My brief blade experience

[bschett]

1 hour ago, mahonie said:

I can tell by the strike I’ve had where the ball is going before I’m halfway through my follow through...I’m sure most players can unless they have fists of ham.

 

If you’re a pro and dialling in a wedge on the range before going out for a round, trackman is a great tool, I’m not disputing it. But hacks building their whole golfing experience around trackman on the range is not what golf is about...you’ve got to get out there and play clubs in the wild to understand what performance you’re going to get. My home course doesn’t have a flat lie anywhere except on the tee...work at the range is ok for grooving the swing, but doesn’t add much to ball-striking. 

 

Looking at the spin numbers is largely irrelevant once you’re playing clubs that you’re comfortable with and give you good gapping.

I don’t think anyone here thinks sitting at a launch monitor is better than playing real golf. All I’m saying is that using one to practice is not harmful. 
 

I agree people care wayyyyy too much about spin. 

[Bubbtubbs]

5 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

Why would you want to know or care about spin rate ? You who seem to know everything about everything ? I am agog. I am aghast. Is Marius in love at last ?) (<--- never mind - obscure reference )

 

So you'd never have a reason to know how far it flew and how far it ran out ? You'd know that you optimized your launch conditions ? 

 

Glad you've got it all covered. Good for you.  

Les Miserables isn't all that obscure. 

[nsxguy]

39 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

That is an excellent example of how using launch monitors can be harmful to one's game. And your comments above are from a playing perspective.

When one uses a launch monitor to fit a person for clubs more harmful factors emerge. For example, a fitting session including multiple consecutive swings with one club , from a flat level lie, is so completely different from playing a golf course that it's likely counter productive to finding the most appropriate club design/specifications. As always, there is no substitute for playing shots during a round of golf and learning from that.

 

 

It's an excellent example because you agree with it.  My main man bladehunter is old school but I'll bet he puts in the time with his driver.

 

So how do your practice sessions go ? Sounds like you never practice, you just go out and play. Sounds like fun. Takes awful lot of time but fun nevertheless.

 

Then again, blade is scratch and you're a 2. You guys pretty much CAN just go out and play. Your swings must be pretty groovy by now. Good for you.

 

But most(?) of the rest of us ? I personally would rather spend $10-15 on a bucket than $50+ on the course just to practice. Takes a lot less time and $$$ and I find it more productive as well.

 

I'd guess most of us actually need to practice, hitting ball after ball to try and figure out why we can't make the contact we'd like more often. And, more importantly(?), try TO groove our swings. Irons are mostly alike except for shaft length so hitting 1 or 2 of them most often will help since the others are similar.

 

Driver needs work. I suppose I should play a round, hit the driver 14 times and figure out what works and what doesn't ? Or do I hit 20 - 40 drivers on the range and figure out what works ? 

 

Wedges, especially partial shots, need work too. If I'm "only" playing, how many partial wedges am I hitting for the round ? 2 ? 3 ? Q: How does that help ? A: it doesn't.

 

Anywho ,to answer a silly question of yours earlier, are you unfamiliar with the ball flight laws off the driver ? Do you NOT know that high launch and low spin = max distance ? And you don't think spin rate means anything ? You'd rather use your eyes and ears ? 

 

I want to know exactly how far my well struck iron goes. I may not strike it well all the time (of course I don't) but if I do I want to know it's the right club. And of course the formula varies according to lie, wind, altitude difference between my ball and the green. But if I START the calculation with the wrong number I have almost no chance of getting the correct result.

 

Now I can only take so much silliness, especially on a holiday so you can have the last word,,,,,,, here,,,,,,,

 

Enjoy your holiday. 

[nsxguy]

23 minutes ago, bschett said:

I don’t think anyone here thinks sitting at a launch monitor is better than playing real golf. All I’m saying is that using one to practice is not harmful. 
 

I agree people care wayyyyy too much about spin. 

 

Off the driver spin is important. Off "other" clubs I would probably agree.

 

For a good strike, especially off the shorter irons, the ball will hit and roll out 5 feet or hit and suck back 5 feet or somewhere in between the 2. And most of us aren't good enough to appreciate the difference.

 

Of course as one gets better and better their touch and feel becomes a lot more finely tuned and spin can make a big difference as the handicap drops. But for most of us it ain't all that. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Bubbtubbs]

2 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Off the driver spin is important. Off "other" clubs I would probably agree.

 

For a good strike, especially off the shorter irons, the ball will hit and roll out 5 feet or hit and suck back 5 feet or somewhere in between the 2. And most of us aren't good enough to appreciate the difference.

 

Of course as one gets better and better their touch and feel becomes a lot more finely tuned and spin can make a big difference as the handicap drops. But for most of us it ain't all that. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It's definitely helpful for iron and wedge approaches to know your shape tendency, average carry, max carry and your typical mishit carry so you can plan the best place to try to leave the ball while mitigating the most common mistakes you make.

 

Usually, only one of those is possible to accurately determine without a launch monitor - unless you have a deserted club where you can hit balls off a tee block and pace the dispersion out without having members rage at you, or if your range uses the ball you game. If I go to my club's practice area and hit their range balls with a 9i, they will not behave in the same way a ProV1 or Z-Star will. That disparity in performance profile only gets worse as you move towards the top of the bag.

 

Just my experience.

[pinestreetgolf]

55 minutes ago, bschett said:

Man no one is saying that playing actual golf isn’t better than sitting at a launch monitor and hitting 7 irons but that doesn’t mean a launch monitor is harmful to 50% of golfers. That just doesn’t make any sense. 

 

All it gives you is data, if you choose to make huge changes that hurt you because you are chasing some magic ball flight numbers, that is your own issue. Again there’s a reason every PGA event has a range lined with trackmans. 
 

 

 

100% this.

 

He didn't say "I don't like trackman".

He didn't say "eh, some golfers will like, some won't."

 

He said "50% of golfers are hurt by trackman", which is a f*cking insane statement.

 

And even bladehunter would agree with that, I think.

 

Nobody thinks trackman is the be all end all, but to say that its hurt 50% of golfers who use it is nuts.  Sorry, but that's nuts.  And you posted it three times, so you and the "reading comprehension please" passive aggressiveness can GTFOH.  Now, I like aggressive/aggressive (people, like blade, who don't agree with me but stand behind it) - passive/aggressive ("reading comphrehension please") while subtly shifting the argument (you started at 50/50, now you've backed off to "let me explain why trackman might be harmful to some hypothetical person e.g. not 50% and not a tour pro).

 

Its annoying when you say something and then five posts later act like what you've actually been arguing is the soft-pedaled version all along.  Passive/Aggressive suits nobody, and certainly not people trying to get better at golf.

 

I'm a relatively low-ish cap, and I love the range.  I have a philosophy that when I play, I *play* - I'm kinda slow, mark all my putts, etc.. But have a fun range group (that's almost like a playing group) that goes out most nights after work, same guys.  One of those guys used to beat it around on the European Tour and has done a ton for my game.  Just how I do it and how I like the game.  I don't really like casual rounds, rather be at the practice area TBH.  We're all different. 

 

But don't tell us trackman has hurt 50% of tour golfers.  That's really stupid.

Edited November 27, 2020 by pinestreetgolf

[bladehunter]

15 minutes ago, Bubbtubbs said:

It's definitely helpful for iron and wedge approaches to know your shape tendency, average carry, max carry and your typical mishit carry so you can plan the best place to try to leave the ball while mitigating the most common mistakes you make.

 

Usually, only one of those is possible to accurately determine without a launch monitor - unless you have a deserted club where you can hit balls off a tee block and pace the dispersion out without having members rage at you, or if your range uses the ball you game. If I go to my club's practice area and hit their range balls with a 9i, they will not behave in the same way a ProV1 or Z-Star will. That disparity in performance profile only gets worse as you move towards the top of the bag.

 

Just my experience.

That is a good point. I take for granted that I have room at home to hit whatever.  I forget that not everyone lives on a farm.
 

So I literally have specific targets on a wedge range etc.  so in a sense with wedges I’m using known yardage plus or minus wind and proper working balls to practice what I guess some folks would do with trackman.  thats likely why my eye must see what the balll does first  hand and why I don’t trust just a launch monitor on its own.  If it’s in conjunction with outside flight off turf. Ok. But it still tends to lead to “ smashing “ in my experience vs control.  

Edited November 27, 2020 by bladehunter

[SPIF]

4 hours ago, mahonie said:

In the same vane, I had a heated debate on Twitter with a journalist from one of the UK golf mags who more or less said that anyone who went on a golf course without a GPS or range-finder was an idiot. I used the same argument and he went back into his box 👍

The tech didn't exist back then.  A professional in any field would be a fool not to use all the tools available to them. 

[Fairway14]

10 minutes ago, SPIF said:

The tech didn't exist back then.  A professional in any field would be a fool not to use all the tools available to them. 

 

Consider that Nicklaus instructor Jack Grout would refuse to teach a player who was unwilling to learn and use fundamentally sound grip technique.

Grout knew that the grip influenced every aspect of the swing, and that using an unorthodox grip technique made striking consistently solid shots 10X harder than necessary. 

However today's instructors are prone to using video, launch monitors and other "tools" which are often counter productive towards helping a player strike consistently better shots and shoot lower scores. I am reasonably certain that improved grip technique alone would help about 95% of the world's players drastically improve their shot making and scoring, no "technology" or "tools" required.

[tannyhoban]

Lost me at Lynx blade. 😂😁

[bschett]

22 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Consider that Nicklaus instructor Jack Grout would refuse to teach a player who was unwilling to learn and use fundamentally sound grip technique.

Grout knew that the grip influenced every aspect of the swing, and that using an unorthodox grip technique made striking consistently solid shots 10X harder than necessary. 

However today's instructors are prone to using video, launch monitors and other "tools" which are often counter productive towards helping a player strike consistently better shots and shoot lower scores. I am reasonably certain that improved grip technique alone would help about 95% of the world's players drastically improve their shot making and scoring, no "technology" or "tools" required.

Aw yes next time I will consider Jack Grout who was born in 1910 in a discussion about launch monitors. 
 

Grip technique is not what anyone is talking about here, obviously important but not related to the topic. Also 95% might be another wild percentage to throw out there. 

Edited November 27, 2020 by bschett

[Fairway14]

8 minutes ago, bschett said:

Aw yes next time I will consider Jack Grout who was born in 1910 in a discussion about modern technology. 
 

Grip technique is not what anyone is talking about here. 

 

Well, if the goal is better shot making and lower scoring maybe the topic of discussion should be about grip technique.

Launch monitors, video and other technology has a way of leading some players and instructors down the wrong path.

And back to the OP of this thread, for some players the latest technology clubs produce worse results than older model clubs.

[Fairway14]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

But most(?) of the rest of us ? I personally would rather spend $10-15 on a bucket than $50+ on the course just to practice. Takes a lot less time and $$$ and I find it more productive as well.

 

I'd guess most of us actually need to practice, hitting ball after ball to try and figure out why we can't make the contact we'd like more often. And, more importantly(?), try TO groove our swings. Irons are mostly alike except for shaft length so hitting 1 or 2 of them most often will help since the others are similar.

 

Driver needs work. I suppose I should play a round, hit the driver 14 times and figure out what works and what doesn't ? Or do I hit 20 - 40 drivers on the range and figure out what works ? 

 

Wedges, especially partial shots, need work too. If I'm "only" playing, how many partial wedges am I hitting for the round ? 2 ? 3 ? Q: How does that help ? A: it doesn't.

 

 

 

Absolutely driving range practice is imperative for improving ones game. The most sensible way to do it is learn good effective  technique (from a competent instructor during live lessons or from a quality instruction book), and diligently practice same at home or on the range for as much time as one can commit to doing.

Accomplished players have been following the above process for 100 years.

[pinestreetgolf]

32 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Well, if the goal is better shot making and lower scoring maybe the topic of discussion should be about grip technique.

Launch monitors, video and other technology has a way of leading some players and instructors down the wrong path.

And back to the OP of this thread, for some players the latest technology clubs produce worse results than older model clubs.

 

The goal is you explaining your statement that launch monitors hurt 50% of golfers.  So far, since being asked by three people to cite some authority for that position, you have:

 

1. Explained the definition of reading comprehension.

2. Told an insane story about Jack Grout refusing to teach people, then using it to conclude 95% of golfers could stand to improve their grip (which is kinda like saying "95% of golfers could stand to improve their putting... its obviously true)

3. Said people should take lessons from accomplish instructors to get better (OK... ?)

 

Either walk back your 50/50 statement or back it up, please.  Why 50%?  How did you get that number?

 

Stop talking about anything but what we're asking about.

 

This is simple.  I've quoted you directly so you will see it.  Possible responses:

 

1. I made it up.

2. Cite a source that also claims its 50/50.

3. Explain the reasoning you use to arrive at literally half of tour professionals being worse because of trackman.

Edited November 27, 2020 by pinestreetgolf

[SPIF]

1 hour ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Consider that Nicklaus instructor Jack Grout would refuse to teach a player who was unwilling to learn and use fundamentally sound grip technique.

Grout knew that the grip influenced every aspect of the swing, and that using an unorthodox grip technique made striking consistently solid shots 10X harder than necessary. 

However today's instructors are prone to using video, launch monitors and other "tools" which are often counter productive towards helping a player strike consistently better shots and shoot lower scores. I am reasonably certain that improved grip technique alone would help about 95% of the world's players drastically improve their shot making and scoring, no "technology" or "tools" required.

What does that have to do with pros using gps or lasers?  

[SPIF]

28 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Absolutely driving range practice is imperative for improving ones game. The most sensible way to do it is learn good effective  technique (from a competent instructor during live lessons or from a quality instruction book), and diligently practice same at home or on the range for as much time as one can commit to doing.

Accomplished players have been following the above process for 100 years.

 

What would you say causes athletes to improve in their sport over those that came before?  I would say better specific training, whole body preparation, better nutrition, and utilizing every available means to increase performance by even fractions of a percent.  So if Jack Grout said the grip was incredibly important (which just about every instructor I've ever met agrees with), does that mean nutrition and aerobic/anaerobic training are useless because he didn't focus on them?

[pinestreetgolf]

3 minutes ago, SPIF said:

What does that have to do with pros using gps or lasers?  

 

I was pretty interested after his first post, because I had never heard some of those things before, and assumed he read them somewhere or had some basis for concluding technology was hurting professional golfers.  Hence my last post, asking him for the last time to stop talking nonsense and back up his statement.

 

If true, its interesting.  If he just posted a statistic he made up in his head that is much less interesting.

[Fairway14]

20 minutes ago, SPIF said:

What does that have to do with pros using gps or lasers?  

 

My commentary is aimed at amateur players who may be interested in improving their shot making and scoring.

[Fairway14]

17 minutes ago, SPIF said:

 

What would you say causes athletes to improve in their sport over those that came before?  

 

For the game of golf the answer is improved clubs and balls, no doubt about that. Back in the era of wooden club heads , steel shafts, and balata balls Tour players had to make extraordinarily good tempo swings with impeccable rhythm to produce consistently accurate , solid golf shots.

In contrast, current technology shafts-clubs-balls allow the swing tempo-rhythm to be off a bit yet still yield good shots results.

I understand that golf media talking heads like to wax on about "athletes" and "fitness" and "nutrition" but that's mostly nonsense rhetoric.

Golf is a technique game, not a sport, 

[braincramp52]

3 hours ago, mahonie said:

Hang on...what was wrong with the first set that you had to buy another one? 🤔

Nothing,  I play different irons every year. I have for 30 years. Half the fun of playing golf is tinkering around with gear. 

Edited November 27, 2020 by braincramp52

[braincramp52]

29 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

For the game of golf the answer is improved clubs and balls, no doubt about that. Back in the era of wooden club heads , steel shafts, and balata balls Tour players had to make extraordinarily good tempo swings with impeccable rhythm to produce consistently accurate , solid golf shots.

In contrast, current technology shafts-clubs-balls allow the swing tempo-rhythm to be off a bit yet still yield good shots results.

I understand that golf media talking heads like to wax on about "athletes" and "fitness" and "nutrition" but that's mostly nonsense rhetoric.

Golf is a technique game, not a sport, 

It's called evolution. 

[bschett]

42 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

For the game of golf the answer is improved clubs and balls, no doubt about that. Back in the era of wooden club heads , steel shafts, and balata balls Tour players had to make extraordinarily good tempo swings with impeccable rhythm to produce consistently accurate , solid golf shots.

In contrast, current technology shafts-clubs-balls allow the swing tempo-rhythm to be off a bit yet still yield good shots results.

I understand that golf media talking heads like to wax on about "athletes" and "fitness" and "nutrition" but that's mostly nonsense rhetoric.

Golf is a technique game, not a sport, 

You do know “fitness” and “nutrition” are real things right? You’ve gone down the road of just doubling down on nonsense until there is nothing left you can say. 

[ChipNRun]

2 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

Consider that Nicklaus instructor Jack Grout would refuse to teach a player who was unwilling to learn and use fundamentally sound grip technique.

Grout knew that the grip influenced every aspect of the swing ...,

However today's instructors are prone to using video, launch monitors and other "tools" which are often counter productive towards helping a player strike consistently better shots... 

Yes, grip is important. In Five Lessons, Ben Hogan focused his first chapter on Grip. But, Hogan also had chapters on Posture, Backswing, Downswing, and Summary Thoughts.

 

F14, grip is important (!) Do you claim, however, that a good grip will automatically lead to an effective golf swing? I hope not.

 

2 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

However today's instructors are prone to using video, launch monitors and other "tools" which are often counter productive towards helping a player strike consistently better shots and shoot lower scores. I am reasonably certain that improved grip technique alone would help about 95% of the world's players drastically improve their shot making and scoring, no "technology" or "tools" required.

 

Most instructors I have worked with check over the grip in the first tune-up lesson each year.

 

And, your view that video and launch monitors are counterproductive is your opinion. Do you have facts to back it up? These can be misused, but they can be effective tools when used properly.

 

Again, launch monitor helps me most in clubfittings. With the explosion of lighter weight shafts, data on the performance of each is critical to weeding out {head + shaft} combos that don't work for me. 

 

 

 

[Fairway14]

1 minute ago, ChipNRun said:

 

 

F14, grip is important (!) Do you claim, however, that a good grip will automatically lead to an effective golf swing? I hope not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can't recall ever seeing a player with a fundamentally sound grip technique that did not also have a good looking, consistently effective swing.

Address posture and alignment are the other imperative fundamentals, but those are relatively easy to learn. Faulty grip technique is the one which most greatly harms nearly all amateur player swings and, or, shot making.

[ChipNRun]

5 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

I can't recall ever seeing a player with a fundamentally sound grip technique that did not also........

I think GolfWRX has pretty well exhausted this thread. Happy Thanksgiving to all!

[ALIF]

Weren’t we talking about playing blades?

[setter02]

And in typical Fairway fashion, gets completely called out and dodges answering yet again...

[mahonie]

8 hours ago, SPIF said:

The tech didn't exist back then.  A professional in any field would be a fool not to use all the tools available to them. 

The premise of his argument was that without the tech of GPS/range finders it is impossible to hit consistent shots.

[mahonie]

5 hours ago, braincramp52 said:

Nothing,  I play different irons every year. I have for 30 years. Half the fun of playing golf is tinkering around with gear. 

Fair play. Hope you’ve got a trusted fitter who doesn’t juice the Trackman settings to push through a sale...particularly prevalent in a closed bay scenario 👍

[Sean2]

On 11/25/2020 at 5:53 PM, longjohnpeter said:

For reasons unbeknownst to myself, I have been obsessed with playing blades lately. So I took a trip to my local range today and picked out an old Lynx USA 7 iron blade from the rental rack (I don't own a blade and had never hit one previously). While I did see a reduction in distance (more of a result of EXTREMELY crappy range balls and a 50 degree day), I couldn't believe how much more consistent my face contact was, compared with my Ping Zing's I currently use. And even on the few mishits, they weren't punished nearly as bad as everyone and their mother said they would be, and I knew exactly what had happened and could adjust accordingly.

 

Anyone have a similar experience? Is this just a honeymoon phase? Or is the golfing elite trying to preserve the sanctity of blade irons?

I don't get the mystique surrounding blades. I have played them, and noticed no appreciable difference in my score. Sure they are a bit shorter, but the lofts are weaker too. I think forgiveness is a bit overrated and you still have to put a decent swing on the ball, no matter what type of club you play.