Supermariodave

It's a myth the sweet spot is smaller of the smaller head. It's the same size on all heads, ie about a millimetre. Forgiveness off centre and moi etc ate different things though. You need to hit away from centre to notice. I'm just as long with my old 983 and 510 TP as I am anything else.

Yeah, this shaping thing, one club versus another. It's a confusing thing that only seems to exist in golf forums. In truth, it's pretty bogus. In reality, one club may have a lower cog compared to another, as in this case, the AP2 have a lower cog versus the CB. This means with the right shaft and swing, the CB is most likely to fly lower. So side spin may have a bigger effect for a certain golfer. This may mean the golfer has more control as the CB takes less effort to shape. But in truth all half decent golfers can shape anything. I've just tested them both, and the CBs are pretty brutal unless you hit everything flush.

I love practice, have played for many years, I buy loads of stuff and I can find positives in all sorts of stuff. I love the one plane and stack and tilt debates, they work for many golfers and help many handicappers, you just work on the range and find something that suits you. justvgreatvdebates to get involved in, they broaden the mind when it comes to how to swing the golf club. I'm a Hogan man myself, grew up with his book, but for the life of me I'm finding the Foley DVDs almost unfathomable. Just seem to be a lot of quotes, pseudo science, and rehashed s and t mixed with Hogan. In fact it's annoyed me thinking how Foley refers to the supposed holy grail of plane, without actually using that word, and as if he's the first instructor to refer to the relevance and importance of plane, doh, Hogan pane of glass springs to mind. He justifies it by trashing two plane as 'traditional' , as if thats bad, and he's found the holy cure. Hogan discovered the grail of plane in the thirties, rehashed by Foley in the noughties. I was just perplexed all the way through, I like his swing, I like his drills, there are some great tips, but why he just mixes it with strange adjectives and stuff that doesn't make sense is beyond me. I suspect his talents are in real life coaching, working with a student and helping them work through their swings, but his stuff doesn't come through a DVD at all. At one point he actually advises you to go to see a swing specialist forgetting he fact you've paid for on on the DVD, and he hilariously says at one point ' there's a bit of swing stuff' to go through to actually hit the ball, after he's just blinded you with Newton, evolution, motor cortex and elastic energy. I've got the DVD for drills and to check it out. My advice is, don't bother. I'll leave you 85% of the balls direction comes from the face position at impact, and 50% of the face position comes from the grip. Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.......can anyone explain that?

They might look great now, as they always do, but they look awful after some clatter

Science and common sense is against you I'm afraid, but what evidence have you that its torque and nothing else that you can feel between a MAS and a V2? I can only be blunt and say this is the sort of the thing that gets posted on the internet and its just totally wrong. You only need to speak to experts such as Tom Wishon to understand this. What you felt was not the difference in torque, certainly not the difference between 3 and 2. Why would you think one shaft with a stiffer tip that feels different to another, feels different because of torque, ie resistance to twisting, and not the tip itself? Its just basic understanding of how a golf club works and yet another myth grown out of internet forums.

But again, the difference you felt will have a hell of a lot more to do with the tip, the weight, the overall profile, the MAS and the V2 are miles apart spec wise, these things do not have to attributed to torque! The torque differences between the two will have had little or nothing to do with how they felt. I'm sorry but no way in a million years will you have felt the difference between a 3 and a 2 torque rating shaft across brands.

No offence but that comparison is more about swingweight, or even static weight, its got nothing to do with torque

Its feel. AS I said earlier, some low torque shafts may feel boardy to some players with low swing speeds. Pros have been tested on several occasions and despite what a lot of posters write on forums, feeling the difference between around 2 and 5 is impossible. Under 2, some players can definately get a sensation of bordiness.

Few golfers will feel the difference between say 2 and 5, but its fair to say that unless you swing the club relatively fast then the really low ratings, 2 or under, will feel very boardy. Its more about feel than anything. Torque used to be around 10 and above.

sig updated

I used them for a month earlier this year but couldn't get along with the Nike shafts.they are very well made and they fly high,another reason I went back to my 690s (which aren't exactly low). You could do worse than putting these on your shopping list,well worth a dem.

Using great pros as examples of how bad technique can be copied by amateurs is just crazy.These guys have more talent in their big toes than all of us put together.Basically,any swing can be grooved in with enough practice,and the players mentioned above,particularly Trevino can then go onto become a great champion. But if you are as talented as them, i.e you haven't the natural ability to square the club at impact,then you have to fall back on the comfort blanket of sound mechanics,or you won't reach your full potential.Your talent will see you through,but if you haven't got a lot,then you will stop improving. imho ps Trevino could sense his plane midswing,and just THINK the adjustments coming down,its just pure unadulterated talent,and as I say,to then extrapolate that and argue that poor basics are ok for less talented golfers is just daft.At impact though,Trevino was pure class,hence why he coluld drive onto a dime form 250 yards.

Yes,good post.Hybrids definately need extensive testing.I regard myself as a resonable striker of a golf ball,but when testing abiut 15 hybrids they were going pretty much everywhere.Yet I would test some 2 irons and the only variation was height. The moral of the story is the right hybrid in the right hands is a deadly weapon as you say,the wrong one is just deadly.

Yep,I'm finding the 690s go high as well,may well give the 680s a whirl. My only issue was the statement 'the club is crap',which it clearly isn't.Thats an opinion that deserved a counter.But I agree,lets drop it,you have qualified the original statement and I can't argue with 90 players who have crap swings;) What is the 905 like? I've had an Ignite and didn't get along with the YS-6+ .350 in it,the club was dead as a dormouse. NC I tired like hell with the TM but just didn't get along with it.I hit a draw and with that thing it went almost straight left,a bit wierd at first.I may give it another go.The Heavenwood flies too high for use off the tee.Its an arse having to carry a 2 iron as well and dump the lob wedge.

I voted seldom. In the club knockout,I will make a player putt out short putt if i think he is getting worked up over short putts,if that constitutes gamesmanship. In no other way would I try and gain an advantage by using gamesmanship

I am happy to discredit the opinion of this pro that the Callaway is crap and can't be hit straight.That is a worthless opinion.It can be hit straight,thats a fact. I am happy to listen to other opinions,and I am perfectly entitled to challenge something as ridiculous as what your pro has said. However,assuming some literary licence on his part,and some element of exageration,and even generalistion,the Heavenwood is not crap.It helped win the the US Open off the 18th tee I believe. It may not be to everyones taste,but in my humble opinion,its not a 'crap' club. You are are correct,opinions on the web are take it or leave it,but sorry,his opinion needed challenging,if only for some balance. ps Gary Player,Seve,Arnold Palmer,Michael Campbell,Phil Mickelson amongst others currently use this club.Readers of this thread can now make their own minds up whether its crap. Btw,the hybrid you use,I can't hit straight.I hook the TM into next week.But I would never describe it as crap.Its just me that can't hit it. On a lighter note,and hopefully we can move on,I like you bag and wouldn't mind your opinion on the 905s (did you move from the 983?) and the 680s,particularly if you've hit the 690s.

Lol,no not proof,just an alternate opinion.The Big Test in Todays Golfer was by a pro btw. Its not crap and it can be hit straight, and he has generalised, albeit from his own persoanl experience. Maybe its a club for better strikers,I dunno.Admittedly,its a slightly weird club to use.It sounds funny and looks funny at address,and it flies quite low compared to others I tested (shaft dependant).Maybe that was the problem with his tests,the majority of club golfers would want a high flying easy stop on a hybrid. Ok,I admit to listening to pros,Michael Campbell said he loves it.

I never listen to reps,or pros,I try clubs myself.Campbell hit them straight enough to win the US Open and the World Matchplay.Mickelson aint to bad either.They also won a 'Big Test' in a recent UK magazine.You have heard just one opinion from someone who obviously doesn't like them.But to say 'no one hits then straight and they are crap' is just ridiculous and renders his opinion worthless.

The Callaway 20* Heavenwood is worth a try.

I have a Spin Milled and the face can wear quickly if you use it as a specialist sand wedge as I do,stones in the bunkers can dent the milling in my experience.