Jump to content
Testers Announced! Callaway Paradym Ai Smoke Drivers and Autoflex Dream 7 Shafts! ×

Tom Wishon on Boom Stick's


fixyurdivot

Recommended Posts

I just finished reading Tom's "The Search for the Perfect Golf Club".  In a nutshell, the vast majority of us have all been misled by the OEM's and are playing drivers that have too long a shaft and too low a loft 🤔.  Add to that the tendency, which he says is primarily vanity driven, to bag shafts with 'S' on them, and the problem gets worse.  It's clear to me Mr. Wishon is pretty confident in his knowledge of club fitting and has a less than favorable view on how the industry has pursued hype over substance - particularly so with drivers.

As one who did not change arrows in the bag like underwear over my golf life, and paid little attention to club fitting and technology, until just a few years ago, I don't have any hands on experience to decide if Tom is right or wrong.  I can say that I see a lot more players struggle with drivers than most any other club in their bag.  I also see the majority of players at the range practicing with their driver.  Could this be because it is ill fit for their swing and they feel the need to get it under control?

After reading this book, I now have my own doubts whether my G410P is too low a loft (9 deg but set at 10), the stock length shaft too long, and whether the 'S' should be an 'R'?  

Is Tom's thinking outdated? 

:ping-small: G410 Plus, 9 Degree Driver 

:ping-small: G400 SFT, 16 Degree 3w

:ping-small: G400 SFT, 19 Degree 5w

:srixon-small:  ZX5 Irons 4-AW 

:ping-small: Glide 2.0 56 Degree SW   (removed from double secret probation 😍)

:EVNROLL: ER5v Putter  (Official Review)

:odyssey-small: AI-One Milled Seven T CH (Official Review)

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's outdated.  The underlying message is finding what works for your swing, being fit.  But I wholeheartedly believe the longer drivers on the market for the last 20+ years are a disservice to the golf public.

There are indeed folks for whom 45" drivers work, but they are a minority.

Drivers were 43" or 43.5" long for a very long time, and it didn't have anything to do with the size of the clubhead.  I've seen many posts from folks who say the new drivers "look funny" because of the size of the clubheads, when made 44" or even shorter.  My take is that it's a visual adjustment, and not instantly making that visual adjustment is a lousy reason to set yourself up with a club that doesn't work for you.  <shrug>
 

Driver: TM Original One 11.5* set to 11*, Aldila NV75 X, 43.5" -or- SpeedZone, HZRDUS Black 75 6.5, 43.5"
3w:  Cobra King LTD, RIP Beta 90, 42" -or- Stage 2 Tour, NV105 X, 42.5"
2h or 3h:  TaylorMade Stage 2 Tour, Aldila NV105 S -or- RIP Alpha 105 S
Irons:  3-PW Mizuno MP37, Recoil Proto 125 F4 (reshaft in progress, slowly); 1i & 3-PW Golden Ram TW276, NV105 S; 2-PW Golden Ram TW282, RIP Tour 115 R
GW: Dynacraft Dual Milled CNC 52*, Steelfiber 125 S; Scratch 8620 DS 53*, Steelfiber 125 S
SW:  Ram TG-898 56*, DGX ss2x; Ram Tom Watson 55*, DGX ss2x; Wilson Staff PMP 58*, DGS; PM Grind 19 58*, stock shaft
Putter:  Snake Eyes Viper Tour Sv1, 34"; Ping Scottsdale TR Craz-E, 35"; Cleveland Huntington Beach 1, 35"
Ball:  Wilson Staff Duo Professional, Bridgestone Tour B-RXS, Callaway Chrome Soft

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, fixyurdivot said:

I just finished reading Tom's "The Search for the Perfect Golf Club".  In a nutshell, the vast majority of us have all been misled by the OEM's and are playing drivers that have too long a shaft and too low a loft 🤔.  Add to that the tendency, which he says is primarily vanity driven, to bag shafts with 'S' on them, and the problem gets worse.  It's clear to me Mr. Wishon is pretty confident in his knowledge of club fitting and has a less than favorable view on how the industry has pursued hype over substance - particularly so with drivers.

As one who did not change arrows in the bag like underwear over my golf life, and paid little attention to club fitting and technology, until just a few years ago, I don't have any hands on experience to decide if Tom is right or wrong.  I can say that I see a lot more players struggle with drivers than most any other club in their bag.  I also see the majority of players at the range practicing with their driver.  Could this be because it is ill fit for their swing and they feel the need to get it under control?

After reading this book, I now have my own doubts whether my G410P is too low a loft (9 deg but set at 10), the stock length shaft too long, and whether the 'S' should be an 'R'?  

Is Tom's thinking outdated? 

I can't say if Tom is right or wrong, but I can say that most people I see on the range struggling with driver is not due to an ill fitting club. I am at a muni, and I seriously doubt most of them have never been to a fitting except at our local golf store to buy an off-the-rack club. They are struggling with the driver because they have a poor swing.  For a poor swing, having too little driver loft exacerbates their flaws; more loft helps, but may not be optimal for distance.

From my experience with a really slow swing speed, a 12º driver is what most fitters will tell me I should be using.  I have a couple of those; I hit them high and lose yards because the ball falls out of the sky.  I am using a 10.5 now which I will change to 9.5 on very windy days.  I have used both shortened shafts and longer shafts.  I am more accurate with shorter shafts, but also shorter off the tee.  What I don't know is what a longer shaft will give me for yards gained and dispersion.  Wish there was a real fitter in my area.

We don’t stop playing the game because we get old; we get old because we stop playing the game.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fixyurdivot said:

I just finished reading Tom's "The Search for the Perfect Golf Club".  In a nutshell, the vast majority of us have all been misled by the OEM's and are playing drivers that have too long a shaft and too low a loft 🤔.  Add to that the tendency, which he says is primarily vanity driven, to bag shafts with 'S' on them, and the problem gets worse.  It's clear to me Mr. Wishon is pretty confident in his knowledge of club fitting and has a less than favorable view on how the industry has pursued hype over substance - particularly so with drivers.

As one who did not change arrows in the bag like underwear over my golf life, and paid little attention to club fitting and technology, until just a few years ago, I don't have any hands on experience to decide if Tom is right or wrong.  I can say that I see a lot more players struggle with drivers than most any other club in their bag.  I also see the majority of players at the range practicing with their driver.  Could this be because it is ill fit for their swing and they feel the need to get it under control?

After reading this book, I now have my own doubts whether my G410P is too low a loft (9 deg but set at 10), the stock length shaft too long, and whether the 'S' should be an 'R'?  

Is Tom's thinking outdated? 

So for me I can say the lower loft is needed I hit the ball very high due to my swing and anything over 10° I hit very high. Also not because of my swing speed but because of how I load the shaft the softer the shaft the more it whips and I hate the feel. Is he wrong it could go either way is it important to get fit 100% because it should make a difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cnosil said:

Teaching about course strategy has also changed. Learn to hit the driver far and then worry about accuracy.

I agree that this, especially recently, has been the biggest shift. With the introduction of strokes gained we see now being in the fairway is not as big of an advantage as we all thought. The distance is the real advantage. If the goal is to hit the most fairway possible, more loft and a shorter shaft will likely help for sure, but as others have mentioned will not maximize distance or strokes gained. That is the change right there, so if you can get fit and get a driver that allows you to maximize distance with decent dispersion, that is the preferred option. Of course if your swing is that far off then there are other considerations, and as always get fit.

:callaway-small: Epic Max LS 9° :Fuji: Ventus Blue 6X  (2021 Official Review) | :callaway-small:Epic Speed 18° Evenflow Riptide 70g 6.0
:titelist-small: 816 H1 21° Mitsubishi Motors Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings Chemical industry Mitsubishi  Rayon Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation, mitsubishi, blue, company png |  PNGEgg Diamana S+ Blue 70 S | 
image.png.08bbf5bb553da418019f0db13c6f4f9a.png SMS 4-5/SMS Pro 6-PW  image.png.267751aa721ee9cf3944fa2ff070b98c.png  Steelfiber i95 S (2023 Official Review)
:ping-small: Glide 4.0 50°.12°S/54°.14°W/58°.6°T PING Z-Z115 Wedge Flex | :cleveland-small:  SOFT 11S Super Stroke Mid-Slim 2.0
:ping-small: Hoofer Bag | :titelist-small: Pro V1 | Right Handed | Tracked by :ShotScope: V3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom is a very intelligent man. And like us, he's entitled to his opinions. We don't have to agree with him, nor he with ours. Most of the time, regarding golf equipment, I agree with him. This is coming from a guy in his mid 40s still playing a 44" driver because I'm not comfortable hitting anything longer (and I've tried several) and I don't think I gain much distance when I do catch one. I just know 44" is more comfortable to me, and I hit it much better than 45" or longer. OEMs have convinced the world that their 46" drivers off the rack are going to give you tremendous distance. That's true, they do when hit well. But how many of us hit a 46" driver consistently better than 45", let alone 44"? I'd love to see what happens if you get a large group to do an experiment hitting a 44", 45", and 46" driver for an extended period, and see what the data specifically says. I'd argue that if you played a 44" driver with some extra weight added in the head, whether inside the head or outside with lead tape or factory weights, you'd lower your handicap by several strokes, because you'll hit more fairways and the balls that miss the fairway aren't as far off the fairway. Just my not-so-humble-opinion...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I know is I'm longer and straighter with a 43" driver than any 45 3/4"I've ever played. And it's not even close. 

Ping G430 Driver, 19° Hybrid, Ping Anser 23° Hybrid, Mizuno 923 Hot Metal 6-GW, Ping 54°&58° Glides, Scotty Cameron 5.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr Wishon makes some good points.  Let me first say, I've never been fitted and know I should.  COVID has killed that for me at the moment.  Hopefully soon.  For me, I play a 1" shorter shaft on the driver and I like it.  I don't hit far, a lot of that is due to the physical mechanics I deal with (no toes on the left foot, grafted skin where they used to be, no lateral support in that foot, the list goes on).  What has helped is that I have my driver dialed up in terms of loft somewhere around 11.5-12.0*.  Then again I believe SLDR drivers need to be lofted up to get back to reasonable lofts.  Also I have worked hard to make consistent strikes in the middle of the face, spray powder on the face even when playing a round is great soon, certain and positive feedback.   Also I play with a "R" the shaft, have toyed with going to an "A" shaft.  I am not afraid of the "senior" flex, I play forward at the senior tees most of the time anyway.  All of this is "educated" guesses and can either be validated or debunked with a good fitting.   

WITB? Ping G400 SFT w/Aldila Mamba shaft R flex; Ping G410 3w; Ping G400 3h(19), 4h(22), 5h(26); TaylorMade SLDR 5i (interchanges w/5h)-PW -stock graphite shafts Rflex; INDI FLX-S wedges (50, 54, 58) w/Recoil graphite shafts -Rflex and Odyssey AI-One 7T BD Milled (aka Millie), ball choice tends to be Pro-V1 or simliar 3pc urethane balls. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have mentioned before on various forums that I consider myself a Wishon disciple regarding club fitting if you will. Having read nearly everything he has written, produced over his design career. IMO he was ahead of the curve (like Mr. Maltby) regarding club fitting and design. Some of us began our fitting decades before video, definitely Trackman/etc. I very much appreciate technology and proper application to fitting and club design, club making.

I do not think he is outdated as he is still active (although he sold his company). Ralph Maltby also sold GolfWorks (he has an excellent newer book worth reading). Tom Wishon has a very good paperback new book (Cap'N Clubmaker --Experiences & Insights From A Life In Search of the Perfect Golf Club) that discusses more in depth his views on club fitting, design and industry career.

In many ways I look at Tom Wishon like a Karsten Solheim in that they both were frustrated about a certain segment of the golf industry and became pioneers through their designs and company firsts. IF anything I think what Tom Wishon writes compliments all of us while considering purchasing a club and/or getting fittings. I consider myself better educated consumer by reading/researching his work. Kinda just like reading MGS forums and reviews.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Tom's philosophy is outdated. However, I do think launch monitors have changed and greatly improved the fitting process for many. I still think the best fitting method is to build a club and try it for awhile as Tom suggests to do. Regarding drivers, I have been a big proponent of shorter drivers for a long time. The amount of control and accuracy you gain from losing one inch on a shaft is massive but the pushback against trying that seems tremendous. I do think technology has improved but I don't think technology improvements have suddenly made longer drivers more controllable. Technology hasn't beat physics yet. Center contact is still optimal and controlling a 45.5"+ shaft is still more difficult that controlling a 44" shaft. TXG tested a shorter driver shaft and there testing seemed to prove that the shorter shaft improved contact and didn't really impact distance much. They were hesitant to recommend it but I think anyone who is dropping $500+ on a driver and fitting should at least try it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Yes, Tom's writing and videos are FAR from outdated. They actually convey information you can't get in most fitting studios. LM tech has given the golf world tons of needed information and is vital for proper fitting these days. However, IMHO, that information has overshadowed the need to pay attention to THE GOLFER and the input about the feel of the club. The numbers need to be optimal, but the feel of the club must also be right.

BT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RI_Redneck said:

Yes, Tom's writing and videos are FAR from outdated. They actually convey information you can't get in most fitting studios. LM tech has given the golf world tons of needed information and is vital for proper fitting these days. However, IMHO, that information has overshadowed the need to pay attention to THE GOLFER and the input about the feel of the club. The numbers need to be optimal, but the feel of the club must also be right.

BT

I've noticed a good chunk of people with fitted clubs I have golfed with actually got longer clubs than they had before because it made the launch monitor numbers better or because they claim it improved where they were hitting the ball on the face. However, their real world performance was generally not better than their prior clubs. However, there is a top 100 in my city that seems to do a much better job fitting than other shops. They typically build a club and let their customers test them for a few weeks before ordering a whole set or finalizing the deal. I have yet to golf with someone fit by that shop who thought their new clubs weren't better than their old ones. I think what I've observed just shows that 1) you won't generally get a perfect fit from one session on a launch monitor that is used indoor on a mat, 2) feel and looks do matter, and 3) a great launch monitor and poor fitter can will still lead to poor fittings.

Anyone who has read Tom Wishon's books would know that none of his methods or principles are outdated. Launch monitors have helped the fitting process but they have not made his principles outdated. There would need to be a revolutionary change in golf technology for Tom's methods to be outdated. In one of his more recent books from 2010, he notes that over the history of golf there has been a few innovations in golf club technology that he says kind of "cheats" physics. These include the creation of steel shafts, then graphite shafts, manufacturing improvements that allowed us to stretch out driver and wood heads, titanium alloys, and most recently variable thickness club faces (VFT). There really hasn't been any innovations since the advent of VFT designs that have changed golf and Tom Wishon claimed in his last book he doesn't expect any major leaps going forward without there being a discovery of a new material. There have been improvements in clubs since 2010 but it's mostly on the manufacturing front that has most notably improved tolerances to make club faces thinner. However, there hasn't been any improvements that have made a material change in club design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I like Wishon but if I’m not mistaken that book was written before the proliferation of LM data.

You need to know your numbers, your real numbers and then get fit accordingly. There are apps out there that will say if your average driver SS is 95, these are the numbers you need to maximize performance. Then it’s a matter of shaft/head combo that gets you as close to the optimal numbers as possible.

What has become clear since Wishon wrote that book is just how much distance (usable distance) is king. It’s true at all levels.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

Taylor Made Stealth 2 10.5 Diamana S plus 60  Aldila  R flex   - 42.25 inches 

SMT 4 wood bassara R flex, four wood head, 3 wood shaft

Ping G410 7, 9 wood  Alta 65 R flex

Srixon ZX5 MK II  5-GW - UST recoil Dart 65 R flex

India 52,56 (60 pending)  UST recoil 75's R flex  

Evon roll ER 5 32 inches

It's our offseason so auditioning candidates - looking for that right mix of low spin long, more spin around the greens - TBD   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/9/2020 at 4:51 PM, RI_Redneck said:

Yes, Tom's writing and videos are FAR from outdated. They actually convey information you can't get in most fitting studios. LM tech has given the golf world tons of needed information and is vital for proper fitting these days. However, IMHO, that information has overshadowed the need to pay attention to THE GOLFER and the input about the feel of the club. The numbers need to be optimal, but the feel of the club must also be right.

BT

+1

Back in the day, Tom was like the oracle when it came to club fitting. His findings and principles still hold true today.

The proliferation of the LM has certainly assisted in crunching the raw data in ball flight dynamics, but it must be noted that any LM data is historic - in other words, you get to know after you hit a shot.

Tom pioneered the fitting of certain club heads and shafts to golfers swing style and tempo. Depending on how you swung your club, how strong the transition was, how early or late you tended to release the club - had a profound effect on which type of head and shaft you should be looking for. It came as no surprise either that the length and weight of a shaft were critical factors. 

The subsequent LM data only served to prove how right he was - and you could see it in the dynamic results. Devices such as Trackman which could calculate the ubiquitous "smash factor" or how well you struck the ball highlighted one simple fact - hit the centre of the club face to achieve the maximum distance. The chances were for most average golfers, this was easier to achieve with a shorter than the longer "standard" shafts OEMs were selling to make the distance claims look real. This gave fitters a tremendous boost in isolating the type of shaft to suit a player from the myriad of models available. Tom was also instrumental in starting a database of shafts and their characteristics and EI curves.

If you ever had a question about the golf club, Tom had an answer for it. The LM validated his thoughts - and then some. On the back of the tech, there is always the theory behind it: CoG, MOI, spin loft, face angle, loft, lie - you name it - Tom was ahead of the curve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/9/2020 at 12:40 PM, Kansas King said:

I've noticed a good chunk of people with fitted clubs I have golfed with actually got longer clubs than they had before because it made the launch monitor numbers better or because they claim it improved where they were hitting the ball on the face. However, their real world performance was generally not better than their prior clubs.

Only after having my fitter at TrueSpec select the optional driver heads and shafts to compete against my gamer, and having collected some data on each, did I ask about shaft length and loft.  After reading Tom's book, I had kind of a sinking feeling that my G425 was too low lofted (9*) and shaft too long (45").  I asked his thoughts on this and why so many pros use shorter shafted drivers.  His explanation is that they don't mind giving up a little swing speed for accuracy and, in contrast, most amateurs want the distance.  Specific to my numbers, I asked whether either my loft or length should change and he said no.  He said my AOA was really good but also noted that I was choking down a wee bit... something I've been doing the last few months and it just came naturally during the fitting session.

:ping-small: G410 Plus, 9 Degree Driver 

:ping-small: G400 SFT, 16 Degree 3w

:ping-small: G400 SFT, 19 Degree 5w

:srixon-small:  ZX5 Irons 4-AW 

:ping-small: Glide 2.0 56 Degree SW   (removed from double secret probation 😍)

:EVNROLL: ER5v Putter  (Official Review)

:odyssey-small: AI-One Milled Seven T CH (Official Review)

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 1/1/2021 at 3:12 AM, jaskanski said:

+1

Back in the day, Tom was like the oracle when it came to club fitting. His findings and principles still hold true today.

The proliferation of the LM has certainly assisted in crunching the raw data in ball flight dynamics, but it must be noted that any LM data is historic - in other words, you get to know after you hit a shot.

Tom pioneered the fitting of certain club heads and shafts to golfers swing style and tempo. Depending on how you swung your club, how strong the transition was, how early or late you tended to release the club - had a profound effect on which type of head and shaft you should be looking for. It came as no surprise either that the length and weight of a shaft were critical factors. 

The subsequent LM data only served to prove how right he was - and you could see it in the dynamic results. Devices such as Trackman which could calculate the ubiquitous "smash factor" or how well you struck the ball highlighted one simple fact - hit the centre of the club face to achieve the maximum distance. The chances were for most average golfers, this was easier to achieve with a shorter than the longer "standard" shafts OEMs were selling to make the distance claims look real. This gave fitters a tremendous boost in isolating the type of shaft to suit a player from the myriad of models available. Tom was also instrumental in starting a database of shafts and their characteristics and EI curves.

If you ever had a question about the golf club, Tom had an answer for it. The LM validated his thoughts - and then some. On the back of the tech, there is always the theory behind it: CoG, MOI, spin loft, face angle, loft, lie - you name it - Tom was ahead of the curve.

Well stated. 100% agree with your comments. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2020 at 9:25 AM, fixyurdivot said:

I just finished reading Tom's "The Search for the Perfect Golf Club".  In a nutshell, the vast majority of us have all been misled by the OEM's and are playing drivers that have too long a shaft and too low a loft 🤔.  Add to that the tendency, which he says is primarily vanity driven, to bag shafts with 'S' on them, and the problem gets worse.  It's clear to me Mr. Wishon is pretty confident in his knowledge of club fitting and has a less than favorable view on how the industry has pursued hype over substance - particularly so with drivers.

As one who did not change arrows in the bag like underwear over my golf life, and paid little attention to club fitting and technology, until just a few years ago, I don't have any hands on experience to decide if Tom is right or wrong.  I can say that I see a lot more players struggle with drivers than most any other club in their bag.  I also see the majority of players at the range practicing with their driver.  Could this be because it is ill fit for their swing and they feel the need to get it under control?

After reading this book, I now have my own doubts whether my G410P is too low a loft (9 deg but set at 10), the stock length shaft too long, and whether the 'S' should be an 'R'?  

Is Tom's thinking outdated? 

I'm a little late to this thread and will have to read " The Search for the Perfect Golf Club", but some input: My fitter put me into a R flex shaft on my driver even though Ping's recommendation was a SR given my swing speed. He also ordered the shaft cut 1/2" and set up the SFT (10.5*) at +1*. I was hitting the ball well in this configuration. However after a swing lesson, my instructor dialed the SFT down to the flat setting and I am hitting the ball slightly longer. So what does all of that mean? Probably that it's a never ending journey to figure out the best combination.   

Left Hand orientation

:taylormade-small:SIM 2 D Max with Fujikura Air Speeder Shaft 

Cobra  Radspeed 3W/RIptide Shaft
:ping-small:  410  Hybrids 22*, 26*

Cobra Speed Zone 6-GP/Recoil ESX 460 F3 Shafts 

:titelist-small: SM7 54* Wedge

:ping-small: Glide 3.0  60* Wedge

:odyssey-small: O Works putter

:ShotScope: V3
:918457628_PrecisionPro:NX9-HD

:CaddyTek: - 4 Wheel 

EZGO TXT 48v cart
:footjoy-small: - too many shoes to list and so many to buy

:1590477705_SunMountain: And  BAG Boy

Golf Balls: Vice Pro Plus 

2020 Official Teste:SuperSpeed: Beginning Driver Speed  - 78

2019 Official Tester :ping-small:  410 Driver

2018 Official Tester :wilson-small: C300

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, this is just like so many other “issues” in golf; really it’s 2 or more separate issues that get combined. How good/repeatable is your swing? Are
you fitting to the best swing or the average? Did you get fit at all? Was it indoors or outdoors? Are your indoor swings anywhere near the same as outdoor on a course? The list goes on...
For me, I had a negative angle of attack (-3.0) on my driver: did my fitter help by getting me a more stable shaft? Yes, but was he limited by my trash swing? Yes. When did my fitter start looking like a guru? When I worked on my swing and changed my avg AOA on driver to + 3.4
In short, a combination of data driven fitted equipment plus lessons and practice delivered optimization. But either without the other would not have been the improvement I was looking for.



Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

 

Driver - Cobra LtDxLS

3 Wood - Ping g410 LST

2iron - Titleist U505

Irons - Ping i59

Wedges - Vokey Sm9

Putter - Mizuno Mcraft IV

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...