My Experience Gaming Blades as a Mid-High Handicapper

[revanant]

> @pinestreetgolf said:

> > @"deadsolid...shank" said:

> > Bet reading all this has been driving you nuts PSG, couldn’t hold off on posting any longer?!?

>

> lol, haven't been at the site, but my digust grew as I read from page 19 to now. I just really, really hope no beginning golfers take this seriously.

>

> "Uh, yeah, i think I learn better on blades. The slightly improved feedback at impact has brought me down from a 95 to a 92."

>

> What a bunch of absolute nonsense. Of course you get better practicing with blades. But the key word is "practice". **You'd get better practicing with anything. if you think you can tell the difference at a 15 between a week of practice with CBs and a week of practice with blades I have some oceanfront property in Kansas to sell you.**

My personal experience has been that shifting to blades and an unforgiving forged CB has only helped my practice and ball-striking, and done so rapidly. The difference between hitting my T-Zoid Pro 6 iron and MP-4 6 iron is really just that the MP-4 goes a club farther, and the T-Zoid has real sting on a mishit, so I prefer hitting the MP-4s. The MP-4s also have a little bit of a cleaner look. I'm not seeing a difference on quality of shot between the two irons. They both have a clear division between a bad shot, an okay shot, and a good shot. In other words, there's not a ton of difference between a player's cb and an MB--both will punish mishits, reward great hits, and give you a distinction between okay strikes and good strikes. However, I think there is a difference between a player's cb or MB and an SGI/GI iron, and that some people can benefit from practicing and playing with the former.

 

I think we both agree that a high handicapper will improve with practice. But one thing I found to be true is that hitting the T-Zoid and MP-4 improved my striking quickly, when I had put similar time in with my AP1s. The only thing I can think to explain it is that, because the AP1s will forgive a mishit farther towards the toe, I was grooving a swing that wasn't resulting in great impact, because the irons were still giving me good ball flight. Which is fine, except that if I'm practicing a strike that puts me closer than I should be to the toe, then I'll wind up with some catastrophically bad strikes when things don't go perfectly. On the other hand, both the T-Zoid and MP-4 force me to adjust more when I practice, so that I'm practicing hitting the center of the clubface and getting my expected yardage, rather than a shot that's 10 yards short but otherwise good.

 

The one thing that makes me not a typical high-handicap, though, is that I have open access to a Trugolf simulator, so when I practice, I get to see a lot of data--swing path, club face at impact, ball speed, club speed, carry, roll, etc. So if my shot fades, I can pinpoint if it was because I was swinging out to in, or because I left the clubface open, and then adjust.

 

It's ok if you disagree. My experiment is really ongoing. I'm definitely not being harmed by playing a cheap set of blades--as a player with 3 seasons under my belt, I think the best thing I can do is just get a lot of on-course practice and try to keep my weekly Sunday tee time as much as my schedule allows. The equipment is all functional, and a bit secondary to getting out there and being forced to hit balls above my feet, after a hard rain, into the wind. :)

 

 

 

 

[BiggErn]

> @lenman73 said:

> So hitting a blade was easier back then because courses were different. That cleared everything up.

>

> Oddly enough I still play alot of the courses I played back when with persimmon woods.

 

Hitting a blade is hitting a blade. If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them. You can argue about how your miss is somehow different or how you don’t score any different with one vs the other or how terrible you are off the tee or how terrible your short game is etc all while ignoring the fact I presented.

[lenman73]

And you ignored the fact I presented. You don't like blades yet I see you in ever blade thread I go to. I am not a fan of chevies, so I actually avoid chevy threads in forums.

[revanant]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @lenman73 said:

> > So hitting a blade was easier back then because courses were different. That cleared everything up.

> >

> > Oddly enough I still play alot of the courses I played back when with persimmon woods.

>

> Hitting a blade is hitting a blade. If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them. You can argue about how your miss is somehow different or how you don’t score any different with one vs the other or how terrible you are off the tee or how terrible your short game is etc all while ignoring the fact I presented.

I feel like you just haven't hit a blade in a long time. It's just an iron with more mass in the center and a low CG. You don't need a perfect strike for a playable golf shot. If you're a little off-center, you still get a good shot. And when you do strike it well, the reward factor is high.

 

When I put my T-Zoids into play, I don't see a shift in the quality of my strikes. If I could only see the topline, I would have no idea there's a cavity there, because there just isn't much help.

 

When I put my AP1s into play, I do find that I gain a club of distance, but at the expense of loft--I can get the same distance by just adding half an inch to my club, which is the difference between my AP1 7 iron and MP-4 6 iron. I also need to put more effort into my swing path and setup to get a fade or a draw, and that more of my shots seem to go straight and offline instead of fading or drawing back into the target. So, really, it seems to me that the major tradeoff is smaller sole + cleaner topline vs. half an inch on length. So for now, I'm playing my MP-4s, which look better than the other two at address and feel a bit softer than both on most of my strikes.

 

[nsxguy]

> @lenman73 said:

> Per usual, a few peoples predictability does not disappoint. Instead of answering a question, instead post snark. I will ask again. Before the advent of game improvement equipment, how did anyone practice and improve? So every since the ping eye 2 came out, practicing with a blade 7 iron is more of an impossible task than putting someone in the moon. Got it.

>

> Another question would be to the people who don't like blades, why not stay out of blade threads ?

> **I patiently await the snark responses from those who don't like blades but can't stay out of a blade thread**.

 

You mean like THIS post of yours ? LOL

 

This thread isn't about "practice". It's about several mid-to-high handicappers expounding their opinions about how well they play with BLADES and how more forgiveness isn't at all "necessary" or even helpful. Since this is a discussion board, that sort of thing cries out for more experienced and varied opinions, whether you agree or not.

 

So consider different points/opinions as a PSA, as pinestreetgolf, among MANY others, have suggested.

 

The blind leading the blind is seldom, if ever, a good way to go. And make no mistake, mid-to-high handicappers AND beginners are, in this instance, the "blind".

[nsxguy]

> @lenman73 said:

> So hitting a blade was easier back then because courses were different. That cleared everything up.

>

> Oddly enough I still play alot of the courses I played back when with persimmon woods.

 

I read the inference as courses (especially) being shorter, perhaps with fewer obstacles that needed to be avoided and therefore errant shots got punished a bit less. That's actually how I remember courses starting the game many years ago.

 

[nsxguy]

> @lenman73 said:

> And you ignored the fact I presented. You don't like blades yet I see you in ever blade thread I go to. I am not a fan of chevies, so I actually avoid chevy threads in forums.

 

How about when you accidentally stumble upon a thread where somebody tells others how much better their Chevy (I assume you mean the car) is so much better than yours ? THAT would be the proper analogy (IMO).

[MelloYello]

> @revanant said:

> I'm not seeing a difference on quality of shot between the two irons. They both have a clear division between a bad shot, an okay shot, and a good shot.

 

> @revanant said:

> In other words, there's not a ton of difference between a player's cb and an MB--both will punish mishits, reward great hits, and give you a distinction between okay strikes and good strikes.

 

I'm not trying to pick on you but it's worth pointing out that these statements are dangerous. One needs to be _precise_ with the language here. It matters.

 

From Jupiter, both an elephant and a mouse appear equally small. But if we're standing beside the two, we can appreciate the difference in size.

 

It depends on what scale we're measuring the separation of a player's CB and a MB. When we're talking about strikes that are far off-center, both will perform poorly. So when the misses are big, it's fair to say _"there is not a ton of difference."_

 

HOWEVER, if we look at the results of strikes that are only slightly off-center, we will observe a clear advantage in the player's CB.

 

This is why low handicaps are so adamant about MBs being hard to hit and why a lot of high-handicaps don't notice much difference. To a skilled golfer who's able to control their misses reasonably well, a little bit of forgiveness goes a long way.

 

 

This was the basis for my advice earlier that if the game's elite (i.e. pros, ams, college, club champs, etc.) don't need blades, neither does a novice player. I think what you describe Rev, is that there's benefit in having a small target. I agree with that, but I don't think you need to make the target as small as physically possible. The amount of scratch-or-better players out there who play something other than a blade proves to us we don't need to go that far.

[MelloYello]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @lenman73 said:

> > And you ignored the fact I presented. You don't like blades yet I see you in ever blade thread I go to. I am not a fan of chevies, so I actually avoid chevy threads in forums.

>

> How about when you accidentally stumble upon a thread where somebody tells others how much better their Chevy (I assume you mean the car) is so much better than yours ? THAT would be the proper analogy (IMO).

 

Dude, learn to recognize a troll.

 

Even if Lenman is a legit poster, it's not worth debating somebody who jumps into a thread that's 22 pages so he can bait folks with snarky nonsense. Let it slide and put the guy on ignore.

[nsxguy]

> @revanant said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > > @lenman73 said:

> > > So hitting a blade was easier back then because courses were different. That cleared everything up.

> > >

> > > Oddly enough I still play alot of the courses I played back when with persimmon woods.

> >

> > Hitting a blade is hitting a blade. If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them. You can argue about how your miss is somehow different or how you don’t score any different with one vs the other or how terrible you are off the tee or how terrible your short game is etc all while ignoring the fact I presented.

> I feel like you just haven't hit a blade in a long time. **It's just an iron with more mass in the center and a low CG**. You don't need a perfect strike for a playable golf shot. If you're a little off-center, you still get a good shot. And when you do strike it well, the reward factor is high.

>

> When I put my T-Zoids into play, I don't see a shift in the quality of my strikes. If I could only see the topline, I would have no idea there's a cavity there, because there just isn't much help.

>

> When I put my AP1s into play, I do find that I gain a club of distance, but at the expense of loft--I can get the same distance by just adding half an inch to my club, which is the difference between my AP1 7 iron and MP-4 6 iron. I also need to put more effort into my swing path and setup to get a fade or a draw, and that more of my shots seem to go straight and offline instead of fading or drawing back into the target. So, really, it seems to me that the major tradeoff is smaller sole + cleaner topline vs. half an inch on length. So for now, I'm playing my MP-4s, which look better than the other two at address and feel a bit softer than both on most of my strikes.

>

 

First of all, IIRC, you're the 27 handicapper yes ?

 

Secondly, NOBODY suggested that one needs "a perfect strike for a playable golf shot"

 

Thirdly, there is virtually no difference between the T-Zoid Pro and the MP-4. For all intents and purposes the T-Zoid is NOT a "Player's CB". You described it perfectly actually. See that square hunk of metal directly behind the SS of the T-Zoid. That "defeats" the purpose of the ever-so-slight perimeter weighting the rest of the back of the club shows.

 

And finally (you're welcome), you can "can get the same distance by just adding half an inch to my club" ??? Adding a half inch makes virtually NO difference in distance. If it FITS you better you should hit it better and THAT may make a slight (or more depending on how ill fit the shorter club was to begin with) difference. The distance difference between your Ap-1 and the other 2 is most likely due to the difference in loft AND forgiveness of a slight(?) mishit.

 

Oops, and BTW, blades typically have a higher center of gravity (than CBs of course).

 

 

[nsxguy]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > > @lenman73 said:

> > > And you ignored the fact I presented. You don't like blades yet I see you in ever blade thread I go to. I am not a fan of chevies, so I actually avoid chevy threads in forums.

> >

> > How about when you accidentally stumble upon a thread where somebody tells others how much better their Chevy (I assume you mean the car) is so much better than yours ? THAT would be the proper analogy (IMO).

>

> Dude, learn to recognize a troll.

>

> Even if Lenman is a legit poster, it's not worth debating somebody who jumps into a thread that's 22 pages so he can bait folks with snarky nonsense. Let it slide and put the guy on ignore.

 

I get it but no, I think he's legitimate.

 

But sometimes it's fun "hoisting a troll on his own petard". LOL

[lenman73]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @lenman73 said:

> > So hitting a blade was easier back then because courses were different. That cleared everything up.

> >

> > Oddly enough I still play alot of the courses I played back when with persimmon woods.

>

> I read the inference as courses (especially) being shorter, perhaps with fewer obstacles that needed to be avoided and therefore errant shots got punished a bit less. That's actually how I remember courses starting the game many years ago.

>

 

A lot of the courses I play were built in the 70's cut out of forests. They are still tree lined today. Some are shorter, some rival the length of anything built around here today. What I have noticed around here is the newer courses have a little more room to spray it off the tee where most of the older courses is target golf with every shot. But that is around here where I live, I am not saying it is that way everywhere.

 

What I have a problem with is people coming in here and speaking in absolutes. A 15 can't do this. A 15 can't do that. Blah blah blah. When some have come in here and explained what they do and why, someone else just says impossible and that is the fact we all must go by. Now if it was worded and said they would be in the minority and it won't work that way for everyone, I would totally agree. But with the things I have done and experienced, those experiences don't make me feel like the moral authority to tell someone I don't know what is and is not impossible for them. And all the "play whatever ya want, but, but, but........." well you lose some cred with me with that. I am not saying you personally. To say to someone play what ever you want and then to go and tell them not to because it won't work for them is going from arrogant to absurd in my view.

 

As far as sharing opinions, I am all for that. For some, the only reason to come in here is to try and prove how smart they are by telling someone they are wrong and they have the only facts. In my neck of the woods, that isn't sharing opinions.

[cliffhanger]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @lenman73 said:

> > Per usual, a few peoples predictability does not disappoint. Instead of answering a question, instead post snark. I will ask again. Before the advent of game improvement equipment, how did anyone practice and improve? So every since the ping eye 2 came out, practicing with a blade 7 iron is more of an impossible task than putting someone in the moon. Got it.

> >

> > Another question would be to the people who don't like blades, why not stay out of blade threads ?

> > **I patiently await the snark responses from those who don't like blades but can't stay out of a blade thread**.

>

> You mean like THIS post of yours ? LOL

>

> This thread isn't about "practice". It's about several mid-to-high handicappers expounding their opinions about how well they play with BLADES and how more forgiveness isn't at all "necessary" or even helpful. Since this is a discussion board, that sort of thing cries out for more experienced and varied opinions, whether you agree or not.

>

> So consider different points/opinions as a PSA, as pinestreetgolf, among MANY others, have suggested.

>

> The blind leading the blind is seldom, if ever, a good way to go. And make no mistake, mid-to-high handicappers AND beginners are, in this instance, the "blind".

 

I think what NSXGUY is saying is that he doesn't have an answer to your question however he wants to chime in nonetheless. To say that someone is blind because they are a mid-to-high handicapper or a beginner is very reckless. There are many types of these players out there from the 1 bucket at the range prior to their round a week/month guy, to the guys that are very passionate about golf and practices to get better on a regular basis. Then there are those that will never get better and those that will very easily. To group everyone in a cap or range like this is insane because its like saying that everyone has the same mental capacity or that everyone has the same level of athleticism. Everyone's motor skills are different and everyone's ability to learn and what they use to learn is different. Couple that with the ability to access so much more on the internet today and i can certainly believe that the right person can improve drastically with any club in their hands with dedication to practice and some "passion". The want to be good has to be there. Getting back to the heart of this discussion, it isn't all about can you improve with blades, its about wouldn't you improve more with a more forgiving club during that same time?

I know this very smart young man who is a trained club fitter and he fits people to help them enjoy the game more. Most of that (i don't even want to guess percentage here) is fitted with the most useable (forgiving design) that he can with the most appropriate shaft that will help to maximize their potential based on their god given talents. Most of those people don't care about practicing to get better, they simply want to enjoy the game and get the most out of it with what they currently have. They get excited to see things like a higher ball flight and more carry distance. These are the people that need to run as far away from blades as possible.

Then there are a very small number of people that show signs of a ball striking skill that would allow them to play something more refined. Of those people the majority of them still walk away with the most useable (again more forgiving) design that produces the best numbers. Once in a while i am told there is a player who will for some reason produce better numbers/results with what would be considered the less forgiving club (a blade). This applies to both indoor and outdoor on course testing. It doesn't make sense however they carry on playing the blades and enjoying them.

Then there is that guy who insists on playing blades and doesn't even want to look at anything else besides that with the heaviest/stiffest shaft combo they can find. They rarely hit the ball very well and are always recommended to play something more suitable to their game even though they will not listen to reason.

I don't believe you can argue with numbers and results when comparing clubs in terms of what performs better for you. Better testing numbers however don't always result in better scores. That goes for people of all abilities and all cap ranges regardless of experience.

[nsxguy]

> @cliffhanger said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > > @lenman73 said:

> > > Per usual, a few peoples predictability does not disappoint. Instead of answering a question, instead post snark. I will ask again. Before the advent of game improvement equipment, how did anyone practice and improve? So every since the ping eye 2 came out, practicing with a blade 7 iron is more of an impossible task than putting someone in the moon. Got it.

> > >

> > > **Another question would be to the people who don't like blades, why not stay out of blade threads ?**

> > > **I patiently await the snark responses from those who don't like blades but can't stay out of a blade thread**.

> >

> > You mean like THIS post of yours ? LOL

> >

> > This thread isn't about "practice". It's about several mid-to-high handicappers expounding their opinions about how well they play with BLADES and how more forgiveness isn't at all "necessary" or even helpful. Since this is a discussion board, that sort of thing cries out for more experienced and varied opinions, whether you agree or not.

> >

> > So consider different points/opinions as a PSA, as pinestreetgolf, among MANY others, have suggested.

> >

> > The blind leading the blind is seldom, if ever, a good way to go. And make no mistake, mid-to-high handicappers AND beginners are, in this instance, the "blind".

>

> I think what NSXGUY is saying is that he doesn't have an answer to your question however he wants to chime in nonetheless.

 

LMAO

 

YOU are the one who apparently wants to chime in with just so much gibberish. I'd comment further on your ramblings but it was hard enough to read the first time - just one run on sentence it seems. LMAO

 

As for the answer to his question(s), the 2nd one I answered.

 

The first one needs no answer. It's basically rhetorical. How did one practice before game improvement equipment ? The same way they do now. They repeat, hopefully good, methods/mechanics and keep trying to repeat them properly. The more they repeat proper mechanics the more likely they are to repeat them on the course.

 

I would have thought even you would have gotten that one,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[revanant]

i> @MelloYello said:

> > @revanant said:

> > I'm not seeing a difference on quality of shot between the two irons. They both have a clear division between a bad shot, an okay shot, and a good shot.

>

> > @revanant said:

> > In other words, there's not a ton of difference between a player's cb and an MB--both will punish mishits, reward great hits, and give you a distinction between okay strikes and good strikes.

>

> I'm not trying to pick on you but it's worth pointing out that these statements are dangerous. One needs to be _precise_ with the language here. It matters.

>

> From Jupiter, both an elephant and a mouse appear equally small. But if we're standing beside the two, we can appreciate the difference in size.

>

> It depends on what scale we're measuring the separation of a player's CB and a MB. When we're talking about strikes that are far off-center, both will perform poorly. So when the misses are big, it's fair to say _"there is not a ton of difference."_

>

> HOWEVER, if we look at the results of strikes that are only slightly off-center, we will observe a clear advantage in the player's CB.

>

> This is why low handicaps are so adamant about MBs being hard to hit and why a lot of high-handicaps don't notice much difference. To a skilled golfer who's able to control their misses reasonably well, a little bit of forgiveness goes a long way.

>

>

> This was the basis for my advice earlier that if the game's elite (i.e. pros, ams, college, club champs, etc.) don't need blades, neither does a novice player. I think what you describe Rev, is that there's benefit in having a small target. I agree with that, but I don't think you need to make the target as small as physically possible. The amount of scratch-or-better players out there who play something other than a blade proves to us we don't need to go that far.

No worries, I think your points are perfectly fair. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the 716 CB. There's also nothing wrong with the AP2, or the AP1, or an all-hybrid set, for that matter.

 

That being said, the premise of this thread is "can a high handicap player benefit from playing blades?" My personal experience is that I really am benefiting.

 

If I had to quantify it, I'd say it's because the MP-4s I have in my bag have a low CG and thin sole, and the Apex Redlines I picked up have a thin sole, small head, and are very high launching due to weaker lofts and the old Apex 4 shaft.

 

In contrast, I had a very hard time with my old set of Adams Idea Tech V4s--I struggled with contact and the iron set phased in hybrids at 6 iron. I don't strike hybrids well--I think my sweeping stroke just isn't a good mesh--and the result was that I played measurably better when I swapped them out for 716 AP1s, from 4-PW. Any day of the week, I will take my AP1 6 iron or 5 iron over the Idea Tech hybrids. Similarly, my favorite club in my bag is my F6+ Baffler. It's a 5 wood. I hit it well from the tee and off the deck. But there are definitely threads that talk about dropping fairway woods in favor of hybrids, due to fairway woods being too hard to hit. For my game, I know that's not true--I tend to duff hybrids, and my F6+ Baffler changed my game and gave me the ability to hit a 170 carry / 190 total shot from the fairway and reach longer par 4s in two.

 

I think the major benefit I'm deriving from my MBs is from the thinner sole and smaller head, along with the mental confidence of looking down at a thinner topline. I could absolutely get a similar benefit from the 716 CB or, say, the Taylormade P-760--I've hit them on sims and liked the results, and they look great. And those traits are obviously shared with blades. I think the benefit I'm deriving is that, for my shallow swing, the MBs I have in my bag are giving me a lot of things that work well with my swing, and the overall benefit is higher than the dropoff in forgiveness hurts. For my game, I think we're talking about a 10 yard drop-off on an okay strike--and as long as the shot is straight, I'm thrilled with that. And I'm sure there are other high-handicappers out there who might benefit from the same things I have so far.

 

In other words, I'm not arguing that the MP-4 is better than the 716 CB for all players. I'm arguing that high handicappers shouldn't be afraid of plunking down $60 for an old set of Ben Hogans, taking them to the course or the range, and trying them out. The only thing at risk is $60, and they might find they have a lot of fun and/or see some benefits from the different iron characteristics.

 

 

 

 

 

> @nsxguy said:

> > @revanant said:

> > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > So hitting a blade was easier back then because courses were different. That cleared everything up.

> > > >

> > > > Oddly enough I still play alot of the courses I played back when with persimmon woods.

> > >

> > > Hitting a blade is hitting a blade. If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them. You can argue about how your miss is somehow different or how you don’t score any different with one vs the other or how terrible you are off the tee or how terrible your short game is etc all while ignoring the fact I presented.

> > I feel like you just haven't hit a blade in a long time. **It's just an iron with more mass in the center and a low CG**. You don't need a perfect strike for a playable golf shot. If you're a little off-center, you still get a good shot. And when you do strike it well, the reward factor is high.

> >

> > When I put my T-Zoids into play, I don't see a shift in the quality of my strikes. If I could only see the topline, I would have no idea there's a cavity there, because there just isn't much help.

> >

> > When I put my AP1s into play, I do find that I gain a club of distance, but at the expense of loft--I can get the same distance by just adding half an inch to my club, which is the difference between my AP1 7 iron and MP-4 6 iron. I also need to put more effort into my swing path and setup to get a fade or a draw, and that more of my shots seem to go straight and offline instead of fading or drawing back into the target. So, really, it seems to me that the major tradeoff is smaller sole + cleaner topline vs. half an inch on length. So for now, I'm playing my MP-4s, which look better than the other two at address and feel a bit softer than both on most of my strikes.

> >

>

> First of all, IIRC, you're the 27 handicapper yes ?

>

> **Secondly, NOBODY suggested that one needs "a perfect strike for a playable golf shot"**

>

> Thirdly, there is virtually no difference between the T-Zoid Pro and the MP-4. For all intents and purposes the T-Zoid is NOT a "Player's CB". You described it perfectly actually. See that square hunk of metal directly behind the SS of the T-Zoid. That "defeats" the purpose of the ever-so-slight perimeter weighting the rest of the back of the club shows.

>

> And finally (you're welcome), you can "can get the same distance by just adding half an inch to my club" ??? Adding a half inch makes virtually NO difference in distance. If it FITS you better you should hit it better and THAT may make a slight (or more depending on how ill fit the shorter club was to begin with) difference. The distance difference between your Ap-1 and the other 2 is most likely due to the difference in loft AND forgiveness of a slight(?) mishit.

>

> Oops, and BTW, blades typically have a higher center of gravity (than CBs of course).

>

>

I mean, I actually quoted the statement before me that said "If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them." I'm not making this stuff up.

 

As for T-Zoids vs. other irons--if we want to bring Matlby into it, the T-Zoid has vertical center of gravity (VCOG) at .738 and an MPF rating of 520. The JPX 900 Forged have a VCOG of .845 and an MPF of 438. My MP-4s have a VCOG of .762 and an MPF of 397.

 

To the extent that VCOG is useful, the MP-4 and T-Zoid have a lower center of gravity than a well -regarded and modern GI. And to the extent we want to use Maltby as a true indicator of forgiveness, the difference between my MP-4s and swapping them out for the JPX 900 is minor.

 

Finally, to your point about the AP1s--we both own a set. I like my AP1s. But if you check the specs, the AP1 7 iron is 31 degrees in loft and 37 inches long. I get about 145 carry, 155 total, at mid 5k spin with my AP1. Mishits have about 10 yards of drop-off, without exagerration. My MP-4 6 iron is at 30 degrees of loft and is 37.25 inches long. I get 145 carry, 155 total at mid-5k spin, and misses lose about 10 yards. So, I don't see a ton of difference, except in aesthetics, feel, and a bit of shot shape.

 

I know that you're of the opinion that "High Handicap = no authority" and that my experience is anecdotal--I'm not going to convince you with data about my shots, etc. The reason I'm willing to comment isn't because I'm an idiot, though--it's because despite public opinion, I've definitely seen personal improvement, and a lot of it seems related to me playing with a shape of iron that suits me better than that of my old Idea Tech V4s and that gives me much more of a warning when my swing is off. I know I'm not the only one that's experienced something similar, and at the end of the day, this is something incredibly easy to test--buy a 6 iron for $15, toss it in the bag, and see what happens.

[cliffhanger]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @cliffhanger said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > Per usual, a few peoples predictability does not disappoint. Instead of answering a question, instead post snark. I will ask again. Before the advent of game improvement equipment, how did anyone practice and improve? So every since the ping eye 2 came out, practicing with a blade 7 iron is more of an impossible task than putting someone in the moon. Got it.

> > > >

> > > > **Another question would be to the people who don't like blades, why not stay out of blade threads ?**

> > > > **I patiently await the snark responses from those who don't like blades but can't stay out of a blade thread**.

> > >

> > > You mean like THIS post of yours ? LOL

> > >

> > > This thread isn't about "practice". It's about several mid-to-high handicappers expounding their opinions about how well they play with BLADES and how more forgiveness isn't at all "necessary" or even helpful. Since this is a discussion board, that sort of thing cries out for more experienced and varied opinions, whether you agree or not.

> > >

> > > So consider different points/opinions as a PSA, as pinestreetgolf, among MANY others, have suggested.

> > >

> > > The blind leading the blind is seldom, if ever, a good way to go. And make no mistake, mid-to-high handicappers AND beginners are, in this instance, the "blind".

> >

> > I think what NSXGUY is saying is that he doesn't have an answer to your question however he wants to chime in nonetheless.

>

> LMAO

>

> YOU are the one who apparently wants to chime in with just so much gibberish. I'd comment further on your ramblings but it was hard enough to read the first time - just one run on sentence it seems. LMAO

>

> As for the answer to his question(s), the 2nd one I answered.

>

> The first one needs no answer. It's basically rhetorical. How did one practice before game improvement equipment ? The same way they do now. They repeat, hopefully good, methods/mechanics and keep trying to repeat them properly. The more they repeat proper mechanics the more likely they are to repeat them on the course.

>

> I would have thought even you would have gotten that one,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

>

i get it, you don't want to argue something sensible. In a way we are all right, and in another way we are all wrong. There are variables here that each of us doesn't want to admit exist. I'm on the fence as i have experienced this myself and while i have mixed emotions on my success (self diagnosed success) with blades in the bag, i can't argue with numbers. And until proven otherwise i can't argue with the successes or even failures that others have brought to this conversation. My personal experience was a combination of both. What i will argue with is the reckless generalization of groups of people based on their handicap of all different natural abilities that they are all the same. That is one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard someone try to argue. Based on your comments you would swear that you are the blind one.

[nsxguy]

>

>

> > @nsxguy said:

> > > @revanant said:

> > > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > So hitting a blade was easier back then because courses were different. That cleared everything up.

> > > > >

> > > > > Oddly enough I still play alot of the courses I played back when with persimmon woods.

> > > >

> > > > Hitting a blade is hitting a blade. If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them. You can argue about how your miss is somehow different or how you don’t score any different with one vs the other or how terrible you are off the tee or how terrible your short game is etc all while ignoring the fact I presented.

> > > I feel like you just haven't hit a blade in a long time. **It's just an iron with more mass in the center and a low CG**. You don't need a perfect strike for a playable golf shot. If you're a little off-center, you still get a good shot. And when you do strike it well, the reward factor is high.

> > >

> > > When I put my T-Zoids into play, I don't see a shift in the quality of my strikes. If I could only see the topline, I would have no idea there's a cavity there, because there just isn't much help.

> > >

> > > When I put my AP1s into play, I do find that I gain a club of distance, but at the expense of loft--I can get the same distance by just adding half an inch to my club, which is the difference between my AP1 7 iron and MP-4 6 iron. I also need to put more effort into my swing path and setup to get a fade or a draw, and that more of my shots seem to go straight and offline instead of fading or drawing back into the target. So, really, it seems to me that the major tradeoff is smaller sole + cleaner topline vs. half an inch on length. So for now, I'm playing my MP-4s, which look better than the other two at address and feel a bit softer than both on most of my strikes.

> > >

> >

> > First of all, IIRC, you're the 27 handicapper yes ?

> >

> > **Secondly, NOBODY suggested that one needs "a perfect strike for a playable golf shot"**

> >

> > Thirdly, there is virtually no difference between the T-Zoid Pro and the MP-4. For all intents and purposes the T-Zoid is NOT a "Player's CB". You described it perfectly actually. See that square hunk of metal directly behind the SS of the T-Zoid. That "defeats" the purpose of the ever-so-slight perimeter weighting the rest of the back of the club shows.

> >

> > And finally (you're welcome), you can "can get the same distance by just adding half an inch to my club" ??? Adding a half inch makes virtually NO difference in distance. If it FITS you better you should hit it better and THAT may make a slight (or more depending on how ill fit the shorter club was to begin with) difference. The distance difference between your Ap-1 and the other 2 is most likely due to the difference in loft AND forgiveness of a slight(?) mishit.

> >

> > Oops, and BTW, blades typically have a higher center of gravity (than CBs of course).

> >

> >

> I mean, I actually quoted the statement before me that said "If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them." I'm not making this stuff up.

>

> As for T-Zoids vs. other irons--if we want to bring Matlby into it, the T-Zoid has vertical center of gravity (VCOG) at .738 and an MPF rating of 520. The JPX 900 Forged have a VCOG of .845 and an MPF of 438. My MP-4s have a VCOG of .762 and an MPF of 397.

>

> To the extent that VCOG is useful, the MP-4 and T-Zoid have a lower center of gravity than a well -regarded and modern GI. And to the extent we want to use Maltby as a true indicator of forgiveness, the difference between my MP-4s and swapping them out for the JPX 900 is minor.

>

> Finally, to your point about the AP1s--we both own a set. I like my AP1s. But if you check the specs, the AP1 7 iron is 31 degrees in loft and 37 inches long. I get about 145 carry, 155 total, at mid 5k spin with my AP1. Mishits have about 10 yards of drop-off, without exagerration. My MP-4 6 iron is at 30 degrees of loft and is 37.25 inches long. I get 145 carry, 155 total at mid-5k spin, and misses lose about 10 yards. So, I don't see a ton of difference, except in aesthetics, feel, and a bit of shot shape.

>

> I know that you're of the opinion that "High Handicap = no authority" and that my experience is anecdotal--I'm not going to convince you with data about my shots, etc. The reason I'm willing to comment isn't because I'm an idiot, though--it's because despite public opinion, I've definitely seen personal improvement, and a lot of it seems related to me playing with a shape of iron that suits me better than that of my old Idea Tech V4s and that gives me much more of a warning when my swing is off. I know I'm not the only one that's experienced something similar, and at the end of the day, this is something incredibly easy to test--buy a 6 iron for $15, toss it in the bag, and see what happens.

 

I will grant you that "If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them" and "one needs "a perfect strike for a playable golf shot" are similar but they're not the same thing.

 

And while I don't believe Maltby is the be all and end and the T-Zoid and T-Zoid PRO are very similar anyway, you DID say "T-Zoid PRO" earlier.

 

Given your 6 and 7 of the different types with the same loft go about the same distance and assuming you're correct and you get roughly the same loss in distance I guess the only question remaining is how often you actually get those results.

 

On second thought, it doesn't really matter. As ~~usual~~ always in these threads, neither side is going to convince the other so I'll simply say "Enjoy the journey".

 

[BiggErn]

Yes. If you do not hit virtually every iron dead solid with an MB there is no benefit in playing them. Are seriously trying to argue that you can get a “playable” shot on a mishit? No kidding. I suppose the best players in the world who use MBs because they are world class ball strikers and wanting to use a club that is the ultimate in workability and precision are just looking for that “playable” shot because they mishit their irons 90% of the time. Yes that was a contradiction and made as much sense as anything you have posted. They aren’t looking for a playable shot on mishits because they don’t mishit. I’m willing to bet you do.....A LOT.

[cliffhanger]

> @BiggErn said:

> Yes. If you do not hit virtually every iron dead solid with an MB there is no benefit in playing them. Are seriously trying to argue that you can get a “playable” shot on a mishit? No kidding. I suppose the best players in the world who use MBs because they are world class ball strikers and wanting to use a club that is the ultimate in workability and precision are just looking for that “playable” shot because they mishit their irons 90% of the time. Yes that was a contradiction and made as much sense as anything you have posted. They aren’t looking for a playable shot on mishits because they don’t mishit. I’m willing to bet you do.....A LOT.

by the amount of PGA Tour player shank clips i have watched recently... yes they actually do mishit and sometimes those mishits are catastrophic misses. Again any comparison to a tour pro is actually quite irrelevant mainly because of the difference in pressure that they feel compared to the average golfer. we will never see that kind of pressure and for some of us thats a great thing. I doubt i could hit an actual shovel off a tee if asked to in front of those many people with that amount of money riding on every shot.

[nsxguy]

> @cliffhanger said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > > @cliffhanger said:

> > > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > Per usual, a few peoples predictability does not disappoint. Instead of answering a question, instead post snark. I will ask again. Before the advent of game improvement equipment, how did anyone practice and improve? So every since the ping eye 2 came out, practicing with a blade 7 iron is more of an impossible task than putting someone in the moon. Got it.

> > > > >

> > > > > **Another question would be to the people who don't like blades, why not stay out of blade threads ?**

> > > > > **I patiently await the snark responses from those who don't like blades but can't stay out of a blade thread**.

> > > >

> > > > You mean like THIS post of yours ? LOL

> > > >

> > > > This thread isn't about "practice". It's about several mid-to-high handicappers expounding their opinions about how well they play with BLADES and how more forgiveness isn't at all "necessary" or even helpful. Since this is a discussion board, that sort of thing cries out for more experienced and varied opinions, whether you agree or not.

> > > >

> > > > So consider different points/opinions as a PSA, as pinestreetgolf, among MANY others, have suggested.

> > > >

> > > > The blind leading the blind is seldom, if ever, a good way to go. And make no mistake, mid-to-high handicappers AND beginners are, in this instance, the "blind".

> > >

> > > I think what NSXGUY is saying is that he doesn't have an answer to your question however he wants to chime in nonetheless.

> >

> > LMAO

> >

> > YOU are the one who apparently wants to chime in with just so much gibberish. I'd comment further on your ramblings but it was hard enough to read the first time - just one run on sentence it seems. LMAO

> >

> > As for the answer to his question(s), the 2nd one I answered.

> >

> > The first one needs no answer. It's basically rhetorical. How did one practice before game improvement equipment ? The same way they do now. They repeat, hopefully good, methods/mechanics and keep trying to repeat them properly. The more they repeat proper mechanics the more likely they are to repeat them on the course.

> >

> > I would have thought even you would have gotten that one,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

> >

> i get it, you don't want to argue something sensible. In a way we are all right, and in another way we are all wrong. There are variables here that each of us doesn't want to admit exist. I'm on the fence as i have experienced this myself and while i have mixed emotions on my success (self diagnosed success) with blades in the bag, i can't argue with numbers. And until proven otherwise i can't argue with the successes or even failures that others have brought to this conversation. My personal experience was a combination of both. What i will argue with is the reckless generalization of groups of people based on their handicap of all different natural abilities that they are all the same. That is one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard someone try to argue. Based on your comments **you would swear** that you are the blind one.

 

Well, at least this post was somewhat readable. Don't you have any way to separate lines/make paragraphs on your phone ?

 

No, you don't get it. And it's not the first time.

 

Anyway, YOU might swear I was the blind one but I wouldn't. LOL I'd swear YOU were, but then I wouldn't try to return a discontinued (or any) club for FULL CREDIT to a store other than the one I bought it at either, so I guess no surprise there,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[cliffhanger]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @cliffhanger said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > @cliffhanger said:

> > > > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > > Per usual, a few peoples predictability does not disappoint. Instead of answering a question, instead post snark. I will ask again. Before the advent of game improvement equipment, how did anyone practice and improve? So every since the ping eye 2 came out, practicing with a blade 7 iron is more of an impossible task than putting someone in the moon. Got it.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > **Another question would be to the people who don't like blades, why not stay out of blade threads ?**

> > > > > > **I patiently await the snark responses from those who don't like blades but can't stay out of a blade thread**.

> > > > >

> > > > > You mean like THIS post of yours ? LOL

> > > > >

> > > > > This thread isn't about "practice". It's about several mid-to-high handicappers expounding their opinions about how well they play with BLADES and how more forgiveness isn't at all "necessary" or even helpful. Since this is a discussion board, that sort of thing cries out for more experienced and varied opinions, whether you agree or not.

> > > > >

> > > > > So consider different points/opinions as a PSA, as pinestreetgolf, among MANY others, have suggested.

> > > > >

> > > > > The blind leading the blind is seldom, if ever, a good way to go. And make no mistake, mid-to-high handicappers AND beginners are, in this instance, the "blind".

> > > >

> > > > I think what NSXGUY is saying is that he doesn't have an answer to your question however he wants to chime in nonetheless.

> > >

> > > LMAO

> > >

> > > YOU are the one who apparently wants to chime in with just so much gibberish. I'd comment further on your ramblings but it was hard enough to read the first time - just one run on sentence it seems. LMAO

> > >

> > > As for the answer to his question(s), the 2nd one I answered.

> > >

> > > The first one needs no answer. It's basically rhetorical. How did one practice before game improvement equipment ? The same way they do now. They repeat, hopefully good, methods/mechanics and keep trying to repeat them properly. The more they repeat proper mechanics the more likely they are to repeat them on the course.

> > >

> > > I would have thought even you would have gotten that one,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

> > >

> > i get it, you don't want to argue something sensible. In a way we are all right, and in another way we are all wrong. There are variables here that each of us doesn't want to admit exist. I'm on the fence as i have experienced this myself and while i have mixed emotions on my success (self diagnosed success) with blades in the bag, i can't argue with numbers. And until proven otherwise i can't argue with the successes or even failures that others have brought to this conversation. My personal experience was a combination of both. What i will argue with is the reckless generalization of groups of people based on their handicap of all different natural abilities that they are all the same. That is one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard someone try to argue. Based on your comments **you would swear** that you are the blind one.

>

> Well, at least this post was somewhat readable. Don't you have any way to separate lines/make paragraphs on your phone ?

>

> Anyway, YOU might swear I was the blind one but I wouldn't. LOL I'd swear YOU were, but then I wouldn't try to return a discontinued (or any) club for FULL CREDIT to a store other than the one I bought it at either, so I guess no surprise there,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

why not? is it not the same as trading in a car at a dealer you didn't buy it at because they offer you more money? Seriously you have to let it go man... as i said before i would definitely not hire you to manage my company with your lack of knowledge on what constitutes a good or bad deal for the business.

[cliffhanger]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @cliffhanger said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > @cliffhanger said:

> > > > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > > Per usual, a few peoples predictability does not disappoint. Instead of answering a question, instead post snark. I will ask again. Before the advent of game improvement equipment, how did anyone practice and improve? So every since the ping eye 2 came out, practicing with a blade 7 iron is more of an impossible task than putting someone in the moon. Got it.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > **Another question would be to the people who don't like blades, why not stay out of blade threads ?**

> > > > > > **I patiently await the snark responses from those who don't like blades but can't stay out of a blade thread**.

> > > > >

> > > > > You mean like THIS post of yours ? LOL

> > > > >

> > > > > This thread isn't about "practice". It's about several mid-to-high handicappers expounding their opinions about how well they play with BLADES and how more forgiveness isn't at all "necessary" or even helpful. Since this is a discussion board, that sort of thing cries out for more experienced and varied opinions, whether you agree or not.

> > > > >

> > > > > So consider different points/opinions as a PSA, as pinestreetgolf, among MANY others, have suggested.

> > > > >

> > > > > The blind leading the blind is seldom, if ever, a good way to go. And make no mistake, mid-to-high handicappers AND beginners are, in this instance, the "blind".

> > > >

> > > > I think what NSXGUY is saying is that he doesn't have an answer to your question however he wants to chime in nonetheless.

> > >

> > > LMAO

> > >

> > > YOU are the one who apparently wants to chime in with just so much gibberish. I'd comment further on your ramblings but it was hard enough to read the first time - just one run on sentence it seems. LMAO

> > >

> > > As for the answer to his question(s), the 2nd one I answered.

> > >

> > > The first one needs no answer. It's basically rhetorical. How did one practice before game improvement equipment ? The same way they do now. They repeat, hopefully good, methods/mechanics and keep trying to repeat them properly. The more they repeat proper mechanics the more likely they are to repeat them on the course.

> > >

> > > I would have thought even you would have gotten that one,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

> > >

> > i get it, you don't want to argue something sensible. In a way we are all right, and in another way we are all wrong. There are variables here that each of us doesn't want to admit exist. I'm on the fence as i have experienced this myself and while i have mixed emotions on my success (self diagnosed success) with blades in the bag, i can't argue with numbers. And until proven otherwise i can't argue with the successes or even failures that others have brought to this conversation. My personal experience was a combination of both. What i will argue with is the reckless generalization of groups of people based on their handicap of all different natural abilities that they are all the same. That is one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard someone try to argue. Based on your comments **you would swear** that you are the blind one.

>

> Well, at least this post was somewhat readable. Don't you have any way to separate lines/make paragraphs on your phone ?

>

> No, you don't get it. And it's not the first time.

>

> Anyway, YOU might swear I was the blind one but I wouldn't. LOL I'd swear YOU were, but then I wouldn't try to return a discontinued (or any) club for FULL CREDIT to a store other than the one I bought it at either, so I guess no surprise there,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

 

and i am super glad you thought my post was readable, i set them up like that because i know you like it. I like your posts because all the LOL's and how they add a sense of "you know what your talking about"... lol?

[dpb5031]

I played a money match this morning. Because of this discussion I brought my MP33 6 iron to the club and warmed up with it paying careful attention to strike, divot pattern, and ball flight. (Hadn't done this in a while) Once I got to repeating it with regularity I switched over to my i200s, then went out and played a very nice round, where BTW, I was very happy to have the forgiveness of my i200s on several occasions. (E.g. on our 4th hole I toed an 8 iron from 170 downwind that still made the front fringe and left an easy 2 putt for par. No doubt would have been a challenging pitch had I missed it the same amount with a blade.)

 

Still, I find practicing and/or warming up with the blade to be beneficial. Helps refine my swing, and boosts my confidence. Then again I'm a low HC player capable of shooting under par ( shot 1 under 71 today from 6700 and won some ca$h ?).

 

My point is, there is middle ground here. Do I think practicing or playing with blades will help a 20+ HC? Probably not....and there are likely a lot more and better things a higher cap can do to improve. Still, it may be a good part of training or practice for some IMHO.

 

 

[nostatic]

fwiw, even with clubs that have some GI qualities (e.g. i210), I certainly can tell the difference between a good and bad hit. In fact there are shots I'll hit that I know weren't quite right even though they fly reasonably well. So to me this whole debate boils down to:

 

will practicing with the smallest possible sweet spot improve my ball striking more than a club with a larger sweet spot?

 

I think it could be the case if you have a lot of time to practice and are aware enough of your swing to make proper adjustments. In a world where time is limited, then it becomes a zero-sum game. Hit more balls with the 7i to get X% more consistency or work on chipping/putting or... If I were in my teens again, I'd be hitting tons of balls with a blade (which is pretty much what I did 40 years ago - my dad's Snead irons iirc). Today that literally is not an option - the mind is willing but the flesh is older and tired. So for me, my practice is about getting striking "good enough", knowing that other parts of my game are where I'm going to make up strokes and picking practice that has less wear-and-tear on the body (e.g. putting, chipping). Other people's calculations will no doubt be different.

[bodhi555]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @revanant said:

> > I'm not seeing a difference on quality of shot between the two irons. They both have a clear division between a bad shot, an okay shot, and a good shot.

>

> > @revanant said:

> > In other words, there's not a ton of difference between a player's cb and an MB--both will punish mishits, reward great hits, and give you a distinction between okay strikes and good strikes.

>

> I'm not trying to pick on you but it's worth pointing out that these statements are dangerous. One needs to be _precise_ with the language here. It matters.

>

> From Jupiter, both an elephant and a mouse appear equally small. But if we're standing beside the two, we can appreciate the difference in size.

>

> It depends on what scale we're measuring the separation of a player's CB and a MB. When we're talking about strikes that are far off-center, both will perform poorly. So when the misses are big, it's fair to say _"there is not a ton of difference."_

>

> HOWEVER, if we look at the results of strikes that are only slightly off-center, we will observe a clear advantage in the player's CB.

>

> This is why low handicaps are so adamant about MBs being hard to hit and why a lot of high-handicaps don't notice much difference. To a skilled golfer who's able to control their misses reasonably well, a little bit of forgiveness goes a long way.

>

>

> This was the basis for my advice earlier that if the game's elite (i.e. pros, ams, college, club champs, etc.) don't need blades, neither does a novice player. I think what you describe Rev, is that there's benefit in having a small target. I agree with that, but I don't think you need to make the target as small as physically possible. The amount of scratch-or-better players out there who play something other than a blade proves to us we don't need to go that far.

 

Point of order here, but I consider myself a low handicap golfer - CONGU 8, but 18 Birdies has worked it out at 5 over 70+ rounds - and I don't find MBs hard to hit compared to a PCB in the slightest. As long as I'm ina golf ball sized area around the middle of the face, the ball goes as far as I need to to, much like it would with a cavity. In fact I lose more distance by flicking on the way through than I do by missing the centre. This massive gulf in scoring between the two I keep hearing about is a myth, frankly.

 

I also know that I wasn't as adept at finding the middle of the face before I got the MBs as I am now - yes there is a lot of practice involved, but I can't say they have been detrimental to my game at all. But then I tend to work best without a safety net, and what has worked for me might not work someone else. However if they don't try, then how are they ever going to find out? And if they are the sort of person they work for, who cares if it doesn't make sense for your game?

 

 

[MelloYello]

> @bodhi555 said:

> As long as I'm in a golf ball sized area around the middle of the face, the ball goes as far as I need to to, much like it would with a cavity.

 

Carry it as far as you need to? First, I'm not even sure what that means other than clearing a hazard or something and if that's your standard, then fine.

 

But anyhow, if you're hitting close to the center every time, it sounds like you're above the level of a mid-to-high handicap iron player which makes me wonder if you read the back and forth between me and dpb earlier in the thread where he and I hashed out our thoughts on low-handicappers practicing with blades? I would reference you back to those pages rather than go through that again.

 

> @bodhi555 said:

> This massive gulf in scoring between the two I keep hearing about is a myth, frankly.

 

And here you resort to hyperbole to make your point.

 

I would remind you that if somebody expects equipment in general to make a "massive" difference in scoring they are barking up the wrong tree.

 

> @bodhi555 said:

> However if they don't try, then how are they ever going to find out?

 

I've reiterated that same point a million times on these boards, dude. People evidently don't listen. As I've said countless times, that was my journey. But that won't stop me from calling certain steps along that journey more valuable than others.

 

> @bodhi555 said:

> And if they are the sort of person they work for, who cares if it doesn't make sense for your game?

 

Annnnd there it is. 23 pages in and we're still on _that_.

 

 

 

[revanant]

> @nsxguy said:

>

> >

> >

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > @revanant said:

> > > > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > > So hitting a blade was easier back then because courses were different. That cleared everything up.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Oddly enough I still play alot of the courses I played back when with persimmon woods.

> > > > >

> > > > > Hitting a blade is hitting a blade. If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them. You can argue about how your miss is somehow different or how you don’t score any different with one vs the other or how terrible you are off the tee or how terrible your short game is etc all while ignoring the fact I presented.

> > > > I feel like you just haven't hit a blade in a long time. **It's just an iron with more mass in the center and a low CG**. You don't need a perfect strike for a playable golf shot. If you're a little off-center, you still get a good shot. And when you do strike it well, the reward factor is high.

> > > >

> > > > When I put my T-Zoids into play, I don't see a shift in the quality of my strikes. If I could only see the topline, I would have no idea there's a cavity there, because there just isn't much help.

> > > >

> > > > When I put my AP1s into play, I do find that I gain a club of distance, but at the expense of loft--I can get the same distance by just adding half an inch to my club, which is the difference between my AP1 7 iron and MP-4 6 iron. I also need to put more effort into my swing path and setup to get a fade or a draw, and that more of my shots seem to go straight and offline instead of fading or drawing back into the target. So, really, it seems to me that the major tradeoff is smaller sole + cleaner topline vs. half an inch on length. So for now, I'm playing my MP-4s, which look better than the other two at address and feel a bit softer than both on most of my strikes.

> > > >

> > >

> > > First of all, IIRC, you're the 27 handicapper yes ?

> > >

> > > **Secondly, NOBODY suggested that one needs "a perfect strike for a playable golf shot"**

> > >

> > > Thirdly, there is virtually no difference between the T-Zoid Pro and the MP-4. For all intents and purposes the T-Zoid is NOT a "Player's CB". You described it perfectly actually. See that square hunk of metal directly behind the SS of the T-Zoid. That "defeats" the purpose of the ever-so-slight perimeter weighting the rest of the back of the club shows.

> > >

> > > And finally (you're welcome), you can "can get the same distance by just adding half an inch to my club" ??? Adding a half inch makes virtually NO difference in distance. If it FITS you better you should hit it better and THAT may make a slight (or more depending on how ill fit the shorter club was to begin with) difference. The distance difference between your Ap-1 and the other 2 is most likely due to the difference in loft AND forgiveness of a slight(?) mishit.

> > >

> > > Oops, and BTW, blades typically have a higher center of gravity (than CBs of course).

> > >

> > >

> > I mean, I actually quoted the statement before me that said "If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them." I'm not making this stuff up.

> >

> > As for T-Zoids vs. other irons--if we want to bring Matlby into it, the T-Zoid has vertical center of gravity (VCOG) at .738 and an MPF rating of 520. The JPX 900 Forged have a VCOG of .845 and an MPF of 438. My MP-4s have a VCOG of .762 and an MPF of 397.

> >

> > To the extent that VCOG is useful, the MP-4 and T-Zoid have a lower center of gravity than a well -regarded and modern GI. And to the extent we want to use Maltby as a true indicator of forgiveness, the difference between my MP-4s and swapping them out for the JPX 900 is minor.

> >

> > Finally, to your point about the AP1s--we both own a set. I like my AP1s. But if you check the specs, the AP1 7 iron is 31 degrees in loft and 37 inches long. I get about 145 carry, 155 total, at mid 5k spin with my AP1. Mishits have about 10 yards of drop-off, without exagerration. My MP-4 6 iron is at 30 degrees of loft and is 37.25 inches long. I get 145 carry, 155 total at mid-5k spin, and misses lose about 10 yards. So, I don't see a ton of difference, except in aesthetics, feel, and a bit of shot shape.

> >

> > I know that you're of the opinion that "High Handicap = no authority" and that my experience is anecdotal--I'm not going to convince you with data about my shots, etc. The reason I'm willing to comment isn't because I'm an idiot, though--it's because despite public opinion, I've definitely seen personal improvement, and a lot of it seems related to me playing with a shape of iron that suits me better than that of my old Idea Tech V4s and that gives me much more of a warning when my swing is off. I know I'm not the only one that's experienced something similar, and at the end of the day, this is something incredibly easy to test--buy a 6 iron for $15, toss it in the bag, and see what happens.

>

> I will grant you that "If you don’t hit virtually every shot with one dead solid there is no benefit to playing them" and "one needs "a perfect strike for a playable golf shot" are similar but they're not the same thing.

>

> And while I don't believe Malby is the be all and end and the T-Zoid and T-Zoid PRO are very similar anyway, you DID say "T-Zoid PRO" earlier.

>

> Given your 6 and 7 of the different types with the same loft go about the same distance and assuming you're correct and you get roughly the same loss in distance I guess the only question remaining is how often you actually get those results.

>

> On second thought, it doesn't really matter. As ~~usual~~ always in these threads, neither side is going to convince the other so I'll simply say "Enjoy the journey".

>

Appreciate it. Depending on whether you play in South Florida or somewhere else, I may wander into you on that journey. :)

 

For what it's worth, the numbers I quoted are for the T-Zoid Pro, my actual 6 iron. Maltby ranked the T-Zoid Pro. We're talking about the same iron--cavity back with a little bit of trapezoidal muscle in the middle, and the words "Pro" written on the back.

 

Source: https://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPF_MIZUNO.pdf

 

But from a tech standpoint, I think the big point is that my MP-4s have a lower COG than the JPX 900 Forged, and a very close MPF rating. Personally, I've started to ignore the MPF ratings, but for folks who put stock in it, the MP-4 and JPX 900 Forged are separated by a mere 41 points.

 

As for the frequency of me hitting my number on the MP-4, it's not infrequent. If I do my job mentally and am careful with my setup, I tend to get good results. But I readily admit that practice in the sim isn't the same thing as reality on the course. I'm hoping I can translate my practice to actual on-course play, when I only get one shot and have to deal with imperfect lies. But the only way to test that out is to bring my MP-4s onto the course with me and see how it shakes out. Which brings us full circle--I'm a high handicapper, and I'm going to play some rounds with blades this summer and see how it goes.

 

I think it'll be a good learning experience, and I'll do my best to make sure that no innocent golf courses will be harmed in the process. :)

 

[BiggErn]

> @cliffhanger said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > Yes. If you do not hit virtually every iron dead solid with an MB there is no benefit in playing them. Are seriously trying to argue that you can get a “playable” shot on a mishit? No kidding. I suppose the best players in the world who use MBs because they are world class ball strikers and wanting to use a club that is the ultimate in workability and precision are just looking for that “playable” shot because they mishit their irons 90% of the time. Yes that was a contradiction and made as much sense as anything you have posted. They aren’t looking for a playable shot on mishits because they don’t mishit. I’m willing to bet you do.....A LOT.

> by the amount of PGA Tour player shank clips i have watched recently... yes they actually do mishit and sometimes those mishits are catastrophic misses. Again any comparison to a tour pro is actually quite irrelevant mainly because of the difference in pressure that they feel compared to the average golfer. we will never see that kind of pressure and for some of us thats a great thing. I doubt i could hit an actual shovel off a tee if asked to in front of those many people with that amount of money riding on every shot.

 

Whatever you need to do to convince yourself.

[cliffhanger]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @cliffhanger said:

> > > @BiggErn said:

> > > Yes. If you do not hit virtually every iron dead solid with an MB there is no benefit in playing them. Are seriously trying to argue that you can get a “playable” shot on a mishit? No kidding. I suppose the best players in the world who use MBs because they are world class ball strikers and wanting to use a club that is the ultimate in workability and precision are just looking for that “playable” shot because they mishit their irons 90% of the time. Yes that was a contradiction and made as much sense as anything you have posted. They aren’t looking for a playable shot on mishits because they don’t mishit. I’m willing to bet you do.....A LOT.

> > by the amount of PGA Tour player shank clips i have watched recently... yes they actually do mishit and sometimes those mishits are catastrophic misses. Again any comparison to a tour pro is actually quite irrelevant mainly because of the difference in pressure that they feel compared to the average golfer. we will never see that kind of pressure and for some of us thats a great thing. I doubt i could hit an actual shovel off a tee if asked to in front of those many people with that amount of money riding on every shot.

>

> Whatever you need to do to convince yourself.

 

I don’t need to convince myself, I am not playing blades this year. Carry on trying to convince others of what you believe in based on innacurrate statements.

[MelloYello]

> @BiggErn said:

> Whatever you need to do to convince yourself.

 

Is it worth cataloging all of these apparent reasons why we have to ignore the best players?

 

(1) The pros play for money so it's _totally_ different. Amateurs need the sweet feel of a flushed blade to keep them going!

 

(2) Every shot matters for them so...oh, snap, that disproves my theory so forget this one.

 

(3) Dude, they're totally manipulated by Big-GI. They're just puppets for multi-national corporations who want to steal our blades.