Equipment

Edwin Watts debuts “ARC” club matching

Published

13 years ago

Apr 8, 2013

Golf retailer Edwin Watts has announcing the debut of its new “ARC,” a system, which will be released as part of the company’s Clubsmarts Report and provide golfers with a matrix that will help them find the club that best matches their particular needs.

The ARC system is the results of robot testing, conducted to try and help golfers find clubs that suit them. Edwin Watts has tested most of the big name drivers in a variety of categories and posted the results on its site (http://www.edwinwattsgolf.com/ARC.aspx) in order to show golfers unbiased results of club testing, which can be viewed free of charge.

Unbiased club testing is a pretty important tool in 2013, because manufacturers have been bery aggressive in their marketing strategies, hoping to convince golfers that new products are considerably better than previous models.

That is not to say that Edwin Watts’ system is perfect, because it is not. Most golfers don’t swing clubs like robots do, although I imagine the results might be appreciated by someone like say, Martin Kaymer, who might actually be a robot. And some golfers aren’t going to be fit into stock-length clubs, or stock-shafted clubs. But it will be a good starting point for many golfers to begin their testing. Furthermore, Edwin Watts doesn’t suggest you buy clubs based on this test, only that you use it as a guide for further testing based on your swing/impact type.

Screen Shot 2013-04-08 at 11.39.38 AM

So what does the ARC club matching system reveal? Well, it shows a list of top-three performers for various categories, further subdivided by the type of contact made by the golfer (in this case, a robot). Do you hit most your shots off the toe? If so, maybe you should consider lessons.

But if you believe that lessons are for sissies, you could check the ARC results and see that the Tour Edge Exotics gave the robot the most distance on toe hits. Or you could find out that the RBZ had the highest ball speeds, or that the RBZ Stage 2 was the most accurate in terms of dispersion.

What if you tend to hit your drives thin (low on the face)? Well, if you are looking for distance on thin shots you might want to test the Ping Anser, which also had the fastest ball speed on those shots. So let me put it to you this way: If you hit it thin, just go buy a Ping Anser, OK buddy?

Of course, if you are like me and you hit dead solid perfect basically every time, the robot tells you that the Cleveland Classic is a low-spin bomber, as is the TaylorMade R1. Did I recently want to buy a Cleveland Classic? Yes I did. And now I want to even more, so thanks Edwin Watts!

The tests show results in five different categories: most distance, highest ball speeds, highest launch, most accurate and lowest spin. Those categories are further broken down into as many as six different categories based on where golfers can impact their drivers — high on the face, low on the face, on the toe, heel, sweet spot and an “overall” rating. Using those categories, golfers can pick some clubs to test based on their tendencies and see if they get similar results.

The results also seem pretty unbiased. Why do I say this? I’ll give you two reasons: Wilson and D100.

Screen Shot 2013-04-08 at 11.39.57 AM

That club, which we’re yet to see used by anyone on the PGA Tour, was sprinkled all over the test. It ranks in the top three in a lot of the distance and ball speed categories, so much so that I thought for a second that Wilson endorser Padraig Harrington hacked into Edwin Watts website and just started doing stuff.

Would you have tested a Wilson club in your 2013 driver shootout? Put your hand down Kevin Streelman, because we know you would have. Then again, you happily hit your Ping G20 en route to his first Tour win at The Tampa Bay Championship, so maybe not.

While the robot results likely aren’t perfect, golfers would be foolish not to consult the Edwin Watts ARC results before they do their next round of driver testing. There are a lot of club tests out there, but very few that actually rank clubs based on anything not subjective, or that don’t recognize many different clubs with the same award.

Anything that helps golfers filter through the hype and even make an attempt to classify things in an organized matter is OK in my books.

Screen Shot 2013-04-08 at 11.40.16 AM

Of course, Edwin Watts’ test doesn’t tell you at what swing speed the robot was set to, and the ARC system has not yet tested 3-woods, hybrids or even irons. But these are things that can be easily be done in the coming months and years. And while my guess is people will demand they provide a bit more details into the settings and results of the ARC tests, the bottom line is they have released information to the public that no one else has, and it’s something that can help the average golfer.

So good for Edwin Watts, good for us, and good for Wilson!

Related Topics:

Up Next

Mickelson confirms plan to use “Phrankenwood”

Don't Miss

Phil’s Secret Weapon: The “Phrankenwood”

Jeff Singer

Jeff Singer was born and still resides in Montreal, Canada. Though it is a passion for him today, he wasn't a golfer until fairly recently in life. In his younger years Jeff played collegiate basketball and football and grew up hoping to play the latter professionally. Upon joining the workforce, Jeff picked up golf and currently plays at a private course in the Montreal area while working in marketing. He has been a member of GolfWRX since 2008

22 Comments

thatsjapanesesfor far

May 1, 2013 at 11:36 am

I appreciate any testing of clubs and i think ewg is less biased than say golf digest since golf digest does get big advertising dollars from the major companies but i love reading their testing also get all the info available and go enjoy the game more, make friends make birdies, make great memories.

Reply Report comment
Kj

Apr 20, 2013 at 8:23 am

As a data point I think this is great. Bottom line, you have to get fit. The hardest part for some of us is that very few fitting carts have X flex shafts. It becomes a guessing game after that.

Reply Report comment
BobD

Apr 9, 2013 at 4:07 pm

This relative ranking is next to useless without the associated data. You need to publish the means and standard deviations for each driver in each category as well as the configurations and environmental data for this to be meaningful at all.

Reply Report comment
Roger Faithfull

Apr 9, 2013 at 1:34 pm

Well done Erwin Watts! A simple visual guide punters can understand. If Wilson has a $100 lower price point…………
Thats called winning market share.
If the TEE works real well, and has a more consistent flexing shaft
in true CPM numbers than this years Callaways (all over the place based on reader reports) then test it out and be Open Minded!
I will bag any brand that works Better Than What I Got Now
and hits More Fairways/Greens in Regulation. 44/45 inch Drivers will help you get Centre Impact…but we all knew that. Cheers.

Reply Report comment
naflack

Apr 9, 2013 at 12:33 pm

I agree that this very unscientific but a great place to get the ball rolling…

Reply Report comment
Joe S

Apr 9, 2013 at 12:05 pm

This testing is flawed for sure; And they do need to provide more info. like clubhead speed, AofA, Path, etc. (i.e. full ‘trackman’ data points) and shafts utilized. That said, this is FREAKIN AWESOME. There is so little objective/’scientific data’ out there, I feel this is a big step forward; maybe will help get the ball rolling for more and help us see thru the haze of the manufacturers hype. Robot testing is fine as far as I can see to help establish a base line; particularly as it would relate to ball flight characteristics/spin rates on center /off center hits. I applaud EW for their efforts.

Reply Report comment
Bill Marshall

Apr 9, 2013 at 9:24 am

You want fitted clubs that work for you,go to a professional club fitter,and not some cut and glue guy.You want the same thing you currently have,clubs that don’t work as described for you,go to an “off the rack” store. Newer version than current heartache,but still a heartache. Bill Marshall, certified level 10 club fitter AGCP,Lakeland Florida

Reply Report comment
J

Apr 8, 2013 at 8:17 pm

So… The Wilson and the Exotics come with aftermarket real deal shafts.

Not sure, but the comment seemed like a backhanded insult to those drivers…

Seems to me that those are great driver options at a great price point with great shafts..

I don’t and won’t play either one of them but for someone’s money… Seems like a good deal

Reply Report comment
- hbugolf89
  
  Apr 9, 2013 at 10:09 am
  
  False…….TEE uses watered down versions of these high end shafts with the retail graphics. The CB 4 had a made for RIP and the XCG series has a made for DI shaft. Not big into following Wilson, but I’m sure it correlates respectivly.
  
  Reply Report comment
  - Joe Golfer
    
    Apr 10, 2013 at 1:00 am
    
    I’m not surprised. Clubs would be too expensive if they used the real deal aftermarket shafts. The Graphite Design Tour AD DI, if that’s what you mean by the “DI”, retails for $380. The Aldila RIP shafts go for about $160.
    What is even more amazing is that, some “made for” shafts are actually made by the same company that has the graphics, just watered down versions with lower technology, less graphite and more resin, higher torque, etc etc…
    And some of those “made for” shafts are not even made by the company that has their name on them. This was revealed in a blog by component company Hireko’s Jeff Summit. The real deal shaft company just takes the money and lets the clubmaker use their name and graphics, but the clubmaker can have a totally different company make that shaft, which just might be a piece of garbage or it might be something reasonably decent, but hardly the quality of the real deal.
    
    Reply Report comment
- thatsjapanesesfor far
  
  May 1, 2013 at 11:29 am
  
  they are not aftermarket shafts they are the stock shaftsthose companies choose and most all major companies have the same ability to put whatever shaft in they like the pings and titleist do not have made for shafts in 2013 it is the true shfts which sell for big dollars as well as the callawy razr extreme with the same shaft as exotics in it’s option package
  
  Reply Report comment
paul

Apr 8, 2013 at 2:56 pm

I tried the Wilson D100 at the golf show when it came to town. What a great club. I hit it farther then the anser…

Reply Report comment
Adam

Apr 8, 2013 at 1:51 pm

I can say with 100% certainty that this testing is bogus. There is no way that the Ping Anser is the highest launching anything.

Reply Report comment
purkjason

Apr 8, 2013 at 1:32 pm

I smell money being exchanged under the table on this testing. Like everyone else I was shockingly suprised with the outcome of this testing. 1)Wilson Staff D100 …. now that’s funny. 2) Where are all the Adams Drivers? 3)The lack of Callaway hitting better scores. I did my own testing this weekend for 4.5 hours hitting every driver possible at Dick’s Sporting Goods and Golf Galaxy and the “Winner For Me” in distance and accuracy was the Callaway X Hot 9.5 Standard Head with a FREE upgrade Project X Velocity Pro 5.5 Shaft cut down 1.5″ to make it feel more like a 6.0 . The “FREE UPGRADED SHAFT” is what made the “BIG DIFFERENCE”. Outdrove every driver with that shaft by 9 yards !

Reply Report comment
- thatsjapanesesfor far
  
  May 1, 2013 at 11:32 am
  
  Funny you should say that since dicks doesnt carry wlson products anyway.
  
  Reply Report comment
rtylerg

Apr 8, 2013 at 1:12 pm

This ARC system is not a scientific test. Unless they’re using the same shaft with the same length in each of these heads matched to the same swing weight, which wasn’t mentioned anywhere on the website, there are far too many variables to determine which head is really the best. After checking on the Wilson D100 and Tour Exotics specs, it turns out that both these drivers come with premium aftermarket shafts whereas the other heads come with “made for” shafts. I could put a premium shaft in a KMart driver head and it would perform better than most drivers with “made for” shafts. I guess if you just want to buy a driver off the shelf then this testing is fine. However, most good manufacturers have aftermarket shaft options that will make a world of difference compared to their “off the shelf” shafts. Those of you using premium shafts in your drivers know what I’m talking about.

Reply Report comment
- SV
  
  Apr 11, 2013 at 11:56 am
  
  This article simply states the ARC system gives starting information for people to consider based on manufacturer offering. It doesn’t pretend to be all encompassing. The majority of people can’t break 90 and a lot can’t break 100. I doubt premium shafts are going to make a difference. Until you have someone consistently in the low to mid 70s the premium shafts are just an ego trip and a waste of money.
  
  Reply Report comment
- thatsjapanesesfor far
  
  May 1, 2013 at 11:26 am
  
  Thw matrix in the exotics and wilson are stock shafts and the shafts for ping and titleist are not made for shafts anymore either the callaway raxr x has the same matrix shaft as the exotics also But just the comment itself is a little funny to me, if you go looking at a corvette and a chevy cruz do you ask them to put the ls9 in th cruz to check performance no you test what the companies produce so that arguement is kind of silly sounding.
  
  Reply Report comment
Double Mocha Man

Apr 8, 2013 at 1:07 pm

Very good catch John.

Reply Report comment
John

Apr 8, 2013 at 12:10 pm

Very good article

Reply Report comment
Jaacob Bowden

Apr 8, 2013 at 12:07 pm

Interesting. 🙂

Wish this test would include a lot of the smaller manufacturers that have great products but limited marketing budgets.

Last I checked, I found 97 different companies that make a driver model…bet there would be some surprises in there.

Reply Report comment
Displayname

Apr 8, 2013 at 11:59 am

This is awesome! Glad to see Wilson shine, but I really wish Adams would have been included.

Reply Report comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Equipment

Putters that never made it: Check out some of the best tour builds that didn’t make the cut

Published

2 weeks ago

May 18, 2026

Alistair Cameron

Arguably, the best perk of being a professional golfer on the PGA Tour is the ability to request or even just be handed pretty much any club you could think of. It happens more often than you think, usually with putters around the practice green from one event to the next. Come Wednesday, the Tour bags lining the edge of the putting surface become resting places for fallen flatsticks that never made the cut.

So let’s take a look at some of the best we’ve seen out on Tour this year that never made it to the competition. (You may notice none of Hideki Matsuyama’s custom Scotty Cameron putters made this list. There are too many.)

Let’s start with this custom Damascus Milled Odyssey Rossie made for Ryo Hisatsune. Featuring a single line and the short-slant hossel, we’ve seen plenty of Number 7 and jailbird heads featuring the Damascus Milled insert, but this is the first and only one we’ve spotted in a Rossie. Hisatsune primarily putts with an Odyssey Black Series iX #9, but we have seen him recently with a TaylorMade TP Collection SOTO, so there could be potential that the Damascus Milled Rossie could end up in the bag.

Everyone wants to be Cameron Young right now. We’ve had Justin Thomas and Tom Hoge both game the Scotty Cameron 9.5R prototype. Well, for the PGA Championship, Brooks Koepka nearly joined that list after requesting the same style of putter, with the full-length alignment line. But the Scotty Cameron reps took the request a step further and made one specially for Koepka with a Teryllium insert, similar to one in his previous Newport 2 gamers. The reason why this one didn’t go into play, though? Because it was too heavy.

Harry Hall was the third-best putter on Tour last year, so when Bettinardi made him a custom proto, you know it was going to be good. The custom BB28 blade features VDF face milling, a custom-welded single-bend shaft, and the owner’s initials – HH – on the sole of the putter. Hall, who usually games an Odyssey O-Works #7 W, has dabbled with a TaylorMade Spider Tour X already this year. Maybe there’s a chance this Bettinardi might make his bag.

Honestly, this one doesn’t need a description. It’s Kieth Mitchell’s custom Scotty Cameron Napa. One Scotty Cameron face stamp, two Scotty Dogs, two Scotty Cameron 7-Point Crowns and one Circle T. That is all. Oh, except for the Cashmere Cameron headcover.

Finally, and just for fun, how about we pour one out for this TaylorMade Spider Tour X made for Scottie Scheffler in its new torched finish. It’s unlikely we’ll see a putter change anytime soon from the best golfer in the world. In fact, he hit just two putts with it on the Harbour Town practice before going back to his trusty gamer.

Whats in the Bag

Patrick Reed WITB 2026 (May)

Published

2 weeks ago

May 18, 2026

GolfWRX Staff

Driver: Titleist GT3 (9 degrees) Buy here.
Shaft: Aldila Rogue Silver 130 M.S.I. 70 TX

3-wood: TaylorMade Qi35 (15 degrees)
Shaft: Fujikura Ventus Blue 7 X

7-wood: TaylorMade Qi35 (21 degrees)
Shaft: Fujikura Ventus Blue 8 X

Irons: Grindworks PR-202 (4), Grindworks PR-101A (5-PW)
Shafts: True Temper Dynamic Gold Tour Issue X100

Wedges: Cleveland RTX6 Tour Rack (52-10 Mid), Titleist Vokey Design SM10 (56-08M), SM11 (60-04T)
Shafts: True Temper Dynamic Gold Tour Issue S400

Putter: Scotty Cameron Tour Rat 1.5 Tour Prototype

Ball: Titleist Pro V1x

Grips: Golf Pride MCC

See more photos of Patrick Reed’s clubs here.

Equipment

Which of Tiger’s major winning irons are your favorite? – GolfWRXers discuss

Published

2 weeks ago

May 18, 2026

Gianni Magliocco

In our forums, our members have been discussing their favorite major winning irons used by Tiger Woods. WRXer ‘golferdude54’ kicks off the thread saying:

“Mizuno MP 14/29. Titleist 681T. Nike Forged Blades. TaylorMade P7TW.

Among these irons that helped Tiger win 15 majors, which is your favorite in terms of looks?”

And our members have been naming their favorites and why in response.

Here are a couple of posts from the thread, but make sure to check out the entire discussion and have your say at the link below.

SwingBlade: “I prefer the early blades he played and the more recent TM TW’s especially because after Tiger had his major behavioral setbacks, part of Nikes support payback was making Tiger play a Nike putter and cease using his beloved uniquely customized Scotty putter.”
ProjectX: “This (Nike Forged Blades) and there’s not even a close second.”

Entire Thread: “Which of Tiger’s major winning irons are your favorite? – GolfWRXers discuss”