I believe the Grid, as Tom demonstrates in videos, and also Rob Cheney, is something a lot of people overlook because it's appears as more of an analysis exercise vs a swing oriented session. However, the cool thing about the grid is it provides a foundation from which to determine if club head path relative to the ball position can create fades, draws, etc. For example, if someone places the ball forward and still hits some variation of a draw/hook, then the club head path off line due to some issue, or set of issues. The reason is because the laws of physics and geometry, if not impeded with manual manipulation, should produce hooks, to draws, to straight, to fades, to slices based upon the ball position on the grid with an inside-out club head path as Tom demonstrates.
I know guys who have played golf for 30+ years. When I show them the grid, they are amazed to learn how ball position at address creates a fade or draw bias. By not understanding the grid, there's no doubt these folks chased a lot of "fixes" that didn't fix anything, or made things worse. Many guys see the static position of the face at impact and therefore believe an open face creates a slice, and a closed face creates a hook. The part they miss is the arc of the club head path relative to face position.
The other day a guy told me about how Nicklaus hit a fade. He said Jack lined up to the left of the target, aimed the club face at the target, and then swung along his toe line. He said "the face was open at impact". The grid tells us the opposite is true, or the face was slightly closing relative to the arc of the clubhead path which imparted left to right spin.
I suggest experimenting with the grid to hit fades (ball forward), draws (ball back), or straighter shots (ball at the inside of the lead heel). If it's difficult to hit these shots with reasonable consistently, then the swing path is either too far in-to-out or excessively out to in, or something else is wrong.
Part of the challenge is getting used to moving the ball forward and back in the stance if someone is used to playing the ball mostly up or back. As a note, Hogan and Nicklaus believed it was best to play all shots (ball) off the inside of the lead heel and only move the trail foot back as the clubs got longer. They really liked a consistent low point. Sometimes I wonder if I should do the same because it does seem that moving the ball back and forth creates more variables. A majority of guys I see play the ball too far back in their stance, like they are trying to hit a massive hook if they were using the grid. They also have a lot of shaft lean at address. Those folks will find it more challenging to play the ball forward, or to the left of the inside of their lead heel.
So the fun part is figuring out what's going on:
I played the ball back as far back as possible and I still hit a fade/slice...why?
I played the ball far forward and I still hit a straight or draw shot...why?
I played the ball off my lead heel and sliced the ball when it should go straight...why?
After using the grid I'm finding I hit thinner shots as I move the ball forward...why?
In my particular case I found my position away from the ball at address played a key role in getting the grid to "work" much better. I was too far away from the ball which created an excessively in to out swing. Plus, when working with the grid, a must have is alignment sticks and balls lined up on the outside of the alignment sticks, lined up from back to front such that when you position a ball to hit in your stance you can see how many balls back or forward on the grid. The other must have is a consistent address position away from the ball. A variation of one inch can change the club path to throw off the results. I suggest 100 shots from a what feels like a very close to the ball position, then 100 from an inch back, then another 100 from another inch back. You may find you're too far away, or too close to the ball, and you then may find your bottom point changes for the better.
I really think working the grid is by far the best form of practice. It's not about hitting great shots, and there's no pressure on the range, and experimentation is key to a far better understanding the golf swing. And the best thing is the grid "doesn't lie" when used correctly.
@Russell Hogue, PhD - I'm not arguing or disagreeing with your analysis, LOL! I'm only comparing "textbook" S&T instruction on the attachments and their relation to shot-shaping with your commentary on the deployment of a strong grip for hitting push-draws. Also, for some folks what appears to be a "strong" 3- to 4-knuckle lead hand grip is actually consistent with the way their hand is naturally oriented, essentially making it more of a "neutral" grip for them. For others, they need to actively rotate the hands to a strong position in order to mask a swing flaw or otherwise produce the desired ball flight. Anyway - no debate, only dialogue.
@GolfLivesMatter - As I've conveyed in some recent threads, the "Nicklaus Fade" is also mentioned as a viable option in the S&T system. Please refer to page 124 of your textbook.
Class dismissed. Now get out there and play as @Patrick Anlauf suggests!