Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

The Wedge Guy: A discussion of swingweight (Part 1: History)

Published

on

Image via Golfworks

For the twenty-five plus years, I’ve been in the equipment business, one of the most commonly-asked-about subjects is that of swingweight. It mostly comes up when a golfer is requesting over-length clubs or is contemplating changing to graphite shafts. So, I’m going to direct a discussion of this topic. Please chime in to let me know your thoughts and input.

The concept of swingweight was developed by custom clubmaker Kenneth Smith about 60 years ago. He was trying to figure out how to “match” clubs, and settled on balance point as a way to do so. His swingweight scale had a “hook” to hold the grip end of the club, and a fulcrum 14 inches from the butt. He created an arbitrary scale of measure that consisted of letters A-F, each letter divided into ten segments, i.e. D1, D2, D3, etc. When he measured the clubs of the day, he found most of them to be in the D2 range, so that became recognized as the “standard” for men’s woods and irons.

The golf club industry quickly adopted this method of “matching” clubs…well, because they had no other way! Because the longer the shaft, the heavier the head feels, clubheads increase in weight as the shaft gets shorter, so that the swingweight will stay the same. The theory then, and now, is that if the swingweight is the same, the clubs will feel essentially the same in the golfer’s hands.

But let’s look at what has happened since Kenneth Smith invented the swingweight scale.

  • Shafts have gotten longer by at least an inch. In the 1940s, a “standard” driver was only 42-43” long – now most are 45” if not more.
  • Shafts have gotten much lighter. Those old steel shafts weighed 150 grams or more, compared to modern graphite driver shafts in the 55-75 gram range.
  • Golfers have gotten stronger while clubs have gotten much lighter overall, but swingweights have always adhered to that D2 “standard.”

You must understand two very important factors about swingweight.

First, a “point” of swingweight–such as D2 to D3–is NOT a unit of measure like an ounce or gram. It takes much less weight to shift a driver one point, for example, than it does a wedge, because the shaft length is such an influence on this measure. Generally, the weight of a single dollar bill is a swingweight point on a driver—not much, huh?

And secondly, the overall weight of the club is at least as important as swingweight. Jack Nicklaus was noted for playing a driver in his prime that was 13.25 oz in overall weight–very heavy even for that time (most are about 10.5 oz now!), while his swingweight was only C9, considered very light. S

Swingweight by itself is a rather worthless piece of information!

So, that should get this discussion going. I’ll give you a few days to toss out your questions and comments on this subject, and then I’ll begin to address my own theories on swingweight for YOUR clubs.

Sound off, readers!

Your Reaction?
  • 90
  • LEGIT19
  • WOW5
  • LOL0
  • IDHT1
  • FLOP3
  • OB1
  • SHANK5

Terry Koehler is a fourth generation Texan and a graduate of Texas A&M University. Over his 40-year career in the golf industry, he has created over 100 putter designs, sets of irons and drivers, and in 2014, he put together the team that reintroduced the Ben Hogan brand to the golf equipment industry. Since the early 2000s, Terry has been a prolific writer, sharing his knowledge as “The Wedge Guy”.   But his most compelling work is in the wedge category. Since he first patented his “Koehler Sole” in the early 1990s, he has been challenging “conventional wisdom” reflected in ‘tour design’ wedges. The performance of his wedge designs have stimulated other companies to move slightly more mass toward the top of the blade in their wedges, but none approach the dramatic design of his Edison Forged wedges, which have been robotically proven to significantly raise the bar for wedge performance. Terry serves as Chairman and Director of Innovation for Edison Golf – check it out at www.EdisonWedges.com.

14 Comments

14 Comments

  1. Stuart

    Oct 29, 2023 at 5:24 am

    Based on what I’ve read – Kenneth Smith did not design the swing weight scale. The scale was originally designed by R.W. Adams, who got the patent in 1934. As I understand it, Kennith Smith bought the rights to use Adam’s invention in 1945 and started producing them with both 14″ and 12″ fulcrum points.

    Also, they certainly did have ways to match the clubs before the scale – but the calculations were tedious. Adam’s wanted to find an easier way.

  2. Bob Pegram

    Jul 13, 2020 at 5:00 am

    The reason Nicklaus’ clubs were heavy, but with a light swing weight is that they were backweighted which simultaneously makes the clubs heavier, but reduces the swing weight.
    My clubs are MOI weighted. The irons are 1-1/2 inches overlength and have graphite X shafts to keep the swing weight down. Also, 2 inches longer length is a whole flex difference. In other words they flex only a little stiffer than S flex. The cheating way to do MOI matching is to make each higher numbered club 0.65 swing weight higher for each 1/2 inch shorter it is (or 1.3 swing weights heaver per 1 inch shorter). They are easier to hit consistently with MOI weighting.

    • Bob Pegram

      Jul 13, 2020 at 5:04 am

      Forgot to mention: All of my wedges (PW, 54, 60) are the same length (37 inches), but each one gets heaver by approximately 0.65 swing weight. The Lob is a little heavier than that. All have the same graphite shafts as the other irons.

  3. Grey

    Jul 10, 2020 at 1:01 am

    I’ve just received my custom built wedges. TM MG2 52, 56, 60 all .5” over standard. The swing weights are coming in at D10, E0, E1. I notice pretty small changes in the feel of equipment. I feel like I’m swinging a garden hoe. Shafts are Nippon Modus 120 S. Is there something about the balance or kickpoint making the swingweight so high? I’ve always thought .5” adds 3 SW points.

    • joro

      Jul 10, 2020 at 11:56 am

      The sad part is that the big club companies do not care. They take a head and shaft and put it together with a grip and call it a custom. I bought a couple of Vokey Wedges and specified what I wanted. The Two Wedges came and they were two different models and not even close to what I had ordered. I had to rebuild them myself to get them right.

  4. BD

    Jul 8, 2020 at 3:30 pm

    I laugh when people are so concerned about swingweight. I can make a telephone pole D2 if I wanted to.

  5. Regardt van Rooyen

    Jul 8, 2020 at 2:28 pm

    100% agree with William Terry. My clubs have been MOI’d for over 10 years now. It’s all about feel weight and not swing weight. Like you’ve explained, you can have a VERY heavy golf club but have a light swingweight.

    A simple way to MOI your irons without a Swing Weight machine is to build your 7i light and go through a specific swing weight test. Keep adding weight until you find your desired feel. Measure that 7i, let’s say it comes out at D2 then follow the next clubs up and down with a half a swing weight, for example:

    3i – D0
    4i – D0.5
    5i – D1
    6i – D1.5
    7i – D2
    8i – D2.5
    9i – D3
    PW – D3.5

    This will get you VERY close to the same MOI (feel kr how much force it takes to move your club) in your irons

    • Regardt van Rooyen

      Jul 8, 2020 at 2:31 pm

      Correction, “to MOI your irons without a MOI Machine”

  6. William Terry

    Jul 8, 2020 at 12:02 pm

    Do you think people would be better off matching MOI instead of swing weight?

    • Hurley

      Jul 8, 2020 at 4:59 pm

      Yes – to a degree – but the important thing is to get a baseline. And that takes trial and error to find that starting point. I’ve noticed for me and many others, there’s definitely a small range where things feel good. Way above or below this, and it’s no good. So you have to MOI a test club then break out the lead tape and get to work.

      Other thing to note is MOI matching really shouldn’t be for an entire bag – same as SW. You should generally break it down to woods, irons, and wedges – and most will prefer woods and wedges higher than irons. Also, here’s another consideration, courtesy of @howard_jones – even though SW isn’t a unit of measure, it can still come in handy. Let’s say there’s a test club built – a 9i – and we get an MOI measurement. Now we take that same 9i and take the SW value on it. Now you have baseline SW and MOI. Think of these as the two “extremes” and the rest of the set may fall somewhere in between. If you SW match a 4i, the MOI will be very different than the MOI matched value. The individual can hit both and see how they each feel, or do the same thing as the test club – break out the lead tape and build it up until it feels right. At the end, you’ll find some people may perform better with MOI match (progressive SW), some with SW match (progressive MOI), and some will fall somewhere in between. It’s crucial to get the measurements of a short and long test club and then draw the slope to find out where the rest of them may fall.

      The advantage of MOI over SW is 1) it’s a measurement and 2) it’s transferable across clubs. SW is not – it’s only valid when the components are all the same (heads, shafts, ferrules, grips, etc). So if you get a new set of irons, you CAN say, “my MOI is 2800” and have them built to that and unless head or shaft weights are WAY different, they’ll feel the same. What you CAN’T do is say “I want them at D3” and expect them to be the same. For this reason alone, MOI is way more valuable.

      All in all, in club building there is no shortcut. I think length and total weight are most important. It’s a combination of art and science to get it right.

      • drkviol801

        Jul 9, 2020 at 8:10 am

        You guys have no idea what you’re talking about. If you don’t play for a living your opinion is meaningless.

        • 51TJesx

          Jul 9, 2020 at 1:50 pm

          Dumbest comment on here in awhile. Newsflash – pros get paid to play and don’t work on their clubs. That’s why they have tour vans and those guys are paid to build clubs, not paid to play.

          Go try to refute a single thing that was stated – you can’t.

          You likely don’t get paid much for anything.

        • joro

          Jul 10, 2020 at 10:45 am

          Let me tell you that the “ones that play for a living” aren’t that aware, and that is why they have a club maker in the Tour Dept. to do it for them. I made a lot of clubs for Tour Pros and most had no clue, it mot have felt right but they did not know how to correct. Leave it to the pro club makers who know what to do.

          Like one poster said, yoo can lighten a telephone pole to the B range or make a Graphite shaft into the F range by where you put the weight, that is simple and also applies to the completed club… There is a danger to all that though, one is length if you cut or extend the shaft, and the other can by overall weight. So I say, if there is a problem look up a competent club maker and not a person who plays for a living. They know their specs and so does the guy that makes their clubs.

      • Ted Noel

        Jul 11, 2020 at 5:11 pm

        I agree that MOI is a great improvement over SW. I build clubs (hobbyist) and if I MOI match clubs, they will work well as a set. Note that MOI integrates weight distribution, elements of flex, and more. It’s a dynamic measurement that approximates how clubs feel in the hand.

        Of key importance, MOI measured from the butt cap is not what you feel MOI measured from 3 1/2- 4 1/2 inches down from the butt cap is much better, and if done properly, works from Drivers through wedges. Unfortunately, the only available MOI machine is set up to measure from the butt cap only, so masking tape kluges come into play.

        Perfect MOI matching is one reason that equal length irons play better for many people. (A single swing is the other, but that’s a different discussion.)

Leave a Reply

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s 2024 Zurich Classic of New Orleans betting preview

Published

on

The PGA TOUR heads to New Orleans to play the 2023 Zurich Classic of New Orleans. In a welcome change from the usual stroke play, the Zurich Classic is a team event. On Thursday and Saturday, the teams play best ball, and on Friday and Sunday the teams play alternate shot.

TPC Louisiana is a par 72 that measures 7,425 yards. The course features some short par 4s and plenty of water and bunkers, which makes for a lot of exciting risk/reward scenarios for competitors. Pete Dye designed the course in 2004 specifically for the Zurich Classic, although the event didn’t make its debut until 2007 because of Hurricane Katrina.

Coming off of the Masters and a signature event in consecutive weeks, the field this week is a step down, and understandably so. Many of the world’s top players will be using this time to rest after a busy stretch.

However, there are some interesting teams this season with some stars making surprise appearances in the team event. Some notable teams include Patrick Cantlay and Xander Schauffele, Rory McIlroy and Shane Lowry, Collin Morikawa and Kurt Kitayama, Will Zalatoris and Sahith Theegala as well as a few Canadian teams, Nick Taylor and Adam Hadwin and Taylor Pendrith and Corey Conners.

Past Winners at TPC Louisiana

  • 2023: Riley/Hardy (-30)
  • 2022: Cantlay/Schauffele (-29)
  • 2021: Leishman/Smith (-20)
  • 2019: Palmer/Rahm (-26)
  • 2018: Horschel/Piercy (-22)
  • 2017: Blixt/Smith (-27)

2024 Zurich Classic of New Orleans Picks

Tom Hoge/Maverick McNealy +2500 (DraftKings)

Tom Hoge is coming off of a solid T18 finish at the RBC Heritage and finished T13 at last year’s Zurich Classic alongside Harris English.

This season, Hoge is having one of his best years on Tour in terms of Strokes Gained: Approach. In his last 24 rounds, the only player to top him on the category is Scottie Scheffler. Hoge has been solid on Pete Dye designs, ranking 28th in the field over his past 36 rounds.

McNealy is also having a solid season. He’s finished T6 at the Waste Management Phoenix Open and T9 at the PLAYERS Championship. He recently started working with world renowned swing coach, Butch Harmon, and its seemingly paid dividends in 2024.

Keith Mitchell/Joel Dahmen +4000 (DraftKings)

Keith Mitchell is having a fantastic season, finishing in the top-20 of five of his past seven starts on Tour. Most recently, Mitchell finished T14 at the Valero Texas Open and gained a whopping 6.0 strokes off the tee. He finished 6th at last year’s Zurich Classic.

Joel Dahmen is having a resurgent year and has been dialed in with his irons. He also has a T11 finish at the PLAYERS Championship at TPC Sawgrass which is another Pete Dye track. With Mitchell’s length and Dahmen’s ability to put it close with his short irons, the Mitchell/Dahmen combination will be dangerous this week.

Taylor Moore/Matt NeSmith +6500 (DraftKings)

Taylor Moore has quickly developed into one of the more consistent players on Tour. He’s finished in the top-20 in three of his past four starts, including a very impressive showing at The Masters, finishing T20. He’s also finished T4 at this event in consecutive seasons alongside Matt NeSmith.

NeSmith isn’t having a great 2024, but has seemed to elevate his game in this format. He finished T26 at Pete Dye’s TPC Sawgrass, which gives the 30-year-old something to build off of. NeSmith is also a great putter on Bermudagrass, which could help elevate Moore’s ball striking prowess.

Your Reaction?
  • 8
  • LEGIT3
  • WOW1
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP3
  • OB1
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s 2024 LIV Adelaide betting preview: Cam Smith ready for big week down under

Published

on

After having four of the top twelve players on the leaderboard at The Masters, LIV Golf is set for their fifth event of the season: LIV Adelaide. 

For both LIV fans and golf fans in Australia, LIV Adelaide is one of the most anticipated events of the year. With 35,000 people expected to attend each day of the tournament, the Grange Golf Club will be crawling with fans who are passionate about the sport of golf. The 12th hole, better known as “the watering hole”, is sure to have the rowdiest of the fans cheering after a long day of drinking some Leishman Lager.  

The Grange Golf Club is a par-72 that measures 6,946 yards. The course features minimal resistance, as golfers went extremely low last season. In 2023, Talor Gooch shot consecutive rounds of 62 on Thursday and Friday, giving himself a gigantic cushion heading into championship Sunday. Things got tight for a while, but in the end, the Oklahoma State product was able to hold off The Crushers’ Anirban Lahiri for a three-shot victory. 

The Four Aces won the team competition with the Range Goats finishing second. 

*All Images Courtesy of LIV Golf*

Past Winners at LIV Adelaide

  • 2023: Talor Gooch (-19)

Stat Leaders Through LIV Miami

Green in Regulation

  1. Richard Bland
  2. Jon Rahm
  3. Paul Casey

Fairways Hit

  1. Abraham Ancer
  2. Graeme McDowell
  3. Henrik Stenson

Driving Distance

  1. Bryson DeChambeau
  2. Joaquin Niemann
  3. Dean Burmester

Putting

  1. Cameron Smith
  2. Louis Oosthuizen
  3. Matt Jones

2024 LIV Adelaide Picks

Cameron Smith +1400 (DraftKings)

When I pulled up the odds for LIV Adelaide, I was more than a little surprised to see multiple golfers listed ahead of Cameron Smith on the betting board. A few starts ago, Cam finished runner-up at LIV Hong Kong, which is a golf course that absolutely suits his eye. Augusta National in another course that Smith could roll out of bed and finish in the top-ten at, and he did so two weeks ago at The Masters, finishing T6.

At Augusta, he gained strokes on the field on approach, off the tee (slightly), and of course, around the green and putting. Smith able to get in the mix at a major championship despite coming into the week feeling under the weather tells me that his game is once again rounding into form.

The Grange Golf Club is another course that undoubtedly suits the Australian. Smith is obviously incredibly comfortable playing in front of the Aussie faithful and has won three Australian PGA Championship’s. The course is very short and will allow Smith to play conservative off the tee, mitigating his most glaring weakness. With birdies available all over the golf course, there’s a chance the event turns into a putting contest, and there’s no one on the planet I’d rather have in one of those than Cam Smith.

Louis Oosthuizen +2200 (DraftKings)

Louis Oosthuizen has simply been one of the best players on LIV in the 2024 seas0n. The South African has finished in the top-10 on the LIV leaderboard in three of his five starts, with his best coming in Jeddah, where he finished T2. Perhaps more impressively, Oosthuizen finished T7 at LIV Miami, which took place at Doral’s “Blue Monster”, an absolutely massive golf course. Given that Louis is on the shorter side in terms of distance off the tee, his ability to play well in Miami shows how dialed he is with the irons this season.

In addition to the LIV finishes, Oosthuizen won back-to-back starts on the DP World Tour in December at the Alfred Dunhill Championship and the Mauritus Open. He also finished runner-up at the end of February in the International Series Oman. The 41-year-old has been one of the most consistent performers of 2024, regardless of tour.

For the season, Louis ranks 4th on LIV in birdies made, T9 in fairways hit and first in putting. He ranks 32nd in driving distance, but that won’t be an issue at this short course. Last season, he finished T11 at the event, but was in decent position going into the final round but fell back after shooting 70 while the rest of the field went low. This season, Oosthuizen comes into the event in peak form, and the course should be a perfect fit for his smooth swing and hot putter this week.

Your Reaction?
  • 12
  • LEGIT3
  • WOW1
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB1
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

The Wedge Guy: What really makes a wedge work? Part 1

Published

on

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.

Your Reaction?
  • 32
  • LEGIT7
  • WOW1
  • LOL1
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP3
  • OB1
  • SHANK3

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending