allenc

No need to compromise on lofts. All companies will give you any lofts you want. So go with 49, 54, 59. 5 degree gaps all the way.

I sometimes get bored at work like Brooks does. But at my hobbies such as golf? No, not for a second. That’s crazy talk.

They are all pretty much tied... for last. I’d say the same for hamburgers if my choices were McDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy’s, and Carl’s Jr. (/snobbery)

I agree, she not nearly as good as the men. It’s just a solid performance from a woman in a men’s event. The format definately helped. https://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/2018/12/08/lexi-thompson-outdrives-charley-hoffman/ This story implies they did play from the same tees, at least in the scramble and modified alternate shot (in the alternate shot they scrambled their drives). I don’t know if they let her play closer tees during the best ball but that would be pretty strange, don’t you think?

I as well may be wrong, but this is how I see it. When you are hitting your 8 iron up a 5 degree slope, the loft of your club relative to the horizon (or gravity) indeed does increase 5 degrees. But it’s loft relative to the direction the club is traveling is still at 8 iron loft — because it is traveling upward 5 degrees. That means it should launch at the angle of a 9 iron but have the spin and ball speed of an 8 iron. You know how if you swing the driver with an upward angle of attack you get a higher launch and lower spin? It isn’t the same as just using a 15 degree driver. I believe that is the same effect here.

I wonder what the effect on distance really is. I doubt it’s as simple as turning a 7 iron into an 8 iron on a 4* uphill slope. The main reason the lower lifted clubs go farther is not because they launch lower, but because they deliver a less glancing blow and therefor give you more ball speed. If you are swinging level with the uphill slope you would still retain the extra ball speed from the lower loft. But it will go higher — which in some cases seems like it might even make the ball go farther. I wonder if the real reason to club up on an uphill lie is that the lie makes it hard to swing as fast as you normally do. I’m sure it’s all documented somewhere on the interwebs. Interesting topic.

I didn’t see much discussion about this on the internet in genreral. The consensus has always been if a lady plays in a men’s event it’s just a publicity stunt. The men are so much better that even the number 1 woman would struggle to finish anywhere but near the bottom. In this even Lexi obviously had a male partner (Tony Finau), but she still had to play plenty of shots that counted and the team seemed very much in contention the whole way. Yes they slipped to 7 strokes off the lead by the end, but that was still near the middle of the pack — and ahead of several world class players. A couple extra good breaks and they could have been right there. I only saw the second round. In the first two rounds they had the option of using Finau’s drive, which is certainly a huge benefit over a woman in an individual event. I wonder if the 3rd round, fourball, was too much to overcome as Thompson had to play her own ball the whole way and perhaps couldn’t contribute enough. I couldn’t find any info on that round other than that the team scored 65 which was 5 back of the best score (60) and 3 ahead of the worst (68). Still doesn’t seem half bad. Comments?

I think if you got that much out of your fittings, you did pretty well. IMO fittings are never going to be that precise, especially for a non expert golfer. Both clubs probably work fine for you. I would go back to club champion and see if they will let you test them both one more time, then pick the one you like best for whatever reason, tangible or not. Maybe try switching back and forth every shot.

Not all good players feel this way. https://www.golf-monthly.co.uk/gear/gear-news/lee-westwood-whats-in-the-bag-2018-150418

I play it and my experience is more in line with what @BushwoodCC says. $125 for a course with a $65 green fee. And yes, $1800 in prizes for 60 players. For nicer courses you sometimes actually get a good deal. I’ve signed up for Pelican Hill next month for $220. The normal green fees there are, wait for it, $220.

I’ll either lower it by the flag or drop it from fairly high and catch it with my foot.

Just chiming in that blades are not necessarily what low handicappers use. They are just what people who prefer blades use. Blade users are in the minority even on the PGA Tour. So don’t make your decision based on that conception.

@nevets88 Exactly. There is a machine that can beat every human at most sports. Certainly simple ones like running, powerlifting, swimming. Interestingly, although computers can beat any human at chess, they are not the best chess players and don't "know" everything. What I'm getting at is a strong chess player with the help of a chess engine, if he is adept at using it, can easily beat another stand alone chess engine. This is true even if the stand alone chess engine is thought to be a more powerful one. So it's interesting that humans and computers actually have different chess skills that complement each other. @saevel25 I am into chess and will definitely follow the match. The first American contender in almost 50 years! Thanks for the ChessNetwork heads up.

You are supposed to position it ahead of the ball, at a 45 degree angle back toward you. So in that photo, to the left of the ball holder, and rotated one quarter turn counter clockwise.

I’ve done a fitting session at both Club Champion and Cool Clubs. I came away unimpressed with both and did not buy clubs. I think fitting is a lot like teaching — The reputation of the company is irrelevant, it’s all about the individual who is conducting the fitting,

I scrolled through the thread to find my answer before duplicating it. Tiger may be the best, but he’s too new. I think of the Mt. Rushmore players as historic, iconic, legendary. I remember reading T. Roosevelt was only added to the real Mt. Rushmore because the designer owed him a favor or something. So I guess add political to the above list. I though it came off pretty well. At least he named himself last. It might have been weird if he’d said, “well me of course, umm, let me think, who else...”

Seeding is usually only mildly important though. In golf it could be something like, the players with the most regular season points get the first pick of tee times.

Regardless of the exact format, I would like to see more of a true playoff. Everyone in the playoffs is on equal footing, but far few players actually make the playoff. Maybe just the top 30 from the regular season. That would take care of rewarding regular season play. Then they play 3 regular events or whatever, either widdling them down further or just accumulating points or maybe cumulative score. My preferred system would be everyone plays two playoff events, then there is a big cut for the final. Maybe top 10. Now the winner of that 10 man tourney wins it all. Or maybe even top 8 for a mini match play bracket.

Have you ever, instead of searching for backswing minutia and the like, just tried, you know, hitting it more off the heel? You swing looks fairly on plane and fast. Maybe just hone in on your natural athleticism, stretch your arms out more through impact, and trust it?

I took the survey. I feel like they were really bombarding me with different ways to get me to agree that "distance" is a problem in golf. I'm afraid many won't be able to stand up to the pressure.

What the hecking heck is that last sentence supposed to mean? That there is something wrong with the typical PW, GW, SW, LW? Should I carry 5 hybrids? Even if I chose to carry a short Sunday bag with just pitching wedge and sand wedge I should also have 3 hybrids in there!?!?! Sig Witb Driver, 1hybrid, 2hybrid, 3hybrid, 4hybrid, 5hybrid, 6hybrid, 7hybrid, 8hybrid, 9hybrid, 10hybrid, 11hybrid, SW, hybrid putter

A sand wedge is a traditional wedge is a sand wedge. Most higher lofted wedges have a decent amount of bounce, although pros are skillful enough to use a higher or lower bounce wedge out of the sand. If you are hitting sand first, then the only way you are "bouncing" off into the ball is if your sand is very hard. Otherwise it will go through the sand to some extent. If your sand is packed super hard then what the pros do doesn't really apply to you because their sand is usually excellent. If your sand is not hard, then you are just hitting too close to the ball (or maybe way too far behind). About 1 inch behind is the usual recommended amount.

I bought a Wilson box set for $2-300 when I first started. When I hit the ball well, it flew nicely and the clubs never broke. I think it turned out to be the right decision. If you get the Strata you will have all the clubs you need and they will be the right design for a beginner. If you buy used you will have to assemble a set piecemeal and probably not be experienced enough to do a good job. You might want to throw out your Stratas in a year or two for a nicer set, and they won’t have much resale value, but I still think you’ll be better if financially and they’ll work just fine.

My hypothetical scheme would have the irons at one end of the spectrum a half inch different. But the gap differences would be negligible. I kind of rambled but my main point is they make such a big deal about a certain length of irons being so much better for your posture or swing or wherever. But wherever length you go with, most of your irons will be in a typical range anyway. So what’s the real story?

I've gone through a few iron fittings in the past, read about them, and watched other people's videos of theirs. The one thing that is the oddest to me is the fitting for length. Here is how it usually works. There are 1/2" progressions between standard length irons. Usually something like 38.5" for a 4 iron down to 35.5 for wedge. Now a fitter measures my wrist to floor and sees it's a bit longer than normal. He hands me three 7 irons, one standard (37"), one 37.5" and one 36.5". My posture is better and I seem to hit it better with the long one. It all seems to add up to using +1/2" irons, right? I'm not so sure. I hit a 37.5 better than a 37. So what? If all my clubs were +1/2" my 8 iron would still be 37. And my 9 iron 36.5. Does that mean I won't be able to hit those? My longer irons will be longer. Will those lengths be better or worse? To me, if I need longer clubs, the only ones that really matter are the wedges, as those are the shortest irons in length. For all the other irons I will have some clubs of each length whether or not I use non standard length irons. For someone who needs shorter than standard the same would be true for their longest iron. It would only matter that that one be 1/2" short. So for me, who supposedly needs +1/2 inch irons, why not get the wedge +1/2" but the 4 iron standard length, with even gaps between each. Around 3/8". Especially since as shafts get longer it's harder to find the sweet spot. Is the reason that you need the length progressions to keep large enough distance gaps? I doubt 3/8" vs 1/2" would make much of a difference. My guess is that the way we do it now is just the easiest for the manufactures, not the best for the players. If they followed the above suggestion they would have to tweak them to non standard lie angles and have additional shaft measuring tools/settings. Finally, I believe just properly matching lie angle to length, and making sure your longest and shortest irons are not too long or short is what is important. It's funny, when I've attempted to bring any of this up to a fitter they would just look at me like a deer in headlights. Part of why I have never been much impressed with most fittings I've done. Thoughts?