Rick Shiels Butchers another Tech Review - AutoFlex

[braincramp52]

3 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Aha but they do. Its just on a scale. So if matt gained 5mph ball speed at his swing speed with a hollow faced vs traditonal faced, its safe to assume you would see about 3/4 of the increase, about 3.5 mph extra.  Its not like the equipment magically changes its characteristics based on who is swinging..

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree because that's not been my experience. No problem.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

I'll lean in Rick's direction. Besides a good fitting, golf equipment in general is mostly snake oil unless you are an elite golfer. More money and newer is not better. 

[pinhigh27]

48 minutes ago, braincramp52 said:

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree because that's not been my experience. No problem.

There is literally no data that any club tech stuff disproportionately helps faster swinging players . There is actually data that as speed increases the clubs get slightly less efficient( at a pretty micro level) 

[Bad9]

31 minutes ago, pinhigh27 said:

There is literally no data that any club tech stuff disproportionately helps faster swinging players . There is actually data that as speed increases the clubs get slightly less efficient( at a pretty micro level) 

Pretty sure Wishon would disagree with you and has said otherwise numerous times in the past. I think he has the data to back up his comments.

Edited December 31, 2020 by Bad9

[Red4282]

1 hour ago, Bad9 said:

Pretty sure Wishon would disagree with you and has said otherwise numerous times in the past. I think he has the data to back up his comments.

Its not rocket science. All you have to do to figure this out is look at smash factors. What output do you get (ball speed) for your input (club speed). Smash factors max out the same for faster speeds as they do for the slowest of speeds, provided the delivery isnt different.

[Hawkeye77]

On 12/31/2020 at 7:45 AM, Red4282 said:

Ok for example, lets say they have a video testing two driver heads against each other. Driver head A launches at 14 degrees, driver head B launches at 12.5 degrees. The delivery and strike were nearly identical. Its safe to assume driver head A has lower COG and and will launch higher than driver B, and thats at ALL speeds. 
 

 

You are claiming that the only possibility is that Driver head B has a higher COG and Driver A a lower COG?  What are your fitting credentials?

[Red4282]

4 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

You are claiming that the only possibility is that Driver head B has a higher COG and Driver A a lower COG?  What are your fitting credentials?

If all the variables are the same.. balls used, dynamic loft, AOA, and strike location, yes... what else could provide a higher launch? I dont need credentials to understand that..

[taskerc]

On 12/31/2020 at 9:06 AM, braincramp52 said:

No, my argument here is that I'm not going to learn a damn thing from a guy with a 120 mph swing in a simulator testing drivers. The ONLY way you're going to know what you're getting is by testing the equipment you buy yourself. Oh, and I love watching TXG. I just never watch expecting to learn anything about equipment that would fit me.

no intent to thread Jack, but ...
 

Funnily enough I live 5 miles from the TXG location in Toronto - awesome studio - a total golf spa.  They did work for me a couple of years ago - iron fitting, bending and shaft recommendation / installation. They somehow got me - an 11 hdcp, max driver SS 99mph - hitting my Mizuno MP5s in ways I never thought possible - no real pressure to buy things and I found the fitting rate to be reasonable given the reputation etc.  They know their stuff.  
 

And Matt is a member at my golf club - haven’t really seen him play but friends are aware and he’s a good player. Ian is a seasoned golf guy with an interesting history.  
 

I say all of this this because they DO know their stuff in ways I’ve never seen before and what they bring in the videos, while demonstrated by an exceptional amateur golfer, shows me how equipment compares side by side from a highly repeatable swing. What is most helpful for me is their extensive adoption of technology for the fitting and testing process.  I feel like I now know what data makes sense, even for me.  And it’s always helpful seeing good, neutral swings as a model.

 

I do recall a TXG video where Matt intentionally swings at a reduced speed which made the experience slightly more personally relevant for me as well 🙂 

 

And  I like Rick - I enjoy what I can take away from the online reviews and topics. Whether it’s Rick or TXG or even WRX, everyone has a business model. I know first hand that if I go to TXG I don’t get forced to buy anything, but I did because I was convinced it made sense and was probably a better outcome than I could do myself. I’m sure TXG does sell many clubs and fittings - Toronto has a market (as do many places) for a premium service and they meet that demand well. As does Modern Golf .... 

 

 

[Hawkeye77]

10 hours ago, Red4282 said:

If all the variables are the same.. balls used, dynamic loft, AOA, and strike location, yes... what else could provide a higher launch? I dont need credentials to understand that..

 

You certainly don't.

[Red4282]

4 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

You certainly don't.

Then whats your point? Im not sure if you are genuinely asking or if you are saying there is something else that could cause it...?

[braincramp52]

26 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Then whats your point? Im not sure if you are genuinely asking or if you are saying there is something else that could cause it...?

 

Are you taking the shaft out of the equation?

[Red4282]

37 minutes ago, braincramp52 said:

 

Are you taking the shaft out of the equation?

All variables the same... that means shaft too.

[ivygynonc]

On 12/28/2020 at 3:20 PM, Feelingofgreatness said:

If it really was that great, Matt from TXG would have put it in the bag and tour pros would actually be using it. Neither is the case.

 

this +1

[wobgon]

Why go in circles.....We are all Golfwrx members....If you have been around here for any length of time, you should know that Rick Shiels=Bad.........TXG=Awesome. 

[vman]

Seemed like a fair review. Rick seems honest about his opinions and that's probably why he has such a huge following. If you create a shaft that only performs at 46"+, it seems like you're aiming at a small audience, hence the crazy price tag, I guess.

[lefthack]

On 12/28/2020 at 9:35 AM, jmorrow020 said:

I tried really really hard to watch the entire thing... but I just couldnt. He admits in the first :30 seconds that he doesnt talk about shafts because "he doesnt see a difference and theres too many out there" 

 

 

Can someone please get this dude a real fitting with some knowledge? Hes a huge influencer in the market whether we like it or not... it would be nice if he was actually producing the correct technical information. 

 

You mean like all the other YouTube personalities? It's literally like anything else. He has an opinion and a channel. You can choose to watch his channel or not. You can take his opinion and run with it, or form your own.

 

If you want to spend your days fact checking YouTube, I hope you have some time on your hands.

 

🤣

[chocolate_rehab]

On 12/28/2020 at 1:20 PM, Feelingofgreatness said:

If it really was that great, Matt from TXG would have put it in the bag and tour pros would actually be using it. Neither is the case.

 

 

A number of professional women golfers use it. Professional men generally aren't chasing 10 yards as much.

 

On 12/31/2020 at 5:57 AM, Red4282 said:

Ok it doesnt matter though. It doesnt change the fact that a certain driver head performs a certain way, because the player cant be consistent. If you delivery it 20 different ways, 20 different strikes it will STILL be a higher launching driver thanks to that test. 
 

i mean your argument here is alot of golfers stink so just get a wal mart set. I have no problem with that. But if you are considering a huge purchase, 400 dollar driver you might want to understand what you are getting. 

 

 

This has been discussed quite a bit. In truth, amateurs are quite consistent with their swings - even if they are flawed. Many of the shots tend to be the same with the same equipment. If you're over the top, you're over the top. Someone mentioned The Average Golfer, in particular, who has an over the top swing. He's pretty consistent with it, though. This is a reason why I've said TXG needs to adjust their position on having Matt test everything. Not only is it boring/useless for most golfers (I understand some viewers enjoy wishcasting Matt's swing), but I'd argue there's MORE benefit in having people with average/flawed swings test equipment. Especially in the game improvement categories.

 

I agree though, this shaft is not for everyone. And doesn't need to be.

Edited January 4, 2021 by chocolate_rehab

[Long_Left]

On 12/28/2020 at 3:10 PM, cachecropp said:

I see two types of equipment reviewer/testers online. 1) they just go through the motions, reading off some of the marketing slogans  then hit a few balls and claim it’s a great product.  2) they hit a dozen balls at their 115 mph swing and claim Whether they like it better than product X.

 

This does nothing for the 90% of golfers who swing 80-105 and hit the ball all over the face with all kinds of swing paths.  Is it really so difficult to gather data at regular swing speeds and ball strikes on the four corners of the face so we can see the results with slight mishits at 85, 95, 105?

I'm curious to know what you feel you'd gain in seeing this type of information? Related question: Does driver performance at the edges of the face factor into the buying decision for anyone?

 

The only thing I have in common with Matt from TXG is that I play left handed... I hit an 8 iron yesterday off the grooves on the smooth part of the toe, lost about 40 yards , stayed on line... but why would I concern myself with that shot's performance?

 

I think the difficulty in collecting data from 10-30 handicappers is the unique nature of the golf swing, the higher the index usually correlates with how "unique" the swing is as well, so one given 20 with an over the top move is going to be significantly different from most other 20ish slicers. I don't, personally, see the benefit of seeing how a club performs when we hit it like a sausage. And I mean "we," I'm not trying to defend only seeing testing from a human robot launching the ball into orbit every time, but I cannot fathom watching my dad (in his 70s, swing speed about 80, can't get the clubface on the ball much, plays as an excuse to drink a couple beers and walk around for a few hours and loves it.)

 

Every reviewer I've seen online with any kind of following would tell you to spend your money on lessons instead of a new driver or any club, or buy the driver with the biggest face...

[Bad9]

1 hour ago, Long_Left said:

I'm curious to know what you feel you'd gain in seeing this type of information? Related question: Does driver performance at the edges of the face factor into the buying decision for anyone?

 

The only thing I have in common with Matt from TXG is that I play left handed... I hit an 8 iron yesterday off the grooves on the smooth part of the toe, lost about 40 yards , stayed on line... but why would I concern myself with that shot's performance?

 

I think the difficulty in collecting data from 10-30 handicappers is the unique nature of the golf swing, the higher the index usually correlates with how "unique" the swing is as well, so one given 20 with an over the top move is going to be significantly different from most other 20ish slicers. I don't, personally, see the benefit of seeing how a club performs when we hit it like a sausage. And I mean "we," I'm not trying to defend only seeing testing from a human robot launching the ball into orbit every time, but I cannot fathom watching my dad (in his 70s, swing speed about 80, can't get the clubface on the ball much, plays as an excuse to drink a couple beers and walk around for a few hours and loves it.)

 

Every reviewer I've seen online with any kind of following would tell you to spend your money on lessons instead of a new driver or any club, or buy the driver with the biggest face...

This is Wrx, the bastion of 10hc golfers who are elite ball strikers but have no short game. Many here have swings pros would kill to have.

[Long_Left]

5 minutes ago, Bad9 said:

This is Wrx, the bastion of 10hc golfers who are elite ball strikers but have no short game. Many here have swings pros would kill to have.

🤣 Well I suppose I ruined my cred then by admitting I almost missed an 8 iron...

[MysteryV]

7 hours ago, Long_Left said:

I'm curious to know what you feel you'd gain in seeing this type of information? Related question: Does driver performance at the edges of the face factor into the buying decision for anyone?

 

The only thing I have in common with Matt from TXG is that I play left handed... I hit an 8 iron yesterday off the grooves on the smooth part of the toe, lost about 40 yards , stayed on line... but why would I concern myself with that shot's performance?

 

I think the difficulty in collecting data from 10-30 handicappers is the unique nature of the golf swing, the higher the index usually correlates with how "unique" the swing is as well, so one given 20 with an over the top move is going to be significantly different from most other 20ish slicers. I don't, personally, see the benefit of seeing how a club performs when we hit it like a sausage. And I mean "we," I'm not trying to defend only seeing testing from a human robot launching the ball into orbit every time, but I cannot fathom watching my dad (in his 70s, swing speed about 80, can't get the clubface on the ball much, plays as an excuse to drink a couple beers and walk around for a few hours and loves it.)

 

Every reviewer I've seen online with any kind of following would tell you to spend your money on lessons instead of a new driver or any club, or buy the driver with the biggest face...

 

Two things occur to me that would be interesting:

 

1) If TXG had a scratch handicapper who was a bit slower ss - say 105 - because they DO exist!  I've played with some!  😄

 

2) If they would hire an intern to collect and filter data on specific off center strikes.  This would be EXTREMELY interesting if done right.  Not just - here's 20 shots off the middle of the face struck perfectly at 120mph - but rather - here are 25 shots 10 mm left / right / high / low.  

 

Matt can hit high toe / low heel / etc.  I'd love to see some videos on forgiveness with more focus on off-center strike data t so a broader range of golfers could understand forgiveness of specific heads in specific areas - or how things like Velocore actually improve off center strikes.

 

I'd happily sacrifice 10 yards from the center of the face for 10 from the high toe  🤣

[Long_Left]

9 hours ago, MysteryV said:

 

Two things occur to me that would be interesting:

 

1) If TXG had a scratch handicapper who was a bit slower ss - say 105 - because they DO exist!  I've played with some!  😄

 

2) If they would hire an intern to collect and filter data on specific off center strikes.  This would be EXTREMELY interesting if done right.  Not just - here's 20 shots off the middle of the face struck perfectly at 120mph - but rather - here are 25 shots 10 mm left / right / high / low.  

 

Matt can hit high toe / low heel / etc.  I'd love to see some videos on forgiveness with more focus on off-center strike data t so a broader range of golfers could understand forgiveness of specific heads in specific areas - or how things like Velocore actually improve off center strikes.

 

I'd happily sacrifice 10 yards from the center of the face for 10 from the high toe  🤣

I'd certainly be interested in seeing more useful information on off center strikes as well. I also have doubts that the information would be reliably repeatable outside of a machine hitting the ball.  Face to path, effective loft, etc are all huge variables that likely (I'm guessing here) are more important when the ball is struck off center. Closure rate would have a significant impact on toe side performance I'd imagine.

 

I think I've gotten to the point where I use reviews and such to get in the ballpark for things I'd like to try and then have to go try them for myself.

[Skhacker]

He’s just a golf nerd and goofball and I enjoy most of his videos. I never take him seriously though. Just watch his videos to see the new and oddball stuff. 

[MysteryV]

5 hours ago, Long_Left said:

I'd certainly be interested in seeing more useful information on off center strikes as well. I also have doubts that the information would be reliably repeatable outside of a machine hitting the ball.  Face to path, effective loft, etc are all huge variables that likely (I'm guessing here) are more important when the ball is struck off center. Closure rate would have a significant impact on toe side performance I'd imagine.

 

I think I've gotten to the point where I use reviews and such to get in the ballpark for things I'd like to try and then have to go try them for myself.

 

Agreed.  With regards to being repeatable - it helps - but also doesn't matter.  What I'm suggesting is hitting a ton of shots, exporting the data, and sorting by off center strike location.  While having someone like Matt try to hit high toe would help reduce the total number of shots required to get a reasonable sample size - taking a large enough sample size would get you there as well.

 

As I talk through this - it's starting to sound like a project for those OTHER guys who pose as being neutral and trustworthy, but nobody seems to trust...

[PeanutsDaddy]

On 1/4/2021 at 2:31 PM, Long_Left said:

I'm curious to know what you feel you'd gain in seeing this type of information? Related question: Does driver performance at the edges of the face factor into the buying decision for anyone?

 

The only thing I have in common with Matt from TXG is that I play left handed... I hit an 8 iron yesterday off the grooves on the smooth part of the toe, lost about 40 yards , stayed on line... but why would I concern myself with that shot's performance?

 

I think the difficulty in collecting data from 10-30 handicappers is the unique nature of the golf swing, the higher the index usually correlates with how "unique" the swing is as well, so one given 20 with an over the top move is going to be significantly different from most other 20ish slicers. I don't, personally, see the benefit of seeing how a club performs when we hit it like a sausage. And I mean "we," I'm not trying to defend only seeing testing from a human robot launching the ball into orbit every time, but I cannot fathom watching my dad (in his 70s, swing speed about 80, can't get the clubface on the ball much, plays as an excuse to drink a couple beers and walk around for a few hours and loves it.)

 

Every reviewer I've seen online with any kind of following would tell you to spend your money on lessons instead of a new driver or any club, or buy the driver with the biggest face...

 

Your Dad's got this figured out.  May I be so blessed to be upright and swinging a golf club in my 70s.  I hope you two are able to share many more enjoyable rounds together.  

 

That comment was the best part of the thread for me.  

[Benkross]

On 12/31/2020 at 8:30 AM, braincramp52 said:

As a 5'7" 68 year old man who hits his tee shots 200-220 yards and his 7 iron 130 yards, what are the things I should be paying attention to that are going to benefit me by watching a guy like Matt from TXG pound balls?

Rick Shiels is entertaining but he drives me crazy that he can't really explain much about the tech. Also for someone who's massive influencer and a golf pro, he does a remarkably poor job of getting fit for his equipment, which he absolutely could before doing a review. Ian Fraser from TXG understands not only tech, but also the golf swing. They've done fittings of players at different swing speeds and handicaps. If you view their playlists, they do fittings of high handicappers, slower swing speed players etc. I know his Scottish accent can be a little thick at times, but the info is on point. Listening to his analysis, you can learn how the swing influences the golf ball and you can learn if your numbers are optimized. If you get on Trackman or GC Quad you can start with ballspeed and then tweak the variables to maximize your performance. Do you know your optimized launch and spin characteristics based on your swing speed and efficiency? You could very well be leaving 20+ yards on the table. Can you swing a driver at 95 MPH? Can you find the center of the face? An efficient strike (1.4) would create a  ballspeed of 133 MPH and with a well fit modern driver, at those speeds you should be carrying the ball 200-220+/240-250 total. This chart is a good reference https://images.app.goo.gl/xCrPKDh5UmAx5LD96. He explains things like dynamic lie angle and how that influences the swing, start lines, he teaches about club building and so many topics. He explains how strike point affects launch and spin. Aside from just watching Matty smash balls into oblivion, you can learn a tremendous amount. If you care about data they're the platinum standard. If you're a feel player, you'll probably glaze over and you should ignore their videos. I'm biased because I'm a data junkie so their videos were made for me 😁. 

Edited January 6, 2021 by Benkross

[braincramp52]

5 hours ago, Benkross said:

Rick Shiels is entertaining but he drives me crazy that he can't really explain much about the tech. Also for someone who's massive influencer and a golf pro, he does a remarkably poor job of getting fit for his equipment, which he absolutely could before doing a review. Ian Fraser from TXG understands not only tech, but also the golf swing. They've done fittings of players at different swing speeds and handicaps. If you view their playlists, they do fittings of high handicappers, slower swing speed players etc. I know his Scottish accent can be a little thick at times, but the info is on point. Listening to his analysis, you can learn how the swing influences the golf ball and you can learn if your numbers are optimized. If you get on Trackman or GC Quad you can start with ballspeed and then tweak the variables to maximize your performance. Do you know your optimized launch and spin characteristics based on your swing speed and efficiency? You could very well be leaving 20+ yards on the table. Can you swing a driver at 95 MPH? Can you find the center of the face? An efficient strike (1.4) would create a  ballspeed of 133 MPH and with a well fit modern driver, at those speeds you should be carrying the ball 200-220+/240-250 total. This chart is a good reference https://images.app.goo.gl/xCrPKDh5UmAx5LD96. He explains things like dynamic lie angle and how that influences the swing, start lines, he teaches about club building and so many topics. He explains how strike point affects launch and spin. Aside from just watching Matty smash balls into oblivion, you can learn a tremendous amount. If you care about data they're the platinum standard. If you're a feel player, you'll probably glaze over and you should ignore their videos. I'm biased because I'm a data junkie so their videos were made for me 😁. 

 

Thanks Ben, this is the most sensible post I've read on this topic. And you're right, since I am a total feel player I'm not interested in having a lot of data thrown at me to just ignore. Don't get me wrong, I still want to kick your tail on the course but my main concerns are keeping the ball in play, never 3 putting, and making sure there's a few cold beers in the cart. 

Edited January 6, 2021 by braincramp52

[Long_Left]

15 hours ago, PeanutsDaddy said:

 

Your Dad's got this figured out.  May I be so blessed to be upright and swinging a golf club in my 70s.  I hope you two are able to share many more enjoyable rounds together.  

 

That comment was the best part of the thread for me.  

Thank you! I hope the same for you as well!

[Long_Left]

21 hours ago, MysteryV said:

 

Agreed.  With regards to being repeatable - it helps - but also doesn't matter.  What I'm suggesting is hitting a ton of shots, exporting the data, and sorting by off center strike location.  While having someone like Matt try to hit high toe would help reduce the total number of shots required to get a reasonable sample size - taking a large enough sample size would get you there as well.

 

As I talk through this - it's starting to sound like a project for those OTHER guys who pose as being neutral and trustworthy, but nobody seems to trust...

Internet forums being what they are I get that it is hard to walk a fine enough line to make a majority of people happy with both the amount of data collected and the methods used to interpret that data. You have Rick Shiels, who presents minimal LM data and makes a conclusion, and he's blasted for being a dope with a bad swing... you have TXG, presenting a more substantial amount of data and they get blasted for having a player of elite? high skill/athleticism gather it... the "OTHER guys" collect a ton of data and they get blasted for how they crunch the numbers...

 

I love watching golf content online, but being a lefty myself and in an area of the country without a golf retail presence, I think I have become accustomed to either planning road trips to test gear or "buy it to try it." Neither of those is ideal because when I road trip I want to purchase something to make the trip "worth it," and when I buy to try I want it to work so I didn't waste my money. I lean on TXG because I can find enough information there on the subjective feel of shafts etc. paired with the hard data of differences in launch angles, spin, and strike consistency to hedge my bets when buying unseen...

 

We need to crowdsource the data you are talking about, or someone like a Club Champion needs to anonymize their vast data collection and make it available for public consumption. Of course the club makers would instantly pull their equipment from CC as the data would show that equipment is generally the same across the board in the hands of the average player. This is where a guy like Shiels gets it 100% right but no one wants to admit it... Velocore and HexTow and AutoFlex and all these other things will do so little to help a swing that is 8 degrees out to in and decending by 4 degrees at contact that it is, 100% literally, irrelevant. I'd still love to see it 🙂

[TGSherriff]

On 12/28/2020 at 12:40 PM, MaineMariner said:

Like him or not, Shiels is one of the very few "influencers" that will totally pan a product. Almost all of the online reviewers just read the press release for the club/ball/whatever, give it a couple whacks, and say a few nice but generic/non-controversial things and move on. 

 

So in that sense, I thought this review was great. He concluded with... no, this mysterious, ridiculously expensive shaft is not worth it. I think he's the first to come to this conclusion, and that's refreshing.

That is true although he should also be the first to know that just throwing in any old head to a shaft is not going to get optimal results.