Blades and the search for "game improvement"

[MelloYello]

...if irons are so freakin' forgiving then let them prove it. Let them publish the robot data.

 

 

100% agree with this and have been saying it for years...where is the objective robot data? Would be so easy to do...but the truth is, at the end of the day in the physics of moving plane strikes stationary sphere, the relative weight distribution on said plane (clubhead) is pretty insignificant when compared to path and face angle. The difference in scoring from one et to the next is all but negligible in my experience. Yes, maybe a few strokes a year on those "almost" shots as someone else described it, but that's about it. Liking your clubs though, trusting them, is HUGE and why it actually does matter what you play. Just not for the reasons they want us to believe.

 

OK, I'm bored. So let me ask you guys a simple question.

 

Do you believe there is any distance and/or directional benefit to cavity back irons over blades ? Or is that urban legend ?

 

Distance -- probably not. I've played various types of MB and CB irons and my yardages have remained the same. I can't think of any club that was particularly forgiving.

 

I guess I'd give a slight advantage to the CB if we're talking dispersion on *slight* misses. Bad misses with either will be bad shots, end of story (IMHO).

 

I'd give a slight advantage to the MB (or the smaller CB) when it comes to workability. I see that mostly as a function of offset. The less offset the less you have to do to overcome it when you don't want it. This seems to be mostly personal preference amongst players.

[NRJyzr]

OK, I'm bored. So let me ask you guys a simple question.

 

Do you believe there is any distance and/or directional benefit to cavity back irons over blades ? Or is that urban legend ?

 

Distance -- probably not. I've played various types of MB and CB irons and my yardages have remained the same. I can't think of any club that was particularly forgiving.

 

I guess I'd give a slight advantage to the CB if we're talking dispersion on *slight* misses. Bad misses with either will be bad shots, end of story (IMHO).

 

I'd give a slight advantage to the MB (or the smaller CB) when it comes to workability. I see that mostly as a function of offset. The less offset the less you have to do to overcome it when you don't want it. This seems to be mostly personal preference amongst players.

 

 

Something I've always found odd/curious, and amusing... when I played Eye2+ for a while, I found I gained a bit of distance. I attributed that to the Pings giving me about 1000 rpm less spin, in spite of my hitting them higher than the Mizunos I'd been playing just prior, which were already on the high side. Unfortunately, it wasn't consistent, I gained much less with the PW, giving me an extra gap between that and the 9 iron.

 

Go figure.

 

Interestingly, my dispersion has been best with Ram Tour Grinds. I felt that way on the course, but had it driven home in an extended session where I compared TM TP MCs, Ping S59, ISI, and Eye2, and a couple others I'm forgetting at the moment. The Rams were an afterthought, done near the end of the session. It was almost comical, the Ram dispersion was less than half that of anything else I hit, in spite of their having shafts I'm not especially fond of; I prefer DG, they had Precision stepped shafts. After all of it, the guy asked why I was even there, I should just put the Rams in my bag and forget about the rest of them. LOL

 

Couple random thoughts in between hideous work related emails....

[nsxguy]

...if irons are so freakin' forgiving then let them prove it. Let them publish the robot data.

 

 

100% agree with this and have been saying it for years...where is the objective robot data? Would be so easy to do...but the truth is, at the end of the day in the physics of moving plane strikes stationary sphere, the relative weight distribution on said plane (clubhead) is pretty insignificant when compared to path and face angle. The difference in scoring from one et to the next is all but negligible in my experience. Yes, maybe a few strokes a year on those "almost" shots as someone else described it, but that's about it. Liking your clubs though, trusting them, is HUGE and why it actually does matter what you play. Just not for the reasons they want us to believe.

 

OK, I'm bored. So let me ask you guys a simple question.

 

Do you believe there is any distance and/or directional benefit to cavity back irons over blades ? Or is that urban legend ?

 

Distance -- probably not. I've played various types of MB and CB irons and my yardages have remained the same. I can't think of any club that was particularly forgiving.

 

I guess I'd give a slight advantage to the CB if we're talking dispersion on *slight* misses. Bad misses with either will be bad shots, end of story (IMHO).

 

I'd give a slight advantage to the MB (or the smaller CB) when it comes to workability. I see that mostly as a function of offset. The less offset the less you have to do to overcome it when you don't want it. This seems to be mostly personal preference amongst players.

 

I guess I wasn't that bored since I didn't explain it properly. Sorry about that.

 

What I meant was not really distance of one vs. the other but rather LOSS of distance, and/or loss of direction, on mishits. i.e. the forgiveness factor - which IS, of course the main difference in the 2 types.

 

i.e. if I hit a 7 iron 155 with a pure strike, how close would each iron type be to my intended target if I mishit it say 1/4" from the exact sweet spot ? How about 1/2" ? etc.

[pinestreetgolf]

I think you guys might be giving too much credit to the actual iron's technology and not enough to how the look and feel of that iron makes you swing.

 

Some people love looking at a blade. They intuitively "get" how forward shaft lean works, whether through other sports or learning as a kid, and the shovel head makes them feel like scooping the ball.

 

Some people love looking at a shovel. They intuitively "feel" like they can swing freely, knowing that a hard hip turn that results in a spin out and a toe strike won't kill 'em, so they go really hard at the ball. Maybe they are former tennis players who are used to something really big to slam a ball with. Who knows.

 

I think there is almost no difference at all between them when hit by iron byron. The difference is in how the look at address, and the weight, and the design, effects the particular player's swing, IMO.

 

I've played j40s forever. I tried playing g25s. It was bad. I didn't like looking down at it. It looked huge and slow. It didn't look like I wanted to hit down, it looked like I wanted to shovel them up. Then I google it, and find Lee Westwood almost won a masters with G20s.

 

I don't think its about the blade versus the cavity back. I think there is literally zero difference *until* you introduce a player's brain and how it reacts to each individually. Then you can really see some differences but they are differences in the swing due to confidence and visuals, etc.. not differences in the actual iron itself.

[slide13]

I think you guys might be giving too much credit to the actual iron's technology and not enough to how the look and feel of that iron makes you swing.

 

Some people love looking at a blade. They intuitively "get" how forward shaft lean works, whether through other sports or learning as a kid, and the shovel head makes them feel like scooping the ball.

 

Some people love looking at a shovel. They intuitively "feel" like they can swing freely, knowing that a hard hip turn that results in a spin out and a toe strike won't kill 'em, so they go really hard at the ball. Maybe they are former tennis players who are used to something really big to slam a ball with. Who knows.

 

I think there is almost no difference at all between them when hit by iron byron. The difference is in how the look at address, and the weight, and the design, effects the particular player's swing, IMO.

 

I've played j40s forever. I tried playing g25s. It was bad. I didn't like looking down at it. It looked huge and slow. It didn't look like I wanted to hit down, it looked like I wanted to shovel them up. Then I google it, and find Lee Westwood almost won a masters with G20s.

 

I don't think its about the blade versus the cavity back. I think there is literally zero difference *until* you introduce a player's brain and how it reacts to each individually. Then you can really see some differences but they are differences in the swing due to confidence and visuals, etc.. not differences in the actual iron itself.

 

 

 

We stated!! I agree completely with almost everything you said (I do believe there is a difference in forgiveness in heads if swung by iron byron for example, I just don't think that necessarily translates to people using them unless someone is completely neutral as regards preference and doesn't change their swing based on appearance) even though I've never thought about it in quite that way. I've tried forgiving irons and I don't really get along with them all that well and I believe you hit the nail on the head as to why. Give me a chunky head, a wide sole and lots of offset and I feel like I'm scooping the ball and I swing like I am...not on purpose, it's just in my head. But with a blade or a more blade-like cavity back I have a completely different feel. I don't think I could translate the one to the other if I tried because it's totally unconscious.

 

I have a set of J40 DPCs as well and I love them because they are the most blade looking forgiving irons I've ever come across. Super low offset and thin topline but they're longer heel to toe and they offer way more forgiveness than one would expect. One of the only truly forgiving irons I like to play and they've always impressed me with their sneaky forgiveness.

 

But I don't do so bad with my CB57s either, the occasional hit out on the toe punishes me more than my J40s, but otherwise we get along well.

 

One of these days I'm going to get a half set of blades as well just for fun because I like hitting them.

[Gautama]

 

I guess I wasn't that bored since I didn't explain it properly. Sorry about that.

 

What I meant was not really distance of one vs. the other but rather LOSS of distance, and/or loss of direction, on mishits. i.e. the forgiveness factor - which IS, of course the main difference in the 2 types.

 

i.e. if I hit a 7 iron 155 with a pure strike, how close would each iron type be to my intended target if I mishit it say 1/4" from the exact sweet spot ? How about 1/2" ? etc.

 

I should preface by saying I own them all, and really don't have a horse in the race. Right now I have everything from MP69 to JPX EZ (non-forged), and typically play my in-between JPX 825s because they just feel the most comfortable and i trust them. That said, I honestly see very little difference in the dispersion between center strikes and mishits, which to me is what matters most, between the ends of the spectrum. I really mean that. If anything, the gap between a nutted JPX EX vs a toe strike, vs the same thing with the MP69s, is actually greater. I just don't see it, but that said I play the CBs more often because in the back of my mind i trust them more. My 2 cents.

[buzlin]

Throughout all of these discussions over the years, the one I absolutely don't get is when people refute those saying that MBs make them concentrate more or focus more or whatever. Can someone who scoffs at the idea that MBs help some players focus please explain why they feel so confident about saying it's BS? I'm asking sincerely, because I have no way of refuting anyone's mental triggers or state of mind.

[pinestreetgolf]

Throughout all of these discussions over the years, the one I absolutely don't get is when people refute those saying that MBs make them concentrate more or focus more or whatever. Can someone who scoffs at the idea that MBs help some players focus please explain why they feel so confident about saying it's BS? I'm asking sincerely, because I have no way of refuting anyone's mental triggers or state of mind.

 

Its not BS, but the key word is "some". There has been extensive research in this area in academia and some folks have chimed in about it in this thread.

 

Some people respond best to making a task harder than has to be and then, during the "real" task, they perform better.

Some people respond best to repetition, so their best method of learning is to use what they will use when it matters, not practice with blades.

Some people respond best to actually making it easier ("tactile" learners) who learn by feeling what its like to do what they want to do, then removing the help.

 

Some sprinters train while wearing a parachute. Some sprinters train sprinting downhill to "feel" faster. Its all up to them what works.

 

Typically, the individuals response to fear is the keystone that puts them in one of those categories. That's why almost everyone does better with training wheels when learning to ride a bike - fear shuts off the parts of the brain that learn. Hitting the pavement sucks. All the people arguing for MBs in high caps hands should take a long look at how they learned to ride a bike. They didn't put you on a unicycle first.

 

If you care a lot what others think of you to the point that you are scared of shanking a million shots on your local club's range with old blades that fear prevents you from learning, and that's probably a bad idea for that person.

 

What's your fear / self-consciousness level? That will likely tell you whether you'd do better by making a public task hard.

 

Nobody (well, nobody reasonable) is suggesting hitting blades or MBs helps or hurts everyone. But there are people who learn a task best when they learn it as hard as possible. There are also people exactly the opposite of that (sprinters who practice downhill, for example).

 

To put it simply, if MBs or blades create fear or self-consciousness or self-doubt they stop your brain from learning which is why, for some, they hurt focus they do not help it. For some, they turn on the parts of the brain geared at running from a tiger not hitting a golf ball.

[mahonie]

https://www.golfdigest.com/gallery/10-potential-problems-with-your-golf-equipment

 

Muscleback irons undoubtedly have a beautiful aesthetic, and they offer more workability for a ball's shape and trajectory. But unless you're playing on the PGA Tour, blades are not for you. If you're struggling with iron play, it's time to head to a more forgiving club design. Even high single-digit handicappers could benefit from using a game-improvement iron. Losing the blades may take a shot at your ego, yet it will also lower your scores.

 

Generally, I think the above statement is true, although the requirement of playing on the PGA Tour is probably a stretch though. My guess is that if you are 5 index or less your swing is probably good enough to play blades.

 

The thing I find hilarious is the 6-15 handicap guy that needs blades to work the ball, control trajectory, etc. Cause you miss like half the greens right (probably more)? Sure, play what you want / like, but let's not pretend you have Spieth or Stenson's iron game.

 

More seriously, mental block and familiarity are probably the biggest things that stop most people from changing. I.e. a) they don't give the new/different clubs (in either direction) a real shot and b) they over estimate how well they played with whatever they want to use. For example, I used to play a forged CB when my swing was worse. At this point, I can't even hit a Ping i200 very well, as I am used to the looks/offset of a G series iron. I don't value the feel of the i200, and don't want to take a month+ to get used to something new, so I believe the G series is what I need.

 

The statement you quoted is the exact reason that I take absolutely no notice of what journalists write in golf magazines and haven’t read one in the last 20 years. What they write is all about the ‘story’ and very rarely based in fact, typically it is their personal opinion. You could say the same about journalists writing car reviews, smart phone reviews or any other published article. What they write should have no bearing on a individual’s personal experience as they haven’t got a clue what that is. It is all part of the marketing machine and the key is recognising it and not getting drawn in like the vast majority of sheep out there.

No doubt journalists write in a way that attracts attention (both negative and positive). But it's not any more personal experience or belief than an internet forum. Just read all the raving reviews here only to see the guy switched clubs after 3 months (yes, skill is most important).

 

Most golfers play equipment that is not well suited to their abilities. Everyone remembers the perfect shots they hit by fail to realize the true frequency with which they occur.

 

It’s why I don’t put much faith in any club review by anybody either because their personal experience is unique to them and has no impact on my club choice. I’ve been playing long enough to know what suits my game. I’ve had two fittings, one 20-odd years ago to educate myself about my swing speed and swing path more than anything and one fitting a few years ago to confirm what I already knew.

 

The thing is, if you hit any club more than three or four times, your brain and body sub-consciously start to make adjustments to accommodate it. The key is to find something that you have confidence in and work with it...a person’s natural skill level, devotion to practice and mental fortitude will take them as far as they can go. Mello Yello hit the nail on the head a few posts back...it really is 99% skill and 1% equipment.

 

In fact, the people who fall for the marketing BS and place an over-reliance on the technology of the latest and greatest are automatically lost when the next best thing comes out. They have doubt in last year’s model when they are told that this year’s model is straighter or longer and subsequently their confidence is shot until they go and buy it and get another short-term shot of confidence...and then the cycle starts over.

[Titleist_PT23]

Throughout all of these discussions over the years, the one I absolutely don't get is when people refute those saying that MBs make them concentrate more or focus more or whatever. Can someone who scoffs at the idea that MBs help some players focus please explain why they feel so confident about saying it's BS? I'm asking sincerely, because I have no way of refuting anyone's mental triggers or state of mind.

I see pinestreetgolf's reply below, and hear what he is saying. While it is hard to refute what works for any one person, I generally don't buy (or place less weight on) the argument you list above.

 

I asked the following question before and never got an answer (add the words "concentrating/focusing" next to improving in the first sentence).

 

This thread has turned surprisingly civil, so please excuse any "tone" issues in the re-pasted text below. I'm asking as a serious question as well.

 

I hear the argument about using a more difficult club to hit and improving. But why don't we see more mid-2000s 0.83 COR drivers? They are as long as anything on centre strikes and horrible/punishing on mishits compared to any modern 460cc driver.

 

If the answer is irons are about control/have a shorter shaft, I am swinging 85%-90% most of the time and I flush it (or very close to that) the vast majority of the time whereas with a driver I am swinging close to 100% all the time to maximize distance potential and want to take advantage of any help available (balls still playable on mishits), then I get it.

 

But its not about using a more difficult to hit club to improve / don't use something that hides a swing/strike flaw. The use of 460cc drivers suggests that if there's a club/technology that can help your game today, use it to score better today (GI/SGI may not be this for some). You can always practice more for a better tomorrow later.

[Titleist_PT23]

I guess I wasn't that bored since I didn't explain it properly. Sorry about that.

 

What I meant was not really distance of one vs. the other but rather LOSS of distance, and/or loss of direction, on mishits. i.e. the forgiveness factor - which IS, of course the main difference in the 2 types.

 

i.e. if I hit a 7 iron 155 with a pure strike, how close would each iron type be to my intended target if I mishit it say 1/4" from the exact sweet spot ? How about 1/2" ? etc.

This is the key question. I think we can all agree that nothing will save the toe strike or a swing where the face/path is way off.

 

Yes, it would be great if the manufacturers would publish this. But they don't publish it with drivers either, and more people than not seem to believe the new iterations retain ball speed better across the face (i.e. they are more forgiving). I know there are various review videos out there that compare subsequent models from the same manufacturer, and they generally show small increases with each release. However, the smash factor is never exactly the same, so to me it's not clear if the club is truly retaining ball speed better on slight mishits or if the data is cherry picked to make the new club look better (what the manufacturer wants from the person they give all the equipment to).

[MelloYello]

I guess I wasn't that bored since I didn't explain it properly. Sorry about that.

 

What I meant was not really distance of one vs. the other but rather LOSS of distance, and/or loss of direction, on mishits. i.e. the forgiveness factor - which IS, of course the main difference in the 2 types.

 

i.e. if I hit a 7 iron 155 with a pure strike, how close would each iron type be to my intended target if I mishit it say 1/4" from the exact sweet spot ? How about 1/2" ? etc.

 

To be honest, I think I understood your question. I just don't have a quantitative answer so I kind of went around it. ;) Without actual test data, we can't explicitly say what "forgiveness" really means in irons. I think iron play is mostly about the subtle stuff--looks, offset, turf interaction, etc. I have never hit a forged iron of any kind and come away thinking anything along the lines of 'OMG, this is on another level!'

 

I have a suspicion that by the time a designer has done something to create some real forgiveness in an iron, they've probably made it noticeably over-sized, at least compared to what it was, and you've taken it out of the category it used to be in. The difference between a blade and a player's CB is totally in the feedback to me. There's no distance loss and accuracy improvements or anything like that. That's my personal opinion after playing for 10 years and swapping back and forth.

 

That's where I would add to what pinestreetgolf and Biggem have said.

 

PSG is spot on about how looks matter. I couldn't agree more with his posts above. Biggem pointed out that more and more professionals are going away from the classic MB designs. In my mind there are other reasons for that. They play harder courses where they are routinely having to hit shots into greens from between 150-250 yards. I don't face a ton of those shots where I play. If I did, I probably couldn't get by with a simply blade. I'd probably need another hybrid, let alone some CB help!

 

I think what it comes down to in irons is really just confidence. I never step up to a shot thinking I'm going to mis-hit it so for me, having a bit of bad feedback isn't the worst thing in the world. Call it confidence. Call it delusion. I don't know what exactly it is. I'm just not the type to be "scared" of an iron. For me, an MB sets me up with the most neutral thing possible and I like that. I can handle the 6-iron on down so that's what I play. The 5 iron is where I start to see some "meh" shots mostly related to trajectory so that's where I change to the T-MB in my set.

[MelloYello]

I think you guys might be giving too much credit to the actual iron's technology and not enough to how the look and feel of that iron makes you swing.

 

Some people love looking at a blade. They intuitively "get" how forward shaft lean works, whether through other sports or learning as a kid, and the shovel head makes them feel like scooping the ball.

 

Some people love looking at a shovel. They intuitively "feel" like they can swing freely, knowing that a hard hip turn that results in a spin out and a toe strike won't kill 'em, so they go really hard at the ball. Maybe they are former tennis players who are used to something really big to slam a ball with. Who knows.

 

I think there is almost no difference at all between them when hit by iron byron. The difference is in how the look at address, and the weight, and the design, effects the particular player's swing, IMO.

 

I've played j40s forever. I tried playing g25s. It was bad. I didn't like looking down at it. It looked huge and slow. It didn't look like I wanted to hit down, it looked like I wanted to shovel them up. Then I google it, and find Lee Westwood almost won a masters with G20s.

 

I don't think its about the blade versus the cavity back. I think there is literally zero difference *until* you introduce a player's brain and how it reacts to each individually. Then you can really see some differences but they are differences in the swing due to confidence and visuals, etc.. not differences in the actual iron itself.

 

Great post, PSG!

 

I'm so glad to hear someone with a strong reputation highlight that particular point, too.

 

 

Most of my drives leave me with 100-160 yards in. From those kinds of distances, I'm much more interested in control than any sort of "forgiveness" anyway. In the same way I don't want a big, clunky lob wedge, I don't really want a big, clunky 7-iron when I'm trying to hit a smooth, controlled shot from 155-yds out.

 

Maybe that's part of it too--being a little bit of a shorter player in comparison with guys who can flick their 5-iron 200-yards. If I played from more of a "power" perspective, maybe I'd look for more of a CB that promised higher, straighter shots. When you can't do that though, I guess you have to rely more on developing a sense of feel--which is certainly the path down which I went.

 

 

But all that said, i experiment a ton on the range and so hit some clunkers from time to time. I love what you said about that, too.

 

I straight shanked one today on the range with the hosel of a 7-iron while I was going back and forth between my MB and an AP2 trying to find a way to come into the ball with one or the other, haha. It was as pure a shank as you could imagine--a worm burner shooting off dead right.

 

What you said about not being embarrassed on the range makes me laugh because I've always kind of worn those horrific Tin Cup moments on the range with a badge of honor. I mean, hey, when you're going for it, stuff is gonna happen, right!?

 

I remember when I went from interlocking to Vardon. I immediately told the guy who was coaching me, 'there's no way I hit the ball like this.' I held the club and thought, 'there's a legit chance I'm clunking this off the hosel. I have no control over the face!' Compared with the interlocking grip, the Vardon felt like my right hand wasn't even on the club.

 

So I gave it a shot and I freakin' flushed it. Beautiful high draw. The most effortless release I'd ever made. It took all of about 2 swings to decide, 'okay, I guess I'm never interlocking again. That's what a release feels like!'

 

But, hey, I've done similar things and absolutely clunked it. You mess with swing plane a little too much, get cute one time and BOOM, one shoots off the hosel. It happens. But like I said, I just laugh it off because it shows you're actually trying something.

[MelloYello]

In fact, the people who fall for the marketing BS and place an over-reliance on the technology of the latest and greatest are automatically lost when the next best thing comes out. They have doubt in last year’s model when they are told that this year’s model is straighter or longer and subsequently their confidence is shot until they go and buy it and get another short-term shot of confidence...and then the cycle starts over.

 

What you're talking about is a real problem I think--even if it's just the fact that constant churn keeps people from ever truly getting dialed in.

 

As a fan of golf, I know I can get addicted to Ebay. I truly have to make an effort sometimes to avoid going down that rabbit hole. It's so easy to kill 5 minutes by browsing and then, BOOM, you're thinking about some major bag change.

 

It really is kind of a deadly sin for players, especially in today's world in which we're constantly bombarded with ads.

[Titleist_PT23]

Here's another real question. How many people here can truly tell the slight(est) mishit and the exact difference in yardage it produced? Some of the pros that favor CBs say that they save a few yards.

 

Obviously, the pros have a tremendous ability to control distance in perfect or at least consistent conditions, so a few yards can be huge in terms of where they are trying to land the ball.

 

For the purpose of this discussion, my skill level is probably average at best and I play clubs that dull feedback. But honestly, my ability to judge wind, air condition, and variance in stirke in what are still reasonably good shots results in well over 5 yards of long or short "miss." Bottom line, on two different slight mishits with different types of clubs I could not definitely tell you they each lost 5 yards or one lost 5 yards and the other one 8 yards.

 

I don't doubt some others have the ability to do this but I also wonder whether the true result is overwhelmed by ones prior belief of what happens.

 

Regardless, I entirely agree on the look / confidence points and how that makes people swing.

[puttingmatt]

I believe equipment plays such a small part in the actual score of any golfer.

If you truly want game improvement,

Then practice is the best and surest

way to lower score. The game is more than irons alone.

[Titleist_PT23]

I believe equipment plays such a small part in the actual score of any golfer.

If you truly want game improvement,

Then practice is the best and surest

way to lower score. The game is more than irons alone.

Of course practicing is what will make you improve from where you are now. No one disputes that.

 

However, in the short run our skills are relatively fixed. The question is how to get the most out of whatever you have now, and does equipment that better matches your ability make any changes to this starting point.

 

10 shots? Probably not. Same as spending $5k won't lower your scores that much either.

[Dinosaur]

As mentioned previously, I acquired a Titleist 695MB mostly on a whim and something to practice with that would give me feedback on mishits. If I get confident enough to actually game it, this presents another minor problem In that the older irons are "weaker" than their modern day counterparts. My MB is a five iron, but has the same loft as my Tour Edge EXi six iron, so I would actually be carrying two six irons. I do have a 6H however, so maybe that would make up the difference. No biggie I guess, as I have no problem bagging 15 clubs and I no longer compete. (I also am not adverse from removing the "do not remove" tags from pillow cases/mattresses).

[puttingmatt]

I believe equipment plays such a small part in the actual score of any golfer.

If you truly want game improvement,

Then practice is the best and surest

way to lower score. The game is more than irons alone.

Of course practicing is what will make you improve from where you are now. No one disputes that.

 

However, in the short run our skills are relatively fixed. The question is how to get the most out of whatever you have now, and does equipment that better matches your ability make any changes to this starting point.

 

10 shots? Probably not. Same as spending $5k won't lower your scores that much either.

 

Your putting to much stock in the { I can buy a game with clubs belief }. Well , good luck with that nonsense.

Building a long term skill set , is your only way out, especially on the amount of dollars that one will waste.

Clubs are only tools, they all work, they all will do the tasks, the only variable, is the golfer. and more times

Than not, first sign of trouble, most golfers will blame the club, and not their own lack of skills.

[dciccoritti]

Building a long term skill set , is your only way out

 

Yup!

[buzlin]

Throughout all of these discussions over the years, the one I absolutely don't get is when people refute those saying that MBs make them concentrate more or focus more or whatever. Can someone who scoffs at the idea that MBs help some players focus please explain why they feel so confident about saying it's BS? I'm asking sincerely, because I have no way of refuting anyone's mental triggers or state of mind.

I see pinestreetgolf's reply below, and hear what he is saying. While it is hard to refute what works for any one person, I generally don't buy (or place less weight on) the argument you list above.

 

I asked the following question before and never got an answer (add the words "concentrating/focusing" next to improving in the first sentence).

 

This thread has turned surprisingly civil, so please excuse any "tone" issues in the re-pasted text below. I'm asking as a serious question as well.

 

I hear the argument about using a more difficult club to hit and improving. But why don't we see more mid-2000s 0.83 COR drivers? They are as long as anything on centre strikes and horrible/punishing on mishits compared to any modern 460cc driver.

 

If the answer is irons are about control/have a shorter shaft, I am swinging 85%-90% most of the time and I flush it (or very close to that) the vast majority of the time whereas with a driver I am swinging close to 100% all the time to maximize distance potential and want to take advantage of any help available (balls still playable on mishits), then I get it.

 

But its not about using a more difficult to hit club to improve / don't use something that hides a swing/strike flaw. The use of 460cc drivers suggests that if there's a club/technology that can help your game today, use it to score better today (GI/SGI may not be this for some). You can always practice more for a better tomorrow later.

Again, this is a personal question for each person. I don't have any explanation for the obvious inconsistency in the thinking. But I can't entirely dismiss the authenticity or validity of anyone's mental reasons for club selection. Cuz we're all mental. :)

 

That's all I'm getting at.

[dlygrisse]

Do "game improvement" clubs actually improve your game?

 

 

 

 

the less forgiving the equipment the more I am driven to do so and the more joy there is in nailing that perfect shot.

So you are saying it’s psychological?

[nsxguy]

Throughout all of these discussions over the years, the one I absolutely don't get is when people refute those saying that MBs make them concentrate more or focus more or whatever. Can someone who scoffs at the idea that MBs help some players focus please explain why they feel so confident about saying it's BS? I'm asking sincerely, because I have no way of refuting anyone's mental triggers or state of mind.

 

The only real "flaw" in this argument is the suggestion/inference that someone playing with some other type of club ISN'T concentrating on hitting the sweet spot time after time.

 

Concentrating/focusing/whatever has NOTHING to do with the club you're swinging.

[SoCalTitleist]

Throughout all of these discussions over the years, the one I absolutely don't get is when people refute those saying that MBs make them concentrate more or focus more or whatever. Can someone who scoffs at the idea that MBs help some players focus please explain why they feel so confident about saying it's BS? I'm asking sincerely, because I have no way of refuting anyone's mental triggers or state of mind.

 

The only real "flaw" in this argument is the suggestion/inference that someone playing with some other type of club ISN'T concentrating on hitting the sweet spot time after time.

 

Concentrating/focusing/whatever has NOTHING to do with the club you're swinging.

Exactly!

[pinestreetgolf]

Throughout all of these discussions over the years, the one I absolutely don't get is when people refute those saying that MBs make them concentrate more or focus more or whatever. Can someone who scoffs at the idea that MBs help some players focus please explain why they feel so confident about saying it's BS? I'm asking sincerely, because I have no way of refuting anyone's mental triggers or state of mind.

I see pinestreetgolf's reply below, and hear what he is saying. While it is hard to refute what works for any one person, I generally don't buy (or place less weight on) the argument you list above.

 

I asked the following question before and never got an answer (add the words "concentrating/focusing" next to improving in the first sentence).

 

This thread has turned surprisingly civil, so please excuse any "tone" issues in the re-pasted text below. I'm asking as a serious question as well.

 

I hear the argument about using a more difficult club to hit and improving. But why don't we see more mid-2000s 0.83 COR drivers? They are as long as anything on centre strikes and horrible/punishing on mishits compared to any modern 460cc driver.

 

If the answer is irons are about control/have a shorter shaft, I am swinging 85%-90% most of the time and I flush it (or very close to that) the vast majority of the time whereas with a driver I am swinging close to 100% all the time to maximize distance potential and want to take advantage of any help available (balls still playable on mishits), then I get it.

 

But its not about using a more difficult to hit club to improve / don't use something that hides a swing/strike flaw. The use of 460cc drivers suggests that if there's a club/technology that can help your game today, use it to score better today (GI/SGI may not be this for some). You can always practice more for a better tomorrow later.

Again, this is a personal question for each person. I don't have any explanation for the obvious inconsistency in the thinking. But I can't entirely dismiss the authenticity or validity of anyone's mental reasons for club selection. Cuz we're all mental. :)

 

That's all I'm getting at.

 

You’re not swinging at 85-90%. You think you are. That’s not the same thing. If you were swinging at 85-90 it wouldn’t go as far.

 

Feel isn’t real. What you think is happening in your swing is almost certainly not what’s happening. Get on video or on track man. It’s likely that swing is faster, and you don’t know (or aren’t familiar enough with) what fast feels like for your swing. Instead of playing insane mind games where you try to take 10% off somehow to go faster (what?) just get on a launch monitor and learn what your swing feels like at its fastest. You can retrain your brain to feel 100% as 100%.

[buzlin]

Throughout all of these discussions over the years, the one I absolutely don't get is when people refute those saying that MBs make them concentrate more or focus more or whatever. Can someone who scoffs at the idea that MBs help some players focus please explain why they feel so confident about saying it's BS? I'm asking sincerely, because I have no way of refuting anyone's mental triggers or state of mind.

 

The only real "flaw" in this argument is the suggestion/inference that someone playing with some other type of club ISN'T concentrating on hitting the sweet spot time after time.

 

Concentrating/focusing/whatever has NOTHING to do with the club you're swinging.

You're probably right, that's the issue, people taking one person's view and then taking it as a personal jab or projection on their own process.

 

[bladehunter]

To be 100% clear I am not advocating for any of the following:

 

(1) People only carrying 4-irons

(2) People not playing equipment designed after the year 2000

(3) Hostility towards OEMs for trying to make money

 

I'm also not advocating for:

 

(1) The average player obsessing about having the latest driver

(2) The average player obsessing about forgiveness in their 7i-Pw

(3) And average player trusting blindly what the OEMs say in their ads

 

 

I don't want to refute straw-man arguments so I just won't make any attempt to. The truth is that we all probably take more or less the same views on equipment:

 

--Enjoy it.

--Buy new stuff when you have disposable cash

--Don't get too obsessed with new tech

 

 

What I advise are really the 2 common-sense ideas I think we all probably support:

 

(1) We be reasonable and measured when we discuss the actual impact of equipment and how much it's likely to improve our abilities.

 

(2) We remind average players that playing is likely to be of more value than shopping because not only will playing lead to more significant improvements compared with equipment changes but it also has the added benefit that it takes one's mind off of their sticks and puts it in a healthier place.

 

 

 

In my particular case, I've elected to "upgrade" my bag in almost every spot after being more or less pretty constant going back 5-6 years. After finding a set of irons and a putter last year, both of which I imagine I'll play with for an extended time, I've elected to experiment with a couple T-MB clubs to see if there's any advantage and I've moved from my 913 woods into the "new" M3 models because, well, I can. I'm an avid golfer so every once in awhile it's time to rejuvenate the bag and spend a little money on stuff because that's part of the fun.

 

But I 100% acknowledge that the hard part is not finding new stuff. The hard part is getting it right and staying away from Ebay so you don't feel compelled to make the same changes next year and the year after. My hope is that I put together a bag that can take me through the next 3 years. If that happens, I'll be happy.

 

Am I swapping clubs because I totally believe it'll make me better? Eh, if I'm honest I'm probably doing just because I can. I don't want to play with the same clubs forever. It's really that simple.

 

I have my take as well

 

(1) Unless you strike virtually EVERY shot dead solid there is no benefit to playing a MB iron.

 

(2) Playing and practicing with a MB iron will not make you a better ball striker.

 

I love the comments about how “MB’s make me focus more” or “my mishits are better” etc.

 

Why do they sell those tiny irons to teach people how to hit the center then ? It’s the same concept.

[pinestreetgolf]

To be 100% clear I am not advocating for any of the following:

 

(1) People only carrying 4-irons

(2) People not playing equipment designed after the year 2000

(3) Hostility towards OEMs for trying to make money

 

I'm also not advocating for:

 

(1) The average player obsessing about having the latest driver

(2) The average player obsessing about forgiveness in their 7i-Pw

(3) And average player trusting blindly what the OEMs say in their ads

 

 

I don't want to refute straw-man arguments so I just won't make any attempt to. The truth is that we all probably take more or less the same views on equipment:

 

--Enjoy it.

--Buy new stuff when you have disposable cash

--Don't get too obsessed with new tech

 

 

What I advise are really the 2 common-sense ideas I think we all probably support:

 

(1) We be reasonable and measured when we discuss the actual impact of equipment and how much it's likely to improve our abilities.

 

(2) We remind average players that playing is likely to be of more value than shopping because not only will playing lead to more significant improvements compared with equipment changes but it also has the added benefit that it takes one's mind off of their sticks and puts it in a healthier place.

 

 

 

In my particular case, I've elected to "upgrade" my bag in almost every spot after being more or less pretty constant going back 5-6 years. After finding a set of irons and a putter last year, both of which I imagine I'll play with for an extended time, I've elected to experiment with a couple T-MB clubs to see if there's any advantage and I've moved from my 913 woods into the "new" M3 models because, well, I can. I'm an avid golfer so every once in awhile it's time to rejuvenate the bag and spend a little money on stuff because that's part of the fun.

 

But I 100% acknowledge that the hard part is not finding new stuff. The hard part is getting it right and staying away from Ebay so you don't feel compelled to make the same changes next year and the year after. My hope is that I put together a bag that can take me through the next 3 years. If that happens, I'll be happy.

 

Am I swapping clubs because I totally believe it'll make me better? Eh, if I'm honest I'm probably doing just because I can. I don't want to play with the same clubs forever. It's really that simple.

 

I have my take as well

 

(1) Unless you strike virtually EVERY shot dead solid there is no benefit to playing a MB iron.

 

(2) Playing and practicing with a MB iron will not make you a better ball striker.

 

I love the comments about how MBs make me focus more or my mishits are better etc.

 

Why do they sell those tiny irons to teach people how to hit the center then ? Its the same concept.

 

Cut your power steering cables. You’ll become 100x better at driving on the highway because it’ll be so much harder you’ll focus so much more. Hm.....

 

Anything that triggers fear doesn’t make you better at anything.

[bladehunter]

Throughout all of these discussions over the years, the one I absolutely don't get is when people refute those saying that MBs make them concentrate more or focus more or whatever. Can someone who scoffs at the idea that MBs help some players focus please explain why they feel so confident about saying it's BS? I'm asking sincerely, because I have no way of refuting anyone's mental triggers or state of mind.

I see pinestreetgolf's reply below, and hear what he is saying. While it is hard to refute what works for any one person, I generally don't buy (or place less weight on) the argument you list above.

 

I asked the following question before and never got an answer (add the words "concentrating/focusing" next to improving in the first sentence).

 

This thread has turned surprisingly civil, so please excuse any "tone" issues in the re-pasted text below. I'm asking as a serious question as well.

 

I hear the argument about using a more difficult club to hit and improving. But why don't we see more mid-2000s 0.83 COR drivers? They are as long as anything on centre strikes and horrible/punishing on mishits compared to any modern 460cc driver.

 

If the answer is irons are about control/have a shorter shaft, I am swinging 85%-90% most of the time and I flush it (or very close to that) the vast majority of the time whereas with a driver I am swinging close to 100% all the time to maximize distance potential and want to take advantage of any help available (balls still playable on mishits), then I get it.

 

But its not about using a more difficult to hit club to improve / don't use something that hides a swing/strike flaw. The use of 460cc drivers suggests that if there's a club/technology that can help your game today, use it to score better today (GI/SGI may not be this for some). You can always practice more for a better tomorrow later.

Again, this is a personal question for each person. I don't have any explanation for the obvious inconsistency in the thinking. But I can't entirely dismiss the authenticity or validity of anyone's mental reasons for club selection. Cuz we're all mental. :)

 

That's all I'm getting at.

 

You’re not swinging at 85-90%. You think you are. That’s not the same thing. If you were swinging at 85-90 it wouldn’t go as far.

 

Feel isn’t real. What you think is happening in your swing is almost certainly not what’s happening. Get on video or on track man. It’s likely that swing is faster, and you don’t know (or aren’t familiar enough with) what fast feels like for your swing. Instead of playing insane mind games where you try to take 10% off somehow to go faster (what?) just get on a launch monitor and learn what your swing feels like at its fastest. You can retrain your brain to feel 100% as 100%.

 

Feel is the only thing that is real.

 

You can look at that from two angles. You can say feel isn’t real. And I understand your idea there. If you’re a trackman queen then yes. But if you play by feel and don’t care what the numbers are then feel is The only thing that’s real. How many times do we find a trackman combo that’s trash on course ? Many many times I have.

[bladehunter]

To be 100% clear I am not advocating for any of the following:

 

(1) People only carrying 4-irons

(2) People not playing equipment designed after the year 2000

(3) Hostility towards OEMs for trying to make money

 

I'm also not advocating for:

 

(1) The average player obsessing about having the latest driver

(2) The average player obsessing about forgiveness in their 7i-Pw

(3) And average player trusting blindly what the OEMs say in their ads

 

 

I don't want to refute straw-man arguments so I just won't make any attempt to. The truth is that we all probably take more or less the same views on equipment:

 

--Enjoy it.

--Buy new stuff when you have disposable cash

--Don't get too obsessed with new tech

 

 

What I advise are really the 2 common-sense ideas I think we all probably support:

 

(1) We be reasonable and measured when we discuss the actual impact of equipment and how much it's likely to improve our abilities.

 

(2) We remind average players that playing is likely to be of more value than shopping because not only will playing lead to more significant improvements compared with equipment changes but it also has the added benefit that it takes one's mind off of their sticks and puts it in a healthier place.

 

 

 

In my particular case, I've elected to "upgrade" my bag in almost every spot after being more or less pretty constant going back 5-6 years. After finding a set of irons and a putter last year, both of which I imagine I'll play with for an extended time, I've elected to experiment with a couple T-MB clubs to see if there's any advantage and I've moved from my 913 woods into the "new" M3 models because, well, I can. I'm an avid golfer so every once in awhile it's time to rejuvenate the bag and spend a little money on stuff because that's part of the fun.

 

But I 100% acknowledge that the hard part is not finding new stuff. The hard part is getting it right and staying away from Ebay so you don't feel compelled to make the same changes next year and the year after. My hope is that I put together a bag that can take me through the next 3 years. If that happens, I'll be happy.

 

Am I swapping clubs because I totally believe it'll make me better? Eh, if I'm honest I'm probably doing just because I can. I don't want to play with the same clubs forever. It's really that simple.

 

I have my take as well

 

(1) Unless you strike virtually EVERY shot dead solid there is no benefit to playing a MB iron.

 

(2) Playing and practicing with a MB iron will not make you a better ball striker.

 

I love the comments about how “MB’s make me focus more” or “my mishits are better” etc.

 

Why do they sell those tiny irons to teach people how to hit the center then ? It’s the same concept.

 

Cut your power steering cables. You’ll become 100x better at driving on the highway because it’ll be so much harder you’ll focus so much more. Hm.....

 

Anything that triggers fear doesn’t make you better at anything.

 

Terrible analogy. The best drivers on earth prefer a quick ratio manual steering box and a manual transmission. Why ? Control. I know. I build some of their cars.

 

If fear enters your head it’s not the clubs fault. That’s the mental issues anyone can have. No matter the club

 

 

Irons like this are just another option in fitting. They fit some better than others. If they don’t fit you cool. But don’t poo poo the fact that they fit others just fine. And it’s not handicap related . It’s more speed related than anything as pertaining to what the longest iron you carry is.