Jump to content

Dave Tutelman

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Dave Tutelman's Achievements



  1. OK, so there's a tendency for golfers looking at swings to focus on minutiae, to not see the forest for the trees. Here is Sasho MacKenzie's most recent research, which is just about as simple as it can be in terms of what a golfer has to do to maximize clubhead speed. (https://www.golfsciencejournal.org/article/12640-how-amateur-golfers-deliver-energy-to-the-driver) BTW, when I said "simple", I didn't mean you don't have to know physics or math. It is a very simple explanation in terms of the physics needed. The message from the study is that the most effective way to get clubhead speed is to maximize the work done along the hand path. In physical terms, work means force in the direction of motion. So it is the component of the force (not torque couple) the hands apply to the club in the direction of the hand path, integrated over the hand path from transition through impact. If you are familiar with physics and math, this is a very simple statement of what you have to do. If not, let me suggest a similar goal that will probably be the same in practice. (If Sasho is on this forum, I'll be glad to defer to him as to whether this is accurate.) During the downswing, move the hands along the hand path as fast as possible. Not the release of the clubhead nor any slap at the ball; torque applied to the grip during the downswing is pretty ineffective in producing clubhead speed. If you are doing this and want even more clubhead speed, you might try a longer hand path (bigger turn). That works better than trying for more wrist cock, according to Dr Sasho. I have said nothing about what the hips, the feet, the glutes, the trail pinkie need to do to make this happen. That is technique, which may be different for different golfers, or starting from a different swing. But the goal is clear: accelerate the hands to the maximum possible speed all through the downswing.
  2. What tony said, and use an old toothbrush to scrub it, in case it's caked in the grooves.
  3. As others have said, that design seems to have more than one manufacturer. I own a Wilson Black Jack putter with the same shape, probably the same insert, but different markings. A single sight line on the body, but not the three above the face. Brand and model ID on the sole. You can see what it looks like because there is currently one like it for sale on eBay at https://www.ebay.com/itm/133754903842?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-117182-37290-0&mkcid=2&itemid=133754903842&targetid=1328894427317&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=9003692&poi=&campaignid=11211718007&mkgroupid=122765038032&rlsatarget=pla-1328894427317&abcId=9300435&merchantid=6296724&gclid=Cj0KCQjwl_SHBhCQARIsAFIFRVXaSAaZ7lIDamkASaPEQqXf5FDyAD2tOhsJe55mBGeO4hIdphvwzqMaAuCFEALw_wcB
  4. I'm just agreeing with everybody else here. There is a wealth of data from manufacturers of clubs and balls supporting the notion that more than half of what we perceive as the feel of impact is really the sound of impact. The companies knew this from actual research, good experiments that verified this every time, starting before the 1990s (which was when I became aware of it. Here's a little supporting (but unscientific) anecdote. The best golfer in my group needs a hearing aid. We were playing a few years ago, and he was playing his usual solid game until late in the front nine. Then his game completely fell apart, and stayed bad until the end. I asked him afterwards what had happened. Seems the batteries were running low in his hearing aid. It was behaving disturbingly, so he turned it off. Then, "All of a sudden, I had no feel at all. I couldn't play because I was getting no feel feedback."
  5. Two things made the arm-lock putter popular recently, but the concept has been around for quite a while. The USGA/R&A banned anchoring, but bracing against a forearm was still legal. Matt Kuchar adopted it. As early as 2002, I built myself an arm-lock putter. It didn't go nearly as high on the arm as a modern ones, but it shared a lot of characteristics with them. At the time, it didn't stay in my bag. But I made the switch for good about 7 years ago. I built myself a few variants of the modern arm-lock, and still use the one I found best at the time Here is what I would expect you to find, at least based on my experience. Good news: your line is likely to be better than before. More good news: if you have any tendency to the yips, this is likely to ward them off. I developed the yips in my early 70s. Tried a lot of things, with varying degrees of success. The arm-lock was the most successful. Not-so-good news: You will have to recalibrate your distance, especially if you were a "feel" putter. You may find it hard to dial in your distance feel. Stick with it; you will probably get there. It just may take some time. Hope this helps.
  6. There is both evidence (actual measured experiments) and analysis saying that higher on the face will give more distance -- until you get so high that you are losing COR from the face flex. Because of vertical gear effect, higher on the face subtracts some from the backspin, so lower backspin. Because of face roll (vertical curvature of the clubface of a driver), higher on the clubface gives higher launch. I have done quite a bit of work quantifying this. You can see the short form of both the experiments (not mine, but published) and my mathematical model which agrees with the experiments at <https://tutelman.com/golf/ballflight/gearEffect2.php#validation>. On later pages of my article, I cover how face roll figures in. Turns out the optimum face roll makes the distance fall off less than a flat face would, as impact gets farther from the sweet spot. BTW, the sweet spot is not the center of the face; it is higher than that to get higher launch and lower spin. I agree with blackngold_blood that this assumes a driver fit roughly to the golfer's clubhead speed and angle of attack. If mismatched, reduced spin could lose distance for you. I have a case study on that at <https://tutelman.com/golf/clubs/centerOfGravity3.php>.
  7. Grew up in the Bronx. I know only these courses, and only from the last half of the 1950s and early '60s. From that point of view... Yes, Split Rock is probably the cream of the crop. (Ferry Point was only a park, an open space for a city kid to run around on grass; the golf course wasn't even a gleam in anybody's eye yet.) I played Pelham more than Split Rock. It's an OK course, but no better than OK. (Gotta admit, I'm spoiled now. I live in a county where the County Parks Dept has 8 courses, and I'd rate 4 of them outstanding.) I played Mosholu a lot -- which I don't see on the list. Does it still exist? I could get there after school on the Jerome Ave subway, and my high school locker was big enough for a bag of clubs. I'd take the subway up there and get on the list. It was first come, first served; no tee times. I'd do homework for the 60-90 minutes before my name was called. Typically finished around dark, and took the subway home. At the time, Mosholu was a fairly short 18-hole course. Last time I looked, it was 9 holes and they hosted the NY First Tee Program. I had one opportunity to play Clearview, in the early '60s. I agree completely with your assessment. Thanks for the trip down memory lane.
  8. My bag is somewhat similar. I have been losing distance since I turned 65 (I turn 80 in about a month). More recently, my strength and motor coordination are slowly becoming compromised. I have been fitting and building clubs since the 1980s, so it is likely you won't recognize the non-OEM names of my components. Driver - 12° Disukaba, Project X Hybrids - 16, 19, 22 degree Dynacraft HyperSteel, SK Fiber TT-100 Irons - 5-9 and PW, GW Pinhawk Single Length, Hireko house brand shaft SW - 54° PinPoint, house brand shaft LW - 60° Titleist Vokey SpinMill, bought at yard sale and modified to fit me Putter - ProSwing Hyper 3-ball, steel 3-bend arm-lock shaft With several of these (Driver & hybrids especially), I went back to these older components because I hit them better and/or more consistently. I also own what I consider the best 3-wood ever (Hireko Acer XS Titanium, which is very innovative, with a SK Fiber TT-80 shaft). My good shots with this 3w go slightly farther than the 16° hybrid, but my average distance is less because I am so much more consistent with the hybrid.
  9. The best 3-wood I've ever used for both distance and ease of getting up in the air is the Acer XS Titanium 3-wood. There are several things about this head design that make it so. I think Hireko stopped making them around 2015. If you can still find one, consider it. If it's the wrong shaft flex, it's not hard to re-shaft. That said, I no longer have it in my bag. Instead, I have a 16° hybrid. My good shots go almost as far as that 3-wood, and a noticeably larger percentage of my shots are good. Easier to get up in the air, too. So consider a low-loft hybrid instead of a 3-wood.
  10. That has been my experience as well. I went with single-lengths to try out the concept when I was doing a study in 2016. They are still in my bag. WaffleHouseTour's observations are the same as mine. BTW, one reason (but not the only one) I like the one length wedges is that my tired, old back likes them. (Tired? L5-S1 requiring PhysTherapy. Old? I'll be 80 next month.) I don't have to bend over nearly as much to hit them.
  11. Thanks for the heads-up. Interesting device. I have never used one, but from the videos I'm pretty sure I know what it is. I have been involved in the development of several training aids, so I think I know what's going on. What it is: There is a 6DOF inertial sensor in the "watch" on your wrist, along with some sort of electrode or, more likely, vibrator (piezoelectric transducer would be my guess). There is a two-way wireless link (probably Bluetooth, but maybe WiFi or some other wireless technology) to an app in your smart phone. The app does the math of inertial navigation to tell where the device is -- both position and attitude -- throughout the swing. The app has a GUI to set up the mode and to report results. (Note: "attitude" is navigation-speak for "the direction where it is pointing".) What it can do: Everything in the videos (swing plane, length of backswing, transition, tempo) all seem well within the reach of the technology. It is less ambitious than some other products (e.g.- SkyPro or SwingByte) in that regard. It can measure and report anything that depends on the position and attitude of the forearm just above the wrist joint. That includes pronation/supination, but not flexion/extension nor radial/ulnar deviation. That brings us to... What it can't do: I just cited flexion/extension and radial/ulnar as things it can't do. That would take something like Hackmotion to tease out those wrist motions. It also doesn't know where the club itself is pointing. So it would not be able to diagnose casting, track lag or clubhead speed and direction, detect ungrip/regrip at the top, or anything else that the club does outboard of the forearm. It would be nice if someone technical from DeWiz could tell us their story instead of my having to play Sherlock Holmes. But please, someone technical, prepared to talk technical! Not a glorified sales pitch, which is what the videos are.
  12. I have some agreement and some disagreement. Agreement: "What he said." What Middler said is spot-on! Agreement: "The difference in feel, if any, is a product of the design of the club head, not whether it is forged or cast." Mostly agree. It's hard -- and expensive -- to forge a deep-cavity clubhead, so you don't see many forged clubs with thin clubfaces. There have been experiments proving that feel comes with the design, not the forming process. Where I disagree is that the softer and perhaps denser metallurgy of a forged head probably makes a different sound from a typical cast head. It has been repeatedly determined with controlled experiments that about half of what we sense as "feel" is really sound. Disagreement: "The higher the swing speed, the more relative increase in ball speed with a thin faced iron." The higher the swing speed, the higher the absolute ball speed increase -- that is, the difference in yards. But the relative ball speed increase -- the difference in percent -- is just about the same. In fact, I have seen at least one analysis that shows the low-speed golfer to have ever so slightly more percent increase from a thin face.
  13. Be careful how you go about this. A negative AoA with a driver often (usually?) results in a low launch angle. Launch angle and spin are closely related in what they do to distance. Yeah, I know the folklore that says: "Lower spin and higher launch for more distance." Well, a key word there is AND! If you have a low launch and you reduce spin without increasing the launch, you will LOSE distance, not gain. You have to do both to increase distance -- really, even just preserve distance. Think of it this way. Launch angle give the ball a higher flight initially. This will keep it in the air longer. Spin keeps the ball in the air longer, because of aerodynamic lift. There is an ideal balance between launch angle and spin. For a given ball speed and launch angle, there is an ideal spin. For a given ball speed and spin, there is an ideal launch angle. Why is speed involved? Because lift varies as the square of speed, so it has to be part of the equation. What that says is that, if you have a low launch angle, the first thing you need to do is raise the launch angle, not reduce the spin. If you can get a higher launch angle, then too much spin will cause ballooning and reduce distance. But if you have too low a launch angle, you need the spin to keep the ball in the air. If you're interested in a more rigorous treatment of this, I have written an article which resides on my web site.
  14. I thought about this a lot after I decided to give the Tee It Forward program a try. At my then age of 77, I had lost a lot of distance. With my drive down from 250yd in my early 60s to 190yd now, the course the TIF program's table recommended for me was 5100yd, not the 6400yd I used to be comfortable with. Relevant to this discussion, one of the big differences was the re-emergence of options. I used to have to think about my tee shot. But trying to play the middle tees with my reduced distance meant there was no thinking involved; just grab the driver, grip it 'n' rip it! From my TIF tees at 5100yd or so, I'm back to thinking about options. The course I played yesterday (Shark River in my home county of Monmouth, NJ) is no longer a driver-only course; in fact, I only bought out the driver seven times the whole round. I wrote an article about it. Even have a section showing how TIF brings back the options and forces you to think about it. Here's a link to the section showing selected holes and how they relate to options you have to think about with TIF. <https://tutelman.com/golf/justgolf/teeItForward.php#Case_studies>
  15. I think jlukes and bens197 are very much on the right track. A couple of points I'd like to add: Nobody has mentioned gear effect here. It actually makes a lot of difference. A high CG not only lowers the trajectory, it significantly increases the spin. Moving the CG up also moves it back, especially with wedges which have high lofts. That increases the gear effect, both vertical and horizontal. Increasing vertical gear effect increases backspin. A minor nit to pick with Manavs's post. He writes, "the further [back] the cg is , the more it's going to add loft via shaft deflection coming through impact, negating any static higher cg advantages of the head." But then he also writes, "The best, or truest way to elevate cg, is to keep it in line with the shaft by lengthening the hosel. The dilemma there of course is you move the cg towards the heel." There is a bigger dilemma than heelward movement. If weight is moving up the hosel, it is not moving backward. So it won't have any effect on the loft -- nor, for that matter, on the gear effect spin. The reason this is only a minor nit is no club manufacturer moves the CG higher in via weight in the hosel. It is all done with weight in the blade itself.
  • Create New...