Bradley Hughes

[TimK1]

Has anybody ever read his critic on the modern golf equipment? It is really interesting. Basically he say's that the modern equipment has ruined the golf swing, even at his level. He is taking PGA Tour level.

He goes on to say that in an effort to keep selling clubs and keep the money machine going the club companies have tweaked all the clubs because the Am is too much in love with distance ahead of good solid fundamentals. The equipment made now masks the flaws of many a player and provides zero feedback as to wear your miss hitting your shots. He say's it too lite and the relationship between the club and hands has been destroyed.

He say's, all the lies angles in clubs now promote a steep golf swing causing most guys to stall out and flip the club at impact. In other words, using the modern equipment has forced even the best players to make some compensation in their swing to use this equipment. Ex, jumping up at impact. Also he say's that because of this it causes misses that spray all over the golf course and it is only because of the non stop practice and playing are the pros able to use this stuff.

He says it has destroyed the Am. ability to really get better.

You can go to Bradleyhughes.com and click on the equipment tab to read it.

 

I happen to agree with him but I always have. I read this article many years ago and have always resisted the modern specs. I do have newer woods but the specs on the shafts and lengths are what they were in the 80's.

I posted this here, because in this classic section I figured there were many who might think the same.

I have a shallow swing on purpose. Built my equipment specs around this.

[scomac2002]

Thanks for providing the link. There is a lot of merit in what he has to say, but I don't necessarily agree with it across the board. Technology has made the game easier, especially for those who for one reason or another lack swing speed and can take advantage of lighter weight equipment without swinging out of their shoes. As always there are more sides to the story than what is presented. If enjoyment is the ultimate goal rather than improvement, then perhaps something that is more forgiving is in the best interest of the player.

[moehogan]

Brad surely knows his stuff. Just ask Brendon Todd!

[TimK1]

I agree with him but it makes sense what you say. Guess it depends on what you're after with the game. I can say though that I agree with him as far as irons go. However I got curious one day and bought a callaway steel shafted driver on E Bay And took it out to hit and I hated it. I like the modern woods. I don't like the shaft lengths so my driver is 43.5, three wood is 42 and five wood is 41 . I gave up really nothing on the distance and I don't miss many fairways with them.

[mocokid]

There is a website, advanced ball striking, (John Erickson) where Hughes' teaching is popular. These guys are big on traditional equipment, and flat lies. You can google them.

[TimK1]

I have to admit. Much to my shame, I know nothing about lie angles and how it does or doesn't effect the swing. I look at my club specs and this stuff goes right over my head. I have no idea what these numbers mean.

I'm a good player too and I don't know. So basically what he is saying is that if you want to learn a shallower swing you are not going to achieve it with the new equipment? I have a pretty shallow swing or I feel I'm pretty good at shallowing out ,but my clubs are only seven years old.

I do understand in principle what he is saying but not in the reality of my game. I just don't see it.

 

Maybe someone can explain what all these lie angles numbers mean?

 

[mocokid]

have all your clubs (the lie) flattened by 4* and you'll be fine, i think is the ABS method. Flat lies do help prevent hooks, pulls and increase shallowing, and promote a later release. Again there are limits here. No lie will help preventing a hook by itself. Upright lies promote the opposite.

[Bigarch]

I'm 6'5" and I feel like I benefited from more upright lie angles years ago when I was taking up the game. My first set of "fit" golf clubs was a set of Ping Eye2 white dot (3 degrees up) It allowed my swing to get better. And since that time, I've had people tell me that I have a good looking swing. Before the clubs, I NEVER had anyone tell me I had a good looking swing. If you have a golfer just learning the game, there's no way they are ever going to develop a good looking swing playing with clubs that are way off in terms of lie angles.

Now that being said, I think once we started to understand lie angles better, clubfitters used variables like lie angle and length to fix the flight of the ball and it did nothing to fix the swing. So now you have swings that look uglier than a rusty gate that can produce good ball flight. Years ago, I was a Henry Griffitts clubfitter...they always stressed teaching the swing along with fitting golf clubs. You wanted the player to make a good looking swing and then build a club that rewarded that swing. If the guy came over the top bad, you wanted the ball to go hard left....not go straight. You wanted the good swing to go straight. I think that's been lost and the manufacturers have figured that out. They realize most players swings look like they are killing snakes so they build clubs longer and more upright to straighten ball flight on these over the top ugly swings.

And that's where we are today. I think my specs for length and lie angle have stayed pretty constant. But when shopping new clubs, I see that I only need about 1 degree upright by today's standards. So I get where he is coming from. And I'll bet its frustrating for tour players because they are under pressure to play what the manufacturers are trying to sell. Thats why their clubs have to be heavily modified to their swings and specs before they go in the bag. NOBODY on tour is playing something off the rack.

[TimK1]

I hear you. My swing when I was a kid was flatter. Not flat flat but somewhat. I was always naturally shallow on my downswing. My ball striking was very good in a short period of time after taking up the game. I always hit the ball straight with very little curve. Even the older balls I didn't curve much. I rarely hit the ball offline.

My clubs were the Callaway S2H2. That was my first set, just bought off the rack. I had no clue about any of this but they fit my swing perfectly. Of course I'm only a few years into the game and don't know that. I was a bit if a club junkie in those days and I started changing irons all the time and my swing got more upright over time. I started hooking more and hitting pulls. Not realizing I was playing with the wrong clubs of course I go and start trying to change my swing.

Thankfully I was able to make it work and have been a two handicap for years but I have never been as good a ball striker as I was in that time. About two years ago I made a decision to go back and flatten out my swing some and shallow my downswing like in those days. I have been able to do it and my ball striking is back the way it was.

I actually bought a set of S2H2 irons on E bay and I'm gonna practice with them. I'm curious. Now that I'm shallowed out again my Mizuno MP69 are too upright so if I stay with them I'm gonna have to flatten them a bit.

Thanks for the input. If upright works for you then cool. Your swing is grooved to that. Mine never really was. I just can play so I made it work.

[NRJyzr]

I have a problem with someone suggesting a flatter swing is The Way, and like BigArch, it's a physical limitation related issue. I am of barely above average height, but have short arms. For me to effectively swing flatter, I would need to bend an absurd amount, or swing over the top of the ball.

Interestingly, Nicklaus was an upright swing guy. He did ok. LOL

All that said, I am now playing my irons two to three degrees flatter than my physical attributes would suggest. Perhaps my version of swinging flatter is to swing such that I use what is roughly a standard lie these days.

[TimK1]

I don't think it is the way for everybody. It is for me. When I first picked up a club when I was 17 it was just the way I started swinging. I never had a lesson or anybody show me how to play. I still haven't had one to this day and I'm 55 now. It seemed more natural to me. For some reason in the last year or so I started thinking that it was always my equipment that kinda forced me into a swing that wasn't natural for me. I only say that because I can remember when I started to struggle it wasn't because I changed my swing at all. Swinging that way was all I knew. I always was buying new irons and over time without knowing it I just conformed to what my equipment specs were. I never knew about lie angles and lofts. All I knew was how to play.

It was the same with my driver. I always had a Big Bertha and drove it straight and long. Once I started using newer drivers I started missing fairways. It was more my lack a knowledge of my swing and what works for me.

I do if anything, I follow some of Bradley Hughes stuff. Mostly though, I'm my own teacher.

That's why I brought this up. It is only the article he wrote about equipment and I wanted to hear what others thought on the topic.

 

[BIG STU]

Here is my take on the whole ball of wax FWIW. You guys have always heard me say I believe there is no etched in stone way to properly swing or play this game. One of the reasons I was never an instructor when I had Class A status. The same can go for equipment too. On the fitting end I am a firm believer in 3 things the lie board, the divot and ball flight consistency. On irons sole design has a lot to do with the overall picture too. I have always stressed this-- that a lot to do with things is the era you learned the game in and the equipment you learned it with which was available at the time. I also believe in one's natural swing whether it be steep or shallow. I think lots of times people try to swing say like Adam Scott and get too tense and go no where. I have seen good players with "too upright swings" and good players with "flat swings" When setting lies on clubs I never go with published numbers I go by what the club needs for that player. Certain clubs may have different lie numbers over other brands or designs to work for a person. I am also a firm believer of the eyes telling the body what to do without getting the brain involved. One other thing on the numbers thing I do not believe in jacking a loft on any club more than 2* from the manufacturers standard whether it be an old school blade or modern already jacked lofts. You get into too many issues with offset and bounce with extreme jacking. Me personally I have been playing and messing with clubs so long I have a practiced eye at address that I can usually tell what a club needs for me as far as lie angle. I know in the past I have had to work quite a while with clubs to get them right for me or others. I have always thought outside the box in everything I do especially golf and racing and will readily admit I have "over engineered" myself at times in both. I also will admit there is a difference in the old school methods of swing and equipment versus the modern game. I am also a firm believer in the difference between the range and actually playing on the course.

[NRJyzr]

I tend to agree with him on club weight, but the whole lie angle thing is a bit overblown IMHO. A caveat on my club weight opinion is that I'm a moderately large person (6 feet, 230 lbs), and when I began the game, I was involved in a weight lifting program. Meaning, I don't know that I'm in the fat part of the bell curve, LOL.

I'm decidedly not fond of graphite shaft weights currently in vogue; I think the sub-70g shafts do a grave disservice to the golf public, and would prefer seeing 80g+ minimum, with plenty more options in 90g and 100g weights (the first driver I could control in my early days had a graphite shaft in excess of 100g). I also find the current steel shaft trend of going ever lighter to be a bit odd. There are definitely applications for such weights, but applying it across the board seems a bit much to me.

On lie angles, speaking generally, the average iron set these days is only 1* more upright at the 5 iron than those of 30-40 years ago, and maybe 2* if we go back 60-70 years. The reason for that is purely the increasing average height of the overall population; the current generation are rather taller than those of golf legend. Again, generally speaking.

I find it rather interesting that nearly every foray into playing a persimmon/laminate driver and 3 wood finds my tee game improving, and scores unaffected, possibly even dropping somewhat. And, that my longest, non-cart-path-aided, drive of the past four seasons is with a Ping Zing Blonde with KT-M shaft. How about that? LOL

A few random thoughts by a guy who finds himself awake for no reason on a Saturday morning, at 4am...

[BIG STU]

You ain't the only one awake at 04:00 on a Saturday morning but then again that is SOP for me up early. I can relate and somewhat explain the thing with persimmon from my perspective. Part of it with a somewhat modern ball the persimmon does not spin as much and for me it translates into side spin. For some reason in my older age I have gotten dead accurate with the persimmon with steel shafts. On certain courses the little decrease in distance does not affect me maybe 1 club difference. On club weight I do not subscribe to the conventional way of thinking. On my personal clubs I weigh strictly by feel. I do have a SW machine but do not use it on my stuff. i did have a friend of mine in the business that wanted to SW my personal clubs. I told him fine but I did not want to know what they were because it would get into my brain too much. He did tell me that they were all over the place which was ok if I liked it that way. Something else we talked about earlier was lie angles. General practice says 1/2 a degree between clubs. I do not go off that number ( on my stuff) I may have a full degree and maybe a degree and a half separation between two irons. On that I go for me strictly by the ball dispersion and the divot. Ran into a little rift on that one time. I sold a set of KZG ZO blades I had been messing with to a player that was going to the PGM school here. Of course a SOP with those guys he had them on the machines. He told my buddy I did not know what I was doing that I had lies all over the place along with swing weights that I was a kook. My buddy laughed and he is a master Miura builder and dealer and told him I knew exactly what I was doing they were set for me and me only. My buddy told me about this second hand. I made a vow that day that I would not sell any clubs that I had seriously experimented with and set up for me without pulling out all the lead tape and setting back to stock standard lies. Lofts I never jack with except to set to standard factory specs. My buddy further told those wet between the ears PGM guys that I marched to the beat of my own drum right or wrong. One of the reasons I do not go on the club builders threads here. I have been called out for some of my statements. Here I feel among friends that maybe see where I am coming from

[TimK1]

It is really only in the last year I have been thinking about this.

I wish the golf industry would have a least a standard for clubs. If you go to a store and buy a set off the rack at standard lofts and lies, no matter what the brand, it is the same. At least that way you have a basis or standard to work off of.

I compared my specs from my current set to those Callaway S2H2 I had in the late eighties and they were very different. Both were considered standard loft and lie clubs. Both bought off the rack. Even yesterday I took an eight iron from an old set of Hogan Radials I have and held it next to my Mizuno Eight iron. Both basically, when grounded were the same but my current eight iron is a half an inch longer. Both were considered Standard off the rack clubs.

I just wish there was some kind of standard to follow. Golf is hard enough. It's no wonder half the golfing population is confused. Just by the arguments I read on here, there just seems to be so many conflicting ideas. Especially about the swing. There are too many instructors all pedaling the latest, greatest secret and making a lot of money off people. Same with all the equipment and just about everything else involved with this game.

Really my issue is that I get board. I have been a pretty good player most my life. I think I just get board and start looking for something to challenge me or make me learn something new. Even in a hour range session I start tinkering. I'm one of those guys that can swing three different ways and basically get the same result.

So I think I just start looking for things just to keep from getting board. This is just my latest . It will pass. LOL

[NRJyzr]

Living in an area where we have a forced off-season, I can truly understand boredom and how it affects a golfer. LOL

[Mitchell]

@BIG STU ,
Definitely get the idea of tweaking lies, club overall and SW to fit a particular sense of feel. Can remember my early days playing watching Raymond Floyd test clubs at his Dad's course in Fayetteville NC with a roll of lead tape and a marker to show where he wanted relief placed on sole to fit his preferences for each iron and wedge. He then would give the manufacturer that particular set and say, "go make a set that feels exactly like these without any weight added to hosel and will test them to go into bag".

[TimK1]

Sure does. Are season ended in mid oct. We had 6 inches on the ground in early Nov.

[BIG STU]

You will never have a standard lie over the board for all clubs. There is too much variance in sole bounces hosels with offset etc. Every one does their own thing which I think is good. No one club will do it for every and all golfers no matter what the manufacturers will lead you to believe. I will give you an example and this is just me and when and how I learned the game. I actually started with Wilson then Spalding and on to Macgregor. Certain Hogan clubs with the under slung hosel do not fit my eye. Nothing at all wrong with those clubs but they do not fit my eye. Now certain Hogan clubs do like my Precisions or my Hogan Grinds fit my eye ok and I hit them well. I also do not like a lot of offset because somewhere between my eyes telling my body what to do it throws me off. Lots of folks need the offset and the longer faced clubs. And as far as lofts forget a standard today it is a power game as in Joe Golfer hitting his 9 iron 150 yards like DJ does. Yeah I tinker too but not with my swing but equipment

[BIG STU]

My old man knew Raymond well and his Dad. I was around Raymond some that is where I get my trigger finger thing from. Around me you had a lot of pros stopping over going to the Kemper in Charlotte. Have seen guys like Mike Winn testing and messing with clubs and that is the guy I got my lead tape doctrine from. Also was around guys like James Black Nate Starks and Calvin Peete testing clubs and tinkering. Mike also instilled the thought in me to trust my natural feel. LOL he was on the Ram Staff at the time and I do not think he had a Ram club in his bag. He had a mismatched set from Hades all covered in lead tape. Saw him in the club house one rainy day and he spied a 8 iron on the Par 3 Rental rack. He picked it up hmmmmm asked the old man what he wanted for it? My old man told him keep it. He handed it to me and asked me to put one of his Crown Cord grips on it and took a pencil and drew where he wanted one strip of lead tape at. That 8 iron was in his bag the next week at the Kemper at Quail Hollow. If memory serves me correctly it was some sort of Maxfli iron. I always thought that was an amazing journey from the rental rack to the PGA Tour in one week! Loved it back in the day those guys with staff bags on the range with a couple of rolls of lead tape slung on the umbrella handle. Actually those guys did not go to our range they hit their own shag balls from behind our 9th green across the par 3 course. They would all rent the par 3 course for the day. Later on they would practice their short games on the Par 3 and then get some money matches up. man those were the days for a 12 or 13 year old

[BIG STU]

This got my curiosity up about Bradley Hughes--- So I looked it up and I agree with him 110% on equipment and the modern game

[NRJyzr]

@BIG STU
Talking about lie angles... old standards were all over the place. Palmer Standards had a 0.5* lie slope. Ram used a 1* lie slope in the 80s. Ping believes in a 0.75* or 0.8* lie slope, depending on how the specs are rounded. My MP-37s are stranger yet, 0.5* between 2i thru 5i, 1* between 5i thru 8i, then 0.5* again in the 8-PW.
I'd been using a bastardized 0.75* for myself, alternating between 0.5* and 1* for each gap. Keeps me either on target or a quarter degree off. I figure I can live with a quarter degree. With my MP37s, I went with a straight 2* up from the I specs (59* 5 iron std), which seemed to work well in the 2nd Swing bay. And it's been working on course, also.

[BIG STU]

LOL I believe Ping always had those crazy numbered lie angles to be a$$es. BTW 60* is my standard lie angle for a 5 iron in all my blade Macs. Now that set of Eye2s I found on the pile a while back were red dot. I set them to my lie specs of my blade Macs and I hit them ok they just don't transfer any feel for me. I remember I think Charley Penna said there were no standard published specs for Macs back in the day. My Old Man was never into the mechanical aspect of things and he always said never screw with a set of Macs to learn to hit them like they were. He probably rolled in his grave 3 times when I built the MacHogans and yes I have lead tape on all of them. I can remember back in the day he had no use for Ben Hogan ( never said why he was like that) and when the Hoganized Macs became sorta popular around our area and the Triad area of NC he stated " Why in the hell would anyone want to mess up a perfectly good set of Macgregors by putting a inferior shaft in them?" I can remember the last round I played with him I was playing my 80 VIPs ( my original set) and had the Brunswick shafts in them and lead tape. He asked what kind of irons were those I told him. He replied well you would never know by all that junky lead tape. He also added I thought I taught you better than that. Like I said he was never about the mechanical aspects of tuning clubs. He was into a proper swing by the book game and greens and fairways.

[TimK1]

I just came back from a two hour practice session. We have several indoor dome type ranges here that are about 100 yards long and pretty high up so you can really get a good feel for your shots. They also have trackman;s at every station but I'm usually to cheap to use one. LOL

I have a set of Hogan Radials in the garage. I dug out an 8 iron and compared it to my current eight. The Hogan is 1/2 inch shorter. It feels a little flatter but I did not measure it. I took it with me today and flushed it for two straight hours. The club was so comfortable in my hands. Mu posture and set up felt great with it.

I believe the 1/2 inch shorter club is the ticket for me. They were standard for the day.

I have my woods set to the old standards with shaft length. My Driver is 43.5, 3 wood is 42 and my 5 wood is 41 inches. Never considered my irons though.

[Fellaheen51]

 @BIG STU. I believe Ping always had those crazy numbered lie angles to be a$$es.As I understand it, Ping has a method to their madness. Using .75* increments in their color code system for lie fitting. Based on "effective lie" angles vs. static lie angles. A static lie is fixed and doesn't change (unless physical altered by bending). In your case, a 60* lie angle 5 iron is fixed. But as one changes the length of a club, the effective lie angle changes. The ratio is 1/2" change in length = .75* change in the effective lie angle. It's a trigonometry thing, relationship between side lengths and angles in triangles.
So if one lengthens a club .5", the club will be .75* more upright than the standard static lie. In order to keep the lie angle consistent, the actual lie (at the hosel) needs to be .75* flatter. The reverse is also the case, as one goes shorter. The Ping color code addresses this ratio between length and effective lies. They even added a couple of additional color dots awhile back to keep the system consistent. Recently though they have returned to using 1* increments in their color dot system. Eliminating a couple of color codes. Perhaps for simplicity of inventory purposes.
Whether all this incrementalism is of value is subject to debate. I'm OK with being +/- a degree from optimum (with flatter being easier to compensate for than upright). But if one knows their length and preferred dot color, it's transferable to other Ping clubs. Ping has been an innovator in "custom" fitting of their OTR clubs for a long time. A concept directly attributable (IMHO) to Karsten Solheim, always the engineer.

[nitram]

Me too Stu.

My first set was some hand me down Hogan Presidentials with literally a pound of lead tape on 14 clubs.

My current set is 3.5* flat and D6-D8 and the wedges are E0.

[BIG STU]

Yep you learned your feel with heavy clubs and I bet you know by instinct where the club is at all times in your swing. And I will add respectively those S-55s in your signature ain't exactly spring chickens either. The few newer Cally wedges I have experimented with seem very light stock. I have a PM 60* I had to melt shot sinker in those holes in the back and add 2 strips of lead tape.

[nitram]

From driver to putter I am well into the 3rd roll of high density lead tape plus 30 grams of hotmelt in the driver.

To quote an old madam of the night, "I like 'em heavy and stiff".

[Bigarch]

We need a new thread called "Show me your lead tape". The pics would be like pornography for some of us. @BIG STU would probably be the Larry Flynt of that thread.

[NRJyzr]

Arch, that might be interesting to see others' handiwork. I'll have to see if I can scrounge up some pics to share LOL