My Experience Gaming Blades as a Mid-High Handicapper

[dont rory be happy]

Does playing a SGI or GI club cure OTT? No.

Does playing a SGI or GI club cure thin or fat? No.

Does playing a SGI or GI club fix path and face? No.

 

Yes, blades require a more accurate strike - but they dont cause the root of peoples swing faults. With that said, if you want to play blades, then play blades. You'll be rewarded with a great strike and punished for bad ones.

 

If you want lower scores - hit more fairways, hit more greens, and practice your short game. Fairly simple. A good, repeatable swing will get you there - not the club.

[dpb5031]

> @"dont rory be happy" said:

> Does playing a SGI or GI club cure OTT? No.

> Does playing a SGI or GI club cure thin or fat? No.

> Does playing a SGI or GI club fix path and face? No.

>

> Yes, blades require a more accurate strike - but they dont cause the root of peoples swing faults. With that said, if you want to play blades, then play blades. You'll be rewarded with a great strike and punished for bad ones.

>

> If you want lower scores - hit more fairways, hit more greens, and practice your short game. Fairly simple. A good, repeatable swing will get you there - not the club.

 

True, and practicing with an MB blade can help you to develop a "good, repeatable swing."

 

[BiggErn]

> @dpb5031 said:

> > @"dont rory be happy" said:

> > Does playing a SGI or GI club cure OTT? No.

> > Does playing a SGI or GI club cure thin or fat? No.

> > Does playing a SGI or GI club fix path and face? No.

> >

> > Yes, blades require a more accurate strike - but they dont cause the root of peoples swing faults. With that said, if you want to play blades, then play blades. You'll be rewarded with a great strike and punished for bad ones.

> >

> > If you want lower scores - hit more fairways, hit more greens, and practice your short game. Fairly simple. A good, repeatable swing will get you there - not the club.

>

> True, and practicing with an MB blade can help you to develop a "good, repeatable swing."

>

 

How? I can’t imagine someone practices diffferent with one type of club vs another. How does knowing the result of a slight miss being more penal make you better? As usual guys who support MBs to their death bed always use unusal analogies and extreme hypotheticals.

[pinestreetgolf]

The strangest thing about this conversation is that y'all say "blades" which covers a 36", 46* pitching wedge to a 38.5" 24* 4 iron. One of those is harder to hit than the other. You can't talk about both of those clubs for a player as if they are the same. I've played around with a bag this year that has hybrids through six iron. Blades above that makes sense, for example.

Are you blade advocates talking about beginners trying to get a T-Zoid 3 iron off the ground or are we talking an 8 iron? "Blades" is so broad its meaningless.

Re: Practice, its thought now that its better to make practice easy so you get the feeling as many times as possible rather than hard so you have to struggle to get the feeling. This is why sprinters train downhill for the Olympics. If you think you've got it figured out about how the human brain learns and the best way to make that happen you shouldn't be wasting time posting on a golf message board. i think we can all just agree none of us know the optimal way for a human brain to learn motor tasks especially the optimal way for someone else to learn motor tasks. Now, if you'll excuse me, I had a piano built with keys that are half the width of a normal piano to make playing it extremely hard and require ridiculous precision to get that "pure" feeling. I should be as good as Beethoven by lunch.

[bodhi555]

> @pinestreetgolf said:

> The strangest thing about this conversation is that y'all say "blades" which covers a 36", 46* pitching wedge to a 38.5" 24* 4 iron. One of those is harder to hit than the other. You can't talk about both of those clubs for a player as if they are the same. I've played around with a bag this year that has hybrids through six iron. Blades above that makes sense, for example.

> Are you blade advocates talking about beginners trying to get a T-Zoid 3 iron off the ground or are we talking an 8 iron? "Blades" is so broad its meaningless.

> Re: Practice, its thought now that its better to make practice easy so you get the feeling as many times as possible rather than hard so you have to struggle to get the feeling. This is why sprinters train downhill for the Olympics. If you think you've got it figured out about how the human brain learns and the best way to make that happen you shouldn't be wasting time posting on a golf message board. i think we can all just agree none of us know the optimal way for a human brain to learn motor tasks especially the optimal way for someone else to learn motor tasks. Now, if you'll excuse me, I had a piano built with keys that are half the width of a normal piano to make playing it extremely hard and require ridiculous precision to get that "pure" feeling. I should be as good as Beethoven by lunch.

 

Not really the best analogy in the world, as if we were being accurate the keys would be 0.5 cm narrower, and the piano would be capable of playing better music.

 

But then for someone who claims that hitting a ball with a solid black of metal will feel the same as one that's been hollowed out, it should be expected really.

[Golf4lifer]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @dpb5031 said:

> > > @"dont rory be happy" said:

> > > Does playing a SGI or GI club cure OTT? No.

> > > Does playing a SGI or GI club cure thin or fat? No.

> > > Does playing a SGI or GI club fix path and face? No.

> > >

> > > Yes, blades require a more accurate strike - but they dont cause the root of peoples swing faults. With that said, if you want to play blades, then play blades. You'll be rewarded with a great strike and punished for bad ones.

> > >

> > > If you want lower scores - hit more fairways, hit more greens, and practice your short game. Fairly simple. A good, repeatable swing will get you there - not the club.

> >

> > True, and practicing with an MB blade can help you to develop a "good, repeatable swing."

> >

>

> How? I can’t imagine someone practices diffferent with one type of club vs another. How does knowing the result of a slight miss being more penal make you better? As usual guys who support MBs to their death bed always use unusal analogies and extreme hypotheticals.

 

Please explain how it doesn't help or can't help? Maybe, just maybe the feel of a miss hit with a blade make a person change their swing to not get that feel again. Maybe they don't get that same feel with GI/SGI clubs and continue with their bad swing.

Just because something doesn't work for you doesn't mean it cant work for someone else, we are individuals after all and experience things differently and learn differently. There have been plenty of stories in this thread and many other of how blades have helped a golfer hon a better swing. Are all these people delusional?

[Bigmean]

I am just stunned all these pages and so many good golfers and not much to speak of about the mental effect on swing execution. Let’s all take the red pill for just a second. What if all clubheads were within 7% identical in terms of their effect on a golf ball for the same motion on a ball, decreasing to 0% to a center strike. What percentage of a strike made would this group agree is mental? Can we safely agree that it is more than 7%, 10%, probably 20% for even bad golfers, 70% for really good golfers? Can we safely Agree that the better you get the larger the mental aspect becomes the greater determining factor in your game?

 

How many of the same people so outraged people feel better about a blade in hand have that trusty V steel or similar older Model 3 wood they always finds fairways for them? Or uses that bad MOI putter they love because they just like it and ergo always seem to make more putts with That one than ones they try out? Clearly this is hurting your scoring, if you want to have fun then fine but henrick Stenson is likely not caring about his best score with his old 3 wood and if he still even has those Callaway irons(not current on his bag but you get the point, even if cbs, there are newer and “better”)

 

The point is the mental factor!

You feel like you are going to make the shot you see, you believe it standing over it...whether it comes from anything from trust built in rounds, to a belief of mind false or not, to wearing your hat a certain way, maybe catchy advertisements, maybe word of mouth, maybe it was your dads putter and so special to you he is with you helping you make putts.....no matter the reason.

 

ANY, ANY, ANY club of ANY kind that elevates a golfers mental game for ANY reason at all will ALWAYS do more for score than any other scientific factors regarding confirming clubs. Period.

 

Ok, you guys can throw up the red pill now.

 

 

[IamMarkMac]

> @Bigmean said:

> The point is the mental factor!

> You feel like you are going to make the shot you see, you believe it standing over it...whether it comes from anything from trust built in rounds, to a belief of mind false or not, to wearing your hat a certain way, maybe catchy advertisements, maybe word of mouth, maybe it was your dads putter and so special to you he is with you helping you make putts.....no matter the reason.

>

> ANY, ANY, ANY club of ANY kind that elevates a golfers mental game for ANY reason at all will ALWAYS do more for score than any other scientific factors regarding confirming clubs. Period.

>

> Ok, you guys can throw up the red pill now.

>

>

The mental factor is, for me, the main reason these threads get so long. Let's say you use a blade and you're doing well with it and then people keep telling you that it's unforgiving and you're better off with a GI club. That thought creeps into your head and pretty soon, you hit worse with the blade because you can't shake the thought that it's unforgiving. Your game is wrecked. I find this to be true for mid and high handicap blade players. With low handicappers, they know they can hit anything so it doesn't really matter.

Faced with that, why wouldn't you defend your point of view to the bitter end? Your game literally depends on it.

 

 

[MelloYello]

> @gbartko said:

> If you don't play blades you might as well just hit it with your purse.

 

LOL, thank _you_, sir!

 

I mean, golly, that's the essence of this whole topic, _right there_.

[MelloYello]

> @pinestreetgolf said:

> Now, if you'll excuse me, I had a piano built with keys that are half the width of a normal piano to make playing it extremely hard and require ridiculous precision to get that "pure" feeling. I should be as good as Beethoven by lunch.

 

LOL....you guys are killing me this morning! :)

[MelloYello]

Keep in mind that nobody is being an extremist here. No one is trying to rip blades away from people and stick SGIs in their place. Broad brush arguments don't really apply.

 

Insofar as I can tell, the debate is about whether novice players should be encouraged to play MBs versus comparable small, forged CBs which deliver the necessary feedback while improving the feel on mis-struck shots all while raising their potential for hitting even better "good" shots with improved trajectory, carry distance and reliability.

 

Nobody who's using either of those is ever going to be comfortable looking down at a GI or SGI club so let's not taint the discussion with that extremist straw-man BS. SGI clubs look hideous to anyone playing a small, forged club of any kind.

 

But when we compare small CBs to their MB brethren we find they are interchangeable. For instance, there isn't a guy out there who enjoys looking down at Titleist MBs that couldn't switch it up and get used to looking down at Titleist's CB clubs. Likewise, players could make the opposite transition as well. You would rightfully be ridiculed as a total dumb-dumb if you thought otherwise as players all over the place switch it up routinely.

 

If some of you really feel like you have to use MBs to get the feedback you need, have at it.

 

That's the mind of a player that's shooting 90 though. I've never seen an LPGA player saying they need to practice with blades. I've never seen a great male player do that. There's a clear trend amongst good players which suggests that you don't need blades to improve.

 

But should we take the word of a few amateurs on the internet or does their argument seem a bit biased and downright arrogant when it flies in the face of how the world's best approach it?

[dpb5031]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @dpb5031 said:

> > > @"dont rory be happy" said:

> > > Does playing a SGI or GI club cure OTT? No.

> > > Does playing a SGI or GI club cure thin or fat? No.

> > > Does playing a SGI or GI club fix path and face? No.

> > >

> > > Yes, blades require a more accurate strike - but they dont cause the root of peoples swing faults. With that said, if you want to play blades, then play blades. You'll be rewarded with a great strike and punished for bad ones.

> > >

> > > If you want lower scores - hit more fairways, hit more greens, and practice your short game. Fairly simple. A good, repeatable swing will get you there - not the club.

> >

> > True, and practicing with an MB blade can help you to develop a "good, repeatable swing."

> >

>

> How? I can’t imagine someone practices diffferent with one type of club vs another. How does knowing the result of a slight miss being more penal make you better? As usual guys who support MBs to their death bed always use unusal analogies and extreme hypotheticals.

 

I've posted "how" twice in this thread. Have you read my previous posts? Nothing hypothetical about what I've described. If you have a reasonable answer...please explain...

[MelloYello]

> @dpb5031 said:

> I've posted "how" twice in this thread. Have you read my previous posts? Nothing hypothetical about what I've described. If you have a reasonable answer...please explain...

 

Let me step in for a sec, dpb.

 

I just went back to see if I missed anything. What I found in searching your name through the pages of this thread was that early in the thread you stated you used a hitting bay wherein you thought the increased feedback of a blade was helpful to you. Later, you reiterated that comment.

 

Nobody debates that blades maximize the harsh vibration and clank of a poor strike. That's obvious.

 

But never did you explain how getting the worst kind of feedback possible led you to actual improvements in your swing mechanics.

 

You made the claim multiple times but you never actually provided a logical, step-by-step as to how that happened. You just assumed that the sound and feel from the blade led you to know more about your swings.

 

In reality, all it did was tell you something about the quality of _IMPACT_, not the swings themselves.

 

Your idea that a player will improve with blades might seem like "common sense" but so does a lot of stuff which doesn't hold up under actual scrutiny. When we zoom in on the claim that blades lead to better swings we end up asking _"how?"_ and we never actually get a real answer. It's just presumed to be true by the folks who say it.

 

So let's imagine that you and I both strike the toe of our irons in exactly the same way. I experience it with my Titleist CBs to a certain degree--enough to know I wasn't perfect. Despite that feedback (which is good enough for the world's best players, mind you) I still know my ball is carrying closer to the intended distance than yours (which I interpret as a good thing).

 

Now, both you and I would agree that you experience the poor strike worse with your blades, both in feel and in the result.

 

Please explain to us exactly how you're benefited by having suffered more for your mistake, when I'm getting all the information as is apparently necessary?

 

The fact you're getting _more_ feedback doesn't necessarily make it _valuable_. That's my point.

[Golf4lifer]

> @MelloYello said:

 

> But should we take the word of a few amateurs on the internet or does their argument seem a bit biased and downright arrogant when it flies in the face of how the world's best approach it?

 

When an amateur is sharing their experience why not believe them? If they said the exact same thing, but they were using a CB iron instead would we be having this conversation?

 

If a MB makes a player feel they can play their best golf, good for them. If it makes another mid to high handicapper try blades, good for them. It might help or they might decide blades aren't for them, bottom line is the person is playing and trying to improve at golf.

 

It really doesn't matter what anyone else is doing. It comes down to what club makes that player feel comfortable...right? Swing your swing and play your game.

 

[MelloYello]

> @Golf4lifer said:

> > @MelloYello said:

>

> > But should we take the word of a few amateurs on the internet or does their argument seem a bit biased and downright arrogant when it flies in the face of how the world's best approach it?

>

> When an amateur is sharing their experience why not believe them?

>

 

Because biased, anecdotal claims that fly in the face of how the best players approach the game aren't helpful to novice folks asking legit questions.

 

Knowing who's actually right matters. It isn't my opinion that most professionals across the men's and women's game make do without blades.

 

If folks are going around spreading the gospel of blades and it's actually kind of untrue you don't find that kinda, sorta worthy of some critique?

 

There are better things to debate in life for sure, but we're here debating this and IMHO one side is more correct than the other.

[nostatic]

Maybe I'm off-base (my ex-wives would probably concur), but I certainly can feel the difference between good, semi-good, and not-so-good strikes on current i210 and Hot Metal Pro irons I'm hitting. Seems to me that the blade just has a smaller "good" spot. The argument that practicing with a tool that has a small sweet spot will improve the player depends 100% on the player. If someone has the eye-hand coordination, the time, the energy, and psychology to work with it, then I agree. But I'd venture a guess that the number of players who posses all of those is in single digits.

 

To extend the musical analogy, I switched basses about 7 years ago, going to a brand that is "boutique", and ended up being quite the highly polished mirror. It reproduces every bit of your technique, for better or for worse. That inspired me to work on my playing, and after playing various stringed instruments for 40+ years, get back with a teacher and relearn the instrument from the ground up. I'm certainly better for it, and continue to play those basses. But I have to be on my game, and work on it every day. That said, many players, some of them quite good, don't like those basses. For some it is just taste - everyone likes different things. But for some number, I'm firmly convinced that they don't like the way the instrument amplifies mistakes and gaps in technique. And that's ok - not everyone has the eye-hand coordination, time, energy, and psychology to make it work, especially if they don't need to in order to get enjoyment from playing.

[Pepperturbo]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @MelloYello said:

> > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > @MelloYello said:

> > > > > > @LowAndLeft32 said:

> > > > > > If you believe Bobby Clampett that "blades are the ultimate game improvement iron" then you can have both blades and GI irons all in one club!!

> > > > > >

> > > > > > On a serious note, what we need in these debates are hard facts which are hard if not impossible to come by. The two test that I think may help expand the discussion would be:

> > > > > > 1) Iron Byron hitting a bunch of different shorts on different parts of the club face with both blades and Gis and then comparing the data for distance and dispersion.

> > > > > > 2) The other test which is difficult to execute would be to play say 50 rounds with blades and GI to see if scores are impacted. This may help to more accurately start to somewhat answer if one type of clubs improves scores. This would help eliminate the feel arguments, the distance on mishits arguments, ect. Why feel, distance, and dispersion are important and easy to talk about, they don't explain what type of score you get!

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > I agree with #1 but once you have actual robot data to discuss, I think you have everything you need for a debate.

> > > > >

> > > > > If we're interested in comparing actual experiences, we don't need robot data. People can simply go buy both and try them out. Good sets are cheap and readily available on Ebay. It's not like it's hard to try out a decent set of blades in 2019.

> > > > >

> > > > > While I would love to settle the argument with robot data, I think people ultimately obsess too much about the potential difference in shots. While we do care about that, the big picture needs to involve questions like the following:

> > > > >

> > > > > (#1)

> > > > > Can a particular novice handle getting constant negative feedback from his/her golf clubs? At what point does maximizing feedback become a distraction that might lead the developing playing to over-do their iron practice and cut short their driving, chipping and putting?

> > > > >

> > > > > (#2)

> > > > > To build upon that first question, let's say you have 1-hr each weekday to practice. Maybe that means you get to spend 25-minutes hitting balls with the rest on short game (both chipping & putting). Let's say you play 9 on Friday instead of going to the range and focus on playing with friends over the weekend. So you ultimately spend a total of 100 minutes per week on your long game (25-min Mon thru Thurs). Let's say 20 minutes is spent with driver, 15 with fairway, and 35 with wedges hitting various distances. So you're now looking at spending a grand total of 30-minutes per week hitting shots with your irons. While that's spread across various days (which helps), is 30-minutes of practice enough to justify those clubs? What if we double that? Is 60-minutes of practicing sufficient?

> > > > >

> > > > > (#3)

> > > > > Is it even fundamentally helpful to continue pushing a reverence for blades that comes mostly from posterity when today's elite players are increasingly embracing CBs? In short, why encourage someone to be a purist in 2019 when there's no advantage in that?

> > > > >

> > > > > If we're truly golfers here, then we should care about golf shots. And until CBs become illegal, a great shot with a CB is still worth exactly the same as one with a MB. Encouraging people to consider the MB shot somehow better seems to me to be somewhat immature. You know, I used to think blades looked cooler than all other clubs. But with today's CBs I don't necessarily feel that way. Now that I don't really have a bias towards MBs I have to say, looking back, obsessing about blades all seems kind of pointless.

> > > > >

> > > > > I would never think bad about a playing partner who was using blades. Good for them. But the kind of talk you get online wherein guys are posting photos and stuff like that, well, we all know what that is. It's the LPGA fashion thread for the equipment forum.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Your first question has limited merit while not saying much for the character, maturity maybe even judgment of the novice. It infers he's not self-confident or committed to his choice of equipment and incapable of learning from mistakes. If someone chooses to play more difficult MB's they should have the characteristics to cope with and eventually convert negative feedback into a positive learning experience and have the tenacity to stick with their convictions. Done long enough their skill improves to the point positive feedback is reinforced and commonplace and negative feedback become fewer and instructional. If someone has those attributes I have no problem confirming their choice of club, regardless of design.

> > > >

> > > > I agree a good shot is a good shot. Doesn't matter what club head design the shot was made with. The only thing that matters is the user is confident in his choice of clubs and mature enough to trust in his own judgment and motivation and not care what others think. Having said that it's clear to me, most of the people that chose MB's do so with purpose, conviction and have a game plan. I was one. Whether others disagree with their choice means nothing. Besides, nobody should care what passerby's think. Those that lack those attributes are the ones that flaunt equipment and typically behave like club ho's. They move on to momentarily obsess over some other club and knock others for their choices.

> > >

> > > Eh, I think you misinterpreted the subtlety of point #1.

> > >

> > > It's about how much feedback is _necessary_ to play effective golf, not whether feedback itself it necessary or whether someone is 'convicted enough' to withstand it.

> > >

> > > I think if we're handing out advice on forums, it should be advice that we believe optimizes the time expenditure of the amateur in becoming scratch or better. To that end, blades provide (_IMHO_) more feedback than is necessary.

> > >

> > > Thus one can easily see why I don't buy into the notion of mid-handicaps telling me they think they're improving with blades in a way they can't otherwise.

> > >

> > > I'm not a moron. I used them too. They feel great and they look superb. That's why they sell.

> >

> > No, I didn't. The problem is "nobody", least of all on a discussion board, has the capacity to make that distinction regarding a novices ability to handle feedback or how much is too much. It may have been too much for you or someone you actually know but broad brushing that conclusion IMO exceeds boundary. Just because a person can improve with CB's doesn't mean they shouldn't choose the club-head design of their choice and do so expecting a different process.

> >

> > I repeat when I took up the game at 40 I started with off-the-shelve Pings and eight or some months later switched to Mizuno blades and reached single digit in under five years and low single digit a few years later. I am almost 70, still play reasonable long yardages, hit 2 iron over 200yds and run circles around others on the golf course, on a bike and office. Yet, many think because of age that couldn't be possible so don't advise it's possible. Instead of negative don't do it, it's easier another way my PGA relative advised me on the pros and cons blades and the Balata ball and said go for it. Advice can either be negative based on bias or reinforcing without bias, I always chose the latter. Have a good day.

>

> Think about what you're saying. It isn't logical. You don't think blades offer more feedback than is necessary to play effectively?

>

> Then how can half the men on Tour (or whatever it is) who are literally the best in the world not to mention virtually _all_ the women get by without blades?

>

> It would be absurd to say blades aren't overkill in the modern game. Of course they are. I don't have to show you why. It's obvious based on the tournament results every single week, all around the world.

>

> Even guys like Tiger who've always used them still resort to the _"I just prefer the look and feel"_ defense, which again, is perfectly legit as far as I'm concerned.

>

> But if a novice is asking me, I'll tell him that based on my experience, using blades isn't going to help or hurt you all that much. The kind of player that will get good can do it just as fine with virtually any small, forged CB as with a blade.

>

> And anyone pushing the use of blades as a game improvement device versus pushing the novice to practice driving, chipping and putting is IMHO a horrible teacher.

>

> Have you ever come across a teacher that said to his student, _'oh we've got to get you into some blades asap!'_ or does that sound as ludicrous to you as it does to me?

>

>

Logic??? So, now you're an authority on what constitutes logic... lol Sorry, but the decisions of tour players as an argument is ineffective at best. They get paid to play equipment and we're not cognizant as to what their equipment contracts stipulate. Plus their motive regarding equipment is unknown so no value. You're making bias assumptions which are fine except I don't buy them as having practical merit. And I don't value what a teacher advises regarding equipment. They too are bias and subjective.

 

A good teacher should only give equipment advise if asked and clear on the students game goals, otherwise, it's biased and means nothing. Over the years I have talked to many teachers, not much respect for most of them. Only one teacher/club fitter and builder properly fit me when others were making fitting assumptions based upon my age. I will finish by saying I remain appreciative of blades and nothing you or anyone else could say will diminish that perception. I am done and off to the gym.

[BiggErn]

> @dpb5031 said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > > @dpb5031 said:

> > > > @"dont rory be happy" said:

> > > > Does playing a SGI or GI club cure OTT? No.

> > > > Does playing a SGI or GI club cure thin or fat? No.

> > > > Does playing a SGI or GI club fix path and face? No.

> > > >

> > > > Yes, blades require a more accurate strike - but they dont cause the root of peoples swing faults. With that said, if you want to play blades, then play blades. You'll be rewarded with a great strike and punished for bad ones.

> > > >

> > > > If you want lower scores - hit more fairways, hit more greens, and practice your short game. Fairly simple. A good, repeatable swing will get you there - not the club.

> > >

> > > True, and practicing with an MB blade can help you to develop a "good, repeatable swing."

> > >

> >

> > How? I can’t imagine someone practices diffferent with one type of club vs another. How does knowing the result of a slight miss being more penal make you better? As usual guys who support MBs to their death bed always use unusal analogies and extreme hypotheticals.

>

> I've posted "how" twice in this thread. Have you read my previous posts? Nothing hypothetical about what I've described. If you have a reasonable answer...please explain...

 

Didn’t you use the ridiculous weightlifting analogy? With that line of thinking it’s kinda hard to take anything you say seriously. You either hit the ball in the center of the face dead solid every time or you don’t. If you don’t there’s absolutely no benefit to using a MB. If you’ve been playing and practicing for years and still don’t then you’re just trying justify something that’s irrational.

[MelloYello]

> @nostatic said:

> Maybe I'm off-base (my ex-wives would probably concur), but I certainly can feel the difference between good, semi-good, and not-so-good strikes on current i210 and Hot Metal Pro irons I'm hitting. Seems to me that the blade just has a smaller "good" spot. The argument that practicing with a tool that has a small sweet spot will improve the player depends 100% on the player. If someone has the eye-hand coordination, the time, the energy, and psychology to work with it, then I agree. But I'd venture a guess that the number of players who posses all of those is in single digits.

>

> To extend the musical analogy, I switched basses about 7 years ago, going to a brand that is "boutique", and ended up being quite the highly polished mirror. It reproduces every bit of your technique, for better or for worse. That inspired me to work on my playing, and after playing various stringed instruments for 40+ years, get back with a teacher and relearn the instrument from the ground up. I'm certainly better for it, and continue to play those basses. But I have to be on my game, and work on it every day. That said, many players, some of them quite good, don't like those basses. For some it is just taste - everyone likes different things. But for some number, I'm firmly convinced that they don't like the way the instrument amplifies mistakes and gaps in technique. And that's ok - not everyone has the eye-hand coordination, time, energy, and psychology to make it work, especially if they don't need to in order to get enjoyment from playing.

 

Cheers, I'm a guitarist myself. Most 70s/80 hard rock with some proggy-shred-wanky stuff mixed in. Are you talking double-bass or electric or what? Just curious what kind of bass.

 

Anyhow, as a musician I understand having played different amps with varying levels of gain & compression that sort of thing has an immediate affect of how comfortable one feels. If an amp is stiff and fights you, it's easy to play worse than if it just felt like you had effortless sustain.

 

I guess the musical analogy is a little different considering that there are different styles of music wherein one can get away with shoddy technique to varying degrees. But your point about encouraging practice is a good one.

 

I actually think blades in the hands of most amateurs is overkill in this discussion about what amount of feedback is necessary.

[Golf4lifer]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @Golf4lifer said:

> > > @MelloYello said:

> >

> > > But should we take the word of a few amateurs on the internet or does their argument seem a bit biased and downright arrogant when it flies in the face of how the world's best approach it?

> >

> > When an amateur is sharing their experience why not believe them?

> >

>

> Because biased, anecdotal claims that fly in the face of how the best players approach the game aren't helpful to novice folks asking legit questions.

>

> Knowing who's actually right matters. It isn't my opinion that most professionals across the men's and women's game make do without blades.

>

> If folks are going around spreading the gospel of blades and it's actually kind of untrue you don't find that kinda, sorta worthy of some critique?

>

> There are better things to debate in life for sure, but we're here debating this and IMHO one side is more correct than the other.

 

Does knowing who is right really matter though? What works for me may not work for you in our golf swings/clubs/shoes/whatever, but which one of us is right?

 

I try not to compare my game or anyone's games to the best in the world. I am just trying to get the best out of my golf game and maybe that's with blades and maybe it isn't. Point being is I don't discount personal experiences because it differs from the norm or the professionals. Confidence can do miraculous things.

[MelloYello]

> @Golf4lifer said:

> > @MelloYello said:

> > > @Golf4lifer said:

> > > > @MelloYello said:

> > >

> > > > But should we take the word of a few amateurs on the internet or does their argument seem a bit biased and downright arrogant when it flies in the face of how the world's best approach it?

> > >

> > > When an amateur is sharing their experience why not believe them?

> > >

> >

> > Because biased, anecdotal claims that fly in the face of how the best players approach the game aren't helpful to novice folks asking legit questions.

> >

> > Knowing who's actually right matters. It isn't my opinion that most professionals across the men's and women's game make do without blades.

> >

> > If folks are going around spreading the gospel of blades and it's actually kind of untrue you don't find that kinda, sorta worthy of some critique?

> >

> > There are better things to debate in life for sure, but we're here debating this and IMHO one side is more correct than the other.

>

> Does knowing who is right really matter though? What works for me may not work for you in our golf swings/clubs/shoes/whatever, but which one of us is right?

>

> I try not to compare my game or anyone's games to the best in the world. I am just trying to get the best out of my golf game and maybe that's with blades and maybe it isn't. Point being is I don't discount personal experiences because it differs from the norm or the professionals. Confidence can do miraculous things.

 

I think we can learn a lot by watching (and talking to) people who have more experience than us. Wouldn't you agree?

 

Nothing here is absolute but nothing in the world is. We're all Bayesians in how we update our views. Guys like pepper above aren't even really worth talking to because they argue with one-sided claims that we can never learn anything by studying the bags of players better than us but most people would disagree. Knowing how the best players approach the game (be those players on Tour or at our local muni) is valuable intel. Why wouldn't we want to hear what feedback others have?

 

In the same way that feedback from impact is helpful (to a degree), so to is studying how better players make up their sets (to a degree).

 

Everything in moderation!

 

So I wish guys like dpb the absolute best.

 

He and I don't disagree that feedback is critical. We seem to disagree on whether there's a limit to the usefulness of feedback. He seems to think it's all linear--the more, the better. I doubt that. I think there are diminishing returns.

 

This thread is for discussion only. I'm not chastising anyone or judging their character.

 

I'd happily say everything to people's faces. I respect them as people. I just know people are irrational and can convinced themselves of weird stuff that isn't exactly helpful.

 

This is why teachers exist and why communication is so helpful in general. Nobody would get anywhere doing anything on their own.

 

I used blades for a long time myself, bro. I just don't embrace them to the degree other people do and I feel they're wrong in their reasoning. :)

[nostatic]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @nostatic said:

> > Maybe I'm off-base (my ex-wives would probably concur), but I certainly can feel the difference between good, semi-good, and not-so-good strikes on current i210 and Hot Metal Pro irons I'm hitting. Seems to me that the blade just has a smaller "good" spot. The argument that practicing with a tool that has a small sweet spot will improve the player depends 100% on the player. If someone has the eye-hand coordination, the time, the energy, and psychology to work with it, then I agree. But I'd venture a guess that the number of players who posses all of those is in single digits.

> >

> > To extend the musical analogy, I switched basses about 7 years ago, going to a brand that is "boutique", and ended up being quite the highly polished mirror. It reproduces every bit of your technique, for better or for worse. That inspired me to work on my playing, and after playing various stringed instruments for 40+ years, get back with a teacher and relearn the instrument from the ground up. I'm certainly better for it, and continue to play those basses. But I have to be on my game, and work on it every day. That said, many players, some of them quite good, don't like those basses. For some it is just taste - everyone likes different things. But for some number, I'm firmly convinced that they don't like the way the instrument amplifies mistakes and gaps in technique. And that's ok - not everyone has the eye-hand coordination, time, energy, and psychology to make it work, especially if they don't need to in order to get enjoyment from playing.

>

> Cheers, I'm a guitarist myself. Most 70s/80 hard rock with some proggy-shred-wanky stuff mixed in. Are you talking double-bass or electric or what? Just curious what kind of bass.

>

> Anyhow, as a musician I understand having played different amps with varying levels of gain & compression that sort of thing has an immediate affect of how comfortable one feels. If an amp is stiff and fights you, it's easy to play worse than is it just felt like you hard effortless sustain.

>

> I guess the musical analogy is a little different considering that there are different styles of music wherein one can get away with shoddy technique to varying degrees. But your point about encouraging practice is a good one.

>

> I actually think blades in the hands of most amateurs is overkill in this discussion about what amount of feedback is necessary.

 

Electric bass. I used to play double as well, but tendonitis made that a no-go some years back. Having started as a guitarist way back when, your amp comments are somewhat similar to my bass ones. My favorite amps were tube amp that you had to play like an instrument - they had a feel, a push and pull that you had to learn to work with (or sometimes around). Decidedly not just a loud box with some dials your fiddle with.

 

I think the analogy does hold - yes, there are different styles of music, but there also are different swings. Not everyone has the same path, speed, etc. But at the end of the day, the club (or the instrument) is a tool that is necessary to accomplish the task. Tools take practice, and some are easier to deal with than others (ever haul an 8-10 SVT cabinet? ). Both endeavors combine physical and mental aspects, both of which require practice to master. Some are great at the former, suck at the latter (and vice versa). I've seen guys with terrible swings who can score. And guys with beautiful swings who play bogey golf. Same with music - plenty of technique masters who I find not very musical. And other players who have terrible technique and couldn't name what key they're in, but they are amazing. Of course the absolute best tend to be those that master both sides of the aisle - in sports, music, or most any other endeavor.

[Golf4lifer]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @Golf4lifer said:

> > > @MelloYello said:

> > > > @Golf4lifer said:

> > > > > @MelloYello said:

> > > >

> > > > > But should we take the word of a few amateurs on the internet or does their argument seem a bit biased and downright arrogant when it flies in the face of how the world's best approach it?

> > > >

> > > > When an amateur is sharing their experience why not believe them?

> > > >

> > >

> > > Because biased, anecdotal claims that fly in the face of how the best players approach the game aren't helpful to novice folks asking legit questions.

> > >

> > > Knowing who's actually right matters. It isn't my opinion that most professionals across the men's and women's game make do without blades.

> > >

> > > If folks are going around spreading the gospel of blades and it's actually kind of untrue you don't find that kinda, sorta worthy of some critique?

> > >

> > > There are better things to debate in life for sure, but we're here debating this and IMHO one side is more correct than the other.

> >

> > Does knowing who is right really matter though? What works for me may not work for you in our golf swings/clubs/shoes/whatever, but which one of us is right?

> >

> > I try not to compare my game or anyone's games to the best in the world. I am just trying to get the best out of my golf game and maybe that's with blades and maybe it isn't. Point being is I don't discount personal experiences because it differs from the norm or the professionals. Confidence can do miraculous things.

>

> I think we can learn a lot by watching (and talking to) people who have more experience than us. Wouldn't you agree?

>

> Nothing here is absolute but nothing in the world is. We're all Bayesians in how we update our views.

>

> I wish guys like dpb the absolute best.

>

> This thread is for discussion only. I'm not chastising anyone or judging their character.

>

> I'd happily say everything to people's faces. I respect them as people. I just know people are irrational and can convinced themselves of weird stuff that isn't exactly helpful to them.

>

> I used blades for a long time myself, bro. :)

 

I did not mean to say you were judging or anything like that and I personally agree with a lot of what you are saying. I just think that blades are not as hard to hit as some like to say they are. I switched from my beloved MP-68's to the Callaway Apex Pro 16's a few years back and have seen my iron game suffer a bit. I always say I am going back to blades then a have a good month with my irons and that thought passes. I started golf playing blades and played them as a 20hcp back in the day even though I was told I should not. I got down to a 5 playing blades, before life got in the way. I cannot say blades help me get to a 5, but they sure did not hinder it either.

 

[MelloYello]

> @nostatic said:

> > @MelloYello said:

> > > @nostatic said:

> > > Maybe I'm off-base (my ex-wives would probably concur), but I certainly can feel the difference between good, semi-good, and not-so-good strikes on current i210 and Hot Metal Pro irons I'm hitting. Seems to me that the blade just has a smaller "good" spot. The argument that practicing with a tool that has a small sweet spot will improve the player depends 100% on the player. If someone has the eye-hand coordination, the time, the energy, and psychology to work with it, then I agree. But I'd venture a guess that the number of players who posses all of those is in single digits.

> > >

> > > To extend the musical analogy, I switched basses about 7 years ago, going to a brand that is "boutique", and ended up being quite the highly polished mirror. It reproduces every bit of your technique, for better or for worse. That inspired me to work on my playing, and after playing various stringed instruments for 40+ years, get back with a teacher and relearn the instrument from the ground up. I'm certainly better for it, and continue to play those basses. But I have to be on my game, and work on it every day. That said, many players, some of them quite good, don't like those basses. For some it is just taste - everyone likes different things. But for some number, I'm firmly convinced that they don't like the way the instrument amplifies mistakes and gaps in technique. And that's ok - not everyone has the eye-hand coordination, time, energy, and psychology to make it work, especially if they don't need to in order to get enjoyment from playing.

> >

> > Cheers, I'm a guitarist myself. Most 70s/80 hard rock with some proggy-shred-wanky stuff mixed in. Are you talking double-bass or electric or what? Just curious what kind of bass.

> >

> > Anyhow, as a musician I understand having played different amps with varying levels of gain & compression that sort of thing has an immediate affect of how comfortable one feels. If an amp is stiff and fights you, it's easy to play worse than is it just felt like you hard effortless sustain.

> >

> > I guess the musical analogy is a little different considering that there are different styles of music wherein one can get away with shoddy technique to varying degrees. But your point about encouraging practice is a good one.

> >

> > I actually think blades in the hands of most amateurs is overkill in this discussion about what amount of feedback is necessary.

>

> Electric bass. I used to play double as well, but tendonitis made that a no-go some years back. I am in a couple of bands - one is a mix of jazz, funk, pop/rock (http://nostatic.com/music/nostatic-live/), a Steely Dan tribute band, Brazilian pop band, and music director for a theater project. Sadly none of that pays the bills - such is the industry.

>

> Having started as a guitarist way back when, your amp comments are somewhat similar to my bass ones. My favorite amps were tube amp that you had to play like an instrument - they had a feel, a push and pull that you had to learn to work with (or sometimes around). Decidedly not just a loud box with some dials your fiddle with.

>

> I think the analogy does hold - yes, there are different styles of music, but there also are different swings. Not everyone has the same path, speed, etc. But at the end of the day, the club (or the instrument) is a tool that is necessary to accomplish the task. Tools take practice, and some are easier to deal with than others (ever haul an 8-10 SVT cabinet? ). Both endeavors combine physical and mental aspects, both of which require practice to master. Some are great at the former, suck at the latter (and vice versa). I've seen guys with terrible swings who can score. And guys with beautiful swings who play bogey golf. Same with music - plenty of technique masters who I find not very musical. And other players who have terrible technique and couldn't name what key they're in, but they are amazing. Of course the absolute best tend to be those that master both sides of the aisle - in sports, music, or most any other endeavor.

 

Don't get me started on gear, I could talk all day. I spent on my youth on gear forums, hahaha.

 

Just to be clear, my analogy comment is this (and I think you'd agree).

 

In golf our goal is more or less pretty singular. We want to shoot the best score. Everyone plays the same course under (similar) conditions. In music, we can do vastly different things. We're not competing per se.

 

If my goal is to be effective and entertain the max number of people I could spend all my life learning to play Allan Holdsworth and never make much of a dent in terms of being "entertaining" to a large group. Then again, I could learn to play like John Frusciante of the RHCP which would take far less effort but it would reach far more people.

 

Point is that in music I have options.

 

Golf isn't so forgiving. Competitive golfers all have the same goal. They all have one path from beginning to end (measured in handicap).

[MelloYello]

> @Golf4lifer said:

> > @MelloYello said:

> > > @Golf4lifer said:

> > > > @MelloYello said:

> > > > > @Golf4lifer said:

> > > > > > @MelloYello said:

> > > > >

> > > > > > But should we take the word of a few amateurs on the internet or does their argument seem a bit biased and downright arrogant when it flies in the face of how the world's best approach it?

> > > > >

> > > > > When an amateur is sharing their experience why not believe them?

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Because biased, anecdotal claims that fly in the face of how the best players approach the game aren't helpful to novice folks asking legit questions.

> > > >

> > > > Knowing who's actually right matters. It isn't my opinion that most professionals across the men's and women's game make do without blades.

> > > >

> > > > If folks are going around spreading the gospel of blades and it's actually kind of untrue you don't find that kinda, sorta worthy of some critique?

> > > >

> > > > There are better things to debate in life for sure, but we're here debating this and IMHO one side is more correct than the other.

> > >

> > > Does knowing who is right really matter though? What works for me may not work for you in our golf swings/clubs/shoes/whatever, but which one of us is right?

> > >

> > > I try not to compare my game or anyone's games to the best in the world. I am just trying to get the best out of my golf game and maybe that's with blades and maybe it isn't. Point being is I don't discount personal experiences because it differs from the norm or the professionals. Confidence can do miraculous things.

> >

> > I think we can learn a lot by watching (and talking to) people who have more experience than us. Wouldn't you agree?

> >

> > Nothing here is absolute but nothing in the world is. We're all Bayesians in how we update our views.

> >

> > I wish guys like dpb the absolute best.

> >

> > This thread is for discussion only. I'm not chastising anyone or judging their character.

> >

> > I'd happily say everything to people's faces. I respect them as people. I just know people are irrational and can convinced themselves of weird stuff that isn't exactly helpful to them.

> >

> > I used blades for a long time myself, bro. :)

>

> I did not mean to say you were judging or anything like that and I personally agree with a lot of what you are saying. I just think that blades are not as hard to hit as some like to say they are. I switched from my beloved MP-68's to the Callaway Apex Pro 16's a few years back and have seen my iron game suffer a bit. I always say I am going back to blades then a have a good month with my irons and that thought passes. I started golf playing blades and played them as a 20hcp back in the day even though I was told I should not. I got down to a 5 playing blades, before life got in the way. I cannot say blades help me get to a 5, but they sure did not hinder it either.

>

 

I'm not going to say X is hard and Y is easy. That's for the individual player to decide. I started with blades as well, so I would agree that for me, they didn't push me away either.

 

I only base my views on ideas like the following:

 

1) Modern player's CBs look "good enough" to appease anyone this side of Rory & Tiger.

2) Modern player's CBs provide ample feedback to become Pro-level.

3) CBs will generally feel better on misses.

4) CBs will generally carry further on misses.

 

 

I think most people who play blades do it because they like the look, the feel, the challenge, the prestige...all that "extra" stuff. To me, that's good enough reason without some nonsense about them being a training aid.

 

If I thought a club simply looked cool, I'd say as much. I'd just rather people be honest and say, _"I prefer the look and feel"_ rather than try and do this sell-job regarding how the make you better. No they darn well don't. If that was the case, they'd issue them to every college player. We'd see every Tour playing practicing on the range with them.

[chisag]

> @BiggErn said: "How? I can’t imagine someone practices diffferent with one type of club vs another. How does knowing the result of a slight miss being more penal make you better? As usual guys who support MBs to their death bed always use unusal analogies and extreme hypotheticals".

 

... BE, I have been in Phoenix all winter playing even day as a single. I have made some friends and played a few repeat rounds with a few different groups but mainly just get paired up with a new 3 some everyday. I have played with Club Pro's, a mini tour player, some college golfers and a few high school and jr players, but mostly just John Q Public and I have answered so many questions about my irons. I have played my Cobra Forged Tours, P790's and P760's. Why am I playing them instead of MB's? Do I fly greens with my P790's? Are my P760 short irons more accurate? And of course ... OH wait a minute. None of that ever happened. Shooting around par I have had exactly 2 questions about my irons out of 75 rounds. "I have never seen these Cobra's, how do you like them?" and concerning the P790's "I hear a lot about these irons, how do you like them?" That's it.

 

... Played with several MB players that were mid index players and they hit them inconsistently. I didn't comment on their MB's and they didn't either. In other words I dint ask them why they play MB's and they didn't ask me what I don't. The 2 Club Pro's played the tips and used Ping i20's and Callaway Apex non tour irons and both shot around par. WRX is the only place I hear these back and forth about what irons anyone plays, especially MB's, or others making comments about what someone is playing. I do find these threads most amusing because they just don't happen in the real world or really any other golf forum. I had most on ignore but the new format has put them back in threads.

[tsecor]

soooooo...blades are better???

[MelloYello]

Yes, sir.

 

Good enough to impress a few Waffle House waitresses, anyway.

[nostatic]

> @tsecor said:

> soooooo...blades are better???

 

yes. no. maybe.

[MelloYello]

Please don't come into a discussion about equipment and chastise the people who are discussing it.

 

You're the loser. Not them.