Offset... Is this really necessary anymore?

[Rich Douglas]

If offset isn't a dynamic factor in performance, but instead a visual matter of confidence, why do my Sterlings have progressive offset through the set?

[Nessism]

If offset isn't a dynamic factor in performance, but instead a visual matter of confidence, why do my Sterlings have progressive offset through the set?

 

Tom isn't saying that offset "isn't a dynamic factor in performance," rather, he's suggesting that not all people will experience these factors. It depends on the person's swing. And even if a person doesn't experience dynamic effects, offset as a way of enhancing visual confidence is in of itself a credible reason to have it.

[Shilgy]

Only one club in my bag has offset. The putter. The more offset the better roll I get on the ball I tend to use a putter with full shaft offset in mid summer when I need to control my roll better. In the other seasons the grass is more dormant and seems easier to roll with putter with very little offset

 

Long club I just close the clubface by releasing my forearms. Offset seems to add unnecessary complications to alignment for my long clubs

 

What irons and wedges do you play? It's extremely difficult to find sets without offset. Most people look at a club, like a Mizuno MP series iron, and say they have no offset, when in reality they do.

 

You are quite right...even the MP4s have a small degree of offset. However, it is when you compare them with something like the G30 that has three times the amount of offset in the long irons that it is really noticeable. A quarter of an inch of additional offset really does throw club alignment off for some players and encourage the hooks. If you have a high ball flight to start with, the higher launching characteristics are really no help either. We know that one club type does not fit all and it really is horses for courses.

The Mizuno have pretty much continuous offset. Almost the same throughout the set. The G30 has a progressive offset with the higher lofted irons offset very similar to the MP4 and the lowest lofted irons having, nearly, the three times you speak of.

[TomWishon]

If offset isn't a dynamic factor in performance, but instead a visual matter of confidence, why do my Sterlings have progressive offset through the set?

 

I can answer that (or rather I BETTER be able to answer that !! HA!) .

 

I did the progressive offset in the Sterling single length irons for two reasons. . .

 

1) to offer a smige of help to those with a later-ish release to help get the ball a little more up in the air to fly and carry with the lower loft irons in the Sterling set. Any single length iron that is shorter in length than its same iron number or loft in a conventional set is going to pose the potential of not having enough shot height, depending on how much slower the golfer swings the shorter length iron of the same head number or loft. Slower swing speed usually means slower ball speed which means less spin and less shot height. I did do the high COR face on the #4, 5, 6, 7 in the Sterling set to be the main thing to make up for any possible swing speed drop in those irons which are shorter in length in the single length set than they are in the conventional length set. So the little bit more offset in the #4, 5, 6 than what is typical in a traditional non offset iron is there to pair with the high COR face to offer a little more help in getting the ball up a little more to fly high enough to get proper carry.

 

But this being said, when I do progressive offset in ANY iron model, I never use all that much offset in the lower loft heads. The Sterling progresses from 4.5mm in the 4 iron down to 2mm in the 8 to wedges so it is not that much. Which leads to reason #2. . . .

 

2) The other reason I did progressive offset was to make the irons look more "familiar" to the broadest segment of the golfer population. Realize that most golfers do play with sets of irons that are more offset than a traditional forged carbon steel iron model. So the use of progressive offset was done to make the look of the head in the playing position not be too different, not be too much of a departure from what the largest segment of golfers has been used to seeing behind the ball with the irons they play currently.

 

OK, not for the traditional minded or better player who always buys the forged iron set to play with. But then too when you design one model of a new iron concept as Sterling was, you are not really aiming at the low hdcp, traditional minded player market as much as you are aiming at the bulk of the player market. This of course is why Cobra chose to do two separate single length models in their ONE design - one with more offset for the avg player market and one with low offset for the player market.

 

They have more money and clout to do that than I do so I had to design one model to satisfy the largest segment of the market. Hence a progressive offset but one that does not start with all that much offset on the lowest loft iron in the set.

 

Thanks for asking so I could explain this better

TOM

[Rich Douglas]

Got it. Because I don't really care what an iron looks like at set up, I was never concerned about the offset. Also, it's considerable more modest than the Ping G set (2016) I put in the garage. I was just trying to reconcile the "it doesn't matter" perspective with the "it matters." Sounds like it matters a little and APPEARS to so to matter a lot.

 

I'm never going back to traditional-length irons, btw. I've played my Sterlings for a solid year now and have never, ever picked up my very new old set of Pings. Not trying to hijack the thread; just sayin'. (And while I don't carry a handicap anymore, I would estimate mine to be a 5.)

[Weston003]

So, it is a proven fact that offset helps golfers close the club face at impact. If anyone refutes this, please tell me more.

 

What I don't get is that players, tour pros include, play game improvement irons, with more offset than I can bear to look at, then play hybrids, fairways and drivers with no offset... none what so ever! If it is so darn helpful, why don't golfers play it through the whole set, from LW to Driver?

 

You basically train your release to hold off at impact cause you have a half inch of offset to help close the club face, then you get to the driver and slice the crap out of it. (not everyone does this, but its safe to say a majority of golfers fit this category)

 

Honestly, I think people are just more comfortable looking at offset irons and now companies sell it as "inspires confidence at address." Well then, why aren't they trying to inspire confidence at address on their drivers?

 

But, the same golfers can't stand looking at drivers with offset. Possibly because it's anti aesthetic or its an ego thing. But who am I kidding, golfers don't have egos...

 

I think golfers in general would benefit from learning how to play golf with irons that have little to no offset (when I say little, I mean less then .08 inches, which is pretty much the offset for a standard pitching wedge)

 

This doesn't mean that everyone needs to play blades... heavens no. I'm just saying it would be really awesome to play a set of game improvement irons, game enjoyment irons, or even oversized clubs with no offset.

 

I would honestly love to hear others opinions about this, because it seriously baffles me.

 

Happy to help with my observations based on 36 yrs of clubhead design and research studies. And BTW, you posed a VERY good question.

 

Offset was actually first seen on clubheads way back in the later 1800s. An old famous player and clubmaker by the name of Willie Park designed a set of irons called the Park Wrye-Neck in circa 1870 or so. From what I could tell from my historical research in late 1800s golf magazines it never really caught on because virtually no other clubmakers made similar type models.

 

Modern offset irons first came about some 50 yrs ago thanks to Ping based on the scientific reasoning that some here in this thread have posted - moving the hosel back from the blade portion of the iron increases the distance that the center of gravity (CG) is back from the center line (CL) of the shaft. 50 yrs ago it was just thought that increasing this distance would increase launch angle and shot trajectory.

 

Much later in the 90s came the real explanation for why this could happen. The farther back the CG from the shaft CL the more the shaft could bend forward to increase dynamic loft at the moment of impact when the golfer releases the club.

 

However, numerous tests not to mention use of offset irons by millions of golfers soon showed that there was no guarantee that a higher flight could happen with offset irons for several reasons.

 

1) not all golfers have a late enough release to allow the shaft to achieve its maximum forward bending right at the moment of impact;

 

2) iron shafts are twice as resistant to actual bending than are wood shafts. So the slower speed of an iron swing coupled with a more bending resistant shaft greatly reduced the actual amount a late release player could cause the shaft to bend forward at impact.

 

3) the actual difference in the distance of the CG to the CL of the shaft between a fully offset and non offset ironhead is no more than 8mm (0.31") at the most - this when coupled with points #1 and 2 here means a big change to the eyes in offset is not likely to create much of a visible change in shot height for more than a very tiny percentage of the golf population.

 

Meaning you would only see it clearly from a player with a higher speed and a very late release - and how many players with these characteristics are going to prefer to play with an iron with a huge amount of offset? Not many.

 

Then came the second explanation of offset around 10-15 yrs ago. That being the one others here have posted about concerning the premise that more offset allows the rotation of the club to continue for a split second longer before impact to have the effect of closing the face a little more than if the iron had much less offset.

 

This one can happen but here again it won't do that for all golfers. Not all golfers actually pronate the hands fully through impact to get the right (upper) hand on top of the left (lower) at the moment of impact. Some, actually many, keep the right (upper) hand more under the left (lower) hand as they swing the club through impact. Think over the top slasher or fall-back types, many who chronically slice the ball. And at the end of the day, the far more sure way to reduce a slice through a custom fitting change is to give the slicer clubs with the face angle more closed than the face angle of what he is playing with currently. No matter the release move or swing type, a face angle change will work the same for EVERY SINGLE GOLFER in terms of reducing how open he delivers the clubface to the ball.

 

Now the guy who can leave the face 15* open at impact will still slice the ball a lot with a 4* closed face head but it won't be as much as before. While the guy who leaves the face 4* open at impact may hit the ball straight with the 4* closed face head. Point is, face angle is a degree for degree change in how much the player leaves the face open (or closed in the case of a guy who hooks the ball and needs a more open face).

 

Offset works only when the release is made in a specific manner coming into the ball. Which is something not everyone does the same.

 

So - from a pure performance standpoint, the OP's point is well taken. Irons could all be designed with no offset, which by specs measurement standards is really an offset between 1mm and 2mm. True 0 offset tricks the eyes and makes the leading edge look as if it is in front of the hosel. That's why you never see a clubhead marketed as no offset or zero offset actually having 0* of offset.

 

BUT. . . . and yes there is always a BUT to an explanation like this !!

 

Irons with as much as 10mm of offset have been around for 50 yrs or so. Gazillions of golfers have bought and played with them AND GOTTEN USED TO THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE HEAD BEING BEHIND THE SHAFT. For many of these players, changing to a non offset iron could bring about enough trepidation, unrest or lack of confidence to have a real effect on their swing and swing repeatibility.

 

And then you would have those who do have the release move with the arms and hands that can close the face of an offset iron a little more than with a non offset iron. For those golfers, going from offset to non offset might bring a whole 'nother situation of accuracy control or lack thereof.

 

Thus after all this diatribe of verbosity, the answer to the OP's proposition is probably not - to leave things as they are but to clearly mark irons and wedges for how much they are offset whether in marketing or on the head so those who hate it or depend on it can know for sure what they are buying is what they need.

 

Thanks for the thorough response Tom! Lots of great info there.