Low hdcp going to GI irons

[edgerat]

 

Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

[BiggErn]

> @edgerat said:

>

>

>

> Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

 

Yes it’s known that Crossfield will pull anything out of his bum to get a view and drag it out for 20 minutes.

[phatchrisrules]

It does differ from person to person. There are a population subset that do hit smaller club heads better...and it is typically those who sweep their shots (i.e. the pickers) as since they interact with the grass for much longer than someone who hits down a lot. In this scenario the wider soled club has more time to kind of get stuck and bobble on the ground than a thin soled iron would. However, I too am a picker and bought into the thin-soled philosophy with my current irons and had one of the worst ball striking episodes I've ever had the past couple of weeks. I played today with a friend who has HM Pros and we generally hit the ball about the same distance wise and use the same weight iron shafts. I used his irons 3 times, now be gentle this was my first round since early October, but still the point stands:

 

1) I hit my 7i from 155 and hit it a bit thin and it pulled horrendously left, coming to rest in a ravine. I hit his immediately after and caught it slightly thin as well but it faded perfectly on line and flew over the flag stick.

 

2) Par 3 two holes later, same iron. Mine, 8 yards short of the green. HM Pro, dead on line and about 3/4 of a club further distance despite catching it off centre and gave myself about a 15-18 footer for a birdie chance.

 

3) Last par 3. PW. Didn't even bother to pull my iron out of the bag and hit his. A touch thin again, it sailed dead on line and barely rolled out of its pitch mark about another 15-18 feet from the hole.

 

I am going to try extending my irons a bit as my miss seems to be thin and toe-y, which I think might help. However, if my ball striking with these continues the way it has been over the next 4-6 weeks, you can say good bye to the irons and Hello to the HM Pros!!!! Which is a darn shame as I hit my New Levels really, really well in the trials (at 1/2" long but stupidly ordered them standard....why? Because I'm an idiot), and they feel better than any iron I've hit in the past 2 years when flushed.

 

-----------------------------------------

 

Back on topic: OP, in my experience, I've played just as well and just as poorly with GI irons as I do with smaller soled ones. I did actually get to the lowest index of my life as a 6 with GI irons, but I've also been as high as an 18 with them, and as low as about a 8 with player's irons and as high as a 16 with smaller heads. I really think the determining factor of our scoring is our waxing and waning swing dynamics for higher handicap players. So I would suggest you play with what works best for you AND what you like the looks of. If that happens to be a GI iron like a G400, all the power to you. If that happens to be an 718 MB bent 3* weak, then again, go for it and enjoy! None of us are going to care what you play as long as you keep up and don't shoot 145.

[jasonTeI3]

> @edgerat said:

>

>

>

> Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

 

Again no one is disputing that like lofts are going to result in similar distances on well struck shots. Not at all what any of this thread was referring to though. What I said when I quoted your previous post and saying it was untrue is that when struck off center an iron like the G400 is most definitely more forgiving than say my Nike blades or even my JPX 900 Tours. Fact

 

 

[NorthernHills]

I moved from a Titelist combo set (735.cm) with blades in the lower irons to a SGI set (Taylormade M2 2016) a couple of years ago. My logic was that I couldn't practice enough to get the best out of the advanced irons anymore as I was down to playing 8-10 times a year. On that basis they worked perfectly, as others have said they are super forgiving and the long irons in particular are a joy to hit. However this year I've been able to get back to playing 1-2 times a week and I'm finding the short irons in the M2's very challenging. Essentially as I get better I'm a lot more aware of the lack of feel in the 8,9,PW range and can't seem to find the target consistently. I'll hit good looking shots but they will often end up just left, right or long of the green and I'm not clear on the reason.

 

As a result I'm considering putting some more player focused irons back in the bag, but keeping hold of the M2 Long irons as they have been a revelation. As such I think GI irons can work well, but it's very dependent on your circumstances and playstyle!

[NRJyzr]

> @edgerat said:

>

>

>

> Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

 

 

I think the guys at TXG also did something like this, as another notable example from a popular source. And, showed the same thing; loft determines the distance.

[jasonTeI3]

> @NRJyzr said:

> > @edgerat said:

> >

> >

> >

> > Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

>

>

> I think the guys at TXG also did something like this, as another notable example from a popular source. And, showed the same thing; loft determines the distance.

 

No one is disagreeing with this guys.

 

[nostatic]

> @phatchrisrules said:

> It does differ from person to person. There are a population subset that do hit smaller club heads better...and it is typically those who sweep their shots (i.e. the pickers) as since they interact with the grass for much longer than someone who hits down a lot. In this scenario the wider soled club has more time to kind of get stuck and bobble on the ground than a thin soled iron would. However, I too am a picker and bought into the thin-soled philosophy with my current irons and had one of the worst ball striking episodes I've ever had the past couple of weeks. I played today with a friend who has HM Pros and we generally hit the ball about the same distance wise and use the same weight iron shafts. I used his irons 3 times, now be gentle this was my first round since early October, but still the point stands:

>

> 1) I hit my 7i from 155 and hit it a bit thin and it pulled horrendously left, coming to rest in a ravine. I hit his immediately after and caught it slightly thin as well but it faded perfectly on line and flew over the flag stick.

>

> 2) Par 3 two holes later, same iron. Mine, 8 yards short of the green. HM Pro, dead on line and about 3/4 of a club further distance despite catching it off centre and gave myself about a 15-18 footer for a birdie chance.

>

> 3) Last par 3. PW. Didn't even bother to pull my iron out of the bag and hit his. A touch thin again, it sailed dead on line and barely rolled out of its pitch mark about another 15-18 feet from the hole.

>

> I am going to try extending my irons a bit as my miss seems to be thin and toe-y, which I think might help. However, if my ball striking with these continues the way it has been over the next 4-6 weeks, you can say good bye to the irons and Hello to the HM Pros!!!! Which is a darn shame as I hit my New Levels really, really well in the trials (at 1/2" long but stupidly ordered them standard....why? Because I'm an idiot), and they feel better than any iron I've hit in the past 2 years when flushed.

>

> -----------------------------------------

>

> Back on topic: OP, in my experience, I've played just as well and just as poorly with GI irons as I do with smaller soled ones. I did actually get to the lowest index of my life as a 6 with GI irons, but I've also been as high as an 18 with them, and as low as about a 8 with player's irons and as high as a 16 with smaller heads. I really think the determining factor of our scoring is our waxing and waning swing dynamics for higher handicap players. So I would suggest you play with what works best for you AND what you like the looks of. If that happens to be a GI iron like a G400, all the power to you. If that happens to be an 718 MB bent 3* weak, then again, go for it and enjoy! None of us are going to care what you play as long as you keep up and don't shoot 145.

 

I have transitioned from outside/in/steep to inside/out/shallow, and began struggling with my i210s. I switched to HMPs and am pretty happy now. While the HMP has a wider sole than a blade, it has a lot of trailing edge relieve and low bounce, so I think it works well with a shallow swing. I didn't like the Hot Metals at all - prefer less offset on the HMPs. And they retain distance on less-than-perfect strikes quite well.

[Tree Levino]

> @nostatic said:

> > @phatchrisrules said:

> > It does differ from person to person. There are a population subset that do hit smaller club heads better...and it is typically those who sweep their shots (i.e. the pickers) as since they interact with the grass for much longer than someone who hits down a lot. In this scenario the wider soled club has more time to kind of get stuck and bobble on the ground than a thin soled iron would. However, I too am a picker and bought into the thin-soled philosophy with my current irons and had one of the worst ball striking episodes I've ever had the past couple of weeks. I played today with a friend who has HM Pros and we generally hit the ball about the same distance wise and use the same weight iron shafts. I used his irons 3 times, now be gentle this was my first round since early October, but still the point stands:

> >

> > 1) I hit my 7i from 155 and hit it a bit thin and it pulled horrendously left, coming to rest in a ravine. I hit his immediately after and caught it slightly thin as well but it faded perfectly on line and flew over the flag stick.

> >

> > 2) Par 3 two holes later, same iron. Mine, 8 yards short of the green. HM Pro, dead on line and about 3/4 of a club further distance despite catching it off centre and gave myself about a 15-18 footer for a birdie chance.

> >

> > 3) Last par 3. PW. Didn't even bother to pull my iron out of the bag and hit his. A touch thin again, it sailed dead on line and barely rolled out of its pitch mark about another 15-18 feet from the hole.

> >

> > I am going to try extending my irons a bit as my miss seems to be thin and toe-y, which I think might help. However, if my ball striking with these continues the way it has been over the next 4-6 weeks, you can say good bye to the irons and Hello to the HM Pros!!!! Which is a darn shame as I hit my New Levels really, really well in the trials (at 1/2" long but stupidly ordered them standard....why? Because I'm an idiot), and they feel better than any iron I've hit in the past 2 years when flushed.

> >

> > -----------------------------------------

> >

> > Back on topic: OP, in my experience, I've played just as well and just as poorly with GI irons as I do with smaller soled ones. I did actually get to the lowest index of my life as a 6 with GI irons, but I've also been as high as an 18 with them, and as low as about a 8 with player's irons and as high as a 16 with smaller heads. I really think the determining factor of our scoring is our waxing and waning swing dynamics for higher handicap players. So I would suggest you play with what works best for you AND what you like the looks of. If that happens to be a GI iron like a G400, all the power to you. If that happens to be an 718 MB bent 3* weak, then again, go for it and enjoy! None of us are going to care what you play as long as you keep up and don't shoot 145.

>

> I have transitioned from outside/in/steep to inside/out/shallow, and began struggling with my i210s. I switched to HMPs and am pretty happy now. While the HMP has a wider sole than a blade, it has a lot of trailing edge relieve and low bounce, so I think it works well with a shallow swing. I didn't like the Hot Metals at all - prefer less offset on the HMPs. And they retain distance on less-than-perfect strikes quite well.

 

Lots of Ping staffers with a good shallow in the downswing hitting in-to-out making the i210 work to great effect.

[bladehunter]

> @edgerat said:

>

>

>

> Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

 

2 things stand out.

 

Loft for loft. Same exact distances.

 

Second. To get consistent strike and spin from the g410 you needed to be off a tee. Which tells me that the wide sole is keeping a good strike from getting the vertical cog down low enough to be a pure strike. But up on a tee it works. In short. You have to be hitting it fat to see a good strike. Which is totally nuts for a decent player to use.

[nostatic]

> @balls_deep said:

> > @nostatic said:

> > > @phatchrisrules said:

> > > It does differ from person to person. There are a population subset that do hit smaller club heads better...and it is typically those who sweep their shots (i.e. the pickers) as since they interact with the grass for much longer than someone who hits down a lot. In this scenario the wider soled club has more time to kind of get stuck and bobble on the ground than a thin soled iron would. However, I too am a picker and bought into the thin-soled philosophy with my current irons and had one of the worst ball striking episodes I've ever had the past couple of weeks. I played today with a friend who has HM Pros and we generally hit the ball about the same distance wise and use the same weight iron shafts. I used his irons 3 times, now be gentle this was my first round since early October, but still the point stands:

> > >

> > > 1) I hit my 7i from 155 and hit it a bit thin and it pulled horrendously left, coming to rest in a ravine. I hit his immediately after and caught it slightly thin as well but it faded perfectly on line and flew over the flag stick.

> > >

> > > 2) Par 3 two holes later, same iron. Mine, 8 yards short of the green. HM Pro, dead on line and about 3/4 of a club further distance despite catching it off centre and gave myself about a 15-18 footer for a birdie chance.

> > >

> > > 3) Last par 3. PW. Didn't even bother to pull my iron out of the bag and hit his. A touch thin again, it sailed dead on line and barely rolled out of its pitch mark about another 15-18 feet from the hole.

> > >

> > > I am going to try extending my irons a bit as my miss seems to be thin and toe-y, which I think might help. However, if my ball striking with these continues the way it has been over the next 4-6 weeks, you can say good bye to the irons and Hello to the HM Pros!!!! Which is a darn shame as I hit my New Levels really, really well in the trials (at 1/2" long but stupidly ordered them standard....why? Because I'm an idiot), and they feel better than any iron I've hit in the past 2 years when flushed.

> > >

> > > -----------------------------------------

> > >

> > > Back on topic: OP, in my experience, I've played just as well and just as poorly with GI irons as I do with smaller soled ones. I did actually get to the lowest index of my life as a 6 with GI irons, but I've also been as high as an 18 with them, and as low as about a 8 with player's irons and as high as a 16 with smaller heads. I really think the determining factor of our scoring is our waxing and waning swing dynamics for higher handicap players. So I would suggest you play with what works best for you AND what you like the looks of. If that happens to be a GI iron like a G400, all the power to you. If that happens to be an 718 MB bent 3* weak, then again, go for it and enjoy! None of us are going to care what you play as long as you keep up and don't shoot 145.

> >

> > I have transitioned from outside/in/steep to inside/out/shallow, and began struggling with my i210s. I switched to HMPs and am pretty happy now. While the HMP has a wider sole than a blade, it has a lot of trailing edge relieve and low bounce, so I think it works well with a shallow swing. I didn't like the Hot Metals at all - prefer less offset on the HMPs. And they retain distance on less-than-perfect strikes quite well.

>

> Lots of Ping staffers with a good shallow in the downswing hitting in-to-out making the i210 work to great effect.

 

Perhaps, but I’m no Ping staffer. Could be some other aspect including psychological that didn’t work as well for me.

 

[Nessism]

> @bladehunter said:

 

>

> To get consistent strike and spin from the g410 you needed to be off a tee. Which tells me that the wide sole is keeping a good strike from getting the vertical cog down low enough to be a pure strike. But up on a tee it works. In short. You have to be hitting it fat to see a good strike. Which is totally nuts for a decent player to use.

 

Bit of a stretch I'd say. The skewing of Crossfield's 410 average spin number off the mat was due to one (relatively minor outlier) shot. All the other shots were in line. The guy in the first video had more spin variation with the Titleist's than the Ping's. Crossfield's 410 shots off the tee flighted higher but that doesn't mean he struggled to get a good strike with the ball off the mat (other than maybe that one shot). I think higher contact strikes were causing the face flex to kick in, which launches the ball higher is all.

 

It's a tradeoff that we see with Ping clubs in general: high bounce and wide sole to reduce digging tendencies, but if you play off clay lies with no grass then the bounce may not be the ideal solution. Personally, I play a course with bare fairways and I don't have too many issues (with my 410's), and actually prefer them to my older clubs which were low bounce Mizuno's. To each their own though I suppose.

 

 

[Jut]

As a decent player (and ball striker) and a sweeper/picker (I could hit off of a green and not take any landscape with me), I've found much success with the F9s (which, with the wide sole, are very similar to the G410 irons). In the past 4 years I've gone from Mizuno MP-68 to Callaway Apex CF16 to Ping i500 (a brief and bad experience) to the Cobra F9's. For what it's worth, the Cobras have been the best of the bunch by far.

[bladehunter]

> @Nessism said:

> > @bladehunter said:

>

> >

> > To get consistent strike and spin from the g410 you needed to be off a tee. Which tells me that the wide sole is keeping a good strike from getting the vertical cog down low enough to be a pure strike. But up on a tee it works. In short. You have to be hitting it fat to see a good strike. Which is totally nuts for a decent player to use.

>

> Bit of a stretch I'd say. The skewing Crossfield's 410 average spin number off the mat was due to one (relatively minor outlier) shot. All the other shots were in line. The guy in the first video had more spin variation with the Titleist's than the Ping's. Crossfield's 410 shots off the tee flighted higher but that doesn't mean he struggled to get a good strike with the ball off the mat (other than maybe that one shot). I think higher contact strikes were causing the face flex to kick in, which launches the ball higher is all.

>

> It's a tradeoff that we see with Ping clubs in general: high bounce and wide sole to reduce digging tendencies, but if you play off clay lies with no grass then the bounce may not be the ideal solution. Personally, I play a course with bare fairways and don't have too many issues (with my 410's), and actually prefer them to my older clubs which were low bounce Mizuno's. To each their own though I suppose.

>

>

 

Yea. To be sure there are many variables at play. Just the acknowledgement that they react differently is good enough for me. Lol. So thanks for that. Thats all I usually get miffed with , that some folks tell me that there’s no difference. There’s a part of me that wishes I played on sand based courses that were softer so that I didn’t have to be so sole and bounce conscious.

[Titleist_PT23]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @Nessism said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> >

> > >

> > > To get consistent strike and spin from the g410 you needed to be off a tee. Which tells me that the wide sole is keeping a good strike from getting the vertical cog down low enough to be a pure strike. But up on a tee it works. In short. You have to be hitting it fat to see a good strike. Which is totally nuts for a decent player to use.

> >

> > Bit of a stretch I'd say. The skewing Crossfield's 410 average spin number off the mat was due to one (relatively minor outlier) shot. All the other shots were in line. The guy in the first video had more spin variation with the Titleist's than the Ping's. Crossfield's 410 shots off the tee flighted higher but that doesn't mean he struggled to get a good strike with the ball off the mat (other than maybe that one shot). I think higher contact strikes were causing the face flex to kick in, which launches the ball higher is all.

> >

> > It's a tradeoff that we see with Ping clubs in general: high bounce and wide sole to reduce digging tendencies, but if you play off clay lies with no grass then the bounce may not be the ideal solution. Personally, I play a course with bare fairways and don't have too many issues (with my 410's), and actually prefer them to my older clubs which were low bounce Mizuno's. To each their own though I suppose.

> >

> >

>

> Yea. To be sure there are many variables at play. Just the acknowledgement that they react differently is good enough for me. Lol. So thanks for that. Thats all I usually get miffed with , that some folks tell me that there’s no difference. There’s a part of me that wishes I played on sand based courses that were softer so that I didn’t have to be so sole and bounce conscious.

This is from the Marty Jertson interview that was posted in the other thread. Personally, I'm still torn on how much this matters (at least for me). If you gave me any combo of Vokey or Glide 2.0 wedges, I'm sure I could figure out how to play for the season. But I do think I would slightly change things a bit (how you hit the ball, what shots you take on, etc). And I'd definitely have a preference if you tell me where I'm playing all year. Whether the preference really matters in terms of performance or how much is what I don't know.

 

https://www.pgatour.com/equipmentreport/2019/05/22/equipment-q-and-a-ping-designer-marty-jertson-pga-championship-bethpage-black.html

 

Then there’s the sole fitting; do you need a bit more for the turf interaction or not? That’s something that never gets talked about in irons, but we design that into our irons. The difference between the i210 and an iBlade and a Blueprint, one of the big factors that our TOUR players experience is how they go through the ground. The sole designs and how much bounce and the leading edge, and the heel-toe camber, all those irons have a different turf interaction. That’s one of the deciding factors that our TOUR players use on which one of those irons to use and fit into.

[Tree Levino]

Tried the i200 again today. Felt like chunky GI compared to my CBs. The long irons were way too cumbersome. Going to try the iblade as I think that may be the ticket.

[caseyb918]

I switched from MB's back to an old set of JPX850 Forgeds but bent the lofts to match the MB's. Couldn't be happier with the switch. Ball striking has always been above average, but my mishits are on the green now. I say give it a try.

[Johnnypenso]

> @NRJyzr said:

> > @edgerat said:

> >

> >

> >

> > Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

>

>

> I think the guys at TXG also did something like this, as another notable example from a popular source. And, showed the same thing; loft determines the distance.

 

Mike Newton has done a similar test a couple of times now and with the same results. Same loft = same distance. The whole "distance iron" thing appear to be yet another golfing myth.

[jasonTeI3]

> @Johnnypenso said:

> > @NRJyzr said:

> > > @edgerat said:

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

> >

> >

> > I think the guys at TXG also did something like this, as another notable example from a popular source. And, showed the same thing; loft determines the distance.

>

> Mike Newton has done a similar test a couple of times now and with the same results. Same loft = same distance. The whole "distance iron" thing appear to be yet another golfing myth.

 

Again. Not sure why we are discussing this on this thread. No one is arguing this point. Especially not me as the OP.

 

[edgerat]

> @balls_deep said:

> Tried the i200 again today. Felt like chunky GI compared to my CBs. The long irons were way too cumbersome. Going to try the iblade as I think that may be the ticket.

 

I tried the i210 against the iBlade, outdoors, and I prefer the iBlade. Similar flight and better feels, I can't comment on launch or spin because I didn't have anything there during the fitting.

[Nessism]

 

 

> @Johnnypenso said:

> Mike Newton has done a similar test a couple of times now and with the same results. Same loft = same distance. The whole "distance iron" thing appear to be yet another golfing myth.

 

I'm not so sure about that. I've got experience playing several different sets of spring face GI irons like the Callaway Steelhead XR, Mizuno Hot Metal, and Ping G410's, and these sets all hit the ball farther than my old G25's when compared loft for loft. The difference is not huge, but it's there.

[Tree Levino]

> @edgerat said:

> > @balls_deep said:

> > Tried the i200 again today. Felt like chunky GI compared to my CBs. The long irons were way too cumbersome. Going to try the iblade as I think that may be the ticket.

>

> I tried the i210 against the iBlade, outdoors, and I prefer the iBlade. Similar flight and better feels, I can't comment on launch or spin because I didn't have anything there during the fitting.

 

I need to try them outdoors. I'm honestly not sold on launch monitor fittings indoors off mats at all. The i200 felt great in 7-UW but the paddle length starts to get too long in the 4-6 and it feels like the toe closes too easily through impact or something? I don't know it just feels odd. Maybe I'm too used to the small headed CB now. I really enjoy my Titleist set but I love Ping as well.

[b.mattay]

I'm actually going the other way. At every demo day I've ever tried I hit blades straighter and further than GI irons (TW blades vs 790, iBlades vs G410 etc.) My friend has some 690MB's and those have a better flight and about 10 yards per club on my AP2.

[jasonTeI3]

> @"b.mattay" said:

> I'm actually going the other way. At every demo day I've ever tried I hit blades straighter and further than GI irons (TW blades vs 790, iBlades vs G410 etc.) My friend has some 690MB's and those have a better flight and about 10 yards per club on my AP2.

 

This is all in your head. Unless it’s because of the shafts or your mishitting every GI iron and flushing every blade there’s no reason that would ever happen. I mean just based of lofts alone that wouldn’t happen. Now someone could hit “blades” much better and have more consistentcy due to the sole and higher cg but to think that you would magically hit them further on similar strikes would definitely not be possible.

 

[Stanks]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @edgerat said:

> >

> >

> >

> > Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

>

> Yes it’s known that Crossfield will pull anything out of his bum to get a view and drag it out for 20 minutes.

Yeah but check it out, Crossfield knows what he's doing and you just got him a few more views.

Loft is loft and that does judge basic idea on distance. Spin, club design, and technique all come into play but they all somewhat correlate off one another.

I'm back into Game Improvement irons. Not for the distances. Never needed help there.

[puttingmatt]

> @"b.mattay" said:

> I'm actually going the other way. At every demo day I've ever tried I hit blades straighter and further than GI irons (TW blades vs 790, iBlades vs G410 etc.) My friend has some 690MB's and those have a better flight and about 10 yards per club on my AP2.

Seeing is believing, I notice no gain in distance when trying different irons compared to my apex mb's.

 

[BiggErn]

> @edgerat said:

>

>

>

> Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

 

Yes it’s known that Crossfield will pull anything out of his bum to get a view and drag it out for 20 minutes. > @Stanks said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > > @edgerat said:

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Same loft, nearly identical numbers. There are a few more videos like this out there. I have done the test myself, filtering out my appalling shots, I get the same results.

> >

> > Yes it’s known that Crossfield will pull anything out of his bum to get a view and drag it out for 20 minutes.

> Yeah but check it out, Crossfield knows what he's doing and you just got him a few more views.

> Loft is loft and that does judge basic idea on distance. Spin, club design, and technique all come into play but they all somewhat correlate off one another.

> I'm back into Game Improvement irons. Not for the distances. Never needed help there.

 

Nobody said it wasn’t. It’s those off center hits where things start to change.

[Tree Levino]

> @"b.mattay" said:

> I'm actually going the other way. At every demo day I've ever tried I hit blades straighter and further than GI irons (TW blades vs 790, iBlades vs G410 etc.) My friend has some 690MB's and those have a better flight and about 10 yards per club on my AP2.

 

If you aren't elevating/spinning the ball properly with the blades that could be the extra distance.. did you test them on course to see how they're stopping on greens? Just saying it's best to test on course if you can.

[marmaduk]

I own 6 sets.

1 set blades. 2 sets muscle backs, 2 sets cavity back, and 1 SGI (burner 2.0).

 

At your skill level, whatever golf clubs that you choose, your game will adapt to them very quickly. You might find, though, that you are unable to adapt your eyes to the amount offset you’re going to see on seven through four iron.

 

My suggestion is the best of both worlds. Find a set of used Callaway Legacy Black irons Stenson model. Huge cavity that is artfully hidden behind a thin topline, smaller head size, and good looking badge

[Outgolfn]

As a fitter, I would have to ask you many questions. Most of which are probably already covered in the above responses that I did not read all of. So, I will go with one, your clubhead speed. The reason I ask is because with GI irons, you get a bigger sweetspot(we all know that). With a bigger sweetspot, you can also get a hotspot. This usually only effects the higher clubhead speeds. It is the main reason you really don't see top level players using GI irons. With speed, it's like hitting a flyer from the fairway if you hit it on the button(hotspot). So, if you have speed, I'd be carefull with this.

One last thing, I use a Players GI iron in the Srixon 585's. I love them. They are forged which gives them a great feel. They are also easy to look down at and are very forgiving. Anyway, with my 95 to 100mph Driver swing speed, they are no problem with "Hot Spot".