Muscle Back "Blade" Irons --- History and Future?

[craz-e]

Well, after 8 demo sessions to find the right shafts and launch conditions; I ordered my Mizuno MP 18 (3-PW)

 

Honestly, there's just so many positives:

 

1. Looks great, timeless

 

2. Feels superb

 

3. So precise and consistent

 

4. Satisfactory launch conditions of 17.6* avg launch angle, 6358 average backspin and a 4 yard average miss to the left over a 3 hour hitting session. Under normal playing conditions, the ball would die off and cross the target line.

 

5. Performs well; can cut it, flight it, draw it, up-shoot it, choke up and choke down for yardage control; does everything on command.

 

6. Chips and pitches are so accurate

 

7. The right shaft not only maximizes my potential, but my stamina improved also.

 

Drawbacks:

 

1. Not sure what to do with my 900 Tours?

 

Nice set up, I am really enjoying the same shafts in a couple of different iron set ups myself

[bladehunter]

The wording of the topic of this thread is VERY SNEAKY (well done!) to get all the +20 cap blade guys going berserk defending how blades make them a better player.

 

NO it isn’t. Lol

 

It’s the guys coming in who have no real opinion on the subject that cause it to derail. It’s a legitimate question. Where will they go ?

 

Calling everyone “20 cappers “ and telling everyone how crazy they are for not choosing your choice is the issue. Not the topic.

 

 

[lenman73]

I am really impressed with the number of clairvoyant posters in this thread. Who without knowing, seeing, or ever playing a round with me or others on here, seem to know what will work best for our game. Many of us have given reasons why we like what we like, just to be told we are wrong by an arrogant few. I'm sorry for some that the thought of hitting a blade keeps you up at knight. But for some of us who have played long enough to have started with wood woods and could make contact with the ball, looking down at a more compact iron doesn't cause a panic attack in us as it seems to in others.

[BiggErn]

I am really impressed with the number of clairvoyant posters in this thread. Who without knowing, seeing, or ever playing a round with me or others on here, seem to know what will work best for our game. Many of us have given reasons why we like what we like, just to be told we are wrong by an arrogant few. I'm sorry for some that the thought of hitting a blade keeps you up at knight. But for some of us who have played long enough to have started with wood woods and could make contact with the ball, looking down at a more compact iron doesn't cause a panic attack in us as it seems to in others.

 

 

If it doesn’t pertain to you why take offense? Every golfer knows that MB irons require a very precise strike almost 100% of the time. That those players will have a dime size wear spot dead center of the face. Not that I care what anyone plays regardless color me skeptic when people start rewriting physics, dismissing technology, hit all over the face but just works for “their swing”, play for a certain “miss”, I play just as good with them vs other clubs, they look better (they do), they make me focus more, they will make me a better ball striker, etc. Irons are scoring tools to hit greens and get the ball close. Why would someone play for a 30 yard miss? I don’t think once that a scratch or better player that pounds the sweet spot has replied in these type threads and argued why MBs work for them. You know why? Because they do. Then you have guys who are not great ball strikers that seem to want some sort of validation and get all bent out of shape at any type of criticism or skepticism. You can play whatever club you like whether you maximize what its capabilities are or not. And yes I can totally understand that these irons won’t affect some players scoring too but not sure I would use that as a positive in many cases.

[MelloYello]

The "dime size wear spot" thing is misleading. That applies to guys with really shallow attack angles who aren't catching much turf. Tiger's clubs are a good example.

 

The wear pattern on most sets (including the majority of good players I've seen who are plenty capable of using MBs) turns out to be mostly caused by the dirt and sand in the divot than from the ball and therefore it's spreads from behind the balls impact location the face along the leading edge. The wear pattern looks kind of like a Normal / Gaussian probability curve.

 

 

I think a lot of the fear of blades stems from the idea that it's hard to hit them flush and to be fair, it's really not for a quality player. If you're coordinated you can do it. It's nothing to brag about IMHO.

 

In my experience it's more a question of 'are you long enough?' It definitely helps to be a long player with blades who can launch it high, carry it far and deal with mis-hits via strong hands and forearms. If you're not a powerful player, blades are all the more demanding and can even seem downright impossible to play with (especially the long clubs).

 

But I would think most avid 20- and 30-somethings could easily get accustomed to a set of MBs. I know that was the case with me.

[Chuck905]

Thank-you.

 

It came down to the LZ vs Modus 120S, both felt great but the clincher for me was after an hour when fatigue kicked in; the LZ continued to shine and the Modus faded.

 

Physics wise, the Modus launched a degree lower and about 300 rpm lower but the LZ was 5 mph faster (club head) and 10 yards longer total distance along with a tighter dispersion pattern.

 

 

Well, after 8 demo sessions to find the right shafts and launch conditions; I ordered my Mizuno MP 18 (3-PW)

 

Honestly, there's just so many positives:

 

1. Looks great, timeless

 

2. Feels superb

 

3. So precise and consistent

 

4. Satisfactory launch conditions of 17.6* avg launch angle, 6358 average backspin and a 4 yard average miss to the left over a 3 hour hitting session. Under normal playing conditions, the ball would die off and cross the target line.

 

5. Performs well; can cut it, flight it, draw it, up-shoot it, choke up and choke down for yardage control; does everything on command.

 

6. Chips and pitches are so accurate

 

7. The right shaft not only maximizes my potential, but my stamina improved also.

 

Drawbacks:

 

1. Not sure what to do with my 900 Tours?

 

Nice set up, I am really enjoying the same shafts in a couple of different iron set ups myself

[NRJyzr]

My experience suggests it's not exactly a question of length or swingspeed. It's more about launch conditions, with turf interaction added as seasoning.

 

I've mentioned playing Ping Eye2+ for a year. My main reason for doing so was due to dissatisfaction with the Mizuno MS-11s I'd been using, which appeared to spin too much, giving me problems hitting into the wind. At 2nd Swing, I compared the 6 iron to the Ping 6 iron, found I was getting over 7000rpm with the Mizuno, and right around 6000 with the Ping. Playing the Pings, I found I could sometimes even ignore smaller headwinds that would require me to club up with the Mizunos, in spite of hitting the PIngs even higher (something I didn't pay attention to on the launch monitor, sadly).

 

I used to think all blades spun the ball more than all CBs, due in part to the above, but I've since seen that not to be true. Have to go case by case. Ballooning a friend's G20 short irons into little wind was a shock. LOL

[JoeJoeJoeUrBoat]

Since I've gone back to my CB.501s my ball striking has improved. Was getting a bit lazy with my P790s. When there's no punishment, it's a lot easier to swing a bit more aggressively. Only 1 club shorter than my 790s, thought it would be more. Way more consistent distances with a lot more spin, holding greens is easy as pie.

[pinestreetgolf]

The wording of the topic of this thread is VERY SNEAKY (well done!) to get all the +20 cap blade guys going berserk defending how blades make them a better player.

 

 

Well I have a thin miss and my ob shots only travel 5 yards past the stakes instead of 10.

 

Yes, but you "learned" a valuable lesson on "not" hitting the shot 10 yards more OB.

 

 

It’s a process. They have to make me better.

 

Totally agree. This exact topic is why I cut the power steering cable in my car. Sometimes I lose control at high speed but it’s so much harder it’s gotta be making me a better driver, right?

 

If you get offended that I think you’d do better without blades (spoiler alert: you would) then me thinks the lady doth protest too much.

 

If you play blades then you obviously “like to look” at blades. It’s a circle. If you looked at G series pings for two years you’d like them instead.

 

You’re confusing “I’m used to X and it makes me comfortable” with “X is optimal for me over time.”

[NRJyzr]

Keep going, you're doing a fine job

 

[dciccoritti]

The wording of the topic of this thread is VERY SNEAKY (well done!) to get all the +20 cap blade guys going berserk defending how blades make them a better player.

 

 

Well I have a thin miss and my ob shots only travel 5 yards past the stakes instead of 10.

 

Yes, but you "learned" a valuable lesson on "not" hitting the shot 10 yards more OB.

 

 

It’s a process. They have to make me better.

 

Totally agree. This exact topic is why I cut the power steering cable in my car. Sometimes I lose control at high speed but it’s so much harder it’s gotta be making me a better driver, right?

 

If you get offended that I think you’d do better without blades (spoiler alert: you would) then me thinks the lady doth protest too much.

 

If you play blades then you obviously “like to look” at blades. It’s a circle. If you looked at G series pings for two years you’d like them instead.

 

You’re confusing “I’m used to X and it makes me comfortable” with “X is optimal for me over time.”

 

I'm very suspicious of all those who continuously feel the need to educate and justify. Wisdom and maturity is the realization that just when you think you've got it all figured out and completely understand, you remain cautious and humble because you've been around long enough to know there's a wrench somewhere down the road that's going to completely turn your opinion(s) up on it's head.

[BiggErn]

If I’m an Olympic archer I get less points for missing the bullseye. The farther from the bullseye I hit the less points I get. Nothing about that will ever change. The bullseye will never be the size of the entire target no matter how much I practice. But if it was woulda that be easier to hit the bullseye? Or would you get lazy and careless missing the target

[gbartko]

If I’m an Olympic archer I get less points for missing the bullseye. The farther from the bullseye I hit the less points I get. Nothing about that will ever change. The bullseye will never be the size of the entire target no matter how much I practice. But if it was woulda that be easier to hit the bullseye? Or would you get lazy and careless missing the target

 

i dont know but i would use a traditional long bow because the centripetal force that is exerted on the arrow allows me to flight them through any media and the arrow-target interaction is much more pure. but thats just me....

[NRJyzr]

If I’m an Olympic archer I get less points for missing the bullseye. The farther from the bullseye I hit the less points I get. Nothing about that will ever change. The bullseye will never be the size of the entire target no matter how much I practice. But if it was woulda that be easier to hit the bullseye? Or would you get lazy and careless missing the target

 

i dont know but i would use a traditional long bow because the centripetal force that is exerted on the arrow allows me to flight them through any media and the arrow-target interaction is much more pure. but thats just me....

 

 

I didn't realize golf scores were dependent on the distance remaining to the hole?

[gbartko]

If I’m an Olympic archer I get less points for missing the bullseye. The farther from the bullseye I hit the less points I get. Nothing about that will ever change. The bullseye will never be the size of the entire target no matter how much I practice. But if it was woulda that be easier to hit the bullseye? Or would you get lazy and careless missing the target

 

i dont know but i would use a traditional long bow because the centripetal force that is exerted on the arrow allows me to flight them through any media and the arrow-target interaction is much more pure. but thats just me....

 

 

I didn't realize golf scores were dependent on the distance remaining to the hole?

 

well, the closer you are to the hole the more likely you are to make the next shot but i get your point.

[bladehunter]

The "dime size wear spot" thing is misleading. That applies to guys with really shallow attack angles who aren't catching much turf. Tiger's clubs are a good example.

 

The wear pattern on most sets (including the majority of good players I've seen who are plenty capable of using MBs) turns out to be mostly caused by the dirt and sand in the divot than from the ball and therefore it's spreads from behind the balls impact location the face along the leading edge. The wear pattern looks kind of like a Normal / Gaussian probability curve.

 

 

I think a lot of the fear of blades stems from the idea that it's hard to hit them flush and to be fair, it's really not for a quality player. If you're coordinated you can do it. It's nothing to brag about IMHO.

 

In my experience it's more a question of 'are you long enough?' It definitely helps to be a long player with blades who can launch it high, carry it far and deal with mis-hits via strong hands and forearms. If you're not a powerful player, blades are all the more demanding and can even seem downright impossible to play with (especially the long clubs).

 

But I would think most avid 20- and 30-somethings could easily get accustomed to a set of MBs. I know that was the case with me.

 

i think this post needs a visual aide..... I may just make a diorama for later viewing..

[scott_Donald]

 

1. Not sure what to do with my 900 Tours?

 

why were they better than the 900 Tours?

[mahonie]

I'm surprised more OEMs aren't producing forged CBs and blades with no offset. With modern design and tungsten weighting, you could create a no offset forging that is very forgiving.

 

Because offset is beneficial to the majority of golfers. The market share for clubs with very little offset is very small. So making design changes to the clubs to an already small market share, to yet divide that share into 2 even smaller groups has no profit in it for the OEM's.

 

The reality is that there is potential to advance blade technology further by finding new forging processes or new material combinations. But since blades are such a small market share, no OEM wants to spend a lot on R&D for that segment.

 

OEMs don’t actually spend a lot of R&D cash, relatively speaking, on any segment. Callaway spends 8x as much on marketing as it does on R&D and I’m sure the ratio is pretty much the same for all the OEMs.

 

When the ‘distance’ story starts wearing thin and the ‘accuracy’ story makes a comeback, don’t be surprised. It has been said, but please don’t repeat it, particularly round these parts, that MBs are only made for those who don’t get taken in by the marketing and realise that no club is going to improve their game - it is down to natural skill, practice and application.

[Tim_Gavrich]

Since I've gone back to my CB.501s my ball striking has improved. Was getting a bit lazy with my P790s. When there's no punishment, it's a lot easier to swing a bit more aggressively. Only 1 club shorter than my 790s, thought it would be more. Way more consistent distances with a lot more spin, holding greens is easy as pie.

This post hints at my feelings re: blades vs. "more forgiving" irons. There's got to be a psychological component to hitting a blade vs. hitting a GI-type iron. With the marketing language surrounding GI irons going something like "It's impossible to mis-hit because the sweet spot is so huge!" it's reasonable to wonder if that makes golfers partially take the whole business of hitting the ball solidly for granted, consciously or subconsciously. I have gamed Titleist 710 MBs since 2010 and never want to hit anything other than blades, so I am definitely biased in their favor. But I don't evangelize them to other golfers.

 

That said, as kind as GI irons are to mishits, if actually making perfect contact is even a little disincentivized, could it be that these clubs might hinder some golfers who earnestly want to improve?

 

Blades demand nothing less than solid contact. People who believe technology has made them obsolete will tell you this is a bug, but I see it as a feature. Where as GI clubs can hide it a little bit, blades will tell you very bluntly if you have not hit a solid shot. For a golfer looking to learn to hit the ball better, couldn't blades be seen as both a training tool and a reward for becoming a good ball-striker?

 

Also, though they're not blades per se, the look of the T-MBs, 790s, i700s, i500s and the PXG irons is generally blade-like, is it not? I think that's an interesting recent development in golf club aesthetics.

[BiggErn]

Since I've gone back to my CB.501s my ball striking has improved. Was getting a bit lazy with my P790s. When there's no punishment, it's a lot easier to swing a bit more aggressively. Only 1 club shorter than my 790s, thought it would be more. Way more consistent distances with a lot more spin, holding greens is easy as pie.

This post hints at my feelings re: blades vs. "more forgiving" irons. There's got to be a psychological component to hitting a blade vs. hitting a GI-type iron. With the marketing language surrounding GI irons going something like "It's impossible to mis-hit because the sweet spot is so huge!" it's reasonable to wonder if that makes golfers partially take the whole business of hitting the ball solidly for granted, consciously or subconsciously. I have gamed Titleist 710 MBs since 2010 and never want to hit anything other than blades, so I am definitely biased in their favor. But I don't evangelize them to other golfers.

 

That said, as kind as GI irons are to mishits, if actually making perfect contact is even a little disincentivized, could it be that these clubs might hinder some golfers who earnestly want to improve?

 

Blades demand nothing less than solid contact. People who believe technology has made them obsolete will tell you this is a bug, but I see it as a feature. Where as GI clubs can hide it a little bit, blades will tell you very bluntly if you have not hit a solid shot. For a golfer looking to learn to hit the ball better, couldn't blades be seen as both a training tool and a reward for becoming a good ball-striker?

 

Also, though they're not blades per se, the look of the T-MBs, 790s, i700s, i500s and the PXG irons is generally blade-like, is it not? I think that's an interesting recent development in golf club aesthetics.

 

 

The next best thing to looking at a guy’s MBs with a browned spot in the center of the face is seeing a guy with CBs/GIs/shovels that look the same. Who knew the goal was to hit the center of the face regardless of the club.

[Pepperturbo]

Since I've gone back to my CB.501s my ball striking has improved. Was getting a bit lazy with my P790s. When there's no punishment, it's a lot easier to swing a bit more aggressively. Only 1 club shorter than my 790s, thought it would be more. Way more consistent distances with a lot more spin, holding greens is easy as pie.

This post hints at my feelings re: blades vs. "more forgiving" irons. There's got to be a psychological component to hitting a blade vs. hitting a GI-type iron. With the marketing language surrounding GI irons going something like "It's impossible to mis-hit because the sweet spot is so huge!" it's reasonable to wonder if that makes golfers partially take the whole business of hitting the ball solidly for granted, consciously or subconsciously. I have gamed Titleist 710 MBs since 2010 and never want to hit anything other than blades, so I am definitely biased in their favor. But I don't evangelize them to other golfers.

 

That said, as kind as GI irons are to mishits, if actually making perfect contact is even a little disincentivized, could it be that these clubs might hinder some golfers who earnestly want to improve?

 

Blades demand nothing less than solid contact. People who believe technology has made them obsolete will tell you this is a bug, but I see it as a feature. Where as GI clubs can hide it a little bit, blades will tell you very bluntly if you have not hit a solid shot. For a golfer looking to learn to hit the ball better, couldn't blades be seen as both a training tool and a reward for becoming a good ball-striker?

 

Also, though they're not blades per se, the look of the T-MBs, 790s, i700s, i500s and the PXG irons is generally blade-like, is it not? I think that's an interesting recent development in golf club aesthetics.

 

 

The next best thing to looking at a guy’s MBs with a browned spot in the center of the face is seeing a guy with CBs/GIs/shovels that look the same. Who knew the goal was to hit the center of the face regardless of the club.

 

Who knew? Not most of the people that buy CB's/GI's/shovels. I could be wrong, but I heard the main reason so many buy them is forgiveness. Apparently they expect to be missing the center of the face rather often. Maybe a mass mailer will help?

 

Side note: the coating material quality used today for MB's or CB's doesn't wear off creating a brown spot like older clubheads. :lol: :beach:

[BiggErn]

Since I've gone back to my CB.501s my ball striking has improved. Was getting a bit lazy with my P790s. When there's no punishment, it's a lot easier to swing a bit more aggressively. Only 1 club shorter than my 790s, thought it would be more. Way more consistent distances with a lot more spin, holding greens is easy as pie.

This post hints at my feelings re: blades vs. "more forgiving" irons. There's got to be a psychological component to hitting a blade vs. hitting a GI-type iron. With the marketing language surrounding GI irons going something like "It's impossible to mis-hit because the sweet spot is so huge!" it's reasonable to wonder if that makes golfers partially take the whole business of hitting the ball solidly for granted, consciously or subconsciously. I have gamed Titleist 710 MBs since 2010 and never want to hit anything other than blades, so I am definitely biased in their favor. But I don't evangelize them to other golfers.

 

That said, as kind as GI irons are to mishits, if actually making perfect contact is even a little disincentivized, could it be that these clubs might hinder some golfers who earnestly want to improve?

 

Blades demand nothing less than solid contact. People who believe technology has made them obsolete will tell you this is a bug, but I see it as a feature. Where as GI clubs can hide it a little bit, blades will tell you very bluntly if you have not hit a solid shot. For a golfer looking to learn to hit the ball better, couldn't blades be seen as both a training tool and a reward for becoming a good ball-striker?

 

Also, though they're not blades per se, the look of the T-MBs, 790s, i700s, i500s and the PXG irons is generally blade-like, is it not? I think that's an interesting recent development in golf club aesthetics.

 

 

The next best thing to looking at a guy’s MBs with a browned spot in the center of the face is seeing a guy with CBs/GIs/shovels that look the same. Who knew the goal was to hit the center of the face regardless of the club.

 

Who knew? Not most of the people that buy CB's/GI's/shovels. I could be wrong, but I heard the main reason so many buy them is forgiveness. Apparently they expect to be missing the center of the face rather often. Maybe a mass mailer will help?

 

Side note: the coating material quality used today for MB's or CB's doesn't wear off creating a brown spot like older clubheads. :lol: :beach:

 

 

Maybe ask the 80% of all touring professionals. Having forgiveness for when you miss doesn’t mean you miss more times than not. That’s one of PXGs selling points. Call it what you want there’s definitely wear spots in the center of the faces of good ball strikers with today’s clubs. Some of you guys are starting to split hairs but that’s what happens when you have no real argument.

[dciccoritti]

Since I've gone back to my CB.501s my ball striking has improved. Was getting a bit lazy with my P790s. When there's no punishment, it's a lot easier to swing a bit more aggressively. Only 1 club shorter than my 790s, thought it would be more. Way more consistent distances with a lot more spin, holding greens is easy as pie.

This post hints at my feelings re: blades vs. "more forgiving" irons. There's got to be a psychological component to hitting a blade vs. hitting a GI-type iron. With the marketing language surrounding GI irons going something like "It's impossible to mis-hit because the sweet spot is so huge!" it's reasonable to wonder if that makes golfers partially take the whole business of hitting the ball solidly for granted, consciously or subconsciously. I have gamed Titleist 710 MBs since 2010 and never want to hit anything other than blades, so I am definitely biased in their favor. But I don't evangelize them to other golfers.

 

That said, as kind as GI irons are to mishits, if actually making perfect contact is even a little disincentivized, could it be that these clubs might hinder some golfers who earnestly want to improve?

 

Blades demand nothing less than solid contact. People who believe technology has made them obsolete will tell you this is a bug, but I see it as a feature. Where as GI clubs can hide it a little bit, blades will tell you very bluntly if you have not hit a solid shot. For a golfer looking to learn to hit the ball better, couldn't blades be seen as both a training tool and a reward for becoming a good ball-striker?

 

Also, though they're not blades per se, the look of the T-MBs, 790s, i700s, i500s and the PXG irons is generally blade-like, is it not? I think that's an interesting recent development in golf club aesthetics.

 

 

The next best thing to looking at a guy’s MBs with a browned spot in the center of the face is seeing a guy with CBs/GIs/shovels that look the same. Who knew the goal was to hit the center of the face regardless of the club.

 

Who knew? Not most of the people that buy CB's/GI's/shovels. I could be wrong, but I heard the main reason so many buy them is forgiveness. Apparently they expect to be missing the center of the face rather often. Maybe a mass mailer will help?

 

Side note: the coating material quality used today for MB's or CB's doesn't wear off creating a brown spot like older clubheads. :lol: :beach:

 

Exactly! And how many just go after it because after all, they're made to go high, long and straight. And like it says on the box, if you mishit it, don't worry, they'll still go high, long and straight minus a couple of yards. All of the sudden, tempo, rhythm and balance is off causing mishits to begin with including other types of mis-hits like fats and thins. Better golfers that learned to swing properly can do well with them but how many golfers are hurt by them never truly getting better because marketing said you don't have to.

 

However marketing for blades are simple, refreshingly honest and truly brilliant, "you have to be a very good ball striker to play them". Not only true, but it even gives the secret to a better game...become a better ball striker. All of the sudden it's "you know what, I'm gonna become a better ball striker so I can put those beauties in the bag", which ultimately leads to better rounds, lower scores, more enjoyment and mass employment of instructors and YouTubers :-)

[BiggErn]

Since I've gone back to my CB.501s my ball striking has improved. Was getting a bit lazy with my P790s. When there's no punishment, it's a lot easier to swing a bit more aggressively. Only 1 club shorter than my 790s, thought it would be more. Way more consistent distances with a lot more spin, holding greens is easy as pie.

This post hints at my feelings re: blades vs. "more forgiving" irons. There's got to be a psychological component to hitting a blade vs. hitting a GI-type iron. With the marketing language surrounding GI irons going something like "It's impossible to mis-hit because the sweet spot is so huge!" it's reasonable to wonder if that makes golfers partially take the whole business of hitting the ball solidly for granted, consciously or subconsciously. I have gamed Titleist 710 MBs since 2010 and never want to hit anything other than blades, so I am definitely biased in their favor. But I don't evangelize them to other golfers.

 

That said, as kind as GI irons are to mishits, if actually making perfect contact is even a little disincentivized, could it be that these clubs might hinder some golfers who earnestly want to improve?

 

Blades demand nothing less than solid contact. People who believe technology has made them obsolete will tell you this is a bug, but I see it as a feature. Where as GI clubs can hide it a little bit, blades will tell you very bluntly if you have not hit a solid shot. For a golfer looking to learn to hit the ball better, couldn't blades be seen as both a training tool and a reward for becoming a good ball-striker?

 

Also, though they're not blades per se, the look of the T-MBs, 790s, i700s, i500s and the PXG irons is generally blade-like, is it not? I think that's an interesting recent development in golf club aesthetics.

 

 

The next best thing to looking at a guy’s MBs with a browned spot in the center of the face is seeing a guy with CBs/GIs/shovels that look the same. Who knew the goal was to hit the center of the face regardless of the club.

 

Who knew? Not most of the people that buy CB's/GI's/shovels. I could be wrong, but I heard the main reason so many buy them is forgiveness. Apparently they expect to be missing the center of the face rather often. Maybe a mass mailer will help?

 

Side note: the coating material quality used today for MB's or CB's doesn't wear off creating a brown spot like older clubheads. :lol: :beach:

 

Exactly! And how many just go after it because after all, they're made to go high, long and straight. And like it says on the box, if you mishit it, don't worry, they'll still go high, long and straight minus a couple of yards. All of the sudden, tempo, rhythm and balance is off causing mishits to begin with including other types of mis-hits like fats and thins. Better golfers that learned to swing properly can do well with them but how many golfers are hurt by them never truly getting better because marketing said you don't have to.

 

However marketing for blades are simple, refreshingly honest and truly brilliant, "you have to be a very good ball striker to play them". Not only true, but it even gives the secret to a better game...become a better ball striker. All of the sudden it's "you know what, I'm gonna become a better ball striker so I can put those beauties in the bag", which ultimately leads to better rounds, lower scores, more enjoyment and mass employment of instructors and YouTubers :-)

 

This is one of the most ridiculous posts yet and that’s saying A LOT.

[Tim_Gavrich]

Since I've gone back to my CB.501s my ball striking has improved. Was getting a bit lazy with my P790s. When there's no punishment, it's a lot easier to swing a bit more aggressively. Only 1 club shorter than my 790s, thought it would be more. Way more consistent distances with a lot more spin, holding greens is easy as pie.

This post hints at my feelings re: blades vs. "more forgiving" irons. There's got to be a psychological component to hitting a blade vs. hitting a GI-type iron. With the marketing language surrounding GI irons going something like "It's impossible to mis-hit because the sweet spot is so huge!" it's reasonable to wonder if that makes golfers partially take the whole business of hitting the ball solidly for granted, consciously or subconsciously. I have gamed Titleist 710 MBs since 2010 and never want to hit anything other than blades, so I am definitely biased in their favor. But I don't evangelize them to other golfers.

 

That said, as kind as GI irons are to mishits, if actually making perfect contact is even a little disincentivized, could it be that these clubs might hinder some golfers who earnestly want to improve?

 

Blades demand nothing less than solid contact. People who believe technology has made them obsolete will tell you this is a bug, but I see it as a feature. Where as GI clubs can hide it a little bit, blades will tell you very bluntly if you have not hit a solid shot. For a golfer looking to learn to hit the ball better, couldn't blades be seen as both a training tool and a reward for becoming a good ball-striker?

 

Also, though they're not blades per se, the look of the T-MBs, 790s, i700s, i500s and the PXG irons is generally blade-like, is it not? I think that's an interesting recent development in golf club aesthetics.

 

 

The next best thing to looking at a guy’s MBs with a browned spot in the center of the face is seeing a guy with CBs/GIs/shovels that look the same. Who knew the goal was to hit the center of the face regardless of the club.

Show me yours and I'll show you mine, BiggErn.

 

Seriously though, I get that the goal is to hit solid shots no matter what you're gaming. There are plenty of excellent players who use non-blades (I think Tim Herron was using PING Eye2 irons a couple decades past their debut date, which I always thought was cool), but there's plenty to be said about liking what you're looking down at at address. For some of us, that's a blade. ‍♂️

[BiggErn]

Since I've gone back to my CB.501s my ball striking has improved. Was getting a bit lazy with my P790s. When there's no punishment, it's a lot easier to swing a bit more aggressively. Only 1 club shorter than my 790s, thought it would be more. Way more consistent distances with a lot more spin, holding greens is easy as pie.

This post hints at my feelings re: blades vs. "more forgiving" irons. There's got to be a psychological component to hitting a blade vs. hitting a GI-type iron. With the marketing language surrounding GI irons going something like "It's impossible to mis-hit because the sweet spot is so huge!" it's reasonable to wonder if that makes golfers partially take the whole business of hitting the ball solidly for granted, consciously or subconsciously. I have gamed Titleist 710 MBs since 2010 and never want to hit anything other than blades, so I am definitely biased in their favor. But I don't evangelize them to other golfers.

 

That said, as kind as GI irons are to mishits, if actually making perfect contact is even a little disincentivized, could it be that these clubs might hinder some golfers who earnestly want to improve?

 

Blades demand nothing less than solid contact. People who believe technology has made them obsolete will tell you this is a bug, but I see it as a feature. Where as GI clubs can hide it a little bit, blades will tell you very bluntly if you have not hit a solid shot. For a golfer looking to learn to hit the ball better, couldn't blades be seen as both a training tool and a reward for becoming a good ball-striker?

 

Also, though they're not blades per se, the look of the T-MBs, 790s, i700s, i500s and the PXG irons is generally blade-like, is it not? I think that's an interesting recent development in golf club aesthetics.

 

 

The next best thing to looking at a guyâs MBs with a browned spot in the center of the face is seeing a guy with CBs/GIs/shovels that look the same. Who knew the goal was to hit the center of the face regardless of the club.

Show me yours and I'll show you mine, BiggErn.

 

Seriously though, I get that the goal is to hit solid shots no matter what you're gaming. There are plenty of excellent players who use non-blades (I think Tim Herron was using PING Eye2 irons a couple decades past their debut date, which I always thought was cool), but there's plenty to be said about liking what you're looking down at at address. For some of us, that's a blade. 🤷🏼ââï¸

 

 

I haven’t had a set long enough lately to develop much wear. I had some J40 DPCs that had some decent wear spots but sold them over a year ago. I admittedly don’t hit the middle all the time but it’s usually just a little off when I don’t. Contrary to some I don’t lose focus or get lazy I just don’t hit it sometimes. Some days are better than others.

[theothertwo]

I'm in there with Duffer. Knocking a shot down or playing a bump and run is face angle and swing. It is not reserved only for blades.

 

Throw in summer conditions of very tight or bare lies, then, advantage blades IMO.

[BiggErn]

I'm in there with Duffer. Knocking a shot down or playing a bump and run is face angle and swing. It is not reserved only for blades.

 

Throw in summer conditions of very tight or bare lies, then, advantage blades IMO.

 

I thought you was referring to thunderstorms and rain checks. What advantages do blades offer on tight or bare lies? None. Wide sole, narrow sole, bounce, no bounce you’re either a good ball striker or not.

[gbartko]

Tell us again who the “real” crusaders are!

[Pepperturbo]

Since I've gone back to my CB.501s my ball striking has improved. Was getting a bit lazy with my P790s. When there's no punishment, it's a lot easier to swing a bit more aggressively. Only 1 club shorter than my 790s, thought it would be more. Way more consistent distances with a lot more spin, holding greens is easy as pie.

This post hints at my feelings re: blades vs. "more forgiving" irons. There's got to be a psychological component to hitting a blade vs. hitting a GI-type iron. With the marketing language surrounding GI irons going something like "It's impossible to mis-hit because the sweet spot is so huge!" it's reasonable to wonder if that makes golfers partially take the whole business of hitting the ball solidly for granted, consciously or subconsciously. I have gamed Titleist 710 MBs since 2010 and never want to hit anything other than blades, so I am definitely biased in their favor. But I don't evangelize them to other golfers.

 

That said, as kind as GI irons are to mishits, if actually making perfect contact is even a little disincentivized, could it be that these clubs might hinder some golfers who earnestly want to improve?

 

Blades demand nothing less than solid contact. People who believe technology has made them obsolete will tell you this is a bug, but I see it as a feature. Where as GI clubs can hide it a little bit, blades will tell you very bluntly if you have not hit a solid shot. For a golfer looking to learn to hit the ball better, couldn't blades be seen as both a training tool and a reward for becoming a good ball-striker?

 

Also, though they're not blades per se, the look of the T-MBs, 790s, i700s, i500s and the PXG irons is generally blade-like, is it not? I think that's an interesting recent development in golf club aesthetics.

 

 

The next best thing to looking at a guy’s MBs with a browned spot in the center of the face is seeing a guy with CBs/GIs/shovels that look the same. Who knew the goal was to hit the center of the face regardless of the club.

 

Who knew? Not most of the people that buy CB's/GI's/shovels. I could be wrong, but I heard the main reason so many buy them is forgiveness. Apparently they expect to be missing the center of the face rather often. Maybe a mass mailer will help?

 

Side note: the coating material quality used today for MB's or CB's doesn't wear off creating a brown spot like older clubheads. :lol: :beach:

 

 

Maybe ask the 80% of all touring professionals. Having forgiveness for when you miss doesn’t mean you miss more times than not. That’s one of PXGs selling points. Call it what you want there’s definitely wear spots in the center of the faces of good ball strikers with today’s clubs. Some of you guys are starting to split hairs but that’s what happens when you have no real argument.

 

I am not arguing with you or defending anything. You've lost your sense of humor and fall on assumption and advertising baloney.

My comments are about amateurs versus professionals who are paid to play equipment, making your percentage a worthless argument. One does not equal the other. That's a hair I will split. And on that note, I will no longer bother your sensibilities. :beach: