DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**jinnsamys** · 07-15-2010, 10:21 PM

JP - Isn't opening up a 52 not too different from just hitting a 60-64 wedge? I understand your trick there, and it's akin to hitting a flop/bunker shot, but I'm not want to aim that way......It feels very imprecise to me. I'm definitely not as practiced with that type of shot as I can hit it, but the times I do mess it up, it's very......slicey.

From a loft perspective it's exactly the same thing.

But your second sentence sums it up; it's all in what you're comfortable with. As I said, I grew up with an open stance approach to golf and when I'm about fifty yards away, my belt buckle is basically facing the target at address and I'm swinging more or less across the ball.

I myself tried to play an entire season with a "modern" setup; a square stance and only varying loft, swing length and ball position, just to see if it might make a difference in my game and even though I stayed with it for an entire season, I simply could not get used to that setup. To me, it took all of the feel out of my game and everything became focused on mechanics.

I understand perfectly why a square setup is advocated and I also understand the reason for carrying extra wedges all the way down to a 60 (which I used for that year), but I found myself thinking too much about clubhead speed and loft rather than focusing on my target and I completely lost my touch.

The open-stanced setup is just natural to me and I guess I've sort of learned the nuances of that setup and so I went back to it after that year and I've never looked back. To me, it's more intuitive to just open the clubface and the stance than it is to try to calibrate a backswing and match a loft to it.

To each his own.

-JP

07-15-2010, 10:21 PM	#9
jinnsamys Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 418 Senior Member	JP - Isn't opening up a 52 not too different from just hitting a 60-64 wedge? I understand your trick there, and it's akin to hitting a flop/bunker shot, but I'm not want to aim that way......It feels very imprecise to me. I'm definitely not as practiced with that type of shot as I can hit it, but the times I do mess it up, it's very......slicey. From a loft perspective it's exactly the same thing. But your second sentence sums it up; it's all in what you're comfortable with. As I said, I grew up with an open stance approach to golf and when I'm about fifty yards away, my belt buckle is basically facing the target at address and I'm swinging more or less across the ball. I myself tried to play an entire season with a "modern" setup; a square stance and only varying loft, swing length and ball position, just to see if it might make a difference in my game and even though I stayed with it for an entire season, I simply could not get used to that setup. To me, it took all of the feel out of my game and everything became focused on mechanics. I understand perfectly why a square setup is advocated and I also understand the reason for carrying extra wedges all the way down to a 60 (which I used for that year), but I found myself thinking too much about clubhead speed and loft rather than focusing on my target and I completely lost my touch. The open-stanced setup is just natural to me and I guess I've sort of learned the nuances of that setup and so I went back to it after that year and I've never looked back. To me, it's more intuitive to just open the clubface and the stance than it is to try to calibrate a backswing and match a loft to it. To each his own. -JP
	Quote