Fitting or Clubs? What to do First

[bluedot]

[quote name='lawsonman' timestamp='1387588100' post='8329927']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1387580453' post='8329525']
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.

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1387564114' post='8328603']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1387560721' post='8328349']
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.
[/quote]


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
[/quote]
[/quote]

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.
[/quote]

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.

[cpriceAP2]

I've got to put my .02 in... A coworker, occasional playing partner was looking for a new set of clubs. He's a solid
15 hcp, 5' 6", 155, and late 50's. With that said he went to GS, because that's where the local club pro suggested. GS salesman "fitted" him. Told him he needed a cavity back set of irons with R flex shafts and he went on his way. Next day returns to the same store, same salesman, they found a set of TM CB irons on the used rack, the salesman wiped them down, boxed them up and sent him on his way. After a couple weeks of frustration I met him at the local range, watched about 3 swings and knew something was wrong. The clubs were 3/4" long and 3*up and the "CB" head on the TM isn't very forgiving. I took him to our local Club Champion location where could mix and match equipment. Bottom line, yes, he needs a cavity back, game improvement iron, 1/2" short and 1* flat. He's hitting the ball well now

Moral of this story, IMO, find someplace to try as much equipment as possible with an unbiased salesperson/fitter and get what FITS YOU, not what the salesman is steering you towards. No point going to "Brand A" fitter because you like the looks of the clubs and not trying EVERY mfg available. I've seen many players buy clubs that don't truly FIT because they hit them well in a store and didn't try them all.
I'm a Titleist guy throughout my bag and I know they are the best for me.

Get fit first, try them ALL and then get them built to Your specs

That sure was a lot of rambling... Sorry. Too much work, not enough golf.

[braincramp52]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1387594587' post='8330349']
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.


[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1387581570' post='8329583']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1387580453' post='8329525']
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.




[/quote]

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
[/quote]
[/quote]

C'mon! Tell us the truth.Are you a Alien? Where are you getting your information? If your idea's are from actual experience I feel sorry for anyone you have fitted for clubs. Not being disrespectful,just factual.

[highscoreinky]

Thanks Tom. I already bag a mix of 7 different brands so it wouldn't bother me to have an even more diverse bag as long as every club was one I love hitting.

[quote name='gvogel' timestamp='1387595467' post='8330397']
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.
[/quote]

[TomWishon]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1387594587' post='8330349']
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.

[/quote]

No chance. Sorry to sound arrogant about that but those who have read my books (which are all based on REAL RESEARCH over the course of 30+ yrs) and who have attended schools and seminars I have given over the past 30 yrs all know that I know what I am talking about when it comes to clubfitting technology. You don't know this because you have not been closely associated with the golf equipment and clubmaking/clubfitting industry, So I don't mind if you are skeptical at first. But you seem to not want to accept the fact that maybe you should be a little more open minded to listening to what someone with my experience and record and reputation has to say about the very basics of what clubfitting is all about.

from where do you get your beliefs, what research have you done to support your position and beliefs? I would be interested to know so I can have the chance to know if I am discussing this with a professional who has definite research experience of your own.

You ask about my qualifications to know what I am talking about. Fine, happy to offer some background.

I began my career in 1972 as a PGA professional in the Northern Cal section of the PGA. I taught extensively in the beginning of my career and studied with a number of very respected teaching professionals in the Nor Cal area so I do have a pretty strong background in swing mechanics and swing fundamentals as well as the practical side of teaching real golfers. My equipment experience began in 1973 when out of both a great interest and necessity for a little more income, I taught myself how to perform all procedures of clubmaking and club repair.

My technical education began out of pure curiosity and a passion to know why some clubs performed well for some golfers but not for all - or when something was changed in a golf club for a golfer, sometimes it resulted in them hitting the ball better and sometimes worse. Back then I used to try to call anyone and everyone I could with any golf club company to any shaft company to ask questions to fuel my learning. Virtually every time I would get through to an engineer or technical person with any of the golf companies, I either got the brush off or was told that the information I sought was "proprietary" and not for public release. (which later I found to be the stock answer for "I don't know).

So I recall about about the 30th time of being rebuffed from one of my calls for information, I got very angry and said to myself, "I'm going to find out all this stuff about how golf clubs really perform for golfers and if I do learn it, I will be sure to share what I learn with anyone who is interested."

And quite simply, over the past 40 yrs, that is precisely what I have done. I have embarked on countless research projects and studies over the course of my career. Some were funded by the companies I worked for, most were not because most of the companies I worked for before starting my own company really didn't care to spend their money on technical research. I had a lot of good technical help along the way from independent engineers and scientists who either pushed me to dig deeper, nudged me back on the correct technical track to get to the answers I was seeking, and in some cases took on a few of the technical research studies on their own for me.

At this point looking back, I really cannot find very many areas related to the performance of golf clubs for golfers that I have not probed professionally and technically. But it was from 2003 to 2009 that I really, and I mean REALLY began to understand the relationship of movements in the golf swing to specifications of golf clubs, and from that to learn just how to match golfers with different swings to the best fitting specifications. This came as a result of several years of study of the biomechanics of the golf swing and how various swing moves reacted to different specifications in golf clubs and vice versa, how changes in golf club specs brought about changes in the golf swing.

Following my declaration to share whatever I learned with whoever was interested, I have written ten books in my career. Two of them were selected as the Golf Book of the Year and the ones I have written specifically about clubfitting have been the reference books used by clubmakers to guide their fitting education since 1997.

How do I know what I say is right? Well for one, the results of the research projects over the years proved that. But really, what I think is better proof is the fact that thousands of clubmakers who follow and use the fitting techniques I teach do have repeated fitting success with golfers of all levels of ability, time after time.

You seem to want to operate from a belief that every golfer has the ability to develop perfectly correct, proper swing fundamentals. Or you feel that any golfer should be able to develop perfect swing fundamentals using ANY type of golf club specifications, as long as they work hard enough on their swings. Sorry, but golf is and will forever be a difficult game to master because it does require a high level of athletic ability and neuro muscular control that many, many people just do not have. So when golfers develop their less than perfect swings, fitting is there to help reduce the severity of the shot patterns of these swing mistakes.

But fitting also has the ability to help golfers develop better swing characteristics. Our biomechanical research proved to us that certain club specs do make it more difficult for golfers to develop better swing characteristics. For example, the longer the driver length, the higher the driver's assembled MOI, and the higher the driver's assembled MOI, the more stress the driver puts on the golfer and his swing moves. Hence the real scientific reason why so many golfers never play consistently well with a longer driver but do gain better consistency when the change to a shorter driver.

The golf swing is forever indissolubly linked to the specifications of golf clubs in terms of achieving a higher level of shotmaking success, Golf clubs are fit to the golfer's existing swing to reduce the severity of shot patterns from swing mistakes. That is done through DYNAMIC FITTING so the clubfitter can see if this combination of fitting specs brings about better shot results than some other combination of fitting specs.

My offer for the free book still stands in the desire to help you learn the facts, and in the hope that you will open your mind to realize the error in your thinking.

TOM

[dunn]

First do the shaft....find shaft that fits you, almost any head will work if you have right shaft.....most should already know their shaft...head isnt that important...long as its in your realm obviously

[Ripken08]

You guys saying beginners need a dynamic fitting are nuts. Fitting a poor swing does nothing but put $$$ in the fitters pocket. Get a resemblance of small swing then get fitted.

[martinbns]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1387516518' post='8326627']
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.
[/quote]

I couldn't disagree with you more.

I went through that process and after 25 year of playing standard lie and loft clubs with stiff shafts it recommended Blue dots with regular. I bought them and after 18 months of trying to learn to play my fitted clubs I was hitting 120 yards 7 irons because if I swung more than about 60% the ball went left.

Went back to standard and my game came back almost immediately. I was fitted by the Ping Rep at a golftown, never saw them outside, my pro theorized I should have had longer more upright clubs as a kid, but over 25 years my body had adapted to clubs that were too short for me.

[martinbns]

[quote name='HitEmTrue' timestamp='1387630683' post='8331321']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1387594587' post='8330349']
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.
[/quote]

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"?
[/quote]

Exactly what happened to me.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='dunn' timestamp='1387654745' post='8332373']
First do the shaft....find shaft that fits you, almost any head will work if you have right shaft.....most should already know their shaft...head isnt that important...long as its in your realm obviously
[/quote]

While the WEIGHT of the shaft is a very important fitting factor for all golfers, the flex and bend profile of a shaft only become an important fitting element as the golfer's release gets later and later in the downswing, AND as their downswing acceleration increases along with it.

For those golfers with smoother tempos and early to midway release, the shaft flex and bend profile are the LEAST IMPORTANT part of the golf club's total fitting parameters - with length, loft, lie, face angle, total weight, swingweight, grip size, head design being THE most important.

But as the golfer's release gets later and later and their downswing tempo gets more and more aggressive, this is when the shaft's flecc and bend profile begin to take their place as being as important as the length, loft, lie, face angle, total weight, swingweight, grip size, head design.

Golfers who have always had a later release and or more aggressive downswing tempo can not relate to this because they have always had the swing characteristics which make the shaft flex/bend profile be important. So it is common that later release/more aggressive players make the mistake and think the shaft flex/bend profile is the most important part of the club - which it is not.

TOM

[martinbns]

Here's my thought on this. It's not practical for most of us to be fit by a guy like Tom.

Pick a few irons you want to try, bring your own 6 iron so you know the electronic data is accurate.

Hit the stock 6 irons from three or four different sets and you quickly find out which ones feel good and have the potential to outperform the current sticks you play.

Narrow it down to one iron, then go to the cart and start trying different shafts etc all the time regularly mixing your own 6 iron into the mix to see the baseline again and again.

I have gone through this a few times and each time ended up keeping my existing sets.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='SHORTBUTSTR8' timestamp='1387655308' post='8332405']
You guys saying beginners need a dynamic fitting are nuts. Fitting a poor swing does nothing but put $$$ in the fitters pocket. Get a resemblance of small swing then get fitted.
[/quote]

Please go read post #15 on this thread, which I did address to your first comment about beginning players.

TOM

[TomWishon]

[quote name='martinbns' timestamp='1387665058' post='8332911']
Here's my thought on this. It's not practical for most of us to be fit by a guy like Tom.

[/quote]

Seriously, there are at least 100 to 200 clubmaker/clubfitters in this country that can fit as well as I can - some of them better than me since they have actually been fitting professionally on a daily basis for decades.

These guys aren't everywhere, that's for sure. But they do exist and if you happen to live in reasonable proximity to one, wow, are golfers missing out on really knowing what specs are THE SPECS for them by not going to see one of these guys.

So if anyone is curious to know if one of these super fitters is in their area, shoot me a PM with your city/zip and I would be glad to check and see if one is in your area. But I am gone from my office until Dec 30 - so if you PM me to ask, just be patient and I will get back to you.

TOM

[redhead]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1387665499' post='8332939']
So if anyone is curious to know if one of these super fitters is in their area, shoot me a PM with your city/zip and I would be glad to check and see if one is in your area. But I am gone from my office until Dec 30 - so if you PM me to ask, just be patient and I will get back to you.

TOM
[/quote]

Hi Tom,
Can you recommend a good fitter in Asia? Particularly in Singapore and/or Indonesia?
Cheers

[square]

Nothing personal, but I don't have much respect for the "golf equipment industry", which is constantly pushing the latest and greatest technology.And consumers aren't much better, many of whom are constantly looking to somehow hit better shots and shoot lower scores by buying new gear. It's all a cheap scene with a bad flavor about it. A desperate search for instant gratification..
The game deserves better. Specifically, competent instructors teaching a few basic fundamentals. And consumers willing to put in the practice time to learn how to properly swing a golf club.


[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1387651546' post='8332231']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1387594587' post='8330349']
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.

[/quote]

No chance. Sorry to sound arrogant about that but those who have read my books (which are all based on REAL RESEARCH over the course of 30+ yrs) and who have attended schools and seminars I have given over the past 30 yrs all know that I know what I am talking about when it comes to clubfitting technology. You don't know this because you have not been closely associated with the golf equipment and clubmaking/clubfitting industry, So I don't mind if you are skeptical at first. But you seem to not want to accept the fact that maybe you should be a little more open minded to listening to what someone with my experience and record and reputation has to say about the very basics of what clubfitting is all about.

from where do you get your beliefs, what research have you done to support your position and beliefs? I would be interested to know so I can have the chance to know if I am discussing this with a professional who has definite research experience of your own.

You ask about my qualifications to know what I am talking about. Fine, happy to offer some background.

I began my career in 1972 as a PGA professional in the Northern Cal section of the PGA. I taught extensively in the beginning of my career and studied with a number of very respected teaching professionals in the Nor Cal area so I do have a pretty strong background in swing mechanics and swing fundamentals as well as the practical side of teaching real golfers. My equipment experience began in 1973 when out of both a great interest and necessity for a little more income, I taught myself how to perform all procedures of clubmaking and club repair.

My technical education began out of pure curiosity and a passion to know why some clubs performed well for some golfers but not for all - or when something was changed in a golf club for a golfer, sometimes it resulted in them hitting the ball better and sometimes worse. Back then I used to try to call anyone and everyone I could with any golf club company to any shaft company to ask questions to fuel my learning. Virtually every time I would get through to an engineer or technical person with any of the golf companies, I either got the brush off or was told that the information I sought was "proprietary" and not for public release. (which later I found to be the stock answer for "I don't know).

So I recall about about the 30th time of being rebuffed from one of my calls for information, I got very angry and said to myself, "I'm going to find out all this stuff about how golf clubs really perform for golfers and if I do learn it, I will be sure to share what I learn with anyone who is interested."

And quite simply, over the past 40 yrs, that is precisely what I have done. I have embarked on countless research projects and studies over the course of my career. Some were funded by the companies I worked for, most were not because most of the companies I worked for before starting my own company really didn't care to spend their money on technical research. I had a lot of good technical help along the way from independent engineers and scientists who either pushed me to dig deeper, nudged me back on the correct technical track to get to the answers I was seeking, and in some cases took on a few of the technical research studies on their own for me.

At this point looking back, I really cannot find very many areas related to the performance of golf clubs for golfers that I have not probed professionally and technically. But it was from 2003 to 2009 that I really, and I mean REALLY began to understand the relationship of movements in the golf swing to specifications of golf clubs, and from that to learn just how to match golfers with different swings to the best fitting specifications. This came as a result of several years of study of the biomechanics of the golf swing and how various swing moves reacted to different specifications in golf clubs and vice versa, how changes in golf club specs brought about changes in the golf swing.

Following my declaration to share whatever I learned with whoever was interested, I have written ten books in my career. Two of them were selected as the Golf Book of the Year and the ones I have written specifically about clubfitting have been the reference books used by clubmakers to guide their fitting education since 1997.

How do I know what I say is right? Well for one, the results of the research projects over the years proved that. But really, what I think is better proof is the fact that thousands of clubmakers who follow and use the fitting techniques I teach do have repeated fitting success with golfers of all levels of ability, time after time.

You seem to want to operate from a belief that every golfer has the ability to develop perfectly correct, proper swing fundamentals. Or you feel that any golfer should be able to develop perfect swing fundamentals using ANY type of golf club specifications, as long as they work hard enough on their swings. Sorry, but golf is and will forever be a difficult game to master because it does require a high level of athletic ability and neuro muscular control that many, many people just do not have. So when golfers develop their less than perfect swings, fitting is there to help reduce the severity of the shot patterns of these swing mistakes.

But fitting also has the ability to help golfers develop better swing characteristics. Our biomechanical research proved to us that certain club specs do make it more difficult for golfers to develop better swing characteristics. For example, the longer the driver length, the higher the driver's assembled MOI, and the higher the driver's assembled MOI, the more stress the driver puts on the golfer and his swing moves. Hence the real scientific reason why so many golfers never play consistently well with a longer driver but do gain better consistency when the change to a shorter driver.

The golf swing is forever indissolubly linked to the specifications of golf clubs in terms of achieving a higher level of shotmaking success, Golf clubs are fit to the golfer's existing swing to reduce the severity of shot patterns from swing mistakes. That is done through DYNAMIC FITTING so the clubfitter can see if this combination of fitting specs brings about better shot results than some other combination of fitting specs.

My offer for the free book still stands in the desire to help you learn the facts, and in the hope that you will open your mind to realize the error in your thinking.

TOM
[/quote]

[highscoreinky]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1387665499' post='8332939']
[quote name='martinbns' timestamp='1387665058' post='8332911']
Here's my thought on this. It's not practical for most of us to be fit by a guy like Tom.

[/quote]

Seriously, there are at least 100 to 200 clubmaker/clubfitters in this country that can fit as well as I can - some of them better than me since they have actually been fitting professionally on a daily basis for decades.

Tom, me zip code is 40218. Please send anything you have on fitters who may be within 6 hours of my area. If there isn't anyone within 6 hours then please send me info on someone who at least is south of me so I can find some warmer weather. Thanks.

These guys aren't everywhere, that's for sure. But they do exist and if you happen to live in reasonable proximity to one, wow, are golfers missing out on really knowing what specs are THE SPECS for them by not going to see one of these guys.

So if anyone is curious to know if one of these super fitters is in their area, shoot me a PM with your city/zip and I would be glad to check and see if one is in your area. But I am gone from my office until Dec 30 - so if you PM me to ask, just be patient and I will get back to you.

TOM
[/quote]

[bluedot]

But these are all separate issues from dynamic fitting vs. static fitting vs. off the rack equipment.

Club manufacturers are in the business of selling clubs, and since golf clubs don't wear out very quickly, the trick is to get people who already have clubs to buy new ones. This in no different from the car industry, right?

That golfers are looking for the next big thing and a way to play better golf without hard work is hardly surprising either, is it?

But none of that has ANYTHING to do with whether or not the clubs that one plays fit them or not, or which type of fitting is more likely to get it right. That you believe that a static fitting on a computer could be better that a dynamic fitting with a strike board, impact tape, and a trained, objective professional watching ball flight is, to be as charitable as possible, odd.

I'm a great example; I did my first fitting for irons 25 years ago, and have done several over the years since. I've always played Pings and I have the good fortune to have access to some really, really good club fitters. Not once have the dynamic fitting results matched the Webfit results. Not once...

[quote name='square' timestamp='1387686342' post='8334153']
Nothing personal, but I don't have much respect for the "golf equipment industry", which is constantly pushing the latest and greatest technology.And consumers aren't much better, many of whom are constantly looking to somehow hit better shots and shoot lower scores by buying new gear. It's all a cheap scene with a bad flavor about it. A desperate search for instant gratification..
The game deserves better. Specifically, competent instructors teaching a few basic fundamentals. And consumers willing to put in the practice time to learn how to properly swing a golf club.


[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1387651546' post='8332231']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1387594587' post='8330349']
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.

[/quote]

No chance. Sorry to sound arrogant about that but those who have read my books (which are all based on REAL RESEARCH over the course of 30+ yrs) and who have attended schools and seminars I have given over the past 30 yrs all know that I know what I am talking about when it comes to clubfitting technology. You don't know this because you have not been closely associated with the golf equipment and clubmaking/clubfitting industry, So I don't mind if you are skeptical at first. But you seem to not want to accept the fact that maybe you should be a little more open minded to listening to what someone with my experience and record and reputation has to say about the very basics of what clubfitting is all about.

from where do you get your beliefs, what research have you done to support your position and beliefs? I would be interested to know so I can have the chance to know if I am discussing this with a professional who has definite research experience of your own.

You ask about my qualifications to know what I am talking about. Fine, happy to offer some background.

I began my career in 1972 as a PGA professional in the Northern Cal section of the PGA. I taught extensively in the beginning of my career and studied with a number of very respected teaching professionals in the Nor Cal area so I do have a pretty strong background in swing mechanics and swing fundamentals as well as the practical side of teaching real golfers. My equipment experience began in 1973 when out of both a great interest and necessity for a little more income, I taught myself how to perform all procedures of clubmaking and club repair.

My technical education began out of pure curiosity and a passion to know why some clubs performed well for some golfers but not for all - or when something was changed in a golf club for a golfer, sometimes it resulted in them hitting the ball better and sometimes worse. Back then I used to try to call anyone and everyone I could with any golf club company to any shaft company to ask questions to fuel my learning. Virtually every time I would get through to an engineer or technical person with any of the golf companies, I either got the brush off or was told that the information I sought was "proprietary" and not for public release. (which later I found to be the stock answer for "I don't know).

So I recall about about the 30th time of being rebuffed from one of my calls for information, I got very angry and said to myself, "I'm going to find out all this stuff about how golf clubs really perform for golfers and if I do learn it, I will be sure to share what I learn with anyone who is interested."

And quite simply, over the past 40 yrs, that is precisely what I have done. I have embarked on countless research projects and studies over the course of my career. Some were funded by the companies I worked for, most were not because most of the companies I worked for before starting my own company really didn't care to spend their money on technical research. I had a lot of good technical help along the way from independent engineers and scientists who either pushed me to dig deeper, nudged me back on the correct technical track to get to the answers I was seeking, and in some cases took on a few of the technical research studies on their own for me.

At this point looking back, I really cannot find very many areas related to the performance of golf clubs for golfers that I have not probed professionally and technically. But it was from 2003 to 2009 that I really, and I mean REALLY began to understand the relationship of movements in the golf swing to specifications of golf clubs, and from that to learn just how to match golfers with different swings to the best fitting specifications. This came as a result of several years of study of the biomechanics of the golf swing and how various swing moves reacted to different specifications in golf clubs and vice versa, how changes in golf club specs brought about changes in the golf swing.

Following my declaration to share whatever I learned with whoever was interested, I have written ten books in my career. Two of them were selected as the Golf Book of the Year and the ones I have written specifically about clubfitting have been the reference books used by clubmakers to guide their fitting education since 1997.

How do I know what I say is right? Well for one, the results of the research projects over the years proved that. But really, what I think is better proof is the fact that thousands of clubmakers who follow and use the fitting techniques I teach do have repeated fitting success with golfers of all levels of ability, time after time.

You seem to want to operate from a belief that every golfer has the ability to develop perfectly correct, proper swing fundamentals. Or you feel that any golfer should be able to develop perfect swing fundamentals using ANY type of golf club specifications, as long as they work hard enough on their swings. Sorry, but golf is and will forever be a difficult game to master because it does require a high level of athletic ability and neuro muscular control that many, many people just do not have. So when golfers develop their less than perfect swings, fitting is there to help reduce the severity of the shot patterns of these swing mistakes.

But fitting also has the ability to help golfers develop better swing characteristics. Our biomechanical research proved to us that certain club specs do make it more difficult for golfers to develop better swing characteristics. For example, the longer the driver length, the higher the driver's assembled MOI, and the higher the driver's assembled MOI, the more stress the driver puts on the golfer and his swing moves. Hence the real scientific reason why so many golfers never play consistently well with a longer driver but do gain better consistency when the change to a shorter driver.

The golf swing is forever indissolubly linked to the specifications of golf clubs in terms of achieving a higher level of shotmaking success, Golf clubs are fit to the golfer's existing swing to reduce the severity of shot patterns from swing mistakes. That is done through DYNAMIC FITTING so the clubfitter can see if this combination of fitting specs brings about better shot results than some other combination of fitting specs.

My offer for the free book still stands in the desire to help you learn the facts, and in the hope that you will open your mind to realize the error in your thinking.

TOM
[/quote]
[/quote]

[Grumpy bumpy]

Hi Bluedot. I have one truly disappointed customer out there. I spent a couple of hours doing his fitting. He settled on a used set of heads ( very nice head) and a shaft that I didn't recommend. He felt he needed a different shaft. He played them all season until he had them rebuilt 7 months later.
3 1/2 months after I fit his clubs, he came back for a putter fitting. He was still happy with his irons. ( or so he told me).
I recommended a putter and he ordered something else on line. He recently heard he had ground off a lot of weight to get it right and now was adding it back.
This gentleman is truly a wonderful person. I really like him, but because of the disservice I did to him, we have both lost.
The disservice I did to him? I did not recognize the type of fitting he desired and that I should NOT have fit him. There was Objectivity to what I showed him, what worked best, and what did not. subjectively it was not what fulfilled his desire. I do not believe he has a fragile ego, or is arrogant. But, what I was telling him was and is different than a lot of others. The golf course he plays has no driving range, and the pro told him he should be playing an X100 shaft. Based on a web fit type program. He did go to a box store, to hit a club with a different shaft, but he did not test it.

So, what did I learn? You can fit everyone, especially those that don't believe it in.
And in the end, All of the objective data in the world, means nothing to some people, only the recommendation made by someone that does a fitting with out testing.

[kloyd0306]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1387580453' post='8329525']
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.

[/quote]

I'm 6ft 10ins, I have very long legs and very short arms - and you expect me to use a 44 inch driver.

Phew! I am seriously glad that that I didn't meet you before getting fitted to my first set of clubs. I'd have given up in the first week!

Sadly, there are many like you who are ignorant of the fact that we are all different. Sometimes those differences are major and sometimes subtle. Fitting clubs is a combination of understanding and recognising those differences.

However, I am going to agree with you on one (earlier) point you make and that is regarding static fitting. Static fitting should always be completed first simply because physical dimensions are constant whereas swing dynamics are not constant. Swing dynamics are more constant in accomplished golfers and can therefore be used to fit more accurately. Fitting a beginner's swing is a recipe for disaster.

A good static fit can put the golfer into a sound address position - spine and knee flex angles that allow him to make the best possible swing he can make. Putting a beginner or novice golfer into a so called standard length just because that golfer hasn't established a swing is folly. The poor golfer may never improve (and likely give up) because a poor static fit never gave him a chance.

Dynamic fitting is just another name for "fine tuning" and is great for those who have a consistent motion.

One size cannot and will not ever fit all. Anyone who thinks that should not be within a hundred yards of giving advice on clubs.

[bluedot]

[quote name='Grumpy bumpy' timestamp='1387739176' post='8335809']
Hi Bluedot. I have one truly disappointed customer out there. I spent a couple of hours doing his fitting. He settled on a used set of heads ( very nice head) and a shaft that I didn't recommend. He felt he needed a different shaft. He played them all season until he had them rebuilt 7 months later.
3 1/2 months after I fit his clubs, he came back for a putter fitting. He was still happy with his irons. ( or so he told me).
I recommended a putter and he ordered something else on line. He recently heard he had ground off a lot of weight to get it right and now was adding it back.
This gentleman is truly a wonderful person. I really like him, but because of the disservice I did to him, we have both lost.
The disservice I did to him? I did not recognize the type of fitting he desired and that I should NOT have fit him. There was Objectivity to what I showed him, what worked best, and what did not. subjectively it was not what fulfilled his desire. I do not believe he has a fragile ego, or is arrogant. But, what I was telling him was and is different than a lot of others. The golf course he plays has no driving range, and the pro told him he should be playing an X100 shaft. Based on a web fit type program. He did go to a box store, to hit a club with a different shaft, but he did not test it.

So, what did I learn? You can fit everyone, especially those that don't believe it in.
And in the end, All of the objective data in the world, means nothing to some people, only the recommendation made by someone that does a fitting with out testing.
[/quote]

I appreciate the difficulty of this situation for club fitters.

It is a complete mystery to me why so many golfers are so resistant to fitting, and have such a difficult time settling on a set of clubs. Maybe I've been lucky, or maybe I have an extra loyalty/trust gene that kicks in when I find something good; I don't know. But taking the word of the pro over a trained clubfitter and buying clubs without testing them extensively first seems bizarre beyond reason to me.

I know that I play a LOT of golf and with a lot of different golfers, and the percentage of them that are using equipment that clearly doesn't suit them is astonishing to me. I don't comment on it, much less make suggestions, and just assume that either it isn't important to them to play their very best golf or that they have completely fallen for marketing.

[squarre]

I don't have anything substantively to add to this discussion because I am certain that I don't know as much as a lot of the other posters.

However, I did want to add that I am a different guy than square.

[square]

Who said "one size fits all "? Not me. I wrote that static fitting (for irons and wedges) is worthwhile. Dynamic fitting is not.


[quote name='kloyd0306' timestamp='1387745106' post='8336135']


One size cannot and will not ever fit all. Anyone who thinks that should not be within a hundred yards of giving advice on clubs.
[/quote]

[square]

Next time try playing the webfit (static fit) recommended specs. You might like the shots you strike with a set like that.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387720352' post='8334873']
I've always played Pings and I have the good fortune to have access to some really, really good club fitters. Not once have the dynamic fitting results matched the Webfit results. Not once...


[/quote]

[bluedot]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1387754634' post='8336639']
Next time try playing the webfit (static fit) recommended specs. You might like the shots you strike with a set like that.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387720352' post='8334873']
I've always played Pings and I have the good fortune to have access to some really, really good club fitters. Not once have the dynamic fitting results matched the Webfit results. Not once...


[/quote]
[/quote]

If I wasn't clear about it, the dynamic fitting results for ball flight have ALWAYS been better for me than the ball flight results with the specs the static results have suggested. That is an advantage of Ping clubs; you can get the static recommendation and then compare it during the dynamic fitting. I have ended up with 1* more upright and .5" longer irons than the static fit suggests each time.

Hope that's clear.

[square]

For a scratch player new to a static fit iron set it may take 6 months to a year, or longer, to make the swing adjustments necessary to produce consistently good shots.
For an 80's or 90's shooter I imagine it would take two years or longer of committed play and practice.
Static fit specifications work best with fundamentally sound swings. For a player who is content to make compensatory moves during the swing, then a dynamic fit set may be of some help.
A beginning player absolutely should use a static fit set, as those specifications will promote making fundamentally sound swings.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387755578' post='8336691']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1387754634' post='8336639']
Next time try playing the webfit (static fit) recommended specs. You might like the shots you strike with a set like that.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387720352' post='8334873']
I've always played Pings and I have the good fortune to have access to some really, really good club fitters. Not once have the dynamic fitting results matched the Webfit results. Not once...


[/quote]
[/quote]

If I wasn't clear about it, the dynamic fitting results for ball flight have ALWAYS been better for me than the ball flight results with the specs the static results have suggested. That is an advantage of Ping clubs; you can get the static recommendation and then compare it during the dynamic fitting. I have ended up with 1* more upright and .5" longer irons than the static fit suggests each time.

Hope that's clear.
[/quote]

[bluedot]

I won't debate this anymore with you; your mind is made up, and so is mine.

But I'll say this in closing: I've heard many say that fitting isn't necessary. I've heard many say that static fitting is enough. But I have NEVER heard ANYBODY claim that static fitting is superior to dynamic fitting. Never...

Forgive me for saying this bluntly, but there is no possible logical justification for your belief, if in fact you really believe this. It simply makes no sense that measurements on a chart could trump being custom fit as you actually swing the club. It doesn't work that way for clothes, it doesn't work that way for other sporting equipment like road bikes, and it doesn't work that way for golf clubs. It also runs 100% counter to everything I've seen in golf.

As to the adjustment period, I might agree about some aspects of equipment change such as going from GI irons to blades, or steel to graphite shafts, or S to R flexes. But if you are talking about lie angle and shaft length, the improvements are most often immediate as the player stops having to make compensations in his or her swing.



[quote name='square' timestamp='1387762469' post='8337133']
For a scratch player new to a static fit iron set it may take 6 months to a year, or longer, to make the swing adjustments necessary to produce consistently good shots.
For an 80's or 90's shooter I imagine it would take two years or longer of committed play and practice.
Static fit specifications work best with fundamentally sound swings. For a player who is content to make compensatory moves during the swing, then a dynamic fit set may be of some help.
A beginning player absolutely should use a static fit set, as those specifications will promote making fundamentally sound swings.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387755578' post='8336691']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1387754634' post='8336639']
Next time try playing the webfit (static fit) recommended specs. You might like the shots you strike with a set like that.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387720352' post='8334873']
I've always played Pings and I have the good fortune to have access to some really, really good club fitters. Not once have the dynamic fitting results matched the Webfit results. Not once...


[/quote]
[/quote]

If I wasn't clear about it, the dynamic fitting results for ball flight have ALWAYS been better for me than the ball flight results with the specs the static results have suggested. That is an advantage of Ping clubs; you can get the static recommendation and then compare it during the dynamic fitting. I have ended up with 1* more upright and .5" longer irons than the static fit suggests each time.

Hope that's clear.
[/quote]
[/quote]

[square]

The long adjustment time is for a static fit set, because to play those specs well the player may need to eliminate faulty swing habits, removing the compensatory moves in his his swing.
Dynamic fit, I agree, should have no adjustment period. Dynamic fit specifications are born from the players faulty swing.
If a players goal is to hit more playable shots with a bad swing, then dynamic fit likely makes sense.
If the player's goal is to make fundamentally sound golf swings, then absolutely static fit is superior to dynamic fit.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387763443' post='8337207']
I won't debate this anymore with you; your mind is made up, and so is mine.

But I'll say this in closing: I've heard many say that fitting isn't necessary. I've heard many say that static fitting is enough. But I have NEVER heard ANYBODY claim that static fitting is superior to dynamic fitting. Never...

Forgive me for saying this bluntly, but there is no possible logical justification for your belief, if in fact you really believe this. It simply makes no sense that measurements on a chart could trump being custom fit as you actually swing the club. It doesn't work that way for clothes, it doesn't work that way for other sporting equipment like road bikes, and it doesn't work that way for golf clubs. It also runs 100% counter to everything I've seen in golf.

As to the adjustment period, I might agree about some aspects of equipment change such as going from GI irons to blades, or steel to graphite shafts, or S to R flexes. But if you are talking about lie angle and shaft length, the improvements are most often immediate as the player stops having to make compensations in his or her swing.



[quote name='square' timestamp='1387762469' post='8337133']
For a scratch player new to a static fit iron set it may take 6 months to a year, or longer, to make the swing adjustments necessary to produce consistently good shots.
For an 80's or 90's shooter I imagine it would take two years or longer of committed play and practice.
Static fit specifications work best with fundamentally sound swings. For a player who is content to make compensatory moves during the swing, then a dynamic fit set may be of some help.
A beginning player absolutely should use a static fit set, as those specifications will promote making fundamentally sound swings.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387755578' post='8336691']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1387754634' post='8336639']
Next time try playing the webfit (static fit) recommended specs. You might like the shots you strike with a set like that.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387720352' post='8334873']
I've always played Pings and I have the good fortune to have access to some really, really good club fitters. Not once have the dynamic fitting results matched the Webfit results. Not once...


[/quote]
[/quote]

If I wasn't clear about it, the dynamic fitting results for ball flight have ALWAYS been better for me than the ball flight results with the specs the static results have suggested. That is an advantage of Ping clubs; you can get the static recommendation and then compare it during the dynamic fitting. I have ended up with 1* more upright and .5" longer irons than the static fit suggests each time.

Hope that's clear.
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

[Grumpy bumpy]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1387764045' post='8337251']
The long adjustment time is for a static fit set, because to play those specs well the player may need to eliminate faulty swing habits, removing the compensatory moves in his his swing.
Dynamic fit, I agree, should have no adjustment period. Dynamic fit specifications are born from the players faulty swing.
If a players goal is to hit more playable shots with a bad swing, then dynamic fit likely makes sense.
If the player's goal is to make fundamentally sound golf swings, then absolutely static fit is superior to dynamic fit.

Hi. I just have one question. Have you seen a case where the club is the cause of the swing flaw? How do you correct a swing flaw, caused by equipment with a static fitting? You don't. Because it does not get identified as a problem.
Equate golf clubs and fitting to going to the doctor. Symptoms, tests, diagnosis, treatment.
You as a golfer has symptoms, you get static fit, and buy golf clubs. The golf clubs are the treatment. If this was a doctors visit, it is like the doctor telling you to take 2 aspirin and call new in the morning. No test no diagnosis. And you still continue to have symptoms.
You have missed out on 2 of the other processes. The tests and the diagnosis.
Every PGA player has a good sound golf swing. How do you think they get fit? Statically?

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387763443' post='8337207']
I won't debate this anymore with you; your mind is made up, and so is mine.

But I'll say this in closing: I've heard many say that fitting isn't necessary. I've heard many say that static fitting is enough. But I have NEVER heard ANYBODY claim that static fitting is superior to dynamic fitting. Never...

Forgive me for saying this bluntly, but there is no possible logical justification for your belief, if in fact you really believe this. It simply makes no sense that measurements on a chart could trump being custom fit as you actually swing the club. It doesn't work that way for clothes, it doesn't work that way for other sporting equipment like road bikes, and it doesn't work that way for golf clubs. It also runs 100% counter to everything I've seen in golf.

As to the adjustment period, I might agree about some aspects of equipment change such as going from GI irons to blades, or steel to graphite shafts, or S to R flexes. But if you are talking about lie angle and shaft length, the improvements are most often immediate as the player stops having to make compensations in his or her swing.



[quote name='square' timestamp='1387762469' post='8337133']
For a scratch player new to a static fit iron set it may take 6 months to a year, or longer, to make the swing adjustments necessary to produce consistently good shots.
For an 80's or 90's shooter I imagine it would take two years or longer of committed play and practice.
Static fit specifications work best with fundamentally sound swings. For a player who is content to make compensatory moves during the swing, then a dynamic fit set may be of some help.
A beginning player absolutely should use a static fit set, as those specifications will promote making fundamentally sound swings.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387755578' post='8336691']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1387754634' post='8336639']
Next time try playing the webfit (static fit) recommended specs. You might like the shots you strike with a set like that.

[quote name='bluedot' timestamp='1387720352' post='8334873']
I've always played Pings and I have the good fortune to have access to some really, really good club fitters. Not once have the dynamic fitting results matched the Webfit results. Not once...


[/quote]
[/quote]

If I wasn't clear about it, the dynamic fitting results for ball flight have ALWAYS been better for me than the ball flight results with the specs the static results have suggested. That is an advantage of Ping clubs; you can get the static recommendation and then compare it during the dynamic fitting. I have ended up with 1* more upright and .5" longer irons than the static fit suggests each time.

Hope that's clear.
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

[Grumpy bumpy]

Hi. This was my question to square. It got lost in all of the mess. Here it us again.

Hi. I just have one question. Have you seen a case where the club is the cause of the swing flaw? How do you correct a swing flaw, caused by equipment with a static fitting? You don't. Because it does not get identified as a problem.
Equate golf clubs and fitting to going to the doctor. Symptoms, tests, diagnosis, treatment.
You as a golfer has symptoms, you get static fit, and buy golf clubs. The golf clubs are the treatment. If this was a doctors visit, it is like the doctor telling you to take 2 aspirin and call new in the morning. No test no diagnosis. And you still continue to have symptoms.
You have missed out on 2 of the other processes. The tests and the diagnosis.
Every PGA player has a good sound golf swing. How do you think they get fit? Statically?

[HitEmTrue]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1387762469' post='8337133']
For a scratch player new to a static fit iron set it may take 6 months to a year, or longer, to make the swing adjustments necessary to produce consistently good shots.
[/quote]

How long would it take a pga tour player to adjust? Why would he make such a change?

Who decided upon the club specs that are put onto the static fitting charts? Are all fitting charts the same, and if not, which one is correct? Were those charts created by people in the golf industry, and how can you trust them....since they just want to sell clubs?

How do you get professional advice from anyone? By definition they are paid in the industry of their expertise....so they must be self serving in their knowledge and trying to lead us all astray.