My Experience Gaming Blades as a Mid-High Handicapper

[Tazz4629]

> @Andus said:

> Anyway, my point in writing this is to hopefully inspire somebody else on the fence about blades to give them a try. If you have any other specific questions, ask away!

 

If you enjoy playing blades play them.

 

Golf can be a hard, frustrating game at times. Having equipment that inspires you to play, to improve, that allows you to enjoy this great game more go for it.

After all isn't enjoying this game we love what it really is all about.

[Tazz4629]

> @Ryan5508 said:

> There are plenty of guys that play very good golf until they are near the greens. I see it all the time and play with them as well.

 

I am one of those guys. You might have seen me. Off the green in 2 on a par 5. Walk off with an 8. Thats me. I can do this with blades, players CB's or SGI irons.

It's a real skill I tell ya. ;)

[pinestreetgolf]

@revanant said:

> > @Timbo929 said:

> > > @KaiserSoze said:

> > > All you guys/gals talking about blades being very playable with no real loss of distance or direction on mishits are ignoring fundamental physics and math. There is a reason perimeter weighted clubs work.

> >

> > I thought forgiveness on a iron heads were for distance only and not direction..

> >

> > like if you miss the sweet spot you will still get the distance but has nothing to do with "direction" forgiveness.

> >

> > I could be wrong but that's what my fitter said. Maybe technology advanced from 2016.

> I don’t generally miss with a square clubface. Usually I’ve left it open. Sometimes, I can catch it closed.

>

> If I’m also not in the center of the club face with a blade, there’s less mass, so the ball doesn’t go so far offline. It loses steam.

>

> Perimeter weighting should do just that—put more weight in the perimeter. So if I make a strike with an open face, and I’m off center, then not only does the ball go right, but it should go further with more height. Now, I’m more offline.

>

>

>

 

That makes no sense at all. Just hit PW on every shot. You'll always be short of the trouble even on a mishit, just like you want!

 

Distance and dispersion are the same thing. Being 2* right at 60 mph ball speed at 2* right at 80 mph ball speed are not the same quality of swing or club - the second is much better even though it goes "further right". Again, if you would pick the 60 mph so your "miss will be less offline" then you're going to shoot high scores for a long time. You want your mishits to go as close to your normal distance as possible. Its the only possible way to manage them and the course. We play in three dimensions. If you are telling us (I don't believe this, by the way) that your right miss with a blade is 20 freaking yards (60 feet) short, that gives you a box to miss in of approximately 1200 square feet, or the size of a small house. So if you are starting a standard 30 yard green with trouble on two sides and your trusty rusty blade in your hand, where the hell do you aim? Just pin and pray? If those numbers are right you are throwing out, your dispersion pattern is so massive you can't possibly manage a course.

[nsxguy]

> @cliffhanger said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > > @joj said:

> > > Low single digit handicap.

> > > Here is my biggest takeaway from playing blades the last year.

> > >

> > > The ball control is what I always wanted.

> > >

> > > I don’t think I will ever go back to cavity’s. For years I’ve played forgiving irons, made to go high and straight. I shot my first round in the 60’s with TM Burner irons. It was **always difficult to flight balls or hit a baby draw or cut**. I would try to hit a 5 iron under a tree branch and it would jump off the face straight up in the air or I would need to hit a slight draw and I had to make a hook swing to get it to move.

> > >

> > > I say all this because cavity backs work for getting the ball to go straighter and higher, but at some point you start battling needing it to go high and straight. Crazy talk.

> >

> > Totally agree about the cut. The draw ? Not so much. I even agree with the G-d of Blades when he said "CBs are more forgiving, blades are more workable". He's absolutely correct.

> >

> > And yes, it is certainly easier to work the ball both ways with blades. I've found that with my CBs it is nigh impossible to move it to the fade side. The draw side ? No problem at all. Cbs are made not only to be more forgiving but also to mitigate a slice. Generally speaking, the more forgiveness the higher the handicapper the club is targeted at and the higher the handicapper the more they need help with a slice.

> >

> > As for hitting out from under a tree goes I liken that to my car buying habits. In the past, when I bought my NSX I had friends asking me "What do you want with a 2 seater ? You can't take more than one person with you".

> >

> > And I'm like "Are you kidding me ? I'm single. 80% of the time I drive by myself in the car and the other 20% of the time my GF is the passenger. What ? I should buy an SUV just in case one day I might need to carry 8 passengers ?" LOL

> >

> > Same thing with my irons. I should get blades because I might find myself under a tree ? Nope. I want my irons to go straight with consistent distance and direction and if I put it under a tree I'll live with not having a blade I might be able to punch out a little bit better with. Chances are I'd make the same score with either club from under that tree.

>

> you do realize that your car buying analogy is backwards from the point you were trying to make right? In your story you buying the NSX is the absolute same as the mid handicap trying to justify buying blades and your buddies represent the CB advocates lol. You try to justify the purchase because you drive by yourself 80% of the time and 20% with your GF. Even though the NSX is still to this day considered a very stiff and rigid ride (thats unforgiving for the non car guys). It does seem funny that you use a 8 seater SUV as the extreme to make your point. There are a lot of reasonable choices between that and the uncomfortable and non practical NSX. I went through the same thing with my first Vette purchase... i was questioned by many who couldn't wrap their head around it.

 

So much for you creating paragraphs. LOL

 

No, my car buying analogy was EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. Obviously you didn't get it.

 

I didn't suggest anything about buying the NSX because of its performance or ride. I brought it up strictly for its cargo capacity. That's ALL I mentioned about the 2 vehicles.

 

As in I buy/get/use a car that works for ME MOST of the time (1 or 2 people), not for the occasional exception (8).

 

As in I don't buy blades for the occasions where I MIGHT need one, such as the suggestion by the poster I quoted about being able to hit the ball lower out from under a tree. I buy CBs because they work for me the vast majority of the time.

 

Can you hear me now ?

 

 

[lenman73]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @cliffhanger said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > @joj said:

> > > > Low single digit handicap.

> > > > Here is my biggest takeaway from playing blades the last year.

> > > >

> > > > The ball control is what I always wanted.

> > > >

> > > > I don’t think I will ever go back to cavity’s. For years I’ve played forgiving irons, made to go high and straight. I shot my first round in the 60’s with TM Burner irons. It was **always difficult to flight balls or hit a baby draw or cut**. I would try to hit a 5 iron under a tree branch and it would jump off the face straight up in the air or I would need to hit a slight draw and I had to make a hook swing to get it to move.

> > > >

> > > > I say all this because cavity backs work for getting the ball to go straighter and higher, but at some point you start battling needing it to go high and straight. Crazy talk.

> > >

> > > Totally agree about the cut. The draw ? Not so much. I even agree with the G-d of Blades when he said "CBs are more forgiving, blades are more workable". He's absolutely correct.

> > >

> > > And yes, it is certainly easier to work the ball both ways with blades. I've found that with my CBs it is nigh impossible to move it to the fade side. The draw side ? No problem at all. Cbs are made not only to be more forgiving but also to mitigate a slice. Generally speaking, the more forgiveness the higher the handicapper the club is targeted at and the higher the handicapper the more they need help with a slice.

> > >

> > > As for hitting out from under a tree goes I liken that to my car buying habits. In the past, when I bought my NSX I had friends asking me "What do you want with a 2 seater ? You can't take more than one person with you".

> > >

> > > And I'm like "Are you kidding me ? I'm single. 80% of the time I drive by myself in the car and the other 20% of the time my GF is the passenger. What ? I should buy an SUV just in case one day I might need to carry 8 passengers ?" LOL

> > >

> > > Same thing with my irons. I should get blades because I might find myself under a tree ? Nope. I want my irons to go straight with consistent distance and direction and if I put it under a tree I'll live with not having a blade I might be able to punch out a little bit better with. Chances are I'd make the same score with either club from under that tree.

> >

> > you do realize that your car buying analogy is backwards from the point you were trying to make right? In your story you buying the NSX is the absolute same as the mid handicap trying to justify buying blades and your buddies represent the CB advocates lol. You try to justify the purchase because you drive by yourself 80% of the time and 20% with your GF. Even though the NSX is still to this day considered a very stiff and rigid ride (thats unforgiving for the non car guys). It does seem funny that you use a 8 seater SUV as the extreme to make your point. There are a lot of reasonable choices between that and the uncomfortable and non practical NSX. I went through the same thing with my first Vette purchase... i was questioned by many who couldn't wrap their head around it.

>

> So much for you creating paragraphs. LOL

>

> No, my car buying analogy was EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. Obviously you didn't get it.

>

> I didn't suggest anything about buying the NSX because of its performance or ride. I brought it up strictly for its cargo capacity. That's ALL I mentioned about the 2 vehicles.

>

> As in I buy/get/use a car that works for ME MOST of the time (1 or 2 people), not for the occasional exception (8).

>

> As in I don't buy blades for the occasions where I MIGHT need one, such as the suggestion by the poster I quoted about being able to hit the ball lower out from under a tree. I buy CBs because they work for me the vast majority of the time.

>

> Can you hear me now ?

>

>

 

As an aside, I have 2 questions. Do you still have a NSX and if so what year? I know someone with a mint 1991 and I have been a fan since their release.

[cliffhanger]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @cliffhanger said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > @joj said:

> > > > Low single digit handicap.

> > > > Here is my biggest takeaway from playing blades the last year.

> > > >

> > > > The ball control is what I always wanted.

> > > >

> > > > I don’t think I will ever go back to cavity’s. For years I’ve played forgiving irons, made to go high and straight. I shot my first round in the 60’s with TM Burner irons. It was **always difficult to flight balls or hit a baby draw or cut**. I would try to hit a 5 iron under a tree branch and it would jump off the face straight up in the air or I would need to hit a slight draw and I had to make a hook swing to get it to move.

> > > >

> > > > I say all this because cavity backs work for getting the ball to go straighter and higher, but at some point you start battling needing it to go high and straight. Crazy talk.

> > >

> > > Totally agree about the cut. The draw ? Not so much. I even agree with the G-d of Blades when he said "CBs are more forgiving, blades are more workable". He's absolutely correct.

> > >

> > > And yes, it is certainly easier to work the ball both ways with blades. I've found that with my CBs it is nigh impossible to move it to the fade side. The draw side ? No problem at all. Cbs are made not only to be more forgiving but also to mitigate a slice. Generally speaking, the more forgiveness the higher the handicapper the club is targeted at and the higher the handicapper the more they need help with a slice.

> > >

> > > As for hitting out from under a tree goes I liken that to my car buying habits. In the past, when I bought my NSX I had friends asking me "What do you want with a 2 seater ? You can't take more than one person with you".

> > >

> > > And I'm like "Are you kidding me ? I'm single. 80% of the time I drive by myself in the car and the other 20% of the time my GF is the passenger. What ? I should buy an SUV just in case one day I might need to carry 8 passengers ?" LOL

> > >

> > > Same thing with my irons. I should get blades because I might find myself under a tree ? Nope. I want my irons to go straight with consistent distance and direction and if I put it under a tree I'll live with not having a blade I might be able to punch out a little bit better with. Chances are I'd make the same score with either club from under that tree.

> >

> > you do realize that your car buying analogy is backwards from the point you were trying to make right? In your story you buying the NSX is the absolute same as the mid handicap trying to justify buying blades and your buddies represent the CB advocates lol. You try to justify the purchase because you drive by yourself 80% of the time and 20% with your GF. Even though the NSX is still to this day considered a very stiff and rigid ride (thats unforgiving for the non car guys). It does seem funny that you use a 8 seater SUV as the extreme to make your point. There are a lot of reasonable choices between that and the uncomfortable and non practical NSX. I went through the same thing with my first Vette purchase... i was questioned by many who couldn't wrap their head around it.

>

> So much for you creating paragraphs. LOL

>

> No, my car buying analogy was EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. Obviously you didn't get it.

>

> I didn't suggest anything about buying the NSX because of its performance or ride. I brought it up strictly for its cargo capacity. That's ALL I mentioned about the 2 vehicles.

>

> As in I buy/get/use a car that works for ME MOST of the time (1 or 2 people), not for the occasional exception (8).

>

> As in I don't buy blades for the occasions where I MIGHT need one, such as the suggestion by the poster I quoted about being able to hit the ball lower out from under a tree. I buy CBs because they work for me the vast majority of the time.

>

> Can you hear me now ?

>

>

I always have a hard time hearing nonsense. It’s hard to take away you meant cargo space when you only referenced seating by the way. Maybe say what you mean. My point was to establish that your NSX was not a rationale purchase and certainly not a responsible one if it was your only means of transportation. Forgiveness also applies to vehicles which the NSX is well known for being “unforgiving” however your choice is your choice even though more forgiving options are available... even with high performance capabilities. So its rather hypocritical of you to push forgiveness on others regarding golf purchases when you obviously are not consistent with your own purchases. You don’t buy a NSX because it’s all you need for “Cargo Space”, you buy it for performance and it’s coolness by design. A vanity purchase maybe? By the way your analogy was in fact presented backwards LOL, OMG, LMAO

 

Now let’s start a new paragraph... just kidding

 

[revanant]

> @pinestreetgolf said:

> @revanant said:

> > > @Timbo929 said:

> > > > @KaiserSoze said:

> > > > All you guys/gals talking about blades being very playable with no real loss of distance or direction on mishits are ignoring fundamental physics and math. There is a reason perimeter weighted clubs work.

> > >

> > > I thought forgiveness on a iron heads were for distance only and not direction..

> > >

> > > like if you miss the sweet spot you will still get the distance but has nothing to do with "direction" forgiveness.

> > >

> > > I could be wrong but that's what my fitter said. Maybe technology advanced from 2016.

> > I don’t generally miss with a square clubface. Usually I’ve left it open. Sometimes, I can catch it closed.

> >

> > If I’m also not in the center of the club face with a blade, there’s less mass, so the ball doesn’t go so far offline. It loses steam.

> >

> > Perimeter weighting should do just that—put more weight in the perimeter. So if I make a strike with an open face, and I’m off center, then not only does the ball go right, but it should go further with more height. Now, I’m more offline.

> >

> >

> >

>

> That makes no sense at all. Just hit PW on every shot. You'll always be short of the trouble even on a mishit, just like you want!

>

> Distance and dispersion are the same thing. Being 2* right at 60 mph ball speed at 2* right at 80 mph ball speed are not the same quality of swing or club - the second is much better even though it goes "further right". Again, if you would pick the 60 mph so your "miss will be less offline" then you're going to shoot high scores for a long time. You want your mishits to go as close to your normal distance as possible. Its the only possible way to manage them and the course. We play in three dimensions. **If you are telling us (I don't believe this, by the way) that your right miss with a blade is 20 freaking yards (60 feet) short, that gives you a box to miss in of approximately 1200 square feet, or the size of a small house.** So if you are starting a standard 30 yard green with trouble on two sides and your trusty rusty blade in your hand, where the **** do you aim? Just pin and pray? If those numbers are right you are throwing out, your dispersion pattern is so massive you can't possibly manage a course.

 

I don’t get it—I literally put up photos up. It's on the prior page. :D

 

That being said, I appreciate the response.

 

My point is this: look at my last shot in the 2nd set vs the 3rd set. Same ball speed (98 mph), same spin (~3k), very different result. The AP1 6 Iron carries 136, rolls to 154, and is 47 feet off-line. The mishit from the MP-4 carries 118, rolls to 142, and is 12 inches offline. While factoring in roll is unreliable, I'll still prefer the dead-straight shot if given a choice. My home course is a links-style track that has a lot of wind and a typical slope of 135--it's very punishing on shots that are inaccurate, but not as much on shots that are short.

 

If you don't mind, take a look at the shot dispersion and averages, and let me know what you think. If you went down to the range, and took those 50 shots, which set looks the best to you?

 

When I read it, my average carry and roll look best with the MP-4. I also think my shot dispersion and control is better with the MP-4. For example, there's a big difference between the 4th set (AP1) and the 5th set (MP-4), even though I hit those 20 shots back to back. I think my MP-4 shots are closer to the target and carrying further. For whatever reason, I clunk the ball around more with the AP1 6 iron, despite my best efforts. The AP1 7 Iron was better than the AP1 6 iron, but the MP-4 got better numbers and I had better control. If you ignore the number on the club, the AP1 7 iron is 31 degrees of loft and 37 inches long, and the MP-4 is 30 degrees of loft and 37.25 inches longs, so we're talking about two very similar clubs.

 

Am I really off-base here?

 

 

[BiggErn]

> @lenman73 said:

> I think this whole you need to hit it perfect everytime to get any benefit is total bs. And the guy who sounds like a broken record saying it needs to just go away. You don't like blades. You and everyone you know are afraid of them. It's cool, as said many times, they aren't for everyone. But just for good measure, could you please say they need a perfect strike one more time before you go ?

 

I understand, facts elude you. I’m sure it’s as monotonous as “they just work for me” or “my scores don’t change” or “they make me focus more” or “I prefer a far worse miss”, etc etc. So you have that broken record too. Lol. Rarely do we here about the scores that don’t change but I’m guessing they’re nowhere around par or better.

[cliffhanger]

> @revanant said:

> > @pinestreetgolf said:

> > @revanant said:

> > > > @Timbo929 said:

> > > > > @KaiserSoze said:

> > > > > All you guys/gals talking about blades being very playable with no real loss of distance or direction on mishits are ignoring fundamental physics and math. There is a reason perimeter weighted clubs work.

> > > >

> > > > I thought forgiveness on a iron heads were for distance only and not direction..

> > > >

> > > > like if you miss the sweet spot you will still get the distance but has nothing to do with "direction" forgiveness.

> > > >

> > > > I could be wrong but that's what my fitter said. Maybe technology advanced from 2016.

> > > I don’t generally miss with a square clubface. Usually I’ve left it open. Sometimes, I can catch it closed.

> > >

> > > If I’m also not in the center of the club face with a blade, there’s less mass, so the ball doesn’t go so far offline. It loses steam.

> > >

> > > Perimeter weighting should do just that—put more weight in the perimeter. So if I make a strike with an open face, and I’m off center, then not only does the ball go right, but it should go further with more height. Now, I’m more offline.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > That makes no sense at all. Just hit PW on every shot. You'll always be short of the trouble even on a mishit, just like you want!

> >

> > Distance and dispersion are the same thing. Being 2* right at 60 mph ball speed at 2* right at 80 mph ball speed are not the same quality of swing or club - the second is much better even though it goes "further right". Again, if you would pick the 60 mph so your "miss will be less offline" then you're going to shoot high scores for a long time. You want your mishits to go as close to your normal distance as possible. Its the only possible way to manage them and the course. We play in three dimensions. **If you are telling us (I don't believe this, by the way) that your right miss with a blade is 20 freaking yards (60 feet) short, that gives you a box to miss in of approximately 1200 square feet, or the size of a small house.** So if you are starting a standard 30 yard green with trouble on two sides and your trusty rusty blade in your hand, where the **** do you aim? Just pin and pray? If those numbers are right you are throwing out, your dispersion pattern is so massive you can't possibly manage a course.

>

> I don’t get it—I literally put up photos up. It's on the prior page. :D

>

> That being said, I appreciate the response.

>

> My point is this: look at my last shot in the 2nd set vs the 3rd set. Same ball speed (98 mph), same spin (~3k), very different result. The AP1 6 Iron carries 136, rolls to 154, and is 47 feet off-line. The mishit from the MP-4 carries 118, rolls to 142, and is 12 inches offline. While factoring in roll is unreliable, I'll still prefer the dead-straight shot if given a choice. My home course is a links-style track that has a lot of wind and a typical slope of 135--it's very punishing on shots that are inaccurate, but not as much on shots that are short.

>

> If you don't mind, take a look at the shot dispersion and averages, and let me know what you think. If you went down to the range, and took those 50 shots, which set looks the best to you?

>

> When I read it, my average carry and roll look best with the MP-4. I also think my shot dispersion and control is better with the MP-4. For example, there's a big difference between the 4th set (AP1) and the 5th set (MP-4), even though I hit those 20 shots back to back. I think my MP-4 shots are closer to the target and carrying further. For whatever reason, I clunk the ball around more with the AP1 6 iron, despite my best efforts. The AP1 7 Iron was better than the AP1 6 iron, but the MP-4 got better numbers and I had better control. If you ignore the number on the club, the AP1 7 iron is 31 degrees of loft and 37 inches long, and the MP-4 is 30 degrees of loft and 37.25 inches longs, so we're talking about two very similar clubs.

>

> Am I really off-base here?

>

>

 

I don’t think your off-base at all. You have presented an explanation and backed it up with numbers. Regardless of what your thought process is (dear god please tell us this argument isnt all about an individuals thought process) your numbers support your decision.

 

However what your up against here is a group of individuals that only see and respond to specific points within a post, not the entire post because they won’t respond to what makes the most sense.

 

So when it comes to debating anything online, a lack of response to your entire post including your numbers is a sign that you are very, very on point.

 

Your outcome is specific to you and I certainly appreciate you sharing that with us. I also appreciate someone who shares the failures they experience as an outcome. With that said, these experiences are very unique to the individual and must be interpreted as such. They may help you to decide what your course of action is however they may not. Buyer beware.

 

I would like more players to send in data as it would certainly add to the discussion. And I would like players that never have taken that step to play blades just go away, their opinion doesn’t interest me. It may be just me but I would rather be a has-been than a never-will-be.

 

Carry on good sir.

[bodhi555]

> @revanant said:

> > @pinestreetgolf said:

> > @revanant said:

> > > > @Timbo929 said:

> > > > > @KaiserSoze said:

> > > > > All you guys/gals talking about blades being very playable with no real loss of distance or direction on mishits are ignoring fundamental physics and math. There is a reason perimeter weighted clubs work.

> > > >

> > > > I thought forgiveness on a iron heads were for distance only and not direction..

> > > >

> > > > like if you miss the sweet spot you will still get the distance but has nothing to do with "direction" forgiveness.

> > > >

> > > > I could be wrong but that's what my fitter said. Maybe technology advanced from 2016.

> > > I don’t generally miss with a square clubface. Usually I’ve left it open. Sometimes, I can catch it closed.

> > >

> > > If I’m also not in the center of the club face with a blade, there’s less mass, so the ball doesn’t go so far offline. It loses steam.

> > >

> > > Perimeter weighting should do just that—put more weight in the perimeter. So if I make a strike with an open face, and I’m off center, then not only does the ball go right, but it should go further with more height. Now, I’m more offline.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > That makes no sense at all. Just hit PW on every shot. You'll always be short of the trouble even on a mishit, just like you want!

> >

> > Distance and dispersion are the same thing. Being 2* right at 60 mph ball speed at 2* right at 80 mph ball speed are not the same quality of swing or club - the second is much better even though it goes "further right". Again, if you would pick the 60 mph so your "miss will be less offline" then you're going to shoot high scores for a long time. You want your mishits to go as close to your normal distance as possible. Its the only possible way to manage them and the course. We play in three dimensions. **If you are telling us (I don't believe this, by the way) that your right miss with a blade is 20 freaking yards (60 feet) short, that gives you a box to miss in of approximately 1200 square feet, or the size of a small house.** So if you are starting a standard 30 yard green with trouble on two sides and your trusty rusty blade in your hand, where the **** do you aim? Just pin and pray? If those numbers are right you are throwing out, your dispersion pattern is so massive you can't possibly manage a course.

>

> I don’t get it—I literally put up photos up. It's on the prior page. :D

>

> That being said, I appreciate the response.

>

> My point is this: look at my last shot in the 2nd set vs the 3rd set. Same ball speed (98 mph), same spin (~3k), very different result. The AP1 6 Iron carries 136, rolls to 154, and is 47 feet off-line. The mishit from the MP-4 carries 118, rolls to 142, and is 12 inches offline. While factoring in roll is unreliable, I'll still prefer the dead-straight shot if given a choice. My home course is a links-style track that has a lot of wind and a typical slope of 135--it's very punishing on shots that are inaccurate, but not as much on shots that are short.

>

> If you don't mind, take a look at the shot dispersion and averages, and let me know what you think. If you went down to the range, and took those 50 shots, which set looks the best to you?

>

> When I read it, my average carry and roll look best with the MP-4. I also think my shot dispersion and control is better with the MP-4. For example, there's a big difference between the 4th set (AP1) and the 5th set (MP-4), even though I hit those 20 shots back to back. I think my MP-4 shots are closer to the target and carrying further. For whatever reason, I clunk the ball around more with the AP1 6 iron, despite my best efforts. The AP1 7 Iron was better than the AP1 6 iron, but the MP-4 got better numbers and I had better control. If you ignore the number on the club, the AP1 7 iron is 31 degrees of loft and 37 inches long, and the MP-4 is 30 degrees of loft and 37.25 inches longs, so we're talking about two very similar clubs.

>

> Am I really off-base here?

>

>

 

If it helps, I don't think you are off base in the slightest. We can only make decisions based on the data we have, and the data you have presented would suggest to me you get a more consistent strike with the MP4s, which when you combine with the fact you play a Links style course, I'd say they were the right choice. I think some people think that because they play a course that resembles a boating lake with forced carries to island greens, we all play similar courses. Some of us play tree lined parkland courses, where control of ball flight is more useful than permanently high and straight, or links courses where keeping the ball low and under the wind is paramount, and where you want to miss short rather than pin high left or right.

 

Take the 17th at the Old Course, a hole I have played many times. Come up short and you have a chip up the green, pin high left you are in the Road Hole bunker, right and you're on the road. Both involve a world of pain. That is also replicated most of the way round all 6 courses in St Andrews.

[lenman73]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @lenman73 said:

> > I think this whole you need to hit it perfect everytime to get any benefit is total bs. And the guy who sounds like a broken record saying it needs to just go away. You don't like blades. You and everyone you know are afraid of them. It's cool, as said many times, they aren't for everyone. But just for good measure, could you please say they need a perfect strike one more time before you go ?

>

> I understand, facts elude you. I’m sure it’s as monotonous as “they just work for me” or “my scores don’t change” or “they make me focus more” or “I prefer a far worse miss”, etc etc. So you have that broken record too. Lol. Rarely do we here about the scores that don’t change but I’m guessing they’re nowhere around par or better.

 

Facts, please. My 8 year old could post more actual facts than you. Some of us actual have used and still use blades and sorry an actual fact is they don't need absolute perfection every time. Why don't you go troll a different thread for a while since you never seem to answer a question with anything but your predictable snark responses. Like the question of why you are in this thread or any other blade thread to begin with.

 

For the numbers lovers, last year I kept track of every round I played and what clubs I used for that round. Guess what, here is an actual fact, the score showed no significant difference between gi or blades for myself. I am not trying to say someone else would have the same results. Those were my results. So why don't you actually try posting something positive or stay the hell out of threads about blades.

 

Oh here it comes, but perfect contact, perfect strike, blah blah blah. How thick do you have to be when someone shows actual results in here and you still resort to your same bullxxxx.

[revanant]

> @lenman73 said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > > @lenman73 said:

> > > I think this whole you need to hit it perfect everytime to get any benefit is total bs. And the guy who sounds like a broken record saying it needs to just go away. You don't like blades. You and everyone you know are afraid of them. It's cool, as said many times, they aren't for everyone. But just for good measure, could you please say they need a perfect strike one more time before you go ?

> >

> > I understand, facts elude you. I’m sure it’s as monotonous as “they just work for me” or “my scores don’t change” or “they make me focus more” or “I prefer a far worse miss”, etc etc. So you have that broken record too. Lol. Rarely do we here about the scores that don’t change but I’m guessing they’re nowhere around par or better.

>

> Facts, please. My 8 year old could post more actual facts than you. Some of us actual have used and still use blades and sorry an actual fact is they don't need absolute perfection every time. Why don't you go troll a different thread for a while since you never seem to answer a question with anything but your predictable snark responses. Like the question of why you are in this thread or any other blade thread to begin with.

>

> For the numbers lovers, last year I kept track of every round I played and what clubs I used for that round. Guess what, here is an actual fact, the score showed no significant difference between gi or blades for myself. I am not trying to say someone else would have the same results. Those were my results. So why don't you actually try posting something positive or stay the **** out of threads about blades.

>

> Oh here it comes, but perfect contact, perfect strike, blah blah blah. How thick do you have to be when someone shows actual results in here and you still resort to your same bullxxxx.

 

Well, it's either one of three things:

Option #1: Blades aren't so hard to hit, and don't require a perfect strike to get a good result.

 

Option #2: Some people benefit more from playing blades, or aren't benefited by the features in GI irons that comprise "forgiveness," i.e. more weight behind off-center hits. This is perhaps why I clunked around the AP1 6 iron, but was really striping the MP-4--the AP1s were giving me more distance on bad strikes, and also cutting down on the spin I rely on to bring the ball back to center.

 

Option #3: I'm the mythical 27 handicap that's actually a perfect ball striker. If you ask me how I became so good, the only answer I have is that I've spent the past few months practicing with blades and it paid off in a way that practicing with my AP1s did not.

 

Personally, I think the answer is a mix of all 3-- 1)blades aren't so bad, 2) "forgiveness" features aren't universally helpful, and 3) practicing with my MP-4 6 iron has given me much better results and refined my swing in a way that I don't get from the AP1 6 iron. The golf season is finally starting, so here's to hoping I can do something about that handicap lol.

 

Feel free to take your pick of the options, or add new ones. ; )

 

Personally, while I happily grant that not everyone may come out with a helpful training tool or a better iron fit with a blade, I really do think everyone should plunk down $15 and experiment--we all like golf, we all want to improve at golf, and the financial risk here is miniscule for something that might really help someone's game with no real downside. If someone takes a blade to the range a few times and doesn't find it helps--just return it to globalgolf. : )

[BiggErn]

> @lenman73 said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > > @lenman73 said:

> > > I think this whole you need to hit it perfect everytime to get any benefit is total bs. And the guy who sounds like a broken record saying it needs to just go away. You don't like blades. You and everyone you know are afraid of them. It's cool, as said many times, they aren't for everyone. But just for good measure, could you please say they need a perfect strike one more time before you go ?

> >

> > I understand, facts elude you. I’m sure it’s as monotonous as “they just work for me” or “my scores don’t change” or “they make me focus more” or “I prefer a far worse miss”, etc etc. So you have that broken record too. Lol. Rarely do we here about the scores that don’t change but I’m guessing they’re nowhere around par or better.

>

> Facts, please. My 8 year old could post more actual facts than you. Some of us actual have used and still use blades and sorry an actual fact is they don't need absolute perfection every time. Why don't you go troll a different thread for a while since you never seem to answer a question with anything but your predictable snark responses. Like the question of why you are in this thread or any other blade thread to begin with.

>

> For the numbers lovers, last year I kept track of every round I played and what clubs I used for that round. Guess what, here is an actual fact, the score showed no significant difference between gi or blades for myself. I am not trying to say someone else would have the same results. Those were my results. So why don't you actually try posting something positive or stay the **** out of threads about blades.

>

> Oh here it comes, but perfect contact, perfect strike, blah blah blah. How thick do you have to be when someone shows actual results in here and you still resort to your same bullxxxx.

 

What were your scores? I guess you’re in the camp where you want to way short instead of on the green. But then you have a terrible short game and that’s why you shoot 90.

[lenman73]

> @revanant said:

> > @lenman73 said:

> > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > I think this whole you need to hit it perfect everytime to get any benefit is total bs. And the guy who sounds like a broken record saying it needs to just go away. You don't like blades. You and everyone you know are afraid of them. It's cool, as said many times, they aren't for everyone. But just for good measure, could you please say they need a perfect strike one more time before you go ?

> > >

> > > I understand, facts elude you. I’m sure it’s as monotonous as “they just work for me” or “my scores don’t change” or “they make me focus more” or “I prefer a far worse miss”, etc etc. So you have that broken record too. Lol. Rarely do we here about the scores that don’t change but I’m guessing they’re nowhere around par or better.

> >

> > Facts, please. My 8 year old could post more actual facts than you. Some of us actual have used and still use blades and sorry an actual fact is they don't need absolute perfection every time. Why don't you go troll a different thread for a while since you never seem to answer a question with anything but your predictable snark responses. Like the question of why you are in this thread or any other blade thread to begin with.

> >

> > For the numbers lovers, last year I kept track of every round I played and what clubs I used for that round. Guess what, here is an actual fact, the score showed no significant difference between gi or blades for myself. I am not trying to say someone else would have the same results. Those were my results. So why don't you actually try posting something positive or stay the **** out of threads about blades.

> >

> > Oh here it comes, but perfect contact, perfect strike, blah blah blah. How thick do you have to be when someone shows actual results in here and you still resort to your same bullxxxx.

>

> Well, it's either one of three things:

> Option #1: Blades aren't so hard to hit, and don't require a perfect strike to get a good result.

>

> Option #2: Some people benefit more from playing blades, or aren't benefited by the features in GI irons that comprise "forgiveness," i.e. more weight behind off-center hits. This is perhaps why I clunked around the AP1 6 iron, but was really striping the MP-4--the AP1s were giving me more distance on bad strikes, and also cutting down on the spin I rely on to bring the ball back to center.

>

> Option #3: I'm the mythical 27 handicap that's actually a perfect ball striker. If you ask me how I became so good, the only answer I have is that I've spent the past few months practicing with blades and it paid off in a way that practicing with my AP1s did not.

>

> Personally, I think the answer is a mix of all 3-- 1)blades aren't so bad, 2) "forgiveness" features aren't universally helpful, and 3) practicing with my MP-4 6 iron has given me much better results and refined my swing in a way that I don't get from the AP1 6 iron. The golf season is finally starting, so here's to hoping I can do something about that handicap lol.

>

> Feel free to take your pick of the options, or add new ones :).

>

> Personally, while I happily grant that not everyone may come out with a helpful training tool or a better iron fit with a blade, I really do think everyone should plunk down $15 and experiment--we all like golf, we all want to improve at golf, and the financial risk here is miniscule for something that might really help someone's game with no real downside. If someone takes a blade to the range a few times and doesn't find it helps--just return it to globalgolf. :)

 

I share your thoughts on this. And will add I admit it won't work for everyone. But to come in here and say that won't work or that's impossible blah blah blah is as absurd as it is offensive. For the nay sayers, just move on.

[BiggErn]

> @lenman73 said:

> > @revanant said:

> > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > I think this whole you need to hit it perfect everytime to get any benefit is total bs. And the guy who sounds like a broken record saying it needs to just go away. You don't like blades. You and everyone you know are afraid of them. It's cool, as said many times, they aren't for everyone. But just for good measure, could you please say they need a perfect strike one more time before you go ?

> > > >

> > > > I understand, facts elude you. I’m sure it’s as monotonous as “they just work for me” or “my scores don’t change” or “they make me focus more” or “I prefer a far worse miss”, etc etc. So you have that broken record too. Lol. Rarely do we here about the scores that don’t change but I’m guessing they’re nowhere around par or better.

> > >

> > > Facts, please. My 8 year old could post more actual facts than you. Some of us actual have used and still use blades and sorry an actual fact is they don't need absolute perfection every time. Why don't you go troll a different thread for a while since you never seem to answer a question with anything but your predictable snark responses. Like the question of why you are in this thread or any other blade thread to begin with.

> > >

> > > For the numbers lovers, last year I kept track of every round I played and what clubs I used for that round. Guess what, here is an actual fact, the score showed no significant difference between gi or blades for myself. I am not trying to say someone else would have the same results. Those were my results. So why don't you actually try posting something positive or stay the **** out of threads about blades.

> > >

> > > Oh here it comes, but perfect contact, perfect strike, blah blah blah. How thick do you have to be when someone shows actual results in here and you still resort to your same bullxxxx.

> >

> > Well, it's either one of three things:

> > Option #1: Blades aren't so hard to hit, and don't require a perfect strike to get a good result.

> >

> > Option #2: Some people benefit more from playing blades, or aren't benefited by the features in GI irons that comprise "forgiveness," i.e. more weight behind off-center hits. This is perhaps why I clunked around the AP1 6 iron, but was really striping the MP-4--the AP1s were giving me more distance on bad strikes, and also cutting down on the spin I rely on to bring the ball back to center.

> >

> > Option #3: I'm the mythical 27 handicap that's actually a perfect ball striker. If you ask me how I became so good, the only answer I have is that I've spent the past few months practicing with blades and it paid off in a way that practicing with my AP1s did not.

> >

> > Personally, I think the answer is a mix of all 3-- 1)blades aren't so bad, 2) "forgiveness" features aren't universally helpful, and 3) practicing with my MP-4 6 iron has given me much better results and refined my swing in a way that I don't get from the AP1 6 iron. The golf season is finally starting, so here's to hoping I can do something about that handicap lol.

> >

> > Feel free to take your pick of the options, or add new ones :).

> >

> > Personally, while I happily grant that not everyone may come out with a helpful training tool or a better iron fit with a blade, I really do think everyone should plunk down $15 and experiment--we all like golf, we all want to improve at golf, and the financial risk here is miniscule for something that might really help someone's game with no real downside. If someone takes a blade to the range a few times and doesn't find it helps--just return it to globalgolf. :)

>

> I share your thoughts on this. And will add I admit it won't work for everyone. But to come in here and say that won't work or that's impossible blah blah blah is as absurd as it is offensive. For the nay sayers, just move on.

 

Nobody ever said you couldn’t skank it around the course and get a score and that the score might not be different if you use something else. I understand that there’s a following of subpar golfers that take great defense in being dealt with facts.

[bodhi555]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @lenman73 said:

> > > @revanant said:

> > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > > I think this whole you need to hit it perfect everytime to get any benefit is total bs. And the guy who sounds like a broken record saying it needs to just go away. You don't like blades. You and everyone you know are afraid of them. It's cool, as said many times, they aren't for everyone. But just for good measure, could you please say they need a perfect strike one more time before you go ?

> > > > >

> > > > > I understand, facts elude you. I’m sure it’s as monotonous as “they just work for me” or “my scores don’t change” or “they make me focus more” or “I prefer a far worse miss”, etc etc. So you have that broken record too. Lol. Rarely do we here about the scores that don’t change but I’m guessing they’re nowhere around par or better.

> > > >

> > > > Facts, please. My 8 year old could post more actual facts than you. Some of us actual have used and still use blades and sorry an actual fact is they don't need absolute perfection every time. Why don't you go troll a different thread for a while since you never seem to answer a question with anything but your predictable snark responses. Like the question of why you are in this thread or any other blade thread to begin with.

> > > >

> > > > For the numbers lovers, last year I kept track of every round I played and what clubs I used for that round. Guess what, here is an actual fact, the score showed no significant difference between gi or blades for myself. I am not trying to say someone else would have the same results. Those were my results. So why don't you actually try posting something positive or stay the **** out of threads about blades.

> > > >

> > > > Oh here it comes, but perfect contact, perfect strike, blah blah blah. How thick do you have to be when someone shows actual results in here and you still resort to your same bullxxxx.

> > >

> > > Well, it's either one of three things:

> > > Option #1: Blades aren't so hard to hit, and don't require a perfect strike to get a good result.

> > >

> > > Option #2: Some people benefit more from playing blades, or aren't benefited by the features in GI irons that comprise "forgiveness," i.e. more weight behind off-center hits. This is perhaps why I clunked around the AP1 6 iron, but was really striping the MP-4--the AP1s were giving me more distance on bad strikes, and also cutting down on the spin I rely on to bring the ball back to center.

> > >

> > > Option #3: I'm the mythical 27 handicap that's actually a perfect ball striker. If you ask me how I became so good, the only answer I have is that I've spent the past few months practicing with blades and it paid off in a way that practicing with my AP1s did not.

> > >

> > > Personally, I think the answer is a mix of all 3-- 1)blades aren't so bad, 2) "forgiveness" features aren't universally helpful, and 3) practicing with my MP-4 6 iron has given me much better results and refined my swing in a way that I don't get from the AP1 6 iron. The golf season is finally starting, so here's to hoping I can do something about that handicap lol.

> > >

> > > Feel free to take your pick of the options, or add new ones :).

> > >

> > > Personally, while I happily grant that not everyone may come out with a helpful training tool or a better iron fit with a blade, I really do think everyone should plunk down $15 and experiment--we all like golf, we all want to improve at golf, and the financial risk here is miniscule for something that might really help someone's game with no real downside. If someone takes a blade to the range a few times and doesn't find it helps--just return it to globalgolf. :)

> >

> > I share your thoughts on this. And will add I admit it won't work for everyone. But to come in here and say that won't work or that's impossible blah blah blah is as absurd as it is offensive. For the nay sayers, just move on.

>

> Nobody ever said you couldn’t **** it around the course and get a score and that the score might not be different if you use something else. I understand that there’s a following of subpar golfers that take great defense in being dealt with facts.

 

That's an awesome way to get people to come rou d to your point of view - call them s*** golfers!

 

Why didn't I think of that?

[revanant]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @lenman73 said:

> > > @revanant said:

> > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > > I think this whole you need to hit it perfect everytime to get any benefit is total bs. And the guy who sounds like a broken record saying it needs to just go away. You don't like blades. You and everyone you know are afraid of them. It's cool, as said many times, they aren't for everyone. But just for good measure, could you please say they need a perfect strike one more time before you go ?

> > > > >

> > > > > I understand, facts elude you. I’m sure it’s as monotonous as “they just work for me” or “my scores don’t change” or “they make me focus more” or “I prefer a far worse miss”, etc etc. So you have that broken record too. Lol. Rarely do we here about the scores that don’t change but I’m guessing they’re nowhere around par or better.

> > > >

> > > > Facts, please. My 8 year old could post more actual facts than you. Some of us actual have used and still use blades and sorry an actual fact is they don't need absolute perfection every time. Why don't you go troll a different thread for a while since you never seem to answer a question with anything but your predictable snark responses. Like the question of why you are in this thread or any other blade thread to begin with.

> > > >

> > > > For the numbers lovers, last year I kept track of every round I played and what clubs I used for that round. Guess what, here is an actual fact, the score showed no significant difference between gi or blades for myself. I am not trying to say someone else would have the same results. Those were my results. So why don't you actually try posting something positive or stay the **** out of threads about blades.

> > > >

> > > > Oh here it comes, but perfect contact, perfect strike, blah blah blah. How thick do you have to be when someone shows actual results in here and you still resort to your same bullxxxx.

> > >

> > > Well, it's either one of three things:

> > > Option #1: Blades aren't so hard to hit, and don't require a perfect strike to get a good result.

> > >

> > > Option #2: Some people benefit more from playing blades, or aren't benefited by the features in GI irons that comprise "forgiveness," i.e. more weight behind off-center hits. This is perhaps why I clunked around the AP1 6 iron, but was really striping the MP-4--the AP1s were giving me more distance on bad strikes, and also cutting down on the spin I rely on to bring the ball back to center.

> > >

> > > Option #3: I'm the mythical 27 handicap that's actually a perfect ball striker. If you ask me how I became so good, the only answer I have is that I've spent the past few months practicing with blades and it paid off in a way that practicing with my AP1s did not.

> > >

> > > Personally, I think the answer is a mix of all 3-- 1)blades aren't so bad, 2) "forgiveness" features aren't universally helpful, and 3) practicing with my MP-4 6 iron has given me much better results and refined my swing in a way that I don't get from the AP1 6 iron. The golf season is finally starting, so here's to hoping I can do something about that handicap lol.

> > >

> > > Feel free to take your pick of the options, or add new ones :).

> > >

> > > Personally, while I happily grant that not everyone may come out with a helpful training tool or a better iron fit with a blade, I really do think everyone should plunk down $15 and experiment--we all like golf, we all want to improve at golf, and the financial risk here is miniscule for something that might really help someone's game with no real downside. If someone takes a blade to the range a few times and doesn't find it helps--just return it to globalgolf. :)

> >

> > I share your thoughts on this. And will add I admit it won't work for everyone. But to come in here and say that won't work or that's impossible blah blah blah is as absurd as it is offensive. For the nay sayers, just move on.

>

> Nobody ever said you couldn’t **** it around the course and get a score and that the score might not be different if you use something else. I understand that there’s a following of subpar golfers that take great defense in being dealt with facts.

 

I wish I was a subpar golfer. Maybe in a few more years of practice. ; )

[cliffhanger]

> @BiggErn said:

> > @lenman73 said:

> > > @revanant said:

> > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > > > @lenman73 said:

> > > > > > I think this whole you need to hit it perfect everytime to get any benefit is total bs. And the guy who sounds like a broken record saying it needs to just go away. You don't like blades. You and everyone you know are afraid of them. It's cool, as said many times, they aren't for everyone. But just for good measure, could you please say they need a perfect strike one more time before you go ?

> > > > >

> > > > > I understand, facts elude you. I’m sure it’s as monotonous as “they just work for me” or “my scores don’t change” or “they make me focus more” or “I prefer a far worse miss”, etc etc. So you have that broken record too. Lol. Rarely do we here about the scores that don’t change but I’m guessing they’re nowhere around par or better.

> > > >

> > > > Facts, please. My 8 year old could post more actual facts than you. Some of us actual have used and still use blades and sorry an actual fact is they don't need absolute perfection every time. Why don't you go troll a different thread for a while since you never seem to answer a question with anything but your predictable snark responses. Like the question of why you are in this thread or any other blade thread to begin with.

> > > >

> > > > For the numbers lovers, last year I kept track of every round I played and what clubs I used for that round. Guess what, here is an actual fact, the score showed no significant difference between gi or blades for myself. I am not trying to say someone else would have the same results. Those were my results. So why don't you actually try posting something positive or stay the **** out of threads about blades.

> > > >

> > > > Oh here it comes, but perfect contact, perfect strike, blah blah blah. How thick do you have to be when someone shows actual results in here and you still resort to your same bullxxxx.

> > >

> > > Well, it's either one of three things:

> > > Option #1: Blades aren't so hard to hit, and don't require a perfect strike to get a good result.

> > >

> > > Option #2: Some people benefit more from playing blades, or aren't benefited by the features in GI irons that comprise "forgiveness," i.e. more weight behind off-center hits. This is perhaps why I clunked around the AP1 6 iron, but was really striping the MP-4--the AP1s were giving me more distance on bad strikes, and also cutting down on the spin I rely on to bring the ball back to center.

> > >

> > > Option #3: I'm the mythical 27 handicap that's actually a perfect ball striker. If you ask me how I became so good, the only answer I have is that I've spent the past few months practicing with blades and it paid off in a way that practicing with my AP1s did not.

> > >

> > > Personally, I think the answer is a mix of all 3-- 1)blades aren't so bad, 2) "forgiveness" features aren't universally helpful, and 3) practicing with my MP-4 6 iron has given me much better results and refined my swing in a way that I don't get from the AP1 6 iron. The golf season is finally starting, so here's to hoping I can do something about that handicap lol.

> > >

> > > Feel free to take your pick of the options, or add new ones :).

> > >

> > > Personally, while I happily grant that not everyone may come out with a helpful training tool or a better iron fit with a blade, I really do think everyone should plunk down $15 and experiment--we all like golf, we all want to improve at golf, and the financial risk here is miniscule for something that might really help someone's game with no real downside. If someone takes a blade to the range a few times and doesn't find it helps--just return it to globalgolf. :)

> >

> > I share your thoughts on this. And will add I admit it won't work for everyone. But to come in here and say that won't work or that's impossible blah blah blah is as absurd as it is offensive. For the nay sayers, just move on.

>

> Nobody ever said you couldn’t **** it around the course and get a score and that the score might not be different if you use something else. I understand that there’s a following of subpar golfers that take great defense in being dealt with facts.

 

In defence of those who you say take great defence in being dealt facts, you have not supplied any facts that would actually cause anyone to be defensive.

Your ability to be narrow minded and your inability to listen to reason, is in fact the reason that you take great defence in being dealt with facts.

By dealing facts you actually mean that you (like others) take a group of golfers who generally score in the same range and say that they all get to that score in the same way. There is no other possibility, it’s just impossible based on several non factual points including “everyone I golf with” LOL. Even though everyone single one of them is different in every possible way imaginable, including the way they learn, their physical limitations or capabilities, their motor skills, etc. And remember that number of similar handicap golfers is somewhere in the range of 21 million worldwide.

[gbartko]

> @lenman73 said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > > @lenman73 said:

> > > I think this whole you need to hit it perfect everytime to get any benefit is total bs. And the guy who sounds like a broken record saying it needs to just go away. You don't like blades. You and everyone you know are afraid of them. It's cool, as said many times, they aren't for everyone. But just for good measure, could you please say they need a perfect strike one more time before you go ?

> >

> > I understand, facts elude you. I’m sure it’s as monotonous as “they just work for me” or “my scores don’t change” or “they make me focus more” or “I prefer a far worse miss”, etc etc. So you have that broken record too. Lol. Rarely do we here about the scores that don’t change but I’m guessing they’re nowhere around par or better.

>

> Facts, please. My 8 year old could post more actual facts than you. Some of us actual have used and still use blades and sorry an actual fact is they don't need absolute perfection every time. Why don't you go troll a different thread for a while since you never seem to answer a question with anything but your predictable snark responses. Like the question of why you are in this thread or any other blade thread to begin with.

>

> For the numbers lovers, last year I kept track of every round I played and what clubs I used for that round. Guess what, here is an actual fact, the score showed no significant difference between gi or blades for myself. I am not trying to say someone else would have the same results. Those were my results. So why don't you actually try posting something positive or stay the **** out of threads about blades.

>

> Oh here it comes, but perfect contact, perfect strike, blah blah blah. How thick do you have to be when someone shows actual results in here and you still resort to your same bullxxxx.

 

Show us on the doll where Bigg Ern touched you ?

 

[nsxguy]

> @lenman73 said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > > @cliffhanger said:

> > > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > > @joj said:

> > > > > Low single digit handicap.

> > > > > Here is my biggest takeaway from playing blades the last year.

> > > > >

> > > > > The ball control is what I always wanted.

> > > > >

> > > > > I don’t think I will ever go back to cavity’s. For years I’ve played forgiving irons, made to go high and straight. I shot my first round in the 60’s with TM Burner irons. It was **always difficult to flight balls or hit a baby draw or cut**. I would try to hit a 5 iron under a tree branch and it would jump off the face straight up in the air or I would need to hit a slight draw and I had to make a hook swing to get it to move.

> > > > >

> > > > > I say all this because cavity backs work for getting the ball to go straighter and higher, but at some point you start battling needing it to go high and straight. Crazy talk.

> > > >

> > > > Totally agree about the cut. The draw ? Not so much. I even agree with the G-d of Blades when he said "CBs are more forgiving, blades are more workable". He's absolutely correct.

> > > >

> > > > And yes, it is certainly easier to work the ball both ways with blades. I've found that with my CBs it is nigh impossible to move it to the fade side. The draw side ? No problem at all. Cbs are made not only to be more forgiving but also to mitigate a slice. Generally speaking, the more forgiveness the higher the handicapper the club is targeted at and the higher the handicapper the more they need help with a slice.

> > > >

> > > > As for hitting out from under a tree goes I liken that to my car buying habits. In the past, when I bought my NSX I had friends asking me "What do you want with a 2 seater ? You can't take more than one person with you".

> > > >

> > > > And I'm like "Are you kidding me ? I'm single. 80% of the time I drive by myself in the car and the other 20% of the time my GF is the passenger. What ? I should buy an SUV just in case one day I might need to carry 8 passengers ?" LOL

> > > >

> > > > Same thing with my irons. I should get blades because I might find myself under a tree ? Nope. I want my irons to go straight with consistent distance and direction and if I put it under a tree I'll live with not having a blade I might be able to punch out a little bit better with. Chances are I'd make the same score with either club from under that tree.

> > >

> > > you do realize that your car buying analogy is backwards from the point you were trying to make right? In your story you buying the NSX is the absolute same as the mid handicap trying to justify buying blades and your buddies represent the CB advocates lol. You try to justify the purchase because you drive by yourself 80% of the time and 20% with your GF. Even though the NSX is still to this day considered a very stiff and rigid ride (thats unforgiving for the non car guys). It does seem funny that you use a 8 seater SUV as the extreme to make your point. There are a lot of reasonable choices between that and the uncomfortable and non practical NSX. I went through the same thing with my first Vette purchase... i was questioned by many who couldn't wrap their head around it.

> >

> > So much for you creating paragraphs. LOL

> >

> > No, my car buying analogy was EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. Obviously you didn't get it.

> >

> > I didn't suggest anything about buying the NSX because of its performance or ride. I brought it up strictly for its cargo capacity. That's ALL I mentioned about the 2 vehicles.

> >

> > As in I buy/get/use a car that works for ME MOST of the time (1 or 2 people), not for the occasional exception (8).

> >

> > As in I don't buy blades for the occasions where I MIGHT need one, such as the suggestion by the poster I quoted about being able to hit the ball lower out from under a tree. I buy CBs because they work for me the vast majority of the time.

> >

> > Can you hear me now ?

> >

> >

>

> As an aside, I have 2 questions. Do you still have a NSX and if so what year? I know someone with a mint 1991 and I have been a fan since their release.

 

Nope, don't have one now. Had 3. '98 Yellow, '04 Blue and '04 Orange.

 

"Panicked" and sold the Orange one when the depression of '08 hit. Wish I'd have kept it. It's now worth twice what I paid for it. LOL

[nsxguy]

> @cliffhanger said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > > @cliffhanger said:

> > > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > > @joj said:

> > > > > Low single digit handicap.

> > > > > Here is my biggest takeaway from playing blades the last year.

> > > > >

> > > > > The ball control is what I always wanted.

> > > > >

> > > > > I don’t think I will ever go back to cavity’s. For years I’ve played forgiving irons, made to go high and straight. I shot my first round in the 60’s with TM Burner irons. It was **always difficult to flight balls or hit a baby draw or cut**. I would try to hit a 5 iron under a tree branch and it would jump off the face straight up in the air or I would need to hit a slight draw and I had to make a hook swing to get it to move.

> > > > >

> > > > > I say all this because cavity backs work for getting the ball to go straighter and higher, but at some point you start battling needing it to go high and straight. Crazy talk.

> > > >

> > > > Totally agree about the cut. The draw ? Not so much. I even agree with the G-d of Blades when he said "CBs are more forgiving, blades are more workable". He's absolutely correct.

> > > >

> > > > And yes, it is certainly easier to work the ball both ways with blades. I've found that with my CBs it is nigh impossible to move it to the fade side. The draw side ? No problem at all. Cbs are made not only to be more forgiving but also to mitigate a slice. Generally speaking, the more forgiveness the higher the handicapper the club is targeted at and the higher the handicapper the more they need help with a slice.

> > > >

> > > > As for hitting out from under a tree goes I liken that to my car buying habits. In the past, when I bought my NSX I had friends asking me "What do you want with a 2 seater ? You can't take more than one person with you".

> > > >

> > > > And I'm like "Are you kidding me ? I'm single. 80% of the time I drive by myself in the car and the other 20% of the time my GF is the passenger. What ? I should buy an SUV just in case one day I might need to carry 8 passengers ?" LOL

> > > >

> > > > Same thing with my irons. I should get blades because I might find myself under a tree ? Nope. I want my irons to go straight with consistent distance and direction and if I put it under a tree I'll live with not having a blade I might be able to punch out a little bit better with. Chances are I'd make the same score with either club from under that tree.

> > >

> > > you do realize that your car buying analogy is backwards from the point you were trying to make right? In your story you buying the NSX is the absolute same as the mid handicap trying to justify buying blades and your buddies represent the CB advocates lol. You try to justify the purchase because you drive by yourself 80% of the time and 20% with your GF. Even though the NSX is still to this day considered a very stiff and rigid ride (thats unforgiving for the non car guys). It does seem funny that you use a 8 seater SUV as the extreme to make your point. There are a lot of reasonable choices between that and the uncomfortable and non practical NSX. I went through the same thing with my first Vette purchase... i was questioned by many who couldn't wrap their head around it.

> >

> > So much for you creating paragraphs. LOL

> >

> > No, my car buying analogy was EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. Obviously you didn't get it.

> >

> > I didn't suggest anything about buying the NSX because of its performance or ride. I brought it up strictly for its cargo capacity. That's ALL I mentioned about the 2 vehicles.

> >

> > As in I buy/get/use a car that works for ME MOST of the time (1 or 2 people), not for the occasional exception (8).

> >

> > As in I don't buy blades for the occasions where I MIGHT need one, such as the suggestion by the poster I quoted about being able to hit the ball lower out from under a tree. I buy CBs because they work for me the vast majority of the time.

> >

> > Can you hear me now ?

> >

> >

> I always have a hard time hearing nonsense. It’s hard to take away you meant cargo space when you only referenced seating by the way. Maybe say what you mean. My point was to establish that your NSX was not a rationale purchase and certainly not a responsible one if it was your only means of transportation. Forgiveness also applies to vehicles which the NSX is well known for being “unforgiving” however your choice is your choice even though more forgiving options are available... even with high performance capabilities. So its rather hypocritical of you to push forgiveness on others regarding golf purchases when you obviously are not consistent with your own purchases. You don’t buy a NSX because it’s all you need for “Cargo Space”, you buy it for performance and it’s coolness by design. A vanity purchase maybe? By the way your analogy was in fact presented backwards LOL, OMG, LMAO

>

> Now let’s start a new paragraph... just kidding

>

 

My apologies. I misspoke. I didn't mean to say "cargo capacity", I meant "carrying capacity", as in PEOPLE, which, BTW should have been clear in the first post of mine on the subject.

 

I buy what *I* want and/or need MOST of the time. I don't buy an SUV because at some unknown time I MIGHT want to carry 7 passengers.

 

Same thing with golf clubs, hence the original (and correct) analogy. I buy and use golf clubs that are the most useful to me MOST of the time, not those that I MIGHT need once every St. Swivens Day..

 

Do you get it NOW ?

[lenman73]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @lenman73 said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > @cliffhanger said:

> > > > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > > > @joj said:

> > > > > > Low single digit handicap.

> > > > > > Here is my biggest takeaway from playing blades the last year.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The ball control is what I always wanted.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I don’t think I will ever go back to cavity’s. For years I’ve played forgiving irons, made to go high and straight. I shot my first round in the 60’s with TM Burner irons. It was **always difficult to flight balls or hit a baby draw or cut**. I would try to hit a 5 iron under a tree branch and it would jump off the face straight up in the air or I would need to hit a slight draw and I had to make a hook swing to get it to move.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I say all this because cavity backs work for getting the ball to go straighter and higher, but at some point you start battling needing it to go high and straight. Crazy talk.

> > > > >

> > > > > Totally agree about the cut. The draw ? Not so much. I even agree with the G-d of Blades when he said "CBs are more forgiving, blades are more workable". He's absolutely correct.

> > > > >

> > > > > And yes, it is certainly easier to work the ball both ways with blades. I've found that with my CBs it is nigh impossible to move it to the fade side. The draw side ? No problem at all. Cbs are made not only to be more forgiving but also to mitigate a slice. Generally speaking, the more forgiveness the higher the handicapper the club is targeted at and the higher the handicapper the more they need help with a slice.

> > > > >

> > > > > As for hitting out from under a tree goes I liken that to my car buying habits. In the past, when I bought my NSX I had friends asking me "What do you want with a 2 seater ? You can't take more than one person with you".

> > > > >

> > > > > And I'm like "Are you kidding me ? I'm single. 80% of the time I drive by myself in the car and the other 20% of the time my GF is the passenger. What ? I should buy an SUV just in case one day I might need to carry 8 passengers ?" LOL

> > > > >

> > > > > Same thing with my irons. I should get blades because I might find myself under a tree ? Nope. I want my irons to go straight with consistent distance and direction and if I put it under a tree I'll live with not having a blade I might be able to punch out a little bit better with. Chances are I'd make the same score with either club from under that tree.

> > > >

> > > > you do realize that your car buying analogy is backwards from the point you were trying to make right? In your story you buying the NSX is the absolute same as the mid handicap trying to justify buying blades and your buddies represent the CB advocates lol. You try to justify the purchase because you drive by yourself 80% of the time and 20% with your GF. Even though the NSX is still to this day considered a very stiff and rigid ride (thats unforgiving for the non car guys). It does seem funny that you use a 8 seater SUV as the extreme to make your point. There are a lot of reasonable choices between that and the uncomfortable and non practical NSX. I went through the same thing with my first Vette purchase... i was questioned by many who couldn't wrap their head around it.

> > >

> > > So much for you creating paragraphs. LOL

> > >

> > > No, my car buying analogy was EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. Obviously you didn't get it.

> > >

> > > I didn't suggest anything about buying the NSX because of its performance or ride. I brought it up strictly for its cargo capacity. That's ALL I mentioned about the 2 vehicles.

> > >

> > > As in I buy/get/use a car that works for ME MOST of the time (1 or 2 people), not for the occasional exception (8).

> > >

> > > As in I don't buy blades for the occasions where I MIGHT need one, such as the suggestion by the poster I quoted about being able to hit the ball lower out from under a tree. I buy CBs because they work for me the vast majority of the time.

> > >

> > > Can you hear me now ?

> > >

> > >

> >

> > As an aside, I have 2 questions. Do you still have a NSX and if so what year? I know someone with a mint 1991 and I have been a fan since their release.

>

> Nope, don't have one now. Had 3. '98 Yellow, '04 Blue and '04 Orange.

>

> "Panicked" and sold the Orange one when the depression of '08 hit. Wish I'd have kept it. It's now worth twice what I paid for it. LOL

 

Those are some sweet rides. What are your thoughts on the 2nd generations ?

[cliffhanger]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @cliffhanger said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > @cliffhanger said:

> > > > > @nsxguy said:

> > > > > > @joj said:

> > > > > > Low single digit handicap.

> > > > > > Here is my biggest takeaway from playing blades the last year.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The ball control is what I always wanted.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I don’t think I will ever go back to cavity’s. For years I’ve played forgiving irons, made to go high and straight. I shot my first round in the 60’s with TM Burner irons. It was **always difficult to flight balls or hit a baby draw or cut**. I would try to hit a 5 iron under a tree branch and it would jump off the face straight up in the air or I would need to hit a slight draw and I had to make a hook swing to get it to move.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I say all this because cavity backs work for getting the ball to go straighter and higher, but at some point you start battling needing it to go high and straight. Crazy talk.

> > > > >

> > > > > Totally agree about the cut. The draw ? Not so much. I even agree with the G-d of Blades when he said "CBs are more forgiving, blades are more workable". He's absolutely correct.

> > > > >

> > > > > And yes, it is certainly easier to work the ball both ways with blades. I've found that with my CBs it is nigh impossible to move it to the fade side. The draw side ? No problem at all. Cbs are made not only to be more forgiving but also to mitigate a slice. Generally speaking, the more forgiveness the higher the handicapper the club is targeted at and the higher the handicapper the more they need help with a slice.

> > > > >

> > > > > As for hitting out from under a tree goes I liken that to my car buying habits. In the past, when I bought my NSX I had friends asking me "What do you want with a 2 seater ? You can't take more than one person with you".

> > > > >

> > > > > And I'm like "Are you kidding me ? I'm single. 80% of the time I drive by myself in the car and the other 20% of the time my GF is the passenger. What ? I should buy an SUV just in case one day I might need to carry 8 passengers ?" LOL

> > > > >

> > > > > Same thing with my irons. I should get blades because I might find myself under a tree ? Nope. I want my irons to go straight with consistent distance and direction and if I put it under a tree I'll live with not having a blade I might be able to punch out a little bit better with. Chances are I'd make the same score with either club from under that tree.

> > > >

> > > > you do realize that your car buying analogy is backwards from the point you were trying to make right? In your story you buying the NSX is the absolute same as the mid handicap trying to justify buying blades and your buddies represent the CB advocates lol. You try to justify the purchase because you drive by yourself 80% of the time and 20% with your GF. Even though the NSX is still to this day considered a very stiff and rigid ride (thats unforgiving for the non car guys). It does seem funny that you use a 8 seater SUV as the extreme to make your point. There are a lot of reasonable choices between that and the uncomfortable and non practical NSX. I went through the same thing with my first Vette purchase... i was questioned by many who couldn't wrap their head around it.

> > >

> > > So much for you creating paragraphs. LOL

> > >

> > > No, my car buying analogy was EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. Obviously you didn't get it.

> > >

> > > I didn't suggest anything about buying the NSX because of its performance or ride. I brought it up strictly for its cargo capacity. That's ALL I mentioned about the 2 vehicles.

> > >

> > > As in I buy/get/use a car that works for ME MOST of the time (1 or 2 people), not for the occasional exception (8).

> > >

> > > As in I don't buy blades for the occasions where I MIGHT need one, such as the suggestion by the poster I quoted about being able to hit the ball lower out from under a tree. I buy CBs because they work for me the vast majority of the time.

> > >

> > > Can you hear me now ?

> > >

> > >

> > I always have a hard time hearing nonsense. It’s hard to take away you meant cargo space when you only referenced seating by the way. Maybe say what you mean. My point was to establish that your NSX was not a rationale purchase and certainly not a responsible one if it was your only means of transportation. Forgiveness also applies to vehicles which the NSX is well known for being “unforgiving” however your choice is your choice even though more forgiving options are available... even with high performance capabilities. So its rather hypocritical of you to push forgiveness on others regarding golf purchases when you obviously are not consistent with your own purchases. You don’t buy a NSX because it’s all you need for “Cargo Space”, you buy it for performance and it’s coolness by design. A vanity purchase maybe? By the way your analogy was in fact presented backwards LOL, OMG, LMAO

> >

> > Now let’s start a new paragraph... just kidding

> >

>

> My apologies. I misspoke. I didn't mean to say "cargo capacity", I meant "carrying capacity", as in PEOPLE, which, BTW should have been clear in the first post of mine on the subject.

>

> I buy what *I* want and/or need MOST of the time. I don't buy an SUV because at some unknown time I MIGHT want to carry 7 passengers.

>

> Same thing with golf clubs, hence the original (and correct) analogy. I buy and use golf clubs that are the most useful to me MOST of the time, not those that I MIGHT need once every St. Swivens Day..

>

> Do you get it NOW ?

Hey I got an apology... it was sarcasm but I’ll still take it. It’s a good practice to say what you mean and not change your intent when you get called on something. Just saying... LOL, OMG, LMAO

 

At the end of the day there are still too many variables to try and discredit what others are claiming. s*** I started a new paragraph... sorry, I don’t want to go out of character.

 

[nsxguy]

> @revanant said:

> > @BiggErn said:

> > > @cliffhanger said:

> > > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > > @cliffhanger said:

> > > > > > @BiggErn said:

> > > > > > I guess it’s odd that none of the better players I know or have played with use an MB. From low single digit to scratch or better they use ping G series, jpx hot metal, and some old Callaway x18s off the top of my head. A kid we played with awhile back had some of the old Titleist CBs (very GI, maybe DCI) that I can’t even recall the exact model was puring everything and hitting all kinds of shots. He only played 9 holes with us and shot -2.

> > > > >

> > > > > it sure is odd man considering that there are an estimated 60 million golfers in the world (2018 number) and single digit or low handicap golfers make up about 35% or basically a third of all golfers (according to the USGA that is). If their estimate carries equal worldwide that means somewhere around 21,000,000 golfers play to the approximate ability of those golfers you know. I am sure that your circle of golfing buddies represents what the other almost 21 million golfers do right? Yeah man thats odd alright.

> > > >

> > > > I guess I associate with a handful of them. They definitely wouldn’t need a fluffer thread on an Internet forum to try and validate the equipment they use....of course they wouldn’t need to.

> > >

> > > they also don't need you on the internet telling them what to play right? Sorry, i mean telling them to play what they want as long as they don't use this, this, this or this as an excuse right?

> >

> > Nobody has done that just stated that certain equipment essentially requires perfection every time to be of any benefit. Of course anybody can buy that equipment and use it whether they can use it effectively or not.

>

> Ok folks—in the name of science and as an excuse to get some practice in, I took my AP1 7 iron and 6 iron down to the sim, along with my MP-4 6 iron.

>

> I hit 10 shots with each iron, starting with the AP1 7 iron, followed by the AP 1 6 iron, and then the MP-4. I then hit a second set of 10 with the AP1 and MP-4 6 irons, in that order. I didn’t want the AP1s to suffer for having gone second, so I gave both sets of 6 irons a second go.

>

> Pictures below.

>

> Set 1 (AP1 7i)

>

> Set 2 (AP1 6i)

>

> Set 3 (MP-4 6i)

> (shot #10 was thinned, but dead straight, decent carry, and appropriate distance with roll. this is the point I’ve been making about why I like my misses with the MP-4).

>

> Set 4 (AP 1 6i)

> (A good number of my shots clustered right. This was despite taking breaks, pausing to check setup, and the sim showing an in-to-our swing path. My guess is that I lost some helpful draw spin due to the AP1 design)

>

> Set 5 (MP-4)

>

>

> **Overall, I think the results show the following: 1) I have pretty consistent distances with all of the irons;

> 2) I can get a 20+ yard drop off regardless of the iron, so it’s just something I need to factor into my shots;

> 3) You really don’t need perfect striking to get good results out of blades;

> 4) You can shape any iron (though I do have to work harder with the AP1s and they aren’t as predictable)**

> Ultimately, I don’t have a ton of bad shots. The real question is which iron gives me better average results. I think the MP-4 has the best results for dispersion, spin, and carry, followed by the 7 iron (which basically has 6 iron spin and flight), while the AP1 6 iron wasn’t consistent for me. Subjectively, the MP-4 definitely fits my eye the best and feels better than the AP1.

>

> **So, I will happily continue to practice with the blade that’s giving me better results**, even though the common wisdom is that the blades should not give playable shots on anything but a perfect strike (which, as anyone who’s ever hit an mb knows, is simply not true), that there’s no real benefit for a high handicapper to practice with blades (not my experience), and I am losing out by not playing a more forgiving iron (possibly true, but it seems like the MP-4s fit me well enough, and my AP1s aren’t the right irons to dethrone them. I’ll be happy to give the 716 CBS a shot at the title someday, though :) ).

 

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics" - Disraeli(?)

 

IMO golf does not lend itself well to statistics; however that doesn't make all statistics irrelevant.

 

Thanks for going through all those shots but the problem with "averages" for something like this is that an average (distance especially) is mostly irrelevant unless you take out the really poor strikes. I GET that they count in an average but they shouldn't count in evaluating a club UNLESS there are way too many of them. And in THAT case, perhaps you should just disqualify that club (or at least with that shaft).

 

Similar problem with dispersion. If I hit 5 shots 30 yards left and 5 shots 30 yards right the simulator stats would show my average dispersion as zero. Not quite accurate, is it ? LOL

 

I say this because once you choose a club, with practice, you will get fewer and fewer "awful" strikes. Also, if you're only going to carry a 7 iron 99 yards, do you really care if it had gone 109 or 89 ? Niope, probably in the same sort of trouble with any of the 3.

 

Since you said the Ap-1 7 and the MP4 6 went about the same distance (due to loft no doubt), those are the 2 sets I looked at. Unfortunately, since you didn't take out the worst hits the AP-1 "low" of only 99 yards carry skews the average of the other 9(?). The average is more relevant without the worst strikes.

 

I suspect the 99 yard strike was a skulled shot (a pull hook too as the worst sidespin was -2000 to the hook(?) side) and that might be at least one reason why the difference in dispersion from right to left sidespin is so wide (over 3,000). So the sidespin difference in this case is unuseable. Also, related to sidespin is the question of whether you were trying to move the ball one way or the other or hit it straight.

 

Take out that 99 yard carry and your average for the AP-1 is now 136, not 132. Take out the 118 (lowest) out of the MP4 and your average carry is 140, not 138. And that's just the one poor strike we can see.

 

Point is, accumulated results/averages, to ME, don't tell nearly the whole story. As well, I expect you didn't use any but if you'd had impact tape on the face, I'd have liked to see that as well.

 

Personally I never use averages. I hit balls and observe each one. I "throw out" the terrible swings. Anyway, IMO, what you really need to do to evaluate your clubs is to list all the strikes with each one and go over them one-by-one.

 

Anyway, good on ya for trying different things.

[nostatic]

> @nsxguy said:

 

> Similar problem with dispersion. If I hit 5 shots 30 yards left and 5 shots 30 yards right the simulator stats would show my average dispersion as zero. Not quite accurate, is it ? LOL

 

Well, it is accurate (average is just a calculation - it is what it is), but not particularly useful or representative of the effort. What has been interesting to me (among other things) in coming back to the game after a long layoff is the amount of data that is now readily available, and arguably over-emphasized. Somewhat akin to the talk of "engineers vs artists" at the Masters this week. Some data certainly is beneficial, and in the right situation can be a game-changer. But most of the time data is of questionable quality, and the analysis is usually nudged by some sort of bias.

 

While some talk about "playing what you like", I think the real factor there is comfort and confidence. If you're not comfortable with the view of the club, you're probably not going to hit it well. Now confidence doesn't magically erase bad swing habits, but I'd certainly rather hit a club I have confidence in rather than one I don't. If I take the club I don't like and I'm able to work through it, then it probably will prove viable. Have I improved my swing or just my confidence? Kinda hard to separate that out, as humans are a walking bag of variables that are hard to control out. At the end of the day, I'm going to be driven by my score and how I felt about the round. Plenty of times I've thought I didn't hit the ball well but was able to score and vice versa. Crazy game...

[dubbelbogey]

> @nostatic said:

> > @nsxguy said:

>

> > Similar problem with dispersion. If I hit 5 shots 30 yards left and 5 shots 30 yards right the simulator stats would show my average dispersion as zero. Not quite accurate, is it ? LOL

>

> Well, it is accurate (average is just a calculation - it is what it is), but not particularly useful or representative of the effort.

 

I wouldn't call that dispersion zero at all. Typically, measurements like this are typically done with absolute magnitude of error. I.e. or, visually, how much physical area the dispersion pattern covers. I've used this sort of thing in a past life dealing with fabrication of electronic circuits, but this sort of measurement is literally everywhere - e.g. long range target shooters measure their dispersion by how big a circle encompasses the holes on the target sheet.

[nsxguy]

> @dubbelbogey said:

> > @nostatic said:

> > > @nsxguy said:

> >

> > > Similar problem with dispersion. If I hit 5 shots 30 yards left and 5 shots 30 yards right the simulator stats would show my average dispersion as zero. Not quite accurate, is it ? LOL

> >

> > Well, it is accurate (average is just a calculation - it is what it is), but not particularly useful or representative of the effort.

>

> I wouldn't call that dispersion zero at all. Typically, measurements like this are typically done with absolute magnitude of error. I.e. or, visually, how much physical area the dispersion pattern covers. I've used this sort of thing in a past life dealing with fabrication of electronic circuits, but this sort of measurement is literally everywhere - e.g. long range target shooters measure their dispersion by how big a circle encompasses the holes on the target sheet.

 

You wouldn't (and shouldn't) but I'm pretty sure the simulator does (although I could be mistaken).

[cliffhanger]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @dubbelbogey said:

> > > @nostatic said:

> > > > @nsxguy said:

> > >

> > > > Similar problem with dispersion. If I hit 5 shots 30 yards left and 5 shots 30 yards right the simulator stats would show my average dispersion as zero. Not quite accurate, is it ? LOL

> > >

> > > Well, it is accurate (average is just a calculation - it is what it is), but not particularly useful or representative of the effort.

> >

> > I wouldn't call that dispersion zero at all. Typically, measurements like this are typically done with absolute magnitude of error. I.e. or, visually, how much physical area the dispersion pattern covers. I've used this sort of thing in a past life dealing with fabrication of electronic circuits, but this sort of measurement is literally everywhere - e.g. long range target shooters measure their dispersion by how big a circle encompasses the holes on the target sheet.

>

> You wouldn't (and shouldn't) but I'm pretty sure the simulator does (although I could be mistaken).

 

so now this has turned into a conversation about dispersion when someone has clearly indicated that the average of his shots distance wise was better with the blade? Interesting turn of events when the distance myth was proven inaccurate. Its also interesting that now any averages of shots is not relevant to the conversation... yes interesting indeed.

[BiggErn]

> @cliffhanger said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > > @dubbelbogey said:

> > > > @nostatic said:

> > > > > @nsxguy said:

> > > >

> > > > > Similar problem with dispersion. If I hit 5 shots 30 yards left and 5 shots 30 yards right the simulator stats would show my average dispersion as zero. Not quite accurate, is it ? LOL

> > > >

> > > > Well, it is accurate (average is just a calculation - it is what it is), but not particularly useful or representative of the effort.

> > >

> > > I wouldn't call that dispersion zero at all. Typically, measurements like this are typically done with absolute magnitude of error. I.e. or, visually, how much physical area the dispersion pattern covers. I've used this sort of thing in a past life dealing with fabrication of electronic circuits, but this sort of measurement is literally everywhere - e.g. long range target shooters measure their dispersion by how big a circle encompasses the holes on the target sheet.

> >

> > You wouldn't (and shouldn't) but I'm pretty sure the simulator does (although I could be mistaken).

>

> so now this has turned into a conversation about dispersion when someone has clearly indicated that the average of his shots distance wise was better with the blade? Interesting turn of events when the distance myth was proven inaccurate. Its also interesting that now any averages of shots is not relevant to the conversation... yes interesting indeed.

 

Lol. All it proved was he was a pretty terrible ball striker.

[nostatic]

> @nsxguy said:

> > @dubbelbogey said:

> > > @nostatic said:

> > > > @nsxguy said:

> > >

> > > > Similar problem with dispersion. If I hit 5 shots 30 yards left and 5 shots 30 yards right the simulator stats would show my average dispersion as zero. Not quite accurate, is it ? LOL

> > >

> > > Well, it is accurate (average is just a calculation - it is what it is), but not particularly useful or representative of the effort.

> >

> > I wouldn't call that dispersion zero at all. Typically, measurements like this are typically done with absolute magnitude of error. I.e. or, visually, how much physical area the dispersion pattern covers. I've used this sort of thing in a past life dealing with fabrication of electronic circuits, but this sort of measurement is literally everywhere - e.g. long range target shooters measure their dispersion by how big a circle encompasses the holes on the target sheet.

>

> You wouldn't (and shouldn't) but I'm pretty sure the simulator does (although I could be mistaken).

 

The displays I've seen will show a circle (which is a good representation of data) and also a number (average - which is not a good representation of data).

 

Averages can be useful numbers in some cases, useless in others. Reminds me of a joke - how many points does it take to draw a straight line? The correct answer is 3 if you want some statistical significance. Yes, scientists have boring jokes...