We have launched our new enhanced Editor. There is an overview and tutorial Here.

Fitting or Clubs? What to do First

 highscoreinky ·  
highscoreinkyhighscoreinky  375Members Posts: 375
Joined:  in Equipment #1
What comes first if you're looking for new clubs? Do you purchase a set a clubs and have them fitted or do you have a fitting and then purchase clubs?



When I go to my optometrist for a check up they give me a sheet with specs on it that I can take to whoever is going to grind my lenses. The specs don't influence whether I have plastic frames, wire frames, or whatever. They don't change based on whether my lenses are glass or plastic so the most critical part to correcting my eyesight are the specs.



Does that work with a fitting? If a fitter recommends I use a X100 shaft in my irons does it matter what brand of irons I might purchase are would X100's be a universal fit for me? If the fitter doesn't have a Cobra fitting cart and recommends a driver shaft for me based on my swing and data with a Cally driver does that mean I could use that recommendation with a Cobra Bio or would the spin rates be too far apart due to a different head?



Do you just purchase irons and hope that a fitter can customize them to your swing?
Posted:
«13
3

Comments

  • mackepamackepa #TheWRX  3676Members Posts: 3,676
    Joined:  #2
    Get fit first. Buying clubs first an adjusting the specs is called being retro fit and it's not near as accurate as a true fitting.



    A real fitting before a purchase will go over every aspect and help you choose the right model then find tune the specs.
    Posted:
    #TheWRX 12/11/16
    Epic Flash SZ 9* AD IZ 6
    Epic Flash SZ 15* AD IZ 8
    Apex Hyb TC serial 20* Kuro Kage 80s
    X Forged Utility 24(bent 22*) KBS $-Taper
    RAZR MB 5-PW KBS Prototype
    MD4 52s, 56s, 60x KBS $-Taper
    Odyssey 10
    Jones Utility Rover
    Chromesoft X Triple Track
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • toobertoober  72Members Posts: 72
    Joined:  #3
    They usually go hand in hand. A good club fitter will have you hit your clubs first to get a base line. Then do a static fit. After that based on the data from flight scope, trackman and there own experience will start making recommendations. Once you have selected the clubs then you will look at the best shaft options for you as well as a grip.



    Remember the more time you put into the fitting the more you'll get out of it. Make sure that you are communicating with the fitter as well. The more feedback you give the better the process works.
    Posted:
  • squaresquare  3203Members Posts: 3,203
    Joined:  #4
    Dynamic fitting often times does more harm than good.

    I suggest Ping webfit, which uses height and wrist-to-floor to give you correct club length and lie angle for your physique. Do that and you are best set up to make fundamentally sound swings.
    Posted:
    Yonex ezone 380 10* Rexis M-1 shaft
    Cleveland Mashie hybrid 15.5* Miyazaki
    Cleveland Mashie hybrid 20.5* Miyazaki
    Ping S56 4-9 Nippon 950 steel shaft
    Ping Gorge 47*, 52* ,56* Nippon 950
    KZG 100% milled center shaft putter
  • hef63303hef63303  2884Members Posts: 2,884
    Joined:  #5
    i suggest picking the club you are interested in and then getting fit. Almost every club out there can be custom fit to the point that it will properly fit you. The biggest problem is that there is no real "standard" in golf club manufacturing. The heads weigh different. The lofts and lies are different. Pick a club that you like the look of and get a professional fitter to fit those clubs to you.
    Posted:
  • j_kingj_king  902Members Posts: 902
    Joined:  #6
    A fitting will do you wonders regarding how you swing versus the equipment that fits your swing.



    My only problem was that I had a driver fitting very soon after I started playing, however I was still relatively new to golf and my mechanics were not sound (not that they are great now). I got fit and the driver was perfect for me, for a couple of months. When I started to make swing changes I noticed that what I was fit for didn't necessarily match up anymore.



    If I could go back, I would have taken a few weeks worth of lessons first with some basic equipment, then gotten the fitting so that it would match my swing with better mechanics. While my fitter did offer some tips during our Trackman session, ultimately his job was to find what club/shaft and setting was going to give me the best results, no matter what my swing looked like.
    Posted:
    Callaway Epic SZ 9°
    Callaway 2014 BB 3 Wood
    Adams TI Peanut 20°
    Adams TI MB2 4-GW
    Taylormade ATV 58°
    Revolving door of Byron Morgan putters
  • richard trichard t  4219Members Posts: 4,219
    Joined:  #7
    Two questions only YOU can answer for yourself. 1. Do YOU intend to take lessons, make big changes/improvements or go with what YOU are, which is fine. 2. Are YOU open to what the fitter tells you? He may say X is best for YOU, but YOU like Y. Be honest, up front with the fitter- likes, dislikes how you play. ( don't say you're a single if you're a 20). Fitter does not care. Only wants to put you in the best club/shaft for YOU.

    I would do as OP said. The Ping static fitting gives you info to start with in the 'search.' Then I would go see/hit as many clubs as you can and are considering. If one is 'yuck' then time is saved.

    Remember it's YOUR money. Get the most from the time as you can. Again, be open minded. Good fitter can have a heck of an impact on enjoyment, scores and general happiness in the game.

    Good Luck!
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • TomWishonTomWishon  3660Sponsors Posts: 3,660
    Joined:  #8
    square wrote:


    Dynamic fitting often times does more harm than good.

    I suggest Ping webfit, which uses height and wrist-to-floor to give you correct club length and lie angle for your physique. Do that and you are best set up to make fundamentally sound swings.




    Just curious as to how you feel a dynamic fitting does more harm than good?



    Proper fitting is totally and completely about identifying the many swing characteristics which have an effect on how the specs that make up every golf club will perform. This consists of your clubhead speeds, transition force, downswing tempo, point of wrist **** release, angle of attack, swing path, face delivery position along with some physical measurements.



    Fill in the blank forms can cover the physical measurements but unless they somehow can ascertain each of these other elements in the swing that have a direct bearing on the fitting specs, AND take them into account when determining the fitting specs, then the fill in the blank form is only slightly better than just buying clubs off the rack at any golf store.



    If your feeling on dynamic fitting is founded in the belief that one day we swing better than the next day so what if we're not swinging well when we get fit. . . . yes for sure we all have good days and bad days with our swings. But the swing parameters that l listed which have to be analyzed as part of a proper fitting DO NOT CHANGE SO MUCH ON A BAD SWING DAY THAT IT WILL MESS UP THE FITTING.



    Even on a bad swing day our swing speeds don't vary by enough to mess up the shaft flex or driver loft decisions. On a bad day our transition, tempo and release are still very close to what they are on a good day so that won't mess up the decisions about shaft weight, shaft flex, total weight, swingweight, length that these swing parameters contribute to. On a bad swing day our angle of attack and swing path may experience a wider range than on a good day, but if the golfer is downward with an outside in path for example, they're never going to all of a sudden be upward with a square or inside out path. So the fitting decisions relevent to angle of attack and path still can be made accurately.



    All day long, a fitting session in which the golfer's key swing characteristics are analyzed and measured BY A FITTER WHO KNOWS HOW TO DO THAT AND TRANSLATE WHAT HE SEES INTO THE ACTUAL FITTING SPECS is really the only proper way to be fit.



    A super good fill in the blank form that asks questions about these swing characteristics is most definitely going to deliver clubs to the golfer which are far better than what he can buy off the shelf at a golf store or pro shop. But it still falls short of the fitting session where a good fitter sees, analyzes and puts 2+2 together from that to come up with the right fitting specs.



    TOM
    Posted:
  • Ripken08Ripken08  4331Members Posts: 4,331 BST Banned
    Joined:  #9
    This is the chicken vs the egg argument. IMO, you MUST have a semi-repeatable swing before getting fit to benefit. Telling someone who has never played before or a total beginner, for example, that they need to get fit first is ludicous. Why fit clubs to a poor swing? Static measurements like length and lie angle, sure, but not a total dynamic fitting. All depends on how repeatable your swing is. At that point, it is worth it.
    Posted:
  • slide13slide13  1338Members Posts: 1,338
    Joined:  #10
    I think that is the key. If you have a swing that is consistent, repeatable, and that you are happy with then I think a dynamic fitting is the way to go to get clubs that are going to be optimized for your swing.



    If you're new, still working on getting to that level, or in a process of changing or rebuilding your swing then I think a dynamic fitting can be, if not a poor choice, an unnecessary one. I think a static fitting based on body measurements will get you a set of clubs that will help encourage your swing to move in a good direction by promoting proper swing fundamentals.



    For example, if you come over the top and get really steep in your down swing then a dynamic fitting would put you into upright clubs. But if that is something you are working on correcting then I don't think it's a good idea to get clubs setup for that as they will then be too upright for a better swing which could lead to poor results even when you're putting a good swing on the ball.
    Posted:
    Minimal: Titleist 913 D3 / Cobra F8 4w / Miura CB57 4/6/8/P / Miura 55C / Byron DH89 / Mackenzie
  • squaresquare  3203Members Posts: 3,203
    Joined:  #11
    Static fit, based on a player's physique measurements, promotes fundamentally sound golf swings.

    Dynamic fit may promote swing faults, and is also subject to the bias of the fitter.




    TomWishon wrote:

    square wrote:


    Dynamic fitting often times does more harm than good.

    I suggest Ping webfit, which uses height and wrist-to-floor to give you correct club length and lie angle for your physique. Do that and you are best set up to make fundamentally sound swings.




    Just curious as to how you feel a dynamic fitting does more harm than good?



    Proper fitting is totally and completely about identifying the many swing characteristics which have an effect on how the specs that make up every golf club will perform. This consists of your clubhead speeds, transition force, downswing tempo, point of wrist **** release, angle of attack, swing path, face delivery position along with some physical measurements.



    Fill in the blank forms can cover the physical measurements but unless they somehow can ascertain each of these other elements in the swing that have a direct bearing on the fitting specs, AND take them into account when determining the fitting specs, then the fill in the blank form is only slightly better than just buying clubs off the rack at any golf store.



    If your feeling on dynamic fitting is founded in the belief that one day we swing better than the next day so what if we're not swinging well when we get fit. . . . yes for sure we all have good days and bad days with our swings. But the swing parameters that l listed which have to be analyzed as part of a proper fitting DO NOT CHANGE SO MUCH ON A BAD SWING DAY THAT IT WILL MESS UP THE FITTING.



    Even on a bad swing day our swing speeds don't vary by enough to mess up the shaft flex or driver loft decisions. On a bad day our transition, tempo and release are still very close to what they are on a good day so that won't mess up the decisions about shaft weight, shaft flex, total weight, swingweight, length that these swing parameters contribute to. On a bad swing day our angle of attack and swing path may experience a wider range than on a good day, but if the golfer is downward with an outside in path for example, they're never going to all of a sudden be upward with a square or inside out path. So the fitting decisions relevent to angle of attack and path still can be made accurately.



    All day long, a fitting session in which the golfer's key swing characteristics are analyzed and measured BY A FITTER WHO KNOWS HOW TO DO THAT AND TRANSLATE WHAT HE SEES INTO THE ACTUAL FITTING SPECS is really the only proper way to be fit.



    A super good fill in the blank form that asks questions about these swing characteristics is most definitely going to deliver clubs to the golfer which are far better than what he can buy off the shelf at a golf store or pro shop. But it still falls short of the fitting session where a good fitter sees, analyzes and puts 2+2 together from that to come up with the right fitting specs.



    TOM
    Posted:
    Yonex ezone 380 10* Rexis M-1 shaft
    Cleveland Mashie hybrid 15.5* Miyazaki
    Cleveland Mashie hybrid 20.5* Miyazaki
    Ping S56 4-9 Nippon 950 steel shaft
    Ping Gorge 47*, 52* ,56* Nippon 950
    KZG 100% milled center shaft putter
  • squaresquare  3203Members Posts: 3,203
    Joined:  #12
    No question about it !


    slide13 wrote:




    I think a static fitting based on body measurements will get you a set of clubs that will help encourage your swing to move in a good direction by promoting proper swing fundamentals.


    Posted:
    Yonex ezone 380 10* Rexis M-1 shaft
    Cleveland Mashie hybrid 15.5* Miyazaki
    Cleveland Mashie hybrid 20.5* Miyazaki
    Ping S56 4-9 Nippon 950 steel shaft
    Ping Gorge 47*, 52* ,56* Nippon 950
    KZG 100% milled center shaft putter
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • TomWishonTomWishon  3660Sponsors Posts: 3,660
    Joined:  #13
    square wrote:


    Static fit, based on a player's physique measurements, promotes fundamentally sound golf swings.

    Dynamic fit may promote swing faults, and is also subject to the bias of the fitter.






    I do thank you for posting in response to my question because you have given me the chance to straighten things out with the right information about fitting so any who read this will get the right and best information. Thank you for that opportunity.



    Plain and simple static fitting (meaning fill in the blank fitting forms that do NOT pose questions about ALL the key swing characteristics very well) will have a far greater chance to result in clubs which can cause more swing problems and prevent golfers from developing better swing fundamentals than will a dynamic fitting done in person by a competent, experienced clubfitter.



    Even if the fitting question form has questions about transition, tempo, release, angle of attack, path, face delivery (and most fitting forms do not) - who's to know if the golfer answering the questions really knows what these swing characteristics are - versus someone who SEES these things in person.



    Now I am not here to debate the fact that there are a good number of people who say they can fit who are not that experienced, or knowledgeable. That's a given because the level of knowledge and experience required to be a very good fitter is significant. But such fitters do exist and can be found through resources like the AGCP or ICG.



    The point instead is that measurements alone or information submitted from afar will never, ever, ever provide the depth of key information about a golfer as will a face to face analysis of the golfer and his/her swing characteristics, from which valid fitting decisions can be made. Realizing you need some proof, let me just use one of many examples for how fill in the blank information can result in clubs that prevent the golfer from playing to the best of his ability.



    Let's say our static fitting form says the golfer is a 9 hdcp, is 6'2, has a wrist to floor measurement of 37". From such information that is commonly asked on many fitting forms, one could make the decision that a driver length of 45" could be ok for this player. But what if the golfer has an outside in swing path, has a 3/4 length backswing, has an upright swing plane, has a strong forceful transition, has a midway release and tends to slice/fade the ball? All these these which so often are not questioned on a fill in the blank fitting form point toward the fact that this is a golfer who better not be using a driver longer than 44" and would be better off with 43.5" - because all of these swing characteristics do NOT match well with longer lengths.



    In such a case, if this golfer gets the 45" driver, his chances of improving his swing path and directional control are severely hampered by the club being too long for the ability he has to control a longer club.



    Yet in a dynamic fitting, meaning if he is face to face with a good fitter, these swing characteristics will be seen and will be factored in to the length decision which all point to the fact this guy is NOT going to do as well with a 45" driver as one much shorter. And this is just length for the driver. All of the other specs on the clubs can also be shown to be better off fit in person, face to face than with any fitting form from afar.



    Sorry, I get a little passionate about this subject of fitting because I have spent the better part of my career researching it more deeply than any person alive I believe - and it is VERY important to me that golfers know the facts about fitting because there are SO MANY MYTHS AND MISINFORMATION out there about fitting. Thanks again for bringing this up so it could be addressed properly for golfers to know.



    TOM
    Posted:
  • HoosierMizunoHoosierMizuno  3476Members Posts: 3,476
    Joined:  #14
    i would think that a fitting before having bought clubs would go a long way in helping you determine what brand and model you like best. sure, a fitter can retrofit you, but for example how do you know you like the ping i20s over the ap1 or another club until you've been fitted. a proper fitting will not only get the right club specs, but let you hit several different models to see which you like best.



    also, if you need to add length or subtract club length, wouldn't ordering to those specs be much better than simply cutting a club down. what happens if you buy clubs and find out you should play +3/4". why mess with swing weight changes after the fact. wouldn't it be cheaper to buy a set of clubs with the correct shaft already installed instead of reshafting?



    my opinion, if you are unsure on the clubs and are going to get fitted, do it ahead of time.
    Posted:
    Ping G400 LST 10 w/ Hzrdus Black 6.0 75g
    TM M2 3HL w/ Rogue Black 70 S
    Cobra F8 19*
    J15CB w/ Modus 120X 4-P
    Cleveland RTX3 CB 50 54 58
    TM Spider Tour Black w/ T-sightline 36" 
  • TomWishonTomWishon  3660Sponsors Posts: 3,660
    Joined:  edited Dec 20, 2013 #15


    This is the chicken vs the egg argument. IMO, you MUST have a semi-repeatable swing before getting fit to benefit. Telling someone who has never played before or a total beginner, for example, that they need to get fit first is ludicous. Why fit clubs to a poor swing? Static measurements like length and lie angle, sure, but not a total dynamic fitting. All depends on how repeatable your swing is. At that point, it is worth it.




    Thank you for bringing this up so I can have a chance to offer a little different perspective on the subject.



    No question whatsoever that a golfer must have a semi repeatable swing before fitting steps in to really benefit. The golfer has to be able to get 95% of his shots airborne and his misses can be over a somewhat wide range but they need to be somewhat more in the same general direction of miss. Hence why we say fitting offers the most benefit for golfers who tend to shoot between 85 and 100.



    On the other hand, we do know for sure that many of the "standard specs" on clubs just bought off the rack for a beginning golfer will have specs which most definitely will prevent him from developing better swing fundamentals. Driver and wood lengths are too long, lofts on woods too low, lofts on longer to mid irons too low, and set makeups are horrible for the beginning golfer.



    Some years ago I got a chance to create a small test situation for just this very matter of beginning golfers with a number of teaching pros in the UK. (UK because I do regular educational seminars in fitting for the Brit PGA) The test came about from pros at my seminars who like you, felt that a beginning golfer didn't need to have anything done with regard to "fitting" - that he should just grab a standard set and go try to learn the game.



    I proposed that they build or buy sets/clubs for beginners and very high handicappers to use when taking lessons and to discourage the beginners/100+ shooters from buying any clubs yet. These teaching sets (men's here for this post - we had other specs for the women) consisted of the following:



    Driver of 13*/42", fairway wood of 20*/39", hybrid of 25*/38", iron set starting at #5 at 30* in 4* increments down to PW at 50*, wide sole sand wedge, putter. Shafts were A flex std. Driver never got used for a while, but it was part of the set because golfers tend to want to hit a driver as soon as possible in the game. Women's version of this was 1" to 1.5" shorter, driver was 16*, fwy was 25*, hybrid was 30*, irons went from 34 down to 50 and all clubs had much lighter shafts.



    We encouraged the pros to start by doing a routine hand measurement then installing grips on these beginner clubs that better fit each golfer - using air to install made this real quick.



    A year later when we checked in with these pros, those who did this most definitely reported better results with their beginners, fewer quit the lessons, more got to a point of breaking 100 in less than a year than the pros had experienced before. Some used these clubs on golfers who had been shooting 95-110 for a long time and found their improvement was very quick.



    So this isn't really FITTING per se as we think of regular golfers going to get fit for full sets. But it is fitting in the sense of tailoring the clubs so that it helps make swing improvements happen sooner. And it works because standard clubs off the rack are so poorly set up for beginning golfers these days.



    The sets were "leased" inexpensively to the beginners if they wanted to play in between lessons. The golfers appreciated not having to buy clubs to learn with, and from that tended to buy their full sets from the pro when it was time. Everyone was happy.



    TOM
    Posted:
  • j_kingj_king  902Members Posts: 902
    Joined:  #16
    TomWishon wrote:



    This is the chicken vs the egg argument. IMO, you MUST have a semi-repeatable swing before getting fit to benefit. Telling someone who has never played before or a total beginner, for example, that they need to get fit first is ludicous. Why fit clubs to a poor swing? Static measurements like length and lie angle, sure, but not a total dynamic fitting. All depends on how repeatable your swing is. At that point, it is worth it.




    Thank you for bringing this up so I can have a chance to offer a little different perspective on the subject.

    ...snip...

    TOM




    And I wish I would have had a set like this to learn with!
    Posted:
    Callaway Epic SZ 9°
    Callaway 2014 BB 3 Wood
    Adams TI Peanut 20°
    Adams TI MB2 4-GW
    Taylormade ATV 58°
    Revolving door of Byron Morgan putters
  • halfsumohalfsumo  720Members Posts: 720
    Joined:  #17
    TomWishon wrote:



    This is the chicken vs the egg argument. IMO, you MUST have a semi-repeatable swing before getting fit to benefit. Telling someone who has never played before or a total beginner, for example, that they need to get fit first is ludicous. Why fit clubs to a poor swing? Static measurements like length and lie angle, sure, but not a total dynamic fitting. All depends on how repeatable your swing is. At that point, it is worth it.




    Thank you for bringing this up so I can have a chance to offer a little different perspective on the subject.



    No question whatsoever that a golfer must have a semi repeatable swing before fitting steps in to really benefit. The golfer has to be able to get 95% of his shots airborne and his misses can be over a somewhat wide range but they need to be somewhat more in the same general direction of miss. Hence why we say fitting offers the most benefit for golfers who tend to shoot between 85 and 100.



    On the other hand, we do know for sure that many of the "standard specs" on clubs just bought off the rack for a beginning golfer will have specs which most definitely will prevent him from developing better swing fundamentals. Driver and wood lengths are too long, lofts on woods too low, lofts on longer to mid irons too low, and set makeups are horrible for the beginning golfer.



    Some years ago I got a chance to create a small test situation for just this very matter of beginning golfers with a number of teaching pros in the UK. (UK because I do regular educational seminars in fitting for the Brit PGA) The test came about from pros at my seminars who like you, felt that a beginning golfer didn't need to have anything done with regard to "fitting" - that he should just grab a standard set and go try to learn the game.



    I proposed that they build or buy sets/clubs for beginners and very high handicappers to use when taking lessons and to discourage the beginners/100+ shooters from buying any clubs yet. These teaching sets (men's here for this post - we had other specs for the women) consisted of the following:



    Driver of 13*/42", fairway wood of 20*/39", hybrid of 25*/38", iron set starting at #5 at 30* in 4* increments down to PW at 50*, wide sole sand wedge, putter. Shafts were A flex std. Driver never got used for a while, but it was part of the set because golfers tend to want to hit a driver as soon as possible in the game. Women's version of this was 1" to 1.5" shorter, driver was 16*, fwy was 25*, hybrid was 30*, irons went from 34 down to 50 and all clubs had much lighter shafts.



    We encouraged the pros to start by doing a routine hand measurement then installing grips on these beginner clubs that better fit each golfer - using air to install made this real quick.



    A year later when we checked in with these pros, those who did this most definitely reported better results with their beginners, fewer quit the lessons, more got to a point of breaking 100 in less than a year than the pros had experienced before. Some used these clubs on golfers who had been shooting 95-110 for a long time and found their improvement was very quick.



    So this isn't really FITTING per se as we think of regular golfers going to get fit for full sets. But it is fitting in the sense of tailoring the clubs so that it helps make swing improvements happen sooner. And it works because standard clubs off the rack are so poorly set up for beginning golfers these days.



    The sets were "leased" inexpensively to the beginners if they wanted to play in between lessons. The golfers appreciated not having to buy clubs to learn with, and from that tended to buy their full sets from the pro when it was time. Everyone was happy.



    TOM




    Agree. Golf is like surfing in that most people have to do it a lot before getting consistent success and enjoyment. If you try to learn to surf on a short/thin board, you are going to have way less success than if you start out with a longer/thicker board.



    My first set of clubs were a ladie's set of MacGregor blades handed down from my grandmother when I was 10. The guy I was taking lessons from cut them down an inch and put junior-sized grips on them. I used to "borrow" the full-sized demo PING eye2 5-iron all the time, but really could only hit it when it was teed up. I wanted a set of PINGs so bad. Had I somehow been able to get that full set of PINGS from the outset, I may have not had the success and improvement as I had with my "custom" blades and might have gone back to playing Nintendo all day.
    Posted:
    G410+ 9* Accra TZ5 M4
    TS3 15 Tensei Pro White 70tx
    TS2 hybrid 19 Tensei Pro White 90tx
    Mizuno MP20 combo 4-PW LZ 6.5
    Mizuno T20 50,54
    Vokey SM7 S grind 60
    PING Sigma2 Tyne stealth 
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • MJisGOATMJisGOAT  4586Members Posts: 4,586
    Joined:  #18


    This is the chicken vs the egg argument. IMO, you MUST have a semi-repeatable swing before getting fit to benefit. Telling someone who has never played before or a total beginner, for example, that they need to get fit first is ludicous. Why fit clubs to a poor swing? Static measurements like length and lie angle, sure, but not a total dynamic fitting. All depends on how repeatable your swing is. At that point, it is worth it.
    I agree with this.

    I'd rather have a driver sit neutral vs closed if I battled a slice or vice versa. Instilling proper mechanics is more valuable than proper fitted clubs to any particular swing fault IMO.
    Posted:
    Cali
    TailorMaid
    t****
    "inefficient and dead rear cavity design"
  • squaresquare  3203Members Posts: 3,203
    Joined:  #19
    My endorsement of static fit applies only to irons and wedges.

    For fairway woods and , or, hybrids there is no need for fitting of any kind. Depending on the loft of the head, 39" to 43" hybrids and, or fairway woods will fit all common height adult male players, and promote fundamentally sound swings.

    For drivers anything longer than 44" finished length is past the point of diminishing returns. All adult male players between about 5'8" and 7' tall will find that a 44" driver is best for making fundamentally sound, balanced swings. If a player wants to use an especially heavy driver shaft of 90 to 100 plus gram weight, then 43" to 43.5" finished length will be needed to achieve a balanced, playable driver.. Unfortunately the current golf equipment industry is producing head sizes (460CC) and driver heads weights (195 to 205 grams) designed for 45" plus length drivers.

    Ideally, driver head vendors would design and produce 380Cc to 430cc size heads weighing in a range from 210 to 240 grams. If these were offered it would make finishing a 43.5" or 44" driver a more reasonable procedure than it is today.


    TomWishon wrote:

    square wrote:


    Static fit, based on a player's physique measurements, promotes fundamentally sound golf swings.

    Dynamic fit may promote swing faults, and is also subject to the bias of the fitter.






    I do thank you for posting in response to my question because you have given me the chance to straighten things out with the right information about fitting so any who read this will get the right and best information. Thank you for that opportunity.



    Plain and simple static fitting (meaning fill in the blank fitting forms that do NOT pose questions about ALL the key swing characteristics very well) will have a far greater chance to result in clubs which can cause more swing problems and prevent golfers from developing better swing fundamentals than will a dynamic fitting done in person by a competent, experienced clubfitter.



    Even if the fitting question form has questions about transition, tempo, release, angle of attack, path, face delivery (and most fitting forms do not) - who's to know if the golfer answering the questions really knows what these swing characteristics are - versus someone who SEES these things in person.



    Now I am not here to debate the fact that there are a good number of people who say they can fit who are not that experienced, or knowledgeable. That's a given because the level of knowledge and experience required to be a very good fitter is significant. But such fitters do exist and can be found through resources like the AGCP or ICG.



    The point instead is that measurements alone or information submitted from afar will never, ever, ever provide the depth of key information about a golfer as will a face to face analysis of the golfer and his/her swing characteristics, from which valid fitting decisions can be made. Realizing you need some proof, let me just use one of many examples for how fill in the blank information can result in clubs that prevent the golfer from playing to the best of his ability.



    Let's say our static fitting form says the golfer is a 9 hdcp, is 6'2, has a wrist to floor measurement of 37". From such information that is commonly asked on many fitting forms, one could make the decision that a driver length of 45" could be ok for this player. But what if the golfer has an outside in swing path, has a 3/4 length backswing, has an upright swing plane, has a strong forceful transition, has a midway release and tends to slice/fade the ball? All these these which so often are not questioned on a fill in the blank fitting form point toward the fact that this is a golfer who better not be using a driver longer than 44" and would be better off with 43.5" - because all of these swing characteristics do NOT match well with longer lengths.



    In such a case, if this golfer gets the 45" driver, his chances of improving his swing path and directional control are severely hampered by the club being too long for the ability he has to control a longer club.



    Yet in a dynamic fitting, meaning if he is face to face with a good fitter, these swing characteristics will be seen and will be factored in to the length decision which all point to the fact this guy is NOT going to do as well with a 45" driver as one much shorter. And this is just length for the driver. All of the other specs on the clubs can also be shown to be better off fit in person, face to face than with any fitting form from afar.



    Sorry, I get a little passionate about this subject of fitting because I have spent the better part of my career researching it more deeply than any person alive I believe - and it is VERY important to me that golfers know the facts about fitting because there are SO MANY MYTHS AND MISINFORMATION out there about fitting. Thanks again for bringing this up so it could be addressed properly for golfers to know.



    TOM
    Posted:
    Yonex ezone 380 10* Rexis M-1 shaft
    Cleveland Mashie hybrid 15.5* Miyazaki
    Cleveland Mashie hybrid 20.5* Miyazaki
    Ping S56 4-9 Nippon 950 steel shaft
    Ping Gorge 47*, 52* ,56* Nippon 950
    KZG 100% milled center shaft putter
  • TomWishonTomWishon  3660Sponsors Posts: 3,660
    Joined:  #20
    square wrote:


    My endorsement of static fit applies only to irons and wedges.

    For fairway woods and , or, hybrids there is no need for fitting of any kind. Depending on the loft of the head, 39" to 43" hybrids and, or fairway woods will fit all common height adult male players, and promote fundamentally sound swings.

    For drivers anything longer than 44" finished length is past the point of diminishing returns. All adult male players between about 5'8" and 7' tall will find that a 44" driver is best for making fundamentally sound, balanced swings. If a player wants to use an especially heavy driver shaft of 90 to 100 plus gram weight, then 43" to 43.5" finished length will be needed to achieve a balanced, playable driver.. Unfortunately the current golf equipment industry is producing head sizes (460CC) and driver heads weights (195 to 205 grams) designed for 45" plus length drivers.

    Ideally, driver head vendors would design and produce 380Cc to 430cc size heads weighing in a range from 210 to 240 grams. If these were offered it would make finishing a 43.5" or 44" driver a more reasonable procedure than it is today.






    WOW. . . . I guess I don't really know what to say, other than to respectfully say that you are completely wrong in your beliefs about fitting. Would you please be so kind as to do me a favor? Would you please send me an email at [email protected] and reference this thread on WRX, and please if you would include a ship to address because I sincerely would like to give you a copy of one of my books to read over the winter in the chance you will be able to open your mind to the facts about custom fitting. Honest offer for a free book to help you understand the facts.



    TOM
    Posted:
  • GbyeballGbyeball  2394Members Posts: 2,394
    Joined:  #21
    Some guys just don't or won't get it Tom. I use to be a highly skilled carpenter and house builder in my 20 - 40s. I remember an accountant arguing with me about some structural elements that he THOUGHT he knew something about. I would have never assumed to know more about accounting than him!!! The world is full of arm chair quarter backs and self proclaimed experts.



    A highly skilled tool and die maker was asked what he thought about a certain project. His reply was " I don't know what I think I only know what I can measure"
    Posted:
    Ping Rapture V2
    Ping G15, four wood
    Callaway X hot pro 20* hybrid
    Ping G25 - 4 to PW
    Callaway X tour 50*' 54* & 58*
    Scotty newport
  • 5 O'Clock Charlie5 O'Clock Charlie  497Members Posts: 497
    Joined:  #22
    hef63303 wrote:


    i suggest picking the club you are interested in and then getting fit. Almost every club out there can be custom fit to the point that it will properly fit you. The biggest problem is that there is no real "standard" in golf club manufacturing. The heads weigh different. The lofts and lies are different. Pick a club that you like the look of and get a professional fitter to fit those clubs to you.




    +1



    These manufacturers classify these clubs into handicap ranges, or "players", "game improvement" etc... as a starting point. Get a feel for them. How the club feels at impact and while you are swinging it is a deciding factor.



    You are never going to find any brick and mortar store or retailer or niche shop that has every shaft from every manufacturer for you to try in every head available on the market. You can try a few shafts from a fitting cart in a few heads from each of that manufacturer if you are lucky.



    You generally can take a shaft you like from head to head - I have done that and have had no issues. Don't believe the hype.
    Posted:
    Ping G400 LST - Driver
    Ping G400 - 3 Wood
    Ping G400 - 19 deg Hybrid
    Ping G400 23 deg Crossover
    Ping I200 Irons (5-9)
    Ping Glide 2.0 Wedges - (46/52/58)
    Ping Vault 2.0 B60
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • lawsonmanlawsonman Freeport, Illinois 5820Members Posts: 5,820
    Joined:  #23
    square wrote:


    My endorsement of static fit applies only to irons and wedges.

    For fairway woods and , or, hybrids there is no need for fitting of any kind. Depending on the loft of the head, 39" to 43" hybrids and, or fairway woods will fit all common height adult male players, and promote fundamentally sound swings.

    For drivers anything longer than 44" finished length is past the point of diminishing returns. All adult male players between about 5'8" and 7' tall will find that a 44" driver is best for making fundamentally sound, balanced swings. If a player wants to use an especially heavy driver shaft of 90 to 100 plus gram weight, then 43" to 43.5" finished length will be needed to achieve a balanced, playable driver.. Unfortunately the current golf equipment industry is producing head sizes (460CC) and driver heads weights (195 to 205 grams) designed for 45" plus length drivers.

    Ideally, driver head vendors would design and produce 380Cc to 430cc size heads weighing in a range from 210 to 240 grams. If these were offered it would make finishing a 43.5" or 44" driver a more reasonable procedure than it is today.


    TomWishon wrote:

    square wrote:


    Static fit, based on a player's physique measurements, promotes fundamentally sound golf swings.

    Dynamic fit may promote swing faults, and is also subject to the bias of the fitter.






    I do thank you for posting in response to my question because you have given me the chance to straighten things out with the right information about fitting so any who read this will get the right and best information. Thank you for that opportunity.



    Plain and simple static fitting (meaning fill in the blank fitting forms that do NOT pose questions about ALL the key swing characteristics very well) will have a far greater chance to result in clubs which can cause more swing problems and prevent golfers from developing better swing fundamentals than will a dynamic fitting done in person by a competent, experienced clubfitter.



    Even if the fitting question form has questions about transition, tempo, release, angle of attack, path, face delivery (and most fitting forms do not) - who's to know if the golfer answering the questions really knows what these swing characteristics are - versus someone who SEES these things in person.



    Now I am not here to debate the fact that there are a good number of people who say they can fit who are not that experienced, or knowledgeable. That's a given because the level of knowledge and experience required to be a very good fitter is significant. But such fitters do exist and can be found through resources like the AGCP or ICG.



    The point instead is that measurements alone or information submitted from afar will never, ever, ever provide the depth of key information about a golfer as will a face to face analysis of the golfer and his/her swing characteristics, from which valid fitting decisions can be made. Realizing you need some proof, let me just use one of many examples for how fill in the blank information can result in clubs that prevent the golfer from playing to the best of his ability.



    Let's say our static fitting form says the golfer is a 9 hdcp, is 6'2, has a wrist to floor measurement of 37". From such information that is commonly asked on many fitting forms, one could make the decision that a driver length of 45" could be ok for this player. But what if the golfer has an outside in swing path, has a 3/4 length backswing, has an upright swing plane, has a strong forceful transition, has a midway release and tends to slice/fade the ball? All these these which so often are not questioned on a fill in the blank fitting form point toward the fact that this is a golfer who better not be using a driver longer than 44" and would be better off with 43.5" - because all of these swing characteristics do NOT match well with longer lengths.



    In such a case, if this golfer gets the 45" driver, his chances of improving his swing path and directional control are severely hampered by the club being too long for the ability he has to control a longer club.



    Yet in a dynamic fitting, meaning if he is face to face with a good fitter, these swing characteristics will be seen and will be factored in to the length decision which all point to the fact this guy is NOT going to do as well with a 45" driver as one much shorter. And this is just length for the driver. All of the other specs on the clubs can also be shown to be better off fit in person, face to face than with any fitting form from afar.



    Sorry, I get a little passionate about this subject of fitting because I have spent the better part of my career researching it more deeply than any person alive I believe - and it is VERY important to me that golfers know the facts about fitting because there are SO MANY MYTHS AND MISINFORMATION out there about fitting. Thanks again for bringing this up so it could be addressed properly for golfers to know.



    TOM





    Square, your post is wrong in so many ways I had to read it 5 times to see if I was hallucinating. Please,Please,Please, take Tom up on his offer.
    Posted:
    Ping G400 driver
    Ping Anser 17,20,23 Hybrids 
    Mizuno MP 20SEL 6-PW
    Ping,54,58ES Wedge
    Scotty Cameron Newport 3


    Snell MTB X
  • highscoreinkyhighscoreinky  375Members Posts: 375
    Joined:  #24
    Wow. Thanks for the replies. Seems to be a mix of opinions but I'm still not sure what comes first. Tom, can you chime in on whether the chicken or the egg comes first? I am an 11 handicap playing Adams A4 forged irons that I bought off the rack. I have played a few rounds with the assistant pro at my club and he he believes that I am probably playing the wrong shafts in my irons and driver. We don't have trackman at the club or a flightscope so I will go offsite for a fitting. I play a Cally driver, a Ping 3 wood, 5 wood from Taylormade and a 4 and 5 hybird by Cobra. I carry 6 through PW in the A4's, a Scor 51* gap wedge and Cleveland CG 14's in 56* and 60*. The only club that will stay in the bag is a SeeMore Si3 putter that I spent 4 hours being fitted for at the SeeMore facility (thanks Ted).



    Do I try to to narrow choices in drivers, fairway woods, hybrids and irons down to 2 or 3 models or can I go to a full fitting and get recommendations based on data and what the fitter sees?
    Posted:
  • squaresquare  3203Members Posts: 3,203
    Joined:  #25
    No disrespect intended, but perhaps you are "completely wrong in your beliefs about fitting'?

    I understand you worked for Golfsmith, manage your own brand now, have decades experience in the equipment industry etc..., But, and again no disrespect intended, none of that makes your fitting related convictions correct, factual, or even especially helpful.

    Consider that (from the perspective of making a fundamentally sound golf swing), static fitting makes sense.

    If a player is content with making faulty swings, yet still wants to get more playable shot results , then perhaps dynamic fitting has merit.




    TomWishon wrote:

    square wrote:


    My endorsement of static fit applies only to irons and wedges.

    For fairway woods and , or, hybrids there is no need for fitting of any kind. Depending on the loft of the head, 39" to 43" hybrids and, or fairway woods will fit all common height adult male players, and promote fundamentally sound swings.

    For drivers anything longer than 44" finished length is past the point of diminishing returns. All adult male players between about 5'8" and 7' tall will find that a 44" driver is best for making fundamentally sound, balanced swings. If a player wants to use an especially heavy driver shaft of 90 to 100 plus gram weight, then 43" to 43.5" finished length will be needed to achieve a balanced, playable driver.. Unfortunately the current golf equipment industry is producing head sizes (460CC) and driver heads weights (195 to 205 grams) designed for 45" plus length drivers.

    Ideally, driver head vendors would design and produce 380Cc to 430cc size heads weighing in a range from 210 to 240 grams. If these were offered it would make finishing a 43.5" or 44" driver a more reasonable procedure than it is today.












    WOW. . . . I guess I don't really know what to say, other than to respectfully say that you are completely wrong in your beliefs about fitting. Would you please be so kind as to do me a favor? Would you please send me an email at [email protected] and reference this thread on WRX, and please if you would include a ship to address because I sincerely would like to give you a copy of one of my books to read over the winter in the chance you will be able to open your mind to the facts about custom fitting. Honest offer for a free book to help you understand the facts.



    TOM
    Posted:
    Yonex ezone 380 10* Rexis M-1 shaft
    Cleveland Mashie hybrid 15.5* Miyazaki
    Cleveland Mashie hybrid 20.5* Miyazaki
    Ping S56 4-9 Nippon 950 steel shaft
    Ping Gorge 47*, 52* ,56* Nippon 950
    KZG 100% milled center shaft putter
  • gvogelgvogel  7982Members Posts: 7,982
    Joined:  #26
    Here is what I suggest.



    Figure out what 7-iron works best for you - looks, performance, shaft, length, lie - everything. Tweak it, test it, and end up getting a7-iron that you love.



    then do that with the 6-iron. Do it with the 9-iron. The PW. then the 5-iron.



    Those clubs might match, or they might not, but if you can hit them straight and the gaps work between clubs, you will be way ahead of 99% of the golfing public.



    Drivers and fairway woods - you need to approach them the same way.



    If you end up with 10 clubs that really perform for you, you can play scratch easily, given some talent on your part.



    If you don't have the time to figure it out for yourself, then go the fitting route.



    but, if you do figure it our for yourself, you will be ahead of the game. And you will have a great set of tools.
    Posted:
    Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove.  P.G. Wodehouse
  • MJisGOATMJisGOAT  4586Members Posts: 4,586
    Joined:  #27
    gvogel wrote:


    Here is what I suggest.



    Figure out what 7-iron works best for you - looks, performance, shaft, length, lie - everything. Tweak it, test it, and end up getting a7-iron that you love.



    then do that with the 6-iron. Do it with the 9-iron. The PW. then the 5-iron.



    Those clubs might match, or they might not, but if you can hit them straight and the gaps work between clubs, you will be way ahead of 99% of the golfing public.



    Drivers and fairway woods - you need to approach them the same way.



    If you end up with 10 clubs that really perform for you, you can play scratch easily, given some talent on your part.



    If you don't have the time to figure it out for yourself, then go the fitting route.



    but, if you do figure it our for yourself, you will be ahead of the game. And you will have a great set of tools.
    I like this idea, would take some discipline though.
    Posted:
    Cali
    TailorMaid
    t****
    "inefficient and dead rear cavity design"
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • c. howardc. howard #GoDucks  327Members Posts: 327
    Joined:  #28
    TomWishon wrote:



    This is the chicken vs the egg argument. IMO, you MUST have a semi-repeatable swing before getting fit to benefit. Telling someone who has never played before or a total beginner, for example, that they need to get fit first is ludicous. Why fit clubs to a poor swing? Static measurements like length and lie angle, sure, but not a total dynamic fitting. All depends on how repeatable your swing is. At that point, it is worth it.




    Thank you for bringing this up so I can have a chance to offer a little different perspective on the subject.



    No question whatsoever that a golfer must have a semi repeatable swing before fitting steps in to really benefit. The golfer has to be able to get 95% of his shots airborne and his misses can be over a somewhat wide range but they need to be somewhat more in the same general direction of miss. Hence why we say fitting offers the most benefit for golfers who tend to shoot between 85 and 100.



    On the other hand, we do know for sure that many of the "standard specs" on clubs just bought off the rack for a beginning golfer will have specs which most definitely will prevent him from developing better swing fundamentals. Driver and wood lengths are too long, lofts on woods too low, lofts on longer to mid irons too low, and set makeups are horrible for the beginning golfer.



    Some years ago I got a chance to create a small test situation for just this very matter of beginning golfers with a number of teaching pros in the UK. (UK because I do regular educational seminars in fitting for the Brit PGA) The test came about from pros at my seminars who like you, felt that a beginning golfer didn't need to have anything done with regard to "fitting" - that he should just grab a standard set and go try to learn the game.



    I proposed that they build or buy sets/clubs for beginners and very high handicappers to use when taking lessons and to discourage the beginners/100+ shooters from buying any clubs yet. These teaching sets (men's here for this post - we had other specs for the women) consisted of the following:



    Driver of 13*/42", fairway wood of 20*/39", hybrid of 25*/38", iron set starting at #5 at 30* in 4* increments down to PW at 50*, wide sole sand wedge, putter. Shafts were A flex std. Driver never got used for a while, but it was part of the set because golfers tend to want to hit a driver as soon as possible in the game. Women's version of this was 1" to 1.5" shorter, driver was 16*, fwy was 25*, hybrid was 30*, irons went from 34 down to 50 and all clubs had much lighter shafts.



    We encouraged the pros to start by doing a routine hand measurement then installing grips on these beginner clubs that better fit each golfer - using air to install made this real quick.



    A year later when we checked in with these pros, those who did this most definitely reported better results with their beginners, fewer quit the lessons, more got to a point of breaking 100 in less than a year than the pros had experienced before. Some used these clubs on golfers who had been shooting 95-110 for a long time and found their improvement was very quick.



    So this isn't really FITTING per se as we think of regular golfers going to get fit for full sets. But it is fitting in the sense of tailoring the clubs so that it helps make swing improvements happen sooner. And it works because standard clubs off the rack are so poorly set up for beginning golfers these days.



    The sets were "leased" inexpensively to the beginners if they wanted to play in between lessons. The golfers appreciated not having to buy clubs to learn with, and from that tended to buy their full sets from the pro when it was time. Everyone was happy.



    TOM






    Tom, you are seriously becoming my favorite wrxer to read. If you are down in Arizona can we get a beer and talk about clubs? Really agree with you on what you are saying



    Highscore: from my experience if you go the fitting route just be completely open. I didn't do that because 1. Everywhere I wanted to get fit admitted to having 0 lefty gear. And 2. I was very gung-ho that I want the nike pro combos. Even if I was told the ap2s would be better I'd probably get the nikes. It was what I liked the look of most.



    So if you know there is something you like then feel free to get fit but know it can limit you.
    Posted:
    Driver - Taylormade 2016 M1 10.5˚ AD-DI 6s
    3W - Taylormade 2016 M1 15˚
    3H -Nike Sasquatch Sumo 2
    4-P - Nike Vapor Pro Modus 120 Stiff
    Wedges - Nike Engage Square 52˚ 56˚ Dual Sole 60˚
    Putter - Nike Method 001
    Ball - Nike RZN Platinum
    Bag - Nike Vapor Air Hybrid Carry

    Twitter -
    Instagram -
  • HitEmTrueHitEmTrue North Texas 6612Members Posts: 6,612
    Joined:  #29


    Wow. Thanks for the replies. Seems to be a mix of opinions but I'm still not sure what comes first. Tom, can you chime in on whether the chicken or the egg comes first? I am an 11 handicap playing Adams A4 forged irons that I bought off the rack.




    As an 11, I am gonna say your chicken has hatched.
    Posted:
  • HitEmTrueHitEmTrue North Texas 6612Members Posts: 6,612
    Joined:  #30
    square wrote:


    No disrespect intended, but perhaps you are "completely wrong in your beliefs about fitting'?

    I understand you worked for Golfsmith, manage your own brand now, have decades experience in the equipment industry etc..., But, and again no disrespect intended, none of that makes your fitting related convictions correct, factual, or even especially helpful.

    Consider that (from the perspective of making a fundamentally sound golf swing), static fitting makes sense.

    If a player is content with making faulty swings, yet still wants to get more playable shot results , then perhaps dynamic fitting has merit.




    There are a lot of very good golfers (including pros) out there with lies that are much flatter than a static fitting would suggest.



    Would you recommend they get static fit into more upright clubs, so they can develop a "fundamentally sound golf swing"?
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • bluedotbluedot  3554Members Posts: 3,554
    Joined:  #31
    lawsonman wrote:

    square wrote:


    My endorsement of static fit applies only to irons and wedges.

    For fairway woods and , or, hybrids there is no need for fitting of any kind. Depending on the loft of the head, 39" to 43" hybrids and, or fairway woods will fit all common height adult male players, and promote fundamentally sound swings.

    For drivers anything longer than 44" finished length is past the point of diminishing returns. All adult male players between about 5'8" and 7' tall will find that a 44" driver is best for making fundamentally sound, balanced swings. If a player wants to use an especially heavy driver shaft of 90 to 100 plus gram weight, then 43" to 43.5" finished length will be needed to achieve a balanced, playable driver.. Unfortunately the current golf equipment industry is producing head sizes (460CC) and driver heads weights (195 to 205 grams) designed for 45" plus length drivers.

    Ideally, driver head vendors would design and produce 380Cc to 430cc size heads weighing in a range from 210 to 240 grams. If these were offered it would make finishing a 43.5" or 44" driver a more reasonable procedure than it is today.


    TomWishon wrote:

    square wrote:


    Static fit, based on a player's physique measurements, promotes fundamentally sound golf swings.

    Dynamic fit may promote swing faults, and is also subject to the bias of the fitter.






    I do thank you for posting in response to my question because you have given me the chance to straighten things out with the right information about fitting so any who read this will get the right and best information. Thank you for that opportunity.



    Plain and simple static fitting (meaning fill in the blank fitting forms that do NOT pose questions about ALL the key swing characteristics very well) will have a far greater chance to result in clubs which can cause more swing problems and prevent golfers from developing better swing fundamentals than will a dynamic fitting done in person by a competent, experienced clubfitter.



    Even if the fitting question form has questions about transition, tempo, release, angle of attack, path, face delivery (and most fitting forms do not) - who's to know if the golfer answering the questions really knows what these swing characteristics are - versus someone who SEES these things in person.



    Now I am not here to debate the fact that there are a good number of people who say they can fit who are not that experienced, or knowledgeable. That's a given because the level of knowledge and experience required to be a very good fitter is significant. But such fitters do exist and can be found through resources like the AGCP or ICG.



    The point instead is that measurements alone or information submitted from afar will never, ever, ever provide the depth of key information about a golfer as will a face to face analysis of the golfer and his/her swing characteristics, from which valid fitting decisions can be made. Realizing you need some proof, let me just use one of many examples for how fill in the blank information can result in clubs that prevent the golfer from playing to the best of his ability.



    Let's say our static fitting form says the golfer is a 9 hdcp, is 6'2, has a wrist to floor measurement of 37". From such information that is commonly asked on many fitting forms, one could make the decision that a driver length of 45" could be ok for this player. But what if the golfer has an outside in swing path, has a 3/4 length backswing, has an upright swing plane, has a strong forceful transition, has a midway release and tends to slice/fade the ball? All these these which so often are not questioned on a fill in the blank fitting form point toward the fact that this is a golfer who better not be using a driver longer than 44" and would be better off with 43.5" - because all of these swing characteristics do NOT match well with longer lengths.



    In such a case, if this golfer gets the 45" driver, his chances of improving his swing path and directional control are severely hampered by the club being too long for the ability he has to control a longer club.



    Yet in a dynamic fitting, meaning if he is face to face with a good fitter, these swing characteristics will be seen and will be factored in to the length decision which all point to the fact this guy is NOT going to do as well with a 45" driver as one much shorter. And this is just length for the driver. All of the other specs on the clubs can also be shown to be better off fit in person, face to face than with any fitting form from afar.



    Sorry, I get a little passionate about this subject of fitting because I have spent the better part of my career researching it more deeply than any person alive I believe - and it is VERY important to me that golfers know the facts about fitting because there are SO MANY MYTHS AND MISINFORMATION out there about fitting. Thanks again for bringing this up so it could be addressed properly for golfers to know.



    TOM





    Square, your post is wrong in so many ways I had to read it 5 times to see if I was hallucinating. Please,Please,Please, take Tom up on his offer.




    I agree. I have read some odd stuff here over the years concerning fitting, but this one takes the cake. I, too, reread it, thinking I must have missed something. I had not.
    Posted:
3

Leave a Comment

Rich Text Editor. To edit a paragraph's style, hit tab to get to the paragraph menu. From there you will be able to pick one style. Nothing defaults to paragraph. An inline formatting menu will show up when you select text. Hit tab to get into that menu. Some elements, such as rich link embeds, images, loading indicators, and error messages may get inserted into the editor. You may navigate to these using the arrow keys inside of the editor and delete them with the delete or backspace key.