We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Two Taylormade R9's Different Lengths

SuperStroke
JB said:
Im curious once again where your stats come from. Both the swing speed increase and the PGA Tour shaft length are different than what we were given by two different sources.
Click to expand...

The most recent shaft length numbers I have are from GolfWRX.com and the distance increase numbers I'm pulling from memory.

I've read that the Tour average has lately risen to 44.5-inches, but I'm hedging that because several manufacturers are pushing lengths close to 46-inches. If the tour average is listed at 44 that would tend to make those 46-inch shafts seem a little overly long so I'm guessing that the tour numbers have been "massaged" just a bit so that the gap isn't so drastic.

At any rate, the point is that in the case of most golfers - even the good ones, a shorter driver shaft usually is a better bet overall unless someone either "fits" a longer shaft by nature or works very carefully to maintain a good swing for it.

This game is complicated enough, so why add to it?


-JP
 
JPsuff said:
The most recent shaft length numbers I have are from GolfWRX.com and the distance increase numbers I'm pulling from memory.

I've read that the Tour average has lately risen to 44.5-inches, but I'm hedging that because several manufacturers are pushing lengths close to 46-inches. If the tour average is listed at 44 that would tend to make those 46-inch shafts seem a little overly long so I'm guessing that the tour numbers have been "massaged" just a bit so that the gap isn't so drastic.

At any rate, the point is that in the case of most golfers - even the good ones, a shorter driver shaft usually is a better bet overall unless someone either "fits" a longer shaft by nature or works very carefully to maintain a good swing for it.

This game is complicated enough, so why add to it?


-JP
Click to expand...

So you massaged the numbers down to 44 inches only to say that the tour massaged them? Okay I guess. The PGA Tour average is not done by manufacturers. It is taken from the Darrell Survey that has nothing to do with any manufacturer and is as of the PGA Championship 44.62 inches.

As for your swing speed distance numbers, that you pulled from memory, they are quite off from what each shaft company told us and we spoke to 6 of them and they all gave us the exact same information.
 
JPsuff said:
The most recent shaft length numbers I have are from GolfWRX.com and the distance increase numbers I'm pulling from memory.

. . .

If the tour average is listed at 44 that would tend to make those 46-inch shafts seem a little overly long so I'm guessing that the tour numbers have been "massaged" just a bit so that the gap isn't so drastic.
Click to expand...

Dude, seriously. I know you like to debate, but if your are going to continue, you can't keep pulling this stuff out of your
q31061022037_2715.jpg
.

"Massaged" numbers, interweb forums, and "memory" are not acceptable sources if you want people to give your arguments any credence whatsoever. And if you use those as your "proof," you certainly can't complain when people then challenge your assertions. Besides, it's just plain annoying.
 
Harry Longshanks said:
Dude, seriously. I know you like to debate, but if your are going to continue, you can't keep pulling this stuff out of your
q31061022037_2715.jpg
.

"Massaged" numbers, interweb forums, and "memory" are not acceptable sources if you want people to give your arguments any credence whatsoever. And if you use those as your "proof," you certainly can't complain when people then challenge your assertions. Besides, it's just plain annoying.
Click to expand...


You guys crack me up.


I took the time to explain to someone why I think that a shorter shaft for a driver is more beneficial and will produce more consistent results. I point out the reasons why, I acknowledge that some players can handle and will benefit from some longer shafts (though they are clearly in the minority) and I even point out that trimming a shaft will affect swingweight and I offer several ways to address that problem.

Yet the thing you focus on is that I included some inexact numbers in my post and as it turns out I was off by 1/2-inch (excuse me, I mean sixty two hundredths of an inch) and all you guys can do is punch your fists in the air like a couple of Junior High school kids because you've proven me wrong.

This must be a great moment for you.

Tell me, Why do you seem to take such joy in that?

It is an absolute, bona fide fact that a shorter shaft is easier to control and will encourage more consistency. It is also a fact that most of the teaching pro's and most competent clubmakers out there advocate shorter driver shafts over longer ones for the average golfer - jndeed for golfers in general.

But you'd rather argue over meaningless statistics and fractions of an inch.

By the way, the PGA Tour only recently nudged up to over 44-inches as an average driver shaft length. In fact, it was about two tears ago or so which coincidentally just happens to be about the same time the Burner appeared with a stock 46-inch shaft and other manufacturers began offering shafts longer than 45-inches.

Things that make you go, "Hmmm..."


So are there any more faults of mine that you'd like to point out, or will that be about it for now?


-JP
 
Nobody is "out to get you" like you seem to think. Yet in each thread you make your "arguments" based on statistics, but in most of them, your statistics are off. How is someone looking for advice supposed to know which part of your answers are correct? I am really curious here?

I simply asked where you got your information from because it was different than ours. You went on a mini rant about how the the tour is fudging statistics. As for your faults? Im sure you have plenty, just like we all do. However, we ask that when you are using statistics to prove a point, you make sure or try to anyway that they are correct.

Otherwise make your argument without them. You chose to use them to emphasize your point, nobody else did.
 
JPsuff said:
So are there any more faults of mine that you'd like to point out, or will that be about it for now?
Click to expand...

Okay, I've been extremely polite up to this point, but twice now you have engaged me in an argument without addressing the actual points I raise. Instead, both times you chose instead to insult me.

You want me to take the gloves off and sink to your level? Fine, I will:


  • Quit pulling stuff out of your ass and back up your arguments with actual facts and sources. If you can't, then don't post them as "facts." They aren't facts just because you think they are true.

  • Stop being paranoid. No one is out to get you and there is no conspiracy. But when someone posts erroneous information as though it was thoughtfully researched, it irritates people. Once or twice is expected on the internet, but you do it ALL the time. And then you complain whenever someone points out the factual inaccuracies or logical fallacies in your arguments.

  • You are one step above a troll in your current form: you seem to enjoy arguing for the sake of argument instead of for the sake of educational discussion. And you always have to be right, whether you actually are or not. If you insist on being a know-it-all, at least be open to the concept that you might be wrong - because you quite often are.
EDIT: Oh, and by the way, a 1/2" difference in shaft length in a considerable difference. That's your entire point isn't it? That people are playing shafts that are too long? Because shorter shafts are easier to control?

So when someone points out that your numbers are wrong by a significant amount, don't attempt to distract from the fact that you were flat out wrong by minimizing the importance of the very point you were trying to make. Especially in such a juvenile manner.

JPsuff said:
Yet the thing you focus on is that I included some inexact numbers in my post and as it turns out I was off by 1/2-inch (excuse me, I mean sixty two hundredths of an inch) and all you guys can do is punch your fists in the air like a couple of Junior High school kids because you've proven me wrong.
Click to expand...
It not only negates your argument, it also makes you look like a moron.
 
JB said:
Nobody is "out to get you" like you seem to think. Yet in each thread you make your "arguments" based on statistics, but in most of them, your statistics are off. How is someone looking for advice supposed to know which part of your answers are correct? I am really curious here?

I simply asked where you got your information from because it was different than ours. You went on a mini rant about how the the tour is fudging statistics. As for your faults? Im sure you have plenty, just like we all do. However, we ask that when you are using statistics to prove a point, you make sure or try to anyway that they are correct.

Otherwise make your argument without them. You chose to use them to emphasize your point, nobody else did.
Click to expand...



I'm not using statistics for anything other than to buttress a point - not "prove it" - as you say; in this case, that shorter drivers are a better choice overall.

So I'm off by a half-inch in the average driver length on tour and that one single point becomes the sum and substance of your ranting. What difference does it make? The point was about shorter drivers, it was not a dissertation on the accuracy of the Darrell Survey.

And the Darrell Survey is manipulated quite a bit and if you're as plugged in to the pro game as you claim to be (or think you are) you should know that.
And no, I'm not claiming that there's fraud, but let's just say that there is and always has been a sort of "game" that's played from time to time between the manufacturers, the players and the people with the clipboards.


-JP
 
Harry Longshanks said:
Okay, I've been extremely polite up to this point, but twice now you have engaged me in an argument without addressing the actual points I raise. Instead, both times you chose instead to insult me.

You want me to take the gloves off and sink to your level? Fine, I will:


  • Quit pulling stuff out of your ass and back up your arguments with actual facts and sources. If you can't, then don't post them as "facts." They aren't facts just because you think they are true.

  • Stop being paranoid. No one is out to get you and there is no conspiracy. But when someone posts erroneous information as though it was thoughtfully researched, it irritates people. Once or twice is expected on the internet, but you do it ALL the time. And then you complain whenever someone points out the factual inaccuracies or logical fallacies in your arguments.

  • You are one step above a troll in your current form: you seem to enjoy arguing for the sake of argument instead of for the sake of educational discussion. And you always have to be right, whether you actually are or not. If you insist on being a know-it-all, at least be open to the concept that you might be wrong - because you quite often are.
EDIT: Oh, and by the way, a 1/2" difference in shaft length in a considerable difference. That's your entire point isn't it? That people are playing shafts that are too long? Because shorter shafts are easier to control?

So when someone points out that your numbers are wrong by a significant amount, don't attempt to distract from the fact that you were flat out wrong by minimizing the importance of the very point you were trying to make. Especially in such a juvenile manner.

It not only negates your argument, it also makes you look like a moron.
Click to expand...


Harry, I don't know anything about what's going on in your personal life, but you really need to find out what's bothering you deep down inside and work to get rid of it because it's just going to continue to eat you up.

Besides what is now becoming the infamous "half-an-inch argument", what part of what I wrote was "out of my ass"?

  • Am I wrong in pointing out that a shorter driver is easier to swing and better for most players?
  • Did I not acknowledge that there are people who can play with a longer driver and have no trouble with it?
  • Was I pulling anyone's leg about swingweight changes due to shortening a shaft?
  • Was there anything non-factual about my suggestions concerning methods of addressing swingweight issues?

I don't see anything non-factual in what I wrote other than that I was using old information (if two years old can be considered "old") when alluding to average driver length on tour.

My God, where's the rusty knife when I need it?!


As for my "massaging" comment, all I can say is that if you truly believe that every single number and comment that comes from the tour, the manufacturers, the Darrell Survey or any other industry-related organization is the unvarnished, Gospel truth, then I'll go find my copy of the deed to the Brooklyn bridge and you can find a pen and your checkbook and we can discuss the terms of sale over coffee.

As for being paranoid, I can only suggest that you browse through all of yours and other's responses to my posts and I dare you to find one that doesn't point out a flaw in my judgment or comments, or one that isn't condescending or didactic or in many cases just plain snarky.

I do however love to argue, but apparently no one else here does. Much of what I write is meant to provoke a response and then (at least with normal people) that usually leads to a spirited debate where admittedly some outlandish ideas often surface, but in the end it serves to fully examine a topic and sometimes even has people (including myself) considering alternatives to formerly cherished beliefs. But even if none of that happens, it was a chance to air some views and where's the harm in that?

But around here, if I bring up something other than the weather, I'm immediately "corrected" by a variety of know-it-alls and no actual argument ever ensues - just a lot of haughty huffing and puffing about how right they are and how hopelessly misinformed I am.

But then, I don't read the Darrell Survey, so what do I know?


Have the kind of day you deserve, Harry!


-JP
 
Alright boys.You all need to kiss and make up.


discussing a topic can be done without the intention to provoke an argument.
 
BigLeftyinAZ said:
Alright boys.You all need to kiss and make up.


discussing a topic can be done without the intention to provoke an argument.
Click to expand...


Lefty's right.

C'mon Harry. You'll feel better!

monkey,lips,glasses.jpg



-JP
 
JPsuff said:
And the Darrell Survey is manipulated quite a bit and if you're as plugged in to the pro game as you claim to be (or think you are) you should know that.
And no, I'm not claiming that there's fraud, but let's just say that there is and always has been a sort of "game" that's played from time to time between the manufacturers, the players and the people with the clipboards.


-JP
Click to expand...

You have got to be kidding right? Please show any kind of proof that the Darrell Survey is manipulated at all. Im begging you. This is a company that for YEARS has had outside people do nothing but collect data.
 
JPsuff said:
I'm not using statistics for anything other than to buttress a point - not "prove it" - as you say; in this case, that shorter drivers are a better choice overall.

So I'm off by a half-inch in the average driver length on tour and that one single point becomes the sum and substance of your ranting. What difference does it make? The point was about shorter drivers, it was not a dissertation on the accuracy of the Darrell Survey.

And the Darrell Survey is manipulated quite a bit and if you're as plugged in to the pro game as you claim to be (or think you are) you should know that.
And no, I'm not claiming that there's fraud, but let's just say that there is and always has been a sort of "game" that's played from time to time between the manufacturers, the players and the people with the clipboards.


-JP
Click to expand...

YOu keep missing the fact that you were also off on the swing speed. You used them and said them like facts to prove your point. However this and in just about every other thread out there, you seem to pull these "facts" out of nowhere.
 
JB said:
You have got to be kidding right? Please show any kind of proof that the Darrell Survey is manipulated at all. Im begging you. This is a company that for YEARS has had outside people do nothing but collect data.
Click to expand...

Yes, and it's that data that gets played with, particularly by the smaller equipment manufacturers. Here's one example: The Darrell people do their surveys on the first day of every tournament. So some small equipment company saves up its pennies and pays a couple of pro's to use their driver on the first day, so that it can be counted by Darrell. For the rest of the tournament, those pro's go back to their regular drivers.

If those pro end up finishing high in the tournament, that company can then use the Darrell numbers to say that their driver finished in the top ten (or twenty, or whatever) and they can brag about it in their advertising.

Another example might be a manufacturer flooding a tournament (again on the first day) with a new hybrid they're selling. After all of these Hybrids are "counted" by Darrell, the ads next month in the golf rags all read: "XYZ hybrids are number one on the PGA Tour!" Granted, it was just for that one tournament, but they wouldn't be lying and the public will never know the difference.

Darrell keeps all of this information confidential because they understand that these players have contracts with sponsors and they wouldn't jeopardize that. All they're interested in is counting golf clubs - no matter whose name is on them.
There are lots of stories on tour about pro's hiding certain clubs under towels or headcovers or instructing caddies to make sure that no Darrell person sees the club. There's no real harm in any of this; the pro's get to make a few extra bucks and the smaller manufacturers get to make a name for themselves, but it IS done and it IS manipulating the facts.

Now I don't know for certain that a tour average driver length number could really be skewed, but in light of the other shenanigans that go on, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if it was - especially if it helped to boost sales industry-wide, of longer shafted drivers. A rising tide lifts all boats and what would it really matter if "someone" said that the tide rose by half an inch?



-JP
 
JPsuff said:
Yes, and it's that data that gets played with, particularly by the smaller equipment manufacturers. Here's one example: The Darrell people do their surveys on the first day of every tournament. So some small equipment company saves up its pennies and pays a couple of pro's to use their driver on the first day, so that it can be counted by Darrell. For the rest of the tournament, those pro's go back to their regular drivers.

If those pro end up finishing high in the tournament, that company can then use the Darrell numbers to say that their driver finished in the top ten (or twenty, or whatever) and they can brag about it in their advertising.

Another example might be a manufacturer flooding a tournament (again on the first day) with a new hybrid they're selling. After all of these Hybrids are "counted" by Darrell, the ads next month in the golf rags all read: "XYZ hybrids are number one on the PGA Tour!" Granted, it was just for that one tournament, but they wouldn't be lying and the public will never know the difference.

Darrell keeps all of this information confidential because they understand that these players have contracts with sponsors and they wouldn't jeopardize that. All they're interested in is counting golf clubs - no matter whose name is on them.
There are lots of stories on tour about pro's hiding certain clubs under towels or headcovers or instructing caddies to make sure that no Darrell person sees the club. There's no real harm in any of this; the pro's get to make a few extra bucks and the smaller manufacturers get to make a name for themselves, but it IS done and it IS manipulating the facts.

Now I don't know for certain that a tour average driver length number could really be skewed, but in light of the other shenanigans that go on, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if it was - especially if it helped to boost sales industry-wide, of longer shafted drivers. A rising tide lifts all boats and what would it really matter if "someone" said that the tide rose by half an inch?



-JP
Click to expand...

YOU are so wrong you have NO idea what you are talking about. You have proved it over and over in this thread. THis is SOOOOOOO far off you have no idea what is right and wrong.

Please, I am BEGGING You, to show ONE bit of proof of ANY company doing this even ONE TIME!

Do you really believe that a player is going to use different equipment on one day to get a couple of thousand bucks and get counted ONCE by a rep from an independent company that is at the events for the entire tourney. For instance players in many instances get $1K to play a putter like a Cameron. I do not know ONE SINGLE SMALL company that pays anybody to play their gear.

Darrell does not count by headcovers or by sponsors. THey examine each bag on their own after rounds of golf. YOu have proved once again that you have absolutely NO IDEA what you are talking about with this subject.
 
JB said:
YOU are so wrong you have NO idea what you are talking about. You have proved it over and over in this thread. THis is SOOOOOOO far off you have no idea what is right and wrong.

Please, I am BEGGING You, to show ONE bit of proof of ANY company doing this even ONE TIME!

Do you really believe that a player is going to use different equipment on one day to get a couple of thousand bucks and get counted ONCE by a rep from an independent company that is at the events for the entire tourney. For instance players in many instances get $1K to play a putter like a Cameron. I do not know ONE SINGLE SMALL company that pays anybody to play their gear.
Click to expand...



JB, give it a rest will ya'?

Enough's enough, OK?


-JP
 
YOu are calling a company out and making accusations once again and I would like you to provide proof or admit that you have none whatsoever and once again are making things up. So far in this thread, you have made up numbers, called out someone's personal life, and then made accusations about a company with no proof. What is next?
 
JPsuff said:
JB, give it a rest will ya'?

Enough's enough, OK?


-JP
Click to expand...

That's kinda what he's saying to you. You have made claims of conspiracies, but have yet to provide a bit of factual data to back them up.

I enjoy the latest/greatest conspiracy as much as the next person, but I need some substance and facts that back it up to believe.

And as far as the shaft lengths on stock drivers go, the average length used on Tour makes little to no difference when it comes to marketing. The shaft lengths were increased because Iron Byron will hit their driver further in head-to-head testing, which they can then use to market their club as the "longest driver".
 
Osahar said:
That's kinda what he's saying to you. You have made claims of conspiracies, but have yet to provide a bit of factual data to back them up.

I enjoy the latest/greatest conspiracy as much as the next person, but I need some substance and facts that back it up to believe.

And as far as the shaft lengths on stock drivers go, the average length used on Tour makes little to no difference when it comes to marketing. The shaft lengths were increased because Iron Byron will hit their driver further in head-to-head testing, which they can then use to market their club as the "longest driver".
Click to expand...

What "conspiracy"?

I'm not talking about conspiracies, I'm just talking about marketing. Do you think that golf manufacturers would be the first companies on the planet to exaggerate their claims? Or their "numbers"? Or that the golf industry as a whole doesn't manipulate data now and then to keep the industry healthy?

I mean, come on.

I have said in the past that 95% of all golfers could play this game just fine with a basic fitting. I have also said that there is very little in the way of groundbreaking or significant advancement in club technology and I've said that if you're going to look at a piece of equipment that is most responsible for the success of the average golfer, look to the ball.

Everyone says I don't know what I'm talking about yet I stumbled upon a video on YouTube just this morning in which none other than Frank Thomas, the former USGA Director of Research himself says EXACTLY the same things that I've been saying. Is he nuts too?

Or how about this tidbit: The difference in yardage between a 43-inch and a 45-inch driver is ONE YARD. Wanna know who said that? Tom Wishon. I guess he's ready for the puzzle house as well, right?

I may not be right about everything, but I'm in good company when it comes to most of what I believe to be true about golf the game as well as golf the industry.


-JP
 
So you are saying that a 43" driver is only one yard difference than a 45" driver which is as usual in direct contradiction to your post earlier where you again as usual pulled numbers from no where for the swing speed increase based on per inch.

Im still waiting for proof that an outside company like the Darrell Survey manipulates numbers like you just accused them of doing. Please show me ONE BIT OF PROOF YOU HAVE. You can calm your posts down and change your positions and facts all you want, but so far in this thread you did as I said, made up numbers, called someone out on personal problems (why I will never know), accused a company of changing information, and have still offered ZERO proof to prove your original post.

You accusing a company of this with no proof is no different than me calling you a felon, predator, or anything else. I have no proof, but it seems that so many like you are, so why not. Do you see the logic there? Of course not, because its absurd.

This was as usual, another gem.
 
Last edited:
AS far as I know the survey is performed on thursday.I have no proof,Just what i've heard.
 
BigLeftyinAZ said:
AS far as I know the survey is performed on thursday.I have no proof,Just what i've heard.
Click to expand...

I don't think you want to get in this war of words BigLefty
 
JPsuff said:
The average golfer increases their club head speed only 2 to 3 mph when using a 45.5" driver over that of a 43.5" driver and that translates, on average, to a whopping (are you sitting down?) 5 to 7 yards of carry!

The hitch though is that the longer driver shaft length creates a problem for the average golfer in that hitting the ball on the center of the clubface becomes more difficult to do consistently as the shaft length increases.

Something to consider: The average driver length on the PGA Tour is 44-inches. So ask yourself this question: Why would you want a shaft that's almost 46-inches long when the best players in the world wouldn't go near it themselves?

Virtually everyone that I've ever spoken to as well as the countless people on golf forums across the internet all claim that they've experienced more accuracy and in most cases LONGER DRIVES after cutting their driver shafts down to a 43 to 44-inch length.

The only thing that you need to consider is that if you cut your driver shaft down, you will have to add weight to the clubhead to maintain the same swingweight you have now. On average, you lose about 3 swingweight points for every 1/2-inch removed from the shaft. So that means that going from a 45 3/4-inch shaft to a 44-inch shaft would cause a loss of about one full "Letter" of swingweight. So if your driver is, say, a D-5 now, it would be a C-5 after trimming.

If you have a driver with movable weights, then it's just a question of purchasing heavier weights to replace them. But if your driver doesn't have such weights, then either lead tape, lead powder in the head or lead powder in the shaft tip or shaft weights will be needed.

Lead tape is the simplest way to correct swingweight but only if you don't mind having it there on the back end of your driver where it can be seen (I've never worried about cosmetics, but that's me).

With graphite shafts, adding weight to the tip of the shaft (inside) is sometimes dicey as it can either change the shafts tip characteristics or even damage the shaft, so I myself wouldn't go that way.

The only really foolproof alternative for both performance and cosmetics is to add weight inside the driver head itself. Unless you're very familiar with doing something like this, it's definitely a job for an experienced clubmaker as it involves drilling a hole into the driver head AND knowing where to do this as well as where and how to add the weight and permanently fix it in place.

I know that all sounds like a lot of trouble, but I think it's worth it for what you'll likely gain in accuracy, distance and confidence by using a shorter driver shaft. As I've said, there are definitely people out there who can comfortably and confidently use long driver shafts, but for the vast majority of golfers, a shorter shaft is almost always a better bet.


-JP
Click to expand...

Since everyone is calling JP out on the 44 inch tour average comment, can someone please explain to me how this post would have been any different in meaning or substance had he said 44.5 inches instead of 44 inches? It's still significantly shorter than what is "standard" these days.

JB, just for the record, there is no reason that the comment "a 45.5" driver will hit it 5 to 7 yards further than a 43.5" driver" is incompatible with "a 45" driver was hit 1 yard further than a 43" driver". The first is describing the difference when the centre of the clubface is hit. The second one is a "real world" number where the impact of missing the centre of the clubface brings the longer-shafted driver's distance down.

Also, for the record, I would suggest that if the pros are playing 44.62" drivers on average, then that's a very strong argument for amateurs to be using 44" drivers or even less. If the people who play all day every day for a living don't want to use 45"+ drivers, why on earth should the average Joe who plays once a week want to?

JP's post here was, I thought, a very good one. It may have lacked in one minor detail which didn't really make the point in any case, but aside from that it was filled with useful information and he clearly put a fair amount of time and effort into putting it together.

From me at least, thank you JP for a well thought out and well reasoned post. I appreciate it.
 
TY,
Its not what he said, its how he said it and continues to in every post he makes. He argues every point he makes based on statistical facts, yet almost every statistic he has made has been incorrect and when questioned, he goes on the defensive and to name calling. If you read the rest of the thread, you will see him call out a person's personal life, accuse a company of lying, etc....all without ONE shred of facts to support it. This all started without an argument. It started with me asking him where his stats came from because they were different than we had received.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top