Qi10 Max. Do I give up 10-15 yards for killer dispersion and consistency?

[Lumberjack627]

13 hours ago, black bnr32 said:

I was in your situation and just picked a lower spinning ball.

What ball did you choose?

[Lobbing Iron]

I don’t believe the 10-15 yards number is real.  

 

I also believe people generally underestimate penalty shots and kick outs.  I would worry if I saw spin kick up over 3000 consistently.  These discussions also necessarily conflate strategy and training goals with equipment choices.

[black bnr32]

3 hours ago, Lumberjack627 said:

What ball did you choose?

Changed from regular ProV1 to left dash

[black bnr32]

OP, I usually reference this chart during driver research.  It’s from Titleist.

Edited February 21, 2024 by black bnr32

[me05501]

19 hours ago, rooski said:

I've recently been down this path myself, but a data point that helped me feel good about my decision was the PGA Tour Average Driver Spin Rate.

 

Do with that info what you will. 

 

I'm seeing 2600-3000 spin off the middle with my setup and couldn't be happier, although my miss is definitely on the high toe rather than the heel like it might be for you. If my miss was consistently low heel I would probably want a bit lower spin off the middle.

 

 

This is a great post, thanks. 

 

The industry is 100% bought in on promoting the chart that shows ideal total distance for any given swing speed. We've all seen it a thousand times and we all know what it means, but it has zero to do with ACCURACY.

 

I really wish Ping or whoever would release a chart that has the ideal stats for optimizing Total Driving for a given swing speed. I'm confident the spin numbers would be higher across the board. 

[vamosjackets]

16 hours ago, Valtiel said:

 

 

That point is though that "10-15y" is likely not even real. If you do a google search for "Foresight low spin" you'll see consistent reports over the last 5+ years of people seeing inflated distance numbers when spin drops below a certain point, with "10-15y" being repeatedly mentioned. Distance numbers that aren't supported by any other launch monitor platform or Flightscope Optimizer. This lures people into getting super low spinning, unforgiving drivers that *aren't* functionally any longer on the course and produce mishits that are far more penal. Hell it even happened to Ian and Matt a couple years back on TXG when they fit him into the Callaway Mavrik SZ. He just "could't give up that distance!" until he actually got on the course and it wasn't any longer AND it was far more punishing on mishits. 10-15y ain't real on GCQuad when you're hitting knuckle balls, and that is especially true if you're low 100's clubhead speed, which leads to the second point...

That's a good spot on the PGA tour spin averages and I do wonder if they "normalize" that at all by removing non-drivers. Assuming they don't though that still doesn't change much. We know for a fact that virtually no one on tour chases sub 2,000rpm with the driver and that optimal spin for total distance depends heavily on clubhead speed. The recent video on Titleist's channel with Aberg sums up most pros approach perfectly; mid 2,000's out of the middle with heel misses staying sub 3,000 and toe misses staying above 2,000. That is a guy swinging 118-120 regularly, so shift that entire window up a few hundred RPM for 100-105mph. There isn't 10-15y on the table for someone with the OP's numbers unless he is miss hitting the ball. If they were swinging 120mph+ then maybe, but that would still depend on other factors. 

 

You make an interesting argument.  Why do the majority of the Pro's use the lower spinning heads on their Drivers? How does that fit the argument you're making?  They would seem to be giving up forgiveness for that added distance that a launch monitor would be telling them they're getting from that lower spinning head.  

[Valtiel]

32 minutes ago, vamosjackets said:

You make an interesting argument.  Why do the majority of the Pro's use the lower spinning heads on their Drivers? How does that fit the argument you're making?  They would seem to be giving up forgiveness for that added distance that a launch monitor would be telling them they're getting from that lower spinning head.  

Most of the variables at play are *very* different for the pros here. 

1) Average swing speed/ball speed means the ideal spin window is lower, per my post above. Pros living in the high 2,000s into low 3,000s are generally giving up a bit of yardage, moreso for the 120mph+ crowd. 2,300 - 2,600 is generally the optimal range for the bulk of the tour.  
2) *Any* yardage left on the table is statistically orders of magnitude more impactful for a pro. They are making decisions based around shaving off 1-2 strokes over the course of four days, so 10y more off the tee = one less club into the green = slightly closer average proximity to the hole = more putts having a better chance of going in over those four days. If they can get that 10y from dropping their spin from 2,800 to 2,300 then they'll favor the lower spin head, because...
3) They obviously hit the center of the face (or thereabouts) far more often, so mishit forgiveness is less of a priority.
4) They most certainly are *not* falling for the "low spin bomb" launch monitor trap because they can test when/wherever they want with whatever equipment is needed. No one on tour is making driver fitting decisions via hitting in an indoor bay at their local PGA Superstore, they're outside often with both Trackman AND GCQuad confirming numbers against each other. 

Even with all that said, we're still seeing more and more pros playing the bigger more forgiving heads. The aforementioned Aberg plays the TSR2 over the TSR3, Rory is now in the Qi10 Core head over the LS version, albeit a tour version of the Core head that is a tweener, but still not the lowest spinning option. 

And if the follow up question is "well if #2 above is good for the pros, isn't that good for us too even if it isn't *as* good?". Yes, but *only* if #3 is rock solid. Lower spinning heads demand very consistent strikes to be better for the average player, because the moment you start missing the sweet spot you'll be punished more and *very* quickly lose any statistical advantage you were getting, an advantage that is already *very* small unless you too are playing multi-day tournaments. It only takes a couple of badly missed fairways or a single toe hook OB for the benefits to be erased and actually become detriments, and the pros are good enough to largely mitigate the missed fairway, while we aren't, and they generally aren't mishitting it so badly as to have an "unforgiving driver induced OB". 

It's a different game with different considerations for them, and they (usually) have the skills to go down certain rabbit holes that we don't. 

 

Edited February 21, 2024 by Valtiel

[CROUSE99]

Go with the consistency.  The woods are full of long hitters.

[ANimz]

On 2/20/2024 at 5:19 PM, HoganHO said:

Been trying many of the new driver releases (Ping 10k, Qi10, Qi10LS, Smoke TD) and today I finally hit the Qi10 Max. I love the look, feel and sound. 

 

My dispersion and consistency were awesome. Love the ball flight pattern as well. 

 

Carrying 250-255 consistently with 102-104 swing speed. Ball Speed around 153-154. Launch 13-15. (GC Quad indoors)

 

My one concern is the spin--its 2800-3000 (a touch higher on heely shots) I have it playing at 7 degrees with a Diamana WB 63 x.

 

In reality, The other heads are spinning lower for sure and getting the occasional 265-270+ carry, but the dispersions are way worse and in reality the average carry is probably the same--just less roll out with the Max.

 

Thoughts?

What would the gap be to your fairway wood?  

[hacker101]

Accordingly to GC Quad, the difference for me was about 15 yards. Same shaft in both max and standard was 3500 rpm vs 2600. Max had a slightly tighter dispersion. Not enough for me to give up 15yds

[bryanwmilburn]

Another thing to consider - your ball will roll more in the fairway than the rough. So if it’s 10-15 yards carry, I guarantee you’ll make at least half of that up in additional roll from being in the short grass (unless it’s sopping wet). Giving up a real 5-7 yards for consistency and no penalty strokes seems more than worth it. 

[BigBlue7]

With that launch angle, you need to be hitting it with a positive angle of attack.

Yet you appear to be hitting it on the bottom of the face - that is really the only way your can generate excessive spin with a positive AoA.  Perhaps a fitting could find a shaft that moves your strike point a little higher on the face to get your spin down closer to 2400-2600.

[LongNwrong27]

4 minutes ago, BigBlue7 said:

With that launch angle, you need to be hitting it with a positive angle of attack.

Yet you appear to be hitting it on the bottom of the face - that is really the only way your can generate excessive spin with a positive AoA.  Perhaps a fitting could find a shaft that moves your strike point a little higher on the face to get your spin down closer to 2400-2600.

Not launching it 13-15 off bottom of the face. They prob just add a lot of loft which is common for people who swing up 

[Golfinfloridaafter40]

On 2/20/2024 at 7:25 PM, Asics10 said:

No, the data is in. The farther you hit your drives the lower the score. Especially 10-15yards 

This is not true at all.  It was based on tour players, with tour quality short games, tour swing speeds/power to get out of rough that isn't deep like it used to be,  perfect equipment, perfect conditions, smooth/fast greens making putts easier to make, etc.  Has literally nothing to do with amateur golf, but people fall for it anyway because marketing works and people in general are just not capable of thinking critically.

 

Being able to control trajectory, carry distance and spin is far more important than being 10 yards closer but off angle or from the rough.  In many cases amateurs play tees that are already too short for where they hit their driver and have odd distances in that require partial swings that are much more difficult .  Would actually lower scores to have full swing approaches in because those swings are easily repeated by muscle memory without playing golf many times per week.  Most amateurs have jobs and families and can not practice constantly.

[MongoSmash]

I would try the standard head - if you can. 
 

also, try CS LS, and ProV1 Left dash - assuming they can jive with the rest of your bag. 
 

i know I would kill for a driver that eliminated the OB ball

[LongNwrong27]

37 minutes ago, Golfinfloridaafter40 said:

This is not true at all.  It was based on tour players, with tour quality short games, tour swing speeds/power to get out of rough that isn't deep like it used to be,  perfect equipment, perfect conditions, smooth/fast greens making putts easier to make, etc.  Has literally nothing to do with amateur golf, but people fall for it anyway because marketing works and people in general are just not capable of thinking critically.

 

Being able to control trajectory, carry distance and spin is far more important than being 10 yards closer but off angle or from the rough.  In many cases amateurs play tees that are already too short for where they hit their driver and have odd distances in that require partial swings that are much more difficult .  Would actually lower scores to have full swing approaches in because those swings are easily repeated by muscle memory without playing golf many times per week.  Most amateurs have jobs and families and can not practice constantly.

No the data shows this applies for ams and there is 0 evidence that having a full swing in is better. While you may be more comfortable with a 100 yd shot vs a 50 yd one, the data is clear that all golfers hit it closer on average from closer to the hole 

[Dan Drake]

Sounds like a perfect opportunity to play TWO drivers, LOL!!!

 

But seriously, just read what @Valtiel wrote, its really on point.  

[HoganHO]

Hit it out on the course today and it's just too spinny and high for me in real life. That said, one of my playing partners who has lower swing speed and lower launch absolutely crushed this driver.

 

This thread has been eye-opening for me though in the sense of not trying to chase super low spin

[Golfrnut]

Provided the launch conditions can still be met, I think you’ll see a lot of higher swing speed guys down in the 7, 8, 9* loft ranges.  Specially if folks want a straight-cut and not any kind of pull-cut due to the added dynamic loft. 
 

There’s good reason the 17/17 numbers chasing that TM was advertising back in the SLDR days has never been heard from again. 🙂.