Tracer Golf Disappoints & On Using Both Arms

It may be that not being in perfect position with regards to my shoulder angle in the setup has invalidated many of my observations since I began hitting balls again at Tracer Golf this year.

I had been swinging with a right-arm only action before I made the setup discovery, and since then, I can’t help but say, while I work on the Post-Modern model, that both arms are in play.

Of course, it would be easy to simply say that since both arm are attached to the shoulders, if you’re swinging with one arm, you’re swinging with the other.

However, because most people focus on one arm or the other when swinging, I conducted an experiment.

I’ve been discussing the Dunaway swing model with the gentleman who sent me the last known video clips of the M.D. swinging:

… and while I earlier called it the most right-dominant swing action you will see, it could be in the eyes of the beholder, because I conducted an experiment in seeing if I could swing in the above manner while focusing on the left arm and side only, as if I hadn’t made the change from a left-dominant golf swing.

Turns out, a left-arm dominant swinger could likely swing in the exact manner seen above, or else it’s just the model similar to this that I’m currently working on.

Now that I’m in the correct position shoulder-wise in the setup, and that I’ve spent an entire session just swinging in the Classic model (yesterday), I think I’ll give the Post-Modern another shot next session.

Tracer Golf Gets An “F” Grade For Metrics

On that note, I have given up on Tracer Golf’s launch monitor. I don’t trust anything about it other than perhaps the line of flight.

You’ve seen that even with horrible metrics, I was able to drive a ball nine years ago over 300 yards with 113 mph club and 170 mph ball speed:

Take note of the back spin on the bottom left – 2448 rpm with a negative Attack Angle of 2.6 degrees, and still a 294 carry with 27 yards of run out.

Even with a negative Attack Angle, I was able with a 7.5 degree Rocketballz driver to keep the back spin below 2500.

Now, I’m to believe this nonsense:

Before I say anything, these balls were nearly perfectly struck, with R Side Spins of less than 300 rpm, and I missed the center line by 1 and 5.5 yards.

If those numbers are to be trusted, that is.

So, first I’m to believe that a 6 degree lofted driver could produce Launch Angles of 14.7 and 16.3, which would be a massive upward “home-run” swing type of contact, and that hitting up on the ball so drastically would produce back spins over 3600 and 4050 rpm.

Absolutely absurd.

Not to mention, I kept close watch on the spin and launch angle numbers with regards to the club and ball speeds and sure enough, the higher my club and ball speeds, the higher the launch angles and back spin numbers given.

Without fail.

So, someone needs to modify the Algo on this particular launch monitor quick fast, because these numbers are goofy.

It was so bad that, near the end of the session, I was just teeing up balls and guessing what the club and ball speeds would be given based on the trajectory and carry distances on the screen while the balls were flying.

Something like, “Oh, I absolutely tagged that one… nice, high trajectory… aaaaand it lands at 270 yards, I’m going to guess 120-180…”

And of course, it would be something like 119-178.  If it carried a little longer, raise the speeds by a couple of mph, and so on.

So, the harder I hit it, the higher the trajectory, the higher the back spin, and the more ridiculous the carry and run out numbers.

It would literally take a 190 mph ball speed number to carry the ball 300 yards on this thing:

The rare times I’ve been able to register a reasonable Launch Angle with high club and ball speeds, but in the real world, the above club and ball speeds & a positive launch angle, with a 6 degree lofted driver – that ball is gone, not just carrying 300 and running 7.

So, I’m officially out.

It looks like I’ll just be using the facility to work on getting used to the new alignment and of course, if the line metrics are OK, to work on tighter dispersion.

I do think the line metrics are OK, as perhaps the speeds – it’s an overhead camera and the video screen gives you the slo-mo video of impact and initial ball line, so if anything is close to correct, I would hope they are close.

I don’t even buy the club and ball speeds, to be perfectly honest – I think they’re high, even though I have certainly picked up club and ball speed over my speeds in recent years with the technical work on the swing and how easy it feels to swing the club compared to before.

Plus, this week I split two balls clean in half on impact, although they are heavily used balls, which is why I only hit the shiny, new-looking ones.

Still, even if the speed numbers are valid, I’m throwing out everything else.

I don’t really obsess about club and ball speeds anyways because, as I’ve shown, you can drive the ball over 300 yards with less than 120 mph and 170 mph club and ball speeds provided you get the right impact conditions:

I always say that if you want to drive the ball longer than you do, without even raising your club and ball speeds, you can do so and by dramatic degrees just by improving your Attack Angle, Launch Angle and Spin numbers.

Then, when you have a decent swing going, you can start trying to increase club and ball speeds.

The advantage to doing it that way is that if you’re swinging with a mechanically-sound model and getting good impact numbers, you can then work on increasing speed without the usual fear of incurring injuries.

I came to this research the opposite way, ironically – I could get a ball out 325 yards with a strong 3 wood (13 degrees) before I began my research and my obsession was not on distance but my inability to hit balls consistently and accurately.

More to come.