Question:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I don’t feel misled by this stuff by the way. Because we all know what it feels like to hit the sweetspot on a golf club, or tennis racket, or whatever. But at the same time, we’ve never actually hit it, have we? Because it’s infinitessimaly small. That sounds more like an excuse for not being able to find your wife’s "G Spot", Jeff. (g) You mean it doesn’t mean "Gravity Spot" ??
I’m confused. Are we talking about using your wife’s golf clubs?
Response:
I don’t feel misled by this stuff by the way. Because we all know what it feels like to hit the sweetspot on a golf club, or tennis racket, or whatever. But at the same time, we’ve never actually hit it, have we? Because it’s infinitessimaly small. That sounds more like an excuse for not being able to find your wife’s "G Spot", Jeff. (g)
You mean it doesn’t mean "Gravity Spot" ??
Response:
There’s a bunch–and I believe Karsten may have invented the first with his original ‘Ping" and then the Anser. Brad
There is one putter made with considerable mass at the ends of the blade and – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – very little at the center.
Response:
I don’t feel misled by this stuff by the way. Because we all know what it feels like to hit the sweetspot on a golf club, or tennis racket, or whatever. But at the same time, we’ve never actually hit it, have we? Because it’s infinitessimaly small.
That sounds more like an excuse for not being able to find your wife’s "G Spot", Jeff. (g)
Response:
Cavity backs use perimeter weighting which helps resist twisting on off center hits. This gives the sensation the sweet spot is enlarged and club manufacturers use it as a marketing ploy. I had an article I wish I hadn’t thrown away about sweet spots and one of the people interviewed was Karsten Solheim. He admitted that the sweet spot couldn’t be enlarged but used it as a marketing ploy in his advertisement.
Well, in any case, the new Callaway commercial puts that to shame – they say the sweet spot is 243% larger, which means 243% more fun (approximate number). I don’t feel misled by this stuff by the way. Because we all know what it feels like to hit the sweetspot on a golf club, or tennis racket, or whatever. But at the same time, we’ve never actually hit it, have we? Because it’s infinitessimaly small. I think there’s a kind of agreed upon "standard" for what the sweet spot means. Hit it near the sweet spot within a certain radius, and it all feels the same to us, and the results are the same, within the bounds of how closely we measure how far a ball goes, etc. That margin for error is bigger on cavity backs than blades. The "sweet spot" is smaller on blades, but feels better.
Response:
I have always joked about this–that Karsten was feeding us a line. I really thought it was just an exageration–with little true benifit to the player. But if he really said that–then he led the whole industry down a path of no return. They will never go back to forged clubs due to cost. Brad
I had an article I wish I hadn’t thrown away about sweet spots and one – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – of the people interviewed was Karsten Solheim. He admitted that the sweet spot couldn’t be enlarged but used it as a marketing ploy in his advertisement. David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor Contributor of spam free golf advice
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have always joked about this–that Karsten was feeding us a line. I really thought it was just an exageration–with little true benifit to the player. But if he really said that–then he led the whole industry down a path of no return. They will never go back to forged clubs due to cost. Brad I had an article I wish I hadn’t thrown away about sweet spots and one of the people interviewed was Karsten Solheim. He admitted that the sweet spot couldn’t be enlarged but used it as a marketing ploy in his advertisement.
There is no question that "the sweetspot cannot be enlarged" because, in fact, the true center of percussion is a point only, and it has virtually zero diameter. That is a technical nicety. There is no question that moving as much mass as is possible away from that center point out to the perimeter does increase the effective mass on an off center hit. And momentum after collision is a product of the velocity AND the effective mass. The amount that a club mfr CAN move out is limited, of course. There is one putter made with considerable mass at the ends of the blade and very little at the center. This is, in principle, a better defense against off center mishit energy loss than the putter blade with evenly distributed mass. It was proven with tests to say nothing about the common sense obviousness of it. But Karsten’s statement is true from a purely technical use of the word "sweet SPOT". gh
Response:
However, on off center hits cavity backs had shot dispersions that was twice as wide as the blades. Is the sweet spot on cavity backs larger, then? Not that a point can be any larger, but you know what I mean.
Cavity backs use perimeter weighting which helps resist twisting on off center hits. This gives the sensation the sweet spot is enlarged and club manufacturers use it as a marketing ploy. I had an article I wish I hadn’t thrown away about sweet spots and one of the people interviewed was Karsten Solheim. He admitted that the sweet spot couldn’t be enlarged but used it as a marketing ploy in his advertisement. David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor Contributor of spam free golf advice
Response:
Cavity backs use perimeter weighting which helps resist twisting on off center hits. This gives the sensation the sweet spot is enlarged and club manufacturers use it as a marketing ploy. I had an article I wish I hadn’t thrown away about sweet spots and one of the people interviewed was Karsten Solheim. He admitted that the sweet spot couldn’t be enlarged but used it as a marketing ploy in his advertisement.
Now, I’d hate to become the victim of a marketing ploy. So, let me think out loud (with some danger of becoming rsg’s duct-tape-and-chewing-gum crackpot scientist), and you come back and pick it to pieces, OK? I’ll hit the ball with something a bit simpler than a clubhead, a 36" aluminum yardstick, using the flat side so it’s all bendy, and use this as a model for a clubhead. Hit the ball with the very tip of the yardstick, and it’ll bend the tip up. Hit it far towards the hand, and the tip will bend down. OK, so in between there’s a spot where it does neither, the "sweet spot". This is about from 5" to 7" from the tip (it feels pretty soggy, but least soggy about there). This is a model of a blade. Now, I’d guess the sweet spot would be larger for a 72" yardstick, and from 10" to 14" (not quite, as my hands grip haven’t doubled in size, but close). OK? That’d be a model for "oversize" heads, so you *could* make a sweet spot larger by making a head bigger. You can’t make heads bigger and bigger ad infinitum, or you’ll move the sweet spot above the equator of the ball. So you could make them a bit bigger, which moves the spot up, and then add mass towards the bottom of the clubhead, so the sweet spot moves down again. I’ve stuck a new 1.5"x2" stack of Post-Its to the end of my yardstick using a a 2" binder clip and looked for the sweet spot — looks like at 3" or below. So you can move a sweet spot, like it’s done in a muscleback or sole-weighted driver. Now the question is: can you stretch the sweet spot by putting post-its above and below the sweet spot? My gut feeling says yes. But it’s very hard to tell: the binder clips rattle and the Post-its fall off… All this applies only to where the club (hammer, baseball bat…) *feels* sweet, i.e. no twisting, jolting or stinging. I *think* this doesn’t necessarily mean that the balls spray less, but likely would. But *that* would mean that cavity backs do spray less on off-center hits, which is in contradiction to an experiment. Any thoughts? And no, none of this improves my game one whit, nor do I think of it when outside! Just armchair theorizing, with little experiments thrown in to supplement the handwaving. Thomas Prufer
Response:
Thats incredible. They decide to stand by their revenue sources over printing the truth.
It really wasn’t a matter of the truth. I could have gone any direction with the article. It was about custom made clubs and which may be better. My article just so happened to favor blades. I’m sure those who build custom clubs could have written an article with a better argument for cavity backs. As I said, I was the wrong person to be writing that article considering my background in club building. But hey, it was my first chance at writing an article and what did I have to lose? David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor Contributor of spam free golf advice
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You make some good points in your post, but regarding this, I don’t really think it’s that difficult. The average golfer will end up closer to the hole on a mishit with cavity backs. How many hits does the average golfer hit on the sweet spot? How much advantage would the average golfer get by hitting a blade on the sweet spot vs. a cavity back on the sweet spot? (Not a whole lot) How many times does the average golfer miss the sweet spot? The answer seems pretty obvious to me. For the pros, the small advantage of hitting blades on the sweet spot added up over many shots gives them an advantage (although many pros nowadays do not use blades. Hank Haney says most of them do not.) For the average golfer (90+ shooter) the somewhat larger advantage of hitting cavity backs *off* the sweetspot adds up over many holes. I am a 90+ shooter and use Hogan blades (technically muscle backs) and although I would probably cut a couple strokes if I switched to cavity backs, I’ll never do it. Why? Well, I would give up THE most important pleasure I get playing golf, which is hitting one of those perfectly executed golf shots that jumps off my club and streaks toward the flag like a bat out of hell. The guys who play blades know what I am talking about, you feel absolutely nothing during impact but as you look up you see the ball 200 yards into the air and "seemingly" still accelerating. Outstanding. Its a shot Tiger or Jack would be proud of on their best days, and I just hit it… yea I only hit one or two of them per round, but that experience is worth more to me then the lowest score ever will and thats why I use blades. On another note, I believe that a test was performed a while back comparing a blade vs cavity back club on a mechanical swinging machine, with off-centered hits, and there was no difference in final landing position of the ball. (the blade shots were actually closer to the target, but not enough to be satistically significant). steve
How could they be (judged to be) closer, if the result was not statistically significant ?? I thought that it was easier to work the ball using blades, than using cavity back clubs (not something a machine could test).
Response:
Thats incredible. They decide to stand by their revenue sources over printing the truth. Brad – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The publisher decided that since Ping and other cavity back manufacturers advertised big time in their mag my article may not have been the smartest thing to print. David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor Contributor of spam free golf advice
Response:
I have a copy of the test results, I used them for an article I wrote (but was never published). Ah, I hope those cavity back manufacturers paided you well 
They decided to yank the article. The publisher needed an article fast to fill the issue before it went to the printer. They asked me if I would be interested in doing a quick article for them. I said "sure, about what"? They said "how about custom made clubs"? I’m the last person who should be writing about custom clubs because I don’t build clubs. I remembered the test results from Golf Digest and asked them for a copy. I also contacted Jeff Jackson of Dynacraft and asked for his input. He really went out of his way to be of help. Using the test data, the info from Jeff and other bits and pieces I picked up I wrote the article. Unfortunately it favored blades over cavity backs. The publisher decided that since Ping and other cavity back manufacturers advertised big time in their mag my article may not have been the smartest thing to print. I’m not mad at them, it’s business. If anything I enjoyed doing the article and it was a learning experience. Hopefully I may one day do another article that gets published. David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor Contributor of spam free golf advice
Response:
However, on off center hits cavity backs had shot dispersions that was twice as wide as the blades.
Is the sweet spot on cavity backs larger, then? Not that a point can be any larger, but you know what I mean. Thomas Prufer
Response:
Actually I remember one in Golf Digest about 4-5 years ago. Brad – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve been set free! OK Jeff C–how much was that you bet me? Brad Sorry – I’m very skeptical of a single test that I don’t know the first thing about
Response:
I have a copy of the test results, I used them for an article I wrote (but was never published).
Ah, I hope those cavity back manufacturers paided you well If it was never published I wonder where I read about the test, perhaps another comparision was done? steve
Response:
Actually I remember one in Golf Digest about 4-5 years ago.
January 1988 Golf Digest. The only thing I have is a black and white Xerox copy of the article they sent me. David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor Contributor of spam free golf advice
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You make some good points in your post, but regarding this, I don’t really think it’s that difficult. The average golfer will end up closer to the hole on a mishit with cavity backs. How many hits does the average golfer hit on the sweet spot? How much advantage would the average golfer get by hitting a blade on the sweet spot vs. a cavity back on the sweet spot? (Not a whole lot) How many times does the average golfer miss the sweet spot? The answer seems pretty obvious to me. For the pros, the small advantage of hitting blades on the sweet spot added up over many shots gives them an advantage (although many pros nowadays do not use blades. Hank Haney says most of them do not.) For the average golfer (90+ shooter) the somewhat larger advantage of hitting cavity backs *off* the sweetspot adds up over many holes. I am a 90+ shooter and use Hogan blades (technically muscle backs) and although I would probably cut a couple strokes if I switched to cavity backs, I’ll never do it. Why? Well, I would give up THE most important pleasure I get playing golf, which is hitting one of those perfectly executed golf shots that jumps off my club and streaks toward the flag like a bat out of hell. The guys who play blades know what I am talking about, you feel absolutely nothing during impact but as you look up you see the ball 200 yards into the air and "seemingly" still accelerating. Outstanding. Its a shot Tiger or Jack would be proud of on their best days, and I just hit it… yea I only hit one or two of them per round, but that experience is worth more to me then the lowest score ever will and thats why I use blades.
Amen to that. Though too few and far in between, when I hit the sweet spot with my muscle backs, to me, it feels as though time slows down just for that moment. It’s really hard to describe. Best, Steve
Response:
I’ve been set free! OK Jeff C–how much was that you bet me? Brad
Sorry – I’m very skeptical of a single test that I don’t know the first thing about
Response:
I am a 90+ shooter and use Hogan blades (technically muscle backs) and although I would probably cut a couple strokes if I switched to cavity backs, I’ll never do it. Why? Well, I would give up THE most important pleasure I get playing golf, which is hitting one of those perfectly executed golf shots that jumps off my club and streaks toward the flag like a bat out of hell.
Understood.
Response:
I’ve been set free! OK Jeff C–how much was that you bet me? Brad – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – On another note, I believe that a test was performed a while back comparing a blade vs cavity back club on a mechanical swinging machine, with off-centered hits, and there was no difference in final landing position of the ball. (the blade shots were actually closer to the target, but not enough to be satistically significant). I have a copy of the test results, I used them for an article I wrote (but was never published). When hit on the sweet spot blades and cavity backs produced the same results. Since the pros hit the sweet spot over 98% of the time this is why they can play both clubs equally the same. However, on off center hits cavity backs had shot dispersions that was twice as wide as the blades. David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor Contributor of spam free golf advice
Response:
Would you be willing to post the test results? thanks -Leslie – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – On another note, I believe that a test was performed a while back comparing a blade vs cavity back club on a mechanical swinging machine, with off-centered hits, and there was no difference in final landing position of the ball. (the blade shots were actually closer to the target, but not enough to be satistically significant). I have a copy of the test results, I used them for an article I wrote (but was never published). When hit on the sweet spot blades and cavity backs produced the same results. Since the pros hit the sweet spot over 98% of the time this is why they can play both clubs equally the same. However, on off center hits cavity backs had shot dispersions that was twice as wide as the blades. David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor Contributor of spam free golf advice
Response:
Would you be willing to post the test results?
I sure will, give me some time to dig them out my file. David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor Contributor of spam free golf advice
Response:
On another note, I believe that a test was performed a while back comparing a blade vs cavity back club on a mechanical swinging machine, with off-centered hits, and there was no difference in final landing position of the ball. (the blade shots were actually closer to the target, but not enough to be satistically significant).
I have a copy of the test results, I used them for an article I wrote (but was never published). When hit on the sweet spot blades and cavity backs produced the same results. Since the pros hit the sweet spot over 98% of the time this is why they can play both clubs equally the same. However, on off center hits cavity backs had shot dispersions that was twice as wide as the blades. David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor Contributor of spam free golf advice
Response:
You make some good points in your post, but regarding this, I don’t really think it’s that difficult. The average golfer will end up closer to the hole on a mishit with cavity backs. How many hits does the average golfer hit on the sweet spot? How much advantage would the average golfer get by hitting a blade on the sweet spot vs. a cavity back on the sweet spot? (Not a whole lot) How many times does the average golfer miss the sweet spot? The answer seems pretty obvious to me. For the pros, the small advantage of hitting blades on the sweet spot added up over many shots gives them an advantage (although many pros nowadays do not use blades. Hank Haney says most of them do not.) For the average golfer (90+ shooter) the somewhat larger advantage of hitting cavity backs *off* the sweetspot adds up over many holes.
I am a 90+ shooter and use Hogan blades (technically muscle backs) and although I would probably cut a couple strokes if I switched to cavity backs, I’ll never do it. Why? Well, I would give up THE most important pleasure I get playing golf, which is hitting one of those perfectly executed golf shots that jumps off my club and streaks toward the flag like a bat out of hell. The guys who play blades know what I am talking about, you feel absolutely nothing during impact but as you look up you see the ball 200 yards into the air and "seemingly" still accelerating. Outstanding. Its a shot Tiger or Jack would be proud of on their best days, and I just hit it… yea I only hit one or two of them per round, but that experience is worth more to me then the lowest score ever will and thats why I use blades. On another note, I believe that a test was performed a while back comparing a blade vs cavity back club on a mechanical swinging machine, with off-centered hits, and there was no difference in final landing position of the ball. (the blade shots were actually closer to the target, but not enough to be satistically significant). steve