Oceans Eleven Confessions to break a man's heart....

[mdgboxx]

Guys, I'm looking at updating my wedges this year but am a bit lost. Do any of you know anything about wedge 'bounce' or what I should be looking for?

 

Trial and error, Wolf. Trial and error.......That's all I got :sorry:

[mdgboxx]

I have found out more about bounce the last two days than i ever knew existed !

No arguments

No trolls.

No insults

No surprise

Good discussion guys.

 

We do this cause we know it gives Ninja a woody.

 

Now, THAT, is funny!!!!!! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

 

Is anger oozing out of the cat? The eyes seem to be lighting up, hope they don't turn to red.

[mdgboxx]

By the way, happy anniversary MC! 10 years is a great milestone. I'm only at 6 myself, so am a comparative beginner, but I hope to be emulating you in the not too distant future.

 

Don't be in such a hurry, give it time and enjoy every minute.

 

LOVE is: Walking together in the same direction

 

Time is not as important.

[DeNinny]

Ok Matt J,

Here is my deep dive into the physics in response to your earlier post. Everything in italics is directly from your earlier post.

 

Ninja, you're obviously a very bright guy and have a much better background in Physics than most of us. I've only taken a little Physics and it was a long time ago, but it seems to me that the subject is all about "vectors."

 

I loved that you mentioned this because actually vectors are integral to the points that I'm making and am going to make. To understand vectors is foundational to understanding the math and formulas that back everything that I am stating.

 

So to start, let's make sure we are on the same page about vectors. The best way I can explain a vector is that it is a change in a dimension or measurement that also requires an actual change in position or direction. For example in the context of this discussion, drag force is a vector. In order to understand it, fundamentally you have to define the magnitude of the force and more importantly the direction that it is pointed. Velocity and acceleration are also vectors. Energy is not. In short, a vector is a literal mathematical "arrow" that represents its direction and magnitude.

 

The way I see the bounce issue is that the blunted wedge, with higher bounce, changes the vector to a much more shallow angle.

 

OK, so this is an excellent segue into our problem statement:

 

A higher bounce (and more rounded leading edge) club actually causes a clubhead travelling at whatever mph and whatever AoA (as long as they are ASSUMED EQUAL, it doesn't really matter what their magnitude is) to dig into SOFT dirt LESS than a lower bounce club

 

One of the things I hated about studying Physics is that the teacher would review our work and if he deemed that it was all done correctly then the difference between the theoretical value and our computations must be "friction." Friction became the ultimate fudge factor between reality and theory and the teacher was the deciding factor if the computations were incorrect or if it was friction.

 

This is really a point about significant figures and error analysis of a numerical result. There is a point at which the amount of decimal places that you take a mathematical value becomes meaningless. If your teacher was good, he would have been able to mathematically explain his limit of "friction". But we digress...

 

So, values that I don't think we're going to figure out.... substrate density. As the ground gets harder the sharper low bounce wedge behaves much like the high bounce wedge. The harder ground surface deflects the wedge down the line more and is preferable because some dig is better than the skimming skull shot.

 

I'm sorry, but the physic of drag and what I'm going to explain in more detail between high and bounce clubs is universal and applies to any substrate and the friction or resistance by said substrate. Density is irrelevant. This falls under my "all things equal" category. And it really doesn't change the math. There is no equation that will change the relative differences and relationships between a high and low bounce club. The substrate will only change the MAGNITUDE of the differences. Dirt just provides more friction to air. As does grass.

 

All things being equal hitting the ball first is obviously preferable in most situations, but I think it can be over-emphasized. A lot of players play the ball too far back in order to make sure they hit it first. Eventually, you end up steep with too much shaft lean and although you may not chunk the pitch you hit a low screamer that runs out too far, over and over again.

 

I can't disagree with this, but the over-emphasis is a completely different issue with respect to our problem statement. You can over-emphasize ball contact first techniques that will create the same issues no matter what type of bounce that you use. Again, only the magnitude of the issues changes.

 

Using the correct bounce is paramount in my mind. I have no doubt that the conventional wisdom concerning bounce is correct. I do not have the skills to explain it, and don't honestly know if anyone does, but using a higher bounce wedge off of fluffy, soft, sandy, or muddy lies and a low bounce wedge off of tight lies 100% works for me.

 

I'm sorry, but again the physics does not support this. Now let's solve the aforementioned problem statement...

 

To start, let's go back to my 100% CONCEPTUALLY accurate drawing of a low bounce (club "A") clubhead and a high bounce (club "B") one:

 

 

 

Now try to visualize both of these are coming into the ground at the same AoA and the same clubhead velocity. As such, they also have the same curved path and somewhere way beyond and above the drawing they both have a fulcrum (actually there are multiple ones) or pivot point that is making the clubheads come into the ground on the same ARCING path of travel. Basically their paths into impact and their pivot points are going to be exact mirror images of each other.

 

So now let's add some vectors to this. Each clubhead will have a velocity vector pointing in the instantaneous linear path of travel, wherever it is on that arc. Now imagine both clubheads arcing down into the ground, again at the same AoA. Now imagine their very tip, the first part to contact the ground, touching the ground. This is the "first contact" point of our problem statement. Now zoom into both tips. The rounded tip one will always have more surface area that is going to contact the ground. And the ground is going to resist the path of the tip and also any part of the clubhead that it contacts.

 

And now to prove there is more ground resistance to clubhead B, imagine how much more ground that will have to change out of position in order to make way for the clubhead. One could imagine little force arrows pointing perpendicular to the curvature of the tip that will literally be pushing the dirt out of the way. Do you see how now there are more arrows on the more rounded tip and how more dirt has to go more around the tip and also more around the rounded sole? Clearly (I hope), that you see my first point in all of this discussion how, ALL OTHER THINGS EQUAL, that there is more drag force resistance by the ground with a higher bounce club. Again, no different than why skis go the FASTEST when they are flat.

 

So again going back to our problem statement, the key question is, does the dirt move out of the way or does the clubhead change its path because the ground was so strong that it resisted? Mathematically in order for the latter to happen, the ground force has to essentially apply a vector force that is upward and countering the part downward path of travel by the arcing clubhead.

 

Furthermore, it has to divert the clubhead path (again a vector) to go in a completely different direction than the initial one. That's the "premise" of our problem statement, correct? That the actual clubhead changes its literal path of travel.

 

So now, is it even realistic for the clubhead to change its path at the highest velocity and highest centripetal force part of the swing? Again, let's take a deeper dive into this. For one thing, in order for the path of the clubhead to change, that means either

 

a) that the shaft needs to bend and account for the changed path somehow OR

 

b) it means the pivot point of the swing has to change.

 

Both of these are integral to the ability of the head to change its path. Remember, the club is not the only thing involved, BUT...club manufacturers and ones that make high bounce clubs will tend to just focus on the clubhead...trust me...it's a pattern...without any other consideration of the physics beyond it.

 

So now, is it realistic that there is enough SOFT dirt resistance to cause either the shaft to bend AND/OR literally move the position of your arms? I agree that eventually yes this will happen, but think deeper into just the initial contact of the clubhead going into the SOFT ground. Again, this is the core of the problem statement. Also remember that the ground ONLY needs to be soft over the physical difference between the actual two different bounces. After all, it is the physical shape that is supposed to be so significant, right? I'm sorry, but without even the math there is no question that the SOFT ground will give way before the clubhead moves position over the distance we are considering. Also remember that the shaft...and the hands...and arms of the golfer are going to give way and change their own positions, somehow, in order for the actual clubhead path to change direction. For sure, the clubhead will NOT change path independently of everything else that is connected to it.

 

I'm sorry, but if you or anyone else want to believe otherwise than this, that you really believe the soft ground, even with some compaction, is actually going to "win the force war" over all that other mass and the forces that they are providing, then there is no point discussing it further because there is no way that will happen in my professional opinion. To prove this outright, you would have to calculate it out and actually provide me some numbers. Otherwise, it is just PURE SPECULATION that the clubhead actually reroutes from bounce. For me, I don't need no stinking numbers. It is OBVIOUS to me that the clubhead arc of travel is defined by the arms and golfer and the head just goes along for the ride, through air and through dirt. I could go on with this discussion even further. But before anything further, I ask that you really think about how much the SOFT ground actually gives way from a glancing sole blow and compare that to how much the bounces and roundedness of the clubhead soles are different between a high and low bounce club. To truly think that it is that significant and it will actually change all those "big masses" at high velocities is what is twisted logic to me.

 

So finally, with respect to your personal experience with high bounce in fluffy lies, all I can say is that the same physics of the benefit of low bounce applies universally across all lies and substrate densities. The only reason a fluffy lie is acceptable to perform with a high bounce club is simply the ball is propped up above the ground so there is more margin of error allowed without the high bounce being an issue. It's not that the high bounce club was better, it's that it was LESS BAD with that type of lie. The tight lie just exacerbates the detriment of the high bounce. Fluffy lies simply mitigate the detriment so that it's "not that bad" when you use a high bounce club.

[mdgboxx]

Can't imagine too many people out there swinging anything but their Woods over 100mph....just to Nit Pick ;)

 

And a few of us (me) don't swing ANYTHING at 100mph, lol.

 

I need to go buy some force multipliers.

 

Taylor Made M2

 

It's on TV, it can't be a lie.

[mdgboxx]

I have found out more about bounce the last two days than i ever knew existed !

No arguments

No trolls.

No insults

No surprise

Good discussion guys.

 

Don't blink, we're just getting started!!!!!!!!!!! :taunt:

 

I'm like Wolf...i fully know when I am in over my head,so I keep my mouth closed !

 

Where's the fun in that? :cheesy:

[DeNinny]

This is what I could find on the subject. Are they experts? Depends on your definition. Do they have degrees and a COMPLETE understanding of physics? IDK

 

Read and decide for yourselves.

 

http://www.publinksg...ight/Page1.html

 

http://www.customfit...g-wedge-bounce/

 

http://wishongolf.co...f-tour-players/

 

http://www.golfclub-...golfwedges.html

 

;)

 

There's a lot of marketing expertise in all of this. But the science is no different than what you/others have brought up already. Did you notice they were all from the perspective of a club manufacturer in the business of selling various bounce clubs? It's kinda like George Foreman espousing how great his grill is...

 

So much to refute. So little time. Just see all my points already made.

 

An independent study would have a little more credibility.

 

In the mid '90s, when I was learning to pronounce the word Golf, someone instructed me that I needed to get rid of my 2i and add a 60° wedge to my arsenal. Keep in mind that I had barely learned that I was a righty, after all. A buddy took me to a club fitter and I bought a *Professional Open 60°/06. When I upgraded to the S58s, 3-PW, I had to search for a SW. By then, I was a frequent visitor at Golftown, and better acquainted with the staff. I learned that when you put two clubs face to face, (touching/glued) if the two shafts form a straight line, they are the same loft. I left the store with both a Ping Tour-W 54°/10 and 60°/06. Until my newer Glides, I have not played with anything else....I took extensive short game lessons with the Tour-Ws. The transition to new ones is much easier.

 

In comparison, to the blade vs cavity debate, I've hit the 714Mb, 6i, and felt comfortable with it. I'm in the process of getting reacquainted with my i20s, and my S58s (lofts jacked to S55) are on stand-by. At soon to turn 72, I'll settle for what I have on hand for now.

 

When things get too technical, I normally take a step back and listen to common sense......my common sense. I'm prepared to live with the consequences.

 

In the end, when we get fitted for clubs, any club, doesn't it still come down to trial and error?

Simulators and computers only assist in saving time, IMHO.

 

My only argument to this is that the improper interpretation of the data from the simulator or computer will completely WASTE time.

 

Also a more complete understanding of the physics is what drives my club decisions now too. Everything I have discovered by trial and error, both good and bad, has been aligned with my understanding of the physics, so now I cannot decouple it from my trial and error process. I don't ever go against what the physics tells me simply because I want to use the physics to every advantage in my game.

[DeNinny]

I have found out more about bounce the last two days than i ever knew existed !

No arguments

No trolls.

No insults

No surprise

Good discussion guys.

 

Don't blink, we're just getting started!!!!!!!!!!! :taunt:

 

I'm like Wolf...i fully know when I am in over my head,so I keep my mouth closed !

 

I'm the same way. If I go in over my head I will put up big disclaimer, especially if it is a technical discussion that I don't have a thorough understanding of.

[DeNinny]

Can't imagine too many people out there swinging anything but their Woods over 100mph....just to Nit Pick ;)

 

Just to nitpick...I first said "up to" 100 mph. :bigwhack:

[mdgboxx]

The USGA's collective wee-wee is hereby flattened so thin you could make orthotic ant shoes with it.

 

OGA members don't ask for a number.... they TAKE one. OGA is behind why eye-balls, eagles, and pyramids appear on currency. There is a secret OGA handshake. There are "orders" of OGA membership. At the highest order - we turn to the south at 2 PM Greenwich on the third Tuesday of every month with an "R" in it's spelling and say three words to the first person who happens by.... "Pull My Finger". For that reason we consume mass quantities of legumes at 1 PM Greenwich.

 

Item next....

 

Lean the shaft forward enough to take bounce out of the equation until AFTER impact - accelerate PAST the ball - THEN let the bounce do its thing.

 

OR - Stand the shaft straight up level with the ball and blade it - and as long as you do so below the equator - up she goes. In that scenario - as was pointed out many pages ago, keep that trail forearm MOVING.

 

How MUCH bounce? How WIDE the flange? How straight vs radiused should the sole be? OR how curved vs straight should the leading edge be? Which of the countless "grinds" is best? Are we talking wedges or irons in general? Are we in the sand or not, here?

 

That journey will hopefully never end given the countless lies, soil and sand conditions, weather, etc... And with a little luck I'll pass from this earth having never fully figured it out but finally owning a clue. Its going to get pretty boring when the day comes I know it all and can execute flawlessly every time up.

 

Next....

 

Putting - Rumor has it that there is some sort to way of using two simple sticks to improve putting but that one must be strictly a rumor.

 

Most importantly and all sarcastic humor aside....

 

How ya doing guys? Happy anniversary MC - good health to Matt's back - Pige...way to win her back.... Stu - I HOPE to get down your way soon for at least a Captain Jack's on me. And Hammy - It WILL happen. The day is coming when you don't have the challenges of parked cars and not much turf to practice on. ITS COMING. TIme to start thinking of HOW to ease yourself back into all those things. What will that look like? What percent will be short vs long game tune-ups. We are ALL right there with you on this.

 

MDG - 30 yards off the tee sounds like about 300+ yards of pure happiness in my book.

 

Getting close to 2PM Greenwich - Gotta go. Have fun fellers.

 

WELCOME BACK Reason,

 

Thank you for the wee wee job. We needed an official Judge's Ruling, and you came through for us. We wouldn't have it any other way.

 

If I could film it and put it on here, you would witness the intensity of her concentration. It could turn off a blaring radio from a distance. After she hits her ball, her face lights up like a child being handed an ice cream cone.

[mdgboxx]

The USGA's collective wee-wee is hereby flattened so thin you could make orthotic ant shoes with it.

 

OGA members don't ask for a number.... they TAKE one. OGA is behind why eye-balls, eagles, and pyramids appear on currency. There is a secret OGA handshake. There are "orders" of OGA membership. At the highest order - we turn to the south at 2 PM Greenwich on the third Tuesday of every month with an "R" in it's spelling and say three words to the first person who happens by.... "Pull My Finger". For that reason we consume mass quantities of legumes at 1 PM Greenwich.

 

Item next....

 

Lean the shaft forward enough to take bounce out of the equation until AFTER impact - accelerate PAST the ball - THEN let the bounce do its thing.

 

OR - Stand the shaft straight up level with the ball and blade it - and as long as you do so below the equator - up she goes. In that scenario - as was pointed out many pages ago, keep that trail forearm MOVING.

 

How MUCH bounce? How WIDE the flange? How straight vs radiused should the sole be? OR how curved vs straight should the leading edge be? Which of the countless "grinds" is best? Are we talking wedges or irons in general? Are we in the sand or not, here?

 

That journey will hopefully never end given the countless lies, soil and sand conditions, weather, etc... And with a little luck I'll pass from this earth having never fully figured it out but finally owning a clue. Its going to get pretty boring when the day comes I know it all and can execute flawlessly every time up.

 

Next....

 

Putting - Rumor has it that there is some sort to way of using two simple sticks to improve putting but that one must be strictly a rumor.

 

Most importantly and all sarcastic humor aside....

 

How ya doing guys? Happy anniversary MC - good health to Matt's back - Pige...way to win her back.... Stu - I HOPE to get down your way soon for at least a Captain Jack's on me. And Hammy - It WILL happen. The day is coming when you don't have the challenges of parked cars and not much turf to practice on. ITS COMING. TIme to start thinking of HOW to ease yourself back into all those things. What will that look like? What percent will be short vs long game tune-ups. We are ALL right there with you on this.

 

MDG - 30 yards off the tee sounds like about 300+ yards of pure happiness in my book.

 

Getting close to 2PM Greenwich - Gotta go. Have fun fellers.

 

Thank you Reasy for the kind and wise words as usual!! :) Excellent post! For the record I'm always "packing heat" no legumes required here! As a matter of fact no need to pull my finger, just a glance in the general direction of any of my fingers is sufficient :D :stinker:

 

I'm on the brink of being TOOL

 

Should I use sparingly?

[DeNinny]

The USGA's collective wee-wee is hereby flattened so thin you could make orthotic ant shoes with it.

 

OGA members don't ask for a number.... they TAKE one. OGA is behind why eye-balls, eagles, and pyramids appear on currency. There is a secret OGA handshake. There are "orders" of OGA membership. At the highest order - we turn to the south at 2 PM Greenwich on the third Tuesday of every month with an "R" in it's spelling and say three words to the first person who happens by.... "Pull My Finger". For that reason we consume mass quantities of legumes at 1 PM Greenwich.

 

Item next....

 

Lean the shaft forward enough to take bounce out of the equation until AFTER impact - accelerate PAST the ball - THEN let the bounce do its thing.

 

OR - Stand the shaft straight up level with the ball and blade it - and as long as you do so below the equator - up she goes. In that scenario - as was pointed out many pages ago, keep that trail forearm MOVING.

 

How MUCH bounce? How WIDE the flange? How straight vs radiused should the sole be? OR how curved vs straight should the leading edge be? Which of the countless "grinds" is best? Are we talking wedges or irons in general? Are we in the sand or not, here?

 

That journey will hopefully never end given the countless lies, soil and sand conditions, weather, etc... And with a little luck I'll pass from this earth having never fully figured it out but finally owning a clue. Its going to get pretty boring when the day comes I know it all and can execute flawlessly every time up.

 

Next....

 

Putting - Rumor has it that there is some sort to way of using two simple sticks to improve putting but that one must be strictly a rumor.

 

Most importantly and all sarcastic humor aside....

 

How ya doing guys? Happy anniversary MC - good health to Matt's back - Pige...way to win her back.... Stu - I HOPE to get down your way soon for at least a Captain Jack's on me. And Hammy - It WILL happen. The day is coming when you don't have the challenges of parked cars and not much turf to practice on. ITS COMING. TIme to start thinking of HOW to ease yourself back into all those things. What will that look like? What percent will be short vs long game tune-ups. We are ALL right there with you on this.

 

MDG - 30 yards off the tee sounds like about 300+ yards of pure happiness in my book.

 

Getting close to 2PM Greenwich - Gotta go. Have fun fellers.

 

Thank you Reasy for the kind and wise words as usual!! :) Excellent post! For the record I'm always "packing heat" no legumes required here! As a matter of fact no need to pull my finger, just a glance in the general direction of any of my fingers is sufficient :D :stinker:

 

I'm on the brink of being TOOL

 

Should I use sparingly?

 

No. Test your 'TOOL sense'! From this point onward, count the number of likes before you actually go TOOL. This is the numerical measurement of your 'TOOL sense'. And it is like handicap: the lower your TOOL sense, the better it is!

 

I've been able to estimate going TOOL within 5-10 likes. I doubt that I have the best TOOL sense because I suffer from TOOLaphobia.

[mdgboxx]

The USGA's collective wee-wee is hereby flattened so thin you could make orthotic ant shoes with it.

 

OGA members don't ask for a number.... they TAKE one. OGA is behind why eye-balls, eagles, and pyramids appear on currency. There is a secret OGA handshake. There are "orders" of OGA membership. At the highest order - we turn to the south at 2 PM Greenwich on the third Tuesday of every month with an "R" in it's spelling and say three words to the first person who happens by.... "Pull My Finger". For that reason we consume mass quantities of legumes at 1 PM Greenwich.

 

Item next....

 

Lean the shaft forward enough to take bounce out of the equation until AFTER impact - accelerate PAST the ball - THEN let the bounce do its thing.

 

OR - Stand the shaft straight up level with the ball and blade it - and as long as you do so below the equator - up she goes. In that scenario - as was pointed out many pages ago, keep that trail forearm MOVING.

 

How MUCH bounce? How WIDE the flange? How straight vs radiused should the sole be? OR how curved vs straight should the leading edge be? Which of the countless "grinds" is best? Are we talking wedges or irons in general? Are we in the sand or not, here?

 

That journey will hopefully never end given the countless lies, soil and sand conditions, weather, etc... And with a little luck I'll pass from this earth having never fully figured it out but finally owning a clue. Its going to get pretty boring when the day comes I know it all and can execute flawlessly every time up.

 

Next....

 

Putting - Rumor has it that there is some sort to way of using two simple sticks to improve putting but that one must be strictly a rumor.

 

Most importantly and all sarcastic humor aside....

 

How ya doing guys? Happy anniversary MC - good health to Matt's back - Pige...way to win her back.... Stu - I HOPE to get down your way soon for at least a Captain Jack's on me. And Hammy - It WILL happen. The day is coming when you don't have the challenges of parked cars and not much turf to practice on. ITS COMING. TIme to start thinking of HOW to ease yourself back into all those things. What will that look like? What percent will be short vs long game tune-ups. We are ALL right there with you on this.

 

MDG - 30 yards off the tee sounds like about 300+ yards of pure happiness in my book.

 

Getting close to 2PM Greenwich - Gotta go. Have fun fellers.

 

Thank you Reasy for the kind and wise words as usual!! :) Excellent post! For the record I'm always "packing heat" no legumes required here! As a matter of fact no need to pull my finger, just a glance in the general direction of any of my fingers is sufficient :D :stinker:

 

I'm on the brink of being TOOL

 

Should I use sparingly?

 

No. Test your 'TOOL sense'! From this point onward, count the number of likes before you actually go TOOL. This is the numerical measurement of your 'TOOL sense'. And it is like handicap: the lower your TOOL sense, the better it is!

 

I've been able to estimate going TOOL within 5-10 likes. I doubt that I have the best TOOL sense because I suffer from TOOLaphobia.

 

Ha!

 

In an earlier version of Confessions, I Googled the yucky phrase ".....you have reached.....Likes" and it redirected me to a third party international site managing the number of Likes, on every sites on the planet. IIRC, it was something around 25, the average amount of posts on a full page. I tried going back in time and unlike some "years old posts" but it wouldn't automatically add to my bank. If I was on here for a while, after I ran out, it would let me slip 4-5 in there.

 

I seem to have given out a lot tonight. So I feared being close to my limit. It always seems to pop up when I feel a post deserves more appreciation (yours, especially tonight) vs Liking out of habit.

[mdgboxx]

This caught my attention, notice the date.

 

Posted 19 January 2016 - 12:28 AM

MelloYello, on 03 January 2016 - 07:16 PM, said:

 

TCMuc, on 03 January 2016 - 08:41 AM, said:

 

I think the most important factor to consider is the bounce, depending on your swing and the course conditions you typically play.

 

I'm typically rather shallow, and my home course has pretty firm fairways, so it's important for me to have a LW with little bounce. When I tried a wedge with more bounce, I never felt comfortable when I opened it since I was always afraid of knifing it over the green.

 

This is why my LW is a 60* Clevenland RTX with 8* bounce, one dot.

 

If you're swing is steeper and you play softer courses most of the time, a wedge with more bounce and a different grind might be best for you.

This is the correct answer.

 

Loft doesn't really matter. You can be off by as much as 3 or 4 degrees of loft and not notice. You'll instantly notice if the bounce you've got is uncomfortable for the environment you're in.

 

Pay attention to the bounce angle but also understand the width of the sole plays a role in enhancing or decreasing the way bounce is perceived. The wider the sole, the more bounce you'll perceive. Therefore, you may get away with lesser bounce if the sole is wider.

 

Lastly, consider how straight the leading edge is. Some wedges provide a very straight leading edge while others provide a rounded (or cambered) leading edge. The curvature can help accommodate grassy and uneven lies. Straight leading edges tend to react more like irons and are better on full shots.

 

PS - I love my Mizuno MP T4 wedges. I fully endorse trying one of those or the newer MP T5! ;)

thanks ! my favorite response thus far!

[DeNinny]

The USGA's collective wee-wee is hereby flattened so thin you could make orthotic ant shoes with it.

 

OGA members don't ask for a number.... they TAKE one. OGA is behind why eye-balls, eagles, and pyramids appear on currency. There is a secret OGA handshake. There are "orders" of OGA membership. At the highest order - we turn to the south at 2 PM Greenwich on the third Tuesday of every month with an "R" in it's spelling and say three words to the first person who happens by.... "Pull My Finger". For that reason we consume mass quantities of legumes at 1 PM Greenwich.

 

Item next....

 

Lean the shaft forward enough to take bounce out of the equation until AFTER impact - accelerate PAST the ball - THEN let the bounce do its thing.

 

OR - Stand the shaft straight up level with the ball and blade it - and as long as you do so below the equator - up she goes. In that scenario - as was pointed out many pages ago, keep that trail forearm MOVING.

 

How MUCH bounce? How WIDE the flange? How straight vs radiused should the sole be? OR how curved vs straight should the leading edge be? Which of the countless "grinds" is best? Are we talking wedges or irons in general? Are we in the sand or not, here?

 

That journey will hopefully never end given the countless lies, soil and sand conditions, weather, etc... And with a little luck I'll pass from this earth having never fully figured it out but finally owning a clue. Its going to get pretty boring when the day comes I know it all and can execute flawlessly every time up.

 

Next....

 

Putting - Rumor has it that there is some sort to way of using two simple sticks to improve putting but that one must be strictly a rumor.

 

Most importantly and all sarcastic humor aside....

 

How ya doing guys? Happy anniversary MC - good health to Matt's back - Pige...way to win her back.... Stu - I HOPE to get down your way soon for at least a Captain Jack's on me. And Hammy - It WILL happen. The day is coming when you don't have the challenges of parked cars and not much turf to practice on. ITS COMING. TIme to start thinking of HOW to ease yourself back into all those things. What will that look like? What percent will be short vs long game tune-ups. We are ALL right there with you on this.

 

MDG - 30 yards off the tee sounds like about 300+ yards of pure happiness in my book.

 

Getting close to 2PM Greenwich - Gotta go. Have fun fellers.

 

Thank you Reasy for the kind and wise words as usual!! :) Excellent post! For the record I'm always "packing heat" no legumes required here! As a matter of fact no need to pull my finger, just a glance in the general direction of any of my fingers is sufficient :D :stinker:

 

I'm on the brink of being TOOL

 

Should I use sparingly?

 

No. Test your 'TOOL sense'! From this point onward, count the number of likes before you actually go TOOL. This is the numerical measurement of your 'TOOL sense'. And it is like handicap: the lower your TOOL sense, the better it is!

 

I've been able to estimate going TOOL within 5-10 likes. I doubt that I have the best TOOL sense because I suffer from TOOLaphobia.

 

Ha!

 

In an earlier version of Confessions, I Googled the yucky phrase ".....you have reached.....Likes" and it redirected me to a third party international site managing the number of Likes, on every sites on the planet. IIRC, it was something around 25, the average amount of posts on a full page. I tried going back in time and unlike some "years old posts" but it wouldn't automatically add to my bank. If I was on here for a while, after I ran out, it would let me slip 4-5 in there.

 

I seem to have given out a lot tonight. So I feared being close to my limit. It always seems to pop up when I feel a post deserves more appreciation (yours, especially tonight) vs Liking out of habit.

 

Pigems and I have both independently confirmed that the total amount that you can ever give is about 75 in the last 24 hours. This is a rolling quota, so you only gain them back based on how many you gave 24 hrs prior to this. So the only way to fully load up back to 75 is to wait a full 24 hours after the very last like that you gave.

 

Also I really appreciate the feedback about my posts tonight. Means more than any measly like.

 

I'm also been enjoying the fact that you've been posting a little more of late. I really like what you said earlier about taking yourself out of context when you do a technical evaluation. I do that too! Also I like to do things like clearly defining a specific problem statement and then ONLY using known laws of science to conclude anything. I've found that simply adhering to scientific first principles will often guide me, step by step, to the answer.

[Palauan Hammer]

I'll chime in on the bounce discussion, my wedges have medium bounce (52*10, 56*14, 60*10) I never really thought about it before, especially when I bought these. They were the only lefty wedges I could find on island LOL. I'll play anything, and basically have played anything my whole "golf life" that goes for shafts, clubs. I just played what I could find and afford. The only thing I find I have trouble adapting to is shaft flex, I don't like feeling like I have to swing real easy. As lazy as my swing looks on camera I'm swinging about 90%. I'm loving hearing everyone's feedback, and of course Ninja's breakdown of the physics and what's actually happening. I'm just the type that if you give me 10 minutes on the range with an entirely different set of clubs I'm confident I could shoot a decent score, sorry if I sound arrogant LOL but I learned how to golf "ghetto style", so I had to play whatever I had :D Now, I have basically a full set of clubs that I've selected and ordered based off reading hundreds of reviews and I'm excited to have a whole new bag to start fresh with. I'm rambling now because I'm hungry so I'll stop! :)

[Fellaheen51]

Can't imagine too many people out there swinging anything but their Woods over 100mph....just to Nit Pick ;)

 

And a few of us (me) don't swing ANYTHING at 100mph, lol.

 

I need to go buy some force multipliers.

 

Taylor Made M2

 

It's on TV, it can't be a lie.

 

Don't believe anything you see on TV. "THE TRUTH" can only be found on the internets. As a Pingster, I'm shocked that you do not recognize the solution to your 100 mph dilemma when its right before you. A forest and trees sort of thing.

 

Force Multipliers = Dragonfly Wings and Turbulators.

 

Guys, I'm looking at updating my wedges this year but am a bit lost. Do any of you know anything about wedge 'bounce' or what I should be looking for?

 

Trial and error, Wolf. Trial and error.......That's all I got :sorry:

 

The WRX anser is obvious. Identify your 'Brand'. Buy one of everything. Keep a tight lies (LB) wedge set and a fluffy lies (HB) one, BST the losers. After one month, send them back to the manufacturer for a custom grind and 'Tiger Step' a more appropriate shaft. Wedgies like Phil.

 

One year latter, after you've worn the grooves off the face and can no longer spin the ball back 10', repeat.

[Fellaheen51]

Belated anniversary best wishes MC!! The Mrs. and I just had our 31st a couple of weeks ago. The love of my life. We argue a lot, keeps both of us sharp in our advancing years. And we played 9 yesterday afternoon, did not offer one word of constructive criticism about her golf swing. Was damn proud of myself. She even said "Thank you for not saying anything today". Matrimonial bliss.

[vaterman]

My ”bible” in truth.

Lurking your discussion on bounce made me wonder what actually the truth in all this is. As some of you know I have taken a “time-out” from golf and wrx the past year or so. Which has given me the time to pursue some other aspects of life, seeking the “deeper meaning of life”… stuff like that. From a viewpoint of curiosity I have been intrigued by some of the many truth and “science says” discussions that is so amply represented here on wrx.

 

I have followed and read tons and tons of material in an effort to establish what the truth is. The funny part is that the more I read the more of conflicting data I got. If you really look at it, it is dumbfounding that so many opposing ideas can derive from the relative simple task of hitting a ball with a club. The end result of my golf truth search was actually just that I got more and more confused.

What is often missed and ignored in the discussions is the point of how do YOU establish what is truth? A question it turned out that went far deeper in life that mere golf related issues.

 

At a point I realized that my search was based on a false premise so to speak. I tried and tried to find THE correct datum that would somehow miraculously make me better. It never happened. Because I found that I was asking the wrong question. Instead of asking “where or what is the truth” I should have been asking “How do I determine what is the truth for me?” Not how can I convince others that this is the truth.

 

No. Truthfully examining how that is established to complete certainty… Oh dear… oh dear… It can be the beginning of the most amazing adventure.

 

You see… On a reversed vector you can also consider; How come if I know the truth I keep failing or don’t really accomplish what I set out to do?

 

These questions for me are not meant to be high flung philosophical considerations far away from the practicalities of life. They are meant to be applied to the very practicalities of everyday life.

 

Pardon my interruption.

[Pigems]

Can't imagine too many people out there swinging anything but their Woods over 100mph....just to Nit Pick ;)

 

Just to nitpick...I first said "up to" 100 mph. :bigwhack:

 

Haha Just To Not Pick, I was just yankin yer chain by!! I totally get what you're saying and am on the same side!! Couldn't help myself on that one though haha ;)

[SixtySomePing]

Ok Matt J,

Here is my deep dive into the physics in response to your earlier post. Everything in italics is directly from your earlier post.

 

So finally, with respect to your personal experience with high bounce in fluffy lies, all I can say is that the same physics of the benefit of low bounce applies universally across all lies and substrate densities. The only reason a fluffy lie is acceptable to perform with a high bounce club is simply the ball is propped up above the ground so there is more margin of error allowed without the high bounce being an issue. It's not that the high bounce club was better, it's that it was LESS BAD with that type of lie. The tight lie just exacerbates the detriment of the high bounce. Fluffy lies simply mitigate the detriment so that it's "not that bad" when you use a high bounce club.

 

Ok Ninje, so as not to repeat your entire discourse on bounce, I cut out the majority of it so I could put in this comment... very well done. I learned a lot about bounce several years ago, as I played 2 local courses and was buying some Vokey wedges. However one has typically hard dirt, and one is typically quite soft. I was having a dilemma as to which wedges to buy concerning bounce. After I learned as much as I could, I simply bought two sets of wedges depending on which course I was playing. (so I could use the 'less bad' etc etc. So today, I play lots of courses and still have the two sets, and still will put in the bag the set of wedges (less bad) I know I will need for that course. The reasoning is based on your spot on explanation as to what bounce does. It works well for me (at least one set will typically work weller) :)

[DeNinny]

My ”bible” in truth.

Lurking your discussion on bounce made me wonder what actually the truth in all this is. As some of you know I have taken a “time-out” from golf and wrx the past year or so. Which has given me the time to pursue some other aspects of life, seeking the “deeper meaning of life”… stuff like that. From a viewpoint of curiosity I have been intrigued by some of the many truth and “science says” discussions that is so amply represented here on wrx.

 

I have followed and read tons and tons of material in an effort to establish what the truth is. The funny part is that the more I read the more of conflicting data I got. If you really look at it, it is dumbfounding that so many opposing ideas can derive from the relative simple task of hitting a ball with a club. The end result of my golf truth search was actually just that I got more and more confused.

What is often missed and ignored in the discussions is the point of how do YOU establish what is truth? A question it turned out that went far deeper in life that mere golf related issues.

 

At a point I realized that my search was based on a false premise so to speak. I tried and tried to find THE correct datum that would somehow miraculously make me better. It never happened. Because I found that I was asking the wrong question. Instead of asking “where or what is the truth” I should have been asking “How do I determine what is the truth for me?” Not how can I convince others that this is the truth.

 

No. Truthfully examining how that is established to complete certainty… Oh dear… oh dear… It can be the beginning of the most amazing adventure.

 

You see… On a reversed vector you can also consider; How come if I know the truth I keep failing or don’t really accomplish what I set out to do?

 

These questions for me are not meant to be high flung philosophical considerations far away from the practicalities of life. They are meant to be applied to the very practicalities of everyday life.

 

Pardon my interruption.

 

vater, my friend, all I can offer you is that everything that I have explained about bounce is in full alignment with the laws of physics. The only reason there is confusion and conflicting information out there about bounce is MARKETING AGENDA by high bounce club manufacturers and ignorance of the complete physics by most golf consumers.

 

Thank you for your interruption!

[DeNinny]

Ok Matt J,

Here is my deep dive into the physics in response to your earlier post. Everything in italics is directly from your earlier post.

 

So finally, with respect to your personal experience with high bounce in fluffy lies, all I can say is that the same physics of the benefit of low bounce applies universally across all lies and substrate densities. The only reason a fluffy lie is acceptable to perform with a high bounce club is simply the ball is propped up above the ground so there is more margin of error allowed without the high bounce being an issue. It's not that the high bounce club was better, it's that it was LESS BAD with that type of lie. The tight lie just exacerbates the detriment of the high bounce. Fluffy lies simply mitigate the detriment so that it's "not that bad" when you use a high bounce club.

 

Ok Ninje, so as not to repeat your entire discourse on bounce, I cut out the majority of it so I could put in this comment... very well done. I learned a lot about bounce several years ago, as I played 2 local courses and was buying some Vokey wedges. However one has typically hard dirt, and one is typically quite soft. I was having a dilemma as to which wedges to buy concerning bounce. After I learned as much as I could, I simply bought two sets of wedges depending on which course I was playing. (so I could use the 'less bad' etc etc. So today, I play lots of courses and still have the two sets, and still will put in the bag the set of wedges (less bad) I know I will need for that course. The reasoning is based on your spot on explanation as to what bounce does. It works well for me (at least one set will typically work weller) :)

 

I really appreciate the feedback, SSP. Being an engineer I once bought a high bounce wedge (Cleveland CG10 60* w/12* bounce) and similarly compared it to my Mizuno MP-R 60* w/5* bounce. Conclusion: I sucked LESS on all types of shots with the low bounce club as compared to the high bounce one.

[DeNinny]

Can't imagine too many people out there swinging anything but their Woods over 100mph....just to Nit Pick ;)

 

Just to nitpick...I first said "up to" 100 mph. :bigwhack:

 

Haha Just To Not Pick, I was just yankin yer chain by!! I totally get what you're saying and am on the same side!! Couldn't help myself on that one though haha ;)

 

Just to nitpick, I just like to nitpick.

[Pigems]

Can't imagine too many people out there swinging anything but their Woods over 100mph....just to Nit Pick ;)

 

Just to nitpick...I first said "up to" 100 mph. :bigwhack:

 

Haha Just To Not Pick, I was just yankin yer chain by!! I totally get what you're saying and am on the same side!! Couldn't help myself on that one though haha ;)

 

Just to nitpick, I just like to nitpick.

 

Just to Nitpick a little more, so do I lol.

 

TOOL'd again ffs, and its raining for the second day in a row...

[Pigems]

Oh and I don't know if I've already mentioned it or not, but now that I've had a chance to hit these RFX fairway woods a few times, I really like them. Very easy to hit off the deck, and go for miles off the tee. If you come across one cheap, definitely a good buy for sure :)

[Matt J]

Ninja, great post!

 

I do think your model misses the mark by not accounting for the difference in the density of the ground under and in front of the ball. I think that is the most important factor. I do understand that all things being equal it shouldn't matter as long as it's the same for both wedges, but I think it's the two extremes where the two wedges excel.

 

I also don't think it's described that well by the "experts," but as you've said repeatedly it isn't sexy marketing material so it gets overlooked. To me, admitting my own ignorance, I think the rub is probably in the different types of grasses, their blade height, root depth, and the amount of water content in each of the three. Probably the biggest for me is how wet the soil is and whether it's sandy or organic. Organic "sticky" mud is the type that really wants to grab a sharp leading edge and remove a surgical piece of divot that sucks all my energy into the divot and none into the ball. That's where I'm talking vectors, my man. There's some special spot in the root zone that science cannot describe. Either the leading edge's vector goes towards the target line and I end up with a playable shot or it goes straight towards the core of the planet and I look like Jordan Spieth.

 

BTW, if Spieth had been using a higher bounce wedge he would have skulled it into the back trap rather than laid the sod over it into the creek. :)

 

I don't want to do it, but I need to buy a new low bounce 52. Mine was new old stock with the old wedges and it's hell on the new generation of golf balls. In the great arms race of spin control once the USGA dulled the grooves the ball companies just softened the covers. Now I end up with fish scales on 4 dollar golf balls that are more frustrating than 3 bogies in a row.

[billh17]

Can't imagine too many people out there swinging anything but their Woods over 100mph....just to Nit Pick ;)

 

Just to nitpick...I first said "up to" 100 mph. :bigwhack:

 

Haha Just To Not Pick, I was just yankin yer chain by!! I totally get what you're saying and am on the same side!! Couldn't help myself on that one though haha ;)

 

Just to nitpick, I just like to nitpick.

 

Really? No one would ever have guessed ! We all love it when your mystical-like explanations are given ! Seriously,you have explained

several issues in discussions,that I was always one of the hackers who always just accepted what some supposed instructor had decreed !

Yourself and the Judge have provided me with a lot of understanding and insight and i really appreciate it,as does everyone on this thread.

[billh17]

My ”bible” in truth.

Lurking your discussion on bounce made me wonder what actually the truth in all this is. As some of you know I have taken a “time-out” from golf and wrx the past year or so. Which has given me the time to pursue some other aspects of life, seeking the “deeper meaning of life”… stuff like that. From a viewpoint of curiosity I have been intrigued by some of the many truth and “science says” discussions that is so amply represented here on wrx.

 

I have followed and read tons and tons of material in an effort to establish what the truth is. The funny part is that the more I read the more of conflicting data I got. If you really look at it, it is dumbfounding that so many opposing ideas can derive from the relative simple task of hitting a ball with a club. The end result of my golf truth search was actually just that I got more and more confused.

What is often missed and ignored in the discussions is the point of how do YOU establish what is truth? A question it turned out that went far deeper in life that mere golf related issues.

 

At a point I realized that my search was based on a false premise so to speak. I tried and tried to find THE correct datum that would somehow miraculously make me better. It never happened. Because I found that I was asking the wrong question. Instead of asking “where or what is the truth” I should have been asking “How do I determine what is the truth for me?” Not how can I convince others that this is the truth.

 

No. Truthfully examining how that is established to complete certainty… Oh dear… oh dear… It can be the beginning of the most amazing adventure.

 

You see… On a reversed vector you can also consider; How come if I know the truth I keep failing or don’t really accomplish what I set out to do?

 

These questions for me are not meant to be high flung philosophical considerations far away from the practicalities of life. They are meant to be applied to the very practicalities of everyday life.

 

Pardon my interruption.

 

Vader..you are one of the guys that we wish would "interrupt" more often ! Good to hear from you .

[Matt J]

BTW, Ninja, you saying that just a few millimeters of difference would be insignificant in regards to the fluid dynamics of the wedge travelling through the ground....

 

I'm thinking of an airplane wing and how lift is created. Isn't the key to lift that the air has to travel faster around the underside of the wing hence pushing up harder? Isn't the wedge something like an upside-down wing through the ground? The bulge in the bounce doesn't seem like much material, but if it changes the fluid dynamics of how much lift the substrate is pushing against the bottom of the wedge then it could be more significant than it seems !?!

 

I'm still liking Radro's skipping rocks... when you go to skip a rock you pick a nice rounded aerodynamic rock, not a sharp one.