- Moderator
- #76
I kind of want to touch on the three things, but I think it's first important to note the obvious: Blanket statements like this are just that.. blanket. You'd have to be a fool in 2020 to think that all shafts/setups/heads work well for all golfers. The proper fit for me is going to be wildly different than the proper fit for a slow swinging 25 handicap.In recent years, whether I am talking to equipment sales reps, listening to podcasts featuring equipment company employees, watching marketing videos from equipment companies etc... it seems that no matter which company, a few points of message are common from each company:
1) big heads are better than small heads
2) graphite shafts are better than steel shafts
3) lighter shafts are better than heavy shafts
A professional fitting seems to be recommended by every equipment company representative or marketing message, and I have no idea if once fit the recommended specs match these points.
Regardless of the "get fit" message, do you agree that the above 3 points are common ones from every major golf club brand ?
Also important to note: The national average for a handicap is not that low. So while there may be a vocal minority objecting to lighter shafts, graphite shafts, and larger driver heads, the reality that each of those things probably do well to benefit a SOLID chunk of the golf marketplace is entirely reasonable to assume.
bigger heads; I think it's pretty safe to say that diminishing returns exists, but so does skill. When you get a person who is actively engaging with their wrists/hands at impact, there's some truth that a smaller head will work for them. It's also a pretty impressive skill. Fair to assume the large majority of golfers aren't like that, and obviously benefit from maximum MOI - If that were NOT the case, Tour heads would still be 420/430/440 vs 460.
Graphite shafts are less taxing on the body, and can be flexed as stiff as you want at this point. If this wasn't true, driver shafts on tour would still be steel, and etc etc etc. It's not a magic show to see everything down to the iron swap to graphite. Also, I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that graphite can offer a more creative flex profile than steel. "Better" is a relative term.
Finally, lighter is better: Sure, for older golfers, slower swinging golfers, ladies, this is basically an absolute. You get an opportunity to promote a faster and possibly more connected move with a 90 gram shaft than you would a 130 gram shaft... But it's also incremental. Does anyone play a 150 gram shaft? Nope. So you could easily say "lighter is better" as a blanket statement and move on. That in mind, I firmly believe that going lighter is way better than going heavier for the majority of golfers.
All that said, I don't see companies making any of these bold claims, however I don't think they need to. Consider what is stock in their product, and the trend they are following, and I think it's pretty clear what their perspective is. You'll find the player'esque irons being heavier and steel, and the SGI irons having lighter and sometimes graphite. It's pretty obvious what works, and of course they are going to set up the product to benefit the most golfers right out of the gate.