The technology is getting so much better

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

Faster swing speed with better path will very likely improve your game.

[Anser]

In my opinion iron technology pretty much peaked at the Ping Eye 2

I'd say the hollow foam filled stuff is the next achievement

 

 

[OrangeGravy]

The hollow foam filled stuff was introduced on more than one occasion many years ago. Back then it probably had no chance to catch on because it was prior to the big loft creep. So is it really the next achievement or just recycling and refinement of past ideas that didn't catch on? I agree by the way about iron tech. I can't think of anything that around now that hasn't been at least tried in the past 25 years.

[Anser]

Yeah I had some ICW's, but the faces weren't really thin enough to take advantage like they are now. I think that makes a bit difference and I guess thinner faces in general are an improvement.

[rgk5]

How are you man? The ICW 5 was good for its time. The ICW 11 was a dog.

[Anser]

Doing ok, you?

[rgk5]

Yes but stuck at home. Golf course not open yet and Golf Town where I work is closed. Both could open by May 15-22.

[Red4282]

Have to necro this thread due to new evidence. Technology in irons could be worse for your game..

[brew4eagle]

Would have liked to seen the actual dispersion circles for where each shot ended up. That's all that really matters in the end. Dispersion of spin, launch, etc. is just behind the scenes data. How close was each shot to the target is what matters.

[Red4282]

At 8:42 is carry dispersion... night and day...

[brew4eagle]

Yes, but are both on target line? No left/right dispersion was shown. Honestly, it was kind of a bogus video especially when he all but admits his bias throughout.

[Nels55]

Yes, I also noticed that he expressed his bias before even starting the experiment. Like most things you can search around on youtube and find 'tests' that give opposite results. LOL I doubt that a double blind study of this subject is ever going to happen so take all the 'data' with a grain of salt!

[Red4282]

So... did his bias hit the shots? Are you saying his data is lying? I will agree left/right dispersion should be included but in my opinion, left/right dispersion is more on the player, and correct fit with shaft and swingweight and less on clubhead design.

[brew4eagle]

Yep, and I like Mark's videos, watch them all the time. However he is quirky, and seems to enjoy playing devil's advocate no matter the topic.

[Red4282]

Id say he has a displeasure for manufacturers marketing claims. How dare you challenge their claims!

[ucmike11]

Left/right dispersion has more to do with your swing path though. As a mid-teens handicapper I have played everything from super game improvement irons to blades and my scores have never wavered. My swing faults show up no matter what. If the club face is open, the ball is going right. A blade may or may not add more side spin to that equation, but at the same time, a GI iron might make that right miss go further right and get you into worse trouble.

[Sean2]

The skill of the average golfer doesn't seem to have has kept up with the same pace as technology. A golfer can have the most forgiving clubs on the planet, but if he doesn't put a decent swing on the ball, all that technology won't be of much use. I used to buy and sell all the time, then it finally dawned on me...duh...that it isn't about the equipment*, it's about the swing.

*unless you are talking about something quite old, or ill-fitted.

[Nels55]

I found it interesting that he expressed his bias before starting the experiment. Yes it is possible that his bias affected his shots. I don't know if his results are valid or not and I don't particularly care. He made an entertaining video and enjoyed watching it, beyond that I don't draw any conclusion from it one way or the other. Over the years I have seen much more convincing data that I took to heart and believed strongly only to find later that it was indeed in error for reasons that I could not see when I first looked at it. So, I am bit skeptical.

Data does not lie. People who set up experiments with a predetermined end point may bias their experiments unintentionally though. I don't think that Mark was intentionally trying to deceive anyone and his results could be valid, I simply don't know.

[Red4282]

Its impossible to take bias out when a human is hitting clubs. He acknowledged it, what more do you want? To be fair part of his reason for being biased was his journey from blade, to cavity/gi, and back to blades. He acknowledges he needs help in the lower end of the back..5 iron to help with launch. Biased can just come from experience..doesnt it make it necessarily bad. I have experienced what he showed first hand in that video, as well, at its least, its a thought provoking test. People get so caught up in the latest and greatest and all the “buzzwords” and they dont actually really look to see if any of it is accurate.

[brew4eagle]

If the clubs don't help, why does he need 'help' in the lower end of the bag?

[Red4282]

Did you watch the video? Might help. Its because he says they help get the ball airborne better. Launch.

[Nels55]

Okay I think that a possible experiment would be take a large sample size of golfers maybe 100 or 500 or 10k? of all handicaps and have them all fit for game improvement clubs and some blades. Then figure some scheme for having them all rotate rounds with each setup. Then we could get some data that would be useful to see just how much of a difference the clubs make in different handicap groups. LOL I know that would never happen but it would be interesting to see the results. My guess would be that there would not be much difference in average scores.

[brew4eagle]

Yep, watched the entire video. Data shows no difference in height, just a wider spread in heights for the Mavrik. Hence there was no launch 'help'. However, he claims there was so he's buying into the preconceived concept that he's trying to disprove. He's all over the place.

[Red4282]

Launch...

Pretty clear cut to me.. if ya just wanna deny for sake if denying... its pretty stubborn..

[brew4eagle]

You need a lesson in stats if you think that's clear cut. Also, take a look at the height data.

[Red4282]

i did, its the same, but spin can effect peak height. Dont know why i bother, just stick ur head in the sand and move on.

[brew4eagle]

Not burying my head, literally don't care either way. Just expressing my opinions...

[WristySwing]

Don't bother man. I've been through this with Red in this thread. They will stop at nothing to prove their point despite contradictory evidence.

[Red4282]

No you buried your head when presented with data that disproved your claims.

[brew4eagle]

So you think the height data is "the same", but launch data is different ("clear cut")? You're the one burying your head, or you don't understand math/statistics.