Shaftiodes Beware - Mark Crossfield Video

[Puttin4Dough]

Some folks ain't going to be happy.

 

 

[Vinsk]

Yeah. But it won’t matter. Some people are hell bent on believing in tech stuff that makes no significant difference in performance. It’s just much more exciting to believe. Like when a 20hcp thinks a ball ‘rolls better off the putter.’  Tests have been done in other areas as well showing it’s kinda nonsense I.e. wine testing...experts couldn’t tell a $1000 bottle from a $7 bottle.  And expert violinists couldn’t tell which violin was a Stratavarius or a brand new violin...and the experts actually preferred the sound of the newer. Nonetheless this is a taboo subject and often forbidden to discuss. Lol. 

[Shorty]

2 hours ago, Vinsk said:

And expert violinists couldn’t tell which violin was a Stratavarius or a brand new violin...and the experts actually preferred the sound of the newer. 

They probably like the sound of a Stradivarius even less.

 

[saevel25]

Getting fitted matters, and what ever comes from that, is what it is.

 

[Vinsk]

35 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Getting fitted matters, and what ever comes from that, is what it is.

 

I’m still just not 100% sold on that. At least not for ameteurs. Don’t blast me yet just hear me out then have at it. I’ve read the ‘most swings are consistent, consistently bad’ thread. I’ve also read Mike’s ‘Change the picture.’ I make rather drastic changes to my swing on a relatively short time frame. Always struggling with shanks, but fats, thins, pulls all come in to play as well. I understand there may be very similar swings taking place and an untrained eye May see them as identical. But the outcomes are vastly different. Something must be different. So I’m not sure how a fitting would really benefit me except for how the results turned out for that day.

Basically I find it hard to believe that if did a double blind study with 10 different fitters over a one month time frame there would be an obvious result to which equipment worked best for me. I believe I would get varying results aside from basic static fits regarding height and wrist to floor. I don’t know this of course, it’s just what seems more likely to me.

Am I wrong?

[BaconNEggs]

I hear you Vinsk, I don’t think you’re necessarily wrong per se. I’m sure it’s not black and white. Fitting will probably help people who are egregiously misfit, i.e. using light shafts when they should be using stiff, or are using standard shafts when they’re really tall. And I’m sure it would make a difference for golfers who are good enough to notice slight differences in equipment. But for the 20 handicapper who is using a reasonable proximate of what he or she should be using, I don’t think getting fitted will have dramatic results. 

As an aside, I recall Phil saying it would take months to adjust to a different golf ball (I think in relation to a Ryder Cup), which I thought was a bit silly. 

[saevel25]

8 hours ago, Vinsk said:

So I’m not sure how a fitting would really benefit me except for how the results turned out for that day.

Obviously, a person who struggles hitting the ball has a wide range of outcomes, large dispersion. They might not see a big difference in dispersion or consistency in distance between golf shafts. If a golf shaft does give slight improvement to distance and consistency, and does not cost extra, then isn't getting fitted worth it? At least here in Ohio, most places will wave the fitting fee if you buy the club that day. For me, it is a no brainer to get fitted for a club when there is no extra cost for it. If one stock shaft works better than another, it's worth an hour of my time. I got nothing better to do 😉 

20 minutes ago, BaconNEggs said:

As an aside, I recall Phil saying it would take months to adjust to a different golf ball (I think in relation to a Ryder Cup), which I thought was a bit silly. 

He is silly. 

20 minutes ago, BaconNEggs said:

But for the 20 handicapper who is using a reasonable proximate of what he or she should be using, I don’t think getting fitted will have dramatic results. 

They wouldn't know unless they get fitted. 😉

 

[Shanks_McGurk]

Isn't shot dispersion more of an issue with shafts that are too flexible?   Meaning if one has S shafts and less than supersonic swing speed there shouldn't be a problem?     Stiffness = consistency.

As a practical matter I just got a driver on the cheap and found out it is an A-flex.    Can deflect the head 2 inches just waving it back and forth.    After seeing this video I'm gonna give it more of a try.    And I might stop blaming the R-flex metal shafts of a set of Cleveland TA5s for the way I hit the ball too high.

[Patch]

My driver shaft is fitted to me. The rest of my fairway woods are cheap, stock brands, and supposingly match up with my swing speed. All 4 club heads are the same, and are very inexpensive. They have served me well over the years.

My irons are fitted for swing speed, and lie angle.

My current putter is an off the rack model. When sold new, with a hi-tec selling promotion, was in the $160-$200 dollar range. It's on eBay now for $10. 

Those fittings, although minor save me strokes. Especially the lie angle fitting, which fits the hand grip I use. 

I am not one to blindly follow new golf technology. Especially when told I can save 5-8 strokes, or gain an extra 20 yards by changing to this, or that piece of equipment. I've been this way most of my golf journey, although I have tried a few things over the years. Some worked, most didn't.

I am sure that yesteryear's golfing info/equipment has been updated to something better, but that old info worked back then too. I think this is especially true with equipment. Who knows what Hogan could have done with today's technology. 

It would not surprise me to learn that there is a high percentage of weekend golfers, who are quite happy with their $99, marked down from $139, complete set of clubs, bag included. Let's throw in a dozen balls for $4.98 while we are at it. 

All this said, I have no problem with the golfer who is technology oriented. In fact I have a great deal of respect for that type of golfer. 

[Shanks_McGurk]

Report on the bargain $50 Goodwill Callaway Razr Fit Extreme 11.5 deg driver with whippy senior A-flex Trinity shaft.   Hits well if I tell myself to swing at 50%.     When I was trying to catch the ball on the upswing and swinging fast,  I had trouble hitting high on the face, nearly on the crown.   Was this a product of shaft flex plus the high loft?    My first experience with an 11+ deg driver or with a senior shaft.

I adjusted the ball closer to the center of my stance and stopped trying to hit up and and reduced speed and my shots improved.     All but one over 200 yds according to the signs but I was not able to see how far the balls flew past that marker.   Need a spotting scope.     

Not sure the Razr hits longer or straighter than my 975D 8.5 deg YS-6 stiff shaft or Integra 320cc 8 deg, TT DG S300 shaft, but it is in the neighborhood, whippy shaft and all.    More consistent maybe. 

Baritone sound on impact;  nothing tinny about it.   Would like to use it just for that sound.   

[Puttin4Dough]

The video data clearly shows a SHORTER ladies shaft performs equally well to a longer X flex.  I think the pro's are using completely different shafts that may in fact NOT be as stiff as advertised.  I wouldn't put it pass the OEMs to  stamp XXX on a flexible shaft so folks run out to PGASS and spend $800 on the  shaft.  Call me cynical, but I don't believe what we're told the pro's play is always true.

Edited May 26, 2018 by Puttin4Dough

[freshmanUTA]

26 minutes ago, Puttin4Dough said:

Call me cynical, but I don't believe what we're told the pro's play is always true.

Oh no, it absolutely isn’t. 

I think the point that Mark was trying to make is that it really doesn’t matter what you get fitted to, one golfer with a slow swing speed might like the weight and feel of a heavy xstiff shaft cause they feel the head better, but someone swinging much faster club may prefer a lighter softer shaft because it allows them to feel the club. There’s no one chart or common logic that goes into shaft fitting. It’s why people say you’re insane if you don’t try as many combinations as possible before deciding which you like the best. 

Personally, I love heavy stiff iron shafts, but I can’t feel the heads of my woods if i’m not using a light and whippy shaft. I think that alone helps prove that shaft flex doesn’t really matter it’s what allows you to feel the head and hit the ball consistently.

[boogielicious]

Terrific video @Puttin4Dough. It shows real data, of which I am a huge fan. I don’t blame the shaft makers for their marketing because they are trying to sell products. They do testing too and have data. But there is not a huge difference between shafts or balls. It really comes down to what feels and performs best for you.

I do advocate fitting as Matt does for two reasons. First, you will get a real view of your swing with no bias. Knowing the state of your swing should prompt you into knowing what to practice. Second, you will see that there’s not a huge difference between shafts and will settle on the one the feels best and is the right length for you.

[iacas]

6 hours ago, Puttin4Dough said:

The video data clearly shows a SHORTER ladies shaft performs equally well to a longer X flex.  I think the pro's are using completely different shafts that may in fact NOT be as stiff as advertised.  I wouldn't put it pass the OEMs to  stamp XXX on a flexible shaft so folks run out to PGASS and spend $800 on the  shaft.  Call me cynical, but I don't believe what we're told the pro's play is always true.

Shafts usually aren’t priced by flex.

[Vinsk]

3 hours ago, iacas said:

Shafts usually aren’t priced by flex.

And a calm, collected mic drop just happened.....

[billchao]

Full disclaimer: I skimmed the video, but I didn't see anything that I didn't already know. Shaft "rules" don't apply equally to each individual. I'm proof of that myself, having gone through a comprehensive fitting a couple of years ago to find out that I needed a heavier shaft to launch the ball higher, which is the opposite of what is expected.

Equipment and fitting is supposed to optimize your good shots or reduce the severity of your misses somewhat, but a bad swing is a bad swing. A good golfer with ill-fitting equipment will still beat a bad golfer with well-fitting equipment. No amount of money spent on equipment is going to trump skill. You're not going to be able to sit home and shell out $300 on a new driver shaft that's going to magically fix your driving issues.

[Puttin4Dough]

7 hours ago, boogielicious said:

Terrific video @Puttin4Dough. It shows real data, of which I am a huge fan. I don’t blame the shaft makers for their marketing because they are trying to sell products. They do testing too and have data. But there is not a huge difference between shafts or balls. It really comes down to what feels and performs best for you.

I do advocate fitting as Matt does for two reasons. First, you will get a real view of your swing with no bias. Knowing the state of your swing should prompt you into knowing what to practice. Second, you will see that there’s not a huge difference between shafts and will settle on the one the feels best and is the right length for you.

Thanks.  I think the fact that a shorter ladies shaft performed as well as the longer X shaft was the "mic drop".   I can't recall the last time I went into a PGASS where they started me out with a ladies shaft.  Never happens...but now we see it should happen...and maybe the industry should stop with the "Ladies Flex" and "Senior Flex" names because that serves to eliminate tons of options...and steers folks into limited selections...and of course...shaft "upgrades".

[colin007]

WTF is a "shaftiod"? I could understand if it were spelled "shaftoid", but it's not...