______________________________________________________________________________
.
TWGT On the Nationwide
Tour
In an effort to "test the waters", obtain feedback on our designs
and expose some of the best "up and coming" players in the country
to the performance of TWGT design engineering, TWGT has recently
hired and trained a representative who will work for TWGT over
the majority of the 2006 season on the Nationwide Tour. Especially
interesting is the dual role that TWGT’s tour rep will be playing
in his work.
Brendan Vahey, a former varsity golf team member and recent
graduate of Ft. Lewis College in TWGT’s headquarters city of
Durango, Colorado, began a career caddying full time on the
Nationwide Tour this year, alternating his caddying duties between
veteran tour players Trevor Dodds and Jay Delsing. On Monday,
Tuesday and Wednesday of each event week, when he’s not toting
the bag for Jay or Trevor’s practice or pro-am rounds, you’ll
see Brendan working the practice areas, introducing the future
PGA Tour players to some of Tom Wishon’s tour player caliber
designs.
We’ll let Tom tell you in his own words how TWGT’s appearance
on the Nationwide Tour came about.
"To be honest with you, I hadn’t planned or budgeted to hire
a rep to work on any of the tours this year," Tom said. I had
known Brendan for a couple of years when he was a member of
the local college golf team. When I found out he had a real
desire to become a professional tour caddy and had hooked up
with Jay and Trevor, I had the thought that Brendan could use
a few more "guaranteed income" in his first year on tour, and
we could possibly see what some of the up and coming tour players
think of our designs. I really feel Brendan has what it takes
to be able to represent us on tour. He is extremely passionate
about the game, is very professional and polite, and for a young
man he has a very strong sense of self-confidence which is an
absolute requirement of someone who intends to work in the incredibly
competitive arena of tour player endorsement and use of golf
equipment."
Brendan first underwent extensive one on one training with
Tom in early April so that he could "talk the talk" with the
Nationwide Tour pros. Then TWGT was able to arrange the proper
credentials to enable Brendan to gain access to the practice
areas and talk to the pros about TWGT designs. The models being
presented to the Nationwide Tour pros in 2006 are the 515GRT
fairway woods, the 785 long iron hybrids, and the CLF-1 and
2 putters. As an additional way to "impress" the Nationwide
players with TWGT’s design ability, Brenden will also have a
couple of the remaining sets of the 550C Limited Edition irons
to show and let the players hit.
While Brendan is still learning the ropes in his dual role,
he has broken the ice and has three players who have started
to use a 515 fairway wood and 785 hybrid in competition. Clubmakers
and golfers need to realize that the world of professional tour
equipment representation is an extremely competitive environment
that is very much fueled by endorsement contract dollars and
perpetuated by very aggressive personalities among the major
companies’ full time tour reps. TWGT’s goal is not to sign any
players to endorsement contracts at this stage in our company’s
life – we’re still a very small company with limited marketing
resources and thus unable to pay players to use our designs.
Our goal is to get a club here or there in play, obtain feedback
from some of the better ball strikers in the game about the
performance of our models and begin to make some of the up and
coming tour players aware of who TWGT is and how good we are
at what we do.
We wish Brendan all the success in the world in his desire
to make a full time living on the tour and we will be updating
you with reports on his and our progress on the Nationwide Tour.
If you live in or near a city that hosts a 2006 Nationwide Tour
event, look for Brendan wearing a TWGT shirt and hat and say
hello!
to top
______________________________________________________________________________
.
The Fitting Importance
of Angle of Attack
Over the past several years, a lot more clubmakers and golfers
too are becoming aware of the need for driver loft to be matched
to the golfer’s swing speed to be able to maximize driving distance.
But choosing the best driver loft for maximum distance is not
simply a matter of "more loft for slower swing speeds." Determining
the correct loft to maximize distance for all golfers requires
that you factor in the golfer’s swing angle of attack with their
swing speed to come up with the best driver fit.
The Angle of Attack is angle at which the clubhead is traveling
with respect to the ground when impact occurs. In general terms
the driver head can meet the ball traveling on an upward, level
or downward angle of attack. The more upward the golfer’s angle
of attack, the lower the loft would need to be to combine with
the golfer’s swing speed to achieve maximum distance. Conversely,
the more downward the golfer’s angle of attack into the ball,
the higher the driver loft has to be when combined with their
swing speed to optimize distance.
How do you know the angle of attack for any golfer? You can’t
unless you have some means to first be able to measure the golfer’s
launch angle and compare that to the loft of the clubhead. Does
that mean you need to invest money in an electronic launch monitor
to determine the angle of attack? While a launch monitor is
definitely a worthwhile piece of equipment for all serious clubmakers
to own and use, launch angle can be accurately measured with
a hitting net and TWGT’s Launch Angle Mat for a whole lot less
cash.
In fitting the right driver loft for golfers, you can get the
information you need to determine the golfer’s angle of attack
accurately enough to ensure a good fit by simply subtracting
the loft of the driver used in the launch angle test from the
launch angle reading to obtain the combination of the angle
of attack and the shaft’s contribution to the launch angle.
Thus if the loft of the driver used in the test is 11° and the
average launch angle with the club is 14°, you can safely consider
the combination of the angle of attack and the shaft’s contribution
to the launch angle to be 3 degrees Upward. If the loft of the
driver used in the test were to be 13° and the average launch
angle is 12°, the combined angle of attack and shaft bending
contribution will be 1 degree Downward.
Remember, you need to know the loft of the driver at the point
of impact for the launch angle test because of the effect vertical
roll radius on the face has on the loft at any point up and
down the face where impact may occur. If you know the driver
used in the launch angle test is 11° and the face has a normal
roll radius of 10-12", you can safely know if the impact is
1/2" above the center of the face, the loft at the point of
impact will be 12°. So remember, for close enough accuracy in
your driver loft fitting, you can subtract the loft of the head
at the point of impact from the launch angle to get the angle
of attack information you need.
Now, what do you do with that to end up finding the best driver
loft that will maximize distance for any golfer? Seriously clubmakers,
you really should have and use TWGT’s Trajectory and Ball Flight
modeling software. For an amazingly powerful and informative
piece of shot prediction software such as this to only cost
$89.50 is literally a steal, considering all it can do for your
fitting. With the TWGT Launch Angle Mat, Trajectory and Ball
Flight software and a driver of known loft, clubmakers can very
accurately fit any golfer for THE loft angle which will result
in the most distance.
How? Meaning, how do you actually do that when you do have
these elements of accurate driver loft fitting? Pages 90-94
in the new Common Sense Clubfitting book describes the
process in complete step by step procedure. See! One more compelling
reason to add TWGT’s new fitting book to your library!
to top
______________________________________________________________________________
.
TWGT Design Profile
– 785HF Hybrid Irons 
The letters ‘HF’ in the model name stand for Hot Face,
which is precisely the primary design difference between
the new 785’s and the 321Li hybrid ironheads. One of the
design elements that allowed us to be the first company
to develop the 515GRT fairway woods with a COR of 0.830
is the special high strength Carpenter Steel alloy forged
to make the 515 faces. We chose the same alloy for use in
the face of the 785HF hybrids to be able to do the same
thing for the 785 designs – to increase the COR of each
head to deliver a higher ball speed for any swing speed
and increase the distance of the shot.
While the 785’s can certainly stand as a high performance
long iron replacement, another unique feature of the 785HF
hybrid irons is their optional full iron set design. We’ve
designed the 785’s to include all irons through the short
irons and PW for golfers who are looking for more distance
and a higher ball flight in all of their irons. As a full
iron set design, the 785’s are especially good for golfers
who sweep through the ball as well as any golfer who hits
down and through the ball and take a normal size divot from
the turf. They are not a good fit for golfers with a severe
downward angle of attack who tear up massive divots with
any iron they hit.
Another key performance element in the design of the 785
hybrid irons comes from the shaft design. The #2, 3, 4,
5 and 6 irons are each designed to accept any of TWGT’s
0.335” tip diameter iron shaft designs – GI-335 Light Weight,
GI-335 Tour Weight, Series 5 Steel 335 – for a very solid
feel and a high flying trajectory. The #7, 8, 9, and PW
heads are designed to accept any 0.370” iron shaft because
the lofts of the short hybrids take care of all trajectory
needs.
For matching with the GI-335 Light Weight graphite shafts
in the 785HF #2-6 irons, we recommend the ZT Series 0.370”
tip graphite iron shafts for the #7-PW irons. For matching
with the GI-335 Tour Weight graphite shafts in the 785HF
longer irons, we recommend the Series 5 Steel iron shafts
or the InterFlexx Mid/Low graphite iron shafts. And of course
if the Series 5 steel 335 shafts are used in the 785 longer
irons, the Series 5 steel iron shafts with their 0.370”
tip will be the perfect match in the 785 short irons.
In the past two weeks since TWGT’s Nationwide Tour rep
has been at work, the 785HF #2 and 3 irons have drawn very
positive reviews from the tour players who have hit them
and at present, two players on the Nationwide Tour are using
them in competition.
to top
_______________________________________________
.
TWGT Garners Full
Page Article in Golfweek Magazine
Golfweek magazine senior editor Jim Achenbach has called Tom
Wishon “the smartest man in golf equipment,” and “the Sherlock
Holmes of golf equipment” in previous writings. In the April
29 issue of Golfweek, Achenbach devoted the full page of his
weekly ‘For Your Game’ section to Tom Wishon in a story titled,
“Spreading the Length/Loft Gospel.”
While the theme of “shorter length and more loft for most golfers’
drivers” is well known to experienced clubmakers, in the article,
Achenbach chose to focus on this very important aspect of driver
fitting that continues to be unknown to millions of golfers.
We recommend that all clubmakers who wish to have more visible
publicity close at hand to verify the experience and image of
Wishon Golf to their customers take the time to print a copy
of the Golfweek article.
Click
here for a printable copy of Achenbach’s article on Tom
Wishon is below.
to top
______________________________________________________________________________
.
Do You “Get It” ?
A couple of times a day, our national accounts manager Matt
Mohi will stroll into my workshop office to either keep me updated
on matters of the business, fill me in on some feedback from
his conversations with custom clubmakers or just plain debate
and discuss technical points in fitting or golf club performance.
When Matt stops in and tells me that he has opened up a new
clubmaker account, I have this little phrase I sometimes ask
Matt when we talk about the new account that is telling me about.
“Does he ‘get it’”?
To me, a clubmaker who “gets it” is a person who fully understands
that what they are selling or offering to their golfers is the
superiority of a real custom fitting process over simply selling
a club or clubs. The beauty of what others call “the component
industry”, but what I prefer to term as “the custom clubmaking
industry” is that any golfer can be truly fit into clubheads,
shafts, grips and assembly specifications which deliver the
best set of clubs with which he has ever played.
Unfortunately, 20+ years of many companies in our side of the
business selling knock-offs, clones, or otherwise poorly made
components has given our side of the golf equipment industry
a black eye to a lot of consumer golfers. Many golfers simply
look at clubs which are made from components as cheap clubs
which cannot possibly be as good as the brand name clubs sold
off the rack in pro shops, off course retail stores or over
the internet.
Let me tell you one of the most fascinating things I have observed
since the book, The Search for the Perfect Swing, was released.
Before the Search book came out to spread the gospel of quality
custom fitting, it was always the other way around. Clubmakers
would have to sometimes talk until they were blue in the face
to convince a golfer that what they were going to build would
be as good as the brand name clubs.
The
reason for this turnaround in credibility in golfers sent by
the Search book to be fit is plain and simple; the facts of
how fitting is better than buying standard made clubs off the
rack are so compelling to the average golfer that they don’t
question the components being used in the fitting. Search makes
golfers “get it” so their quest is all about the fit.
When a golfer reads Search and proceeds to find the clubmaker
in his area to book a fitting, the golfer never questions
whether the components being used to build their custom fit
set are as good as the brand names.
So here’s a little cheap advice (and I always say ‘cheap’ when
I offer advice because the supply is greater than the demand!).
If you want to increase your business in clubmaking, talk only
about the fitting process and how that will always be better
for the golfer than simply picking clubs that are made to some
national standard and sold in a “one size fits all” manner by
all of the retail golf outlets. If the golfer happens to question
the quality of the components, sure, fire out the facts you
know that support their quality, but as quickly as possible,
shift the conversation back to what you offer that no retail
golf store, pro shop or internet golf site can beat you at –
your ability to custom fit every golfer with clubs that will
accent the individual differences in each golfer.
And of course, there is no better way for you to ensure that
your golfers “get it” than to hand them a copy of the Search
book, or give them a copy of the 12 Myths That Can Wreck Your
Golf Game booklet.
to top
______________________________________________________________________________
.
A History of Club
Design Technology and its Effect on the Game
As so many of you know, I am very frustrated with the rule
making philosophy of the USGA concerning golf clubs over the
past ten years. Don’t get me wrong. The USGA is a fantastic
organization that does a huge amount for the game and I applaud
their efforts in all of the many areas in which they contribute
to golf. But the past ten years of equipment rule making edicts
have been utterly frustrating to me as a serious golfer and
serious golf equipment designer because the organization is
not operating with any sense of consistency, and most definitely
seems to be making their judgments on the basis of hearsay,
emotion and misinformation rather using science and the clear
lessons of the past.
When questioned in various articles about their motivation
to establish limits on COR, head size, club length and most
recently on the moment of inertia of driver heads, the USGA
always defends their rule making actions with the statement,
“we must make sure technology does not replace skill in the
game.”
Something hit me last month after a fellow passionate golfer
posed the question, “haven’t there been a lot of technical advances
in equipment over the years which replaced golfer skill with
technology which were allowed, and which proved to be no harm
to the game?” Being an avid reader and sponge for the history
of this great game, that question switched on a light bulb of
clarity and reason in my head. Once I started to think back
on the evolution of golf equipment over the past 100+ years,
I could list several equipment breakthroughs which not only
were more significant in their effect on shot performance than
COR, head size, club length and head MOI, but which were allowed
to exist and resulted in more enjoyment for golfers with no
harm whatsoever to the game.
1. Dimples on Golf Balls
From the late 1400s to the 1860’s, while the material and
construction of golf balls went through changes from wood
to the ‘featherie’ to gutta-percha, all balls were made with
a smooth surface. Some clever caddies starting in the 1860s
began to notice that gutty balls which became nicked on the
surface displayed a more consistent flight when hit. As a
result, the sharp caddy looking for a nice tip from his player
would sharpen the tang of his belt buckle and intentionally
carve cross-hatched grooves on the surface of his player’s
balls! Once done, the balls flew far longer and far more consistently
because the grooved surface pattern allowed the ball to fly
with aerodynamic properties.
Soon after, ball makers began to mold all sorts of different
patterns on the surface of the gutta percha balls they made.
The result on the flight of the ball was nothing short of
remarkable, and without question was an example of technology
replacing skill in the game. From that time no ball has been
made without some type of dimple pattern. By the way, if you
want to know how hard the game was before dimples appeared
on balls, go find a very old range ball with dimples that
have been worn down and try to hit it with your driver.
2. Wound Center Golf Balls
In 1898, Coburn Haskell, an engineer employed by BF Goodrich
in Ohio, unveiled the first golf ball made with a rubber core,
wound with a continuous rubber strand. The rubber core ball
immediately delivered at least 25% more distance over its
solid predecessor, the one-piece, hard gutta percha golf ball.
When the rubber core ball began to gain recognition, this
created what was perhaps the game’s first major equipment
controversy. Traditionalists threw up their hands in protest,
claiming the game would be forever ruined. Golfers who were
thrilled with the immediate and huge increase in distance
were just as adamant about wanting to use the new balls, and
by 1904 the rubber core ball had taken over the game, both
in major competition as well as in recreational play.
Yes, the introduction of the rubber core ball did mean that
the typical 5800 yard long courses built during the gutta
percha era no longer could pose the desired challenge to tournament
and professional competitions. In the history of the game,
courses have always been designed to suit the manner and style
of play at the time they were built. Just like today, when
the rubber core ball began to take over, courses with enough
land built new tee boxes to lengthen the holes. And all new
golf courses built after the introduction of the rubber core
ball were designed with the longer distance of the new ball
in mind. The game went on and suffered no harm from what has
to be the single most significant example of technology replacing
skill in the game.
“If the ‘bounding billie’ with its rubber core is not banned,
the game shall be irreparably harmed.”
Golf Illustrated, UK 1902
3. When Steel Replaced Hickory
From the late 1400s to the early 20th century, the shaft
for every golf club was hand-cut and shaped from a hardwood
tree. By the mid-1800’s, clubmakers relied on hickory for
their shaft making because it possessed the “right whip”.
At their best, hickory shafts provided the golfer with a nice
feel when the ball was struck solidly. At their worst, hickory
shafts would warp from exposure to the elements and were difficult
to control because of their 20-30 degrees of torque!
While the first experiments in making shafts from steel began
in the 1890’s, steel shafts did not begin to present themselves
as a viable replacement for hickory until the 1920’s, when
the company that eventually became True Temper developed a
more efficient and accurate means to form shafts from steel
strip material.
The effect of steel replacing hickory from the early 1930’s
as the only shaft in the game was more than remarkable. No
longer having to contend with the very high torque of hickory,
golfers immediately enjoyed a significant improvement in the
accuracy of their shots. Soon after, the swing itself evolved
from a flippy, cup-wristed sweep of the club through the ball
to the modern power swing of today. Thus not only did steel
shafts automatically improve accuracy for all golfers, they
opened the door to a swing style that allowed clubhead speed
to be increased for more distance.
Technology replacing skill? You betcha, and big time, but
again, despite some initial cries from dissenters who feared
harm would come to the game from such an instant improvement
in accuracy, nothing of the sort ever happened. The game rolled
on in its evolution just fine.
4. Perimeter Weighting Offers
More Distance on Mis Hits
Whether it was the 1960s when heel and toe weighted putter
heads first appeared, the 1970s when deep cavity back irons
made their debut, or the early 1980s when hollow, steel woodheads
took the game by storm, perimeter weighting in clubhead design
presented a remarkable improvement in off-center hit results
for all golfers over the blade and wooden head clubheads which
preceded these equipment advances.
While the first experiments in making shafts from steel began
in the 1890’s, steel shafts did not begin to present themselves
as a viable replacement for hickory until the 1920’s, when
the company that eventually became True Temper developed a
more efficient and accurate means to form shafts from steel
strip material.
While there are still many golfers who prefer to play a muscleback
style iron or a few who still putt with a pure blade, no one
can argue that their off-center hits are not instantaneously
better when hit with a clubhead designed with good perimeter
weighting as opposed to a blade. Here again, technology in
the form of an immediate increase in the moment of inertia
in the clubhead did indeed replace the skill of hitting the
ball consistently on the sweet spot and no harm can be said
to have come to the game.
5. The Instant Swing Speed Increase
from Graphite Shafts
Despite the fact that graphite shafts first began to appear
in the game in the 1960s, it was not until shaft makers learned
to control the torque of their composite shafts in the 1980s
that graphite began to exert its real influence of technology
replacing skill in the game. Today, industry statistics say
that over 90% of all drivers, more than 70% of all fairway
woods and some 30% of all irons are sold with graphite shafts.
Here’s another interesting statistic. The majority of golfers
who change from a 120 gram steel shaft to a 60-65 gram graphite
shaft can experience an automatic increase of 3 to 4 mph because
of the drop in the total weight of the club. Same swing, more
swing speed from la big drop in shaft weight. For most golfers
with the driver, a 1mph increase in swing speed means 2.8
more yards in carry distance for the same loft and quality
of impact. Hence a 3-4mph increase in swing speed means that
a golfer can achieve as much as a 11.2 yard increase in distance
with the driver simply by changing from a heavy steel to a
light graphite shaft.
For a golfer with a 100mph swing speed to achieve the same
11.2 yard increase in distance from the COR of a driver compared
to the old steel metal woods of the early 1990s, the COR limit
would have to be 0.870! No one protested the advent of graphite
shafts and what their distance increase could do to harm the
game. Yet today, we have to live with a COR limit of 0.830,
a distance improvement which is not quite half of what the
USGA allowed when graphite shafts came into the game!
6. What Happens Next?
Dimples on golf balls, the rubber core golf ball, steel shafts,
perimeter weighted clubheads and graphite shafts are all valid
examples of new technology that was allowed to come into the
game which replaced the skill required to hit a quality shot.
Not only that but dimples, the rubber core, ball, steel and
graphite shafts each brought about far more of an improvement
in distance (not to mention accuracy and on-center hit ability)
than a higher COR, large head, greater length and higher clubhead
MOI can offer.
Recently, the USGA ruled that range finders were legal for
tournament play. The response has been a split between many
state golf associations who are outlawing the use of these
distance reading devices, and the USGA, because officials
within several of these state associations do not agree with
the USGA’s ruling.
Earlier this year, the Ohio Golf Association announced the
implementation of a uniform ball rule for their 2006 state
competitions. Why? Because some officials in the OGA refused
to believe the USGA’s opinion that some modern ball designs
did not offer an advantage in shot making to players with
higher swing speeds.
Such actions of disagreement among regional associations
and the USGA are certainly not good for golf. Unfortunately,
they are the result of an inconsistent administration of the
rules of this great game by the USGA. Technology replacing
skill is supposedly why we in the US and Mexico live with
the COR, head size, club length and now driver head MOI limits
recently imposed by the USGA. Yet range finders, dimples,
different ball core designs, steel shafts, perimeter weighting,
graphite shafts and fitting specification changes such as
woodhead face angle and clubhead weight distribution are allowed
even though they are far more of an example of technology
replacing skill than COR, size, length and MOI.
I love this game. I mean I really love this game. And I for
one would hate to see any harm come to golf that would result
in both decreased participation and enjoyment. If you care
about the game, I think it’s time for you to write a letter
to the USGA and ask them to consider the inconsistency of
their recent equipment rulings about range finders, COR, head
size, club length and head MOI in light of what the history
of this game has taught us.
to top
