At 08:38 AM 10/10/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Received this info over the weekend about "modernization of swingweight", called WaggleWeight. I've got the entire press release at http://clubmaker-online.com/waggle.html . I'm not certain if he's a Shoptalker, but he asked me to post the info.
The guy is Bill Kostuj. I don't know either whether he's a ShopTalker. I had a brief correspondence with him a few months ago. Here's what I can glean from what's publicly available.
Here's the gist of his proposition. (I'm not saying that any of this has any basis in physical reality, nor even that it's exactly what Kostuj believes -- he didn't share details with me. It is what I read into what he did share.) The golfer's waggle has something important to do with his swing. Golfers have different waggles, and the important difference is the stationary point along the shaft during the waggle. Yes, it may be near 14" for many golfers, but the important thing is to match swingweight based on a fulcrum that is the waggle fulcrum for that golfer. So he proposes a variable-fulcrum swingweight scale, and a procedure (computer aided?) for determining the stationary point of a golfer's waggle.
As I said, I'm not certain that's what he believes, but it seems to be from what he has made publicly available. He has not shared any of his data. I haven't seen anything from him that suggests golfer-based testing of his thesis that fulcrum-matched sets are better than matching by either conventional swingweight or MOI. He has definitely done tests showing that different golfers have different stationary points in their waggle; I'm prepared to believe that, but I don't know what that has to do with the actual swing itself.
As those of you who read my articles on swingweight can guess, I'm not in love with Kostuj's theory. If he makes available enough actual data and analysis, I'm willing to be convinced. But I'm not going to pay for his monograph; in the absence of data and presence only of hype, I have to categorize it as "snake oil" until proven otherwise and don't intend to spend a penny on it.
BTW, his press release describes this as "patent pending". I did a search of patent applications, and failed to find it. I can't say for sure it's not "patent pending", but it doesn't look like it is.
Just my take for now. I could certainly be wrong. But the burden of proof is on Kostuj, and so far he is nowhere near satisfying that.
DaveT -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.13/124 - Release Date: 10/7/2005
