My experience gaming clubs that were designed for my handicap range

[Exactice808]

> @"b.helts" said:

> And the words per post count in this thread I through the roof!

>

> Edited for clarity

 

LOOLLOLOL BBBRRRAAAAHHHH you gotta see the other one....I gotta have a record.... I know twice it said "post too long please shorten by a novel"..... I just wanted to share my "passion and conviction"

 

In all fairness the moment "Gaming Blades" is at any point a discussion...Its a dumpster fire.... But in all fairness... some enjoy the debate others are pyromaniacs and just want to see stuff burn LOL!!!!!!!

[bladehunter]

> @Exactice808 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > The part above id still take exception to is it having anything to do with handicap. Some 12s strike the ball quite well. And some 15s barely get it airborne , even off a tee. I do buy that some irons weighting and some sole designs will help the severely flawed swing. But I don’t buy that it’s nearly enough to call a gospel truth accepted principle. Even though it is a widely accepted marketing strategy. Anecdotal evidence-

> >

> > My 10 year old. Stated him several years ago on ping moxie clubs. Wide everything. Hit them ok as a beginner. Grew. So we built him a set of TM GI irons with L flex graphite. Hit those terrible.

> >

> > (For reference. This kid shoots in the 40s from junior tees since he turned 9. He can drive it and score. )

> >

> > So I started noticing he hit his 2 wedges just ridiculously good compared to his set pw. They are both vokey with a bit of a heel grind to take off a spot of extra material. So as a experiment I built him a pw and 7 iron titleist 962b with L flex graphite. And boom. He smokes them just like the 2 wedges. Why ? I think it’s the thin sole and low vertical cog. He can get a better strike on the ball and hit it higher. The irons that are supposed to help. Don’t. They bounce into the ball and glide. Instead of cutting a divot. Again. Anecdotal. But true 1 time.

> >

>

> You edify my point.... You experimented and found what works right. You did NOT follow the basic rules or marketing hype? Here is the thing, some scream that because you are a high handicap you need to play the most forgiving clubs by ** default**.

>

> You can try by default but if you DO Not experiment you will NEVER know your abilities or potential right? So anecdotal evidence as you stated is weak. Heck now even more so I feel the need to agree that people SHOULD experiment as much as possible and try hitting blades just for the heck of it to confirm they suck enough not to play them.... How can I say something that? Because of MY experiences. I sucked lied and tried... after the "experiment" I finally realized I was lying to myself and actually sucked. Moved to a forgiving club, learned how to play a complete game... got better and then tried again... Only to find out that the quality of my game now is not a major deficiency in the swing, but just being able to put the whole game together. (which unfortunately for me) Is not possible without a lot of practice. I have Zero natural talent and only practice will help put all facets of the golf game together.

 

Yes sir.

 

Agree 100%. I too have tried and found what seems to forgive for me. It’s all in the turf action for me. I played i500 all winter in the mud and slop. Worked great. As soon as it stopped raining and the ground got firm. They were trash ( as the kids say ). Why ? My courses aren’t sand based. There red clay. Similar to Texas hardpan based courses. Playing that condition as a shallow attack guy is tough with a lot of bounce. You catch yourself putting the balk back in stance and hitting more and more down on the ball. Why ? T try to get a good strike. Sometimes you can. But a lot of times you just get weak flares to the right. But when you know it’s wrong is when you can swap irons on the same day and within 3 balls go to striking It beautifully. And controlling everything. Same shaft and grip etc. only variable were heads. This went on back and forth for 2 months. Finally I said “ enough “. If there were a GI iron as far as perimeter weighting with a blades sole and offset I’d be interested immediately. Doesn’t exist that I know of.

[tigerfan23]

yes of course.

Im currently a 5 HC and play AP2. I tried bigger irons all winter and had a hard time playing my stock shot. For me GI don't spin as much (maybe due to stronger lofts) and when I try to hit a draw the ball starts right and doesn't move back as much as I would like. I'm giving the i210 a run right now. They are borderline and i'm not 100% sure if Ill game them or move back to a smaller forged iron.

[nostatic]

There are lies, damned lies, and statistics...

 

The core problem is that aggregate results give a trend, but all the individual cares about is their personal results. Pros don't play irons that are designed to go high and straight because they want to work the ball. Most high cappers don't play blades because they can't consistently hit them straight - either due to physics or psychology (or both). There certainly can be exceptions because humans.

 

But I'm an empiricist, so I'm up for an (anecdotal) experiment. I'm about a 12 (GIR my weakest point currently), happily playing Hot Metal Pros at the moment. My question for the bladers, would a 919 Tour qualify or do I need to go MP18? Plan would be to order up a 7 iron in the exact same shaft/length as my current clubs as I'd want to control some variables. I wouldn't bend it - I know it would be shorter due to weaker loft. More interested in mishits and consistency rather than absolute carry.

[nsxguy]

> @Exactice808 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > Al anyone is saying is that anecdotal evidence is wrong both ways. Yours and mine. For some reason that is agreeable until it’s cited as a 2 way street. Why ?

>

> I think it goes just a touch more beyond this, Everyone has their own Experiences & Opinions

> Now then comes the way we post and deliver ourselves, We can share our experiences & Opinions to the masses

>

>

> Both the way we share is dependent on our intent.

> 1) Are we sharing our experience & opinions with others so others can **make their own judgement**

> 2) Are we sharing our experience & opinions with others to **convince them to take our** experience and opinions

>

> What I have found in a couple of forums not just GolfWRX is people have their own bias. There are people that want to learn and expand there knowledge and there are those that are set in their ways and if you disagree you are wrong to them no matter what.

>

> Golf unfortunately has, 2 ego facets,

> 1) Handicap

> 2) Blades

> If you have a low handicap, you are treated with a little more respect of opinion over the high handicap that may have a difference of opinion, Why just because you are a High Handicapper can you not be respected of opinion?

> Blades have its "persona" that you must be an excellent over all player to be able to play it.

>

> Fact remains while a minority group there are some honest people that honestly are out to help and want to share their opinions and experiences so others can make the most educated decision .

>

> the other minority group is those that have a bias opinion and no matter what "scientific" facts, no matter what experiences an individual has if it does not align with their bias. you are wrong..... at that is when the egos go off the rails.......

>

>

 

First of all, when *I* was 16, *I* knew it all. Didn't you ? LOL

 

And then, when I was 26, I realized that my 16 year old self really didn't know all that much. And when I was 36,,,,,,,,,,, I trust you get the point.

 

Experience counts. That includes, especially in the case of a low handicapper, the "been there, done that" POV that many of them have. And many less experienced as well as less talented players do not. You yourself suggested that dedicated practice could get you back to your "7" and possibly (probably ?) further than that, no ? I also believe though that you claimed not to be very good at most (other ?) sports. Or perhaps I'm mistaken ?

 

So just how good do you think you COULD possibly get ? Low single ? Scratch ? +4 ?

 

Point is, a LOT of these very low 'cappers are NOT like bladehunter. They did NOT get to scratch in 5(?) years as bh did. And they clearly have better than average hand-eye coordination, reflexes and the ability to learn the nuances.

 

Do you not think a lower handicapper is due a "little more respect" (your words) ? Would you take the opinion of your buddy, who's read the Constitution, on a question of Constitutional Law ? Or would you go to a college Law Professor ? Would you take a 27 'caps opinion here on the board on a particular subject ? Or would you take Harmon's, Pelz', Monte's, or iteach's opinion ? Or perhaps a guy who'd gone through all that practice and pain of getting down to low singles or better ?

 

I mean, after all, despite all the scientific evidence, there really IS a "Flat Earth Society". LOL

 

And you think it's a FACT that posters giving their honest opinions are in the minority ? Frankly, I find that sad. And if I believed that I wouldn't read a single post on here,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and I don't know why you'd bother either.

[mahonie]

> @nostatic said:

> There are lies, damned lies, and statistics...

>

> The core problem is that aggregate results give a trend, but all the individual cares about is their personal results. Pros don't play irons that are designed to go high and straight because they want to work the ball. Most high cappers don't play blades because they can't consistently hit them straight - either due to physics or psychology (or both). There certainly can be exceptions because humans.

>

> But I'm an empiricist, so I'm up for an (anecdotal) experiment. I'm about a 12 (GIR my weakest point currently), happily playing Hot Metal Pros at the moment. My question for the bladers, would a 919 Tour qualify or do I need to go MP18? Plan would be to order up a 7 iron in the exact same shaft/length as my current clubs as I'd want to control some variables. I wouldn't bend it - I know it would be shorter due to weaker loft. More interested in mishits and consistency rather than absolute carry.

 

It would have to be an MP18 MB.

[MelloYello]

> @dpb5031 said:

>

> It's extremely rare that a mid to high HC player is going to be more proficient with a long iron (2,3,4) than with a hybrid or fairway metal of similar loft. I play a lot of golf with players of varying abilities and cannot recall the last time I saw a mid or high capper flushing towering long irons. Most are sensible and carry hybrids or higher lofted fairway metals. Look in the bags of Champions Tour players and LPGA players and you'll find plenty of hybrids in place of long irons...and these are some of the best players in the world Seems it's only on GolfWRX that all of these higher caps exist who claim to be better off with their blade long irons...lol!

>

> Hybrids provide oft needed margin for error. A 210 yard shot over water (that must carry 195 to clear the water) is a very tough shot from the rough or even the fairway with a long iron...even for most low ssingle digit and scratch level players. Long irons require ample CH speed and extremely precise contact both in terms of with the ball and with the turf. Shots with long irons will typically not carry as far as their hybrid equivalent, and will reach a lower peak height, making it harder to hold greens. Hybrids and FWs are WAY more forgiving, and it's not even close. You can drop kick a shot, hitting an inch behind the ball and often still carry darn near full distance. Same goes if you catch it a groove or two low on the face or toward the toe. Their design gets the ball up quickly with generally longer carry than the equivalent iron, plus they glide through the turf much better without digging. The same mishits with a long iron will be swimming, I guarantee it.

>

> I'm a low HC player and CAN hit long irons reasonably well, but I'm smart enough and care about my scores enough to know that in the real world, where I'm playing for money or in a tournament, hybrids in the 3 and 4 provide me with much greater overall utility and versatility, ultimately saving me strokes. Don't kid yourselves fellas!

 

I put my 19-deg hybrid back in the bag for a couple of rounds this past week and I have to say, it is really the way to go. While the 3- and 4-irons are nice when I hit them well, they invite bad shots into the mix on days when I'm just not striking it that great. My experience with hybrids is that they make the ball go the same distance every time leaving the player to reign in his dispersion pattern a little.

 

So with a hybrid in my hand, it exposes my tendency to miss laterally a bit more but so long as I don't do anything incredibly stupid, the results seem to be pretty spot on with the hybrid doing a lot of the heavy lifting. I hit it a couple times on Friday which included a shot from about 225 from a very tight lie. I ended up pin high but after a great pitch I tapped in for birdie. I have to say, with a 3-iron I definitely wouldn't have been pin-high there. I would missed on the same line (slightly right) but I'd have been short. The result might have been the same given the pitch wasn't anymore difficult, BUT the hybrid was really "easy" to hit. I didn't swing that hard and the ball came off the face quite nicely.

 

So with that experience, I think I'm going to at least replace the 3-iron which requires a more/less perfect strike. Having toyed with my hybrid again now, I don't think my concerns about lateral misses were as realistic as I had made them.

 

So, thanks for steering me in this direction @dpb5031 !!

[MelloYello]

> @nsxguy said:

>

> First of all, when *I* was 16, *I* knew it all. Didn't you ? LOL

>

> And then, when I was 26, I realized that my 16 year old self really didn't know all that much. And when I was 36,,,,,,,,,,, I trust you get the point.

>

> Experience counts. That includes, especially in the case of a low handicapper, the "been there, done that" POV that many of them have. And many less experienced as well as less talented players do not. You yourself suggested that dedicated practice could get you back to your "7" and possibly (probably ?) further than that, no ? I also believe though that you claimed not to be very good at most (other ?) sports. Or perhaps I'm mistaken ?

>

> So just how good do you think you COULD possibly get ? Low single ? Scratch ? +4 ?

>

> Point is, a LOT of these very low 'cappers are NOT like bladehunter. They did NOT get to scratch in 5(?) years as bh did. And they clearly have better than average hand-eye coordination, reflexes and the ability to learn the nuances.

>

> Do you not think a lower handicapper is due a "little more respect" (your words) ? Would you take the opinion of your buddy, who's read the Constitution, on a question of Constitutional Law ? Or would you go to a college Law Professor ? Would you take a 27 'caps opinion here on the board on a particular subject ? Or would you take Harmon's, Pelz', Monte's, or iteach's opinion ? Or perhaps a guy who'd gone through all that practice and pain of getting down to low singles or better ?

>

> I mean, after all, despite all the scientific evidence, there really IS a "Flat Earth Society". LOL

>

> And you think it's a FACT that posters giving their honest opinions are in the minority ? Frankly, I find that sad. And if I believed that I wouldn't read a single post on here,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and I don't know why you'd bother either.

 

I don't think blade guys are really ever open to hearing suggestions. Threads like this demonstrate that. They want to argue and debate the subject so they can try and find personal justification for what they choose to do. In reality, only time will teach them. I know that back when I played blades I came up with all sorts of reasons why it _'didn't really hurt my score.'_ I would talk about how my driving and my putting were worse and all that. I would repeat the same stuff about the experience of a great shot with a blade and how my irons were the strongest facet of my game. Only later did I learn how little I really cared about feel and how pointless it is whether something is a strength or a weakness. You should want to improve the results no matter what!

 

The real question is why anyone keeps trying to debate people that reside inside the one group that seems to have the most hard-line stance with regard to their equipment. If someone else handed me something and said, _'use this, it will be easier'_ I would happily try it and most likely change if the results were good. We know blades make the game harder. Nobody debates that outside of the few zealots who refuse to let go. I'm happy to admit that it's a mistake on my part to ever enter into these debates when you're basically arguing against the one person in a hundred that thinks blades are going to make them a better golfer.

 

You can't even really have a debate anyhow because as soon as you make a point you're scolded for telling other people what to do. I mean, there's just no winning in that scenario. At the end of the day, you can't help them. They'll block you at every turn.

 

The funny thing about these two threads is that most of the people are sharing info and having a good time but there are a couple of guys who clearly want to argue about every single thing. Never once do they accept a piece of helpful advice. They shut out anyone and everyone that tries to reach out and make the game a little easier and more enjoyable.

[Exactice808]

> @nsxguy said:

> First of all, when *I* was 16, *I* knew it all. Didn't you ? LOL

>

> And then, when I was 26, I realized that my 16 year old self really didn't know all that much. And when I was 36,,,,,,,,,,, I trust you get the point.

>

> Experience counts. That includes, especially in the case of a low handicapper, the "been there, done that" POV that many of them have. And many less experienced as well as less talented players do not. You yourself suggested that dedicated practice could get you back to your "7" and possibly (probably ?) further than that, no ? I also believe though that you claimed not to be very good at most (other ?) sports. Or perhaps I'm mistaken ?

>

> So just how good do you think you COULD possibly get ? Low single ? Scratch ? +4 ?

>

> Point is, a LOT of these very low 'cappers are NOT like bladehunter. They did NOT get to scratch in 5(?) years as bh did. And they clearly have better than average hand-eye coordination, reflexes and the ability to learn the nuances.

>

> Do you not think a lower handicapper is due a "little more respect" (your words) ? Would you take the opinion of your buddy, who's read the Constitution, on a question of Constitutional Law ? Or would you go to a college Law Professor ? Would you take a 27 'caps opinion here on the board on a particular subject ? Or would you take Harmon's, Pelz', Monte's, or iteach's opinion ? Or perhaps a guy who'd gone through all that practice and pain of getting down to low singles or better ?

>

> I mean, after all, despite all the scientific evidence, there really IS a "Flat Earth Society". LOL

>

> And you think it's a FACT that posters giving their honest opinions are in the minority ? Frankly, I find that sad. And if I believed that I wouldn't read a single post on here,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and I don't know why you'd bother either.

 

LOL! Totally get it, I have a 2 & 4 year old and the 2 yr old ( Boy) is Ultra payback when I was a crazy kid, not looking forward to him when his hormones kick in nor my daughter thats is the 4 year old.

 

Absolutely experience counts. BUT any experience counts its a golf forum NO? What do you understand experience to be? Length of time or just a singe moment. I interpret your comment as Length of time. You again seem to be focusing on low handicap as edification. (As I have stated) "Would I take a 27 cap (opinion) on the board" WHY would I have a reason NOT to. The "OPINION" is Not fact. Its an opinion. I feel I have progressed way faster and much further on these boards from the opinion and facts from others. REGARDLESS of their handicap. WHY? Because I choose to take it as info to make my own educated decision. NOW I would choose to disregard's someone post when they show they either lack credibility or just being a jerk. We have a couple of those as well. There could be permanent 27 hdcps that just lack the physical skill yet a high cognitive and analytical skill, Why are the best teachers in the world not 18 major winners... So yes I usually try to respect ALL comments and opinions but make my OWN educated decision.

 

Not sure your point.... You seem to think I do not take low handicappers with respect? I have just said that high handicaps have respectable opinions. If you take that as a bash on low caps. thats on you dont put words in my mouth.

 

And YES the Flat earth society is an OPINION, that many people here have. ITS up to the person receiving that a person making a conscious choice to take what they want.

 

As for Minority giving honest help. YES NOW take that for how you want. It seems you want to take every post of mine a negative. BUT that is actually intended to be respectful and a gracious nod to people like "Monte, Dan, Iteach" Tha share and teach on this forums. Golf is their living YET they give free personal advice in hopes to see them do better.

They are a minority in the sea of golfers. I have NOTHING but respect for them and I personally would LOVE to be as giving and helpful to perpetuate their kindness. That is also why I post when I feel I can contribute something.

 

[MtlJeff]

I completely agree that a big part of struggling to hit blades is being intimidated by them. Even as a scratch I struggle to look down at a blade 3 iron and feel confident so I can't imagine how others feel. If they are happy with it good for them

 

But the thread isnt really intended to be blades vs cavities though understood the undertones are there. But I imagine many, many 10+ indexes might play SGI because it makes them more comfortable and that translates to better results

 

I do believe there is some forgiveness benefits of a bigger iron because I feel like there is when I hit them. But I don't have documented proof of this. I just feel like a poor swing with one leads to a marginally better result. But that's all personal experience and not rigorous testing in a lab

[BIG STU]

I have been reading this over the course of a few days and so I will throw my .02 in FWIW. Golf is very subjective period. What a person's handicap dictates can be for different reasons. Every ones swing is different for what ever reason. Really I can not subscribe to the theory of a certain club for a certain handicap. I have always been of the belief of play what fits your eye and feels good to you. Me I am a dyed in the wool blade man period even though I do stray and mess with CBs some. Those that know me on here will tell you I am not one of those blade fogies that tries to force the theory of blades make you a better ball striker. Hey I have been around a lot of good players over the years from gambling and playing the Minis etc. Hey I have seen plus handicappers play GI or CB irons. I never considered myself a ball striker still do not. The reason I had some success was because I had a stellar short game and could get out of jail quickly. Other folks are good players because they can hit fairways and GIRs. There is no one etched stone way to "properly" play this game and that goes into equipment selection too.

[nsxguy]

> @Exactice808 said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> > First of all, when *I* was 16, *I* knew it all. Didn't you ? LOL

> >

> > And then, when I was 26, I realized that my 16 year old self really didn't know all that much. And when I was 36,,,,,,,,,,, I trust you get the point.

> >

> > Experience counts. That includes, especially in the case of a low handicapper, the "been there, done that" POV that many of them have. And many less experienced as well as less talented players do not. You yourself suggested that dedicated practice could get you back to your "7" and possibly (probably ?) further than that, no ? I also believe though that you claimed not to be very good at most (other ?) sports. Or perhaps I'm mistaken ?

> >

> > So just how good do you think you COULD possibly get ? Low single ? Scratch ? +4 ?

> >

> > Point is, a LOT of these very low 'cappers are NOT like bladehunter. They did NOT get to scratch in 5(?) years as bh did. And they clearly have better than average hand-eye coordination, reflexes and the ability to learn the nuances.

> >

> > Do you not think a lower handicapper is due a "little more respect" (your words) ? Would you take the opinion of your buddy, who's read the Constitution, on a question of Constitutional Law ? Or would you go to a college Law Professor ? Would you take a 27 'caps opinion here on the board on a particular subject ? Or would you take Harmon's, Pelz', Monte's, or iteach's opinion ? Or perhaps a guy who'd gone through all that practice and pain of getting down to low singles or better ?

> >

> > I mean, after all, despite all the scientific evidence, there really IS a "Flat Earth Society". LOL

> >

> > And you think it's a FACT that posters giving their honest opinions are in the minority ? Frankly, I find that sad. And if I believed that I wouldn't read a single post on here,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and I don't know why you'd bother either.

>

> LOL! Totally get it, I have a 2 & 4 year old and the 2 yr old ( Boy) is Ultra payback when I was a crazy kid, not looking forward to him when his hormones kick in nor my daughter thats is the 4 year old.

>

> Absolutely experience counts. BUT any experience counts its a golf forum NO? What do you understand experience to be? Length of time or just a singe moment. I interpret your comment as Length of time. You again seem to be focusing on low handicap as edification. (As I have stated) "Would I take a 27 cap (opinion) on the board" WHY would I have a reason NOT to. The "OPINION" is Not fact. Its an opinion. I feel I have progressed way faster and much further on these boards from the opinion and facts from others. REGARDLESS of their handicap. WHY? Because I choose to take it as info to make my own educated decision. NOW I would choose to disregard's someone post when they show they either lack credibility or just being a jerk. We have a couple of those as well. There could be permanent 27 hdcps that just lack the physical skill yet a high cognitive and analytical skill, Why are the best teachers in the world not 18 major winners... So yes I usually try to respect ALL comments and opinions but make my OWN educated decision.

>

> Not sure your point.... You seem to think I do not take low handicappers with respect? I have just said that high handicaps have respectable opinions. If you take that as a bash on low caps. thats on you dont put words in my mouth.

>

> And YES the Flat earth society is an OPINION, that many people here have. ITS up to the person receiving that a person making a conscious choice to take what they want.

>

> As for Minority giving honest help. YES NOW take that for how you want. It seems you want to take every post of mine a negative. BUT that is actually intended to be respectful and a gracious nod to people like "Monte, Dan, Iteach" Tha share and teach on this forums. Golf is their living YET they give free personal advice in hopes to see them do better.

> They are a minority in the sea of golfers. I have NOTHING but respect for them and I personally would LOVE to be as giving and helpful to perpetuate their kindness. That is also why I post when I feel I can contribute something.

>

 

Brother, you should go BACK to politics. Not discussing them, running for office !!!

 

Flat Earth is an "opinion" ? LOL Sure it is; one that flies in the face of an overwhelming of scientific research (I was going to say "fact" but then you'd probably say "Prove it" and personally I can't LMAO).

 

Minority giving honest help I should take how I want ? How ELSE can one take that ? And why SHOULD I take that as I want when you are right here able to explain what you meant ?

 

You said, and I quote, "_Fact remains while a minority group there are some honest people that honestly are out to help and want to share their opinions and experiences so others can make the most educated decision_."

 

I don't think there's any OTHER way to take it. You are suggesting that posters trying to HELP are in the minority around here.

 

Is that or is that NOT what you meant ? A simple "Yes" or "No" should suffice in this particular instance.

[Exactice808]

> @nsxguy said:

 

 

> Brother, you should go BACK to politics. Not discussing them, running for office !!!

>

> Flat Earth is an "opinion" ? LOL Sure it is; one that flies in the face of an overwhelming of scientific research (I was going to say "fact" but then you'd probably say "Prove it" and personally I can't LMAO).

>

> Minority giving honest help I should take how I want ? How ELSE can one take that ? And why SHOULD I take that as I want when you are right here able to explain what you meant ?

>

> You said, and I quote, "_Fact remains while a minority group there are some honest people that honestly are out to help and want to share their opinions and experiences so others can make the most educated decision_."

>

> I don't think there's any OTHER way to take it. You are suggesting that posters trying to HELP are in the minority around here.

>

> Is that or is that NOT what you meant ? A simple "Yes" or "No" should suffice in this particular instance.

 

Thats the best you got flat earth as your base point to argue...... just going to leave it right there.

 

As for "Facts remain" Yes, I feel "Iteach, Dan, Monte" are minorities here. They are amazing people with amazing track records willing to share their professional experience. I have ZERO accolades in relation to them. YES they are a minority here. PERIOD.

 

I want to honestly help, but I can agree IF my post was right next to Monte in the same thread. people would NOT give 2 $4!ts and a giggle for my post regardless how valuable it may be. AND you know what I get it because they hold that respect. But it does not mean you or anyone's post are less valuable. It is again UP to the individual receiving the info to use it as they please.

 

Again not sure what your aim is.... if you want to just sit here and cut down my post....... You are doing a fine job and have at it.... have a blast.......

 

 

[mahonie]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> >

> > First of all, when *I* was 16, *I* knew it all. Didn't you ? LOL

> >

> > And then, when I was 26, I realized that my 16 year old self really didn't know all that much. And when I was 36,,,,,,,,,,, I trust you get the point.

> >

> > Experience counts. That includes, especially in the case of a low handicapper, the "been there, done that" POV that many of them have. And many less experienced as well as less talented players do not. You yourself suggested that dedicated practice could get you back to your "7" and possibly (probably ?) further than that, no ? I also believe though that you claimed not to be very good at most (other ?) sports. Or perhaps I'm mistaken ?

> >

> > So just how good do you think you COULD possibly get ? Low single ? Scratch ? +4 ?

> >

> > Point is, a LOT of these very low 'cappers are NOT like bladehunter. They did NOT get to scratch in 5(?) years as bh did. And they clearly have better than average hand-eye coordination, reflexes and the ability to learn the nuances.

> >

> > Do you not think a lower handicapper is due a "little more respect" (your words) ? Would you take the opinion of your buddy, who's read the Constitution, on a question of Constitutional Law ? Or would you go to a college Law Professor ? Would you take a 27 'caps opinion here on the board on a particular subject ? Or would you take Harmon's, Pelz', Monte's, or iteach's opinion ? Or perhaps a guy who'd gone through all that practice and pain of getting down to low singles or better ?

> >

> > I mean, after all, despite all the scientific evidence, there really IS a "Flat Earth Society". LOL

> >

> > And you think it's a FACT that posters giving their honest opinions are in the minority ? Frankly, I find that sad. And if I believed that I wouldn't read a single post on here,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and I don't know why you'd bother either.

>

> I don't think blade guys are really ever open to hearing suggestions. Threads like this demonstrate that. They want to argue and debate the subject so they can try and find personal justification for what they choose to do. In reality, only time will teach them. I know that back when I played blades I came up with all sorts of reasons why it _'didn't really hurt my score.'_ I would talk about how my driving and my putting were worse and all that. I would repeat the same stuff about the experience of a great shot with a blade and how my irons were the strongest facet of my game. Only later did I learn how little I really cared about feel and how pointless it is whether something is a strength or a weakness. You should want to improve the results no matter what!

>

> The real question is why anyone keeps trying to debate people that reside inside the one group that seems to have the most hard-line stance with regard to their equipment. If someone else handed me something and said, _'use this, it will be easier'_ I would happily try it and most likely change if the results were good. We know blades make the game harder. Nobody debates that outside of the few zealots who refuse to let go. I'm happy to admit that it's a mistake on my part to ever enter into these debates when you're basically arguing against the one person in a hundred that thinks blades are going to make them a better golfer.

>

> You can't even really have a debate anyhow because as soon as you make a point you're scolded for telling other people what to do. I mean, there's just no winning in that scenario. At the end of the day, you can't help them. They'll block you at every turn.

>

> The funny thing about these two threads is that most of the people are sharing info and having a good time but there are a couple of guys who clearly want to argue about every single thing. Never once do they accept a piece of helpful advice. They shut out anyone and everyone that tries to reach out and make the game a little easier and more enjoyable.

 

Mello, taking all the points you’ve said about your game (and everyone else’s for that matter) I cannot for the life of me understand why you haven’t got at least a set of AP1s in your bag! You’ve just admitted that you can’t really hit 3 and 4 irons, which is no surprise as your CBs have a relatively high CG. Now that you seem to be enjoying the high launch and forgiveness of hybrids, the next natural step seems to be the AP1, particularly if score is so important to you. However, a little anecdote that might influence your decision:

 

A few years ago we had two pros at our club, one was an ex-Titleist fitter on the European Tour and fitted for Rory and Ross Fisher. The other pro, a bit older, but played off +4 and a long time blade player was the go to guy for lessons (a great teacher). ‘Fitter’ pro, fitted ‘teacher’ pro into a set of AP1s and he couldn’t have been happier. He said that every club in the bag felt like he was hitting pitching wedge, even the 4-iron. OK he did say that he had lost a bit of love for the game as it was not so nearly as satisfying, but while it was this easy to score he could live with it, particularly as he was still competing in the odd mini tour event. At a clinic, he let me hit a few and I agreed, it felt like cheating. I even lost my slight fade with everything going slightly left, but straight and functional and something I would work out in time. Having no spare cash at the time, I declined the offer of a fitting.

 

I saw a bag at the club a few weeks later full of Hogan blades. I asked ‘fitter’ pro who the player was. He mentioned something about ‘teacher’ pro losing his swing and going back to basics to try and find it. ‘Teacher’ Pro left our club a short time later and moved to a local driving range to focus on teaching. I kept in touch and even gave him a couple of sets of old clubs that he could use for teaching. After a while, I had a couple of lessons, but he confessed that he wasn’t enjoying golf and had stopped playing. I spoke to him last summer and he’s now stopped teaching and is fitting kitchens.

 

[dciccoritti]

> @MtlJeff said:

> But I imagine many, many 10+ indexes might play SGI because it makes them more comfortable and that translates to better results

>

 

I agree with this but I don't think it's only for 10+ indexes. I firmly believe it depends on the individual and that's always been my point. I played 588 Altitude irons and G30's and just never felt comfortable looking down at the mid to long irons. However as good as I'm hitting it now I still don't believe I've hit anything better than the G30 short irons and wedges (for full shots). I would have no issue playing a reverse combo set. Go figure.

 

Confidence and trust in your equipment is the first step to getting better.

[MtlJeff]

> @dciccoritti said:

> > @MtlJeff said:

> > But I imagine many, many 10+ indexes might play SGI because it makes them more comfortable and that translates to better results

> >

>

> I agree with this but I don't think it's only for 10+ indexes. I firmly believe it depends on the individual and that's always been my point. I played 588 Altitude irons and G30's and just never felt comfortable looking down at the mid to long irons. However as good as I'm hitting it now I still don't believe I've hit anything better than the G30 short irons and wedges (for full shots). I would have no issue playing a reverse combo set. Go figure.

>

> Confidence and trust in your equipment is the first step to getting better.

 

For sure, as I posted i myself am not confident enough to play blades though I've dabbled with it. I draw the line at "players CB" as the marketing guys call them.

 

So on the other end of my initial question, blades would be targeted at scratch players among others, but I won't play them, and it's probably more confidence based than ability

 

 

[IamMarkMac]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @IamMarkMac said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @IamMarkMac said:

> > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > @IamMarkMac said:

> > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > @IamMarkMac said:

> > > > > > > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > > > > > In the same index range as the OP except probably much older. My Titleist 716CB's are similar in design purpose to the OP's Apex irons. Mine have a skosh of forgiveness with muscle in cavity, MB specs and shot working benefits.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > (Unrelated rant) I am tired of seeing the word "Anecdotal" on discussion boards. For the life of me don't know why certain people emphasize its use when it's not really fitting for a discussion board. One man's thoughts might not be accurate or credible while another man's contribution is based on extensive subject-matter experience and understanding. In other words, reader judgment is crucial, and this is a discussion board where people offer opinions not a scientific research journal

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > "Anecdotal" needs to be specified because there's no shortage of people here (or other places for that matter) who will use something that is purely their own experience as rebuttal evidence to a general norm. It needs to be specified because if you don't and people actually think you're saying that GI clubs aren't more forgiving or something like that, you're going to trigger a lot of people.

> > > > > > > > FWIW though, I don't mind flame wars at all.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Yes. For sure. But. To be fair ... 99.9 % of the time it’s used to rebut someone else’s anecdotal information. Especially as forgiveness and strokes lost or gained form it , or the lack thereof , has never been proven or accurately quantified.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > As in a player chooses a club based on best outcomes vs choosing one based on mitigating a miss. I’ve never seen it studied , talked about nor proven that the better outcomes do not out weigh the mitigated misses ( when they are indeed helped ) On other words. My anecdote carries as much water as yours. And both leak.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Exactly. "A player chooses..." is, by definition, anecdotal and, as there is no rule governing it, no one can gainsay it. A player may choose to play a set of hickory sticks for example and say it gives him the best outcome. Purely anecdotal and, regardless of whether or not a modern set will outperform the hickory, it is moot because the instance is limited to the anecdote.

> > > > > > Should the hickory player though, for example, insist that everyone will score better with hickory because the smaller sweetspot and shorter distance will both improve your striking and course management, that's not an anecdotal assertion anymore.

> > > > >

> > > > > Agree. I’ll also add that if a player suggests the opposite it is also invalid. You can’t say that everyone will score better with a theoretically more forgiving club. Just nothing except marketing speak to back it up.

> > > >

> > > > Yes, to say that someone will score better with a more forgiving club is a generalization. Even if the generalization is true, it can't possibly apply universally as a single exception will scuttle that.

> > > > That you'll score better with X clubs is marketing (and all clubs market that you'll score better with them, GI or blade). What is not marketing is the measure of how far off target a ball will be on mishits as that is scientific and repeatable of which GI clubs are demonstrably better at. But yes, I have seen the arguments that it is better to miss by 15 yards rather than 5 yards or it doesn't matter if you miss by 15 or 5 as the 15 yard miss might have avoided a bunker or something and I can't argue that. So if you're in the market for clubs that will miss by 15 yards instead of 5, people know what to buy.

> > >

> > > That’s my point though. It’s not a proven thing. It’s not a zero sum Deal. If it were no pro playing for a living would ever play anything except the most “ forgiving “ thing available. And why ? They’d just make an easy 2 putt par for any approach “ miss “ and go on. But. It doesn’t work that way. What forgives the 18 handicaps constant fat , toe strike also impedes the pure strike of a pro or elite am. Two extreme examples. Sure. But it’s the double standard that says those two extreme can’t be true. But the issue is. They are both true.

> >

> > It's not. It is indeed horses for courses and when you're a pro that literally has a dime-sized indentation on your club because you always hit the sweetspot, you clearly don't need the forgiveness. You would prefer the tight distance control, the workability of flight and the "hotspots" and larger gaps in GI irons are a far greater problem.

> > But even pros will not contest that GI clubs give you straighter shots and more forgiveness (quantified as distance retention, I suppose) on off-center strikes in exchange for wider distance gaps and distance control issues. That being the case, one can never say that a particular type of club is for everyone but there's a general acceptance that a mid to high handicapper needs to prioritize straight flight and low distance loss versus demanding a fairly pure strike each time. However, if for some reason a golfer doesn't get that sort of performance from a GI club, who cares? It doesn't alter the general principle.

> >

>

> I could agree with you there for the most part. But. Most in this thread will not agree with what youre conceding. Which is why it’s gone eerily silent.

 

Well that's just unreasonable if someone won't concede that there are specific instances where GI clubs don't perform as designed for an individual. Golf is a game of such idiosyncrasy that exceptions are inevitable.

I do know of cases like a really good friend of mine (and neighbor at the time) who was gifted a set of blades by his wife when he himself didn't buy blades because thought that he couldn't hit them. So he falls instantly in love with the set, practices constantly, finally brings it out to a game, shoots a little less than his normal score and then remarked how blades weren't "as bad as people made them out to be." Did it occur to him that he logged regular practice with the blades when he never practiced with his old clubs? Did the fact that he was so enthusiastic about finding a way to hit the blades affect his ability to hit them? Did his lower expectation of his score lead him to validate his opinion more quickly?

None of these questions can be answered. I can't even logically say that if he practiced with his old clubs as much as the blades, his game would have improved because of the enthusiasm factor. I have to therefore concede that exceptions are possible.

[bladehunter]

> @dciccoritti said:

> > @MtlJeff said:

> > But I imagine many, many 10+ indexes might play SGI because it makes them more comfortable and that translates to better results

> >

>

> I agree with this but I don't think it's only for 10+ indexes. I firmly believe it depends on the individual and that's always been my point. I played 588 Altitude irons and G30's and just never felt comfortable looking down at the mid to long irons. However as good as I'm hitting it now I still don't believe I've hit anything better than the G30 short irons and wedges (for full shots). I would have no issue playing a reverse combo set. Go figure.

>

> Confidence and trust in your equipment is the first step to getting better.

 

Hilarious dude. The long irons and their odd size and offset are always my gripe too. I thought I was The only one who had thought “ reverse combo set “. Wow.

[MelloYello]

> @mahonie said:

>

> Mello, taking all the points you’ve said about your game (and everyone else’s for that matter) I cannot for the life of me understand why you haven’t got at least a set of AP1s in your bag! You’ve just admitted that you can’t really hit 3 and 4 irons, which is no surprise as your CBs have a relatively high CG. Now that you seem to be enjoying the high launch and forgiveness of hybrids, the next natural step seems to be the AP1, particularly if score is so important to you. However, a little anecdote that might influence your decision:

>

 

Read the thread. No reason we can't be serious. I don't mind discussing equipment with folks but you gotta be serious. If you're talking to me about AP1's and saying I "can't hit long irons" it's obvious that you're being sarcastic and snarky.

 

My question is why? Why do that? Why can't we be serious while still being friendly? Why do you choose to be sarcastic about it?

 

Just seem inappropriate. Bad for the forum.

 

 

[mahonie]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @mahonie said:

> >

> > Mello, taking all the points you’ve said about your game (and everyone else’s for that matter) I cannot for the life of me understand why you haven’t got at least a set of AP1s in your bag! You’ve just admitted that you can’t really hit 3 and 4 irons, which is no surprise as your CBs have a relatively high CG. Now that you seem to be enjoying the high launch and forgiveness of hybrids, the next natural step seems to be the AP1, particularly if score is so important to you. However, a little anecdote that might influence your decision:

> >

>

> Read the thread. No reason we can't be serious. I don't mind discussing equipment with folks but you gotta be serious. If you're talking to me about AP1's and saying I "can't hit long irons" it's obvious that you're being sarcastic and snarky.

>

> My question is why? Why do that? Why can't we be serious while still being friendly? Why do you choose to be sarcastic about it?

>

> Just seem inappropriate. Bad for the forum.

>

>

 

You posted that blade users weren’t open to hearing suggestions. Just wanted to see what you’re reaction was when I made a suggestion to you. Pot...kettle...black are a few words that spring to mind.

 

Point made...we can go back to being friendly now ;-)

[IamMarkMac]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @nsxguy said:

> >

> > First of all, when *I* was 16, *I* knew it all. Didn't you ? LOL

> >

> > And then, when I was 26, I realized that my 16 year old self really didn't know all that much. And when I was 36,,,,,,,,,,, I trust you get the point.

> >

> > Experience counts. That includes, especially in the case of a low handicapper, the "been there, done that" POV that many of them have. And many less experienced as well as less talented players do not. You yourself suggested that dedicated practice could get you back to your "7" and possibly (probably ?) further than that, no ? I also believe though that you claimed not to be very good at most (other ?) sports. Or perhaps I'm mistaken ?

> >

> > So just how good do you think you COULD possibly get ? Low single ? Scratch ? +4 ?

> >

> > Point is, a LOT of these very low 'cappers are NOT like bladehunter. They did NOT get to scratch in 5(?) years as bh did. And they clearly have better than average hand-eye coordination, reflexes and the ability to learn the nuances.

> >

> > Do you not think a lower handicapper is due a "little more respect" (your words) ? Would you take the opinion of your buddy, who's read the Constitution, on a question of Constitutional Law ? Or would you go to a college Law Professor ? Would you take a 27 'caps opinion here on the board on a particular subject ? Or would you take Harmon's, Pelz', Monte's, or iteach's opinion ? Or perhaps a guy who'd gone through all that practice and pain of getting down to low singles or better ?

> >

> > I mean, after all, despite all the scientific evidence, there really IS a "Flat Earth Society". LOL

> >

> > And you think it's a FACT that posters giving their honest opinions are in the minority ? Frankly, I find that sad. And if I believed that I wouldn't read a single post on here,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and I don't know why you'd bother either.

>

> I don't think blade guys are really ever open to hearing suggestions. Threads like this demonstrate that. They want to argue and debate the subject so they can try and find personal justification for what they choose to do. In reality, only time will teach them. I know that back when I played blades I came up with all sorts of reasons why it _'didn't really hurt my score.'_ I would talk about how my driving and my putting were worse and all that. I would repeat the same stuff about the experience of a great shot with a blade and how my irons were the strongest facet of my game. Only later did I learn how little I really cared about feel and how pointless it is whether something is a strength or a weakness. You should want to improve the results no matter what!

>

> The real question is why anyone keeps trying to debate people that reside inside the one group that seems to have the most hard-line stance with regard to their equipment. If someone else handed me something and said, _'use this, it will be easier'_ I would happily try it and most likely change if the results were good. We know blades make the game harder. Nobody debates that outside of the few zealots who refuse to let go. I'm happy to admit that it's a mistake on my part to ever enter into these debates when you're basically arguing against the one person in a hundred that thinks blades are going to make them a better golfer.

>

> You can't even really have a debate anyhow because as soon as you make a point you're scolded for telling other people what to do. I mean, there's just no winning in that scenario. At the end of the day, you can't help them. They'll block you at every turn.

>

> The funny thing about these two threads is that most of the people are sharing info and having a good time but there are a couple of guys who clearly want to argue about every single thing. Never once do they accept a piece of helpful advice. They shut out anyone and everyone that tries to reach out and make the game a little easier and more enjoyable.

 

I think by virtue of what they are, a blade guy isn't really open to hearing suggestions. You have to have a large amount of determination and some part stubbornness to keep playing blades when people are eyeing your less than perfect swing or watching you hack around a course on a particularly bad day. Then you have to listen to all the coaches, stores, marketing, etc telling you that other clubs are more forgiving. And then there's yourself, you chunk enough shots and you could easily start questioning why you're putting yourself through the misery.

But for whatever it's worth, you managed to raise your game to a certain level and you built it on the foundation of blades. So now, any wavering on your part on the efficacy of blades is like taking a hammer to your golf game. And unless you can really ignore all your bad shots, your belief is going to waver.

So all these factors into consideration, a lot of people who start to play blades just stop and go back to something more forgiving. This leaves who exactly? Only the staunchest and unwavering of blade proponents who would sooner quit golf than yield their position. Thankfully for those people, no one can tell you not to play what you want so they have a completely unassailable argument. But I've been the guy who hacked his way around a course with blades because well, I don't have a perfect swing and on a bad day, poor hitting can last the whole round. It's like I could hear voices (both others and my own) saying, "You should be playing with more forgiving clubs." I don't have it in me to hold fast in the face of that but some people do and I imagine that's why they defend themselves so zealously.

[revanant]

So, for what it's worth, I'm all about data and facts. My handicap sits at 25.4 (though dropping), I have about 3 years of experience golfing, and I want to play my best golf, though I'm not particularly hung up on any given round or score, as I'm still very much in the learning phase. The only thing that makes me atypical is I have 24 hour access to a quality golf simulator and get a lot of practice in, with data.

 

My driver swing speed is 90 mph. My 6 iron speed hovers around 75 mph. I'm not breaking any speed records. What I care about, first and foremost, is minimizing my horizontal misses. My home course is narrow and difficult, with high wind (135 slope from tees I often wind up playing as a single paired with randoms).

 

Things I don't know: do SGI/GI minimize horizontal misses, or just lateral misses? Do they reduce sidespin?

 

Things I've proven for myself: On a mishit, I can lose just as much distance with a GI iron as with a blade. With GI irons, I seem to have more pushes right, whereas with less forgiving cb's and mb's, I get a draw that comes back to center. Mentally, I find smaller heads and thinner toplines more confidence inspiring, and I make better swings with smaller, thinner irons. Additionally, when I do my part, I have good consistency, directional control, and numbers with my blades, and they don't require perfection on my part for me to get good results.

 

I have MP-4s in the bag, shafted in Project X 6.0. I'm going to hit them against recently acquired Titleist 716 CBs, in Aerotech Steelfiber i95 stiff. The latter is theoretically my perfect setup. As I test, I will update with my results.

 

So far, I've only got about 30 minutes of sim time with the 716 CBs, but I haven't found much difference between the two irons. They get the same numbers on good hits, the same dropoffs on bad hits, similar feel, and similar control. I'm going to keep testing--if more pronounced differences appear, I'll happily bag the irons that perform best for me.

 

For what it's worth, if the difference we're talking about is maybe one to three strokes saved in a round, then I think the whole blade vs. cb controversy is massively overblown in the blades favor. In other words, nobody should be losing sleep over iron choice.

 

> @mahonie said:

> > @nostatic said:

> > There are lies, damned lies, and statistics...

> >

> > The core problem is that aggregate results give a trend, but all the individual cares about is their personal results. Pros don't play irons that are designed to go high and straight because they want to work the ball. Most high cappers don't play blades because they can't consistently hit them straight - either due to physics or psychology (or both). There certainly can be exceptions because humans.

> >

> > But I'm an empiricist, so I'm up for an (anecdotal) experiment. I'm about a 12 (GIR my weakest point currently), happily playing Hot Metal Pros at the moment. My question for the bladers, would a 919 Tour qualify or do I need to go MP18? Plan would be to order up a 7 iron in the exact same shaft/length as my current clubs as I'd want to control some variables. I wouldn't bend it - I know it would be shorter due to weaker loft. More interested in mishits and consistency rather than absolute carry.

>

> It would have to be an MP18 MB.

 

I disagree. The MP18 has a VCOG of .849 and an MPF of 284. Plus, they're super expensive and this is an experiment. Don't play the MP-18.

 

Instead, I think you should test a blade with a low VCOG and relatively high MPF. The MP-4 has a VCOG of .762 and MPF of 397. The MP-33 has a VCOG of .718 and an MPF of 419. And if we want to go really forgiving, the MP-14s have a VCOG of .687 and MPF of 457 (but may suffer from weaker lofts on a test of distance). In other words, choose a blade that's considered an all-time classic and which would rank as relatively forgiving under accepted metrics, and see how you get on.

 

Other great options: Nike VR-TW (VCOG .726, MPF 516), Macgregor M675 (VCOG .687, MPF 537), or Macgregor V-Foil 1025m (VCOG .715, MPF 600).

 

Personally, I find my MP-4s compete well and don't require perfection from me, which makes sense given their VCOG and MPF rating. They're theoretically better than the MP-64, a cavity back design with a VCOG of .763 and MPF of 393.

 

But @nostatic -- feel free to confirm with your own testing. My only recommendation is to test cheaply with classic used sets--easier on the wallet and you'll get more relevant results. : )

 

 

[IamMarkMac]

> @revanant said:

> So, for what it's worth, I'm all about data and facts. My handicap sits at 25.4 (though dropping), I have about 3 years of experience golfing, and I want to play my best golf, though I'm not particularly hung up on any given round or score, as I'm still very much in the learning phase. The only thing that makes me atypical is I have 24 hour access to a quality golf simulator and get a lot of practice in, with data.

>

> My driver swing speed is 90 mph. My 6 iron speed hovers around 75 mph. I'm not breaking any speed records. What I care about, first and foremost, is minimizing my horizontal misses. My home course is narrow and difficult, with high wind (135 slope from tees I often wind up playing as a single paired with randoms).

>

> Things I don't know: do SGI/GI minimize horizontal misses, or just lateral misses? Do they reduce sidespin?

>

> Things I've proven for myself: On a mishit, I can lose just as much distance with a GI iron as with a blade. With GI irons, I seem to have more pushes right, whereas with less forgiving cb's and mb's, I get a draw that comes back to center. Mentally, I find smaller heads and thinner toplines more confidence inspiring, and I make better swings with smaller, thinner irons. Additionally, when I do my part, I have good consistency, directional control, and numbers with my blades, and they don't require perfection on my part for me to get good results.

>

> I have MP-4s in the bag, shafted in Project X 6.0. I'm going to hit them against recently acquired Titleist 716 CBs, in Aerotech Steelfiber i95 stiff. The latter is theoretically my perfect setup. As I test, I will update with my results.

>

> So far, I've only got about 30 minutes of sim time with the 716 CBs, but I haven't found much difference between the two irons. They get the same numbers on good hits, the same dropoffs on bad hits, similar feel, and similar control. I'm going to keep testing--if more pronounced differences appear, I'll happily bag the irons that perform best for me.

>

> For what it's worth, if the difference we're talking about is maybe one to three strokes saved in a round, then I think the whole blade vs. cb controversy is massively overblown in the blades favor. In other words, nobody should be losing sleep over iron choice.

>

> > @mahonie said:

> > > @nostatic said:

> > > There are lies, damned lies, and statistics...

> > >

> > > The core problem is that aggregate results give a trend, but all the individual cares about is their personal results. Pros don't play irons that are designed to go high and straight because they want to work the ball. Most high cappers don't play blades because they can't consistently hit them straight - either due to physics or psychology (or both). There certainly can be exceptions because humans.

> > >

> > > But I'm an empiricist, so I'm up for an (anecdotal) experiment. I'm about a 12 (GIR my weakest point currently), happily playing Hot Metal Pros at the moment. My question for the bladers, would a 919 Tour qualify or do I need to go MP18? Plan would be to order up a 7 iron in the exact same shaft/length as my current clubs as I'd want to control some variables. I wouldn't bend it - I know it would be shorter due to weaker loft. More interested in mishits and consistency rather than absolute carry.

> >

> > It would have to be an MP18 MB.

>

> I disagree. The MP18 has a VCOG of .849 and an MPF of 284. Plus, they're super expensive and this is an experiment. Don't play the MP-18.

>

> Instead, I think you should test a blade with a low VCOG and relatively high MPF. The MP-4 has a VCOG of .762 and MPF of 397. The MP-33 has a VCOG of .718 and an MPF of 419. And if we want to go really forgiving, the MP-14s have a VCOG of .687 and MPF of 457 (but may suffer from weaker lofts on a test of distance). In other words, choose a blade that's considered an all-time classic and which would rank as relatively forgiving under accepted metrics, and see how you get on.

>

> Other great options: Nike VR-TW (VCOG .726, MPF 516), Macgregor M675 (VCOG .687, MPF 537), or Macgregor V-Foil 1025m (VCOG .715, MPF 600).

>

> Personally, I find my MP-4s compete well and don't require perfection from me, which makes sense given their VCOG and MPF rating. They're theoretically better than the MP-64, a cavity back design with a VCOG of .763 and MPF of 393.

>

> But @nostatic -- feel free to confirm with your own testing. My only recommendation is to test cheaply with classic used sets--easier on the wallet and you'll get more relevant results. : )

>

>

With a SS of 75 for 6i, you might be better helped by a shaft change. PX 6.0 is really stiff and so is the SteelFiber, for that matter. Might be the reason why you can’t feel a difference between a 120g shaft and a 95g one. You’re not able to load either shaft at that stiffness.

As I’ve played with a lot of rentals this year, I’ve found that so long as I have a shaft in my range, I can make just about any head work.

 

[revanant]

> @IamMarkMac said:

> > @revanant said:

> > So, for what it's worth, I'm all about data and facts. My handicap sits at 25.4 (though dropping), I have about 3 years of experience golfing, and I want to play my best golf, though I'm not particularly hung up on any given round or score, as I'm still very much in the learning phase. The only thing that makes me atypical is I have 24 hour access to a quality golf simulator and get a lot of practice in, with data.

> >

> > My driver swing speed is 90 mph. My 6 iron speed hovers around 75 mph. I'm not breaking any speed records. What I care about, first and foremost, is minimizing my horizontal misses. My home course is narrow and difficult, with high wind (135 slope from tees I often wind up playing as a single paired with randoms).

> >

> > Things I don't know: do SGI/GI minimize horizontal misses, or just lateral misses? Do they reduce sidespin?

> >

> > Things I've proven for myself: On a mishit, I can lose just as much distance with a GI iron as with a blade. With GI irons, I seem to have more pushes right, whereas with less forgiving cb's and mb's, I get a draw that comes back to center. Mentally, I find smaller heads and thinner toplines more confidence inspiring, and I make better swings with smaller, thinner irons. Additionally, when I do my part, I have good consistency, directional control, and numbers with my blades, and they don't require perfection on my part for me to get good results.

> >

> > I have MP-4s in the bag, shafted in Project X 6.0. I'm going to hit them against recently acquired Titleist 716 CBs, in Aerotech Steelfiber i95 stiff. The latter is theoretically my perfect setup. As I test, I will update with my results.

> >

> > So far, I've only got about 30 minutes of sim time with the 716 CBs, but I haven't found much difference between the two irons. They get the same numbers on good hits, the same dropoffs on bad hits, similar feel, and similar control. I'm going to keep testing--if more pronounced differences appear, I'll happily bag the irons that perform best for me.

> >

> > For what it's worth, if the difference we're talking about is maybe one to three strokes saved in a round, then I think the whole blade vs. cb controversy is massively overblown in the blades favor. In other words, nobody should be losing sleep over iron choice.

> >

> > > @mahonie said:

> > > > @nostatic said:

> > > > There are lies, damned lies, and statistics...

> > > >

> > > > The core problem is that aggregate results give a trend, but all the individual cares about is their personal results. Pros don't play irons that are designed to go high and straight because they want to work the ball. Most high cappers don't play blades because they can't consistently hit them straight - either due to physics or psychology (or both). There certainly can be exceptions because humans.

> > > >

> > > > But I'm an empiricist, so I'm up for an (anecdotal) experiment. I'm about a 12 (GIR my weakest point currently), happily playing Hot Metal Pros at the moment. My question for the bladers, would a 919 Tour qualify or do I need to go MP18? Plan would be to order up a 7 iron in the exact same shaft/length as my current clubs as I'd want to control some variables. I wouldn't bend it - I know it would be shorter due to weaker loft. More interested in mishits and consistency rather than absolute carry.

> > >

> > > It would have to be an MP18 MB.

> >

> > I disagree. The MP18 has a VCOG of .849 and an MPF of 284. Plus, they're super expensive and this is an experiment. Don't play the MP-18.

> >

> > Instead, I think you should test a blade with a low VCOG and relatively high MPF. The MP-4 has a VCOG of .762 and MPF of 397. The MP-33 has a VCOG of .718 and an MPF of 419. And if we want to go really forgiving, the MP-14s have a VCOG of .687 and MPF of 457 (but may suffer from weaker lofts on a test of distance). In other words, choose a blade that's considered an all-time classic and which would rank as relatively forgiving under accepted metrics, and see how you get on.

> >

> > Other great options: Nike VR-TW (VCOG .726, MPF 516), Macgregor M675 (VCOG .687, MPF 537), or Macgregor V-Foil 1025m (VCOG .715, MPF 600).

> >

> > Personally, I find my MP-4s compete well and don't require perfection from me, which makes sense given their VCOG and MPF rating. They're theoretically better than the MP-64, a cavity back design with a VCOG of .763 and MPF of 393.

> >

> > But @nostatic -- feel free to confirm with your own testing. My only recommendation is to test cheaply with classic used sets--easier on the wallet and you'll get more relevant results. : )

> >

> >

> With a SS of 75 for 6i, you might be better helped by a shaft change. PX 6.0 is really stiff and so is the SteelFiber, for that matter. Might be the reason why you can’t feel a difference between a 120g shaft and a 95g one. You’re not able to load either shaft at that stiffness.

> As I’ve played with a lot of rentals this year, I’ve found that so long as I have a shaft in my range, I can make just about any head work.

>

 

Actually, this isn't an area where I have concerns. Did a club champion fitting--fitter recommended the i95, and noted that I was hitting the Project X 6.0 fine. We put the numbers up with trackman, and I was pretty consistent across all shafts tested--the improvements were marginal and mainly related to shaft weight.

[Exactice808]

> @revanant said:

 

>

> Actually, this isn't an area where I have concerns. Did a club champion fitting--fitter recommended the i95, and noted that I was hitting the Project X 6.0 fine. We put the numbers up with trackman, and I was pretty consistent across all shafts tested--the improvements were marginal and mainly related to shaft weight.

 

So I am a data guy and enjoy the numbers aspect so if I may put in my useless $0.02. When I justify I try to at least hit a shot window first and then see how consistent I can get to it. I apply optimized numbers

 

75mph 6 iron swing speed, lets start there, 1.37 smash, 103mph ball speed, 18* Launch angle and 6000rpms

 

 

138 carry and total. Are you getting this at least. If I played with the launch + 2* and reduced spin a little up to 200rpms it was still about 140 total. So this is about realistic and optimal. With your Shafts and setup are you getting this distance and shot window? As a good strike should net this if all things are working. I feel 68ft is a little low personally and think unfortunately with the lower swing speed you might need a slighlty higher launching shaft to get up to 75+ft.

 

If you are not getting the launch or the spin then it may be a shaft tweak. if you are not getting the ball speed then for sure it is a smash issue, What is your smash factor, Or your ball speed in relation to you 75mph 6 iron swing speed? while 1.39 smash basically perfect, lets say 1.37 are you getting at least 102mph ballspeeds?

 

If you want to play the blades as a test, at least confirm you are optimizing your launch window. the PX 6.0 is a pretty hefty shaft. I just went to the range (busted out my voice caddie SC100) and I have about 93mph swing speed with my 6 iron and I currently play rifle PX 6.0 that its tuned to my shot window im looking for. So with the reduced swing speed I wonder what actual shot data you are getting.

 

If you could fill in the blanks now and I can add more useless $0.02?

6iron

75mph Swing Speed

??? Ball speed

??? Smash (we can calculate when you get the ball speed

??? Vertical launch/Launch angle

??? Spin

??? Carry distance.

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

[revanant]

> @Exactice808 said:

> > @revanant said:

>

> >

> > Actually, this isn't an area where I have concerns. Did a club champion fitting--fitter recommended the i95, and noted that I was hitting the Project X 6.0 fine. We put the numbers up with trackman, and I was pretty consistent across all shafts tested--the improvements were marginal and mainly related to shaft weight.

>

> So I am a data guy and enjoy the numbers aspect so if I may put in my useless $0.02. When I justify I try to at least hit a shot window first and then see how consistent I can get to it. I apply optimized numbers

>

> 75mph 6 iron swing speed, lets start there, 1.37 smash, 103mph ball speed, 18* Launch angle and 6000rpms

>

>

>

> 138 carry and total. Are you getting this at least. If I played with the launch + 2* and reduced spin a little up to 200rpms it was still about 140 total. So this is about realistic and optimal. With your Shafts and setup are you getting this distance and shot window? As a good strike should net this if all things are working. I feel 68ft is a little low personally and think unfortunately with the lower swing speed you might need a slighlty higher launching shaft to get up to 75+ft.

>

> If you are not getting the launch or the spin then it may be a shaft tweak. if you are not getting the ball speed then for sure it is a smash issue, What is your smash factor, Or your ball speed in relation to you 75mph 6 iron swing speed? while 1.39 smash basically perfect, lets say 1.37 are you getting at least 102mph ballspeeds?

>

> If you want to play the blades as a test, at least confirm you are optimizing your launch window. the PX 6.0 is a pretty hefty shaft. I just went to the range (busted out my voice caddie SC100) and I have about 93mph swing speed with my 6 iron and I currently play rifle PX 6.0 that its tuned to my shot window im looking for. So with the reduced swing speed I wonder what actual shot data you are getting.

>

> If you could fill in the blanks now and I can add more useless $0.02?

> 6iron

> 75mph Swing Speed

> ??? Ball speed

> ??? Smash (we can calculate when you get the ball speed

> ??? Vertical launch/Launch angle

> ??? Spin

> ??? Carry distance.

>

> Thanks!

>

>

>

Here are a few examples from a prior thread. Long story short, I basically get those numbers.

 

 

[MelloYello]

> @revanant said:

> So, for what it's worth, I'm all about data and facts.

 

Don't kid yourself. Everyone wants to get better. Launch monitor data is just one kind of data and since it doesn't even involve hitting real shots off real grass, it's not a great representation of one's skill.

 

Just saying that so we can keep perspective here.

 

> @revanant said:

>My handicap sits at 25.4 (though dropping), I have about 3 years of experience golfing, and I want to play my best golf, though I'm not particularly hung up on any given round or score, as I'm still very much in the learning phase.

 

The launch monitor thing is seriously cool but it doesn't really have a lot to do with you getting better TBH. The truth is you're not good enough as a 25-handicap to be concerned with optimizing your bag. Play what looks coolest and feels the best and worry about improving your understanding of the golf swing. Right now, there is no optimal equipment for you. You're honing your swing.

 

> @revanant said:

> My driver swing speed is 90 mph. My 6 iron speed hovers around 75 mph. I'm not breaking any speed records. What I care about, first and foremost, is minimizing my horizontal misses. My home course is narrow and difficult, with high wind (135 slope from tees I often wind up playing as a single paired with randoms).

 

Work on improving your SS. When I was starting I swung hard and could reach 110- or 115-mph with the driver. It's way better to try and refine that potential and get fit later than it is to try and fit yourself now when you're still building up your swing. The best 6-iron for a guy hitting it 150-yards (which is short) is one that makes it go further than 150-yds, LOL. Play blades if you want. I did. No one here cares. But focus on getting faster. Even early on I was hitting 6-iron 175-yds.

 

*Also note that the blade guys on tour are typically the longest hitters who would be pulling PW at 150-yds to my 8-iron and your 6. Plus, out on the course where the conditions aren't perfect, you're not going to gain yardage. You're going to lose it.

 

> @revanant said:

> Things I've proven for myself: On a mishit, I can lose just as much distance with a GI iron as with a blade. With GI irons, I seem to have more pushes right, whereas with less forgiving cb's and mb's, I get a draw that comes back to center.

 

Dude, who cares? You're a 25-handicap. The goal is to improve on that, or is it? I don't think it matters what you play until you start consistently hitting some greens to where you can actually appreciate the slight advantages of a CB versus a blade.

 

> @revanant said:

> So far, I've only got about 30 minutes of sim time with the 716 CBs, but I haven't found much difference between the two irons. They get the same numbers on good hits, the same dropoffs on bad hits, similar feel, and similar control. I'm going to keep testing--if more pronounced differences appear, I'll happily bag the irons that perform best for me.

 

Just as it takes a lot of precision to hit a blade, it takes a lot of precision to hit a CB. You have to be pretty consistent with your strike to appreciate the slight gains the CB provides. I find mine to be a wonderful improvement on my MBs. My toe-shots are worlds better. I get one or two a round that are clearly superior to anything I'd get out of a MB. This often results in my saving a GIR where I might've lost one. So maybe I gain 0.5 strokes or something with an easy 2-putt par versus having to try and chip it close.

 

The me at 25-yo who was 3 years in wouldn't have cared about that. Me now? Shoot yeah!

 

> @revanant said:

> For what it's worth, if the difference we're talking about is maybe one to three strokes saved in a round, then I think the whole blade vs. cb controversy is massively overblown in the blades favor. In other words, nobody should be losing sleep over iron choice.

 

Well, you hit the nail on the head. If you don't care about score, it doesn't matter.

 

But if you're concerned about score, which is the point of golf, then it does matter. Clearly a lot of people don't care. That's fine. But experience has taught me that the more I play, the more I don't see the point in sucking at this. There are better ways and better places to be average, LOL....restaurants, breweries, hiking, etc.

 

I have no interest in spending money and being frustrated as I shoot bad scores on the golf course. Golf's nice, but it's not _that_ nice. :)

 

 

 

[Nard_S]

Revanant,

Work on gaining swing speed, then control of path. You don't need blades for any of that, you might like blades better for a number of reasons and a significant one is they tend to have more heft. PX 6.0 is plenty of shaft, maybe a shaft in same weight class but with softer bend profile is more judicious. But spend doe & effort on the aspect of full swing speed. Give that the priority. 3 years in, learn the right things now because to unwind bad habits later is incredibly hard to do. $500 in lessons is worth thousands chasing a better game with gear, be them SGI or traditional MB's.

 

I play blades for their naked honesty and draw a line that game improvement stops at fingers and toes. It's not everyones' cup of tea to view it in such stark terms. But this imposes constraints that keep focus where it belongs. That's not "score". Anybody can get to low singles with a swing that has significant problems, I did that and all I can say is "big whoop". Once you get there, it's oddly even more frustrating not to be better. Takes a greater soundness of mechanics and method to go under 5, start playing in youth is major factor to go scratch, start playing as an adult, the barrier is near impossible and there's real anatomical, neurological reasons for it. So don't look for the fix in tools and gear, look for it in the body and mind because that's where the epicenter of peak capability resides. Good luck.

[revanant]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @revanant said:

> > So, for what it's worth, I'm all about data and facts.

>

> Don't kid yourself. Everyone wants to get better. Launch monitor data is just one kind of data and since it doesn't even involve hitting real shots off real grass, it's not a great representation of one's skill.

>

> Just saying that so we can keep perspective here.

>

> > @revanant said:

> >My handicap sits at 25.4 (though dropping), I have about 3 years of experience golfing, and I want to play my best golf, though I'm not particularly hung up on any given round or score, as I'm still very much in the learning phase.

>

> The launch monitor thing is seriously cool but it doesn't really have a lot to do with you getting better TBH. The truth is you're not good enough as a 25-handicap to be concerned with optimizing your bag. Play what looks coolest and feels the best and worry about improving your understanding of the golf swing. Right now, there is no optimal equipment for you. You're honing your swing.

>

> > @revanant said:

> > My driver swing speed is 90 mph. My 6 iron speed hovers around 75 mph. I'm not breaking any speed records. What I care about, first and foremost, is minimizing my horizontal misses. My home course is narrow and difficult, with high wind (135 slope from tees I often wind up playing as a single paired with randoms).

>

> Work on improving your SS. When I was starting I swung hard and could reach 110- or 115-mph with the driver. It's way better to try and refine that potential and get fit later than it is to try and fit yourself now when you're still building up your swing. The best 6-iron for a guy hitting it 150-yards (which is short) is one that makes it go further than 150-yds, LOL. Play blades if you want. I did. No one here cares. But focus on getting faster. Even early on I was hitting 6-iron 175-yds.

>

> *Also note that the blade guys on tour are typically the longest hitters who would be pulling PW at 150-yds to my 8-iron and your 6. Plus, out on the course where the conditions aren't perfect, you're not going to gain yardage. You're going to lose it.

>

> > @revanant said:

> > Things I've proven for myself: On a mishit, I can lose just as much distance with a GI iron as with a blade. With GI irons, I seem to have more pushes right, whereas with less forgiving cb's and mb's, I get a draw that comes back to center.

>

> Dude, who cares? You're a 25-handicap. The goal is to improve on that, or is it? I don't think it matters what you play until you start consistently hitting some greens to where you can actually appreciate the slight advantages of a CB versus a blade.

>

> > @revanant said:

> > So far, I've only got about 30 minutes of sim time with the 716 CBs, but I haven't found much difference between the two irons. They get the same numbers on good hits, the same dropoffs on bad hits, similar feel, and similar control. I'm going to keep testing--if more pronounced differences appear, I'll happily bag the irons that perform best for me.

>

> Just as it takes a lot of precision to hit a blade, it takes a lot of precision to hit a CB. You have to be pretty consistent with your strike to appreciate the slight gains the CB provides. I find mine to be a wonderful improvement on my MBs. My toe-shots are worlds better. I get one or two a round that are clearly superior to anything I'd get out of a MB. This often results in my saving a GIR where I might've lost one. So maybe I gain 0.5 strokes or something with an easy 2-putt par versus having to try and chip it close.

>

> The me at 25-yo who was 3 years in wouldn't have cared about that. Me now? Shoot yeah!

>

> > @revanant said:

> > For what it's worth, if the difference we're talking about is maybe one to three strokes saved in a round, then I think the whole blade vs. cb controversy is massively overblown in the blades favor. In other words, nobody should be losing sleep over iron choice.

>

> Well, you hit the nail on the head. If you don't care about score, it doesn't matter.

>

> But if you're concerned about score, which is the point of golf, then it does matter. Clearly a lot of people don't care. That's fine. But experience has taught me that the more I play, the more I don't see the point in sucking at this. There are better ways and better places to be average, LOL....restaurants, breweries, hiking, etc.

>

> I have no interest in spending money and being frustrated as I shoot bad scores on the golf course. Golf's nice, but it's not _that_ nice. :)

>

>

>

 

For what it’s worth, I generally agree with you. I only posted the 6 irons since @Exactice808 wanted to drill into the metrics.

 

I’m with you on there being a real difference between playing on course vs sim practice. Playing in the elements, with wind, off of uneven lies is vastly different from range practice off an indoor mat.

 

I here you regarding speeding up my swing. I think I can do it—I get spikes to 80 mph with my 6 iron every so often. I may start a workout plan this summer with a golf focus. But partly, my mindset is that I don’t care if my 6 iron goes 145 or 155, since my ultimate bottleneck is my swing speed and I phase into 5 wood for my longer par 4s and par 5s anyway. If I’m getting the right spin and I’m hitting an iron consistently, all I care is that I pull my iron and can hit my number with accuracy. If I get the shot I want, I don’t care what the number is on the sole.

 

On golf, I absolutely want to score my best. But I’m a glass-half full kind of guy. I need on-course practice, and a lot of that is just taking your lumps, seeing different lies, and learning for the future. Basically, learning course management the hard way. : ) But, even a bad round is something I just chalk up to extra practice. I’m not a club thrower—I’m the guy who thinks about his good shots all week, even when he shoots 102, and looks forward to more good shots the next weekend.

 

In terms of improvement, I’m losing a lot of strokes with balls out of bounds and putting/chipping. By and large, it’s not my iron play.

 

I played a round on Saturday down in my Miami with my spare T-zoids. I’m not as familiar with my distances for those clubs. I lost one ball in the water for being too long, 3 balls out of bounds, two balls sailed the green with my pw, and I couldn’t buy a putt—only one putt got me up and down in a single stroke. I also had two 4 irons that hit middle of the green but didn’t stick—I’m not sure what my spin was, but I was short a club with that set (it was a 155 carry shot, and that’s normally a comfortable 5 iron for me with around 5k spin). I did make par nonetheless on one of the holes—it was my lone 1-putt. More importantly, I made $4 bucks on match play with my handicap—my scores are usually pars and bogeys, with a few blowups, so match play suits me.

 

On iron play, though, I’m not a bad ball striker. I think I should be able to see a difference between my 716 CBs with a 95 gram shaft and my MP-4s with a 120 gram shaft. I do love the 716 aesthetics, and may just keep them as my spare set and flip the AP1s I have. But, essentially, to the extent there’s forgiveness in play, I would think I should find the 716 CBs noticeably easier to hit well. Otherwise, what am I spending my money on, right?

 

I’m going to keep testing this week, and really put the 716 CBs through their paces.

 

Long story short, though, my MP-4s are $280, my 716 CBs are $450, and my actual priorities are improving my putting, taking more lessons, and getting a 3 wood I like hitting off the deck (probably an F9). If it turns out my good strikes go my expected distances, and my bad shots aren’t noticeably better with the CBs, such that I only have 1 shot that drops 10 yards instead of 20 because I’m either making good strikes or bad strikes and not a lot of intermediate misses, then my gut says that the line between the blades and the CBs isn’t so pronounced and my mental and aesthetic preferences should be the major factor, as you say.

 

Anyway, always appreciate these back and forths, @MelloYello. I find your advice and outlook helpful, and I’m excited to see what my game looks like at the end of the summer and into next year.

[MelloYello]

> @mahonie said:

> > @MelloYello said:

> > > @mahonie said:

> > >

> > > Mello, taking all the points you’ve said about your game (and everyone else’s for that matter) I cannot for the life of me understand why you haven’t got at least a set of AP1s in your bag! You’ve just admitted that you can’t really hit 3 and 4 irons, which is no surprise as your CBs have a relatively high CG. Now that you seem to be enjoying the high launch and forgiveness of hybrids, the next natural step seems to be the AP1, particularly if score is so important to you. However, a little anecdote that might influence your decision:

> > >

> >

> > Read the thread. No reason we can't be serious. I don't mind discussing equipment with folks but you gotta be serious. If you're talking to me about AP1's and saying I "can't hit long irons" it's obvious that you're being sarcastic and snarky.

> >

> > My question is why? Why do that? Why can't we be serious while still being friendly? Why do you choose to be sarcastic about it?

> >

> > Just seem inappropriate. Bad for the forum.

> >

> >

>

> You posted that blade users weren’t open to hearing suggestions. Just wanted to see what you’re reaction was when I made a suggestion to you. Pot...kettle...black are a few words that spring to mind.

>

> Point made...we can go back to being friendly now ;-)

 

So now I'm expected to entertain your nonsense s***-posting?

 

Good to know. That's what the ignore list is for.

 

See you around...or I guess I won't. Nice knowing ya. Thanks for wasting all of our time.