Proper Length Fitting - how it needs to be done

[TomWishon]

Wrist to Floor is NOT bad when you understand its role

I've seen a number of threads asking about proper length on clubs. I've also seen a number of posts in which people say that a Wrist to Floor measurement is bad. I felt it was time to offer the facts based on sound fitting research and fitting experience to help more golfers make the right length fitting decisions.

First of all, height alone is in NO WAY your indicator for how long your clubs should be. Our ability to be COMFORTABLE over the ball and through the swing with our clubs is a product of the relationship of the clubs' lengths to our height + ARM LENGTH + our learned/proper stance and posture for our swing plane. We never want to have our clubs force us into a stance or posture that is not proper for how our swing plane needs to be to gain our highest level of swing repeatability and proper swing path and correct position as we rotate through the ball.

We have to have a starting point for length determination. Height + arm length can act as a starting point for comfort in our stance and posture, followed closely by a careful analysis of the swing characteristics which either make it easier or more difficult to control a longer length. From all that you then come up with the best length that fits the golfer for comfort and which also tries hard to not make the club length more difficult to control.

People have criticized a wrist to floor measurement chart for length as being worthless. If a W to F chart is used for final length decisions, I agree it is wrong to do that. But a well thought out wrist to floor measurement chart is very valuable to offer a STARTING POINT ONLY FROM WHICH A SWING ANALYSIS IS CAREFULLY DONE TO THEN COME UP WITH THE FINAL BEST LENGTHS FOR THE GOLFER.

I remember years ago fitting a number of the San Antonio Spurs players and former players. George Gervin was 6'7" but after all our analysis ended up with a set of irons in which the 5 iron was +3/4"and with the lengths between the rest of the irons set up in 3/8" increments - not the usual 1/2" that all companies use in their irons.

These club lengths fit him perfectly. Why? In addition to his 6'7 height, George had very long arms, which is not all the unusual among very tall people. He was also not that good of a player, with an over the top move and a little bit of an early release - both of which are swing elements that make it far more difficult to control a longer length. So the +3/4" on the 5 iron was the shortest length with which he could still have comfort over the ball for his height + arm length + stance position so that we could give him the best chance at controlling the club. We then chose 3/8" increments down from there so that he gradually got a little more over length down through the set, but with the clubs that with their progressively higher loft became easier to hit anyway.

When we teach length fitting to clubmakers, we teach it like this:

1. Start with the Wrist to Floor measurement to come up with a STARTING POINT ONLY for the driver and 5 iron lengths. This is NOT the final length. This is ONLY an indication of what is the shortest length with which this golfer can achieve COMFORT with so he/she is not crouching over or altering his stance and posture too much.

2. Next analyze the golfer's swing path, transition force, swing tempo, point of release, overall golf athletic ability. Swing Path - Outside in, Square or Inside Out; Transition and Tempo - Forceful/quick/fast/aggressive or Average force/quickness or smooth/passive; Point of Release - Early in the downswing, Midway or Late; Golf Athletic Ability - Good player with good control of the club, Average or less skilled player in terms of athletic ability.

3. Swing moves like an over the top/outside in path, strong forceful transition, fast tempo, early release and poor golf athletic ability are all swing characteristics that make it far, far more difficult to control a longer length. To contrast, a square to inside path, smooth transition, smoother tempo, later release and good athletic ability are all swing characteristics that make it easier to control a longer length.

4. If the golfer has 3 or more of the "difficult" swing characteristics you never make the final lengths longer than what the W to F chart says - and you can always alter the wood to wood length increments down to 3/4" and the iron to iron length increments down to 3/8" or even 5/16" to give the golfer more comfort down through the set. In fact, we teach almost every time you have a golfer who does need longer than std lengths for comfort, always use a 3/8" or 5/16" increment between the irons.

5. if the golfer has 1 or 2 of the "difficult" swing characteristics, you can go up to but not more than +1/2 longer than what the W to F chart says. But you do not go 1" longer than the W to F chart says unless the golfer has 3-4 or more of these "EASY" swing characteristics. Also, there is rarely ever any need to go more than +1/2" over what the W to F chart says for irons, especially when you have the 3/8" or 5/16" increments between irons to help you give the golfer more comfort over the higher numbered irons anyway.

6. Remember too - the only golfers who will experience an increase in clubhead speed from a longer length are those with a progressively later and later wrist-c o c k release. For golfers with an early to midway release, going longer not only brings about far more lack of control and off center hits, but it never brings higher clubhead speed. There is nothing wrong with experimenting with longer lengths to get more distance - but it really only works for golfers with an inside out to square path, who have smoother more controlled tempo with a late release. If you don't have most to all these swing characteristics and you do not have an inordinately high wrist to floor measurement, men should not be playing a driver longer than 44 to 44.5 and women no longer than 42.5 to 43.

Do length fitting this way, and you will never have length getting in the way of a golfer playing to the best of their ability.

Right now in my opinion based on years of fitting research, within the woods, 90% of all men and 99% of all women who play men's and women's wood lengths off the rack are using driver lengths which are WAY too long and fairway wood lengths which are a little too long. These standard wood lengths of 46-46.5" drivers and 43.5-44" 3-woods (with women's only -1" to that) are truly getting in the way of a HUGE number of golfers being able to play to the best of their ability.

Golf is not about hitting 1 of 10 solid, far and in play. It's about hitting the highest percentage on center and in play, even if you have to give up 10 yds.

In irons, the modern lengths are not quite as bad as the drivers/woods because over the past 30 yrs, iron lengths have only "grown" by 1/2" while driver lengths have grown by (cough) 3". But in the woods and chiefly in drivers, it really is unfortunate that so many golfers could be hitting the driver so much better if they only would go to aGOOD clubmaker to be fit to a much shorter driver length than what they bought off the rack.

Also, it is much better to be fit with clubs that are built from scratch to the proper lengths than to cut down existing clubs. The reason is because most golfers need headweight to be added to a cut down club to get the swingweight and head feel back up to where it properly matches the golfer's swing tempo/timing/rhythm. Cutting down clubs and NOT re-weighting the head typically leads to a lack of head feel and from it, an increase in off center hits and more tendency to swing over the top and outside in.

As in all cases of custom fitting, it is always best to go find a good, experienced independent custom clubfitter/clubmaker to work with. Far better than to try to fit yourself or go to a big box retail store or pro shop.

TOM

[packman80]

Very interesting and informitive post/write-up. Particularly the part about using 5/16 or 3/8 increments between irons. Which iron do you use as a starting point? Do you start at the wedges and go from there or is that what you were talking about with the 5 iron?

[TomWishon]

[quote name='packman80' timestamp='1337789732' post='4964824']
Very interesting and informitive post/write-up. Particularly the part about using 5/16 or 3/8 increments between irons. Which iron do you use as a starting point? Do you start at the wedges and go from there or is that what you were talking about with the 5 iron?
[/quote]

Our wrist to floor chart references off the 5 iron for the irons. That's simply because from years and years, the 5 iron was considered to be the "middle of the set of irons."

But these days in our fitting instruction, we really consider the hybrids to be a member of the iron set family. What we mean is that for however many hybrids a golfer may choose to replace his lower lofted irons in his set, all those hybrids need to be fit to the golfer as if they are a part of his iron set for LENGTH and LOFT.

We think hybrids that are much longer than the iron of the same loft are ridiculous and just end up leaving distance gaps in the iron set and duplicating distances you get with some of your fwy woods.

So - not to belabor this but to make sure we're clear. . . .

Let's say we determine your proper 5-iron length from W to F and swing analysis is 38". But let's say we think your best set make up would be hybrids to replace the 3-iron, and 4-iron so the actual irons would start with the 5 iron. And let's say we want to incorporate that 3/8" increment too. So the length set up for the FULL SET OF HYBRIDS + IRONS WOULD GO LIKE THIS. . . .

3 hybrid - 38 3/4"
4 hybrid - 38 3/8"
5 iron - 38
6 iron - 37 5/8 (+1/8 over)
7 iron - 37 1/4 (+1/4 over)
8 iron - 36 7/8 (+3/8 over)
9 iron - 36 1/2 (+1/2 over)
PW - 36 1/8 (+5/8 over)

For the other wedges, we also tend to fit these separate from the numbered irons for length because wedge lengths can be so more personal based on how each golfer uses each of their wedges in terms of % of full swing shots vs % of half/3/4 length shots and pitches/chips. Based on this, we teach clubfitters to sometimes keep with the 3/8 increments from PW to AW to SW or depart from the 3/8 increment between wedges and use 1/4 between PW to AW to SW.

TOM

[kooch1221]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1337788032' post='4964630']
I've seen a number of threads asking about proper length on clubs. I've also seen a number of posts in which people say that a Wrist to Floor measurement is bad. I felt it was time to offer the facts based on sound fitting research and fitting experience to help more golfers make the right length fitting decisions.

First of all, height alone is in NO WAY your indicator for how long your clubs should be. Our ability to be COMFORTABLE over the ball and through the swing with our clubs is a product of the relationship of the clubs' lengths to our height + ARM LENGTH + our learned/proper stance and posture for our swing plane. We never want to have our clubs force us into a stance or posture that is not proper for how our swing plane needs to be to gain our highest level of swing repeatability and proper swing path and correct position as we rotate through the ball.

We have to have a starting point for length determination. [b]Height + arm length can act as a starting point for comfort in our stance and posture, followed closely by a careful analysis of the swing characteristics which either make it easier or more difficult to control a longer length.[/b] From all that you then come up with the best length that fits the golfer for comfort and which also tries hard to not make the club length more difficult to control.

People have criticized a wrist to floor measurement chart for length as being worthless. If a W to F chart is used for final length decisions, I agree it is wrong to do that. But a well thought out wrist to floor measurement chart is very valuable to offer a [b]STARTING POINT ONLY[/b] FROM WHICH A SWING ANALYSIS IS CAREFULLY DONE TO THEN COME UP WITH THE FINAL BEST LENGTHS FOR THE GOLFER.

I remember years ago fitting a number of the San Antonio Spurs players and former players. George Gervin was 6'7" but after all our analysis ended up with a set of irons in which the 5 iron was +3/4"and with the lengths between the rest of the irons set up in 3/8" increments - not the usual 1/2" that all companies use in their irons.

These club lengths fit him perfectly. Why? In addition to his 6'7 height, George had very long arms, which is not all the unusual among very tall people. He was also not that good of a player, with an over the top move and a little bit of an early release - both of which are swing elements that make it far more difficult to control a longer length. So the +3/4" on the 5 iron was the shortest length with which he could still have comfort over the ball for his height + arm length + stance position so that we could give him the best chance at controlling the club. We then chose 3/8" increments down from there so that he gradually got a little more over length down through the set, but with the clubs that with their progressively higher loft became easier to hit anyway.

When we teach length fitting to clubmakers, we teach it like this:

1. Start with the Wrist to Floor measurement to come up with a [b]STARTING POINT ONLY[/b] for the driver and 5 iron lengths. [b]This is NOT the final length[/b]. This is ONLY an indication of what is the shortest length with which this golfer can achieve COMFORT with so he/she is not crouching over or altering his stance and posture too much.

2. Next analyze the golfer's swing path, transition force, swing tempo, point of release, overall golf athletic ability. Swing Path - Outside in, Square or Inside Out; Transition and Tempo - Forceful/quick/fast/aggressive or Average force/quickness or smooth/passive; Point of Release - Early in the downswing, Midway or Late; Golf Athletic Ability - Good player with good control of the club, Average or less skilled player in terms of athletic ability.

3. Swing moves like an over the top/outside in path, strong forceful transition, fast tempo, early release and poor golf athletic ability are all swing characteristics that make it far, far more difficult to control a longer length. To contrast, a square to inside path, smooth transition, smoother tempo, later release and good athletic ability are all swing characteristics that make it easier to control a longer length.

4. If the golfer has 3 or more of the "difficult" swing characteristics you never make the final lengths longer than what the W to F chart says - and you can always alter the wood to wood length increments down to 3/4" and the iron to iron length increments down to 3/8" or even 5/16" to give the golfer more comfort down through the set. In fact, we teach almost every time you have a golfer who does need longer than std lengths for comfort, always use a 3/8" or 5/16" increment between the irons.

5. if the golfer has 1 or 2 of the "difficult" swing characteristics, you can go up to but not more than +1/2 longer than what the W to F chart says. But you do not go 1" longer than the W to F chart says unless the golfer has 3-4 or more of these "EASY" swing characteristics. Also, there is rarely ever any need to go more than +1/2" [b]over what the W to F chart says for irons[/b], especially when you have the 3/8" or 5/16" increments between irons to help you give the golfer more comfort over the higher numbered irons anyway.

6. Remember too - the only golfers who will experience an increase in clubhead speed from a longer length are those with a progressively later and later wrist-c o c k release. For golfers with an early to midway release, going longer not only brings about far more lack of control and off center hits, but it never brings higher clubhead speed. There is nothing wrong with experimenting with longer lengths to get more distance - but it really only works for golfers with an inside out to square path, who have smoother more controlled tempo with a late release. If you don't have most to all these swing characteristics and you do not have an inordinately high wrist to floor measurement, men should not be playing a driver longer than 44 to 44.5 and women no longer than 42.5 to 43.

Do length fitting this way, and you will never have length getting in the way of a golfer playing to the best of their ability.

Right now in my opinion based on years of fitting research, within the woods, 90% of all men and 99% of all women who play men's and women's wood lengths off the rack are using driver lengths which are WAY too long and fairway wood lengths which are a little too long. These standard wood lengths of 46-46.5" drivers and 43.5-44" 3-woods (with women's only -1" to that) are truly getting in the way of a HUGE number of golfers being able to play to the best of their ability.

Golf is not about hitting 1 of 10 solid, far and in play. It's about hitting the highest percentage on center and in play, even if you have to give up 10 yds.

In irons, the modern lengths are not quite as bad as the drivers/woods because over the past 30 yrs, iron lengths have only "grown" by 1/2" while driver lengths have grown by (cough) 3". But in the woods and chiefly in drivers, it really is unfortunate that so many golfers could be hitting the driver so much better if they only would go to aGOOD clubmaker to be fit to a much shorter driver length than what they bought off the rack.

Also, it is much better to be fit with clubs that are built from scratch to the proper lengths than to cut down existing clubs. The reason is because most golfers need headweight to be added to a cut down club to get the swingweight and head feel back up to where it properly matches the golfer's swing tempo/timing/rhythm. Cutting down clubs and NOT re-weighting the head typically leads to a lack of head feel and from it, an increase in off center hits and more tendency to swing over the top and outside in.

As in all cases of custom fitting, it is always best to go find a good, experienced independent custom clubfitter/clubmaker to work with. Far better than to try to fit yourself or go to a big box retail store or pro shop.

TOM
[/quote]

I have seen several differing W to F charts around. Some as much as an inch apart for the same measurements. Could you post the chart you use? Also how do you determine when to start using 3/8" gaps instead of the standard 1/2" Thanks for the informative information you post.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='kooch1221' timestamp='1337805584' post='4966276']
I have seen several differing W to F charts around. Some as much as an inch apart for the same measurements. Could you post the chart you use? Also how do you determine when to start using 3/8" gaps instead of the standard 1/2" Thanks for the informative information you post.
[/quote]

Good point and sorry I did not think to post our chart in my original post. My bad there.

[attachment=1178200:wrist to floor.JPG]

This chart does have a lot of work behind it in that I started it with golfer measurements about 20 yrs ago and then have tweaked it off and on over the years from successive measurement and fitting research work with golfers. So from a STARTING POINT FOR COMFORT basis, I think it's pretty much the right one in the industry to follow - again as the STARTING POINT ONLY for length.

TOM

[Jamboy72]

When measuring the wrist to floor, where exactly is the "wrist"?

[webber]

[quote name='topekareal' timestamp='1337871061' post='4970314']
When measuring the wrist to floor, where exactly is the "wrist"?
[/quote]

You don't know where your wrist is?

[Jamboy72]

Yeah, that sounds kind of stupid, but I guess my question is, when measuring to the wrist, do you measure to the very base of the hand? As I look at my wrist, there is about 1.5" of "wrist" from the base of my hand where I would say the wrist begins and the rest of the wrist area....

[GooseHook]

[quote name='topekareal' timestamp='1337872889' post='4970490']
Yeah, that sounds kind of stupid, but I guess my question is, when measuring to the wrist, do you measure to the very base of the hand? As I look at my wrist, there is about 1.5" of "wrist" from the base of my hand where I would say the wrist begins and the rest of the wrist area....
[/quote]

I believe its the base of the hands, since that's the point where "grip and hand" stop and arm starts. Tom will set it right if I'm wrong lol.

TOM:

I find that length chart really intriguing. Most of the golfers on these boards are playing shorter lengths, but this is even shorter than that! I have a 31" W to F and play a 42.5" fairway wood and 44" driver- while those are pretty short, I do feel that I could go shorter (especially in the driver).

When fitting folks for a driver, would you say they are pretty surprised at the playing length they end up with? Is it a PITA to get swingweights right, at that point? Looking at conventional swingweight charts, if you're playing a modern driver head at 3W length, you've got to add a bunch of weight and do some tip trimming (almost to 3W level). I know you are a fan of MOI matching- does it make things any easier/more difficult to do that?

Long story short: trial and error is a recipe for disaster if you're short (or have long arms) and strong!!

[PingG10guy]

[quote name='topekareal' timestamp='1337872889' post='4970490']
Yeah, that sounds kind of stupid, but I guess my question is, when measuring to the wrist, do you measure to the very base of the hand? As I look at my wrist, there is about 1.5" of "wrist" from the base of my hand where I would say the wrist begins and the rest of the wrist area....
[/quote]

I always wondered the same thing. There's some area that is open for interpretation and could change measurements. Tom...can you post a pick of where the tape starts on WTF?

[TomWishon]

[quote name='topekareal' timestamp='1337872889' post='4970490']
Yeah, that sounds kind of stupid, but I guess my question is, when measuring to the wrist, do you measure to the very base of the hand? As I look at my wrist, there is about 1.5" of "wrist" from the base of my hand where I would say the wrist begins and the rest of the wrist area....
[/quote]

Use the LEFT wrist for right handed golfers, the RIGHT wrist for left handed playing golfers because we want the reference to the upper hand in the grip. Measure from the major crease right at the base of the palm, to the floor while standing comfortably erect with your shoulders perfectly level, arms hanging comfortably relaxed at your sides. Flat sole shoes on a hard surface floor.

TOM

[Jamboy72]

Awesome...thanks!

[TomWishon]

[quote name='GooseHook' timestamp='1337875324' post='4970828']

I find that length chart really intriguing. Most of the golfers on these boards are playing shorter lengths, but this is even shorter than that! I have a 31" W to F and play a 42.5" fairway wood and 44" driver- while those are pretty short, I do feel that I could go shorter (especially in the driver).

When fitting folks for a driver, would you say they are pretty surprised at the playing length they end up with? Is it a PITA to get swingweights right, at that point? Looking at conventional swingweight charts, if you're playing a modern driver head at 3W length, you've got to add a bunch of weight and do some tip trimming (almost to 3W level). I know you are a fan of MOI matching- does it make things any easier/more difficult to do that?

Long story short: trial and error is a recipe for disaster if you're short (or have long arms) and strong!!
[/quote]


Keep in mind that most golfers do not know things like what length their current clubs are nor what loft or much of anything. It's typically only the much more serious and experienced golfers that ever are interested in club specs to study, learn, read and remember things about clubs like thi

The reason I shade our chart a little shorter on the driver length is because of a serious biomechanical engineering study we did in the early 2000s about the scientific effects of longer length drivers on the golf swing.

Long story short, with really smart professional assistance, we discovered that as the driver gets longer, the STRESS and the LOAD that the longer length puts on the golfer's swing/body/axis of rotation in the swing increases by the square of the length and the length increase. My engineer who I had do this project created a software program that actually could calculate these factors on the golfer at any given driver length and weight.

Long story short, at lengths above 44", the stress and load on the swing becomes so great that it most definitely can and does cause the swing to break down unless you have superior athletic ability and superior control over the club from possessing various swing elements.

This is why we learned that the ONLY golfers who can effectively control a longer length of more than 44" are golfers who have, 1) an inside out to square path; 2) a smoother transition and tempo; 3) more wrist-c o c k angle AND the ability to hold that angle later in the downswing. All these things make the load and stress of a longer length to be LOWER. Do these things in your swing and the longer length has less ability to cause your swing to break down - you still hit the ball off center a higher percentage of the time though, but your overall success with a longer length is far better than for a golfer who does not possess these specific swing characteristics.

On the other hand, if you have an outside in path, a faster, more forceful transition/tempo and an earlier to midway release, all these things multiply the stress and load from a longer length BY A LOT - and hence such golfers fight their driver when it is longer - sometimes even when it is longer than 43".

Bottom line on this? By our calculations in this study, one of the worst things the golf industry has done in the past 30+ yrs has been to keep cranking standard driver lengths up longer to the point that most now are 46 to 46.5" for men - and even worse, at 44.5 to 45 for women.

Of course if you want a more practical, common sense proof of this, all you have to do is look at what the average driver length on the PGA TOUR is compared to the average length of drivers sold in every golf retail store and pro shop. Data we have says the avg driver length on tour since 2005 has been 44.5" - yet most drivers sold to men by all the OEM club companies is 45.5 to 46.5.

Doesn't make much sense, does it, that the world's best players use driver lengths which are not just a little shorter but significantly shorter than what the golf companies all put on the racks for all golfers to buy.

TOM

[Awsi Dooger]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1337788032' post='4964630']
In fact, we teach almost every time you have a golfer who does need longer than std lengths for comfort, always use a 3/8" or 5/16" increment between the irons. [/quote]

Fantastically sensible. You need to inform the industry as a whole, make it a priority. It's never been applied to me. I've never heard it among friends, some of whom are tall guys who are fitted and change clubs every time a new hyped set of irons shows up.

I can't remember seeing those guidelines on this site, among all the sharp posters. No doubt the theme would surface via search function but if so it would be obscure, certainly not in the mainstream club length threads. No surprise that other posters in this thread already have highlighted that aspect. Among all your astute and appreciated points the past few days, that one stands out.

I'm 6-4 at 37.25 wrist to floor, with sciatica and lower back issues. Played 38.5 for years until switching to 39 a year ago on advice of a local pro, a guy who was on the range when I first hurt my back in 2004. It's been a great move but at 110 yards and in I don't even want to hit those shots. Just last week I stood over a 58 degree from 90 yards and struggled to get the clubface to the ground. I held it roughly 3/4 above the surface and told my playing partner it felt like it should be on the ground right there. Now I realize I was mostly correct.

Lately I've been laying up to 125 or 135 in preference to swing the 36.5 wedge than a lesser club, but more awkwardly painful.

[Nick West]

Tom, I've had this question rolling around in my head for a long time....maybe you can help. In my opinion, it is a critical question regarding fitting, that no one seems to address, and it's this; When fitting a player, do you assemble a combination of components that fits the player's current swing (with all it's swing flaws), or do you assemble a club that is suited to meet a player's future potential?

As a club maker/fitter myself, I am constantly presented with this ethical dillema. I am extremely reluctant to witness a fundamental swing flaw, and then assemble a club to accomodate it, when the player would benefit MUCH more by spending their money getting lessons, and then coming to me. I feel that offering a club that accomodates a players swing flaws, is really just a crutch, and really does more to divert him or her from their path to their full potenial.

Now, the way I've dealt with this up until now, is just to be completely up front, point out all options, and let them decide whether or not they wish to address a swing flaw. If they don't want to address it (which is fine), then I'll do my best to accomdate them in terms of building a club that will suit their needs. But the bottom line is, I think they need to know. I see far too much reliance on component combinations around here, and I'm apt to think that this is probably the case regarding the general public.

For instance, if you're fitting a healthy young man, and he's pulling the ball, and hitting it out to the left, there is an ethical dillema there. One fitter might fit him in an open-faced head, with a shaft that's too stiff to promote a lower trajectory, and a shot that is more prone to go right....and some fitters will leave it at that..."Fixed the problem!!!"....but thave they? All they've done is create a situation in which this player will have to continuously reinforce bad habits just to make the ball go straight. He might not be on an optimal swing plane...he might be reducing his potential for SS/distance. In essense, you['ve encouraged this player to stop pursuing a better swing, for the false promise that a better swing can be acheived through the club. You've effectively diverted this man from his full potential.

This topic was brought up here recently in regards to changing lie to affect shot dispersion. If you do that, and remove the ability of the club to play neutral, then you remove the players ability to ever work the ball in the other direction...and that doesn't seem right to me.

Now, obviously, there are some exceptions, some players might be older, or maybe they're just weekend warriors, and have no desire to build/rebuild their swing from the ground up...and that's totally fine...I get that. But I think this is teh aspect of club fitting that is a real grey area, and for some reason, it seems like the issue is polarized...where fitters will feel one way or the other.

What is your method of addressing this issue?

[TomWishon]

[quote name='Nick West' timestamp='1337953880' post='4975966']
Tom, I've had this question rolling around in my head for a long time....maybe you can help. In my opinion, it is a critical question regarding fitting, that no one seems to address, and it's this; When fitting a player, do you assemble a combination of components that fits the player's current swing (with all it's swing flaws), or do you assemble a club that is suited to meet a player's future potential?

What is your method of addressing this issue?
[/quote]

Very good question that I hope is seen by many golfers who frequent WRX.

Even going back to the fitting schools I taught when at Dynacraft and then at Golfsmith, I always made sure we brought up this matter because it is very important.

Among all of the things that you have to ask and go over with a golfer during a fitting session, you always need to ask this series of questions. . . .

[b]Are you presently taking lessons? What swing issues are you and your instructor working on? How often are you taking lessons and how much are you able to get to the range to work on what your instructor is teaching you, in between your lessons? Are you seeing definite improvement?

[/b]From the golfer's answers you sometimes have to evaluate if they're telling you the truth or not. First of all, if they say NO I AM NOT TAKING LESSONS - OK, now it's easy. You fit them for their current swing characteristics and game improvement needs as they are now.

But if they tell you they are working on their swing and/or taking lessons, now you have to dig a little more to really find out if they really are showing improvement or if that is just wishful thinking. Sorry to say you have to act like a DA who needs "proof", but there are golfers who will go to a fitting session and want you to believe they are better than they are or that they are going to be better than how you see them swing at the ball. it's just a natural part of the ego of the game for some people.

[b]The main swing changes that can affect the outcome of a fitting recommendation are, 1) clubhead speed, 2) swing path, 3) wrist c o c k release, 4) deliver of the face angle to impact. [/b]

If the golfer is definitely working on any of these 4 things and is showing improvement, then you are best to wait until they are finished with their swing work to see where they are at with these 4 swing elements before you prescribe the final fitting specifications.

If they're gaining swing speed, this can affect the recommendations for loft, lie, shaft flex, shaft weight, total weight, swingweight or MOI of the clubs.

If they're improving or changing their swing path and/or their delivery of the face to impact, this will affect the recommendation for the face angle of the woods.

If they're seeing progress on changing their point of release in the downswing, this could/will affect your recommendation for the length, loft, lie, shaft flex, shaft weight, shaft bend profile, total weight, swingweight of the clubs.

So that's the scoop.

While you bring up this matter of the golfer's swing evolution vs fitting, there is also the matter of when is the golfer just not good enough to be fit and needs to take lessons, work on their game to get to a point where fitting can then step in and do what it can do for the golfer. It's important for clubmakers to know this too so they don't spend a lot of time on a fitting, only to have the golfer walk away with new clubs that do very little to nothing to help them and then have the golfer bad mouth you to other golfers as having done nothing to help.

Fitting IS designed to offset and reduce, and sometimes even eliminate the ball striking problems from certain swing errors. That is for sure how fitting works. Proper loft makes up for a lower clubhead speed or a more downward or upward angle of attack. Proper face angle changes make up for a less than perfect swing path or less than perfect rotation of the club face into the ball. Proper length helps offer more control of the club when the swing path, swing tempo, release are less than good. Stuff like that.

But a golfer has to get to a point in their swing where their mistakes are at least "consistently inconsistent". Many of us miss shots both right or left but in fitting we'd like to see that the golfer misses much more in one direction than the other, not 50/50. We also want to see that the golfer can get the ball airborne at least 90% of the time - not topping it 50/50 or even 66/33. If they slice the ball more than 30-35 yds of actual curving flight, that too is something we'd like to see reduced with some swing changes before we want to step in to fit the golfer.

Now one other thing is for sure too. Beginners or golfers with more severe swing faults can learn better swing characteristics sooner and with less work if the clubs they are taking lessons with are SHORTER, LIGHTER, HIGHER LOFTED, MORE FLEXIBLE or in general have a MORE FRIENDLY SET MAKEUP than what they probably bought to start playing the game.

Anyway, time to stop rambling on this and say I hope this helps,

TOM

[HawkeyeDan]

Tom, you mentioned the importance of getting fit from a reputable clubfitter vs a big box store.

Because of where I live, the only option that comes close to this in my area is a guy who is at a local shop that has had intensive fitting training from PING (he has been to AZ a bunch of times). What's your opinion on PING's method? Is it similar to your own? He has told me he would do a fitting for any brand, but his ideas and philosophy regarding fitting have come straight from PING. I would also point out that he does not do any club building or anything like that, so I do not believe he would get into the detail that you have discussed above.

What's your opinion on this? Would it get me "close enough", so to speak?

[TomWishon]

[quote name='HawkeyeDan' timestamp='1337957407' post='4976342']
Tom, you mentioned the importance of getting fit from a reputable clubfitter vs a big box store.

Because of where I live, the only option that comes close to this in my area is a guy who is at a local shop that has had intensive fitting training from PING (he has been to AZ a bunch of times). What's your opinion on PING's method? Is it similar to your own? He has told me he would do a fitting for any brand, but his ideas and philosophy regarding fitting have come straight from PING. I would also point out that he does not do any club building or anything like that, so I do not believe he would get into the detail that you have discussed above.

What's your opinion on this? Would it get me "close enough", so to speak?
[/quote]

Of all the OEMS, Ping takes fitting more seriously and has developed the means to offer a wider range of fitting options than any of the other OEM companies. One of the things I have always respected about Ping is that they have always been run by an engineer - first Karsten and then and now his son John. John's son John K, also an engineer, will likely run them next. Every other golf club company is run by a person who came up from sales, marketing, finance or management.

That sort of thing speaks volumes to someone like me who is so committed to believing that golf clubs should be all about offering every user the greatest chance at playing to the best of their ability.

Any golfer's greatest chance of getting the full, highest level of fitting improvement can only come when every one of the 13 key fitting specs is accurately fit AND CUSTOM BUILT FROM SCRATCH for the golfer for each of the clubs in the set.

In all honesty that is simply not possible when using OEM clubs, no matter what company that might be. Ping goes farther than the others, but not as far as a good, experienced custom clubmaker who builds the custom fit set all from scratch.

If your PING trained man can build the clubs from scratch so he can ordain every single one of the 13 key fitting specs for each club, then yes, you will be in good hands. But if he is just going to alter an existing set that was originally made standard to be sold off the rack, or if he is going to order the clubs from an OEM for you, nope, you will fall short of what you possibly could gain for total game improvement were the set to be accurately custom fit for all 13 key fitting specs AND CUSTOM BUILT FROM SCRATCH for the golfer for each of the clubs in the set.

There maywell be other golfers who read this and completely disagree - but in all honesty and with all respect, those who think an OEM fitting can match a good clubmaker fitting with all clubs built from scratch simply do not know what real fitting is all about. It would take a long explanation that would go through each one of the 13 key specs, one by one, to explain why this is true. If that is required, I am happy to explain this so you (or any naysayers) can understand why what I say is true.

Bottom line - I don't question the training he may have gotten from PING, but unless he's going to build the clubs from scratch using quality heads, shafts, grips, I question if he can provide you with clubs which are accurately custom fit for all 13 key fitting specs AND CUSTOM BUILT FROM SCRATCH for the you for each of the clubs in the set.

TOM

[Break68]

Tom do you do fitting at your location in Durango, Colorado?

[Ace2424]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1337793341' post='4965146']
[quote name='packman80' timestamp='1337789732' post='4964824']
Very interesting and informitive post/write-up. Particularly the part about using 5/16 or 3/8 increments between irons. Which iron do you use as a starting point? Do you start at the wedges and go from there or is that what you were talking about with the 5 iron?
[/quote]

Our wrist to floor chart references off the 5 iron for the irons. That's simply because from years and years, the 5 iron was considered to be the "middle of the set of irons."

But these days in our fitting instruction, we really consider the hybrids to be a member of the iron set family. What we mean is that for however many hybrids a golfer may choose to replace his lower lofted irons in his set, all those hybrids need to be fit to the golfer as if they are a part of his iron set for LENGTH and LOFT.

We think hybrids that are much longer than the iron of the same loft are ridiculous and just end up leaving distance gaps in the iron set and duplicating distances you get with some of your fwy woods.

So - not to belabor this but to make sure we're clear. . . .

Let's say we determine your proper 5-iron length from W to F and swing analysis is 38". But let's say we think your best set make up would be hybrids to replace the 3-iron, and 4-iron so the actual irons would start with the 5 iron. And let's say we want to incorporate that 3/8" increment too. So the length set up for the FULL SET OF HYBRIDS + IRONS WOULD GO LIKE THIS. . . .

3 hybrid - 38 3/4"
4 hybrid - 38 3/8"
5 iron - 38
6 iron - 37 5/8 (+1/8 over)
7 iron - 37 1/4 (+1/4 over)
8 iron - 36 7/8 (+3/8 over)
9 iron - 36 1/2 (+1/2 over)
PW - 36 1/8 (+5/8 over)

For the other wedges, we also tend to fit these separate from the numbered irons for length because wedge lengths can be so more personal based on how each golfer uses each of their wedges in terms of % of full swing shots vs % of half/3/4 length shots and pitches/chips. Based on this, we teach clubfitters to sometimes keep with the 3/8 increments from PW to AW to SW or depart from the 3/8 increment between wedges and use 1/4 between PW to AW to SW.

TOM
[/quote]

TOM,

I have two questions: 1. What goes into the decision of using 3/8" increments over the standards 1/2"?
2. How does this affect the yardage gap between clubs? Obviously, loft is the main factor but how much does the shaft length play into it?

And I just wanted to say thank you for your insightful posts. It is a big help to those of us out there that are unable to be properly fit due to various reasons.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='Break68' timestamp='1337963644' post='4976912']
Tom do you do fitting at your location in Durango, Colorado?
[/quote]

Yes, we do offer Nth degree fitting sessions by appointment, between April 1 and November 1 at our R&D facility which is located at the Dalton Ranch GC, just north of Durango in the absolutely GORGEOUS Animas Valley with mountains and tall red cliffs on both sides.

TOM

[TomWishon]

[quote name='Ace2424' timestamp='1337969569' post='4977390']

I have two questions: 1. What goes into the decision of using 3/8" increments over the standards 1/2"?
2. How does this affect the yardage gap between clubs? Obviously, loft is the main factor but how much does the shaft length play into it?

And I just wanted to say thank you for your insightful posts. It is a big help to those of us out there that are unable to be properly fit due to various reasons.
[/quote]

One of the biggest indications is if the golfer has ever felt like they have to couch down or bend over a little more with the 8, 9, PW, AW irons and/or if they have ever felt like it is a little more work to maintain the posture through the shot. Also if you have gone into any bouts of pulling the high number irons and wedges, this is another indication that a move to 3/8 or 5/16 increments can help.

Effect on distance is really insignificant because as you move up in loft, distance becomes so much more and more a product of the loft. In fact, in all the years we have been advising a change to 3/8 or 5/16 increments, I honestly cannot remember one time a golfer said they noticed any change in shot distance from having changed the length increments like this.

Much appreciated for sure,

TOM

[forefrazier]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1337982901' post='4978464']
[quote name='Ace2424' timestamp='1337969569' post='4977390']
I have two questions: 1. What goes into the decision of using 3/8" increments over the standards 1/2"?
2. How does this affect the yardage gap between clubs? Obviously, loft is the main factor but how much does the shaft length play into it?

And I just wanted to say thank you for your insightful posts. It is a big help to those of us out there that are unable to be properly fit due to various reasons.
[/quote]

One of the biggest indications is if the golfer has ever felt like they have to couch down or bend over a little more with the 8, 9, PW, AW irons and/or if they have ever felt like it is a little more work to maintain the posture through the shot. Also if you have gone into any bouts of pulling the high number irons and wedges, this is another indication that a move to 3/8 or 5/16 increments can help.

Effect on distance is really insignificant because as you move up in loft, distance becomes so much more and more a product of the loft. In fact, in all the years we have been advising a change to 3/8 or 5/16 increments, I honestly cannot remember one time a golfer said they noticed any change in shot distance from having changed the length increments like this.

Much appreciated for sure,

TOM

[/quote]

My exact situation is being explained here. I was recently fit for a set of new irons by one of the major mfg. fitting days. Always played +1", 2 up for the past 20 years. I am 6'5" with a 40" WTF measurement. I was fit using a 6 iron only and told that +1/2" , 2 up would be better than my current spec. Ordered the clubs and now feel as if the lower irons are too short and posture is uncomfortable. After receiving my clubs, I requested a second sitting with the fitter. His recommendation did not change but he did offer to reshaft them at +1" if I wanted. We ended up only adjusting the lie angles to 3 up to hopefully have me feel more comfortable at address and when I look down at the ball. Not sure this is correct at all but trying to trust the mfg. fitting rep. I am sure I can get used to them and the ball stricking and computer seem to show a nice repeating ball fight. Posture does feel a bit bent over though with the lower clubs.

[greens hit]

Thanks for the great insight Tom. I had no idea my 45.5" driver was fit for T-Rex.

If I chop off an inch and add enough weigh in the head to add 6 SW points, will the club/shaft behave differently?

[Nick West]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1337956311' post='4976176']
[quote name='Nick West' timestamp='1337953880' post='4975966']
Tom, I've had this question rolling around in my head for a long time....maybe you can help. In my opinion, it is a critical question regarding fitting, that no one seems to address, and it's this; When fitting a player, do you assemble a combination of components that fits the player's current swing (with all it's swing flaws), or do you assemble a club that is suited to meet a player's future potential?

What is your method of addressing this issue?
[/quote]

Very good question that I hope is seen by many golfers who frequent WRX.

Even going back to the fitting schools I taught when at Dynacraft and then at Golfsmith, I always made sure we brought up this matter because it is very important.

Among all of the things that you have to ask and go over with a golfer during a fitting session, you always need to ask this series of questions. . . .

[b]Are you presently taking lessons? What swing issues are you and your instructor working on? How often are you taking lessons and how much are you able to get to the range to work on what your instructor is teaching you, in between your lessons? Are you seeing definite improvement?

[/b]From the golfer's answers you sometimes have to evaluate if they're telling you the truth or not. First of all, if they say NO I AM NOT TAKING LESSONS - OK, now it's easy. You fit them for their current swing characteristics and game improvement needs as they are now.

But if they tell you they are working on their swing and/or taking lessons, now you have to dig a little more to really find out if they really are showing improvement or if that is just wishful thinking. Sorry to say you have to act like a DA who needs "proof", but there are golfers who will go to a fitting session and want you to believe they are better than they are or that they are going to be better than how you see them swing at the ball. it's just a natural part of the ego of the game for some people.

[b]The main swing changes that can affect the outcome of a fitting recommendation are, 1) clubhead speed, 2) swing path, 3) wrist c o c k release, 4) deliver of the face angle to impact. [/b]

If the golfer is definitely working on any of these 4 things and is showing improvement, then you are best to wait until they are finished with their swing work to see where they are at with these 4 swing elements before you prescribe the final fitting specifications.

If they're gaining swing speed, this can affect the recommendations for loft, lie, shaft flex, shaft weight, total weight, swingweight or MOI of the clubs.

If they're improving or changing their swing path and/or their delivery of the face to impact, this will affect the recommendation for the face angle of the woods.

If they're seeing progress on changing their point of release in the downswing, this could/will affect your recommendation for the length, loft, lie, shaft flex, shaft weight, shaft bend profile, total weight, swingweight of the clubs.

So that's the scoop.

While you bring up this matter of the golfer's swing evolution vs fitting, there is also the matter of when is the golfer just not good enough to be fit and needs to take lessons, work on their game to get to a point where fitting can then step in and do what it can do for the golfer. It's important for clubmakers to know this too so they don't spend a lot of time on a fitting, only to have the golfer walk away with new clubs that do very little to nothing to help them and then have the golfer bad mouth you to other golfers as having done nothing to help.

Fitting IS designed to offset and reduce, and sometimes even eliminate the ball striking problems from certain swing errors. That is for sure how fitting works. Proper loft makes up for a lower clubhead speed or a more downward or upward angle of attack. Proper face angle changes make up for a less than perfect swing path or less than perfect rotation of the club face into the ball. Proper length helps offer more control of the club when the swing path, swing tempo, release are less than good. Stuff like that.

But a golfer has to get to a point in their swing where their mistakes are at least "consistently inconsistent". Many of us miss shots both right or left but in fitting we'd like to see that the golfer misses much more in one direction than the other, not 50/50. We also want to see that the golfer can get the ball airborne at least 90% of the time - not topping it 50/50 or even 66/33. If they slice the ball more than 30-35 yds of actual curving flight, that too is something we'd like to see reduced with some swing changes before we want to step in to fit the golfer.

Now one other thing is for sure too. Beginners or golfers with more severe swing faults can learn better swing characteristics sooner and with less work if the clubs they are taking lessons with are SHORTER, LIGHTER, HIGHER LOFTED, MORE FLEXIBLE or in general have a MORE FRIENDLY SET MAKEUP than what they probably bought to start playing the game.

Anyway, time to stop rambling on this and say I hope this helps,

TOM
[/quote]



Thank you, Tom, for your response. I really like your method. I think I've basically been doing the same thing, I just hadn't narrowed the parameters that specifically.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='greens hit' timestamp='1337993584' post='4979106']
Thanks for the great insight Tom. I had no idea my 45.5" driver was fit for T-Rex.

If I chop off an inch and add enough weigh in the head to add 6 SW points, will the club/shaft behave differently?
[/quote]

If you add the weight to restore the swingweight, you won't notice any difference in the shaft. the slight stiffness increase from shortening the shaft by an inch is then reversed with the addition of headweight which has the effect of making the shaft bend more during the swing. One cancels out the other, even though it is very slight.

TOM

[raytracer]

Tom,

First off - thank you so much for this wealth of information. You mention taking the measurement while wearing 'flat sole shoes'. Would you recommend using the golf shoes we normally play in? When I take my measurements barefoot compared to golf shoes it varies by an inch or more.

[TLT_Dan]

[quote name='PingG10guy' timestamp='1337875694' post='4970876']
[quote name='topekareal' timestamp='1337872889' post='4970490']
Yeah, that sounds kind of stupid, but I guess my question is, when measuring to the wrist, do you measure to the very base of the hand? As I look at my wrist, there is about 1.5" of "wrist" from the base of my hand where I would say the wrist begins and the rest of the wrist area....
[/quote]

I always wondered the same thing. There's some area that is open for interpretation and could change measurements. Tom...can you post a pick of where the tape starts on WTF?
[/quote]

WTF - you need to be standing upright, shoes on, head up - with your arms hanging to your side comfortably, and just kink your wrist. The inside bend point is the location you need. It is always best to have someone else measure for you as I've seen alot of mistakes by - self measuring.

As Tom says, it is a great starting point

[pedarius]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1337982901' post='4978464']
One of the biggest indications is if the golfer has ever felt like they have to couch down or bend over a little more with the 8, 9, PW, AW irons and/or if they have ever felt like it is a little more work to maintain the posture through the shot. Also if you have gone into any bouts of pulling the high number irons and wedges, this is another indication that a move to 3/8 or 5/16 increments can help.


[/quote]

This is fascinating stuff. I am 6'6", with a static WTF of 38.25". Have been fitted (not just at a big box store) a couple of times for irons and come out each time at +1", 3* up off of Mizuno standard spec. Problem is that the mid-irons have always felt fine while wedges built to that spec frequently have felt uncomfortable, like I get stuck and can't really turn through it because I have to bend over too far. The result is that I sometimes have trouble completing my turn with anything shorter than a PW and have a tendency to jerk/pull or flip at it, generally producing a very high hook. This is particularly common later in the round or a range session when my back is already somewhat tired (and I get tired faster hitting a wedge on the range than I do a 5i--could do that all day without fatigue). Have finally found a teaching pro this year that I really like and have been working on a completely new swing, but still have not been able to get past the feeling that I'd often rather be hitting a 6i into a green than a GW. Never occurred to me that the increments between irons could be changed--always assumed that 1/2" gaps were a law of nature that was beyond questioning.

Thanks very much for your posts, Tom. Great information and food for thought in all of them.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='raytracer' timestamp='1338057488' post='4981662']
Tom,

First off - thank you so much for this wealth of information. You mention taking the measurement while wearing 'flat sole shoes'. Would you recommend using the golf shoes we normally play in? When I take my measurements barefoot compared to golf shoes it varies by an inch or more.
[/quote]

Even soft spikes can elevate you a little bit when standing on a hard floor. Best for this to be in loafers or tennis shoes and standing on a tile/cement/wood floor - not carpet with any type of pile to it. Outdoor carpet is ok. Chart entries are at the least based on 1" ranges in W to F, so getting this within an accuracy of 1/2" is what you need to do. And that'll be good enough.

VERY important to be standing comfortably ERECT, shoulders PERFECTLY LEVEL, arms hanging RELAXED at the sides. If you are doing this solo, do it in front of a mirror so you know the hsoulders are level - if you have a mirror somewhere around a hard surface floor that is.

TOM