Lowering spin rates??

So I'm a newby to all this new fangled monitors and electronics, have mercy on me :)

Swinging a BB Alpha 9' (set at 10') with stock OEM Fubuki 60g shaft, my spin rate was right around 3000, launch angle around 11, and ball speed around 155mph.

What can I do to get the spin rate down lower?

thank you sirs

The first thing you really need to do is get some impact tape (or equivalent) to find out where on the face contact is typically occurring. That, by itself, can make a big difference in both launch angle and spin.

[quote name='white03' timestamp='1404323490' post='9624375']
So I'm a newby to all this new fangled monitors and electronics, have mercy on me

Swinging a BB Alpha 9' (set at 10') with stock OEM Fubuki 60g shaft, my spin rate was right around 3000, launch angle around 11, and ball speed around 155mph.

What can I do to get the spin rate down lower?

thank you sirs
[/quote]

Read this - http://www.golfwrx.com/62891/the-practical-facts-about-spin-and-shaft-design/

Wow Tom...lotta info there!!!!!! Truthfully not sure I understand all of it. Interesting though that only Trackman and Flightscope give realistic spin numbers, I'll remember that. Also interesting that one shaft mare be less spin for one golfer and more spin for another (based on each persons differing swing characteristics), so my takeaway is that a shaft alone is not the answer to lowering spin. Seems from the charts (keeping swing speed constant), that angle of attack and launch angle have the most effect on spin and distance.

I was advised by the guy running the measuring system (not sure what measuring system it was, but as I was hitting into a net it could not have been a trackman or flightscope), that to increase distance I needed to increase my launch angle. He suggested the 10.5 driver with a 70g shaft. Would those changes seem to be going in the right direction?

This is NOT a argue or a disagreement to anything that Tom Wishon has been written about this, but there is one more subject to pay attention to, and thats impact spot and gear effects.

I hope Tom would chime in again and tell about his own finding here, but ive found impact spot to be the most important fitting parameter of them all in distance concerns. Tom have been advocating more "playable" driver lengths for as long as i can remember and i have followed his footsteps here, being half shrink and half club fitter to convince players about the fact that a shorter driver than off the rack would be a way better club for scoring, distance, and direction.

We have all seen "strange" launch and spin numbers, even from Trackman and Flightscope, but way to many dont understand how to judge those numbers because they did not record impact spot, and they dont know how gear effect on the club face works. Many of them who operates a Trackman or Flightscope dont even know how the machine does its measurements, so they dont really know what this "strange" numbers tells us, and what to do about that.

Most players knows that a impact heel side promotes a fade or slice, and a toe impact promotes a draw or hook, but when it comes to drivers we must also pay attention to the height on the face, and the gear effects who rules that axis.Look closely on this photo, it shows the club face measure by Trackman to 100 Mph.Trackman measure club speed at the very CENTER of the face, and club speed is 100 all the way on the RED line.

[attachment=2305725:Trackman Club head speed.JPG]

Players who dont understand their own best, will play a off the rack club who is way to long, and that means HEEL impact...look at ACTUAL Club speed against the heel side...Not beneficial since its lower than center, AND smash factor / possible ball speed is lower.

If we play a club a tad to the shorter side, its not only easier to pure it, we will also steal some club speed from a impact slightly against the toe side, but not as far out that PTR value drops, or we risk a hook.

Look at the photo again, now at the SMILEY, and the GREEN line
Ive placed the smile of the spot on the face where we can actually have HIGH LAUNCH - LOW SPIN, tanks to a bit higher loft above the center line of the face, and a bit longer distance from the club heads VCOG to the balls COG who gives a gear effect who eats spin.

Many players who look at a launch monitor, and see to high spin numbers should pay attention to IMPACT SPOT, and make sure its in the middle of the face, or slightly above. Any impact below will both reduce loft = lower launch, and ADD TONNS of spin.

Ive found a average of 2400 Rpm at the very center to be 4100 where the Blue oval and the red line is crossing below the center line heel side, but if we can impact the Smiley, spin drops to about 1800. So the same driver can make 1800 to 4200 rpm of spin, depending on impact spot, and that overrules any loft change possible, so DONT be afraid to get enough loft for your needed launch angle, just make sure Club length, Weight and Balance is made right so you can dial in the optimum impact spot, and stay in that zone.

IF PTR value is low and spin is high, GEAR EFFECTS is playing games with you and impact spot is the problem. NOT the shaft profile, unless it changes your swing and by that your impact spot.
If its a club issue, start by Length, Weight and Club Balance, and then tee height since those parameters are the most important for impact spot.

This is a problem with typical OEM fitting. Only those with respect for themselves and their customers will offer other shaft length than "standard" for fitting, and the same goes for weight and balance matching. No wonder folks is running wild in a jungle of shaft and think a "special shaft" might solve the problems made by a "walk over" for the 3 most important club specs of them all.

So Spin is mostly gear effects, only when impact spot is equal would a loft difference be visible in spin matters, so dont worry about loft, worry about impact spot, thats what makes the real difference to distance.

Thank you Howard, that is a very good discussion and I follow almost all of it...Stuart above also recommended using impact tape....and I started using it yesterday on the course. In order to get a realistic range of impacts, I'm going to use the tape for several rounds to see where the majority of my impacts are. No intent to brag, but as I'm a 2 handicap and because of what I feel at impact, I suspect my impacts will show a relatively consistent and relatively concise area, rather than just all over the face or a large deviation in impacts. That being said, and after what you write above, I am very curious now to see exactly where that consistent spot (or area) is .

Would you agree that for most low handicap golfers, our swing is what it is...in other words it would be difficult to change our swing in order to have a consistent effect on moving the impact spot 1/4 inch to the left (for instance). Thus I like your suggestion of shortening the club in order to gain more consistency in the impact spot, which would at least maximize to potential distance for each swing. I may experiment with shortening the club after I figure out where I am impacting the face.

Granted, impact spot has a direct correlation to the other parameters listed in the tables Tom had. In my question I was assuming a consistent impact spot, and I think in Tom's tables he was too. Based on your email above, without a consistent impact spot, any data collected would not be usable.

Thanks to everyone for taking your time to help me, hopefully this may be helpful to others as well. I've tried to explain my thoughts so they are understandable, but forgive me if I have not.

I would like to think that what ever someone is writhing, unless stated otherwise it means "all else equal", so when we say that adding static loft adds spin by low 200 for 1* at 80 Mph, and close to 300 rpm at PGA 112 mph, it demands the same impact spot, where the only difference is that static loft is 1* higher (or lower if we want lower spin)

That means loft is mostly a tweak for LAUNCH angle and descent angle, not spin, neither is the shaft, since a variable impact spot who is typical for the average golfer gives him different loft due to roll on the face, and by that a different launch. Because of gear effects, spin will be "all over the place" from stroke to stroke. Its a variable impact spot who causes the variables, NOT a "unstable" shaft who many players like to think it is.

Instead of using impact tape on the face, get a whiteboard pen and make a DOT in the ball you align against the sweet spot at address. It makes a smaller more precise mark.

Here is how you dial in club length and impact spot
Just follow the axis for each

[attachment=2305877:Smiley Dial in.JPG]

Howard,

I carry a marker pen in the Golf Bag.
Regularly tee off with balls marked with Red Ink.
It is a very simple ultra lo tech way to say yes or no to a fairway/driver.
All my drivers are 44/44.5
As a result of this, you get Funny Comments... like...
oh..your ball is in the middle of the fairway again....hmmmm
from other people with Stock Drivers!!!

[quote name='RogerinNewZealand' timestamp='1404494387' post='9637383']
Howard,

I carry a marker pen in the Golf Bag.
Regularly tee off with balls marked with Red Ink.
It is a very simple ultra lo tech way to say yes or no to a fairway/driver.
All my drivers are 44/44.5
As a result of this, you get Funny Comments... like...
oh..your ball is in the middle of the fairway again....hmmmm
from other people with Stock Drivers!!!
[/quote]

Just remember that its not legal during play, so this is for dial in on the range or during "private" rounds only

This illustration is measurements from a Wishon 919THi Head who got 10 grams hot melt toe side close to the face. The Circle with a cross, is actual VCOG + Sweetspot area after adjustment, and COG moved 3/16 against the toe, close to 1/8 lower, so it was a bit heel side of center before Hot melt, now its a tad toe side of center. Loft is 13* 1* Closed 58*Lie

The Smileys are marks on the face about 0.25 inch apart, and i found Gear effect to add average 480 Rpm spin for each 0.25 we move on this axis up or down (94 Mph Club speed player). I hope this photo better explains the gear effect vs impact spot on the face. The line they follow is "Correct club length" but different impact spot due to tee height, so the lower the tee, the lower impact and against the heel side = Lower launch, added spin.

So, depending on impact spot, we might vary from low 1900 to just above 4100, and there is not a shaft in this world who can eat that spin, so pay attention to impact spot before you go crazy by the spin number the launch monitor returns.

[attachment=2307979:Gear effect total.JPG]

EDIT:
Adding a chart for Spin pr degree Loft vs Club speed as a compare to what causes spin.
Loft is not your enemy if you need it for launch, Gear effects is the enemy to watch out for.

[attachment=2309285:Spin change vs loft.PNG]

very interesting, thank you. I'll sure use the "dot: method and watch tee height. THANX AGAIN!!!

Very informative thread/reading so really this process would need to be done with each head to get true spin numbers by impact location. also imagine with how uptight the manufacturing tolerances are you would really need to perform this process with the club head that you are actually hitting and keep that one vs ordering a new one.

This makes justifying buying a trackman even more and more easy after reading this. Off topic but I have been really considering getting one more and more lately, just got to try and find a few different revenue streams to pay for it over the next couple of years.

Great posts again guys very informative.

What an awesome thread! Big thanks to Tom and Howard, I am significantly more knowledgable in this area now than I was 10 minutes ago.

not to hijack this thread but...

I have a pretty consistent heel bias on impact (giving me high spin numbers and low smash factor), so I should try to go shorter in length? I am already playing my driver around 44" so should I go shorter than that even? I don't seem to have that problem with other long clubs (3w @ 42.5" or hybrid @ 39") so I want to believe it is a set up and/or swing flaw with the driver but I would be willing to try anything. I also have an in to out swing path and play a draw (with hook or high block misses ). What do the fitting gurus recommend?

[quote name='AustinA' timestamp='1404696350' post='9649135']
not to hijack this thread but...

I have a pretty consistent heel bias on impact (giving me high spin numbers and low smash factor), so I should try to go shorter in length? I am already playing my driver around 44" so should I go shorter than that even? I don't seem to have that problem with other long clubs (3w @ 42.5" or hybrid @ 39") so I want to believe it is a set up and/or swing flaw with the driver but I would be willing to try anything. I also have an in to out swing path and play a draw (with hook or high block misses ). What do the fitting gurus recommend?
[/quote]

To turn a few "rules" upside down, play your driver 1 inch longer than your favorite 3W = your driver should be 43.50"

Use this photo to dial in. Club length distance is about 0.5 for each line of 2 mph club speed, so if your impact line is equal to the blue line, try to lower your grip with 0.5 and use a white board pen to track impact spot. Follow Tee height axis to move height of impact.

[attachment=2311027:Dial in 3.JPG]
Edit, this was the wrong photo, but the other with club speed lines is above
This one shows what gear effect both Vertical and Horizontal does to ball flight, so dialing in is not only for distance, but also direction since gear effect let-right on the face is one of the enemies too.

Closer we gets to VCOG, longer and straighter we can hit it, and if hit slightly toe side a bit higher than VCOG we can hit the drives we dream of, who goes over and beyond what Trackman has as "optimum", and we DONT even need a positive angle of attack to make it. Down by 1-2 is good enough if impact spot is right and since LOFT is higher above center line of the face, we "steal" some launch, while we let gear effect eat spin.

Just a update with a photo of a TM SLDR ive measured today
VCOG IS lower than other driver heads, but its still ABOVE ceterline.

[quote name='Howard Jones' timestamp='1410274217' post='10089281']
Just a update with a photo of a TM SLDR ive measured today
VCOG IS lower than other driver heads, but its still ABOVE ceterline.
[/quote]

Howard

It is virtually impossible to ever get the CG to be on the very center to lower half of the driver head. As long as driver heads remain the shape they are where the top crown area is larger than the sole area and the sides of the head taper inward to the head, you just cannot get enough weight on the lower part of the head to make the CG be in the center of the face to lower half. It will always be in the upper half of the face.

The SLDR is going to have about the lowest possible CG one could create in a driver because unlike other driver heads, it has a lot more mass on the sole due to the sliding weight piece itself combined with the increased metal from the channel in which the weight slides. So even with that doing the most possible to lower the CG, you still cannot get the CG to the center or lower half of the face.

With other clubheads it is easy to get the CG on the lower half of the head because all other heads are smaller in size and heavier in weight so you have much more in the way of discretionary mass to position low on the head to move the CG downward. But never with drivers because they not only are the largest of all heads by far, but they are the lightest in mass too.




Hope this helps,
TOM

Thanks for chiming in Tom, i added the photo since there is a debate on "How low" did they get it...
Just by holding the head in my hand i could feel that balance is far from "classic", so its no doubt they have "moved something".

Do yo have any comments on my findings when it comes to Impact spot vs Gear effect?
As you know, there is no robot testing behind it, but a lot of player testing to get those spots where the other parameter is "within reason of equality", but the pattern seems to be clear.

...and are you saying that if we accept a strange design (might look ugly but), then there is a way to get VCOG down to the center line, or even below? If so jump to it, looks might not be that important if the head deliver performance in a class of its own.

Wasn't there a Cleveland driver with a caved in crown that sounded terrible that may have had a lower COG?

[quote name='cxx' timestamp='1410278428' post='10089679']
Wasn't there a Cleveland driver with a caved in crown that sounded terrible that may have had a lower COG?
[/quote]

That was the Hibore series, which many found to be the lowest spinning drivers of their time...which was just several years ago.

I'm interested in having someone actually measure the COG of the favorite Hibore model and compare it to the SLDR

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1410275570' post='10089403']
[quote name='Howard Jones' timestamp='1410274217' post='10089281']
Just a update with a photo of a TM SLDR ive measured today
VCOG IS lower than other driver heads, but its still ABOVE ceterline.
[/quote]

Howard

It is virtually impossible to ever get the CG to be on the very center to lower half of the driver head. As long as driver heads remain the shape they are where the top crown area is larger than the sole area and the sides of the head taper inward to the head, you just cannot get enough weight on the lower part of the head to make the CG be in the center of the face to lower half. It will always be in the upper half of the face.

The SLDR is going to have about the lowest possible CG one could create in a driver because unlike other driver heads, it has a lot more mass on the sole due to the sliding weight piece itself combined with the increased metal from the channel in which the weight slides. So even with that doing the most possible to lower the CG, you still cannot get the CG to the center or lower half of the face.

With other clubheads it is easy to get the CG on the lower half of the head because all other heads are smaller in size and heavier in weight so you have much more in the way of discretionary mass to position low on the head to move the CG downward. But never with drivers because they not only are the largest of all heads by far, but they are the lightest in mass too.




Hope this helps,
TOM
[/quote]
Tom,

Which design methodologies do you have in mind when you say this? Immediately, carbon crown drivers and drivers with tungsten weighting come to mind as being different in their approach to CG manipulation than an all-titanium head.

From some diagrams and articles I have read, is there really an attempt to get the head's CG more in line with the ball's CG and have it exit the face at an intended trajectory/launch angle? Essentially, drawing a line from the head's CG right thought the ball's CG and out into it's intended trajectory?

Have you looked at the gear effect going on with SLDR? To me, it seems they fight the high CG in a somewhat counter-intuituve, spin-INDUCING way with more loft to add some gear effect back in for required spin to keep it airborne. Is it better to re-introduce in this manner some spin, or to have the CG lower and back to have it more in line with the ball's CG?

Thanks in advance if you choose to answer.

[quote name='mr_divots' timestamp='1413045894' post='10270795']

Which design methodologies do you have in mind when you say this? Immediately, carbon crown drivers and drivers with tungsten weighting come to mind as being different in their approach to CG manipulation than an all-titanium head.
[/quote]

You still cannot make very much of a change in the vertical CG position even with a graphite crown driver head. I've designed 2 such head models in my career so I can tell you that the weight savings in replacing the top crown area with graphite is just not very much. The reason is because first of all, the crown of a typical titanium driver head of 450-460cc volume is never more than 1mm thick, sometimes even thinner than that. While graphite has a lower density than titanium for sure, the graphite piece you have to make to be attached to the crown area has to be thicker than what the titanium it replaced in order to have the best chance of that graphite crown piece staying put on the head and not coming loose. So this means the weight savings is just not significant enough to allow the vertical CG to be positioned below the geometric center of the face on a 450-460cc volume size head with a typical shape in which the crown area is larger than the sole area.

[quote name='mr_divots' timestamp='1413045894' post='10270795']
From some diagrams and articles I have read, is there really an attempt to get the head's CG more in line with the ball's CG and have it exit the face at an intended trajectory/launch angle? Essentially, drawing a line from the head's CG right thought the ball's CG and out into it's intended trajectory?
[/quote]

Having impact so the force vector of the head's CG can be directed straight through the ball's CG may sound like the best situation but it rarely works out that way in real ball striking because of the variety of different angles of attack that different golfers have in their swing. For this matter of having the force vector of the head's CG directed straight through the ball's CG the golfer would have to always hit the shot with a dead level angle of attack. And that just doesn't happen too often.

Then you have this matter of the vertical gear effect that happens when impact occurs above the CG and how that can result in a better overall ball flight shape and spin result than for an impact where the ball's CG is directly in line with the force vector of the head's CG.

Then you have the fact that with a driver, 99.99% of the time the shot is hit with the ball sitting up off the ground on a tee and how that when combined with the golfer's swing variability can result in different orientations of the CG of the head to the CG of the ball. While I pay close attention to all three CG axis orientations on every non driver head I design, with drivers I pay far more attention to the horizontal and face to back CG positions and don't really even think much about the vertical CG position because of the facts that, 1) you can't alter the vertical CG much once you choose a specific driver head size and shape that is 450-460cc with a 53-55mm face height. 2) with the ball on a tee and with launch angle and trajectory controlled FAR more by the loft and vertical face roll radius, the vertical CG of a driver really is a non-issue in the performance of the head. It really is.

Only when the clubhead is used chiefly to hit shots off the ground does the vertical CG begin to play more of a role in the contribution to the launch angle and shot height because here the golfer tends to be a little more consistent with regard to where vertically on the face he is making contact due to the ball being on the ground and not subjected to as many vertical impact variables as happens with a much taller face hitting the ball off a tee.

Horizontal CG is also pretty much of a non issue because the assumption is that one never wants to put the horiz CG too far off the face centerline for obvious reasons. So that means the Face to Back CG position is where you can have a little bit more of a chance to have an effect on the launch angle and spin for any given loft. But here too, the FB CG position only really has an effect on shot height for those golfers with a late-ish to later to very late release because FB CG works only in conjuction with the forward bending of the shaft to have its effect on the shot height. And only later to very late release players deliver the shaft in a forward bend position at impact.

Bottom line is that players with a later to late release can tweak their shot height with shafts of different flex or different tip stiffness a little, but for anyone else and for more significant shot height tweaks, that comes from a loft change far more often and more surely.

[quote name='mr_divots' timestamp='1413045894' post='10270795']
Have you looked at the gear effect going on with SLDR? To me, it seems they fight the high CG in a somewhat counter-intuituve, spin-INDUCING way with more loft to add some gear effect back in for required spin to keep it airborne. Is it better to re-introduce in this manner some spin, or to have the CG lower and back to have it more in line with the ball's CG?

Thanks in advance if you choose to answer.
[/quote]

I have not obtained a SLDR for any analysis or measurements so I can only repeat what I know about the relationship of the vertical CG position to the face to back CG position with respect to ball flight as offered in the previous explanation above. From my experience, SLDR most definitely should have a more forward CG from all that weight moved much closer to the face when compared to any other driver without such a mass of weight that close to the face. And with that much weight on the forward sole, I have to believe that if you compared the vertical CG of the SLDR to any other driver of similar size and face height, you would find its vertical CG to be a little lower. But here again, because of all the variables I mentioned above in this post about the effect of vertical CG in a driver, to me the bottom line on the SLDR having the chance to change ball flight shape is from that weighting moving the CG more forward. And again, that effect is only seen progressively as the golfer's release gets later and later. High speed player with a very late release should definitely see a lower flight for the same exact loft and point of impact on the face. Slower speed players with less late releases won't.

Thanks, Tom. I did deduce that the 430cc head has more potential than the 460cc head with SLDR some time ago with its FB CG location. I've also been saying our swings vary swing to swing enough that 500RPM spin reductions due to raising or lowering the CG are probably not all that important. I do see what you're saying with respect to the ball and clubhead CG's aligning. We need forward momentum and getting under the ball CG, when combined with the spin loft, would have it going nowhere.

Nice to have an expert to back up my findings and ponderings. Appreciate your time in formulating your responses. You're a great resource here.

To piggy-back on Howard's measurement, I also measured my 430 head a little while back. I never did take pictures, but in comparison to where Howard measured his, mine WAS a little bit lower(just above centerline) and actually about a 1/8" on the heel side. I did not measure front to back but I probably could at some point if the mood hits me right.

And in case anyone wonders, although I have a 11 gram weight in mine w/ hot melt added to sole and crown, moving it side to side did nothing for the CG location.

Thanks for all the info.. i used to to it high.. but when i measured the smash i knew something wss wrong...