Dear blade,

[pinestreetgolf]

I think the majority of people who can't hit a certain club due to its design are fooling themselves. I have a small collection of one irons and I will let folks with a decent swing try them if they dare. Most of them are out of the chance to hit the club well by address. I believe that people saying they can work the blade better than a CB is likely a load of bull as they obviously don't have the swing path control to do so. They can shuffle their feet a bit maybe and limit the hip turn if they want, but honestly they are just guessing and praying that the face doesn't catch crazy sidespin.

 

I'm not yet a bogey golfer and my justification for playing blades is this:my set 3-P cost me $600 brand new. They're beautiful and when I do well with them they feel great. When I do poorly they crack like a bat and it feels bad and sounds worse. It works for me.

The club that's really teaching me about swing path is the 3+ wood. I hit balls well with it and everything under it falls into line. I'm finding a tempo that allows me greater control over the path of my swing. The one iron, a real 15° blade, is making me aware of form and face control. It's such a demanding club that it builds my focus. That's why it's my favorite club.

 

Totally agree. Its why I drive a Model T. That lack of power steering makes me such a better driver because if I don't pay super close attention I'll kill everyone on the highway.

 

I'm glad you are having fun, but nobody "can't hit" any club. You are better or worse with certain clubs. I am better with my Cruze than a Model T. Chances are you, as not even a 90 shooter, would be better with something other than a 15* blade.

 

I don't understand how you can say "people who can't hit a certain club are fooling themselves" and "these blades are making me better because i can't hit them but they are telling me the truth" within three sentences of each other. It sounds like you're, well, fooling yourself.

[dodgyman]

While I generally lean towards trying to be scientific on most things (to a fault at times) you cannot under-state the human/emotional aspect of "forgiveness." I know a lot of people who think that large clubheads give them forgiveness/confidence and would immediately struggle with blades, but there are those with the opposite problem, who see every flyer, every long directional miss-hit as a detrimental aspect of game improvement irons.

 

I was fit to Callaway XRs last year and while I hit them great on trackman, not just distance but dispersion etc... when I took them to the course their bulk/offset just drove me nuts. My handicap was dropping and I felt like I should be able to play irons I liked more, and I was just never able to score well with them.

 

This year, I just said "screw it" I've always played the irons I was fit to best, and not the ones I liked most, and ended up with a nice set of MP-18s. The trackman numbers would say I should score better with the XRs. If the difference between these two was so great, no amount of boosted confidence would add up improved scoring, yet my handicap continues to drop. I'm still >10, so I mis-hit all the time, my misses are just different and I would say better. I'm no longer in bunkers on the left/right, instead I'm more occasionally short and I can chip up from a nice fairway.

 

Count me in the "game improvement is mostly marketing" category. Just like 7 irons have been given more distance with jacked lofts but trade on spin/direction, GI/CB technology just seems to trade off one kind of forgiveness (distance on off-centered hits) for another (fliers/distance on off centered hits ending up in odd places.)

 

Assuming they're both about equal with different tradeoffs the answer really should be to play the clubs you like/. Aesthetics/fit/confidence are going to impact you a lot more than any tech they can put in there.

[pinestreetgolf]

Count me in the "game improvement is mostly marketing" category. Just like 7 irons have been given more distance with jacked lofts but trade on spin/direction, GI/CB technology just seems to trade off one kind of forgiveness (distance on off-centered hits) for another (fliers/distance on off centered hits ending up in odd places.)

 

Assuming they're both about equal with different tradeoffs the answer really should be to play the clubs you like/. Aesthetics/fit/confidence are going to impact you a lot more than any tech they can put in there.

 

I liked your post because you are absolutely right everyone should play what they like. i just wanted to point out two things to this discussion:

 

1. Confidence changes over time. You may hate the way iron X looks today but if you use it for three months you'll probably hate it less as you use it more (and convince yourself that you can, in fact, hit good shots with it).

 

2. The discussion of forgiveness in this thread assumes clean contact. In that respect, yeah, GI's probably arn't worth all *that* much. But even great players are going to fat or thin one during a round. Those misses are helped a ton by the sole of the super game improvement / game improvement iron. If i hit a ball slightly heavy with a basically-no-bounce-no-offset blade its digging and the ball is going nowhere. If I have an inch of sole like one of the callaway X series irons, i'll probably only lose ten yards. The first thing i'm looking at in an iron is sole interaction. Its difficult to hook an 8 so bad you make double bogey, but its not hard to fat it an inch (wasting the shot) or hit a thin rocket through the green and make double. And all i'm looking for to have a chance in an event or to shoot a good round is no doubles. I saw a guy at Chambers Bay cold top a 3 wood. It doesn't matter how good you are, you need to plan for when you don't hit the little ball before the big ball. And the soles of the CB-GI iron excel at saving these types of shots, IMO.

 

Contact misses (low point of the swing) matter just as much as face/path misses. Game improvement helps the contact miss quite a bit more than it helps a face/path miss.

 

Edit - I have zero "science" on this, but all this other "science" is talking only about ball-first strikes. A non-bogey shooter (like the gentleman above who posted about his blades) is probably hitting heavy or thin on nearly every iron shot. He will maybe pure one a round. Maybe.

[nsxguy]

I was fit to Callaway XRs last year and while I hit them great on trackman, not just distance but dispersion etc... when I took them to the course their bulk/offset just drove me nuts. My handicap was dropping and I felt like I should be able to play irons I liked more, and I was just never able to score well with them.

 

 

Let me ask you something. Those XRs, which you say their bulk/offset drove you nuts (on the course).

 

Why do you suppose that while you were being fitted for them and hit them so well on the LM, those same 2 features DIDN'T drive you nuts ?

 

I'm just curious because while I'm pretty sure I'm the exception rather than the rule I don't much care WHAT the clubs look like as I've played Lynx Parallax, Cleveland VAS and Ping's TiSi driver so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, LMAO I'm only looking (briefly) at the club face and the leading edge and then I'm concentrating on the ball so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

Having said that I do understand that looks are, from a little bit, to very important, to a lot of (most ?) players.

[FourTops]

While I generally lean towards trying to be scientific on most things (to a fault at times) you cannot under-state the human/emotional aspect of "forgiveness." I know a lot of people who think that large clubheads give them forgiveness/confidence and would immediately struggle with blades, but there are those with the opposite problem, who see every flyer, every long directional miss-hit as a detrimental aspect of game improvement irons.

 

I was fit to Callaway XRs last year and while I hit them great on trackman, not just distance but dispersion etc... when I took them to the course their bulk/offset just drove me nuts. My handicap was dropping and I felt like I should be able to play irons I liked more, and I was just never able to score well with them.

 

This year, I just said "screw it" I've always played the irons I was fit to best, and not the ones I liked most, and ended up with a nice set of MP-18s. The trackman numbers would say I should score better with the XRs. If the difference between these two was so great, no amount of boosted confidence would add up improved scoring, yet my handicap continues to drop. I'm still >10, so I mis-hit all the time, my misses are just different and I would say better. I'm no longer in bunkers on the left/right, instead I'm more occasionally short and I can chip up from a nice fairway.

 

Count me in the "game improvement is mostly marketing" category. Just like 7 irons have been given more distance with jacked lofts but trade on spin/direction, GI/CB technology just seems to trade off one kind of forgiveness (distance on off-centered hits) for another (fliers/distance on off centered hits ending up in odd places.)

 

Assuming they're both about equal with different tradeoffs the answer really should be to play the clubs you like/. Aesthetics/fit/confidence are going to impact you a lot more than any tech they can put in there.

 

I think the Ping Eye 2's revolutionized golf, and not much has happened to improve upon them since in terms of performance. Watch the video on YouTube (link below) which tests the Eye 2 against the newest Ping irons. Virtually no difference. Plus, they compared based on loft differentials. I forgot to mention that along with my G30's, I have a set of Eye 2's I picked up for $89 years ago, 1-PW. In great shape. I can say the Eye 2's have more "reverberation" on mishits than the G30s, but they are every bit as capable. And i actually substitute my 52* with the Eye 2 PW.

 

So my point is i believe the new GI/SGI clubs have found a combination of metals to make the player feel like they are hitting flusher shots, but in reality they're really getting the same results...mishits are just "masked" better. To that extent, the newer tech is "easier" on the body on mishits, so I think the newer irons and hybrids have made the game more fun for older folks...you know...those over 30!

 

[FourTops]

I was fit to Callaway XRs last year and while I hit them great on trackman, not just distance but dispersion etc... when I took them to the course their bulk/offset just drove me nuts. My handicap was dropping and I felt like I should be able to play irons I liked more, and I was just never able to score well with them.

 

 

Let me ask you something. Those XRs, which you say their bulk/offset drove you nuts (on the course).

 

Why do you suppose that while you were being fitted for them and hit them so well on the LM, those same 2 features DIDN'T drive you nuts ?

 

I'm just curious because while I'm pretty sure I'm the exception rather than the rule I don't much care WHAT the clubs look like as I've played Lynx Parallax, Cleveland VAS and Ping's TiSi driver so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, LMAO I'm only looking (briefly) at the club face and the leading edge and then I'm concentrating on the ball so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

Having said that I do understand that looks are, from a little bit, to very important, to a lot of (most ?) players.

 

When I was taught I was told to look just in front of the ball, pick out some blades of grass, not at the ball because I would get "ball focused" and end the swing at the ball vs. beyond. So for me, the look of a club doesn't matter, I'm entirely focused upon where I want the club head to go. Same for putting.

[nsxguy]

I was fit to Callaway XRs last year and while I hit them great on trackman, not just distance but dispersion etc... when I took them to the course their bulk/offset just drove me nuts. My handicap was dropping and I felt like I should be able to play irons I liked more, and I was just never able to score well with them.

 

 

Let me ask you something. Those XRs, which you say their bulk/offset drove you nuts (on the course).

 

Why do you suppose that while you were being fitted for them and hit them so well on the LM, those same 2 features DIDN'T drive you nuts ?

 

I'm just curious because while I'm pretty sure I'm the exception rather than the rule I don't much care WHAT the clubs look like as I've played Lynx Parallax, Cleveland VAS and Ping's TiSi driver so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, LMAO I'm only looking (briefly) at the club face and the leading edge and then I'm concentrating on the ball so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

Having said that I do understand that looks are, from a little bit, to very important, to a lot of (most ?) players.

 

When I was taught I was told to look just in front of the ball, pick out some blades of grass, not at the ball because I would get "ball focused" and end the swing at the ball vs. beyond. So for me, the look of a club doesn't matter, I'm entirely focused upon where I want the club head to go. Same for putting.

 

I get the way you were taught. Basically the instructor wants to make sure you accelerate through the ball, not just hit "at" the ball.

 

That's one problem I don't have. :D And I look at the 7 o'clock position for a reason; probably the same reason you look in front of the ball. (cool)

[FourTops]

I was fit to Callaway XRs last year and while I hit them great on trackman, not just distance but dispersion etc... when I took them to the course their bulk/offset just drove me nuts. My handicap was dropping and I felt like I should be able to play irons I liked more, and I was just never able to score well with them.

 

 

Let me ask you something. Those XRs, which you say their bulk/offset drove you nuts (on the course).

 

Why do you suppose that while you were being fitted for them and hit them so well on the LM, those same 2 features DIDN'T drive you nuts ?

 

I'm just curious because while I'm pretty sure I'm the exception rather than the rule I don't much care WHAT the clubs look like as I've played Lynx Parallax, Cleveland VAS and Ping's TiSi driver so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, LMAO I'm only looking (briefly) at the club face and the leading edge and then I'm concentrating on the ball so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

Having said that I do understand that looks are, from a little bit, to very important, to a lot of (most ?) players.

 

When I was taught I was told to look just in front of the ball, pick out some blades of grass, not at the ball because I would get "ball focused" and end the swing at the ball vs. beyond. So for me, the look of a club doesn't matter, I'm entirely focused upon where I want the club head to go. Same for putting.

 

I get the way you were taught. Basically the instructor wants to make sure you accelerate through the ball, not just hit "at" the ball.

 

That's one problem I don't have. :D And I look at the 7 o'clock position for a reason; probably the same reason you look in front of the ball. (cool)

 

Interesting. Are you saying you look about a foot ahead, roughly?

[Kingcat990]

Why do we subject our forum to this every year? Everyone should be drinking tequila and eating carnitas today. Not beating this century old dead horse. But if we are going to do this, I'd rather beat the horse with MB's than CB's

[dodgyman]

I was fit to Callaway XRs last year and while I hit them great on trackman, not just distance but dispersion etc... when I took them to the course their bulk/offset just drove me nuts. My handicap was dropping and I felt like I should be able to play irons I liked more, and I was just never able to score well with them.

 

 

Let me ask you something. Those XRs, which you say their bulk/offset drove you nuts (on the course).

 

Why do you suppose that while you were being fitted for them and hit them so well on the LM, those same 2 features DIDN'T drive you nuts ?

 

I'm just curious because while I'm pretty sure I'm the exception rather than the rule I don't much care WHAT the clubs look like as I've played Lynx Parallax, Cleveland VAS and Ping's TiSi driver so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, LMAO I'm only looking (briefly) at the club face and the leading edge and then I'm concentrating on the ball so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

Having said that I do understand that looks are, from a little bit, to very important, to a lot of (most ?) players.

 

Great question! It was a bit of a strange case, I was just starting what is now a year+ long journey with a coach to re-work and improve my swing. We noticed right away that I had shafts in my irons that were way too heavy for me, so I needed to either re-shaft or get new irons. I like new irons, so I chose the latter.

 

The bulk/offset did drive me nuts during the fitting. I knew when I bought them that I would probably get new irons in a year/two since I was just starting to re-work my swing, so I ended up getting them because they fit me as well/better than most and were not too expensive. But more importantly, I did what I always I believed that the clubs that fit me best would perform the best. For me this is just not true, aesthetics have always been important to me, I just never had the guts to sacrifice looks/feel over fit.

 

But here's the thing, when I got fed up with these clubs, I still didn't learn that lesson. I didn't think I had the game to play blades so I looked at irons like AP2s and XForged only. I assumed that I should not even touch blades, this is how ingrained this stigma had been on me. Luckily I thought the ApexMB's were so sexy that when I was trying out XForged I asked to try the MBs too. I was shocked how similar they were. I realized I could probably just choose what I wanted, not what my handicap should allow.

 

I still did a fitting, I didn't end up with ApexMBs, the Mizuno's were performing better on TM, so I do believe that fit/performance are important. But I was not going to even look at a club I didn't love aesthetically.

 

Clearly there are clubs a person should not hit. There are probably plenty of high handicappers that would struggle to hit my MP18s, but there are probably plenty of low handicappers who from offset/aesthetics/weighting can't hit Ping G700s.

[FourTops]

Where do the Hogan PTx's fall into this discussion?

[FourTops]

I was fit to Callaway XRs last year and while I hit them great on trackman, not just distance but dispersion etc... when I took them to the course their bulk/offset just drove me nuts. My handicap was dropping and I felt like I should be able to play irons I liked more, and I was just never able to score well with them.

 

 

Let me ask you something. Those XRs, which you say their bulk/offset drove you nuts (on the course).

 

Why do you suppose that while you were being fitted for them and hit them so well on the LM, those same 2 features DIDN'T drive you nuts ?

 

I'm just curious because while I'm pretty sure I'm the exception rather than the rule I don't much care WHAT the clubs look like as I've played Lynx Parallax, Cleveland VAS and Ping's TiSi driver so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, LMAO I'm only looking (briefly) at the club face and the leading edge and then I'm concentrating on the ball so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

Having said that I do understand that looks are, from a little bit, to very important, to a lot of (most ?) players.

 

Great question! It was a bit of a strange case, I was just starting what is now a year+ long journey with a coach to re-work and improve my swing. We noticed right away that I had shafts in my irons that were way too heavy for me, so I needed to either re-shaft or get new irons. I like new irons, so I chose the latter.

 

The bulk/offset did drive me nuts during the fitting. I knew when I bought them that I would probably get new irons in a year/two since I was just starting to re-work my swing, so I ended up getting them because they fit me as well/better than most and were not too expensive. But more importantly, I did what I always I believed that the clubs that fit me best would perform the best. For me this is just not true, aesthetics have always been important to me, I just never had the guts to sacrifice looks/feel over fit.

 

But here's the thing, when I got fed up with these clubs, I still didn't learn that lesson. I didn't think I had the game to play blades so I looked at irons like AP2s and XForged only. I assumed that I should not even touch blades, this is how ingrained this stigma had been on me. Luckily I thought the ApexMB's were so sexy that when I was trying out XForged I asked to try the MBs too. I was shocked how similar they were. I realized I could probably just choose what I wanted, not what my handicap should allow.

 

I still did a fitting, I didn't end up with ApexMBs, the Mizuno's were performing better on TM, so I do believe that fit/performance are important. But I was not going to even look at a club I didn't love aesthetically.

 

Clearly there are clubs a person should not hit. There are probably plenty of high handicappers that would struggle to hit my MP18s, but there are probably plenty of low handicappers who from offset/aesthetics/weighting can't hit Ping G700s.

 

Makers produce clubs to adhere to USGA rules. The different metals give different feels of accomplishment. Some probably help "more" pending swing and course played, some may not be as good based on swing and course played.

 

If you look at the width of the grooves on an MP-9, '88 Hogan Redline, or MP-18, they're all the same width. But, they make the overall head larger to give one the impression there's more room for error. I burst the bubble of a guy with SGI clubs (not bagging on SGI's!) at the range who said my Redline 7 iron looks "small". I got his 7 iron and compared...YEP...the grooves were the exact same width. I think he actually thought his clubs had more "hitting area".

[gbartko]

I think the majority of people who can't hit a certain club due to its design are fooling themselves. I have a small collection of one irons and I will let folks with a decent swing try them if they dare. Most of them are out of the chance to hit the club well by address. I believe that people saying they can work the blade better than a CB is likely a load of bull as they obviously don't have the swing path control to do so. They can shuffle their feet a bit maybe and limit the hip turn if they want, but honestly they are just guessing and praying that the face doesn't catch crazy sidespin.

 

I'm not yet a bogey golfer and my justification for playing blades is this:my set 3-P cost me $600 brand new. They're beautiful and when I do well with them they feel great. When I do poorly they crack like a bat and it feels bad and sounds worse. It works for me.

The club that's really teaching me about swing path is the 3+ wood. I hit balls well with it and everything under it falls into line. I'm finding a tempo that allows me greater control over the path of my swing. The one iron, a real 15° blade, is making me aware of form and face control. It's such a demanding club that it builds my focus. That's why it's my favorite club.

 

Totally agree. Its why I drive a Model T. That lack of power steering makes me such a better driver because if I don't pay super close attention I'll kill everyone on the highway.

 

I'm glad you are having fun, but nobody "can't hit" any club. You are better or worse with certain clubs. I am better with my Cruze than a Model T. Chances are you, as not even a 90 shooter, would be better with something other than a 15* blade.

 

I don't understand how you can say "people who can't hit a certain club are fooling themselves" and "these blades are making me better because i can't hit them but they are telling me the truth" within three sentences of each other. It sounds like you're, well, fooling yourself.

 

Model T ????

[buzlin]

For me, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. YMMV.

[cliffhanger]

Dear Blades,

 

i really like you right now however i may hate you tomorrow. And just to remind you i have never kept a set of irons in play for 2 full seasons and most don't make it past the first. So ya better keep on keepin on... or else!

[BMC]

OP opened up a can of worms.....with a blade instead of a can opener.

 

It's just recreation. Play what you enjoy looking at.

[FourTops]

Dear Blade,

 

It's been fun...it's been real....but it's over. You look great, but looks are deceiving. My golf therapist says this "trophy wife" co-dependent relationship is not goof for.me. There's so many more suitable options now it makes no sense to continue on this way. I'm glad I signed the pre-nup at PGASS.

 

P.S. I've progressed from rubbing sticks together to light a fire to using matches, and I just sold my 8-Track player.

[Sir Slicealot]

Totally agree. Its why I drive a Model T. That lack of power steering makes me such a better driver because if I don't pay super close attention I'll kill everyone on the highway.

 

I'm glad you are having fun, but nobody "can't hit" any club. You are better or worse with certain clubs. I am better with my Cruze than a Model T. Chances are you, as not even a 90 shooter, would be better with something other than a 15* blade.

 

I don't understand how you can say "people who can't hit a certain club are fooling themselves" and "these blades are making me better because i can't hit them but they are telling me the truth" within three sentences of each other. It sounds like you're, well, fooling yourself.

I'm fooling myself alright with that 1 iron. I fooled a couple of folks down the fairway today. I had an 8 iron cover on it and some folks were seriously interested in what kind of eight iron was going so far. Carrying 200-220 on good shots rolling out 40-50 yards. On the 17th hole today I measured a 261 yard total drive from the tee box off the deck. A bad shot is still on the fairway and rolling toward the hole. Minimum distance traveled on a topped ball was 100 yards. I'm not able to say similar things about my driver. I've found a club that works for me until I can learn to hit my woods reliably. I can't find fault there. If I had played that club all day off the tee, I'd have broken 100 today. What's the strokes gained if I'm not taking an OB or lost ball every other hole due to a wood? I've figured it that I save 28 strokes by not playing the driver right now. With the 3+ and 1 iron going a similar distance, I'm strokes ahead to use the club which has the least penalized miss.

 

I should have said people who think they can't hit a club are fooling themselves. They can hit the club.

 

I don't remember saying I couldn't hit my blades. I said when I hit them poorly I have feedback. My strokes lost are mainly driver/wood, bladed chipping and three putting. I lose maybe one or two strokes a round due to improper contact with my irons.

[nsxguy]

I was fit to Callaway XRs last year and while I hit them great on trackman, not just distance but dispersion etc... when I took them to the course their bulk/offset just drove me nuts. My handicap was dropping and I felt like I should be able to play irons I liked more, and I was just never able to score well with them.

 

 

Let me ask you something. Those XRs, which you say their bulk/offset drove you nuts (on the course).

 

Why do you suppose that while you were being fitted for them and hit them so well on the LM, those same 2 features DIDN'T drive you nuts ?

 

I'm just curious because while I'm pretty sure I'm the exception rather than the rule I don't much care WHAT the clubs look like as I've played Lynx Parallax, Cleveland VAS and Ping's TiSi driver so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, LMAO I'm only looking (briefly) at the club face and the leading edge and then I'm concentrating on the ball so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

Having said that I do understand that looks are, from a little bit, to very important, to a lot of (most ?) players.

 

When I was taught I was told to look just in front of the ball, pick out some blades of grass, not at the ball because I would get "ball focused" and end the swing at the ball vs. beyond. So for me, the look of a club doesn't matter, I'm entirely focused upon where I want the club head to go. Same for putting.

 

I get the way you were taught. Basically the instructor wants to make sure you accelerate through the ball, not just hit "at" the ball.

 

That's one problem I don't have. :D And I look at the 7 o'clock position for a reason; probably the same reason you look in front of the ball. (cool)

 

Interesting. Are you saying you look about a foot ahead, roughly?

 

Sorry, I guess I didn't phrase that clearly.

 

I'm looking at the ball. I look at the 7 o'clock position ON the ball,,,,,,,,,,, i.e. I want to strike it from the inside.

[Johnnypenso]

 

You know what else sucks ? Newbies making like they know what's going on. Newbies that don't realize they're being trolled YET AGAIN by this guy.

 

Newbies who haven't seen that same troll, fouling any valid discussion in a CB vs blade thread, ultimately ending up getting hte thread closed, with his same nonsense,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, even while admitting "blades are more workable, CBs are more forgiving".

 

I have no idea who is trolling whom. I don't pay attention to the forum politics. I'm just looking for some hard evidence of how different club designs actually perform on course. I've got some money burning a hole in my pocket and would like to spend it wisely.

[FourTops]

You know what else sucks ? Newbies making like they know what's going on. Newbies that don't realize they're being trolled YET AGAIN by this guy.

 

Newbies who haven't seen that same troll, fouling any valid discussion in a CB vs blade thread, ultimately ending up getting hte thread closed, with his same nonsense,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, even while admitting "blades are more workable, CBs are more forgiving".

 

I have no idea who is trolling whom. I don't pay attention to the forum politics. I'm just looking for some hard evidence of how different club designs actually perform on course. I've got some money burning a hole in my pocket and would like to spend it wisely.

 

Check out Ben Hogan golf. They are selling direct with much lower prices.

[wrmiller]

From my experience call it 7i to W there is minimal difference between blades or forgiving clubs.

 

However, once you get to the 165-225 range, which every strokes gained guru has said is the key spot to lowering scores, you'll find out real quick how good you are.

 

205 yard par 3 over water, here's a blade 4 iron and 10 balls, lets see whatcha got.

 

OK, I'm old, so can I have a 3 iron instead? :)

 

Honestly, before the last break from golf all 10 would have carried. Ball striking was never my problem. Direction however can be an issue on some days. ;)

 

But as I've only played one full round since returning, can I have a rain check for a few weeks? Last time at the range I hit four shots with my 712 AP2 3 iron and was dropping them around 210 or so. It's nowhere near as far as I was hitting them two decades ago, but hey, like I said I'm getting old. :D

[nsxguy]

As an aside, yesterday I had a pretty good ball striking day,,,,,,,,,,, for the most part.

 

I decided to test the new ProV1x on the back nine. Being it is a white ball, like most everyone else's, I put a mark on it - a little "tee pee" over the number. I always place the number directly in the back of the ball and see the strike mark on the club face.

 

On 12, 165 par 3 downwind, pin pretty much in the center of the green. I took my 150 club (7 iron), lost my balance a bit and hit it terribly, right off the toe (as below) - ended up 30 feet from the pin, a bit short and to the right.

 

I guess if I was hitting a blade it would've been even better. :russian_roulette:

 

 

[nsxguy]

You know what else sucks ? Newbies making like they know what's going on. Newbies that don't realize they're being trolled YET AGAIN by this guy.

 

Newbies who haven't seen that same troll, fouling any valid discussion in a CB vs blade thread, ultimately ending up getting hte thread closed, with his same nonsense,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, even while admitting "blades are more workable, CBs are more forgiving".

 

I have no idea who is trolling whom. I don't pay attention to the forum politics. I'm just looking for some hard evidence of how different club designs actually perform on course. I've got some money burning a hole in my pocket and would like to spend it wisely.

 

Well my friend, since ALL this "evidence" is anecdotal, the only hard evidence you're going to get is when you hit the various irons you're interested with the help of a launch monitor.

 

Then you'll have your hard evidence.

[Chuck905]

Do you live your life being justified by science?

 

Life has too many intangibles that your data collection would render incomprehensible.

 

You could live life justifiable by faith?

 

BTW, I have and engineering and science background and can fortell an arrogant atoned character. A few of the GI proposals do have a valid points.

 

So does anyone have any real evidence that blades are less forgiving than GI irons or is it all anecdotal evidence?

 

Depends on what you constitute "real evidence." Science says that high MOI clubs resist twisting on off center strikes better than low MOI clubs like blades. Science says that a rounded sole with a fair bit of bounce, common on GI clubs, will dig less on fat strikes than a sharp leading edge blade. Science says that offset helps increase launch and reduce slicing by some (small) degree, two features that benefit a lot of people.

 

People that experience 10+ yards of distance variation between "similar strikes" with a GI club are poor judges of strike quality. Blade guys will say that their clubs provide better "feedback" and that may be true, but the only feedback I need is how close to the hole my shot winds up.

I understand the science but science doesn't play golf :taunt: . That science also doesn't provide a lot of quantification, nor does it mention some of the downsides of SGI irons, such as hitting the ball higher on the face, killing the spin and producing the proverbial flyer. What I want is the quantification of the science. You hit a ball on the correct groove but 20mm toe with the same angle of attack and swing path and what happens with each club? What about 10 mm high in the centre? 5 mm low and 10 mm towards the heel? What about spin rates and holding greens? What about controlling the ball flight? Golf has a ton of variables that all contribute to the results of your shot and your overall score, above and beyond how "forgiving" the face is. Is there any data to support that the GI clubs actually produce tighter dispersion patterns and better overall scores?

 

Science sucks...

 

 

You know what else sucks? Mocking people who have a genuine interest in getting to the truth. I'd like to separate the science from the marketing by getting some actual data that pertains to real world situations. You know how you prove things in science? You test over and over and over until you can repeat the tests ad nauseum and get the same results every time. The only comparisons I've seen are from YT golfers hitting balls and in each case I can recall, there was no discernable advantage to the GI irons. I'd be happy to look at anyone's data that proves anything one way or the other.

[dciccoritti]

As an aside, yesterday I had a pretty good ball striking day,,,,,,,,,,, for the most part.

 

I decided to test the new ProV1x on the back nine. Being it is a white ball, like most everyone else's, I put a mark on it - a little "tee pee" over the number. I always place the number directly in the back of the ball and see the strike mark on the club face.

 

On 12, 165 par 3 downwind, pin pretty much in the center of the green. I took my 150 club (7 iron), lost my balance a bit and hit it terribly, right off the toe (as below) - ended up 30 feet from the pin, a bit short and to the right.

 

I guess if I was hitting a blade it would've been even better. :russian_roulette:

 

 

 

So like the first strike or more like the second strike? There's definitely a few towards the toe here, take your pick.

 

[media=]

[/media]

[BIG STU]

As an aside, yesterday I had a pretty good ball striking day,,,,,,,,,,, for the most part.

 

I decided to test the new ProV1x on the back nine. Being it is a white ball, like most everyone else's, I put a mark on it - a little "tee pee" over the number. I always place the number directly in the back of the ball and see the strike mark on the club face.

 

On 12, 165 par 3 downwind, pin pretty much in the center of the green. I took my 150 club (7 iron), lost my balance a bit and hit it terribly, right off the toe (as below) - ended up 30 feet from the pin, a bit short and to the right.

 

I guess if I was hitting a blade it would've been even better. :russian_roulette:

 

 

Nope the key here is that you lost your balance ---- guess what that would have happened with any club of any construction. you might have gotten lucky and saved it again with any type of club if you had shut the face down quick. Note I said MAYBE LUCKY But that is hard to do off balance--- Hey I am a blade man period and I refuse to get into these arguments with anyone over what type of clubs they choose. Some of us old guys learned the game with blades because that was all we had. Some of the newer generation learned with CBs and GIs and so the Earth still turns. I will interject that some folks the GI type irons may help their game. Now you can get into some mechanical things that would be lengthy to explain here but a quick one from me on my perspective. If in your scenario if that had been me (and I am strictly a feel player) and I had got lucky and turned the face in and saved it with that hot faced Ping (again hot faced to me) more than likely I would have hit a rope hook off the planet which is my dreaded miss. On the same mindset I would have hit that rope hook rotating the blade but maybe not as nasty. Some basic physics you can not dispute. But then again assuming you were on the green from 30 feet all was not lost. On my face shutting thing I may have been worse off again no matter the type or design of club. I look at both sides of the equation objectively. In plain language different strokes for different folks and absolutely nothing wrong with that

[Bubbtubbs]

Do you live your life being justified by science?

 

Life has too many intangibles that your data collection would render incomprehensible.

 

You could live life justifiable by faith?

 

BTW, I have and engineering and science background and can fortell an arrogant atoned character. A few of the GI proposals do have a valid points.

 

Not that it has any place on this board, but I do - I won't believe anything I cannot personally verify, and I never take anybody's word as 100% true, no matter who it is.

[gbartko]

As an aside, yesterday I had a pretty good ball striking day,,,,,,,,,,, for the most part.

 

I decided to test the new ProV1x on the back nine. Being it is a white ball, like most everyone else's, I put a mark on it - a little "tee pee" over the number. I always place the number directly in the back of the ball and see the strike mark on the club face.

 

On 12, 165 par 3 downwind, pin pretty much in the center of the green. I took my 150 club (7 iron), lost my balance a bit and hit it terribly, right off the toe (as below) - ended up 30 feet from the pin, a bit short and to the right.

 

I guess if I was hitting a blade it would've been even better. :russian_roulette:

 

 

 

are you trying to say that you got feedback from your Ping G 7 iron? i was under the impression that any strike with a GI felt like christmas morning no matter where the contact occurred. interesting! :dntknw:

[BIG STU]

While I generally lean towards trying to be scientific on most things (to a fault at times) you cannot under-state the human/emotional aspect of "forgiveness." I know a lot of people who think that large clubheads give them forgiveness/confidence and would immediately struggle with blades, but there are those with the opposite problem, who see every flyer, every long directional miss-hit as a detrimental aspect of game improvement irons.

 

I was fit to Callaway XRs last year and while I hit them great on trackman, not just distance but dispersion etc... when I took them to the course their bulk/offset just drove me nuts. My handicap was dropping and I felt like I should be able to play irons I liked more, and I was just never able to score well with them.

 

This year, I just said "screw it" I've always played the irons I was fit to best, and not the ones I liked most, and ended up with a nice set of MP-18s. The trackman numbers would say I should score better with the XRs. If the difference between these two was so great, no amount of boosted confidence would add up improved scoring, yet my handicap continues to drop. I'm still >10, so I mis-hit all the time, my misses are just different and I would say better. I'm no longer in bunkers on the left/right, instead I'm more occasionally short and I can chip up from a nice fairway.

 

Count me in the "game improvement is mostly marketing" category. Just like 7 irons have been given more distance with jacked lofts but trade on spin/direction, GI/CB technology just seems to trade off one kind of forgiveness (distance on off-centered hits) for another (fliers/distance on off centered hits ending up in odd places.)

 

Assuming they're both about equal with different tradeoffs the answer really should be to play the clubs you like/. Aesthetics/fit/confidence are going to impact you a lot more than any tech they can put in there.

 

I think the Ping Eye 2's revolutionized golf, and not much has happened to improve upon them since in terms of performance. Watch the video on YouTube (link below) which tests the Eye 2 against the newest Ping irons. Virtually no difference. Plus, they compared based on loft differentials. I forgot to mention that along with my G30's, I have a set of Eye 2's I picked up for $89 years ago, 1-PW. In great shape. I can say the Eye 2's have more "reverberation" on mishits than the G30s, but they are every bit as capable. And i actually substitute my 52* with the Eye 2 PW.

 

So my point is i believe the new GI/SGI clubs have found a combination of metals to make the player feel like they are hitting flusher shots, but in reality they're really getting the same results...mishits are just "masked" better. To that extent, the newer tech is "easier" on the body on mishits, so I think the newer irons and hybrids have made the game more fun for older folks...you know...those over 30!

 

About the only difference between theory and engineering is the lofts and maybe the metal make up between the sets. Now on the vibration thing shaft construction has a lot to do with it. Newer shafts have different metal composition and such. On your Eye 2s if vibration is a problem on miss hits may I suggest going to newer grips and Sensicore inserts