From: Bobby Knight on
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 14:49:54 -0500, "Otto"
<ottondebREMOVE%$#%^%$> wrote:

>"Martin Levac" <vac3(a)> wrote in message
>> Shaft rigidity is one aspect of quality. The stiffer it is, the higher the
>> quality of the shaft.

Just another check in the L column for Levac.
/ \
�Someone likes every shot�
From: Bobby Knight on
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 15:09:14 -0500, "Martin Levac"
<vac3(a)> wrote:

>"Otto" <ottondebREMOVE%$#%^%$> wrote in message
>> "Martin Levac" <vac3(a)> wrote in message
>> news:uyKxh.31042$vT5.840428(a)
>>> Shaft rigidity is one aspect of quality. The stiffer it is, the higher
>>> the
>>> quality of the shaft.
>> Wrong.
>> Otto
>OK. So, shaft rigidity is one aspect of quality. The more supple it is, the
>higher quality it is.
The flex of a shaft has no bearing, whatsoever, on it's quality. Try
another tack, this one isn't even questionable.
/ \
�Someone likes every shot�
From: Otto on

"Martin Levac" <vac3(a)> wrote in message
> Try this exercise. Convince yourself that what you think is the truth.
> You'll be surprised by the amount of bullshit you can convince yourself

You have clearly mastered this exercise.


From: Joe on

Martin Levac wrote:
> "Otto" <ottondebREMOVE%$#%^%$> wrote in message
> news:POLxh.23429$fC2.16030(a)
>>"Martin Levac" <vac3(a)> wrote in message
>>>Shaft rigidity is one aspect of quality. The stiffer it is, the higher
>>>quality of the shaft.
> OK. So, shaft rigidity is one aspect of quality. The more supple it is, the
> higher quality it is.

Lets start with an accepted definition of quality:


The totality of features and characteristics of a product or service
that bear on its ability to satisfy stated or implied needs.

Not bad, is it?

Shaft rigidity: A single characteristic. Or is that all that matters?

Now, your lover might answer that shaft rigidity is a good measure of
quality but as it pertains to hitting a golf ball, maybe not so much.

If you are hitter, you apply most of the acceleration at the top of the
downswing so a more rigid shaft is certainly more suitable. Underline
suitable! A softer shaft would lag too much at the top and be ahead at
impact, adding loft.

A swinger will have more continuous acceleration applied so that the
maximum speed is reached at a point just past the impact point. A
softer shaft will lag further into the swing, returning the club head to
a neutral loft (against the design spec) at the low point. A more
suitable approach for this swing type. Underline suitable again.

Each case illustrates suitability for a specific swing type. Using that
widely accepted definition of quality that I provided, rigidity is only
a characteristic, not a measure of total quality. A quality golf club
shaft would be one that matches the user, will not vary from one shaft
to the next in terms of specifications, will not fail under normal use etc.

If you want to lecture, I suggest that you fully understand what you are
saying before pontificating.

Respectfully yours,


From: Rex on

"Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC(a)> wrote in message
> I'm toying with the idea of building a new set of irons in the near
> future.
> At the rate that I typically proceed on such things that would mean
> calendar
> 2007 :-)
> An accepted "golf truism" that I have heard more than once is (roughly)
> "the
> right flex shaft is the most flex that you can control" (where stiffer
> means
> less flex). Particularly with irons I wonder why it really shouldn't be
> "the
> stiffest flex that you can tolerate swinging".
> I know that I seriously dislike driver shafts with stiff tips. I honestly
> don't know if they hit the ball worse for me (or hell - maybe they are
> better). But I don't like the feel at impact.
> I don't seem to have that reaction to stiffer iron shafts. And I just
> don't
> see any upside to more flex other than how it feels. The downsides are
> more
> clubhead droop that will vary depending on how hard you swing the club and
> similar considerations for the other directions of shaft flex. The "droop
> thing" in particular seems to be a real negative to me as it means that if
> the lie is right on a full swing then it will almost have to be too
> upright
> for a chip shot.
> Any comments on this? I recall some discussion on this a while back, but I
> recall that it seemed to go off in other directions. Well, of course it
> did
> Dave - this is RSG :-)
> dave
I used regular steel shafts for years. No great problems but did not hit the
ball as well as I thought I should. Then I had a fiting session with a
pro who suggested that I needed Senior steel shafts so I went with them. I
was not altogether happy with the irons and never really seemed tohave them
under control. I then went back to regular steel shaft and that was an

I was subsequently given a set of Mizuno TP 19 blades with S400 shafts. I
have never hit irons as well as I have hit these irons. I am sure that it
is in part the shafts. I am 64 years old with a short fast swing. Ihit a 4
iron 180 meters (200 yards). I am sure that matching the shaft to my swing
has been then greatest improvement for me over the last 5 years.

So I would suggest you look at your swing and then try to match shaft with
swing. If you can build 3 irons - regular, stiff and either senior or xtra
stiff depending on how your swing is. Then trial them over several days.
You will know what feels best.

My mistake when I was fitted was that it was after a round of golf and I was
tired and was not hitting the ball but just taking easy swings. I had a
different swing on the course.