The "HOG" putter is also heavy !! I have one and like to use it at times.
Jay ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 3:14 AM Subject: ShopTalk: Heavy Putter > I'm interested in this discussion of the Heavy Putter. Eight or ten > years ago, a company named, I think, Octagon, came out with a putter > which had a very heavy shaft (Octagon shaped). As I remember it, there > was metal "wrap" around a several inch long section of the the shaft a > few inches below the grip. It felt very different, but as claimed by > the Heavy Putter website, I had the sense that the very heavy overall > weight smoothed out my putter path. Felt good. But it felt to me like > the shaft actually flexed when stroking a putt, and that bothered me, > so I never got one. Does this putter feel like the shaft is flexing > during, say, a 20-30 foot putt? > > I know that it got me to experimenting with total weight in subsequent > putters that I've used. Since then, I've added sand to increase their > weights to the shafts of all of the putters I've used . In the range > of 40-60 grams of sand. > > The graphical test results posted on their site of changes in putter > path when using the putter look like how I FELT the Octagon putter > changed my stroke. I'll be interested in what Shoptalkers say who see > this one in Orlando. > > Brad > > > > > On Tuesday, January 18, 2005, at 07:34 PM, Dave Tutelman wrote: > > > Charlie, > > Thanks for posting this. I've been walking on eggshells, wondering > > what it's OK for me to say about Heavy Putter. You've just extended my > > threshold... > > > > At 09:50 AM 1/18/05 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Back weighting has been around for years and is still being used > >> today. Hell I've spent the last 2 1/2 years developing a new putting > >> product that will be launched onto the golf world at the PGA Show in > >> about a week. It incorporates a very heavy mass head that is > >> adjustable by 100 grams and a weight management which is a > >> backweighting system that runs from 150 to 300 grams not including > >> the grip. > > > > I've watched Charlie's efforts, and participated a little bit. A year > > and a half ago, Charlie gave me a chance to try one of the early > > prototypes when we played together. Felt very different, but made an > > amazing number of putts. Last Spring, I got involved in a little > > prototyping with Charlie, and the result kicked my Tech-Line putter > > out of the bag. The Tech-Line had been my putter for years; no other > > experiment lasted more than a few weeks before the Tech-Line was back. > > But the prototype has been there since Spring. > > > > That brings me to two things, one of which I said and one that I would > > have liked to: > > > > (1) I said that backweighting is a very different principle in a > > putter (where the goal is for the wrist not to break) than in the full > > swing (where wrist cock and release is critical). That comes from some > > mini-analysis of the Heavy Putter and what the backweight > accomplishes. > > > > (2) I wanted to say that I have enough backweight in my bag to reduce > > a whole set of clubs by 3 swingweight points each. But all that > > backweight is in just one club -- my putter. Now that Charlie has > > publicly talked about the principles of the Heavy Putter, I feel I can > > say it. > > > >> Backweighting manipulates the balance point and that is I feel its > >> main advantage as all golfers have a different release point and by > >> moving this balance point you can match the release of the club to > >> the release of the golfer. > > > > The context here is not putters, but full-swing clubs. I had a > > discussion with Charlie after he posted this. Here's where I come out > > on it. > > > > If you apply backweight to a full-swing club and have it swung by > > either a robot or a computer program, there will be no -- or at most > > negligible -- difference. Release point, clubhead speed, wrist cock at > > impact... all virtually the same with and without the backweight. > > > > So my conclusion is that the backweight does not cause the club's > > release point to change; it causes the golfer's release point to > > change. You're not matching the club to the swing so much as doing > > something to the club that changes the feel, thus changing the swing. > > It is still club fitting at its finest, but: > > * You can't equate the swingweight change of backweight to the > > swingweight change of, say, head weight or club length. > > * You are not changing the dynamics of the club. Rather, you are > > changing the feel and the result MAY be a change in the forces the > > golfer applies in the swing -- and that MAY be a favorable change. I'd > > be surprised (though not completely flabbergasted) if it did the same > > thing for all golf swings. > > > > Cheers! > > DaveT > > > > > > > > > >
