Mark, The specific SW may not always be critical when fitting SW to correct ball flight (read swing faults). It is often the amount and direction of change, that has the affect. But they says we swingers are soooooooo smoooth that we can adjust to most any flex and swing weight. You do believe that dontcha?
Al At 11:51 PM 9/23/2002, you wrote: >I have been watching this thread and had a couple thoughts: > >1. A personal observation for myself as well as most that I have fitted >that had a quick swing. A heavier SW while not compromising a heavy >total weight has mostly proven better. Do not view any SW measurement as >TOO much, but rather insure these are matched by some reason and that >the total weight is not too much. > >PS: Don't try to fool the SW scale (easy to do) by using a lighter grip. >Measure the club un-gripped as the scale measures on a different pivot >point (fulcrum in scale language) than what the golfer actually uses. (A >difference of roughly 8 inches) (IE: Do you really think that a given >club with a GP Tour Wrap swings that much different than the same club >with a GP Tour Wrap Lite. The scale says so though the golfer doesn't; >but then again SW is not a dynamic measurement - refer to Jorgenson's >work or previous posts from DaveT, etal) > >2. While SW is important to match because: >A: To insure consistency in your work as viewed by you >B: To insure consistency in your work as viewed by potential other >clubmakers that measure these clubs > >it is not the only factor. Total weight as well as MOI should be taken >into consideration. Keep in mind that SW is a static measurement and >that MOI is dynamic For further information, I would again refer to >Jorgenson's work. > >I am not certain if a specific SW should be targeted without these other >items being taken into consideration. I have even noted that with >golfers w/ large hands, it appears that the grip dia has an effect on >their "apparent" view of "SW" > >For those that wonder: larger grip = lighter, smaller grip = heavier. >Seems to be more pronounced in shorter swings. I would be interested in >any other fitters that may have observed this (yes the grips were the >same weight as were the shafts, heads, and SW on the std scale). > >Always seeming to bump up against a strange new observation > >Mark > > > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Thank you Tom. What you have just outlined is what I have been telling > > people for years. Still it seems the majority of people think that > > there is something magical about swingweight. Perhaps it is due to > > it's relative ease of measurement and that the measurement is directly > > related to a club rather than just a general weight measurement. I > > really don't know why most people are fascinated with it though, apart > > from the consistency aspect. > > > > Rich "Mac" McHattie > > Mac's Golf
