So I got fitted for a driver, and...

[nbg352]

I must have spent all day on this one then?

 

Should I be quitting my day job? Obviously I'm pro material?!? Maybe it's just all photoshop?

 

I can do this for a while...

 

 

 

Geez, buddy....I never said you doctored the data...unless of course, deleting the bad ones is considered doctoring, lol. And of course that takes no time at all.

[Golfrnut]

Check my 15 shot data nbg. Those are my normal, unfiltered numbers. And I have plenty of those reports. As for my swing, you can find it over on the swing forums. There are plenty of flaws, disconnections, etc. But, if you letting people be satisfied with being all over the face, then you are selling them short. The smash factor is no more than hitting the face where you are supposed to. Unless you have a situation with excessive dynamic loft, then the ball speed will take care of itself.

 

And if I can find the reports where I am using an unfit, stock length driver, I will gladly post those results. It's night and day difference.

[Golfrnut]

I must have spent all day on this one then?

 

Should I be quitting my day job? Obviously I'm pro material?!? Maybe it's just all photoshop?

 

I can do this for a while...

 

 

 

Geez, buddy....I never said you doctored the data...unless of course, deleting the bad ones is considered doctoring, lol. And of course that takes no time at all.

 

Yes, deleting my bad shots could be considered "doctoring" to reinforce my stance on the subject, but there isn't a need. The 4 shot driver was from a gap report, I got the data I needed so no reason to go any further.

 

15 shot report was a normal test. Again, no real need to delete any shots. I can easily hit fades, blocks, pulls, etc...not on demand. But I still hit center of the face when I do it.

 

And I've help quite a few people turn their consistency around, and it starts will getting the length off the club. I've watched people go from crap to solid numbers in minutes by doing so. OEM lengths are garbage....

[nbg352]

Check my 15 shot data nbg. Those are my normal, unfiltered numbers. And I have plenty of those reports. As for my swing, you can find it over on the swing forums. There are plenty of flaws, disconnections, etc. But, if you letting people be satisfied with being all over the face, then you are selling them short. The smash factor is no more than hitting the face where you are supposed to. Unless you have a situation with excessive dynamic loft, then the ball speed will take care of itself.

 

And if I can find the reports where I am using an unfit, stock length driver, I will gladly post those results. It's night and day difference.

FOR YOU! Others mileage may very well vary. Many golfers have swings that will never allow them to hit the centre of the face at the correct dynamic or swing loft. Their smash will always be at least somewhat low, regardless of the club or how well they are fit into a club. Can it be improved with a fitting? YES! Should it improve smash above 1.40? Probably! But without the swing mechanics to support the numbers, 1.47 may be a long way off for many.

[Golfrnut]

Wanna see bad data when I wasn't using a fitted driver?

 

Again, I nor anyone else is immune. But which do you think was better? Should I have just stayed and said that this was "good enough" since I am an amateur?

 

Amazing what a difference doing this correctly can make...

 

 

[Exactice808]

I'm not gonna even bother with a long-winded response. It's obvious by all your previous posts that you really don't understand anything of what you are trying to preach about. The only reason, that people accept that they are being told that low smash factor numbers are "okay" is because they really don't know any better, just like you don't know any better. Meanwhile they are hampered by gear effects, have no idea where the ball is going to go or how far, and we get posts here asking us if they were cheated out of money or they can't understand why they didn't see any improvement. And yes, for the record, that makes you part of the problem. Do yourself, and anyone else that may choose to listen to you a favor and educate yourself more about what it is you are saying, because until you do, you are only doing them a disservice and feeding them garbage. I gave you data, and the only rebuttal you have to the fact that I can sit here and blatantly, and very easily, prove you wrong is that I manipulate the data? Get outta here with that ignorant nonsense. You have no real idea what you are talking about, I can easy show you that you really have no idea what you are talking about, as I already have. Hell, I have 4 wood and hybrid/rescue data that is in the mid/high 1.4s. Mediocre swing for me? At best! But I have clubs that will give me enough consistency to get in the sweet spot. I can post for data for a good while to prove my point, I'm sure others that own monitors and can actually effectively use them can as well. But it doesn't do a whole lot of good if your only response is that the numbers are somehow "doctored". There isn't a need to doctor them. Hell, if I cared that much I wouldn't even worry about posting them....with my doctored "95 MPH" swing speed and all.

I have no doubt that some of your strikes are up there or that there are times when you can repetitively do it. If you didn't delete a couple of not quite perfect for illustration purposes hits, so be it. My apology. But I don't need your data...and remember, it is just your data.....to tell me what I have seen over and over and over. and that is, with rare exception, most average golfers are also very average ball strikers. Especially with driver. 1.50 consistently, just does not happen. Many times they come to me at 1.30 or so and leave at mid 1.40 or so, but only the good ball strikers ever get consistent 1.47 or above numbers. Obviously, if you are actually averaging 1.48 with your driver, you are an above average striker of the ball regardless of your 94.4mph club speed and you have a driver that fits you. But don`t confuse your numbers with the norm. Because your numbers do not speak to the norm. Many of the average golfers I see can`t imagine hitting a fairway wood or hybrid with a smash factor in the 1.40s. And they never will until they fix their swings. And that, most often is the problem. Fitters fit clubs. To the best of their ability in most cases. They do not fix swings.......although a change in lie angle, weight, length may contribute to an improvement in that regard.

Now go fix that hook.......

 

Nbg and Golfrnut, funny part you guys are some what on the same page.... So with that if I may bridge the gap.

 

 

1) Yes People struggle with efficient strikes, Both of you are agreeing to this.

2) The Optimal or the Goal is to try to get the mythical 1.50 strike, get the max ball speed reading and use that is the optimal ball speed to base the remainders of your swing on.

 

 

So yes, people DO struggle with quality of strike especially with the Driver. This is the thing, with most units especially at Big box stores, the smash factor is often set to something, more so if there was previous fitting done they may have set it to the 6iron smash 1.36 and someone hitting their driver with and getting a 150mph ball speed, would see a swing speed of 110mph, thinking they are swinging 110mph swing speed.... which is total BS.

 

Then, from there if not I have seen many LM's set between 1.4 and 1.45 smash giving some erratic ball speed and swing speed numbers.

 

 

Anyways..... this is my point... 1.5 smash is to find our highest swing speed and ball speed to give us an optimal shot we can produce.

 

From there if we figure that out, it will give us a base of our base optimal swing speed where we can set the bases of shaft weight and flex,

 

More so location of strike can tell us lie angles and lengths of shaft. Ngb & Golfrnut, Im preaching to the choir im just trying to be the mediator LOL

 

Any ways, To me something is up when the smash factor was at 1.4 and the swing speed varies from 102 - 110 thats a pretty tale tale sign something is off.

 

With that likely his quality of strike is still an issue.

 

 

So agree to disagree you guys are both right...

 

OP needs to really sit down and figure things out.

[nbg352]

Blanket statements in a business where there are no standards, a lot of rules of thumb and even more teaching and fitting philosophies, are just plain inappropriate and irresponsible. I prefer to use words such as some, many, most, often, depends....because there are no rules only the basis for them in most instances. And every time I presume that something applies to everyone, I am proven wrong by someone who just won't fit the mold.

With that said, I hope that what I have tried to say in this thread is actually read in the way I intended. I really dislike getting into it with another member on here. And yet, here I went. Golfnut, too.

I leave by way of apologising to any who saw my posts in the wrong light.

[Exactice808]

Blanket statements in a business where there are no standards, a lot of rules of thumb and even more teaching and fitting philosophies, are just plain inappropriate and irresponsible. I prefer to use words such as some, many, most, often, depends....because there are no rules only the basis for them in most instances. And every time I presume that something applies to everyone, I am proven wrong by someone who just won't fit the mold.

With that said, I hope that what I have tried to say in this thread is actually read in the way I intended. I really dislike getting into it with another member on here. And yet, here I went. Golfnut, too.

I leave by way of apologising to any who saw my posts in the wrong light.

 

Well I think the words used are based on context..... I am guilty of "rules of thumb" and also Blades are made only for quality ball strikers.

 

I still feel there are general rules of thumbs and its not being irresponsible as when it comes down to it.... there is 2 options, it works or it doesnt. Out side of it, being consistent and starting of with the same variables keeps the guessing game down to a minimum rather than trying to go back and forth back and forth.

 

 

While I 100% there are many anomalies and people that dont fit the mold, Golf is still one that I feel the tweaks and the "static" numbers dont lie, and people would better suit to work on molding their swing to reach those static numbers. Rather than trying to bandaid a bad swing with equipment tweaks....

 

Get fit for your general swing and then from there tweak the swing to optimize, once your swing is as good as it get, guess what? Another fitting to solidify everything and then call it a day.....

[Howard_Jones]

Drivers of standard length has a potential for higher club speed and if pured, it goes longer, thats simple math.

The problem is you want do that very often, so as average you loose vs a shorter driver.

 

A driver fitting that ends up with a PTR value below 1.47 is no good, and im talking AVERAGE JOE, not professionals

Professionals should have a PTR value of 1.5 to 1.52 on 7 out of 10 strokes, if not its not a good club fitting.

 

1.4 is normal for "any driver" grabbed and played by a amateur golfer, and when PTR is this low, GEAR EFFECTS control everything from flight, direction to distance, and it will be all over the place. 1.4 is the LOWEST estimate of PTR value im using in my examples to explain whats still in that club, and this club has more than 25 yards total to get out, with the same player AND SWING.....

 

Yes i saw a few bad swings, but for the most ive seen bad fitted clubs, and when fixed, most players has a way more consistent swing than they was aware of.

 

To make sure i had customers coming in, i offered re-fitting of the customers existent driver if it had a potential we could get out by changing a few club specs, and it was nobody who returned with a PTR lower than 1.48 as average. This did NOT include a shaft change, only a change of the shaft in that club by length adjustment from tip or butt or both, plus new club balance and grip.

 

Those who has a club where shaft weight and flex is within reason of what it should be will be able to make that at home if they follow my DIY driver tune up, but it does not mean that a true fitting is a waist of money, its just hard to find a place who actually offers true custom fitting.

[Howard_Jones]

Here is a Trackman report ive "ripped" from a Danish forum where a player tried his own "off the rack club"

PTR as average is as low as 1.36 if we dont take out the worse shots, but the other numbers is "all over the place", and it does NOT have to be like this.

 

 

[Howard_Jones]

Here is a report from a driver fitting ive done, the player above has a average club speed of 92.9, and this player has 91.9 so they should be possible to put up against each other.

 

The player above with a club off the rack and a PTR as low as 1.36 only gets 160.9 meters average carry (176.8 yards)

THIS player with a driver i made for him, has a average PTR of 1.50 and a average carry of 199.7 meters (219.5 yards)

 

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/1295166-heavier-shaft-less-spin/#entry13097400

 

its 43 yards carry as difference from the same club speed, actually the one with lowest club speed hit it longest

[Howard_Jones]

The driver I hit the best was the driver I currently own! Waste of money maybe...but the Trackman results were worth some $ amount, I guess. Golf stores had my clubhead speed at 110 or so, in reality I was only swinging 102-106, hell I even had quite a few after I was winded under 100mph. That surprised me. I would assume the golf store monitors are off and not Trackman, but it begs the question, "why?"

 

I will say this to all those who are considering getting fitted...if you can go demo clubs at a Golfsmith or any local indoor place with some type of launch monitor. And you can find a driver that shows a LA of 15 or so, under 3,000rpms spin consistently, and a smash factor around 1.4, you do not need to spend the money on a proper fitting. It's just probably not going to get much better than that. Now, if you're super serious about the game, compete, etc. then it probably is worth getting fitted. But for the average Joe, I really think in-store, personal fitting is the way to go.

 

Hope I saved a couple of guys $100+ :D

 

I hope you saw the posts above, and since i dont have a LM report from you, i hope you dont mind that im now putting you into the shoes if the "1.36" player and convert the numbers to make a compare.

 

IF that was you, we had to adjust for your PTR value of 1.4 vs 1.36, and thats 4 mph ball speed each of 2 yards "all else equal".

That means your carry would have been 168.9 yards with a PTR of 1.4, vs the player im showing you who has 1.5 as PTR and MORE than 30 yards longer carry. As you can see, ball speed alone does not count for the hole difference, it would have been 20 yards only, but we can still "stretch it" a but further, and any fitting with a outcome who is not comparable to Trackmans "optimum numbers", is no good, we should get there or beyond in some cases where we really make it good.

 

Many might find that statement strange, how could we get over and beyond Trackmans "optimum numbers", and the answer is that this numbers is not really optimized, they dont even have maximized ball speed, and thats why we should be able to get there for most players during a fitting, and if done right, many will be above those numbers like player #2 in the link above who has a average CS of 89.6

He has a carry thats 5 yards longer from a AoA close to zero than Trackman say is optimum with a AoA of 5 up in the ball, so if we look at what Trackman say is optimum from 90 as club speed and a AoA of 0, he should only get 203 yard carry but he get 216.6 or more than 13 yards carry extra vs Trackmans optimum for his Angle of attack.

 

So a PTR value of 1.4 is no good, you are leaving 20-30 yards, and you would hit way more fairways too when PTR improves, since a higher PTR also means less gear effects who mess with ball flight spin and curves.