______________________________________________________________________________
Common
Sense Clubfitting is now a Reality
It is a year later than I hoped for, but I f
inally
made good on my promise to finish a new fitting book that would
bring clubmakers up to date with all of the latest skills, knowledge
and techniques of modern custom clubfitting!
The new fitting book, Common Sense Clubfitting: The Wishon
Method is officially finished and is in the process of final
proofing and layout of its 465 pages of new fitting information.
Unless we run into any last minute problems, we should have
the book all ready to ship early in April.
Let me give you a little rundown on how Common Sense Clubfitting
is organized:
Chapter 1 – The Common Sense ofCommon Sense Clubfitting
The entire basis of common sense clubfitting expands on what
was first proposed in the Practical Fitting Program book in
1997 – identify which of the 5 Game Improvement Factors
the golfer most wants and needs to be able to play better. Does
the golfer want/need more Distance, better Accuracy, more Consistency,
different Trajectory and/or better Feel. Clubmakers who remember
the five game improvement factors from Practical Fitting will
note that I have dropped Backspin from the list and added Consistency.
Chapter 1 then goes on to explain what specifications of the
clubs are considered an A or a B effect on each of the five
game improvement factors. An “A" effect specification
is one that when correctly fit for the golfer, will result in
a more immediate and visible change in that game improvement
factor. A “B" effect specification is one that has
to be substantially different than the same specification in
the golfer's existing set for it to bring about a visible improvement
in the game improvement factor.
Again, clubmakers familiar with the “Major", “Medium"
and “Minor specification effects that I proposed in the
first book will note that I have changed and added quite a number
of specifications to the lists of “what spec affects what
game improvement factor." These changes are all based on
what more I have learned about the real effects of the specifications
on performance since the Practical Fitting book came out in
1997.
Chapter 2 – Clubfitting Procedures
To many clubmakers, this chapter may very well be the most
valuable part of Common Sense Clubfitting. The chapter lists
in step by step form, each of the steps and procedures of a
common sense fitting session with a golfer. But more than that,
the chapter also consists of a running dialog between me and
an example golfer. In essence, Chapter 2 is a “script"
which is just like you are there watching and listening to me
personally fit a golfer from start to finish.
In the running dialog between me and the golfer, I have tried
to not only tell you what I am doing in each step of the fitting,
but I have also attempted to explain what I am thinking and
why, every step of the way through the fitting. It is my sincere
belief that the best clubfitters are able to continually think
about the input they get from a golfer and process those inputs
into continuous thoughts about what is best and what is not
for the golfer's fitting recommendation. That is what I have
attempted to share with all clubmakers in Chapter 2.
Be aware that common sense fitting does not involve wasting
time on the minutia that is not important for coming up with
the best fitting recommendation for the golfer. Thus, the running
dialog of the fitting session in Chapter 2 does not waste time
with steps and procedures that are not important.
Chapter 3 – The Fitting Specifications and Their Performance
for Woodheads
One by one, I take you through each of the specifications
that makes up a driver and fariway woodhead in Chapter 3. This
is where I not only explain what specifications are an “A"
or “B" effect on each of the five game improvement
factors, but I also explain in depth just about everything I
know from my 30 + years in the business about WHY each of the
woodhead specifications do what they do, or do not do what people
think they have done with respect to performance. Just to let
you know how in depth this discussion of woodhead performance
is, Chapter 3 is over 70 pages long.
Chapter 4 – The Fitting Specifications and Their Performance
for Ironheads and Hybrids
Chapter 4 follows the same path as Chapter 3 through a detailed
60-page discussion of iron and hybrid performance. All of the
iron and hybrid specifications are listed and explained, including
each one's role as an “A" or “B" effect
on each of the five game improvement factors.
Chapter 5 – Shaft Fitting
In what may have been the chapter which was both the most
enjoyable to write as well as completley updated from the original
Practical Fitting Program book, Chapter 5 explains the complete
performance of the shaft in both woods and irons. I lead clubmakers
through a complete discussion and illustration of exactly HOW
the shaft performs for different golfers with different swing
characteristics and exactly WHAT performance changes golfers
can expect from the shaft.
In addition to the explanation of each of the specifications
of shafts, I list what shaft specs are considered an “A"
or “B" effect on the five game improvement factors.
Included is a discussion on the use of the new TWGT Bend Profile
Shaft System software.
Chapter 6 – The Fitting Effects of the Assembled Golf
Club
Chapter 6 is the part of Common Sense Clubfitting that “puts
it all together." Combining the head, shaft and grip into
the finished club, Chapter 6 covers all of the specifications
of the fully assembled club, including the length, swingweight
and MOI of the fully fit and built golf club.
Chapter 7 – Common Sense Clubfitting for the Wedges
and Putter
Often the “forgotten clubs" of the fitting session,
Chapter 7 goes deeper in the key elements for proper wedge and
putter fitting than any other fitting book has ever attempted
to delve. Of particular importance is the common sense fitting
credo which establishes the point that fitting wedges for the
golf course design factors is as important as fitting the specifications
of wedges to the golfer.
Chapter 8 – The Golf Swing as it Relates to Common
Sense Clubfitting
One of the areas in which I have spent the most time since
starting TWGT is researching the actual moves of the golf swing
which have a specific relationship to the fitting specifications
of a golf club. In Chapter 8, I have identified all of the swing
characteristics that clubmakers need to know and need to be
able to identify to truly over the highest level of fitting
performance for golfers.
Appendix – Technology and Technique
In the “catch all" and “conclusion"
to Common Sense Clubfitting, the appendix section includes complete
discussions on the proper measurement of clubhead specifications,
fitting the beginner or inexperienced golfer, fitting juniors,
common sense concepts in clubfitting and use of modern clubfitting
equipment.
to top
______________________________________________________________________________
TWGT
Shaft Bend Profile System for Shaft Comparison
One of the most valuable aids offered to clubmakers in
the 2006 TWGT Catalog is the brand new Shaft Bend Profile
System software. Shafts have been one of the most frustrating,
if not the most frustrating part of the golf club to fit
accurately to golfers because of the lack of empirical fitting
information about shafts.
With clubheads we can empirically measure all of the specifications
and from that, easily understand their effect on shot performance.
For example, loft is measured in degrees and from that,
there is no doubt what an increase or decrease in the loft
will do to the flight of the ball. The same is true for
all of the other clubhead specs, but not so for shafts.
What DOES an L, A, R, S or X mean in real stiffness terms
when it comes to real fitting recommendations? How firm
is a butt firm designation for a bend profile design in
a shaft? Or how flexible is a tip flexible profile in a
shaft? The lack of real empirical shaft information has
hamstrung clubmakers and has forced shaft fitting to be
more of a trial and error process than a real scientific
search through comparative data.
The new Shaft Bend Profile System software is the start
of what we hope will end up being a truly definitive process
for selecting shafts for golfers. In its present form, the
software has empirical bend profile measurements for some
500 different popular wood and iron shafts. With the capability
to easily accept data updates, the software will eventually
hold illustrative bend profile data for thousands of shafts.
But let's take a look so you can see how all this works,
and how it can make a difference in your fitting.
Click image to enlarge
A. Thousands of Possible Shaft to Shaft Comparisons
In image #1, you see the main screen of the
Shaft Bend Profile System software. The part of the screen
notated as "A" is where you select the first shaft
to which you want to compare the stiffness and bend profile
of any other shaft(s). Once you select the first shaft,
you then can select the shafts you wish to compare to it
from the main data base noted by the "B". All
you have to do is double click on the box to the left of
the name of the shaft(s) you want to compare.
Click image to enlarge
In image #2 you can see that I have selected the Grafalloy
Blue S flex wood shaft and I wish to compare it to Grafalloy's
Blue Pro 65 S flex and Blue Superlite S so I can find out
the difference between these three shafts flex wood shaft.
By clicking on the tab FREQUENCY at the top of the main
screen, up comes the illustration of the actual bend profile
graph lines for all three shafts.
Up and down on the left side of the screen is the scale
for the frequency measurements in cycles per minute. Across
the bottom are the 7 points along the length of the shaft
that the frequency is measured on each shaft. #1 is the
first butt frequency measurement done at a 41" beam
length clamping position with the frequency analyzer, #2
is the 36" beam length clamping point, #3 is the 31"
beam length measurement and so on down to the last frequency
measurement point #7 at 11" from the tip of the shaft.
Now look at the graph lines. The butt section of the shafts
is at the lower left hand end of the line, depicted in bend
profile frequency measurements 1 and 2 (the 41" and
36" beam length positions). The tip section is at the
upper right and is stiffness described in measurement points
#6 and 7 (16" and 11" beam length measurements).
The center section of the shafts is between the two and
represented by frequency measurement points #3, 4 and 5.
Note that the black line is the Grafalloy Blue S, the blue
line is the Grafalloy Blue Pro 65 S, and the red line is
the bend profile measurement for the Grafalloy Blue Superlite
S. You can see that the Blue Pro 65 S and the Blue Superlite
S are very close to each other and traveling on virtually
the same bend profile line. To contrast, the Blue S, represented
by the black line, is much higher up on the graph field
than the other two shafts.
What does all this mean? Let's take a quick look at each
of the three shaft's individual frequency measurements to
learn what this means by clicking on the tab at the top
of the screen for Graph Data.
By clicking Graph Data, up comes the individual bend profile
measurements for each of the seven positions on each of
the three shafts. Let's take a look at the two butt section
measurements for each shaft, listed under the headings of
"41" and "36". As you can see, the Blue
S is 179/220, the Blue Pro 65 S is 176/206, and the Blue
Superlite is 181/210. In the butt section of a shaft, it
is generally accepted that 10-12 cpm is equivalent to a
full letter flex. Five or less is really insignificant in
the large picture of comparing the whole shaft's stiffness.
Granted, in the "36" stiffness measurement, there
is a high to low range of 14cpm between the three shafts,
that being the difference between the "36" reading
of the Blue Pro S and the Blue S. In addition, the Blue
S is 10cpm stiffer for the "36" reading than the
Blue Superlite S. So from looking at the data for the butt
sections of the three shafts only, the conclusion can be
made that the Blue S is going to be about 1/3 to ½
flex stiffer at the very least than the other two shafts
in the butt section.
Now let's move down and look at the three center section
measurements under data points "31", "26"
and "21". Here you are seeing that the Blue Pro
65 S and Blue Superlite S are very close to each other,
with differences in succession of 3cpm, 2cpm and 6cpm. In
the center section of shafts, a 20cpm difference is equivalent
to a full flex level. Therefore, the differences of 3cpm,
2cpm and 6cpm for the center sections of the Blue Pro 65
S and Blue Superlite S are insignificant, and thus supporting
the conclusion that these two shafts are virtually identical
in the center section. Because the "36", "31",
"26" and "21" measurements of the Blue
Pro 65 S and Blue Superlite S are all small, this is one
way the Bend Profile Software leads you to suspect that
the 181cpm to 176cpm reading of the "41" measurement
of the Blue Pro 65 S and Blue Superlite S shafts may be
an aberration that would not show up if we had a larger
population of the two shafts to test. Normally, when a shaft
is intentionally designed to be stiffer in the butt section,
the "36" measurement would have a greater difference
than the 4cpm shown between the Blue Pro 65 S and Blue Superlite
S. So this is a hint that when considered along with the
fact that the three center section measurements are so close
to each other, the entire butt and center sections of the
Blue Pro 65 S and Blue Superlite S are so close that they
are the same from a pure fitting standpoint.
To contrast, now look at the three center section measurements
of the Blue S to the same measurements for the Blue Pro
65 S and Blue Superlite S. Here you see a big difference
of approximately 20/20/35 cpm for these three measurement
points of the center section of the shafts. Most definitely
this says that the Blue S is slightly stiffer in the butt
to much stiffer in the center section than the Blue Pro
65 S and Blue Superlite S. In other words, a player who
likes the stiffness feel of the Blue Pro 65 S and Blue Superlite
S will feel that the Blue S is too stiff. Or a player who
likes the Blue S shaft will think the Blue Pro 65 S and
Blue Superlite S to both be too flexible.
But we're not quite done because we still have the tip
section measurements to compare. First, a word about using
frequency for tip section measurement comparison. If there
is a "weakness" in using frequency measurements
for bend profile comparison, it is seen in the tip section
measurements. It is very difficult for even the best frequency
analyzer on the market today to capture precise, "without
a doubt" measurements for the tip section of any shaft
because the cpm oscillation is so fast. In truth, this is
a case for using electronic deflection measurements instead
of frequency for illustrating a more precise view of the
bend profile measurements of shafts. And to that eventual
end, the Bend Profile System software is already set up
to accept deflection measurements when companies like us,
or dedicated clubmakers like Ted Strickland and Jerry Hoefling,
find the time to perform that many deflection measurements
on the proper equipment.
In the meantime, please do not feel that my statement means
the current Bend Profile System is suspect. On the contrary,
the software is set up so that data from any number of different
samples of the same shafts can be entered and subjected
to standard deviation statistical analysis. So as more and
more of the same shafts are entered into the system, the
measurements become more accurate and representative of
the actual design of each shaft. Remember too, all shafts
are subject to +/- tolerances. You can have ten samples
of the same shaft and see ten different sets of bend profile
frequency measurements for each of the seven bend profile
measurement points. Granted, for most of the better shaft
companies, the range won't be all that much, but there will
be a range so the Bend Profile software is set up to help
improve the accuracy of its data base through standard deviation.
Back to the tip section measurements. We said that 10cpm
at the butt and 20cpm in the center section is the frequency
difference equivalent to a full flex difference in stiffness
feel in a shaft. At the tip section that difference has
to be in the range of 30 to 40cpm over the "16"
and "11" bend profile measurements to display
a discernable difference in the bending feel of the tip
section of two shafts. In the case of the three Grafalloy
shafts, the Blue S is much 70+ cpm stiffer in the "16"
reading than the Blue Pro 65 S and Blue Superlite S. While
the last "11" reading drops to a 20cpm difference,
again, this is more likely a slight anomaly in the reading
because of the huge difference in the "16" measurement.
So the conclusion is that the Blue S is all around a noticeably
stiffer shaft than either the Blue Pro 65 S and Blue Superlite
S.
From a fitting standpoint we can say that the Blue Pro
65 S and Blue Superlite S are virtually the same shaft from
a bending feel and bending performance standpoint, with
only their weight and torque being points of any difference
between them. But the Blue S is a totally different shaft
and definitely for a higher swing speed player who also
would have to possess and strong downswing acceleration
and a late release of the wrist-cock. These are all swing
characteristics which are matched well to butt firm, center
firm and tip section firm bend profile designs.
Find Matching Shafts
Comparing the bend profile of overall stiffness of any
of the hundreds of shafts in the data base is not the only
value of the Bend Profile System software. Have you ever
had a reshaft to do and wanted to know what shaft would
be the closest to the one you have to replace? The Bend
Profile System software is also designed to sort and compare
all shafts in the data base to find matching shaft bend
profiles. Let me show you how that works.
Click image to enlarge
On the main graph screen above, look at the area in the
upper left side under the heading of "Criteria".
There are two boxes named "Percentage" and "Max
Points Out". Under percentage you can select how close
you desire all of the bend profile measurements of the matching
shafts to be to the shaft you want to duplicate. If you
select 1%, the software will only select shafts in which
each of the bend profile measurements are only 1% different
than the selected shaft you wish to duplicate. An allowance
of 3% or less will ensure the matching shafts are so close
to the selected shaft that no feel or performance difference
will result.
Click image to enlarge
Let's say you have a Callaway driver with a broken RCH
65 S flex shaft and the golfer wants the new shaft to be
as close as possible to the original. Find the Callaway
RCH 65 S in the data base and click on it as the selected
shaft. Then go to the "Percentage" window under
"Criteria" and successively select 1%, 2% and
3%, being sure to click on the button labeled "Find
Matches" after each percentage selection. No matches
are found in the 1% and 2% deviation, but under the 3%,
the program finds the UST ProForce UL S flex shaft.
Click image to enlarge
Click on the "Frequency" tab at the top of the
page to display the bend profile graphs of the Callaway
RCH 65 S and the UST ProForce UL S shafts. As you can see,
the two lines are virtually on top of each other. While
you can click on the "Graph Data" tab at the top
of the screen to compare each of the seven bend profile
measurements to see how close they are, the Bend Profile
System software allows you to also place the cursor arrow
directly on top of the bend profile lines at any place along
the graph to read the measurements. In the above image,
the cursor has been placed on the 11" measurement position
where the two shaft lines deviate the most. A quick check
of both shafts' bend profile measurements shows that the
two shafts are extremely close. Thus the UST ProForce UL
S is a very close replacement to the Callaway RCH 65 S shaft.
The Bend Profile System software is designed to accept
updates whenever Ted, Jerry or TWGT obtain more shafts for
bend profile testing. Updates will be made available to
all clubmakers who purchase the software so that over the
succeeding years, the data base will grow to include all
new shaft offerings. As we gain access to more of the OEM
proprietary shafts, these too will be included as well.
All in all, the new TWGT Bend Profile System software really
is a must for all clubmakers who are serious about shaft
fitting.
to top
______________________________________________________________________________
Model
Profile – 730CL Intelligent Set
Since
receiving the 2006 TWGT catalog, the clubmakers' response to
the new 730CL Intelligent Set for golfers with an 80mph driver
swing speed and lower has been nothing short of phenomenal!
We've had to boost production on the 730CL heads and shafts
to meet this early interest and demand and we expect to be caught
up with the demand by the middle of March.
I wanted to offer a little insight into the 730CL as a way
to help you understand more about the specifics of the design,
who it's for, who it's not for and give you some tips its fitting
so you can be assured of making more golfers happy with this
set.
First and foremost, the 730CL is designed for ANY golfer, male
or female, with a driver swing speed of 80mph and lower. That
means most women golfers, but it also means a lot of senior
men are well fit into this set. Golfers with such swing speeds
do NOT need a full set of 14 clubs. 14 club sets are designed
with 3-4 degree loft increments and 80mph and slower swingers
simply cannot get more than 5-6 yards difference in distance
when loft increments between clubs are the typical 3-4 degrees.
730CL consists of a 400cc-15° titanium driver, 20°
Long Fairway, 26° High Fairway, all hybrid body irons in
a #5 (30°), 6/7 (36°) and 8/9 (42°), and a more
conventionally designed PW (48°) and Dual Wedge (54°)
which is designed to be a sand wedge. The 6 degree loft increments
are designed to offer the golfer with an 80mph swing speed a
more useable distance difference between clubs.
The matching 730CL graphite shafts are designed as an A/L combination
flex. By custom tip trimming, the shafts are able to be well
fit to golfers with a driver swing speed from under 60mph all
the way up to 80mph. To build the set, clubmakers need to order
three of the 730CL wood shafts, three of the 730CL iron shafts
and two of the 730CL wedge shafts.
A key performance element of the shafts is the 0.335"tip
diameter design of the 730CL iron shafts. In the same way that
the GI-335 hybrid iron shaft complements the 321Li and 785HF
hybrids, the 0.335" tip 730CL iron shaft is a perfect design
for the hybrid body #5, 6/7 and 8/9 irons. Again, the A/L combination
flex design is a part of the 0.335" tip 730CL iron shafts
to customize flex for the 80mph and slower swinger.
One of the best performance features in the 730CL design is
the thinner spring face of the 400cc-15* titanium driver. Each
730CL driver is shipped with a warning sticker attached to the
face – WARNING, do not allow any golfer with a swing speed
of 90mph or higher to hit this driver or the face will cave
in!! This means the 730CL driver is designed so the face will
flex more for the 80mph and slower swing speed player than any
other driver made today. Slower swinging golfers who use drivers
designed to withstand all swing speeds cannot possibly make
the face flex inward as much as golfers with higher swing speeds.
That means loss of potential distance simply because they have
a slow swing speed.
TWGT attempted to convince the USGA that the 730CL driver could
not possibly "do harm" to the organization's desire
to limit distance for the elite players because the driver cannot
possibly be used by any golfer with a swing speed of 90mph or
higher. The USGA still decided to rule the 730CL driver as non-conforming,
despite our best efforts to convince them the driver posed no
threat to their credo for distance control.
Clubmakers and golfers who are concerned about this ruling
do have the option of choosing the 915-460cc High Launch or
the 915-420cc High Launch drivers, both which are conforming
to the USGA Rules for spring face, as the driver option to complete
the 730CL set.
Player hit testing conducted for the 730CL set last summer
was more fun than almost any other hitting evaluation TWGT has
conducted. This was because all of the participants simply could
not believe how easy the 730CL clubs were to hit, all the way
through the fully hybrid body irons and into the two wedges.
This season, the 730CL is primed and ready to allow clubmakers
to deliver more game improvement for men or women with an 80mph
swing speed or lower.
to top
______________________________________________________________________________
TWGT
Golfwear Now Available
In response to the demand we received from a lot of clubmakers
all through 2005, TWGT has created two different color golf
shirts and two different outer wear garments with the distinctive
TW logo.
The new TW logo shirts are a super high quality soft collar
golf shirt made by Cutter & Buck from their new Dry-Weave
material. Super soft to the touch and with the quality that
keeps the shirts looking new after many trips through the laundry,
the TW logo shirts are available in Tan or Black weave in sizes
M, L, XL and XXL. When you order, remember – Cutter &
Buck shirts do run generous in their sizing.
Complementing the Cutter & Buck TW logo shirts are a forest
green wind vest and short sleeve wind shirt, both embroidered
with the TW logo on the left breast. The knit waistband ensures
the wind vest and wind shirt will keep their shape and not hang
down after many washings.
to top
______________________________________________________________________________
Driver
Profile – 949MC
"This
driver went into my bag last summer when we completed the first
round of prototype testing and it's going to be a while before
it leaves. I honestly think that this is the best driver I have
designed in my career."
This is the comment of designer and TWGT founder Tom Wishon,
in reference to the new 949MC drivers which debuted in the 2006
TWGT catalog.
The 949MC drivers are an example of how TWGT pushes the envelope
in design to continue to create the finest clubhead designs
for custom fitting and clubmaking. Clubmakers will remember
in 2004, TWGT introduced a driver with a composite crown and
tungsten backweight called the 949G/Ti. Because of the use of
the composite material on the crown, the 949G/Ti and all other
composite + titanium drivers pushed the price of quality driver
heads up to a higher level than before.
Use of the composite material on the crown was considered necessary
to create the discretionary weight movement to be able to move
the Center of Gravity farther back from the shaft. However,
as is often the case with Tom, shortly after the 949G/Ti was
introduced, he went to work on trying to determine a way to
keep the CG far back in the head for a higher flight and higher
MOI, but without the costly use of composite material on the
top of the head.
The result is an all new Milled Crown manufacturing technique
which brought about the completion of the 949MC drivers for
2006. By precisely CNC machining the undersurface of the crown
and side skirt areas of the head body, Tom was able to get rid
of enough top and forward weight to push the CG back in the
head and achieve a USGA maximum allowable MOI of 4700 g-cm2.
As a nice "side effect", by achieving the design parameters
without the use of more expensive composite material, the 949MC
drivers are less expensive to manufacture, a savings which TWGT
has passed on to clubmakers!
The maximum MOI combined with the variable thickness CNC machined
SP700 titanium face is why Tom kept one of the first prototypes
in his bag as his "first string driver."
The 949MC drivers are available in 400cc in a 10.5 loft and
a 460cc version in both a 9 and 10.5 loft. Both 10.5 loft versions
of the 949MC are available and in stock now, with the 9 degree
model in the 460cc size slated for availability in early April.
to top
