# club head speed



## vickers (Aug 13, 2012)

I am told to slow my swing down, if I do how do I ceate club head speed?


----------



## JustOne (Aug 13, 2012)

vickers said:



			I am told to slow my swing down,
		
Click to expand...

Why? ...and by whom?


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 14, 2012)

vickers said:



			I am told to slow my swing down, if I do how do I ceate club head speed?
		
Click to expand...

whilst I agree with Justone that the answers to those questions will help focus responses to your situation, the general issue you have to grasp is that the time it takes your hands to move from 9 o'clock to impact and the time the club head takes to travel the same angular distance, but greater actual distance (club length dependent), are completely different (well they should be!!!)


----------



## USER1999 (Aug 14, 2012)

If, and it is an if, you swing like a mad axe man with a strimming attachment, you might benefit by slowing your swing down, getting every thing in synch, and hitting the ball in the most efficient manner. Sometimes less is more. Just go down your local range and look at the idiots thrashing a driver less than 170, and then look at the old guy at the end, casually knocking it out beyond 200.

Or I could be wrong.....


----------



## bobmac (Aug 14, 2012)

Don't slow it down, make it smoother


----------



## Monty_Brown (Aug 14, 2012)

One of the best truisms in golf is the old favourite "You don't hit it on the backswing"

Nothing to be gained by an overly quick b/s, except giving yourself no time to get the club in the right position. A nice steady transition from backswing to downswing will help. Try to feel everything pause at the top of the backswing (you probably won't in reality) to help things get smoother, as Bob recommends.


----------



## Minhoca (Aug 14, 2012)

Monty_Brown said:



			"You don't hit it on the backswing"

Try to feel everything pause at the top of the backswing to help things get smoother, as Bob recommends.
		
Click to expand...

This is Sound advice!


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 14, 2012)

bobmac said:



			Don't slow it down, make it *smoother*

Click to expand...

I prefer the term 'flowing' as 'smooth' tends to indicate more maniipulated/tension building and without the essential oomph through impact.

'Slow your swing down to a blur' isn't a bad thing to do though!


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 15, 2012)

Shawn Clements has an analogy of pushing a kid on a swing.  You dont wrench the swing back then push it down fast from the top.  You swing it down smoothly and progressively increase speed through the bottom of the swing arc.


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 15, 2012)

SocketRocket said:



			Shawn Clements has an analogy of pushing a kid on a swing.  You dont wrench the swing back then push it down fast from the top.  You swing it down smoothly and progressively increase speed through the bottom of the swing arc.
		
Click to expand...

all of these observations are fine for 'hand speed', which, if my arithmetic isn't to rusty, will be about 20mph if it takes you 0.1 sec to get them from shoulder height to impact........maybe 30


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 15, 2012)

duncan mackie said:



			all of these observations are fine for 'hand speed', which, if my arithmetic isn't to rusty, will be about 20mph if it takes you 0.1 sec to get them from shoulder height to impact........maybe 30
		
Click to expand...

Dont see your point there Duncan.


----------



## MadAdey (Aug 15, 2012)

I know exactly what your mate is trying to tell you. Someone said to me a couple of months ago that when I take it back nice and steady, then accelerate my hands into impact, I smash the driver a mile and very straight. When my swing looks faster, it looks horrible and the ball can go anywhere. I think what someone is telling you is to swing with more control, not necessarily swing slow.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 15, 2012)

Just watch this piece of film of THE Maestro Ben Hogan and listen to him describing the drive.  Watch his hip movement, and watch his hands, the flow, the smoothness - the tempo. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL_6M_xZvq0

Oh how I wish I asked Jim to fix it for me to meet the great man. Absolute complete and utter perfection in motion.


----------



## RGDave (Aug 15, 2012)

another quality thread by someone who can't be bothered to revisit.

Thread: club head speed
by vickers Replies
12
Views
212
 club head speed
I am told to slow my swing down, if I do how do I ceate club head speed?


02-Jul-2012 19:14
Thread: Wristy
by vickers Replies
4
Views
156
 Wristy
i am told that I am wristy, what does this mean?


11-May-2012 11:30
Thread: srixon xx10 u6
by vickers Replies
0
Views
92
srixon xx10 u6
can anyone give me information about this club please, I bought it recently second hand but i have been unable to find any reviews.

There's give and take in this world.


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 15, 2012)

SocketRocket said:



			Dont see your point there Duncan.
		
Click to expand...

Brian

Just trying to keep the distinction between hand speed and club head speed for those, as the OP, who struggle to understand how a slower, smoother, more flowing 'swing' can deliver as much, let alone much faster, club head speed.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 16, 2012)

duncan mackie said:



			Brian

Just trying to keep the distinction between hand speed and club head speed for those, as the OP, who struggle to understand how a slower, smoother, more flowing 'swing' can deliver as much, let alone much faster, club head speed.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, good point.


----------



## JustOne (Aug 18, 2012)

duncan mackie said:



			Just trying to keep the distinction between hand speed and club head speed for those, as the OP, who struggle to understand how a slower, smoother, more flowing 'swing' can deliver as much, let alone much faster, club head speed.
		
Click to expand...




			
				SocketRocket said:
			
		


			Yes, good point.
		
Click to expand...

How exactly does a slower swing deliver _much faster_ clubhead speed?

I'm not entirely sure what either of you are talking about, feel free to clarify. You did say something about the hands being 20mph or 30mph - that's a massive 50% difference, you don't think that would have an effect on the speed of the clubhead that is on an arc a further 44" away from the hands?

If hand speed meant nothing then shouldn't those 'long drive' guys be swinging as slowly as they can?

[video=youtube;TnXsZ8SL0bg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnXsZ8SL0bg[/video]

Sloooooooow and smooth!! erm............ not.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 18, 2012)

JustOne said:



			How exactly does a slower swing deliver _much faster_ clubhead speed?

I'm not entirely sure what either of you are talking about, feel free to clarify. You did say something about the hands being 20mph or 30mph - that's a massive 50% difference, you don't think that would have an effect on the speed of the clubhead that is on an arc a further 44" away from the hands?

If hand speed meant nothing then shouldn't those 'long drive' guys be swinging as slowly as they can?

Sloooooooow and smooth!! erm............ not.
		
Click to expand...

These Long Driving Comp types hit it long but not down narrow fairways with water/sand/doglegs etc in their path.

I believe Duncan's point is that swinging out of your socks on the golf course will not automatically make you shoot low.   We dont see these LD guys on tour earning big bucks.

When I hit my driver I am looking for good impact conditions and a controlled flight path.   I can only get this by swinging under control with a smooth swing that gradually increases speed into and through the impact zone.  I know all my best drives and other shots come to that are a result of a good temo and balance.   I dont believe Duncan meant that you should hit the ball 'Slow' but under good control, just like 'The Big Easy' does.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 18, 2012)

SocketRocket said:



			When I hit my driver I am looking for good impact conditions and a controlled flight path.   I can only get this by swinging under control with a smooth swing that gradually increases speed into and through the impact zone.  I know all my best drives and other shots come to that are a result of a good temo and balance.   I dont believe Duncan meant that you should hit the ball 'Slow' but under good control, just like 'The Big Easy' does.
		
Click to expand...

Having played a few holes with JM a few times, I can say that that's the way he hits it too. That's why I use 'flowing' rather than 'smooth' and 'rhythm' rather than 'tempo'. Otherwise I agree. Else may swing 'easy' but I certainly wouldn't want to have a finger between his club and ball!


----------



## MadAdey (Aug 18, 2012)

[video=youtube;INE1-49o4Cs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INE1-49o4Cs&amp;feature=g-all-u[/video]

What I would say on this matter is look at a normal club golfer that gives the ball a good whack out to the 300 yard mark. Yes there is some good speed through impact. But it is not breaking the speed of sound on the back swing and neither is it getting thrashed at the ball from the top. But what is happening is a nice controlled acceleration at the ball from the top.


----------



## MadAdey (Aug 18, 2012)

JustOne said:



			How exactly does a slower swing deliver _much faster_ clubhead speed?

I'm not entirely sure what either of you are talking about, feel free to clarify. You did say something about the hands being 20mph or 30mph - that's a massive 50% difference, you don't think that would have an effect on the speed of the clubhead that is on an arc a further 44" away from the hands?

If hand speed meant nothing then shouldn't those 'long drive' guys be swinging as slowly as they can?

Sloooooooow and smooth!! erm............ not.
		
Click to expand...

With you on this one James. If your swing is slow and deliberate then you are not going to generate tons of speed. I think your swing needs to be rhythmic and accelerate your hands into impact to generate lots of speed. But it goes without saying that a slow swing will not generate more clubhead speed.


----------



## spawn_ukuk (Aug 19, 2012)

If your Swing is fast but uncontrolled, then yes slow it, does help alittle
will give your accuracy a helping hand
But if you think you can control your swing as it is then dont change it, Faster then better if you can handle it


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 19, 2012)

JustOne said:



			How exactly does a slower swing deliver _much faster_ clubhead speed?
		
Click to expand...

It doesn't. But Faster clubhead speed doesn't necessarily mean faster Ball-speed either - and it's ball-speed that governs distance (plus a few other attributes of course!). Remember the Smash-Factor thread!

So swing *better*, not harder/faster!


----------



## bobmac (Aug 19, 2012)

There are 5 things that influence the ball directly at impact.


Angle of attack
 

Swing path
 

Clubface direction
 

Where the ball strikes the clubface (heel/toe/sweet spot)


and finally speed.
 If you increase the speed without changing the other 4, you will hit it further.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 19, 2012)

Increasing speed will accentuate the impact conditions.  If the ball was hit well then it will have more distance, otherwise the bad shot will be worse.   Hooks and slices will be two fairways over instead of one , skied shots will be sponsored by NASSA.


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 19, 2012)

JustOne said:



			How exactly does a slower swing deliver _much faster_ clubhead speed?

I'm not entirely sure what either of you are talking about, feel free to clarify. You did say something about the hands being 20mph or 30mph - that's a massive 50% difference, you don't think that would have an effect on the speed of the clubhead that is on an arc a further 44" away from the hands?
		
Click to expand...

I was illustrating the gap/relationship between hand speed and club head speed, and the 20 or 30 was indacative based on some quick mental arithmetic and estimates (specified in the post)  - I made no comment at all regarding the impact on distance that might result from a 50% increase in hand speed but there is a clear inference that if hand speed is in that area, and clubhead speed is around 110 (say), then whatever it is that is delivering that clubhead speed is more important than simply increasing hand speed.............bluntly, releasing the clubhead at the right moment from the right position.

Once you have that 'nailed' (we could call it timing I suppose) then if you can increase your hand speed without compromising your timing then it will increase your club head speed.

If you can do it without compromising the accuracy of your strike (club head alignment and the other angles involved) then you will hit the ball even further in the direction you wish 

It's probably the last element in the equation to go to work on, and delivers the least practical benefit in the hunt for consistent on target distance.


----------



## kev_off_the_tee (Aug 19, 2012)

murphthemog said:



			Just go down your local range and look at the idiots thrashing a driver less than 170, and then look at the old guy at the end, casually knocking it out beyond 200.
		
Click to expand...

Murph has been watching me at the range

Regards, madaxeman


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 19, 2012)

bobmac said:



			There are 5 things that influence the ball directly at impact.

Angle of attack

Swing path

Clubface direction

Where the ball strikes the clubface (heel/toe/sweet spot)

and finally speed.
 If you increase the speed without changing the other 4, you will hit it further.
		
Click to expand...

These are the '5 Ball Flight Laws' that both UK and US mobs (PGAs) have been able to agree on, though calling them 'Laws' is a bit dodgy imo - Factors is a much better term; and (Ball) Flight Shapes would be better for the other lot too.

Indeed, if clubhead speed is the only factor that changes, then the result will just be 'more' of what happens with lower clubhead speed - more distance, bigger fade/slice/pull/hook etc.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Aug 19, 2012)

Foxholer said:



			It doesn't. But Faster clubhead speed doesn't necessarily mean faster Ball-speed either - and it's ball-speed that governs distance (plus a few other attributes of course!). Remember the Smash-Factor thread!

So swing *better*, not harder/faster!
		
Click to expand...

Many, many years ago (30+) I read a little article by John Jacobs in a golf magazine (may have been GF) - words of his in that article have stuck with me 'you hit the ball further by hit it better'


----------



## Ethan (Aug 19, 2012)

Foxholer said:



			These are the '5 Ball Flight Laws' that both UK and US mobs (PGAs) have been able to agree on, though calling them 'Laws' is a bit dodgy imo - Factors is a much better term; and (Ball) Flight Shapes would be better for the other lot too.

Indeed, if clubhead speed is the only factor that changes, then the result will just be 'more' of what happens with lower clubhead speed - more distance, bigger fade/slice/pull/hook etc.
		
Click to expand...

They are called 'laws' in the sense of the laws of physics - certain actions cause certain effects, rather than laws in a legal sense.


----------



## JustOne (Aug 19, 2012)

Did anyone actually answer the question yet?



vickers said:



			I am told to slow my swing down, if I do how do I ceate club head speed?
		
Click to expand...

....or is he better served by simply saying "improve your contact and don't worry about how fast you are swinging the club"?


----------



## bobmac (Aug 19, 2012)

Did anyone actually answer the question yet?
		
Click to expand...

I'll try. 
If you swing at such a fast speed that you have little control of the 


Angle of attack
 

Swing path
 

Clubface direction
 

Where the ball strikes the clubface (heel/toe/sweet spot)
then chances are you will not gain any distance
If however you reduce the swing speed to a point where you improve the above factors, then you will increase the distance.
So, perfect the other 4 factors and then increase the speed without losing track of the other factors.
Or as my dad used to say....

_"Hit it as hard as you can but no harder"_


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 19, 2012)

Ethan said:



			They are called 'laws' in the sense of the laws of physics - certain actions cause certain effects, rather than laws in a legal sense.
		
Click to expand...

H'mm.

Doesn't seem like the way I remember the 'laws of physics'!

Can you explain how 'Centredness of Strike' is a law? I can understand how it's a Factor.

Analogous, to 'Mass' being a Law in Newton's 2nd Law of Motion, where it's certainly a Factor (2 meanings of it too

Is 'Size of Dose' a Law or is it a Factor?


----------



## bobmac (Aug 19, 2012)

Can you explain how 'Centredness of Striks' is a law? I can understand how it's a Factor.
		
Click to expand...

If the other 4 laws aren't changed but the ball is struck with the toe/heal, would you not expect the ball to travel less distance than a ball hit in the centre of the club face?


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 19, 2012)

bobmac said:



			If the other 4 laws aren't changed but the ball is struck with the toe/heal, would you not expect the ball to travel less distance than a ball hit in the centre of the club face?
		
Click to expand...

That statement might be heading towards a 'Law' (well. not really), but the 5 Factors are not Laws in themselves.

Your post regarding the 5 *Factors* that contribute to the strike of a golf ball - (only 4 apply directly to 'swing') is fine and could almost be considered to be a (single) Law, but the individual components  (factors) are certainly not 'Laws'!

Is 'Mass' a Law? No. Is it a Factor in a Law (F=ma)? Yes!


----------



## bobmac (Aug 19, 2012)

Do the 5 items on my list have a direct influence on the ball ?


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 19, 2012)

bobmac said:



			Do the 5 items on my list have a direct influence on the ball ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes. They are the Factors that are involved!

Here's an article (found by quick google search) that, sort of, associates both our (?) points of view on 'Law' - though I'm unconvinced!

http://home.earthlink.net/~debbievang/id1.html

BTW. Why are we even hving this ping-pong posting? You posted and I agreed that they were Factors! Are you 'complaining' about folk agreeing with you?


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 19, 2012)

Foxholer said:



			Yes. They are the Factors that are involved!

Here's an article (found by quick google search) that, sort of, associates both our (?) points of view on 'Law' - though I'm unconvinced!

http://home.earthlink.net/~debbievang/id1.html

BTW. Why are we even hving this ping-pong posting? You posted and I agreed that they were Factors! Are you 'complaining' about folk agreeing with you?
		
Click to expand...

Dont know if I should be saying this but the article in that link uses Old Ball Flight Law reasoning.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 19, 2012)

SocketRocket said:



			Dont know if I should be saying this but the article in that link uses Old Ball Flight Law reasoning.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed. That wasn't the purpose of the quote though. And calling those (9) 'Ball Flight Shapes'  or 'Flight Shape Results' 'Laws' is almost as daft imo.


----------



## bobmac (Aug 19, 2012)

Why are we even hving this ping-pong posting? You posted and I agreed  that they were Factors! Are you 'complaining' about folk agreeing with  you?
		
Click to expand...

I dont agree they are just factors. I only said it so as not to rock the boat.
I get told off if I disagree with someone who has different ideas from me.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 19, 2012)

bobmac said:



			I dont agree they are just factors. I only said it so as not to rock the boat.
I get told off if I disagree with someone who has different ideas from me.
		
Click to expand...

Bob. You are too sensitive!

But they really are 'just' factors!

Consider yourself 'told off'! (boy do we need those smilies back!)


----------



## JustOne (Aug 20, 2012)

Don't worry Bob, I'm also still learning this stuff:

Laws aren't laws they are factors, factors aren't factors they are ball speeds/club speeds and have no value, pull fade is a preferred stock shot, slower swings mean faster clubheads, and I'm not even going near the roll release!!

Hoping to learn something new tomorrow......!


----------



## JustOne (Aug 20, 2012)

Foxholer said:



			Bob. You are too sensitive!

But they really are 'just' factors!
		
Click to expand...

I don't get this, I read the link you posted http://home.earthlink.net/~debbievang/id1.html and he says they are Laws.

He even says..



			Ball Flight Laws rank as the first priority because they are absolute rather than arbitrary.
		
Click to expand...

....whereby *absolute* means *invariable* which is the definition of a *LAW* (at the top of the page). So I'm confused as to what you're trying to say.

The swing itself has no laws, only principles (or factors if you don't like the word PRINCIPLE). The 5 ball flight laws that Bob posted don't refer to the swing at all only the 'absolute' geometry of the club: angle, path, direction, mass and speed which makes them physical LAWS.....

does it not????


----------



## kev_off_the_tee (Aug 20, 2012)

My head hurts


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 20, 2012)

JustOne said:



			Don't worry Bob, I'm also still learning this stuff:

Laws aren't laws they are factors, factors aren't factors they are ball speeds/club speeds and have no value, pull fade is a preferred stock shot, slower swings mean faster clubheads, and I'm not even going near the roll release!!

Hoping to learn something new tomorrow......!
		
Click to expand...

So!  would you prefer a push fade to a pull fade as a stock shot?


----------



## JustOne (Aug 20, 2012)

^
^
^
Open a new thread with that title and we can discuss/dispute/argue it  LOL


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 20, 2012)

JustOne said:



			^
^
^
Open a new thread with that title and we can discuss/dispute/argue it  LOL
		
Click to expand...

Yes or No will do for now.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 20, 2012)

SocketRocket said:



			Yes or No will do for now.
		
Click to expand...

Doesn't seem to be a popular method of reply! 

I prefer a Pull Fade - as it's what I do! 

@JO. re the link. That's why I remain unconvinced of *her* (there were some clues; Deb, LPGA.. and the picture at the bottom) argument, but only used it to assist a 'compromise' of factor vs law. I can be accommodating sometimes - though I'll stiill use 'factor'!


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 20, 2012)

JustOne said:



			Don't worry Bob, I'm also still learning this stuff:

Laws aren't laws they are factors, factors aren't factors they are ball speeds/club speeds and have no value, pull fade is a preferred stock shot, slower swings mean faster clubheads, and I'm not even going near the roll release!!

Hoping to learn something new tomorrow......!
		
Click to expand...

Will swinging the arms fast always create a fast clubhead speed?


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 20, 2012)

SocketRocket said:



			Will swinging the arms fast always create a fast clubhead speed?
		
Click to expand...

Wasn't there a link to a video (quite) a few pages back that showed the different speeds of swings with arms only, arms and hips and arms hips and legs?

Just swinging the arms fast doesn't seem to me the 'best' way of creating high club-head speed. And certainly not high ball-speed, which is my real aim in an 'all-out' swing.

BTW. Aren't you an 'apostle' of golf swing being arms driven rather than body driven? Including the one-piece-takeaway being 'bad'?


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 20, 2012)

Foxholer said:



			Wasn't there a link to a video (quite) a few pages back that showed the different speeds of swings with arms only, arms and hips and arms hips and legs?

Just swinging the arms fast doesn't seem to me the 'best' way of creating high club-head speed. And certainly not high ball-speed, which is my real aim in an 'all-out' swing.

BTW. Aren't you an 'apostle' of golf swing being arms driven rather than body driven? Including the one-piece-takeaway being 'bad'?
		
Click to expand...

I was asking those questions to James with a tongue in cheek after his post to Bob.

The video you mention was one I posted, it was Paul Wilson from 'Swing Machine Golf'

I think you are a bit out of touch with the teachings from the NGS.   The arms lead swing was in fact what Leslie King suggested way back but things have moved on since then.

Here is one of their videos about  clubhead speed:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKWtgPypExs&feature=relmfu


----------



## JustOne (Aug 20, 2012)

SocketRocket said:



			Yes or No will do for now.
		
Click to expand...

No. Push-fade is better in my opinion.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 20, 2012)

Really?


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 20, 2012)

SocketRocket said:



			I was asking those questions to James with a tongue in cheek after his post to Bob.

The video you mention was one I posted, it was Paul Wilson from 'Swing Machine Golf'

I think you are a bit out of touch with the teachings from the KSG.   The arms lead swing was in fact what Leslie King suggested way back but things have moved on since then.

Here is one of their videos about  clubhead speed:
		
Click to expand...

Ah! We need those Smilies back!!!!

Never been 'in-touch' with KSG teaching - though can understand the things moving on bit. 

Arms leading the body (rather than the other way around) was fundamental to LK's teaching and 1PT was 'bad' because that;s what it encouraged/meant. Out of interest, have they kept any of it (apart from face being at right angles to swing plane)? Or gone Hogan approach, or mixed/hybrid/their own? I did/do like King's method of not fixing things, but getting it right in the first place - though  probably too late for me I'm afraid! That coincides with my 'fix the fundamental cause, not just the symptom' desire.


----------



## SocketRocket (Aug 20, 2012)

Foxholer said:



			Ah! We need those Smilies back!!!!

Never been 'in-touch' with KSG teaching - though can understand the things moving on bit. 

Arms leading the body (rather than the other way around) was fundamental to LK's teaching and 1PT was 'bad' because that;s what it encouraged/meant. Out of interest, have they kept any of it (apart from face being at right angles to swing plane)? Or gone Hogan approach, or mixed/hybrid/their own? I did/do like King's method of not fixing things, but getting it right in the first place - though  probably too late for me I'm afraid! That coincides with my 'fix the fundamental cause, not just the symptom' desire.
		
Click to expand...

They have a very good book out at the moment  'Golf's Golden Rule'   It focuses on 'the impact zone' and getting the club into the correct positions a few feet before and after impact.  It does go into a fair bit more though.  Worth a browse if you are in Waterstones.   They do have a website on 'Golfs Golden Rule' which has the video I just posted and a number of others on their methods.


----------



## stevelev (Aug 21, 2012)

Foxholer said:



			That statement might be heading towards a 'Law' (well. not really), but the 5 Factors are not Laws in themselves.

Your post regarding the 5 *Factors* that contribute to the strike of a golf ball - (only 4 apply directly to 'swing') is fine and could almost be considered to be a (single) Law, but the individual components  (factors) are certainly not 'Laws'!

Is 'Mass' a Law? No. Is it a Factor in a Law (F=ma)? Yes!
		
Click to expand...

Who cares to be honest whether they are laws or factors, the terminology is understood by golfer internationally, thatys good enough for everyone else on this forum and worldround, Deal with it.


----------

