Smash factor.... Duh!

[Nebgolfer]

So you hit on a monitor when you practice? How often do you repeat your smash factor? And how does that translate on the golf course?

I use my SC100 on the range, and I'm seeing consistent smash factor numbers on good shots. With my driver if I'm under 1.45 I'm doing something wrong and try to figure it out. Of course, I use that as a piece of data, not the only piece though. I look at ball flight and consider feel. 1.5 smash that hooks into the trees, but 1.2 with a driver that goes dead straight isn't great either.

As to how it relates to the golf course, as I get more consistent on the range, I'm seeing more consistent distances in the course, so I think they are related but not causal, if that makes sense.

 

[Chickopher]

The Voice Caddie VC100 is pretty much exactly that



Freddie, I think you're mostly right on this. I know when I went for my THPMC fitting my fitter and I took smash very seriously when trying to determine shaft/head combination. It wasn't until I hit the Bio Cell with the 6.0 PXi shaft when I saw my number gor from 1.32 to 1.47. That added about 10mph of ball speed which turned into more distance. What I agree with you 100% on is that the number is meaningless to most, but only because they may not understand it. For me, it's all about efficiency and what I'm doing to keep things as simple as possible to get the best results. If I swing a club 115 mph, my smash is usually around 1.2 and the ball goes where ever it wants. However, if I take a nice controlled swing 100-105, I'll get a nice boring shot that will roll out to around 265 and leave me in the short stuff. Same with my irons.

Numbers mean nothing unless you understand everything that is included in them. Smash isn't JUST ball speed and club head speed. It tells you a whole lot more if you dig into it.

Exactly!

 

[malemotives]

If you don't hit the center of the face or have a repeatable swing why would this concern you. Do you have a personal smash factor monitor in your pocket every time out?

If the amount of effort was put into game improvement as was data collection the number you seek would mean something.

Exactly! Tadashi has put it short and directly to the point.

 

[Mark_UK]

I remember going for a club fitting years ago and zeroing in on the smash factor (it was the first time I'd heard of it). I ended up buying a set of irons that were totally unsuitable for me. Now I couldn't give 2 boots what my smash factor is, I didn't even look at it during my last fitting!

 

[malemotives]

You say your more comfy with a 5i than a wedge but the GW is fine? So basically you would hit more greens with a 5i and/or a GW but not with the clubs in between? A little confusing or I am misunderstanding.
As for the 5i, many have a favorite club or two and many also have a preferred club distance to hit in from but I cant imagine one hitting more greens with a 5i vs a 7,8,9 etc. I mean too each his own and personally I love my 4iron but I certainly will hit many more greens with a 7,8,9,pw whatever.

For managing a given hole I'm always in agreement to play to ones stregnths including often laying up my tee shots with shorter clubs. But if i was a shorter hitter than I currently am I would never justify it by saying I'd rather hit my 4iron to the green than a shorter club.

But each hole itself imo should be managed dependent on the lay out of that hole and not simply distance. If one desires so called position "A" then all hings like over all distance, doglegs, hazards, flatest part of the fairway, forgiving landing area, angle into the green, elevation, and all or any combinations of those, etc need to be considred and not simply just always to a preferred distance of your 5iron as that may not be the best place to actually put oneself.

So driver distance is not the "end all cure all" by any means and I agree with that logic but it certainly is a big deal and not just a "SO WHAT" as it gives one more options to obtain a better position "A" in many cases. Those extra yards can prove very beneficial when needed. And besides what if you dont hit the driver good enough on that hole? The longer player who expected to playing 8iron instead is left with playing his 5i. But the shorter hitter who expected to be playing his 5i now is left with a 3i or fw, whatever. Being as long as one can be is very important when needed. We all have limits and can only play with what we are capable of and saying "SO WHAT?" is only ok because one cant obtain the extra 20 yards or 30 whatever so there is nothing they can do about it except to manage thier game accordingly but using the term to try to dismiss its importance or degrade the value of it is incorrect.

At this particular time... for what ever the reason with my swing, I am more comfortable with less loft. I seem to take a little less divot and have better contact/control. Of my wedges, I mentioned Gap from 80 because I often find myself there on shorter holes, and unless I were to master a control punch and run with a 5 iron, from 80 yards, which doesn't sound feasible, I am stuck with the game I have. This, hopefully changes as I get better... and I will, but my point is, for me... managing my ball position to my strengths is more important than hitting long drives or concerning myself with more numbers that don't help me.

 

[Paladin]

Like a lot of data collection for golf, it's a symptom of the situation as a whole, the situation being...well, your swing. Inconsistent swing, inconsistent face contact, inconsistent smash factor...generally. But I think it's so far down the list of metrics in terms of what really helps your game that spending too much time worrying about it is kinda silly.

 

[arydolphin]

The Voice Caddie VC100 is pretty much exactly that



Freddie, I think you're mostly right on this. I know when I went for my THPMC fitting my fitter and I took smash very seriously when trying to determine shaft/head combination. It wasn't until I hit the Bio Cell with the 6.0 PXi shaft when I saw my number gor from 1.32 to 1.47. That added about 10mph of ball speed which turned into more distance. What I agree with you 100% on is that the number is meaningless to most, but only because they may not understand it. For me, it's all about efficiency and what I'm doing to keep things as simple as possible to get the best results. If I swing a club 115 mph, my smash is usually around 1.2 and the ball goes where ever it wants. However, if I take a nice controlled swing 100-105, I'll get a nice boring shot that will roll out to around 265 and leave me in the short stuff. Same with my irons.

Numbers mean nothing unless you understand everything that is included in them. Smash isn't JUST ball speed and club head speed. It tells you a whole lot more if you dig into it.

Good post adamw238.

It's funny to me that the majority of posters in this thread don't want to take advantage of the technology that is out there and learn how these numbers can help their game. News flash: if you work on your swing and get more consistent with it, your smash factor is probably going to go up and you can hit the ball further, who doesn't want that? There are multiple examples from guys like Nebgolfer and golf4life of how knowing these numbers has helped their game, and others choose to disregard it. I just don't understand it.

 

[katman]

Assuming the exact same contact, the higher ball speed should go farther. The smash factor is only comparable if the swing speed and contact are the same.
For example:
Player A: Swing speed 100 mph and 135 mph ball speed = 1.35 smash
Player B: Swing speed 80 mph and 120 mph ball speed = 1.50 smash

Player B gets the most out of his/her swing but Player A hits it farther assuming all else is the same.

That is correct but a bit misleading. Yes, the person with the 20 MPH faster swing gets more distance out of the same club. This shouldn't surprise anyone.

But if Player A drops swing speed to 97 and gets a smash factor of 142 (what most amatuers should be aiming for), he or she gets 138 MPH of ball speed (rounded) or roughly 6 yards further distance. Smash factor is poorly named because it implies things about speed and mass (which are parts of the formula, admittedly). Really, smash is about consistency and control.

Anyone who has ever said, "Half as hard, twice as far" is talking mostly about Smash Factor.

 

[adamw238]

Really, smash is about consistency and control.

Anyone who has ever said, "Half as hard, twice as far" is talking mostly about Smash Factor.

I'm going to say yes and no to the bold part. You can be consistent and still have a lower than average smash factor. The same for control. Some of the highest smash numbers I get from my driver are blocks. The shot goes right and stays right but was hit pure. But, I think you might have been saying that a controlled swing with get you getter results? I'm basing that off of your last quote. That, I 100% agree with. My worst strikes are when I get to long and feel like I have to do all of the work.

Anytime you're measuring an input against the output you're talking efficiency. When I was in school for my electrical engineering degree, we constantly had to calculate the electrical/power efficiency of a component when determining if we were going to use it in our projects. And that calculation was useful output/total input. Same here, useful output would be your ball speed divided by your total input (club head speed). This is why I take shaft selection so seriously now. I want something that is going to deliver as much energy as possible from my body to the ball.

I've got a friend who puts no worth in smash numbers and thinks I waste my time trying to maximize it. However, I'm now either driving it as far as him or out driving him now as opposed to last year when he was 50 yards farther than I was. Same with my irons. I can take one iron less than him sometimes because I've got my clubs set up to delivery more than 125% of my input.

But, I understand it's not for everybody. Even pros don't care about these numbers. They want to see results, not hear about numbers and such.

 

[sposey013168]

I hear ya panda, I know at contact if I hit it solid or not. I am focusing on a repeatable swing not what my smash factor is

So you hit on a monitor when you practice? How often do you repeat your smash factor? And how does that translate on the golf course?

 

[sposey013168]

That is true whether you know the smash factor or not.

Yes it is nice to know what your smash factor is on good swings, but I would rather practice a repeatable swing without worrying about what my smash is on every swing.

Good post adamw238.

if you work on your swing and get more consistent with it, your smash factor is probably going to go up and you can hit the ball further, who doesn't want that?

 

[boondoggle]

What an education ... this whole time I thought smash factor was:

2 beers in cooler at the start of round + 3 beers bought from cart girl during the round + 2 beers at the turn = smash factor

I increased my smash factor significantly by adding a shot of burbon after each hole from a pocket flask to the above formula. I was pushing a 2.0 by the 18th. Or was I blowing a .20?:dont-know:

 

[Tadashi70]

The Voice Caddie VC100 is pretty much exactly that



Freddie, I think you're mostly right on this. I know when I went for my THPMC fitting my fitter and I took smash very seriously when trying to determine shaft/head combination. It wasn't until I hit the Bio Cell with the 6.0 PXi shaft when I saw my number gor from 1.32 to 1.47. That added about 10mph of ball speed which turned into more distance. What I agree with you 100% on is that the number is meaningless to most, but only because they may not understand it. For me, it's all about efficiency and what I'm doing to keep things as simple as possible to get the best results. If I swing a club 115 mph, my smash is usually around 1.2 and the ball goes where ever it wants. However, if I take a nice controlled swing 100-105, I'll get a nice boring shot that will roll out to around 265 and leave me in the short stuff. Same with my irons.

Numbers mean nothing unless you understand everything that is included in them. Smash isn't JUST ball speed and club head speed. It tells you a whole lot more if you dig into it.

And this is my point. The vast majority don't have personal swing monitors to get their numbers. So smash factor is of not more importance then a potato masher on the golf course. And those that have devices and no idea how to adjust properly for a better smash factor are wasting time. The numbers we get in a fitting are only relevant if, like you, people understand and can make the prose adjustments to change said numbers if they see fit.

 

[tequila4kapp]

DRIVER EXAMPLE
Golfer A has a club speed of 100 mph and a smash factor of 1.40. Golfer A’s ball speed is 140 mph.
Golfer B has a club speed of 100 mph and a smash factor of 1.50. Golfer B’s ball speed is 150 mph.
The 10 mph difference in ball speed between Golfer A and Golfer B equates to approximately 20 yards in distance between the two golfers even though they have the same club speed.

My reaction is... SO WHAT?!

What causes someone's SF to be low? It is one of two things: 1) a poorly executed swing or 2) a ball struck somewhere other than the center. More often than not either of those flaws leads to the ball being short and/or off line. As a result, I think the premise that less SF is fine because we can course manage our way around less distance vs the long bomber misses the mark.

 

[rollin]

At this particular time...

....., I am stuck with the game I have. This, hopefully changes as I get better... and I will, but my point is, for me... managing my ball position to my strengths is more important than hitting long drives or concerning myself with more numbers that don't help me.

What causes someone's SF to be low? It is one of two things: 1) a poorly executed swing or 2) a ball struck somewhere other than the center. More often than not either of those flaws leads to the ball being short and/or off line. As a result, I think the premise that less SF is fine because we can course manage our way around less distance vs the long bomber misses the mark.

The bold ^^^^ is what I was implying.
To the OP I think when you say "getting better" is the difference if that's what you want (and as you implied you do).
While the actual numbers are unimportant to you they are (regardless if you know them or not) what you will get better at as your game/swing improves just as you wish for. The management decisions (as one becomes better) then will be different and offer up more options. In one sense you can say "so what" to the extra yards because you'll simply manage a certain way but in another sense (simply by wanting to improve) you do indeed care and do realize the importance of those extra yards. Like I said earlier, we can only manage what we are capable of at the time and I think we are on the same page with that. The numbers are only meaningless because one is stuck and has no choice but to play what/how he can and manage accordingly but they are important if and because one wishes to improve. As "tequila" alludes to - we cant suggest anything holds little or no value simply because we manage our way around it. In fact, "managing our way around things" in itself is what proves to us that they hold a lot of value.

 

[adamw238]

The bold ^^^^ is what I was implying.
To the OP I think when you say "getting better" is the difference if that's what you want (and as you implied you do).
While the actual numbers are unimportant to you they are (regardless if you know them or not) what you will get better at as your game/swing improves just as you wish for. The management decisions (as one becomes better) then will be different and offer up more options. In one sense you can say "so what" to the extra yards because you'll simply manage a certain way but in another sense (simply by wanting to improve) you do indeed care and do realize the importance of those extra yards. Like I said earlier, we can only manage what we are capable of at the time and I think we are on the same page with that. The numbers are only meaningless because one is stuck and has no choice but to play what/how he can and manage accordingly but they are important if and because one wishes to improve. As "tequila" alludes to - we cant suggest anything holds little or no value simply because we manage our way around it. In fact, "managing our way around things" in itself is what proves to us that they hold a lot of value.

Bravo!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Trout Bum]

Good post adamw238.

It's funny to me that the majority of posters in this thread don't want to take advantage of the technology that is out there and learn how these numbers can help their game. News flash: if you work on your swing and get more consistent with it, your smash factor is probably going to go up and you can hit the ball further, who doesn't want that? There are multiple examples from guys like Nebgolfer and golf4life of how knowing these numbers has helped their game, and others choose to disregard it. I just don't understand it.

Ary I think for most golfers it comes with time. People focus a lot on other things because they don't know what exactly to focus on and only time playing can shift that focus. It's an important number for a very small percentage. I do agree with you though.

 

[baldguy]

its pretty simple... smash factor is good for equipment fitting and swing work. that's about it. Like others have said, it's just a measure of how well you are hitting the center of the face. it's not just about distance, it's about repeatable efficiency. it's also not only for drivers. When you're trying out different equipment (like during a fitting), smash factor is just an easy way to see how well that equipment works for you.

 

[rollin]

something else about SF pops up in my head. Many say its about how on center we are but I would think there is much more than that.

We have (in other threads) discussed things like power vs or along with speed. I think there is something to be said for power in relation to everything and its affect on SF. I would believe power has to do with having everything in the swing and with the entire body all coming together correctly as possible at point of contact. Basically all energy exerted at the precise time at contact. But as one varies with things like not getting enough energy of the body involved or spending the energy at the incorrect spot it means less power and should also mean less efficient SF. Not getting all available energy transferred and /or also spending that energy a bit too soon or a bit too late from point of contact then ball speed and SF should drop.

Even dead center hits then do not generate the BS or SF even though club speed may be the same and even though contact with head was in same place. Hence the power side of the equation. If this logic stands correct then its not just about center of face. I can hit same spot (or very close) on the club with two drives and similar trajectory and one goes 245 while the other goes 275. I'm sure you've all experienced similar. SF has changed due to power or energy transfer even though contact was in the same spot. This whole thing is more a curiosity for me than a dictation from me.

 

[tahoebum]

Smash factor is a modern way of saying flush contact - squared center face with a square path. I don't need a launch monitor to tell me how center face and square my contact is, all I have to do is look at my divots, ball flight, and feel where the ball is contacting the face of the club. One of the reasons why I prefer a forged, less forgiving iron is they give me immediate feedback when my "smash factor" is less than ideal.