Wedges: Conforming vs. Non-Conforming Grooves

Are the new grooves capable of producing as much spin as our old beloved square (and now non-conforming) grooves? Could the hoopla surrounding the 2010 groove rule have been much ado about nothing?

It's certainly worth looking into.

We had two golf professionals test new conforming grooves against the older square grooves, and the results suggest that, from fairway lies, grooves actually don't make a heck of a lot of difference!

Test Objective and Conditions

Here is what was tested and how we went about it:

For this test our objective was to determine what, if any significant, difference exists between the current USGA legal C-C (condition of competition) grooves and the old (non-conforming) square grooves from fairway lies.

Our test conditions were as follows:

• We used two almost brand new 56 degree clubs with near identical specs. The difference between the two was that one had C-C grooves and the other had square grooves.
• Two golf professionals hit 15 shots each from 3 different distances with each club. Data from the best 12 shots (24 shots per distance) was used for the calculations.
• The measured distances were 25, 50 and 75 yards and the objective was to carry the ball to that distance.
• All shots were hit with premium golf balls except the shots hit from deep rough.
• All shots were hit from a tight mat so as to limit outside factors interfering with friction between the face and the ball.
• As a point of interest each tester also captured data on five 50 yard shots from the rough with each club.
• The Results

Observations & Analysis

There were no noticeable differences between the two types of groove and both testers reported not being able to tell the difference between the two clubs in how the ball reacted off the club face.

For the shots out the rough we hit from very poor lies in thick Bermuda and the golf ball was coming out and knuckle-balling through the air. You could clearly see the ball change direction in mid flight. I don't believe there are any grooves out there that could significantly impact the flight of the ball from these types of lies.

I do believe that when tested in a strictly controlled laboratory type environment, and with a much larger sample size square grooves might show that they spin the ball marginally more than the current C-C grooves. However, our tests indicate that the difference might be so minute that not even golf professionals are able to identify a difference.

A side note to keep in mind is that in order to hit chip and pitch shots that end up consistently close to the hole we don't need maximum spin, we just need enough spin.

Whatever grooves you're currently using, as long as they're clean and not worn down will be able to get the job done.

WRIST TO FLOOR MEASUREMENT FOR LENGTH

From the Lab – Is Longer Really Longer?

Getting more distance of the tee is easy right?

Getting more distance off the tee is easy right?  Well, golf companies sure would like you to believe that...they have us feeling as if the equation is as simple as...longer drivers = longer drives.   Not so fast cowboy! As recently as the early-90s, most standard off-the-rack drivers were 43" - 43.5".  That number has since jumped up to around 46".  But, remember humans don't evolve that quickly...we aren't getting taller but clubs sure are getting longer.

So the question we wanted to answer for everyone ..."Is Longer Really Longer?"

A Sanity Check

(Written By: GolfSpy T) If you've ever read anything Tom Wishon has written about driver length, or spoken to your local fitter about the topic, there's a curious statistic that you've probably encountered.

Since the mid 2000's, the average driver length on the PGA Tour has held steady at 44½".

Think about that for a second. The very best players in the world, guys who hit the sweet spot on their driver as easily as most of us would hit water after falling from a cruise ship, guys who routinely drive the ball to distances that some reading this would need two swings to achieve are playing drivers upwards of 1.5" shorter than what most of the rest of us have in our bags right now.

Last season (2010) the majority of drivers we received for testing were outfitted stock with 46" shafts. While there were exceptions, only one driver we've ever received for testing was shorter than 45.5" (Titleist), and that was more than countered by another that actually measured in at 46.5"!

Somewhat surprising considering the distance race the big OEMs are engaged in; for 2011 - and from what we've seen from the 2012 lineups - many OEMs have backed off driver length every so slightly (we're seeing more 45.75" than 46" shafts), but I think most would agree overall shaft lengths are at historic highs. As you'll see below, many golfers custom order clubs well above stock lengths. What they probably haven't considered is that in all likelihood, their games are suffering for it.

All of this begs the question; Are the Pros shorting themselves distance by playing shorter drivers, or have the rest of us, driven by the compulsive need to gain the fabled10-15 More Yards, completely lost our minds?

How Did We Get Here...and Who Can We Blame

While it would be easy to blame the OEMs for the never-ending demand for more distance, the reality is, while the golf companies perhaps give us tools we don't need, they do so only because we asked for them. It's our prevailing willingness to accept the flawed equation that shaft length = clubhead speed = ball speed = distance ...ALWAYS that has most of us hitting out of the rough much more often than we should be.

To get a better idea of how pervasive the "longer than the Pros play" driver phenomenon actually is, we asked TaylorMade to provide us with some details about their custom orders from the last several years. While it's not surprising that the most popular order, even among custom orders, is for standard length (45.75"-46") drivers, what I found most shocking is that TaylorMade receives orders for drivers 2" longer than standard at a rate of 2 to 1 over drivers 2" shorter than standard.

And while their most popular non-standard order is for drivers cut 1" below standard length, TaylorMade still ships 2 drivers at 1" above spec for ever 3 1" below. In fact, over the last 3-4 years, TaylorMade has received nearly as many orders for drivers longer than standard length as they have for drivers shorter than standard.

When you examine these orders, what you find isn't a case of the OEMs pushing longer drivers on consumers; you can make the argument that it's the consumer demanding longer shafts from the golf companies.

To get some perspective on the madness, we asked seasoned club-fitter and Director of the New York Golf Center's Custom Shop, Josh Chervokas what he generally recommends to his customers. Here's what he had to say:

"I rarely fit anyone into a driver over 45" and often I build them shorter, I just did a 43" build. People want to hit it farther but what we see in fittings is that clubspeed is useless if it cannot be turned into ballspeed. People have a harder time centering the ball in the middle of the club and so they get lower and lower smashfactors as the club gets longer".

The suggestion is that the average golfer would actually benefit more from playing a shorter driver. We've heard this same sentiment echoed time and time again from basically every fitter we've ever come in contact with. And yet despite a chorus of respected professionals telling us otherwise, the overwhelming majority of golfers are still bagging drivers longer than most club fitters would recommend.

While golfers should probably shoulder the bulk of the responsibility, the OEM's aren't completely without blame. When you look at current product lineups, it's actually the high-MOI, ultra-forgiving clubs...the ones designed for high handicap golfers (guys who struggle to produce consistent swings) that come stock with the longer (46" shafts). High handicap golfers have basically been conditioned to believe that longer drivers provide more distance, and ultimately fit them better. Clubs designed for better players often come stock with slightly to significantly shorter shafts. What's up with that?

On the off chance that Tom Wishon, Josh Chervokas, and basically everyone else who earns a living fitting golfers for their clubs might be wrong, we decided to put together our own little test to determine how much is gained (accuracy), and how much is lost (distance) when golfers are willing to trim a couple of inches off the big dog.

The Test Equipment

Shafts

To provide the shafts for our tests we contacted UST-Mamiya. They agreed to provided us with 4 of their new Proforce VTS Shafts (2 - 65 regular flex, 2 - 75 Stiff flex). Though we didn't undergo a full shaft fitting for this test, we were very interested to get our hands on the new VTS, which introduces what UST-Mamiya calls 3D Fitting.

While shaft torque has largely been an after-thought the Proforce VTS lineup includes torque as a key part of the fitting equation. Every weight/flex combination in the VTS lineup is offered with 3 distinct torque options. No longer does heavier and stiffer necessarily mean lower torque.

As it turns out, the pearly white color scheme of the VTS also looks positively sick with the head we chose for this test.

HEADS

To provide the heads for our testing we reached out to TaylorMade to see if they'd be interested in participating. Since our test involves multiple shafts (multiple flexes, multiple lengths) it was important for the sake of consistency, simplicity, and expedience that we were able to quickly swap out shafts while using the same head for every shaft. TaylorMade's R11 heads coupled with their Flight Control Tips matched that need perfectly.

While we sometimes find the marketing a bit over the top, TaylorMade's implementation of adjustability is almost without argument the most complete and user friendly on the market today. The simple fact that TaylorMade makes its FCT tips available for purchase by the consumer was a substantial factor in why we chose to approach TaylorMade first. Quite frankly we think every OEM should make their adapters available to the consumer. As it stands right now, TaylorMade is the only big OEM that actually does.

We had planned to have our resident club builder help us out with shaft assembly, but when the team at TaylorMade volunteered their Tour Department to handle the assembly, we were happy to take them up on the offer.

At our requests, shafts in each flex were cut to 43.75" and 45.75" inches. We asked that each pair be frequency matched, and that the neutral bend point of each shaft be aligned to the standard/neutral position of the Flight Control tip.

The Testing Process

To test distance and accuracy, each of 6 testers was asked to hit a series of 12 shots with both the 43.75" and 45.75" drivers. In a perfect world testing would have been blind to eliminate any possibility of the placebo effect, however; let's be honest...you'd have to be some special kind of oblivious not to notice a 2" difference in driver length.

To balance things out as much as we possibly could, half of testers hit the longer driver first, the other half hit the shorter first.

After the 12 shot sequence was completed, impact tape was placed on the driver face, and testers were asked to hit an additional 5 shots with each shaft so we could observe quality of impact.

Calculating Averages

To calculate our averages and develop other conclusions we selected the best 10 of 12 shots from each tester at both driver lengths. Best was determined by calculating a total point value based on a simple formula of total distance minus yardage from the center line. This is the same equation we use to determine driver performance within our standard review process.

The Data

As we do with all of our reviews, we've provided all the pertinent details of our tests. The "Group Performance" tab contains the Virtual Driving Range which shows the details for each of the 10 shots we recorded for each tester at each length.

• Solid circles represent shots taken with the 45.75" driver.
• Hollow circles represent shots taken with the 43.75" driver.
• Each shot is color coded by golfer.
• We have provided the capability for you to filter shots by both driver length and golfer.
• Hovering over any point on the Virtual Range reveals every detail about that shot.
• The Group Performance tab also shows group averages for Distance and Accuracy, Clubhead* and Ball speed, Spin, and Launch Conditions.
• Clicking on the Individual Performance Tab reveals similar information similar to the graphs on the Performance tab. Sortable by golfer and shaft length, this tab provides a head to head comparison of key shot data at the individual tester level.

Interpreting the Data

>> Carry Distance

With the 45.75" shaft, our testers averaged 233.75 yards of carry compared to 232.35 yards with the 43.75" shaft. That's a difference of only 1.4 yards.

Examining the data on an individual level shows that 5 of 6 testers, as one might expect, produced more carry with the longer driver. However, of those 5, only 2 were more than 4 yards longer with the 45.75" driver. Each of the remaining 3 produced less than 2 yards more carry on average. Our senior tester carried the ball an average of 4.9 yards farther with the shorter club.

>> Total Distance

With the 45.75" shaft our testers averaged 247.65 yards compared to 247.15 yards with the 43.75" shaft, leaving a total distance gap of only ½ yard.

Looking at the data on an individual level reveals some interesting details. Two of our testers proved to be longer with the 45.75" driver (3.9 and 5.7 yards). One tester achieved an identical average with both clubs. The remaining 3 testers actually produced greater average total distances with the shorter (43.75") shaft.

Our senior tester showed the greatest discrepancy; his distance actually increased by 5.7 yards with the shorter driver. The other 2 testers posted more modest gains of .1 and .8 yards.

To better understand how distance numbers can remain relatively consistent despite a 2" discrepency in shaft length we need to examine the key factor in determining distance; ball speed.

As it turns out, some testers produced better ball speeds with the shorter driver, while others maintained higher numbers with the longer driver. Looking at the averages, our testers as a whole produced a relatively insignificant .55 MPH more ball speed with the longer driver.

Those 2 testers that showed higher ball speed with the longer driver produced greater clubhead speed. Most importantly, they were able to be efficient enough in doing so. Individually their ball speed with the 45.75" driver was 2.8 and 3.0 MPH faster than what they produced with the shorter driver.

For each of our other 4 golfers, however; the greatest average ball speeds were achieved using the shorter driver. In each case the speed gains were more modest (1.8 MPH, 1.1 MPH, .5 MPH, and .1 MPH), but they are increases none the less.

"People who do not have the benefit of launch monitor data usually assume that more clubspeed equals more ballspeed. Additionally, with people who swing under 100 we often see a longer club actually slows their ss down instead of increasing it". - Josh Chervokas, Director New York Golf Center Custom Shop

The argument for playing a shorter driver has never been about distance. The suggestion as I've always interpreted it is that a shorter driver will be more accurate, and because you're better able to control the club, and find the sweet spot, more often, average total distance could actually increase. For us, the argument for a shorter driver is really an argument for accuracy, and that's information we were most interested in obtaining.

>> ACCURACY

As a group our testers were 4.63 yards (28% closer) to the target line with the 43.75" driver. With the longer shaft, our testers averaged 16.6 yards offline, compared to only 11.97 yards offline with the 43.75" driver. Looking at testers individually reveals more detail. Our senior tester actually showed the smallest accuracy gain (.1 yards). This isn't altogether surprising considering that his total yardage was significantly shorter than any other tester.

While a 2nd tester showed a relatively most improvement of 1.5 yards, the remaining testers showed accuracy improvements of between 4.9 and 10.4 yards or (63% more accurate)!

As expected, the 43.75" driver proved to be substantially more accurate. And while I wouldn't expect that most golfers would see a 63% improvement, moving the ball an average of nearly 5 yards closer to the center line is almost certainly going to save a couple of strokes over the course of an average round.

So...Should You Cut 2" Off Your Driver?

Well, our data (and the years of experience from reputable club fitters all over the globe) suggest that the majority of golfers (yes you too) would absolutely benefit from playing a shorter-shafted driver. Not only will accuracy increase (our tests show by a whopping 28%), our numbers also suggest that any distance loss would be very minimal, and there's a chance you could actually increase your total distance as well.

Whether cutting 2" is the optimal number for you is impossible to say. Maybe for you it's .5", maybe it's 2.5". Maybe stock is perfect. These are questions that a knowledgeable club fitter can help you answer and is yet another example of why it's absolutely imperative that every golfer serious about improving his game be custom fit for his equipment.

Now, before you decide, make sure you're fully aware of the effect the change will have on your driver's swing weight. Cutting 2" off the shaft will dramatically lower the swing weight of your driver (with our sample head, the difference was about 7 swing weight points). Some golfers will actually find they prefer the lighter feel, some may find the club harder to control, and many probably won't care one way or the other(especially if you become 28% more accurate). If you have a head like the TaylorMade R11 you can easily change the moveable weights to bring your driver back up to a comfortable level. Clubs like Titleist's 910 have weight ports that can also be adjusted (by the factory). And of course, there's always good old fashioned lead tape. Be advised, adding additional weight to the head will soften the flex (~1 CPM per gram of weight added).

Swing Weight issues aside, the raw data says you probably should cut some length of your driver, but few things in this game are absolute, and there are certainly some mitigating factors. Not surprisingly, it was largely our mid-to-high handicap golfers who showed the most improvement with the shorter shaft. Though not true of our lowest handicap golfer, 2 of our single (or near single) digit handicappers actually lost upwards of 5 yards with the shorter shaft. We also observed that golfers with a flatter swing plane also showed less benefit from the shorter shaft.

TWGT DRIVER & FAIRWAY WOOD MEASUREMENTS. A Technical discussion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VexY0XJ-J4

Tell me about TWGT's NEW 2015 HM SERIES WEDGES.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3rgUCDITIU

Tell me about TWGT's NEW 590 DIH DRIVING IRONS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csQ51B-_Du0

Tell me about the NEW TWGT 919 THI DRIVER.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzPoLFiJ29Q

Heads with slots vs. heads with variable face thickness design. Which is more effective regarding COR?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj-m6sIQuGc&feature=youtu.be

Wishon: “What shaft flex should I use?” By Tom Wishon

Let’s start our discussion by making one thing clear. There’s a lot to fitting the flex and bend profile of shafts — enough to write a whole book.

In asking me to write about the fitting of each of the key specs of golf clubs, GolfWRX in essence gives me a “1-pound bag” each week to offer information about each fitting spec. Covering everything about shaft flex and bend profile would be like trying to put 100 pounds of stuff into that 1-pound bag!

For those who are really into knowing as much as possible about flex and bend profile fitting in shafts, I recommend you read the three-part series I wrote for GolfWRX some time ago.

For those who may not be that familiar with fitting for FLEX and for BEND PROFILE, fitting for the flex is a matter of finding a shaft with the correct swing speed rating for the golfer’s clubhead speed AND transition/tempo, while fitting the bend profile involves matching the tip stiffness design of the shaft to the golfer’s point of release.

Of all the points that an experienced club fitter has to evaluate to do a good job in the fitting of flex and bend profile, the most important one is to have accurate shaft bend profile measurement and swing speed rating data on the largest possible population of shaft models and flexes. This is because there are no standards for the flex of a shaft in the golf industry. Each golf company and shaft company is free to decide how stiff any of their letter flex codes on their shafts are to be. As such, the R flex from one company can be of the same stiffness as the S flex from another company or the A flex from a third.

Without access to a large data base of actual stiffness and swing speed rating measurements for shafts to be able to clearly know and compare the stiffness design of shafts, fitting for flex and bend profile is a matter of time consuming and frustrating trial and error. Period.

The following bend profile data graph is simply offered as an example of the type of shaft stiffness measurement data required to take shaft flex/bend profile fitting from a trial-and-error process to one of clear, succinct organization. This example graph will also prove the point about the confusion in flex due to a lack of standards in the industry.

Each of the five shafts in this graph are labeled and sold as S-flex shafts. The stiffness measurements represent a range of three full flexes, or stated another way, represent a swing speed rating difference of more than 30 mph.

With such data, the flex and bend profile fitting analysis follows these procedures:

1. Accurately measure the average clubhead speed of the golfer with a driver and a 5- or 6-iron.

2. Observe the golfer’s downswing transition and tempo and evaluate it as either:

A) Smooth/gradual/passive with little sense of acceleration.

B) Average, with some sense of force and acceleration from the transition through the downswing.

C) Forceful and aggressive, as if the golfer cannot wait to pour on the coals to accelerate the club to impact.

In simple terms, the club fitter is observing whether the golfer is more of a swinger (A), a definite hitter (C) or somewhere in between (B) with his downswing transition and tempo.

3. Observe the golfer’s point of release (i.e. the point at which the golfer begins to unhinge the wrist-cock angle on the downswing as either (1) early, (2) midway, (3) later, or (4) very late. Another way to evaluate this is to reference the point of starting the release to the hour numbers on a clock while facing the golfer.  

• (1) Early: 11 to 9:30
• (2) Midway: 9:30 to 8:30
• (3 Later: 8:30 to 7:30
• (4) Very Late: 7:30 to 6:30

4. Choose shafts of the correct weight (see my story on shaft weight/total weight), which have a swing speed rating that matches to the golfer’s clubhead speed and an adjustment for their transition and tempo evaluation with a tip stiffness design that matches the golfer’s point of release.

We will use an example of a golfer with a 100 mph driver clubhead speed. The up or down adjustment in the swing speed rating and tip stiffness recommendation is the same for all other clubhead speeds.

The above procedures are done to give the club fitter A STARTING POINT for shaft flex and bend profile fitting. Suitable candidate shafts are chosen by the club fitter from which the test club hitting process begins.

Again, because the best club fitters are superb multi-taskers during the test club sessions for flex and bend profile, the club fitter is also testing for shaft weight, swing weight and continually asking the golfer for feedback with each change of head weight or shaft.

Without question, the matter of ADVANCED PLAYER SHAFT FLEX/BEND PROFILE FITTING must also include an evaluation of the golfer’s preference for feel elements and shot shape/performance related to the flex/bend profile. Experienced club fitters will ask the golfer to provide the names of shafts the golfer has used, along with the golfer’s feedback of too high, too low, good flight, too stiff feeling, too flexible feeling, just right feeling, etc.

With this information, the club fitter will access his database of shaft stiffness measurements to study as many of the golfer’s previous shafts and compare the stiffness measurements. Through this process, the club fitter will be able to know what the actual stiffness measurements are for each shaft model feedback opinion from the golfer. From this the club fitter will have a very clear picture of what the stiffness measurements need to be to best satisfy the golfer’s feel and shot shape preferences.

Again, with the right database of shaft stiffness measurements, the process of flex and bend profile fitting becomes a very organized, very orderly, and very accurate process. Without such information, shaft flex and bend profile fitting will forever be a matter of trial and error.

Related

Want to hit longer drives? Focus on trajectory.

“I need more distance!” golfers always tell me.

Sadly, with golf courses getting longer and agronomy improving, gone are the days of golf courses with fairways that play firm and fast. Players prefer to see lush green grass, which requires a high density of grass and a lot of water. That makes firm conditions a rarity.

These changes have made it very important for average golfers to increase their distance off the tee. The issue now becomes choosing between carry and roll. 

In order to achieve more distance, should golfers:

• Carry the ball farther?
• Hit drives with a more penetrating trajectory that will roll out more?

Let’s look at two drives I hit on Trackman — one low-launching, and one high-launching drive.

Low Shot

• Height: 46 feet
• Carry: 179.7 yards
• Total Distance: 218.7 yards
• Swing Speed: 92.9 mph

High Shot

• Height: 98 feet
• Carry: 205.3 yards
• Total Distance: 220.2 yards
• Swing Speed: 91.4 yards

For the low shot, I swung the club 92.9 mph. For the higher shot, I actually swung slower (91.4 mph), but I carried the shot 25.6 yards farther. Notice, however, that both shots rolled out to nearly the same distance — roughly 220 yards. Those total distance results are from Trackman, which simulates roll on a PGA Tour fairway.

Most of us don’t play on PGA Tour fairways; our course conditions change from day to day. If that describes you, here are three things for to remember about driver trajectory.

1. Higher ball flights are best when you wants to CARRY the ball as far as possible.
2. Medium ball flights are best when you want to carry the ball farther, but still have it roll out nicely.
3. Low ball flights are never the best option in softer conditions, as they tend to land well short of higher-flying drive and stop quicker.

From my experience, most average players tend to hit the ball TOO LOW, relying on roll to make up for their lack of carry.

Lower ball flights are OK when the conditions are faster, the wind is blowing, or you have a tendency to spin the ball too much with the driver. Most of the time, however, a higher ball flight will provide the best results.

Spray your driver face with Dr. Scholl’s Foot Spray to audit your impact position.

If you want to carry the ball farther, and most golfers do, you MUST contact the ball in the high center of the club face with your driver. If you don’t, your drives will spin too much and that will reduce carry distance.

By contacting your drives high on the face, you are using what is called “Gear Effect” to your advantage. On shots hit above the a club’s sweet spot, gear effect causes the ball to launch higher and with less spin, one of the main keys to hitting longer drives.

I encourage you to experiment with various trajectories until you find the one’e that optimal for the course conditions you play most often.

Wishon: What swing weight should your clubs be?

In a previous article, I discussed the fitting of the shaft weight and mentioned that a discussion about the weight of a golf club should not only include shaft weight, but swing weight as well.

The reason? These two elements are so interrelated, and so important when it comes to helping golfers find clubs that will give them their best tempo, timing, rhythm and of course, their best shots.

Before I dig in any further, let’s clarify two things:

• Shaft weight is by far the biggest contributor to the total weight of the club, which is simply a measurement of how heavy a club is.
• Swing weight is the measurement of the head-weight feel of a club. A club with a heavier swing weight will feel heavier to a golfer than one with a lighter swing weight, because its balance point is closer to the club head.

As with the fitting of the shaft weight, the club fitter also has to evaluate the golfer’s transition force, tempo, strength and any pre-determined feel preference the golfer may have when making the decision of what the swing weight of the clubs needs to be.

Both elements — shaft weight and swing weight — are influenced by the same golfer swing characteristics, which is why good club fitters will fit for both the shaft weight and the swing weight at the same time in the fitting process.

In the actual fitting process, however, the shaft weight comes first. This is because the test clubs required to focus on the fitting of shaft weight and swing weight together have to first be assembled with a shaft that the club fitter deems suitable from his analysis.

Shaft flex and bend-profile design is also important, and I’ll cover that in my next article. It’s why good club fitters think about weight and flex/bend profile simultaneously in the fitting process —  they have to in order to come up with candidate shafts to use in the test club hitting sessions.

Once the club fitter determines a shaft with suitable weight and the best flex/bend profile characteristics for the golfer’s swing characteristics, the matter of fitting for the swing weight is done by having the golfer hit shots with a test club while adding lead tape to the club head. Shot shape, on-center hit results, and certainly the feedback from the golfer are then assessed.

Usually, it goes like this. As the golfer hits shots with the test clubs, the fitter adds lead tape to the clubs heads — about two swing weight points at a time — while observing the ball flight and on-center hit performance.

The fitter is also asking the golfer questions such as:

• How does your swing tempo/timing feel?
• Do you sense that you are fighting any tendency to be too quick with your tempo?
• Do you sense that you have to make more of an effort to swing the club?
• Do you feel the presence of the club head during the swing enough?
• Do you feel that the head feels a little too light, too heavy, about right?

The club fitter has to find that point at which the golfer begins to sense either a little better feel or begin to feel that his swing tempo and timing is better for the weight feel of the test clubs. That really is the key of a successful total weight/swing weight fitting — when the golfer does not have to consciously think about his swing tempo and timing.

It just happens.  

And because the swing weight fitting process has to also include the flex/bend profile and weight of the shaft, the fitter knows that he will be switching between the different shafts he has evaluated as suitable for the golfer while he is also performing the “add a little weight at a time to the club head” evaluation to determine the best head weight feel for the golfer.

This is a perfect example of how experienced club fitters will “multi-task” to evaluate separate, but related specs in the fitting process, all at the same time. It’s why good club fitters are good and others are not when it comes to simultaneously evaluating each of these separate but very much related fitting elements.

The goal in the swing weight fitting is to get the golfer to a point where he reports that the club head is starting to feel a little bit too heavy, or the club is starting to require a little more effort to swing than the golfer would prefer. At that point, the club fitter removes a little of the head weight. Then a few more shots are hit to determine if the golfer still senses the head weight feel to be too much, or just right.

It is possible that the golfer never indicates a distinct, positive feel preference for the weight feel of the test club even when the head weight is brought back from a point of feeling too heavy for the golfer. When this happens, the good club fitters know that they need to test the golfer with a different weight shaft and go through the head weight fitting process all over again.

In my previous story, I offered some basic shaft weight fitting guidelines:

• Strong golfers/aggressive transitions/faster tempos = heavier shaft weights
• Weaker golfers/smooth transitions/smooth tempos = lighter shaft weights

These are guidelines that work for most golfers, but are not 100 percent set in stone for all golfers.

It is not uncommon for strong/aggressive transition/faster tempo golfers to end up being better fit into lighter shafts, but with a higher swing weight. While it certainly is less common for weaker/smooth transition/smooth tempo golfers to do better with a heavier shaft, it is not impossible.

This is why a very experienced club fitter can be worth his weight in gold. With experience come more situations in which the fitter encounters golfers who deviate from the guidelines.

Good clubfitters also realize that the interaction of shaft weight and swing weight is such that it is always possible to find strong/aggressive transition/faster tempo golfers who achieve their best tempo consistency with a lighter shaft, but with a higher swing weight to prevent the light shaft from making the clubs feel too light in some manner.

After all, there are a lot of tour players who play well with 60-to-65-gram shafts in their drivers and fairway woods. And a heavier head weight feel is how this can happen, even though logic may say that the player is too strong and forceful to be fit into such a lightweight shaft.

Sidebar: MOI Matching as an Alternative to Swing Weight Matched Clubs

Matching all clubs in a set to their MOI has become a viable alternative to swing weight matching for many golfers. MOI matching may also be thought of roughly as building the clubs in a set to progressively increase swing weights from long to short irons in the set.

Candidates for MOI matching over swing weight matching can be golfers who:

• Go in and out of consistency issues with the irons
• Suffer from occasional-to-frequent bouts of pulling short iron shots offline
• Sense less comfort and consistency with the short irons vs other irons in the set

For more information on MOI matching, visit: http://wishongolf.com/clubmakers/matching-golf-clubs-by-moi/

Sidebar: Don’t Get Trapped by a Specific Swing Weight

Remember, swing weight is NOT an actual measurement of weight as are grams, ounces or pounds. Swing weight is an arbitrary measurement of the relationship of weight in a golf club about the 14-inch fulcrum point on a swing weight scale.

When fitting swing weight, good club fitters really know that they are instead fitting for the head weight feel of the golf club. They are trying to find what head weight feel is going to bring about the best swing tempo and shot consistency for the golfer based on the length, shaft weight and grip weight of the clubs. Once that best head weight feel is found for the golfer, then the club fitter can perform a swing weight measurement to have as a guideline for the other clubs in the set, or as a baseline for taking the golfer into an MOI matched set.  

In short, the head weight feel of D2 in a club that is 45 inches with a 60-gram shaft and a 50-gram grip is not going to be the same head weight feel as D2 in a club that is 43.5 inches with an 80-gram shaft and 40-gram grip. Thus, golfers should not get locked into a particular swing weight when changing length, shaft weight, or grip weight but rather go through a new investigation into what head weight will bring about the best tempo and timing in the swing.  

Good club fitters know this, so once they choose the best length, shaft weight and grip preferred by the golfer, they fit for the best head weight feel and do not get locked into a specific swing weight.

What shaft weight should you play?

When discussing the manner of fitting the shaft weight and total weight of a golf club, the conversation should also include fitting the swing weight, or better stated, the head weight FEEL of the golf club at the same time. This is because the two “weights” of a golf club are very much interrelated in their effect on the fitting performance of golf clubs for each golfer.

In the interest of brevity, this segment will discuss the fitting of shaft weight and total weight, followed next by a conversation about swing weight/head weight feel fitting. So we’ll start with the meat and next week we’ll add the sauce to make it a more complete dish!

Fitting the golfer for the correct total weight and swing weight (head weight feel) is extremely important for enabling the golfer to achieve the highest level of shot consistency and swing repeatability. Too light or too heavy and the golfer struggles to maintain a consistent swing tempo, timing and rhythm. Match the weights of the clubs to the golfer’s transition force, tempo, rhythm and strength and a higher level of swing consistency happens, which also results in a greater on-center hit performance, better quality “misses” and fewer “off-the-world” shots.

All experienced clubfitters know when fitting the weight of the shaft that the total weight of the club is being fit to the golfer at the same time. This is because shaft weight is the No. 1 determinant of the total weight of the club. Yes, grip weight and head weight have an influence on total weight, but they aren’t as important as the effect of the weight of the shaft. In short, when the golfer needs a lighter or heavier total weight in the clubs, fitting the weight of the shaft is how that is done.

In fitting the golfer for the best shaft weight, experienced club fitters study the “force and strength” of the golfer and his swing. The more forceful and aggressive the transition move, the more quick and fast the swing tempo and the greater the strength of the golfer, the heavier the shaft weight should be to better match to these more powerful swing and golfer characteristics. Conversely, the smoother and more passive the transition, the smoother and more rhythmic the tempo and the weaker the golfer, the lighter the weight of the shafts and total weight should be.

Another way the good club fitters look at this matter of fitting the weights of the golf club is to understand that the total weight of the club is felt more on the backswing and the very beginning of the downswing while the head weight is detected and shows its influence on swing tempo consistency more from the beginning of the downswing to the release.

Without question, the golfer’s personal preference for the overall weight feel of his clubs takes precedence over any shaft weight recommendation done on the basis of strength, transition and tempo. Shaft weight fitting involves judgment by the club fitter based on experience from having fit many golfers and learning from what golfers of different strengths, transition forces, tempos and weight feel preferences preferred, along with what ended up performing the best for them.

As with any area involving judgment, it is always helpful to have a guideline as a starting point in the decision making process. The following chart can be used as a basic starting point in the shaft weight fitting process. As with so many parts of the fitting process, test clubs should be assembled with the shaft weight being recommended to be hit by the golfer to assist in making the final decision.

A starting point for shaft weight

Click the chart to enlarge it

In the next segment in the series on club fitting, we will finish the discussion of fitting the weights of the clubs by bringing in the co-important specification of head weight feel (i.e. swing weight or MOI).