Shots with side-spins

Lady A: "There is nothing more gorgeous than a man who hit a slightly draw driving shot"
Lady B: "That's right, it looks so cool"
Lady A: "I especially hates those men who slice, especially huge crooked slices"
Lady B: "Like he could not control his golf, kinda symbolize he is failing his career also"
Lady A: "Men that slice are ugly"
Lady B: "So is it!"

Quoted this from a conversation by two young ladies golfers... Is slice shot really that bad? For one, it is the most easiest to produce shots. For two, it is always there when you least need it and attracted to trees and water. For three, it is always a golfer dream to drive long and far, with slight draw as a plus. So why slice?

Nowadays the so called forgiving larger size, higher MOI, deeper COG driving head kinda intuitive to this fact. Firstly, the driver head is delivered with maximum MOI and higher COG, which means it is harder for the head to rotate. Secondly, with better material and manufacturing process, the face is "hotter" and sound is sharper at impact, leading a tendency to use more force for maximum swing speed. All these seems perfect for every golfer.

In the old days, with the smaller head, golfers used to be able to "shape" the shot better. The reason behind is less MOI allows the hands to supinate and driver face to open and close easier. The drawback is it requires tremendous accuracy in timing and skill to create those shots. To resolve the timing problem for regular John Doe, larger MOI and deeper COG is introduced; the head face is intended to maintain "square" constantly and launch the ball higher. Yet, most companies forget to mention the catch, if the golfer have a good swing and return the head squared to the ball, it is easier to launch a good shot. Yet, if the swing is questionable to begin with and not squared to the swing path, it is a lot easier to produce shots with side-spin. In order for the large MOI head to be really forgiving, the head have to be squared to the swing path, it is not much forgiveness after all.

In order to deliver the large MOI and deep COG head squared to the ball, swing nowadays require golfers to maintain the arms-triangle before and after the impact longer compare to the old days where it requires timing to rotate the club head during impact. The new triangle form requires tremendous body rotation (Michelle Wie, Tiger Woods, Anthony Kim, Adam Scott, etc). If there is any blockage or slow down in rotation, the head is not going to be squared. The larger head requires golfers to be physically stronger.

Occasionally, golfer will launch a shot that is long and far. The fined tuned sound from the new club heads allows golfers to differentiate between a good shot from a bad shot. The sound actually stimulates how good a good drive could be. Research has shown that audible sound represents more importance than visual sights in good golf shots. Unfortunately, an opened-face shot also sounds better in today's better manufactured golf clubs, it is louder "Ding" than muted "Dung" on central hit. Audio, could be the most misleading factor.

Realizing the fact that the face which sounds better could be opened, golfers usually tend to rush the club down in order to close the face. In the process of doing this, the swing speed is also increased. Problem is increasing swing speed for many does not equivalent to increasing ball speed. This is because the back-spin and side-spin are also increased due to mishit on the club face, or simply a premature release of force prior to impact.. To resolve this problem, most choose to use a lighter and stiffer shaft, in the same time reducing the loft of the club, hoping to reduce the ballooned ball flight.

With the combination of the above, golfers are usually chasing after the infamous cycle of the large MOI, deep COG, big sweet spot and light head weight golf clubs. In the end, golfers have a longer, stiffer, lighter shaft with a lower loft that produces sharp sound at impact head that is also high MOI, deep COG and large sweet spot. To complete all these, it is also paired with huge and fast swing. Yet half the shots are usually sliced to the right. Unfortunately it is just easier to swing the club as well as slicing the ball. Worst, compensating for going to the right side, many golfers pull it to the left by collapsing the left elbow and bending the wrist, resulting hook shots.

Consequently, there are two outcomes to this:
1. The golfer gets a bigger, lighter, deeper face with larger MOI, deeper COG and larger sweet spot to resolve all the problems above.
2. The golfer learn to swing it softer with less force, reduces the distance to maintain the accuracy. He later will adopt step 1 because the short distance is just not, err, satisfying.

This circular cycle of MOI, COG chase, can be easily found in any driving ranges or golf courses.

2008 US Open

I have been thinking, why was this past US Open championship such a big deal... Tiger was not playing at his best, thus whoever challenged him at their best is still lacking by a big gap comparing to the best at his top form.

So why is it so exciting? Enough to stir the media, the community to commend it as the best Open? Yeah, there was some circumstantial moments where the ball seemed to roll in for the sake of continuity of the game, but what the heck? In simply put, it was fun because the best had lowered his standard to good and he was more touchable, thus the competition was more enjoyable and more exciting?

What are the spectators' psychology behind? Emotion was moved because the best was more "reachable" now, they could feel the downfall of the best? Justification was leveled because the best was not so god-like anymore? or simply because of jealousy and feeling the sour-grape? or just like to watch the show because that was not something in concern in real life but something to talk about over a beer?

Personally, I like to see good become great. I like ultimate winning, I like dominance. I like the raw American absolute power. I like to see the best wins by a margin, the best is untouchable, unreachable by common folks. I like to see a human challenges the physical limit and break the rules set and reaches a level of unexpected, of unanticipated. All these mean something to me.

Whether it is a show or there is much competition now, it is a matter of sparking lights that go away quickly. I like to explore the universe, to break the boundary of what knowledge could bring us now. Tiger winning by margin kind of resembling this, whereas if there is another challenger to compete him and make the game more exciting, is immeasurably small. We are already living daily lives that are monotonous enough most the time, what is the point of watching something similar?

Tiger's shutdown for the year, is a disappointment to many, to me. The continuing of the legend, the boundary breaking fantasy, is once again put into the unknown territory.

Shaft Fitting

Knowing and looking at the wrong shaft measurements, that's one thing.
Knowing and fitting with the wrong shaft measurements, that's something.

For instance, if you are 180 lbs, you will likely choose a 75g shaft, with a regular 200g head + 50g grip, that gives you roughly 320g club at 45", a SW that's around D2/D3. Average people feel this is the most stable combination, meaning that you can drop the club in the "slot" and produce optimal club-speed. Some people with different weight, choose heavier or lighter club according to physical strength, and together with feel, this is where trial and error comes into picture. Though, you can only perform trial and error after you have a narrowed scope.

As general outline, flex could be fitted by swing speed, torque could be treated as a sign of forgiveness and release in timing, weight could be paired with strength, length could be adjusted according to height and finally swing weight and the shaft's characteristics, are varied by personalized preference. Noted that indicators like "tempo", "rhythm", "hitter or swinger", "1 or 2 axis swings", etc are normally not used as they are more a swing mechanism but has nothing to do with shaft fitting.

U.S is always an unique place where different circumstances allowed to happen, I meant those extreme scenarios beyond the norm. Only in U.S you will find shaft of 55g and X-stiff, take a look at other branded Japanese shafts, you will never find this combination. The argument behind is in order to go for extra distance, you sacrifice the stability for faster swing speed. This makes sense as U.S is a country of raw power. Though, do you perform better when you increase swing speed, do you hit longer or better? Normal understanding says you have to give up one to get the other. Yet, does increment in swing speed proportional to increment in distance?

The other view to look at this is, do you want shaft deforming for optimal performance? is deflecting in shaft shape a parameter to the swing's tempo, meaning that your tempo determine when to place the shaft back to the initial point that it bounds back and release all the energy on the ball?

So simply put, there are many measurements in shaft fitting to be considered, but fitting depends on how one prioritize the parameters grouped and chosen. (e.g. weight and length, then flex and torque, then SW). Usually the most charming fitting is the best distance under the controlled dispersion, providing that the golfer himself is assumed the fixed variable. An understanding view to this would be a sliding bar where left is swing speed and right is control, you choose the best fitting parameters available to move the slider horizontally along both ends, finding the optimal setting. Yet, you could never have both ends together.