jaskanski

Other than the well documented list of fellow professionals and swing coaches that have gone on record to state that Schefflers swing is 'unique' and probably shouldn't be tried by anyone else or it wold probably result in injury? None, but I have eyes, ears and an opinion just like anyone else. If he proves me wrong - great. When you get your accredited teaching credentials and your doctors degree, let me know - my years of golf are really taking their toll...

Titleist AVX

Scottie is indeed a class act and a formidable competitor any time he tees it up - you can pretty much guarantee he's going to be the favourite going into to any tournament (as did Tiger back in the day when he was 100% fit). For me that is the biggest issue - 100% fitness. Mentally, that isn't in question (at present) - physically though, that swing is going to take it's toll on his body eventually - and that's what the biggest obstacle to multiple wins/majors/holding on to #1 status will be IMO. Out of the rest of the field for ranking versus events played, Auberg takes some beating and will possibly surpass expectations in due course with current form - possible future #1?

Once you start removing elements from a shaft, they are essentially irreversable - so consider the overall specification first. Tipping 1/4" isn't going to make a huge difference, but cutting the butt and then adding weight to the head to restore swingweight is. You will essentially be making the shaft weaker to original flex, because (a) you have removed a larger portion of the stiffest part of the shaft (ie the butt) and (b) you have added weight to the head to make it frequency lower. A better option would be to simply grip the club 3/4" lower down first to see what the results are before considering any drastic action on the shaft itself.

scallop and salmon terrine omelette arnold bennett selection of cheese and biscuits Chablis 1er Cru to wash it down

A lot out there, but for pure nostalgia and the longest time spent with any shaft - period - Dynamic Gold.

...I should also add - the eyeball shows the here and now - the Trackman explains the why...

If you can use your gamer ball for your fitting numbers, then so much the better. You'll be comparing apples to apples with your overall specs. If you have the luxury of Trackman and an outdoor fitting so you can visually see what's going on downrange - win/win. The mk1 eyeball still cuts through the BS on just about everything.

Generally speeaking about most of Mitsubishi's product line, 'blue' shafts are the mid launch/mid spin offering, whereas the 'white' line of shafts are the stiffer lower launch and spin variant. Some of the whites can be very stiff, so if you're looking for a higher launch shaft, then look elsewhere. Typical swing chatacteristic for whites is a stronger player with a late release looking to get launch and spin down.

Picked up a set of used MP18 MMC's for a bargain, so will probably put them in play next week and retire the aging set of JPX Tours. Fli Hi 4 and 5 iron was a bonus too, so may also look into switching out one of the hybrids.

I think TT don't publish that data anymore. It used to be relevant in the old days when shafts were fitted with bands to show the flex post install (without the need to remove the grip to read the butt code), but now that most of their shaft range is screen printed to heck, it's fairly easy to determine what shaft it is. You may be able to wite to TT directly to see if they'll share any detailed shafts specs, but I wouldn't get your hopes up.

Adidas have several

Well, that's a case of two sides. Build quality is a given. There isn't a significany delta on how shafts are constructed nowadays regardless of core materials. What there is a significant delta on is the actual materials. A high 'quality' shaft will typically have the superior fibre in terms of fibre specification and bonding content. An expensive shaft will have a certain amount of specified fibre ply to pre-preg content in how it is constucted in comparison to a lower value shaft, purely because one has a higher content of fibre ply specification (the expensive raw material) than the lower value version which has (arguably) a lower mass content of the same fibre raw material per gram per mm. Does this mean the lower value shaft is any inferior in terms of construction and quality? Absolutely not. It just means the more expensive shaft has more grams per mm in it's build constuction than it's conterpart. Can you tell the differnce in terms of playability and performance? That's the decision of the end user - some say yes, there's a distinct defined difference, others may say there is minimal or insignificant difference to justify the price difference. Long story short, the fibre ply that OEM's go to great lengths to design, develop and produce is the lions share of any shaft unit cost. The 'glue' that binds it all together to make a shaft is the least expensive part. How that ratio of fibre to glue works out will have a bearing on how much that shaft will cost. But saying one is a higher 'quality' than the other because of it's raw marerial content is somewhat mis-leading. Neither is of inferior quality - it's just one has more of the expensive raw material than the other in it's final build ratio.

Quality used to be an issue between 'real deal' aftermarket shafts and 'made for' OEM offerings, but this is less of a gap these days. Most shafts have an overall QC that is prettty much night and day to what it used to be. Which is good for anyone who thinks they are buying into 'quality' for a ridiculous price.

Grew up playing a glove, watched my heroes playing a glove - so yes, I wear a glove. It works for me - and I don't wear for putting or delicate pitch/chip 'feel' shots - but it makes for a solid grip on most shots which is key. Taylormade Tour Preferred is current glove of choice - I've yet to find anything better since the demise of the Titlesit players.

Parallel tip Nippon 1050GH are a constant weight shaft even though they're parallel tip. They come in discrete sets to match the respective iron because they're not meant to be tip-trimmed - you trim the butt to length only. +1" shouldn't be an issue because you have plenty to play with. This is the cheapest I've seen them: https://www.hurricanegolf.com/nippon-n-s-pro-1050gh-4-pw-parallel-tip-shaft-set.html On a side note - what does $100 per shaft include? If it's fitted including grips and labour - I'd be inclined to stop complaining. YMMV.

Totally gutted for Clarke, but he'll bounce back. But kudos for Scottie - what a player.

Meanwhile in the background, Patrick Reed...

Fair point - now you mention it, you could employ a hoodie while you are standing about not swinging a club. But as for playing with the hood up - I've tried it and it didn't make any rational sense to me over wearing a hat. Sincere apolgies if it came across as crass.

Probably Wilson.

Sure they have. The question is - why? Nobody has even been seen playing with the hood up, so why would you wear a hoodie - other than making a 'statement' ? The hoodie has no obvious advantage - unless you intend to use the hood functionality it provides. So ditch the hoodie - it's a crock.

Wow - some polarised views! For me - any dress code (golf or otherwise) is not out-dated in it's fundamental principle, which is in essence and standard of expectation (to eliminate doubt) and a request for respect (in regard to personal interpretation). It's all about give and take. What we wear (regardless of situation) is a projection of our attitude and our outlook on an occassion. I wouldn't dream of wearing cut-down jeans and a t-shirt to a wedding reception the same as I wouldn't dream of wearing a tuxedo for clearing out the garage. It's all about right attire for the situation - whatever that may be. If it's golf, wear something that looks like you're about to play golf, rather than attending a beach party (as an example). How you interpret that situation is up to you, but how you present says more about your attitude to that situation than you may (or may not) give it due consideration or respect for. Maybe that's just me because I'm an old fart with a father who was in the miltary. Either way, dress for the occassion - but give due consideration to what your choice for that occassion may affect those around you. If you don't care about those around you - you probably shouldn't be playing golf, or whatever event you're attending. My 2 cents.

46 by default, because of the iron set I currently play. Roll that back 30 odd years, my PW was 50. 15 years ago it was 48. In 10 years time - it could be 44 whether i like it or not!

Tour Velvet 360 on everything. I don't like logos or markers - just plain as possible. I build them out with my own +2 over standard.

The truth is nobody knows. Torque is a misnomer anyway because it relates to a force which should be measured in ft/lbs, but instead the figure given for shafts is in degrees. Nobody knows what force is applied to the shaft to record a measurement of deflection, nobody knows how long the fulcrum is to apply the force, the velocity of the force, how long the shaft is, and nobody knows knows if the force is sustained or timed. Nobody will say if the deflection in degrees is an upper limit (before the shaft will break), an mean/average figure, or a standard deviation. Each OEM may well have their own method of how 'torque' is calculated - and how it is applied in terms of rating for each shaft. In general terms 'low torque' shafts will tend to feel harsh and boardy, 'high torque' shafts will tend to feel softer and looser. That in turn is a product of how they are constructed - you can't have a 'high torque' shaft that is heavy and has an uber stiff tip, and you can't have a 'low torque' shaft that is very light with a soft tip. Think about how a shaft is made with multiple plys of fiber and how those plys are placed and you'll get a picture of how 'torque' generally mirrors the profile of the shaft and it's weight to flex ratio. Which in turn doesn't apply to steel shafts - because most are around the 1.1 - 2 degrees of 'torque' mark but feel anything but harsh or boardy. Probably because steel is an entirely different material, not made of multiple plys and more malleable. So in summary, 'torque' is all talk.