sev112]

Sorry, i said i wouldn't but i'm getting so much info out of this.
I think these "things" are useful to some/many, not because they necessarily teach you how how to do play a new shot, but they help you stop doing a bad shot. And lots of people are interested in that
Presumably Pros use these "laws" and things when they look at a player and help them to eradicate swing faults.
Many top pros, big names, say "i look at ball flight - that's all i need to know what the fault is "
But it's no longer simple any more
e.g.
I stand on the tee, i hit a ball that goes 225 yards, starting on a line 25 yards to the right and curves back another 12.5 yards back towards the left - some might say a good shot.
What is my club face doing at impact and where are my feet aiming (assuming my clubhead path is parallel with my feet) for any/all of the following cases :
1) A Big faced driver, with the ball hit 1.5" closer to the toe (i.e Gear Effect maximum)
2) A Draw biased driver
3) a straight faced 1 iron (no gear effect)

Hmmm.... I'm confused now - each of those would have my feet and face in different places and combinations and generate the same shot ?

 

[SocketRocket]

Not sure what point our new found golf coach is trying to make by taking clay pigeon shooting and substituting it with darts... seeing as it's exactly the same principle as mine

Weird!



Socket, the point I was trying to make is nothing to do with golfballs or clay pigeons or even the ball flight laws, just a point about learning/teaching and knowing the facts in order to do so.

If someone can get by without knowing the facts or being instructed in some way by somebody who DOES know the facts then good for them... for all others it would be advisable NOT to learn (or take advise) from someone who just says "point the club and hit it, that's what I do", and even worse by someone who knows the WRONG facts and teaches those!

Yes James, I see what you meant. I was referring more to the additional posts.

 

[SocketRocket]

I know some of us have been discussing the details of ball shaping, the physics and mechanics of what works, what doesn't and why, but that's for some of us that are interested in such things, for those that aren't then as I said previously 'just ignore that bit'.

Some are suggesting the NBFL and OBFL are complicated and to be honest some of the discussion has made it seem that way. People don't stand by their ball when needing to move it in flight and consider how many degrees left or right their clubface should point and how many degrees this way or that way they must swing. How on earth could you measure somthing like that? Would you consider that you need a push draw or a pull hook etc and mentally look up all Patricks drawings in your mind so that you can hit ball into a tight green? No! all you need to do is ensure the clubface is pointing in the direction you want the initial flight then swing to the right or left of that by the desired amount to create a suitable sidespin. It's not too difficult, OK it needs a bit of practice before you use it, just like hitting out of a bunker or chipping onto a green does.

The OBFL were the same, you didnt need a manual of examples to do it, just aim yje clubface where you want the ball to finish and swing in the direction you wanted the ball to start. It does not work but the method is simple enough.

It takes a bit of understanding to become very proficient at ball shaping as different clubs work in slightly different ways. More loft creates less sidespin for example. The basics are easy to learn and the average player should pick it up fairly fast.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

The OBFL were the same, you didnt need a manual of examples to do it, just aim yje clubface where you want the ball to finish and swing in the direction you wanted the ball to start. It does not work but the method is simple enough.

Brilliant!! Always used to work until someone decided we needed 'new' laws

:rofl:

 

[kid2]

It takes a bit of understanding to become very proficient at ball shaping as different clubs work in slightly different ways. More loft creates less sidespin for example. The basics are easy to learn and the average player should pick it up fairly fast.

SR.... Good post....As you say i think for the most part it would be good for people to understand them anyway at least me included but for the average Joe also me included i think that it makes the game more technical than it needs to be.....
The average player isnt trying to shape the ball around the course....They want a starightish shot (Something thats near impossible to pull off) but they are happy if they have a controllable flight...Be it left to right or right to left......
I think that trying to shape your ball both ways for some can be a recipe for disaster.....It brings too much thinking into the equation....
As well as that i believe that as you get lower then maybe you'll need the required shots to hit into greens to flags left and right but even then that may not be the right choice....

The game is riddled at all levels with players trying to hit the ball the opposite way from what they naturally do...
If you can embrace the shape you play with get it under control then i dont think that all these Ball flight laws are going to matter one bit....

I also think that most club golfers maybe dont realize that they do it but are actually hitting the ball with these NBFL's....
Its when the science comes into it i have a tendency to switch off and do what feels natural to me....

For my irons im aiming the clubface 6 or 7 yards right of the pin and aiming the rest of me parallel to this a few yards inside that line....
My ball flight starts straight and then sometimes draws a little back to the pins....
Its different with me for the driver...
Today i was aiming the clubhead at the left edge rough and opening my body a few degrees to that target and fading the ball back into the fairway...A managable flight at last and i couldnt tell you if any of the 2 shapes fall into the OBFL's or the NBFL's.....

I just do what feels natural..... :thup:

 

[duncan mackie]

....

For my irons im aiming the clubface 6 or 7 yards right of the pin and aiming the rest of me parallel to this a few yards inside that line....
My ball flight starts straight and then sometimes draws a little back to the pins....

sorry but this makes even less sense than most of what's in this, and other posts, on the subject!

1. you can't have something parallel to and inside
2. you can't have a ball flight that starts straight and then curves back to the pin

you do however support the principle that there isn't any difference between the 'laws' only how they are presented and interpreted. excellent!

 

[kid2]

sorry but this makes even less sense than most of what's in this, and other posts, on the subject!

1. you can't have something parallel to and inside
2. you can't have a ball flight that starts straight and then curves back to the pin

you do however support the principle that there isn't any difference between the 'laws' only how they are presented and interpreted. excellent!

Which is also why i said in my post that when the science comes into it i switch off Duncan....And do what feels natural to me....

I dont care what the clubface is doing or why it starts straight and curves back....For me its what i can control and what i know.....Simples....

 

[duncan mackie]

Which is also why i said in my post that when the science comes into it i switch off Duncan....And do what feels natural to me....

I dont care what the clubface is doing or why it starts straight and curves back....For me its what i can control and what i know.....Simples....

then why post the bo**ox bit then?

 

[kid2]

then why post the bo**ox bit then?

:cheers: :thup:....Just thought that there might be someone else thinking along the same lines....
As interesting as all this thread is......It'll confuse the crap out of a lot.....

 

[duncan mackie]

:cheers: :thup:....Just thought that there might be someone else thinking along the same lines....
As interesting as all this thread is......It'll confuse the crap out of a lot.....

unfortunately - yes!

:whoo:

 

[Region3]

The direction that the ball moves in the air is the same regardless of new or old ideas.

For me at least, it's all about trial and error. I can't believe anyone stands there and tries to guess angles and degrees. You have a general idea then play around with it on the range to find what works.

Even if a coach tried to teach someone the wrong way and they found it wasn't working out surely they'd play around with path and face until the ball did what they wanted it to.

I think where a good understanding of the ball flight laws is invaluable is in understanding what the club was doing around impact based on the observed flight of the ball.

 

[Patrick57]

My OP argues that new and old laws are not as different as the few would want us to believe. How golfers perform ball shaping on the golf course is much less complicated...

In order to shape balls, a golfer must have a feel for a closed and/or open clubface. I refer to this as either toe pressure or heel pressure. Once they have this skill, then they just have to align the feet to the desired path and swing away.

 

[SocketRocket]

My OP argues that new and old laws are not as different as the few would want us to believe. How golfers perform ball shaping on the golf course is much less complicated...

In order to shape balls, a golfer must have a feel for a closed and/or open clubface. I refer to this as either toe pressure or heel pressure. Once they have this skill, then they just have to align the feet to the desired path and swing away.

Your first statement is completely wrong. They are not the same.

Your second statement is just mumbo jumbo that will help no one.

 

[SocketRocket]

Brilliant!! Always used to work until someone decided we needed 'new' laws

:rofl:

So! explain to us, if you can how it used to work? I am waiting with baited breath for your pearls of wisdom that will reveal the sacred cow of ball shaping that you seem to think whe rest of us elude to. Come on then, please amaze us. I dont think I will hold my breath though. :rofl:

 

[Patrick57]

Your first statement is completely wrong. They are not the same.

My first statement claimed they are not as diferent as people make out. If you read that as me stating that they are the same, then I can't win.

Your second statement is just mumbo jumbo that will help no one.

These simple instructions work for most of my students which is a greater success rate than the 'it will work for no one' that you suggest.

 

[Patrick57]

So! explain to us, if you can how it used to work? I am waiting with baited breath for your pearls of wisdom that will reveal the sacred cow of ball shaping that you seem to think whe rest of us elude to. Come on then, please amaze us. I dont think I will hold my breath though. :rofl:

I would like to take a stab at this one...

Shaping shots is something that is achieved using intuition and instinct. Its a subconscious skill like, throwing, catching etc and not a scientific formula.

 

[SocketRocket]

These simple instructions work for most of my students which is a greater success rate than the 'it will work for no one' that you suggest.

If you teach clubface direction creating sidespin and swingpath creating initial direction, most of your students must be ignoring or misunderstanding your instructions then.

 

[SocketRocket]

I would like to take a stab at this one...

Shaping shots is something that is achieved using intuition and instinct. Its a subconscious skill like, throwing, catching etc and not a scientific formula.

Ah! So its a black art.

I have previously asked you to debate 'D' Plane. This is not intuition or instinct, its a physical action that can be explained. You seem to have a Luddite attitude to it. If you have a problem understanding exactly what forces create ball flight then just ask and I will try my best to educate you. If you just want to dismiss this and use the argument that it's some kind of instinct then I despair at the thought that you make people pay to be confused.

 

[Patrick57]

If you teach clubface direction creating sidespin and swingpath creating initial direction, most of your students must be ignoring or misunderstanding your instructions then.

No they work out the angles with a thing called touch. Its difficult to curve a ball abck to the middle of the fairway if you start it on the wrong path. Now if you are going to use silly face angles then you could argue that the face is more improtant than path but that's not my experience. I aim at the side of the fairway and curve the ball back with sufficient face conditions.

Ah! So its a black art.

If you consider simple motor skills to be a black art then, yes!