Bogey Golfers Only (Index 16-22) / Breaking 90 Topic

[Lihu]

[quote name="Lihu" url="/t/70872/bogey-golfer-only-thread-handicap-index-from-16-22-what-are-you-going-through-working-on-sob-stories/540#post_935788"] I decided to use heavier woods to improve my driving and long distance accuracy with the woods and hybrids. As I got used to the he added weight of the woods, it made the effective weight of my irons much lighter.

You put heavier shafts in, right? Why didn't you putt heavier shafts in the irons, too? I don't know a lot about equipment, so I never really played around with mine (not to mention the cost), but if heavier shafts make you more accurate, that's something I should look into, myself. Personally, I've been considering a Harrison Shotmaker for a while, I might just pull the trigger on it this year.[/quote] [quote name="MS256" url="/t/70872/bogey-golfer-only-thread-handicap-index-from-16-22-what-are-you-going-through-working-on-sob-stories/540#post_936310"][QUOTE name="Lihu" url="/t/70872/bogey-golfer-only-thread-handicap-index-from-16-22-what-are-you-going-through-working-on-sob-stories/540#post_935788"]   I am also hoping to have this settled soon. I was getting to a decent swing with the MP-32 up through the 3i. Well, I decided to use heavier woods to improve my driving and long distance accuracy with the woods and hybrids. As I got used to the he added weight of the woods, it made the effective weight of my irons much lighter. This in turn made me swing these clubs too fast, and broke down a lot of things I worked hard to get. Now it's time to work on tempo and a decent pre-shot routine, and possibly to fit my ping I20s to the same swing weight as my "new" woods. Or to add lead weight to the MP-32 clubs. It seems like longer straighter drives have had a cost. [/QUOTE] If you have access to somebody that does MOI matching it might help. I don't live close to anybody that does that so I've been tinkering around by feel with lead tape in a homemade attempt at MOI matching.  Basically instead of the same swing weight the clubs have progressively more swing weight as they get shorter to make them all swing with the same amount of effort. Funny thing is that I think I've got them just about right but can't play because of this damned weather. They feel very good out in the yard though. [/quote] I didn't know there was a name for MOI tuning, and will look around my area. If I can't find anyone, the lead tape is always an option. Thanks for the info. Yes, my woods are quite a bit heavier to swing, but it feels good to swing.

[rkim291968]

I thought, in general, lighter club = faster swing = longer distance.

[Lihu]

I thought, in general, lighter club = faster swing = longer distance.

Depends upon how you are built.

For a thin, fit and flexible kid (like my son), yes a lighter shaft and club would hit farther because of increased speed. For a heavier built middle aged man (like me) with a slower swing speed, a heavier shaft would probably not slow down the club (as in my case). In addition to this, the added mass would increase the distance without a faster swing. Simple physics.

I see so many middle aged (or older) men trying to swing too fast at the range, and injuring themselves in the process. If you can't swing faster anyway, without potential for injury, why do it? I bet most of them can swing a heavier club at the same speed. All they would do is gain some distance and stability with the same exact swing. The purpose is to avoid injury with nice easy swing.

[iacas]

For a thin, fit and flexible kid (like my son), yes a lighter shaft and club would hit farther because of increased speed. For a heavier built middle aged man (like me) with a slower swing speed, a heavier shaft would probably not slow down the club (as in my case). In addition to this, the added mass would increase the distance without a faster swing. Simple physics.

It doesn't work that way. The weight of the shaft is largely inconsequential to ball-club impact. Only the bottom little bit of the shaft matters. (Plus consider that the velocity matters to exponentially (a square) while the mass is merely a linear property).

Lighter shafts can produce worse distances in two primary situations:

1. Throws off the timing (i.e. lag releases prematurely, arms come down too quickly, whatever)
2. Increases the mis-hits.

The latter is why I'll prefer a heavier shaft for awhile. I lose a little speed (not a lot - you're talking about 10-20 grams, admittedly rather far out on the radius), but I gain more centeredness of contact, and that's also very important to generating ball speed.

[Lihu]

The two reasons you listed are exactly why I hit worse with a lighter setup. I guess the feeling of more solidness is just that.

[rkim291968]

It doesn't work that way. The weight of the shaft is largely inconsequential to ball-club impact. Only the bottom little bit of the shaft matters. (Plus consider that the velocity matters to exponentially (a square) while the mass is merely a linear property).

Lighter shafts can produce worse distances in two primary situations:

Throws off the timing (i.e. lag releases prematurely, arms come down too quickly, whatever)

Increases the mis-hits.

The latter is why I'll prefer a heavier shaft for awhile. I lose a little speed (not a lot - you're talking about 10-20 grams, admittedly rather far out on the radius), but I gain more centeredness of contact, and that's also very important to generating ball speed.

Seems like one can benefit from heavier shaft at an expense of small distance loss.  I will have to remember that when I get fitted for driver.

[Lihu]

Even with my over exaggerated case, there was a gain in distance. If I can find someone like Spitfisher in my area, I might consider to get fitted again to see if I can gain even more distance with a more optimal setup.

[RFKFREAK]

When I picked up my Driver in Spring 2013 I got fitted for it.

I think subsequently picked up a couple of woods.

Does anyone know how much a place like Golf Galaxy typically charges for refittings?

[rkim291968]

- Improved on bunker shot, enough to go for greens surrounded by bunkers.   Spent 20 - 30 minutes in bunker about 3 - 4 times a week.

- Improved on chip putting with 9 iron.

- Improved on 3/4 shots

Every time I get good at one area, I wonder how many strokes it is shaving off my game.   I've heard that  carrying lob wedge (and knowing how to use one) can shave a stroke or two. What about getting out of bunker cleanly to near pin area?  I think it shaved about 2 strokes off my game on current home course with lots deep, huge bunkers.   Getting good at 9i chip putt?  Perhaps, it saved 1/2 - 1 stroke than using wedges or putter.   I wonder ...

[billchao]

- Improved on bunker shot, enough to go for greens surrounded by bunkers.   Spent 20 - 30 minutes in bunker about 3 - 4 times a week.  - Improved on chip putting with 9 iron.  - Improved on 3/4 shots Every time I get good at one area, I wonder how many strokes it is shaving off my game.   I've heard that  carrying lob wedge (and knowing how to use one) can shave a stroke or two. What about getting out of bunker cleanly to near pin area?  I think it shaved about 2 strokes off my game on current home course with lots deep, huge bunkers.   Getting good at 9i chip putt?  Perhaps, it saved 1/2 - 1 stroke than using wedges or putter.   I wonder ...

How's your iron play holding up? One of the best ways to save strokes from bunkers is simply not to be in them in the first place. Where do you miss on your approach shots? Short, long, laterally? Is it mishits, club selection, or do you have a wide dispersion area? I'm not saying you shouldn't work on what you're working on, in fact I think your routine is pretty good. I'm just trying to look at it from a different perspective.

[rkim291968]

How's your iron play holding up? One of the best ways to save strokes from bunkers is simply not to be in them in the first place.

Where do you miss on your approach shots? Short, long, laterally? Is it mishits, club selection, or do you have a wide dispersion area?

I'm not saying you shouldn't work on what you're working on, in fact I think your routine is pretty good. I'm just trying to look at it from a different perspective.

My iron is also improving.   Along with other things I am working on, I am working on ball striking the most, specifically on 2 of the 5SKs.   One Key is shifting my weight, and the other one getting my wrist action right.  I am OK with head shifting Key and no need to work on it.  I will get to the remaining two Keys after I master the current two I am working on.

My iron shot has been either near perfect, or are very bad misses (more to left than right or short).  By working on 5SKs, my dispersions have been narrowed.   E.g, in yesterday's round, I had 0 OBs, or penalties and ended the round with the same ball I started.

I feel I am almost back to where I was in April when my unofficial HI from easier (than course rating) courses dipped below 13 for the only time.

[billchao]

My iron is also improving.   Along with other things I am working on, I am working on ball striking the most, specifically on 2 of the 5SKs.   One Key is shifting my weight, and the other one getting my wrist action right.  I am OK with head shifting Key and no need to work on it.  I will get to the remaining two Keys after I master the current two I am working on.  My iron shot has been either near perfect, or are very bad misses (more to left than right or short).  By working on 5SKs, my dispersions have been narrowed.   E.g, in yesterday's round, I had 0 OBs, or penalties and ended the round with the same ball I started.  I feel I am almost back to where I was in April when my unofficial HI from easier (than course rating) courses dipped below 13 for the only time.

Nice! It sounds like you've been putting in a lot of hard work and it's paying off. Just be careful about working on two keys simultaneously, I know the guys will tell you it's generally pretty hard to work on multiple keys productively. That's why it's so important to find your priority piece and work from there.

[MissouriHack]

Have any of you guys tried too map out your short game? Club+ball position+Swing length ect ect.= the shot distance that you want. If so how did you do it and how did you keep track of it?

[rkim291968]

I keep a list (spreadsheet) of my average full & 3/4 swing, chipping distance for each club, down to lob wedge.   They are gathered from my range sessions over time.   I use laser range finder to accurately map distance.

[Lihu]

Have any of you guys tried too map out your short game? Club+ball position+Swing length ect ect.= the shot distance that you want. If so how did you do it and how did you keep track of it?

If you figure out a way let me know.

By the time I get to the greens, there is not a lot of time to take measurements and determine the accuracy of the shots other than by eye-balling them.

[billchao]

If you figure out a way let me know. By the time I get to the greens, there is not a lot of time to take measurements and determine the accuracy of the shots other than by eye-balling them.

It's really something you do in practice. Find a range with a good short game practice area and do your work there. I haven't made a list, so I didn't respond to @MissouriHack , but I do the practice and have a pretty good idea of my distances. Maybe I'll chart them this year. Btw I haven't observed much difference in distance based on ball position, just height. My distance control is based on swing length, club selection, and how much I'm choking down on the club.

[rkim291968]

I keep a laser range finder handy instead of eye balling distance.   I can't rely on my eye sight.   Lost a little bit of depth perception as I have gotten older.   Getting old sucks.

[Meltdwhiskey]

Have any of you guys tried too map out your short game? Club+ball position+Swing length ect ect.= the shot distance that you want. If so how did you do it and how did you keep track of it?

As an alternative to this - I think we bogey guys can try too much of this for our own good sometimes.  In my observation, the fancier and more technical folks at this level try to get, the less effective the outcome.  Unless someone is a REALLY consistent chipper, it might be a good idea to go with: 2 clubs, one ball position, one level of face openness, one level of choking down, etc.  Then once you are really good at that - add something.

The two clubs are so you can make two different shots.  One for closer pins with less green and one for when you have more green.  Everything else being the same offers you 2 things.  1) a chance to actually become really reliable with the shot 2) a chance to actually develop an expectation of what the ball will do.

When you add variables of several clubs, each with different ball positions, then each combination of those with different face angles, etc etc etc - the number of variables and outcomes is tremendous.  And none of them matter if you mishit it because you've been varying the ball position.  The small difference in outcomes due to all these variables is small potatoes on the scorecard compared to 1) making great contact time after time and 2) knowing how far the ball is going to fly, check and roll.

I don't believe bogey golfers have poor performance around the greens because they are consistently hitting high quality shots but simply picked the wrong ball position or choked down the wrong length.  In my observation, we perform poorly because we mishit the ball, skull it across the green, fat it into a bunker, etc.  I'd think reducing variables as opposed to adding them would help with decreasing the score-killing mishits.

I feel I'll catch flack for this - but it seems logical to me.