Opinion & Analysis
Part 1: Taking the guesswork out of selecting shafts
It’s clear that a lot of threads and posts in the GolfWRX forums are from golfers asking all sorts of questions about shafts. In nearly 40 years of golf equipment design and research work, I think it is fair to say that the shaft is the least understood component of the golf club.
I have engaged in serious shaft research since 1990, and from that have learned a lot about shaft design, performance and fitting, I would like to help clear some things up and share some facts about shafts and what you need to know to pick the best shaft for YOUR swing.
I will do my best to make all of this understandable without stressing everyone’s attention span. But there is a lot to explain about this subject so I will separate this into three parts with some time in between each thread to allow you to digest it and ask questions.
How Can Golfers TRULY Compare Shafts to Know their Real Performance Differences?
Below is a typical “specification chart” from a major shaft company. I have removed the names because it is not my intent to criticize a specific shaft maker. It is simply my desire to show you how the typical information provided about shafts will not allow golfers to know what they really need to know about shafts to be able to make an informed buying decision.
Plain and simple, the information in this chart cannot tell a golfer how any of these shafts truly perform, much less how they actually compare in stiffness to any other the shaft.
The flex? There are no standards for exactly how stiff any of the flex letter codes are. Charts like this provide no quantitative measurements of exactly how stiff any shaft might be. In fact the ONLY bits of information on a typical chart like this which can be helpful are the WEIGHT and the TORQUE.
The butt and tip diameter? These are fine for knowing what the hosel bore of the clubhead needs to be to easily accept the shaft and to know how to install the grip to obtain a desired size.
The parallel tip section? That simply tells you if you cut more than 2 inches off the tip, it’s not likely to fit all the way into any normal hosel with a 0.335-inch bore.
The bend point? Sorry, but the term bend point is not relevant because with terms like “high,” “mid,” or “low,” it has always been way too generic. WHERE EXACTLY IS a mid bend point? And how does this mid bend point compare to some other company’s mid or low or high bend point?
Recently I have seen a couple of other shaft companies begin to offer a form of QUANTITATIVE stiffness measurements for their shafts. Here’s an example:
This shaft company offers a series of stiffness profile measurements for the butt, mid and tip sections of their shafts. That’s a start, but the problem is that this company only offers these stiffness profile measurements for their own shafts. This is somewhat reasonable for comparing the various shaft models and flexes within this one company, but what if you have some other company’s shaft in your driver, or you wish to compare these shafts to some other company’s shafts? And if you have never hit one of these shafts, how stiff or flexible are any of these measurements in the first place? These rudimentary stiffness profile measurements do not allow the depth and scope of stiffness information to allow you to make a valid shaft fitting decision.
You might look at the butt stiffness number and say, “That’s a frequency measurement and I know how stiff a 270 cpm shaft plays.” Yes, that butt stiffness number is a frequency measurement. But the problem is you have no idea how these butt frequency measurements were obtained.
- What length of the butt was clamped?
- How heavy was the tip weight?
- Is this 270 cpm frequency the same as a 270 cpm shaft that you played?
Again, there are no standards in the golf industry for shaft frequency measurement so you have no idea if a measurement of say, 270 cpm from this company is equivalent to a measurement of 255 cpm or 265 cpm or whatever cpm using one of the many other types of shaft frequency measurement.
What makes all this even more “exciting” or I should say, challenging, is the fact the industry is now populated with many shafts that are VERY expensive. Do you really want to GUESS whether that $300 shaft is right for you, or would you like to have a more definitive way to help make that decision?
Is there a Better Way to Compare Shaft Stiffness?
Ever since I began to perform quantitative measurements on shafts, I knew we needed a way to be able to see and compare the stiffness of as many shafts as possible, and do it over their entire length. That way, club makers and golfers could have a tangible way to compare the complete full length stiffness design of shafts to each other. The performance and the bending feel of any shaft are products of its stiffness design over its entire length. Not just the butt, not just the tip, but the whole length of the shaft. There are almost an infinite number of ways the stiffness of a shaft can be created over its entire length.
In 2005, we arrived on a reasonably simple method to perform full length comparative stiffness measurements for golf shafts. From this, we created a software program that would house and display the data from our shaft stiffness comparison methodology. We made the first version of the software available to club makers in 2006. Two times each year we ask the shaft companies to send us multiples of each of their new shaft models and flexes so we can keep adding shafts to the software data base.
At present, we have more than 2,000 different wood, hybrid and iron shafts in the TWGT Shaft Bend Profile software. We charge a one-time fee of $129.50 for the software because the expense to have it programmed and maintained is not insignificant. It also takes us quite a number of hours to acquire, test and input the new shaft data into the software two times each year. You can find more information about this on my site, which is linked in my bio.
As much as we would like, there is no possible way we can include EVERY shaft in the industry in the software’s data base. We have to rely on the shaft companies to send us the multiple samples of each of their shafts to measure because we simply cannot afford to actually buy all of the shafts. We also cannot obtain the OEM stock shafts because the OEM companies will simply not allow anyone to have their raw shafts for any measurement work like this. We do have some OEM stock shafts in the data base, which come from “pulls” from OEM clubs that we can measure. But we do try to put as many shafts as we can into the data base so that clubmakers and golfers can better compare the relative stiffness of shafts.
To date more than 600 different club makers now use the TWGT Shaft Bend Profile software in their shaft fitting. This use by the club makers has also provided “in the field” verification that the measurements of the shafts do indeed provide a valid representation of the performance and even the bending feel of the shafts in the data base. The shaft fitting comparisons made with the data in the TWGT Shaft Bend Profile software is most definitely valid for predicting the performance and feel of a shaft.
How Does the Bend Profile Data Explain the Performance and Differences Between Shafts?
Some of you have seen graphs from the TWGT Bend Profile software that I have posted to answer a question here and there about shafts. For those of you who have not seen this, the following is a basic screen image from the software showing a comparison of the relative stiffness design of two shafts. I just randomly chose to use the Mitsubishi Rayon’s Diamana White 83 X5CT S flex and the UST ProForce V2 HL65 S flex to start the explanation.
You see seven columns in the data box. These show WHERE on the shafts we do the stiffness measurements. Starting at 11 inches up from the tip, the measurements then are made at 5-inch spaced positions up from the tip end of each shaft, ending at 41 inches up from the tip. Because iron and hybrid shafts are shorter in raw length, their measurements run from 11 inches up to 36 inches up from the tip end of the shafts.
Measurements are done with a 454 gram weight attached to the tip of the shaft using a specially designed frequency analyzer that measures the shaft oscillations using two separate load cells and two separate strain gauges. Each shaft is tested at the same exact place on the shaft, using the same exact test methodology. This ensures the data is comparable from shaft to shaft to shaft in the data base of the software.
Let’s take a look at an example graph and data chart
The 41-inch, 36-inch and 31-inch measurements represent the butt section, the 31-inch, 26-inch and 21-inch measurements represent the center section and the 21-inch, 16-inch and 11-inch measurements represent the tip section of the shaft (yes, there is an overlap).
When companies design different flexes of a shaft, each different letter flex version is ordained chiefly by the stiffness measurements of the 41-inch to 21-inch positions of the shaft (butt, to center, to upper tip). Tip section differences on shafts do not play as significant of a role in the overall flex design (swing speed rating) of a shaft as do the butt to center to upper tip sections. The tip section design of a shaft is chiefly designed to create differences in the launch angle, trajectory and spin rate among shafts within the same flex.
After significant research and study of the shaft data, we can make conclusions about how much of a difference in the stiffness measurements is significant or not. With so many shafts in the data base, we can also identify a basic relationship between a golfer’s clubhead speed, the average bending force generated by that clubhead speed, and the overall stiffness design of a shaft. This is very important for being able to tell a golfer which shaft may be better suited to his clubhead speed. Therefore, we can use the stiffness measurements of the 41-inch to 21-inch positions on the shaft to determine the swing speed rating of any shaft.
We can also determine how much of a measurement difference is significant or not with respect to stiffness in the butt, center and tip sections of the shafts.
- For example, at the start of the butt section, as represented by the 41-inch measurement, a measurement difference of 8-to-10 cpm is approximately equivalent to one full letter flex difference.
- At the middle of the center section, as represented by the 26-inch measurements, a difference of 12-to-15 cpm is equivalent to one full letter flex difference.
- In the middle of the tip section, as represented by the 16-inch measurement, a difference of 30-to-40 cpm usually accounts for a visible difference in the launch angle, trajectory and spin rate of the shot.
There are no standards for how stiff any of the letter flex designations of shafts may be. How stiff IS an R flex, an S flex (or any of the other letter flexes)? How much variation is there among shafts of the same letter flex?
Below is data to show the low-to-high range in stiffness for all shafts for drivers and fairway woods in our data base that are marked as being a letter R flex shafts. These are listed from softest to stiffest, but all of these are made and marked by their respective companies to be an R flex shaft.
Based on the measurements of the 41-inch and 36-inch sections for the butt section, you are looking at a range of FOUR FULL FLEXES. That means the R flex shafts in the golf industry actually exist within a range of four full flexes. The same is true for S flex shafts, as well.
Because there are far fewer L, A and X flex shafts, the range in stiffness within these letter flex codes is not quite as wide as it is within the R and S flex shafts. Here is the Bend Profile graph and data chart to illustrate the range in R flex shafts for woods that exist today.
Based on all of our research to associate a driver clubhead speed with the measurements for the 41-inch, 36-inch, 31-inch, 26-inch positions of the butt and center of the shaft, here are the appropriate driver clubhead speed ratings for each of these above five different R flex shafts:
- Miyazaki C.Kua 39 R: For a golfer with a driver clubhead speed of 55-to-65 mph
- UST ProForce V2 HL-55 R: For a golfer with a driver clubhead speed of 65-to-75 mph
- Aldila RIP’d NV65 R: For a golfer with a driver clubhead speed of 75-to-85 mph
- Fujikura Blue 004 R: For a golfer with a driver clubhead speed of 85-to-95 mph
- Rapport Blue Velvet R: For a golfer with a driver clubhead speed of 95-to-105 mph
Therefore, you are looking at shafts in the golf industry that match up to a range in swing speed of 50 mph, yet ALL are marked and sold as R flex shafts.
You may be prompted to comment, “This has to be the exception rather than the rule.” If we take a look at the data base to search where the majority of R-flex shafts lie with respect to their 41-inch, 36-inch and 31-inch butt section measurements, we find that the majority of R-flex shafts exist within a range that represents a 20-to-30 mph difference in the clubhead speed rating for the shafts.
This is precisely why golfers sometimes buy a new club and its shaft doesn’t feel as stiff or feels stiffer than their previous shaft with the same letter flex.
Do all shafts of the same letter flex have the same butt-to-center section stiffness (same swing speed rating) within the same shaft company or the same golf club company?
Let’s take a look at the R-flex version of a number of different shaft models from one shaft manufacturing company. All are selected on the basis of being very close to the same shaft weight so they potentially could be considered for purchase by the same golfer.
I want to be sure to first make something clear. I am NOT saying it is wrong for a company to make the same letter flex version of each different shaft model to be of a different stiffness design. That is their right as a company to determine the exact design of each flex for each shaft they make.
What I am saying is that it is very difficult for consumer golfers to know how to choose the shaft that might best match their swing when the companies provide no empirical information like this to use for making quantitative comparisons of the different shafts.
The swing speed range for all these R-flex shafts from Aldila ranges by 25 mph. At one end, the NVS 65-R is a shaft that would be rated for use by a golfer with a driver clubhead speed of 70-to-80mph. At the other end, the RIP Gamma 60-3.6-R is a shaft that would be rated for use by a golfer with a driver clubhead speed of 85-to-95 mph. That means within all the R-Flex shafts from Aldila, the clubhead speed rating for possible selection by a golfer can range by 25 mph – yet all are marked as being an R-Flex shaft.
On top of this are definite differences in the TIP SECTION design of all these different R-flex shafts. Within all the R-Flex shafts from Aldila, we see shafts with a tip section design that ranges from the very tip-soft (Habanero 60-R) all the way up to the moderately tip stiff design of the RIP Gamma 60-3.6-R. If both these R-flex shafts were hit by the same golfer, the Habanero would launch the ball approximately 3-degrees higher and with an estimated 750 rpm more backspin than the RIP Gamma 60-3.6-R. Yet again, both are marked as R-flex shafts.
Again, each company is free to design their shafts as they see fit, for whichever golfer swing types they designate. But how can any golfer really know the difference in the overall stiffness design of any of these shafts and from that, know anything about the performance difference between these shafts of the same flex without clear, quantitative comparative information?
Please understand that variation between the same letter flex of different shaft models goes on INTENTIONALLY with every shaft company in the golf industry. It is not specific to Aldila. I simply use them to illustrate that this does happen within each shaft manufacturing company. Without a clear, quantitative means to compare the stiffness design of shafts, consumer golfers are in the dark with respect to making accurate shaft buying and shaft fitting decisions.
For those of you who made it this far, CONGRATULATIONS! You ARE indeed interested in shafts. For those of you who didn’t… well, true shaft knowledge can be a little beyond a normal realm of interest, I do admit that. I hope you all got something out of this, and there is more to come to help you know much more about how to determine the differences between shafts and how to turn that information into better shaft buying decisions.
By the way, there are many custom clubmakers out there who can help you find the right shaft FAR more accurately than the ways you have been trying to pick the right shaft in the past. These club makers who study this stuff are worth knowing and can help you. Again, to find a good club fitter, check out these sources:
- The AGCP (Association of Golf Clubfitting Professionals)
- The ICG (International Clubmakers’ Guild)
- The TWGT Clubmaker Locator
Related
- Part 1 — Taking the guesswork out of selecting shafts
- Part 2 — Taking shaft fitting from guessing to specifics
- Part 3 — Facts about shafts, and what they do
- LIKE277
- LEGIT20
- WOW36
- LOL6
- IDHT2
- FLOP3
- OB3
- SHANK17
Of all the clubs in our bags, wedges are almost always the simplest in construction and, therefore, the easiest to analyze what might make one work differently from another if you know what to look for.
Wedges are a lot less mysterious than drivers, of course, as the major brands are working with a lot of “pixie dust” inside these modern marvels. That’s carrying over more to irons now, with so many new models featuring internal multi-material technologies, and almost all of them having a “badge” or insert in the back to allow more complex graphics while hiding the actual distribution of mass.
But when it comes to wedges, most on the market today are still single pieces of molded steel, either cast or forged into that shape. So, if you look closely at where the mass is distributed, it’s pretty clear how that wedge is going to perform.
To start, because of their wider soles, the majority of the mass of almost any wedge is along the bottom third of the clubhead. So, the best wedge shots are always those hit between the 2nd and 5th grooves so that more mass is directly behind that impact. Elite tour professionals practice incessantly to learn to do that consistently, wearing out a spot about the size of a penny right there. If impact moves higher than that, the face is dramatically thinner, so smash factor is compromised significantly, which reduces the overall distance the ball will fly.
Every one of us, tour players included, knows that maddening shot that we feel a bit high on the face and it doesn’t go anywhere, it’s not your fault.
If your wedges show a wear pattern the size of a silver dollar, and centered above the 3rd or 4th groove, you are not getting anywhere near the same performance from shot to shot. Robot testing proves impact even two to three grooves higher in the face can cause distance loss of up to 35 to 55 feet with modern ‘tour design’ wedges.
In addition, as impact moves above the center of mass, the golf club principle of gear effect causes the ball to fly higher with less spin. Think of modern drivers for a minute. The “holy grail” of driving is high launch and low spin, and the driver engineers are pulling out all stops to get the mass as low in the clubhead as possible to optimize this combination.
Where is all the mass in your wedges? Low. So, disregarding the higher lofts, wedges “want” to launch the ball high with low spin – exactly the opposite of what good wedge play requires penetrating ball flight with high spin.
While almost all major brand wedges have begun putting a tiny bit more thickness in the top portion of the clubhead, conventional and modern ‘tour design’ wedges perform pretty much like they always have. Elite players learn to hit those crisp, spinny penetrating wedge shots by spending lots of practice time learning to consistently make contact low in the face.
So, what about grooves and face texture?
Grooves on any club can only do so much, and no one has any material advantage here. The USGA tightly defines what we manufacturers can do with grooves and face texture, and modern manufacturing techniques allow all of us to push those limits ever closer. And we all do. End of story.
Then there’s the topic of bounce and grinds, the most complex and confusing part of the wedge formula. Many top brands offer a complex array of sole configurations, all of them admittedly specialized to a particular kind of lie or turf conditions, and/or a particular divot pattern.
But if you don’t play the same turf all the time, and make the same size divot on every swing, how would you ever figure this out?
The only way is to take any wedge you are considering and play it a few rounds, hitting all the shots you face and observing the results. There’s simply no other way.
So, hopefully this will inspire a lively conversation in our comments section, and I’ll chime in to answer any questions you might have.
And next week, I’ll dive into the rest of the wedge formula. Yes, shafts, grips and specifications are essential, too.
- LIKE17
- LEGIT5
- WOW1
- LOL1
- IDHT2
- FLOP2
- OB1
- SHANK1
Golf's Perfect Imperfections
Golf’s Perfect Imperfections: Amazing Session with Performance Coach Savannah Meyer-Clement
In this week’s episode, we spent some time with performance coach Savannah Meyer-Clement who provides many useful insights that you’ll be able to implement on the golf course.
- LIKE0
- LEGIT0
- WOW0
- LOL0
- IDHT0
- FLOP0
- OB0
- SHANK0
19th Hole
Vincenzi’s 2024 RBC Heritage betting preview: Patrick Cantlay ready to get back inside winner’s circle
Just a two-hour drive from Augusta National, the PGA TOUR heads to Harbour Town Golf Links in Hilton Head Island, S.C. Hilton Head Island is a golfer’s paradise and Harbour Town is one of the most beautiful and scenic courses on the PGA TOUR.
Harbour Town Golf Links is a par-71 that measures 7,121 yards and features Bermuda grass greens. A Pete Dye design, the course is heavily tree lined and features small greens and many dog legs, protecting it from “bomb-and-gauge” type golfers.
The field is loaded this week with 69 golfers with no cut. Last year was quite possibly the best field in RBC Heritage history and the event this week is yet another designated event, meaning there is a $20 million prize pool.
Most of the big names on the PGA Tour will be in attendance this week with the exceptions of Hideki Matsuyama and Viktor Hovland. Additionally, Webb Simpson, Shane Lowry, Gary Woodland and Kevin Kisner have been granted sponsors exemptions.
Past Winners at Harbour Town
- 2023: Matt Fitzpatrick (-17)
- 2022: Jordan Spieth (-13)
- 2021: Stewart Cink (-19)
- 2020: Webb Simpson (-22)
- 2019: CT Pan (-12)
- 2018: Sotoshi Kodaira (-12)
- 2017: Wesley Bryan (-13)
- 2016: Branden Grace (-9)
- 2015: Jim Furyk (-18)
In this article and going forward, I’ll be using the Rabbit Hole by Betsperts Golf data engine to develop my custom model. If you want to build your own model or check out all of the detailed stats, you can sign up using promo code: MATTVIN for 25% off any subscription package (yearly is best value).
Key Stats For Harbour Town
Let’s take a look at key metrics for Harbour Town Golf Links to determine which golfers boast top marks in each category over their past 24 rounds.
Strokes Gained: Approach
Strokes Gained: Approach is exceedingly important this week. The greens at Harbour Town are about half the size of PGA TOUR average and feature the second-smallest greens on the tour. Typical of a Pete Dye design, golfers will pay the price for missed greens.
Total SG: Approach Over Past 24 Rounds
- Scottie Scheffler (+1.27)
- Tom Hoge (+1.27)
- Corey Conners (+1.16)
- Austin Eckroat (+0.95)
- Cameron Young (+0.93)
Good Drive %
The fairways at Harbour Town are tree lined and feature many dog legs. Bombers tend to struggle at the course because it forces layups and doesn’t allow long drivers to overpower it. Accuracy is far more important than power.
Good Drive % Over Past 24 Rounds
- Brice Garnett (88.8%)
- Shane Lowry (+87.2%)
- Akshay Bhatia (+86.0%)
- Si Woo Kim (+85.8%)
- Sepp Straka (+85.1%)
Strokes Gained: Total at Pete Dye Designs
Pete Dye specialists tend to play very well at Harbour Town. Si Woo Kim, Matt Kuchar, Jim Furyk and Webb Simpson are all Pete Dye specialists who have had great success here. It is likely we see some more specialists near the top of the leaderboard this week.
SG: TOT Pete Dye per round over past 36 rounds:
- Xander Schauffele (+2.27)
- Scottie Scheffler (+2.24)
- Ludvig Aberg (+2.11)
- Brian Harman (+1.89)
- Sungjae Im (+1.58)
4. Strokes Gained: Short Game (Bermuda)
Strokes Gained: Short Game factors in both around the green and putting. With many green-side bunkers and tricky green complexes, both statistics will be important. Past winners — such as Jim Furyk, Wes Bryan and Webb Simpson — highlight how crucial the short game skill set is around Harbour Town.
SG: SG Over Past 24 Rounds
- Jordan Spieth (+1.11)
- Taylor Moore (+1.02)
- Wyndham Clark (+0.98)
- Mackenzie Hughes (+0.86)
- Andrew Putnam (+0.83)
5. Greens in Regulation %
The recipe for success at Harbour Town Golf Links is hitting fairways and greens. Missing either will prove to be consequential — golfers must be in total control of the ball to win.
Greens in Regulation % over past 24 rounds:
- Brice Garnett (+75.0%)
- Scottie Scheffler (+69.9%)
- Corey Conners (+69.0%)
- Shane Lowry (+68.3%)
- Patrick Rodgers (+67.6%)
6. Course History
Harbour Town is a course where players who have strong past results at the course always tend to pop up.
Course History over past 24 rounds:
- Patrick Cantlay (+2.34)
- Cam Davis (+2.05)
- J.T. Poston (+1.69)
- Justin Rose (+1.68)
- Tommy Fleetwood (+1.59)
The RBC Heritage Model Rankings
Below, I’ve compiled overall model rankings using a combination of the five key statistical categories previously discussed — SG: Approach (24%), Good Drives (20%), SG: SG (14%), SG: Pete Dye (14%), GIR (14%), and Course History (14%)
- Shane Lowry
- Russell Henley
- Scottie Scheffler
- Xander Schauffele
- Corey Conners
- Wyndham Clark
- Christiaan Bezuidenhout
- Matt Fitzpatrick
- Cameron Young
- Ludvig Aberg
2024 RBC Heritage Picks
Patrick Cantlay +2000 (FanDuel)
With the exception of Scottie Scheffler, the PGA Tour has yet to have any of their star players show peak form during the 2024 season. Last week, Patrick Cantlay, who I believe is a top-5 players on the PGA Tour, took one step closer to regaining the form that’s helped him win eight events on Tour since 2017.
Cantlay limped into the Masters in poor form, but figured it out at Augusta National, finishing in a tie for 20th and ranking 17th for the week in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking. The former FedEx Cup champion will now head to one of his favorite golf courses in Harbour Town, where he’s had immaculate results over the years. In his six trips to the course, he’s only finished worse than 7th one time. The other finishes include three third places (2017, 2019, 2023) and one runner-up finish (2022). In his past 36 rounds at Harbour Town, Cantlay ranks 1st in Strokes Gained: Total per round at the course by a wide margin (+2.36).
Cantlay is winless since the 2022 BMW Championship, which is far too long for a player of his caliber. With signs pointing to the 32-year-old returning to form, a “signature event” at Harbour Town is just what he needs to get back on the winning track.
Tommy Fleetwood +3000 (FanDuel)
I truly believe Tommy Fleetwood will figure out a way to win on American soil in 2024. It’s certainly been a bugaboo for him throughout his career, but he is simply too talented to go another season without winning a PGA Tour event.
At last week’s Masters Tournament, Fleetwood made a Sunday charge and ended up finishing T3 in the event, which was his best ever finish at The Masters. For the week, the Englishman ranked 8th in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach, 10th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking and 16th in Strokes Gained: Putting.
Harbour Town is a perfect layout for Fleetwood, and he’s had relative success at this Pete Dye design in the past. In his four trips to the course, he’s finished inside of the top 25 three times, with his best finish, T10, coming in 2022. The course is pretty short and can’t be overpowered, which gives an advantage to more accurate players such as Fleetwood. Tommy ranks 8th in the field in Good Drive % and should be able to plot his way along this golf course.
The win is coming for Tommy lad. I believe there’s a chance this treasure of a golf course may be the perfect one for him to finally break through on Tour.
Cameron Young +3300 (FanDuel)
Cameron Young had a solid Masters Tournament last week, which is exactly what I’m looking for in players who I anticipate playing well this week at the RBC Heritage. He finished in a tie for 9th, but never felt the pressure of contending in the event. For the week, Young ranked 6th in Strokes Gained: Off the Tee and 6th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking.
Despite being one of the longest players off the tee on the PGA Tour, Young has actually played some really good golf on shorter tracks. He finished T3 at Harbour Town in 2023 and ranks 20th in the field in Good Drive% and 16th in Greens in Regulation in his past 24 rounds. He also has strong finishes at other shorter courses that can take driver out of a players hand such as Copperhead and PGA National.
Young is simply one of the best players on the PGA Tour in 2024, and I strongly believe has what it takes to win a PGA Tour event in the very near future.
Corey Conners +5500 (FanDuel)
Corey Conners has had a disappointing year thus far on the PGA Tour, but absolutely loves Harbour Town.
At last week’s Masters Tournament, the Canadian finished T30 but ranked 20th in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach. In his past 24 rounds, Conners ranks 3rd in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach, 3rd in Greens in Regulation % and 24th in Good Drive %.
In Conners’ last four trips to Harbour Town, his worst finish was T31, last season. He finished T4 in 2021, T12 in 2022 and ranks 8th in Strokes Gained: Total at the course over his past 36 rounds.
Conners hasn’t been contending, but his recent finishes have been encouraging as he has finished in the top-25 in each of his past three starts prior to The Masters, including an impressive T13 at The PLAYERS. His recent improvement in ball striking as well as his suitability for Harbour Town makes Conners a high upside bet this week.
Shane Lowry (+7500) (FanDuel)
When these odds were posted after Lowry was announced in the field, I have to admit I was pretty stunned. Despite not offering much win equity on the PGA Tour over the last handful of years, Shane Lowry is still a top caliber player who has the ability to rise to the top of a signature event.
Lowry struggled to score at The Masters last week, but he actually hit the ball really well. The Irishman ranked 1st for Strokes Gained: Approach on the week and 7th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking. As usual, it was the putter that let him down, as he ranked 60th in the field in Strokes Gained: Putting.
Harbour Town is most definitely one of Lowry’s favorite courses on the PGA Tour. In his six starts there, he’s finished in the top 10 three times, including third twice. Lowry is sensational at Pete Dye designs and ranks 7th in Strokes Gained: Total in his past 36 rounds on Dye tracks.
Lowry is perfect for Harbour Town. In his past 24 rounds, he ranks 5th in Strokes Gained: Approach, 2nd in Good Drive% and 5th in Green in Regulation %. If he figures it out on the greens, Shane could have his first win in America since 2015.
Lucas Glover +12000 (FanDuel)
This is one of my weekly “bet the number” plays as I strongly believe the odds are just too long for a player of Glover’s caliber. The odds have been too long on Glover for a few weeks now, but this is the first event that I can get behind the veteran being able to actually contend at.
Glover is quietly playing good golf and returning to the form he had after the understandable regression after his two massive victories at the end of 2023. He finished T20 at The Masters, which was his best ever finish at Augusta National. For the week, Lucas ranked 18th for Strokes Gained: Approach and 20th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking.
Over his past 24 rounds, Glover ranks 9th in Strokes Gained: Approach and 13th in Good Drive %. Harbour Town is a short course that the 44-year-old will be able to keep up with the top players on Tour off the tee. He’s played the course more than 20 times, with mixed results. His best finishes at Harbour Town include a T7 in 2008, but recently has a finish of T21 in 2020.
Glover has proven he can contend with the stars of the Tour on any given week, and this number is flat out disrespectful.
- LIKE30
- LEGIT5
- WOW2
- LOL1
- IDHT1
- FLOP2
- OB0
- SHANK2
Dave Portnoy places monstrous outright bet for the 2024 Masters
John Daly stuns fans into silence with brutal opening tee shot on PGA Tour Champions
Things got heated at the Houston Open between Tony Finau and Alejandro Tosti. Here’s why
Tiger Woods arrives at 2024 Masters equipped with a putter that may surprise you
Scottie Scheffler WITB 2024 (March)
Report: Tiger Woods has ‘eliminated sex’ in preparation for the 2024 Masters
Two star names reportedly blanked Jon Rahm all week at the Masters
2-time major champ announces shock retirement from the sport at age of 33
Neal Shipley presser ends in awkward fashion after reporter claims Tiger handed him note on 8th fairway
Paulina Gretzky opens up on receiving death threats following DJ’s move to LIV Golf
Collin Morikawa WITB 2024 (April)
Collin Morikawa what’s in the bag accurate as of the RBC Heritage. More photos from the event here. Driver: TaylorMade...
WITB Time Machine: Jordan Spieth’s winning WITB, 2022 RBC Heritage
At the 2022 RBC Heritage Jordan Spieth defeated Patrick Cantlay on the first playoff hole after nearly holing his greenside...
Jason Day WITB 2024 (April)
Jason Day what’s in the bag accurate as of the RBC Heritage. Driver: Ping G430 LST (9 degrees @10) Shaft: TPT...
Ludvig Åberg WITB 2024 (April)
Ludvig Åberg what’s in the bag accurate as of the RBC Heritage. Driver: Titleist TSR2 (9 degrees, D4 SureFit setting)...
-
19th Hole1 week agoDave Portnoy places monstrous outright bet for the 2024 Masters
-
19th Hole3 weeks agoThings got heated at the Houston Open between Tony Finau and Alejandro Tosti. Here’s why
-
19th Hole1 week agoTiger Woods arrives at 2024 Masters equipped with a putter that may surprise you
-
19th Hole2 weeks agoReport: Tiger Woods has ‘eliminated sex’ in preparation for the 2024 Masters
-
19th Hole5 days agoTwo star names reportedly blanked Jon Rahm all week at the Masters
-
19th Hole4 days agoNeal Shipley presser ends in awkward fashion after reporter claims Tiger handed him note on 8th fairway
-
19th Hole3 days agoReport: LIV Golf identifies latest star name they hope to sign to breakaway tour
-
19th Hole2 weeks agoAddiction, spinal fusion, and scam artists – Everything Anthony Kim revealed in candid interview with David Feherty
Pingback: Best 13 swing speed shaft flex chart - lindaadvisors.com
Graham Davis
Dec 10, 2016 at 10:00 pm
One more point. I am 5 fòot 7 inches and 11 stone, so not a power house. 7 is my highest handicap and I hit my driver about 240 yards with mý 88 to 90mph swing speed. 220 yards carry.
Graham Davis
Dec 10, 2016 at 9:15 pm
I should add to my previous mail that I have put together at least ten different shaft combos ranging from 45.5 inch fujikura 44gm regular to 44.25 inch black tie regular. I have tried senior, regular and stiff flex, and high , mid and low bend points At 85 to 90mph, why does a long heavy shaft give me the best results?
Graham Davis
Dec 10, 2016 at 9:02 pm
I am a 7 handicap 61 year old with driver swing speed of 88 to 90 mph. You often say current drivers are too long and to use more loft but my stats on trackman say 45.5 inch shaft at 9° gives my best launch and carry with least spin. Why is this? I use grafalloy prolaunch blue and swing weight is about D5. This is a 68gm shaft. I have the same shaft at 44.5 inches but don’t hit it as far. Consistency is not a compromised with the longer shaft. My smash factor is just as good. I can see 10 to 20 yards more carry. Do I simply have good tempo?
Montree
Mar 23, 2016 at 11:34 pm
May I share my story to choose golf swing analyser
A common mistake made by amateur golfers is choosing golf clubs that are not suited to their swing speed. If you do not match your clubs to your abilities to swing them, it can have an adverse effect on your game. Club factors that should be adjusted based on how fast you swing a club include the shaft flex, torque and the type of shaft. By taking the time to find the right clubs for your game, you can best leverage your golf equipment to improve your game.
Step 1
Determine your swing speed. Many golf retail stores and pro shops can take this measurement. Otherwise, the speed can be estimated based on the club that you hit from a distance of 150 yards. If you use a 3-iron or wood, your swing speed is probably less than 60 mph; a 4-iron is 60-75 mph; a 5-iron is 75-84 mph; a 6- or 7-iron is 84-93 mph; and an 8- or 9-iron is over 93 mph.
Step 2
Determine the shaft flex of your clubs based on your swing speed. The shaft flex is representative of how much force is required for the shaft to transfer energy to the golf ball during your swing. Ladies flex should be used for a swing speed of less than 60 mph, senior flex for 60-75 mph, regular flex for 75-84 mph, stiff flex for 84-93 mph, and extra-stiff flex for speeds above 93 mph. Choosing the wrong shaft flex can lead to hooked, sliced or generally inaccurate shots.
Step 3
Pick a material for the shafts of your irons. The two most common options are graphite and steel. Players with a slow swing speed normally will choose a graphite shaft to maximize the distance the ball travels, while those with a fast swing will choose steel for greater consistency. If your swing speed is moderate, test clubs of each type to determine which feels the best. The majority of modern fairway woods and drivers are sold with graphite shafts and should be chosen based on the information provided in Step 2.
Step 4
Choose the clubhead for your irons. Low-handicap players will prefer half-cavity or blade clubheads for greater consistency and control, while high-handicap players should opt for full-cavity clubs to aid in getting the ball in the air consistently. A half- or full-cavity golf clubhead has a hollowed-out area toward the back to distribute weight around the clubhead, creating a larger “sweet spot.” Blade clubheads have more weight around the face of the club.
Step 5
Test the clubs you have chosen before purchasing them. If you do not like the feel of the clubs, pick a different manufacturer with the same configuration options before changing the shaft flex, material or clubhead variant.
Read More : http://www.golfswinganalysers.com/best-golf-swing-analyzer-2016/
Pingback: How to Hit More Fairways with a Custom Golf Shaft
Rob Campbell
May 8, 2015 at 6:45 pm
Dear Mr. Wishon,
How about if I clamp the grip to a work bench with the shaft cantilevered, hang a weight (maybe 454 g) onto the head (hosel) and measure the deflection along the shaft, once with just the head, once with the added weight? A lot more time consuming than clamping a bare shaft in an expensive oscillator but way easier for us at home. A profile of the shaft bend could be drawn and different shafts could be compared without messing with the club.
I just found out I hit my cousin’s driver 30 yards further than mine. He’s got an R Fujikara and I have an A Project X. His would have way more deflection.
Could such a profile convert to yours?
Pingback: Does the golf shaft really effect your shots? | golfblogaustralia
Adrian Hubert
Mar 31, 2013 at 11:20 am
Hi,
I have some good knowledge of shafts, please can someone confirm that there is a difference between buying a shaft from say Golfsmith and having the same branded shaft from the tour. ?
Tom
Mar 11, 2013 at 5:38 pm
Great article Tom. Just wondering, how did you determine that 454 grams was the best weight to use?
tlmck
Oct 8, 2012 at 10:09 pm
lol. Just thinking of the guy who tried to sell me a C.Kua 39 R for my 92mph clubhead speed.
I can say for certainty, with only my swing as evidence, that a C.Kua 39 stiff is equivalent to a Diamana Red 44L stiff. I have the C.Kua in my identical head backup driver as the Diamana is apparently no longer made, and was nowhere to be found. It’s also nice that the C.Kua does nor require a special grip.
Nathan
Oct 2, 2012 at 3:56 am
This article looked promising untill i got to the part ( you really want to know it will cost you!!) good work
Chris
Oct 1, 2012 at 9:39 pm
When can we expect part 2?
Tom Wishon
Sep 26, 2012 at 5:25 pm
to JEFF who asked about shaft swing speed ratings for golfers with different levels of transition/tempo force in their swing.
Most definitely you are sniffing at a lot of what is going to be in Part 2 of this series. This is precisely why we teach clubmakers to do a basic 1, 2, 3 rating of each golfer’s transition force and downswing tempo to go along with their swing speed.
For example, three golfers all with a 90mph swing speed. But Golfer #1 has a very forceful transition and aggressive tempo. Golfer 2 has an average force/aggressiveness in transition/tempo and Golfer 3 has a smooth, more passive “swinger” type of transition and tempo.
For golfer 2, you can choose from shafts rated to be 85-95mph because his bending force is average for a 90mph swing. For golfer 1, you’d pick from shafts rated at 90-100 because these would be slightly stiffer shafts his swing speed is at the low end of the shaft’s rating – more stiff to better match with the fact that for his 90mph swing speed, his strong/forceful transition/tempo puts more bending force on the shaft so he needs a little stiffer shaft than what his swing speed indicates on its own.
And then finally the 90mph smooth swinger should pick from shafts with a swing speed rating of 80-90mph because he is NOT putting as much bending force on the shaft for his 90mph swing.
But you have the big basic point of shaft flex fitting down – amount of bending force is not always related to the golfer’s swing speed, but is heavily influenced by their transition and downswing tempo.
Tom Wishon
Sep 26, 2012 at 5:04 pm
To John who asked about OEM stock shaft stiffness:
There’s no nice way to say this. You can’t and won’t know how stiff an OEM stock shaft is. The OEMs do not provide any quantitative information on the stiffness/bend profile design of their stock shafts. Test hitting is the only way unless you buy the club, take it apart and then send me the shaft so I can measure it and include it in the data base of the software we created.
We’d love to include them in the data base of this software program but they will not send us their stock shafts to measure, nor will they allow their shaft mfg vendor to do that either. So the few OEM stock shafts we have in the software come from clubmakers who pull these shafts intact from stock clubs and send them to us to measure.
This again is one more good reason to be working with a GOOD, experienced clubmaker who has this software when you want to nail down what works/performs best for your swing and sense of feel.
Ian Mikutel
Apr 22, 2013 at 4:18 am
Why not use some of the $129.50 you charge for database access to purchase OEM shafts each year? It seems to me like the most valuable data for most golfers out there would be that of the OEM shafts, not super expensive, custom shafts? Unfortunate that the OEMs won’t send clubs for this testing, or just standardize this testing across all OEMs.
Pingback: GolfWRX.com – Taking the guesswork out of selecting shafts (Part 1) | Golf Products Reviews
Pingback: Light VS heaver shafts or clubs??? - Page 2 - Golf Forum - Golf Rewound is the Family Friendly Golf Forum and Discussion Group
Justin
Sep 24, 2012 at 11:36 pm
@Eric:
Yes, the more flexible the shaft, the more you can “feel”.
Davy
Mar 29, 2015 at 2:40 pm
The more ‘what’ you can feel?
The answer should be interesting.
Ryan
Sep 22, 2012 at 4:17 pm
Great write up. This definitely confirms what a lot of us already thought we knew which was every OEM even within there own shafts has no tangible way of discerning flex even within their own shafts that to me is CRAZY but soo glad Tom gave us real eveidence to prove this and I cannot wait for part 2
Davy
Mar 29, 2015 at 2:50 pm
You seem to have missed the point. Each manufacturer arbitrarily decides by their own measurement and priorities what they will market as an ‘R’ flex for example. One practice is to offer an ostensible ‘R’ flex with an ‘S’ shaft band on it to capture the vastly misinformed share of the market that believes they require a stiff shaft. But, you are correct about Tom’s authoritative expertise.
Ryan
Sep 22, 2012 at 4:14 pm
Great write up. This definitely confirms what a lot of us already thought we knew which was every OEM even within there own shafts has no tangible way of discerning flex even within their own shafts that to me is CRAZY but soo glad Tom gave us real eveidence to prove th
Jeff
Sep 21, 2012 at 8:24 pm
Terrific article. Does the data about stiffness profiles lend itself to discerning which shafts are more suitable based on an individual’s loading characteristics at a given swing speed? Does this matter? Looking forward to reading your next article.
Eric
Sep 21, 2012 at 5:17 pm
Tom:
I play hickory clubs with a group. One thing I’ve noticed is one can truly feel the weight of the club, and I believe that significantly affects how the club is swung – particularly as you begin the forwardswing, and your subconscious changes the path of the swing.
As a result, I wonder if the whippier shafts improve feel of the clubhead – OR – is there a way to get great clubhead feel without giving up the control of a stiffer shaft?
Mark
Sep 21, 2012 at 3:06 pm
Thanks Tom.
As always, a well thought out and informative article. I’ll be getting the software, and look forward to part 2.
ACGOLFWRX
Sep 21, 2012 at 8:42 am
Excellent information for the masses, well written and above all, very informative.
John
Sep 21, 2012 at 6:16 am
Very well written Tom – thanks. The only problem remains, how do I know what level of stiffness I should be purchasing through the OEM’s at retail stores? Hope that’s covered in Part II.
Al
Oct 16, 2012 at 11:47 pm
Not speaking for Tom by any means, but his philosophy is that, rather than relying on the OEM’s, you should be custom fitted for your clubs rather than buying off the shelf.
Davy
Mar 29, 2015 at 2:54 pm
Well, you might try hitting before buying. Would you buy shoes without trying them on?
Matt
Sep 20, 2012 at 10:50 pm
As an engineer I am fascinated by this and am always on the search for the right fit as a scratch golfer, to maximize my game. This is revolutionary stuff. Thanks!
Davy
Mar 29, 2015 at 3:18 pm
It probably seems revolutionary, but Tom has been doing this since back in the 1980s when he was at Dynacraft and wrote his first Complete Guide to Golf Shaft Fitting. While there are no generalities, many tour players over the years have opted for heavier dynamic and static weighting with flatter lie angles than off the shelf mass-produced clubs. As an engineer, you probably enjoyed reading Homer Kelley’s The Golfing Machine. Bob Tway, Bobby Clampett, and a litany of others found it interesting all the way to their demise in a vortex of paralysis by analysis. But, it is interesting and has one salient bit of advice you can look up at 6B-1D in the book.
Bill B
Sep 20, 2012 at 8:54 pm
Tom,
Without a doubt this is the best information on shafts I have seen in one place. You have created my dream of the “golf shaft genome project”. The golf shaft is the heart of the club and you are making quantative information available that provides options to professional fitters and club junkies alike. We have all made our own personal golf shaft assments on various shafts via real life play, launch monitor results, and feel, but this speeds up the process and opens the door to choices across various manufactures.
Thanks and keep up the good work
Bill Baitinger
Mike D.
Sep 20, 2012 at 12:50 pm
Thanks for the write-up Tom. Verifies what I’ve thought about shaft manufacturing. Can’t wait to see part two!
Chris
Sep 20, 2012 at 12:35 pm
This is absolutely fantastic information. Many thanks!.