Blade (MB) MythBuster

[PuffyC]

2 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

I would recommend not using the final MPF scores for any sort of comparison.  It's really nothing more than a grade system of how close a given design is to the iron head principles Ralph Maltby believes are important.  Those being, a low CG that's some distance from the hosel.  

 

Where the MPF data is king is showing us the CG location and the measured MOI.  

 

Yep, I know MPF is a lightning rod topic just like blades, I guess my point was really that comparing the z785 to the Z-Forged is perhaps not the ideal way to demonstrated the characteristics of a blade. 

[Nick_E]

14 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

I would recommend not using the final MPF scores for any sort of comparison.  It's really nothing more than a grade system of how close a given design is to the iron head principles Ralph Maltby believes are important.  Those being, a low CG that's some distance from the hosel.  

 

Where the MPF data is king is showing us the CG location and the measured MOI.  

 

What would you recommend instead?  Moi by itself isn't enough.  If there is a better system I'm all ears

 

Up and down the ratings its pretty consistent on general playability.  Agree its not everything but its a very good indicator.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Nick_E

[Red4282]

Little late to this thread, but to the OP- the mythbuster approach was probably not the best choice as there was very little science in your post. Even when you post about spin, which is true, you should provide data.  That being said, this topic is like 50 shades if grey... in not all cbs are the same. I have titlesit 620 cbs, and they are essentially a blade, and in fact are harder to hit than some other companies “blades”. Then there are other “cavity backs” that are really in the game improvement category. Thats why when everyone offers their anecdotal accounts, it should be taken with a grain of salt, or at least taken into account the clubs in question.

Edited December 30, 2020 by Red4282

[NRJyzr]

9 minutes ago, Nick_E said:

What would you recommend instead?  Moi by itself isn't enough.  If there is a better system I'm all ears

 

My thinking is to use the component parts of MPF.  You can track how high or low the CG is, and the MOI.

 

Unfortunately, there's no system for sole/turf interaction.  Might be tough to try quantifying that.  The Srixon V-Sole is a good example of that; some love it, some hate it, and it doesn't seem to perfectly follow the classic shallow-swing/steeper-swing characteristics.

 

I'm not sure there's a system that can really tell you from theory what will or won't work for everyone, before they use the club.  A personal example.... 

 

I do fairly well with Golden Rams.  They're fairly narrow soled, and have a sharp leading edge.  Because of my short arms at slightly above average height, my swing is steeper than many.  In theory, Rams would be not a great fit for me, at least in terms of turf interaction, but over time, they've shown themselves to be the best for me.  Go figure.

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by NRJyzr

[forrester_fire]

2. Blades are more punishing than cavity backs - SEMI-BUSTED - Yes, they are more punishing in terms of distance loss when you mishit. But score card wise, they are actually better. When you mishit a blade, the ball does not fly off into the woods, rough or water but because of the significant distance loss you actually have a better second shot chance from the first initial mishit most of the time.

 

I think this point completely depends on the situation.  If you're facing a forced carry over water or heather, a mishit with a blade and the resultant distance loss could be the difference between carrying the hazard and ending up in the hazard.

[OsnolaKinnard]

53 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

I've done this, though it was actually inadvertent.  I went to a local 2nd Swing, was looking at a couple different clubs, thinking about buying a set of irons.  The 2011 TM TP MC were on the list, but I compared with a couple others, including Ping ISI.  I happened to have my set of Golden Ram TW276 in the car (they were the main set at the time), I was encouraged to grab one and do a comparison (5 iron, if it matters).

 

My dispersion with the Rams was between one third and one quarter the size of any of the other clubs I'd been hitting.  Shafts were all pretty similar, didn't have that as a variable.

 

Surprised me a bit, though I suppose it shouldn't have.  2nd Swing fitter told me I should maybe just stick with the Rams.  <shrug>

 

Not long ago, I was gaming a set of MacGregor VFoil VIP 1025 CM irons.  Granted, the 4-6 irons were CB's, but the 7-PW were blades and while this is purely anecdotal evidence, I found that the distance lost on less than perfect hits was there but no better or worse than my Callaway X18 irons which were a borderline SGI club.  My enjoyment with a perfectly struck shot though, was much more.  Those Mac's felt awesome and were great sticks, and like every good club-whore, I sold them like an idiot.

[Nick_E]

6 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

My thinking is to use the component parts of MPF.  You can track how high or low the CG is, and the MOI.

 

Unfortunately, there's no system for sole/turf interaction.  Might be tough to try quantifying that.  The Srixon V-Sole is a good example of that; some love it, some hate it, and it doesn't seem to perfectly follow the classic shallow-swing/steeper-swing characteristics.

 

I'm not sure there's a system that can really tell you from theory what will or won't work for everyone, before they use the club.  A personal example.... 

 

I do fairly well with Golden Rams.  They're fairly narrow soled, and have a sharp leading edge.  Because of my short arms at slightly above average height, my swing is steeper than many.  In theory, Rams would be not a great fit for me, at least in terms of turf interaction, but over time, they've shown themselves to be the best for me.  Go figure.

 

I agree with your comments, but I'm saying its the best baseline we have.  It won't tell you exactly, but gives you the best starting point

[NRJyzr]

2 minutes ago, Nick_E said:

I agree with your comments, but I'm saying its the best baseline we have.  It won't tell you exactly, but gives you the best starting point

 

I love MPF, but the final score really has no meaning.  At least not as some apply it.  It's frequently used as a forgiveness measure, but forgiveness is really all about Moment of Inertia.

 

To their credit, they *do* refer to it as the Playability factor.  🙂

 

[Ri_Redneck]

Just for the record, the MOI difference between the Z785 and Z-Forged is approximately 100g/cm², which is literally nothing. VCOG is .02" difference, which also equates to nothing. Both irons are made from 1020 carbon steel using the same forging process. The lofts are 1* stronger in the 4-8 z785. 3, 9 & PW are identical. IMHO, providing the exact same shafts and weighting are used, these clubs will feel and perform virtually identical.

 

Just my $.02

 

BT

[gripandrip]

What low irons are you hitting? Down to a 3 iron?

[Nick_E]

30 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

I love MPF, but the final score really has no meaning.  At least not as some apply it.  It's frequently used as a forgiveness measure, but forgiveness is really all about Moment of Inertia.

 

To their credit, they *do* refer to it as the Playability factor.  🙂

 

The final number does categorize clubs as shown below.  Moi doesn't, and it gets away from depending on what OEMs say.  Unbiased facts.  Again, its a starting point, but best available. 

 

Link - http://ralphmaltby.com/what-is-mpf/#:~:text=The higher the Playability Factor rating of a particular model,the ball into the air.&text=Simply put%2C via Maltby Playability,with a HIGHER Playability club.

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by Nick_E

[Tree Levino]

33 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

My thinking is to use the component parts of MPF.  You can track how high or low the CG is, and the MOI.

 

Unfortunately, there's no system for sole/turf interaction.  Might be tough to try quantifying that.  The Srixon V-Sole is a good example of that; some love it, some hate it, and it doesn't seem to perfectly follow the classic shallow-swing/steeper-swing characteristics.

 

I'm not sure there's a system that can really tell you from theory what will or won't work for everyone, before they use the club.  A personal example.... 

 

I do fairly well with Golden Rams.  They're fairly narrow soled, and have a sharp leading edge.  Because of my short arms at slightly above average height, my swing is steeper than many.  In theory, Rams would be not a great fit for me, at least in terms of turf interaction, but over time, they've shown themselves to be the best for me.  Go figure.

 

good point re turf interaction. I would argue Titleist has one of the best sole designs for the widest range of golfers. If you look at close ups of Bernd W’s bag you can see how classically “brutal” his leading edges are. 
 

For what it’s worth, most golfers don’t have the speed to effectively get a combo or high launch/low spin with long iron blades. Those that are mid speed and think they are are very likely flipping and adding loft. I use to be that way. Could hit a 4i blade 35-40 yards in the air. Flat out shallow AoA and flipping. Had speed so it “worked” but wasn’t consistent. 
 

Combo sets are king. You can play the same shafts and add launch to help gapping. The drop offs in ball speed are the same for me with a Titleist u500 vs an MB but the former launches higher so carries further. Shafts are an interesting part of the conversation. I use the seldom seen DG Pro X100 in my blades and the 4i launches beautifully. Conversely, the short irons are beautifully penetrating. I think many could be helped with higher launching shafts in the long end whether that be due to design like mine or weight. 

[Red4282]

14 minutes ago, Nick_E said:

The final number does categorize clubs as shown below.  Moi doesn't, and it gets away from depending on what OEMs say.  Unbiased facts.  Again, its a starting point, but best available. 

 

 What he is saying is that scale is a formula based on measurements. The actual measurements are great, and should be compared, but many many people dont agree with the formula used to get that final score number. They HEAVILY weigh low cog in the formula. It takes almost no account into blade length. (C-dim would partially account for this).

 

Compare Cog, c-dim, and moi and forget about the final “score”

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by Red4282

[Red4282]

8 minutes ago, TigerInTheWoods said:

good point re turf interaction. I would argue Titleist has one of the best sole designs for the widest range of golfers. If you look at close ups of Bernd W’s bag you can see how classically “brutal” his leading edges are. 
 

For what it’s worth, most golfers don’t have the speed to effectively get a combo or high launch/low spin with long iron blades. Those that are mid speed and think they are are very likely flipping and adding loft. I use to be that way. Could hit a 4i blade 35-40 yards in the air. Flat out shallow AoA and flipping. Had speed so it “worked” but wasn’t consistent. 
 

Combo sets are king. You can play the same shafts and add launch to help gapping. The drop offs in ball speed are the same for me with a Titleist u500 vs an MB but the former launches higher so carries further. Shafts are an interesting part of the conversation. I use the seldom seen DG Pro X100 in my blades and the 4i launches beautifully. Conversely, the short irons are beautifully penetrating. I think many could be helped with higher launching shafts in the long end whether that be due to design like mine or weight. 

You kind of bring up a good point. Its been proven that around 35 degrees of loft and higher, it doesnt really matter if you have hollow face, high moi GI, or a blade. Just about anyone would be fine with a blade in the short irons, unless you are hoseling balls.

[NRJyzr]

4 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

 What he is saying is that scale is a formula based on measurements. The actual measurements are great, and should be compared, but many many people dont agree with the formula used to get that final score number. They HEAVILY weigh low cog in the formula. It takes almost no account into blade length. (C-dim would partially account for this).

 

Compare Cog, c-dim, and moi and forget about the final “score”

 

 

I think you hit it fairly well.  It's the formula I don't especially agree with.  For what little that's worth, LOL.

 

[NRJyzr]

11 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

You kind of bring up a good point. Its been proven that around 35 degrees of loft and higher, it doesnt really matter if you have hollow face, high moi GI, or a blade. Just about anyone would be fine with a blade in the short irons, unless you are hoseling balls.

 

Don't really need to chime in, just feel like giving credit to Tom Wishon for having said that a few times over the years.  🙂

 

Then I'll go tangential....  a lot of folks like to use handicap as a basis in this discussion, I'm not so sure it is.  And as an example, I like to think about the difference between a friend of mine and myself.

 

Around 9-10 years ago, we were both around a 7-8 index.  I played Ram Tour Grinds or Mizuno MS-11s, he played Ping G series irons.  As I've mentioned a bit ago, the Rams proved themselves to be the best fit for me, which implies that I could hit them well enough.  My friend, on the other hand, is a prototype for the all over the clubface golfer.  It's possible he would quit the game if he somehow were not allowed to use rather forgiving irons.  

 

I've also tried hitting his clubs, and found I could use them in the long irons, but the short irons would kill me.  They ballooned on me in the slightest breeze (which is related to something else, but mentioning it anyway).

 

Roughly same handicap, nearly diametrically opposed iron contact ability.  The quick surface look, using hdcp, would try to put both of us in similar types of clubs, and would probably be a disservice in both cases.

 

For whatever it's worth.  🙂 

 

Edited December 30, 2020 by NRJyzr

[Red4282]

28 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

Don't really need to chime in, just feel like giving credit to Tom Wishon for having said that a few times over the years.  🙂

 

Then I'll go tangential....  a lot of folks like to use handicap as a basis in this discussion, I'm not so sure it is.  And as an example, I like to think about the difference between a friend of mine and myself.

 

Around 9-10 years ago, we were both around a 7-8 index.  I played Ram Tour Grinds or Mizuno MS-11s, he played Ping G series irons.  As I've mentioned a bit ago, the Rams proved themselves to be the best fit for me, which implies that I could hit them well enough.  My friend, on the other hand, is a prototype for the all over the clubface golfer.  It's possible he would quit the game if he somehow were not allowed to use rather forgiving irons.  

 

I've also tried hitting his clubs, and found I could use them in the long irons, but the short irons would kill me.  They ballooned on me in the slightest breeze (which is related to something else, but mentioning it anyway).

 

Roughly same handicap, nearly diametrically opposed iron contact ability.  The quick surface look, using hdcp, would try to put both of us in similar types of clubs, and would probably be a disservice in both cases.

 

For whatever it's worth.  🙂 

 

Awesome, It doesnt surprise me at all that wishon said this, unfortunately i was away from the game, and not on the forums when tom was here. Sure would have enjoyed his time, he is a legend. I have also seem manufacturers say this too. Like some of the hollow sets (p790ish) where the short irons are solid and and not hollow-because it makes no difference at those lofts.

[TheDeanAbides]

Seeing as we're myth busting here, can we throw the idea that a blade hit out of the sweet spot is miles better feeling than any other iron? I have, six or seven sets of blades, but I've also played loads of sets of forged CBs and they've all 'felt' (sounded) great out of the COG. some felt more solid than others, but I honestly cannot say that my Apex 99s are any more amazing than my old Mizzy MX-300s. 

[LeoLeo99]

2 hours ago, TheDeanAbides said:

Seeing as we're myth busting here, can we throw the idea that a blade hit out of the sweet spot is miles better feeling than any other iron? I have, six or seven sets of blades, but I've also played loads of sets of forged CBs and they've all 'felt' (sounded) great out of the COG. some felt more solid than others, but I honestly cannot say that my Apex 99s are any more amazing than my old Mizzy MX-300s. 

 

Yeah, I'm an insensitive low feel player myself.  They all feel great when flushed.  Growing up I played 100s of rounds with my FG17s.  They never seemed difficult to hit.  But I've tried other blades that I couldn't hit well.  The best feeling clubs to my that I've tried, and I've tried a lot, are Burner 2.0.  Just loved that woosh sound they made.  I got rid of them because I had difficulty controlling distance dispersion with them.  

[Nels55]

2 hours ago, TheDeanAbides said:

Seeing as we're myth busting here, can we throw the idea that a blade hit out of the sweet spot is miles better feeling than any other iron? I have, six or seven sets of blades, but I've also played loads of sets of forged CBs and they've all 'felt' (sounded) great out of the COG. some felt more solid than others, but I honestly cannot say that my Apex 99s are any more amazing than my old Mizzy MX-300s. 

I agree as far as blades not feeling any better when hit really well.  I grew up hitting blades and I have several sets now.  The blades feel awesome when hit correctly but I like the feel of my PXG irons better.  Feel is a subjective thing and I am quite sure that blades do feel better for some folks but not for others.  So in the end it is not really a myth that can be busted because it depends on who is doing the feeling.

[mahonie]

8 hours ago, forrester_fire said:

2. Blades are more punishing than cavity backs - SEMI-BUSTED - Yes, they are more punishing in terms of distance loss when you mishit. But score card wise, they are actually better. When you mishit a blade, the ball does not fly off into the woods, rough or water but because of the significant distance loss you actually have a better second shot chance from the first initial mishit most of the time.

 

I think this point completely depends on the situation.  If you're facing a forced carry over water or heather, a mishit with a blade and the resultant distance loss could be the difference between carrying the hazard and ending up in the hazard.

Try telling Jordan Spieth that one 👍

[SamboRoll]

19 hours ago, forrester_fire said:

2. Blades are more punishing than cavity backs - SEMI-BUSTED - Yes, they are more punishing in terms of distance loss when you mishit. But score card wise, they are actually better. When you mishit a blade, the ball does not fly off into the woods, rough or water but because of the significant distance loss you actually have a better second shot chance from the first initial mishit most of the time.

 

I think this point completely depends on the situation.  If you're facing a forced carry over water or heather, a mishit with a blade and the resultant distance loss could be the difference between carrying the hazard and ending up in the hazard.

My experience from playing 6 years with full blade set and then changing to a combo set (4-7 cb’s, 8-P mb’s) is that blades do create more spin, including side spin. My mishits with blades from the heel or toe always produced shorter ball flight with more curve than with cb’s. The difference started to play out with mid and long irons where the relative curve and distance loss was bigger due to greater ball speed and less back spin. In terms of scoring it does make a difference to have your misshit with 7i still on the fringe of the green 10m short of the hole and 7m left than 20m short and 15m left in a rough or in the greenside bunker.

 

When it comes to the better feeling of a purely struck shot of a blade vs cb or gi, one factor is that with blade the perfect contact with the ball feels so much better relative to the other shots with the same club, due to less forgivness and more honest feedback of a mishit. With some cb’s and most gi’s you don’t feel that big of a difference between pure shots and mishits. Of course the steel quality and softness of the clubface plays a factor in how ”buttery” the feel is. My experience is that pure contact with blade feels both relatively and absolutely better than with other club head types, at least if you game Mizunos.

Edited December 31, 2020 by SamboRoll

[Ri_Redneck]

On 12/30/2020 at 10:13 AM, Nick_E said:

The final number does categorize clubs as shown below.  Moi doesn't, and it gets away from depending on what OEMs say.  Unbiased facts.  Again, its a starting point, but best available. 

 

Link - http://ralphmaltby.com/what-is-mpf/#:~:text=The higher the Playability Factor rating of a particular model,the ball into the air.&text=Simply put%2C via Maltby Playability,with a HIGHER Playability club.

 

Mr. Maltby considers the COG placement to be the most important factor in figuring the MPF ratings which are an indication of how easy a club is to hit. The lower and further from the face the COG is, the higher the rating. The Z785 COG is slightly lower and slightly more rearward than the ZForged which gives it a slightly better MPF. Still, they are very similar in measurement. I have different sets of irons that vary a little more than that and I can't tell the difference when hitting them. So, COG and MOI matter in how easy it is to hit a club. COG is ease getting the ball airborne and MOI is dispersion.

 

However, This discussion is all about blades and cavities. It just so happens the OP was comparing a blade and a cavity that spec out very similar. What if he were comparing a Ping Blueprint with a Ping G710? The MOI of the Blueprint is approx. 2020G/cm² and the MOI of the G710 is approx. 3475g/cm² for a difference of 1450. More than 14x the difference in the Srixons! With these two clubs, I would expect him to see quite a difference in dispersion. This is what I find to be the real value in the MPF information It shows that all blades are not the same and all cavities are not the same.

 

BT

[Ri_Redneck]

On 12/30/2020 at 10:43 AM, NRJyzr said:

 

Don't really need to chime in, just feel like giving credit to Tom Wishon for having said that a few times over the years.  🙂

 

Then I'll go tangential....  a lot of folks like to use handicap as a basis in this discussion, I'm not so sure it is.  And as an example, I like to think about the difference between a friend of mine and myself.

 

Around 9-10 years ago, we were both around a 7-8 index.  I played Ram Tour Grinds or Mizuno MS-11s, he played Ping G series irons.  As I've mentioned a bit ago, the Rams proved themselves to be the best fit for me, which implies that I could hit them well enough.  My friend, on the other hand, is a prototype for the all over the clubface golfer.  It's possible he would quit the game if he somehow were not allowed to use rather forgiving irons.  

 

I've also tried hitting his clubs, and found I could use them in the long irons, but the short irons would kill me.  They ballooned on me in the slightest breeze (which is related to something else, but mentioning it anyway).

 

Roughly same handicap, nearly diametrically opposed iron contact ability.  The quick surface look, using hdcp, would try to put both of us in similar types of clubs, and would probably be a disservice in both cases.

 

For whatever it's worth.  🙂 

 

NRJyzer makes a GREAT point here. They have the same handicaps, but not the same abilities. Something to be considered when approaching a fitting.

 

BT

[mahonie]

2 hours ago, Ri_Redneck said:

Mr. Maltby considers the COG placement to be the most important factor in figuring the MPF ratings which are an indication of how easy a club is to hit. The lower and further from the face the COG is, the higher the rating. The Z785 COG is slightly lower and slightly more rearward than the ZForged which gives it a slightly better MPF. Still, they are very similar in measurement. I have different sets of irons that vary a little more than that and I can't tell the difference when hitting them. So, COG and MOI matter in how easy it is to hit a club. COG is ease getting the ball airborne and MOI is dispersion.

 

However, This discussion is all about blades and cavities. It just so happens the OP was comparing a blade and a cavity that spec out very similar. What if he were comparing a Ping Blueprint with a Ping G710? The MOI of the Blueprint is approx. 2020G/cm² and the MOI of the G710 is approx. 3475g/cm² for a difference of 1450. More than 14x the difference in the Srixons! With these two clubs, I would expect him to see quite a difference in dispersion. This is what I find to be the real value in the MPF information It shows that all blades are not the same and all cavities are not the same.

 

BT

Clubhead MOI seems to be largely irrelevant...’whole club MOI’ makes more sense to me:

 

http://golf.okrasa.eu/clubs/moi-en/

 

I don’t come close to understanding it, but measuring the resistance of a clubhead to twisting surely needs to take into account the length, weight and torque of the shaft?

[Ri_Redneck]

1 hour ago, mahonie said:

Clubhead MOI seems to be largely irrelevant...’whole club MOI’ makes more sense to me:

 

http://golf.okrasa.eu/clubs/moi-en/

 

I don’t come close to understanding it, but measuring the resistance of a clubhead to twisting surely needs to take into account the length, weight and torque of the shaft?

Whole club MOI is relevant to the way the weighting of the club fits your swing and tempo. Clubhead MOI is relevant to dispersion and feel of off-center contact. Both are relevant, just in different ways.

 

Yes, the length, weight and torque of the shaft WILL affect the feel of off-center contact. But the affect on the ball will be about the same. Since the OP was discussing different clubheads and not shafts, that's the way the discussion is trending.

 

BT

[mahonie]

54 minutes ago, Ri_Redneck said:

Whole club MOI is relevant to the way the weighting of the club fits your swing and tempo. Clubhead MOI is relevant to dispersion and feel of off-center contact. Both are relevant, just in different ways.

 

Yes, the length, weight and torque of the shaft WILL affect the feel of off-center contact. But the affect on the ball will be about the same. Since the OP was discussing different clubheads and not shafts, that's the way the discussion is trending.

 

BT

That’s sort of where I was going...to get back on topic, my best iron play always occurs with a heavy stiff shaft and small MB clubhead. By best iron play I’m referring to shot dispersion, both left-to-right and front-to-back. I have a set of Mac VIP Limited’s from the early 1970s with Mac Tourney Taper stiff shafts (aka rebar!). They are the most accurate, consistent clubs I have ever hit but they are so heavy, I struggle to swing them properly for a full 18 holes. The weaker lofts are a bit of an issue and I struggle to build a comfortable set-up at either end of the bag to compensate.

 

I find my MP4s with S300 probably the best balanced irons I’ve had. The Cobra combo set currently in my bag is not bad but I can feel a distinct difference in feel between the CBs and MBs with the CBs feeling slightly mushy in comparison and the ball flight is also a couple of yards higher (with a high ballflight already, this is not necessarily a good thing).

[nsxguy]

On 12/29/2020 at 6:04 PM, GolfTurkey said:

Combo set? I’ve always been too nervous to try one because the last thing I need is an internal infernal blades vs cavity back argument out on the course

 

Fixed that for ya. 

[A.Princey]

Not to derail your subject, but there's no way in 100 shots with a 1/2 iron MB, that I could ever get 230 out of said club from the deck like I do with my Rogue X 4i. High launch and low spin that just isn't possible with any MB.

[nsxguy]

On 12/29/2020 at 5:30 PM, revanant said:

This is a recent video from Mark Crossfield on exactly this topic. He set out to test a Mavrik Max against a random Top-Flite blade from the '80s, on dispersion/distance loss from mishits. There are charts. 🙂
 

 

On the "concentration" side, I don't quite get why folks who play golf find it weird. Matthew Wolff does his funky juke before every swing--its a training aid that helps him swing well. Some folks waggle the club, take practice swings, etc.
 

Personally, I find that having a blade in play is a very effective swing thought/reminder not to overswing, that 80% power is plenty, and smooth=fast. Putting a blade behind the ball is a very effective and sobering swing thought.  That being said, all things being equal, I wouldn't turn down a free set of 620 CBs or MP-20 MMCs--I don't think a small cavity magically spoils a club. 
 

On the issue of mishits flying further though, that is something I've definitely experienced with prior sets (716 AP1, Idea Tech v4, etc) and it's a real problem. 
 

We all play golf. A lot of golf courses aren't friendly to mishit balls. If my ball is directionally offline, I want it to die and stop as fast as possible, because if it doesn't, there's a good chance I'm going to lose the ball or get wet. I don't want it flying faster and carrying further in the wrong direction, because a lost ball is the fastest way to ruin a hole. 
 

Likewise, I really don't want my ball to fly further than I expect it to with an iron. We all have to factor in the short miss when we play golf--it's a known quantity. If there's a hazard in front of me, I can plan around it by taking more club, etc. If my ball winds up in the water because I made poor contact, it's not good, but it's not a surprise. 
 

A long miss is bad because it's unpredictable. It not only can ruin a hole, but it shakes my confidence that I know my distances. It leaves me wary of making a full swing the next time I pull my iron out. It rewards a good input with bad feedback/results. 
 

Ultimately, a long miss just makes golf harder. If you look at the Crossfield video, the Mavrik has a two way miss, length-wise. Lots of golfers make it a point to remove the two-way miss from their game on the horizontal plane. The Mavrik Max basically introduces a vertical miss that the blade doesn't have. 

 

Wolff's forward knee flex, IMO, is not "concentration/focu". It is simply a "trigger" much akin to the waggling you mention. As many posters in this thread there are just as many mental and physical preparations before one pulls the trigger.

 

Secondly, NOBODY makes a full swing at 80%. Nobody. I'll take 95% as a full swing leaving a little in reserve but except for a partial wedge,,,,,,,,,,,,, 

 

Thirdly, wanting a club that's "shorter so one's directional miss doesn't go into the woods is about the worst reason for choosing a less forgiving club. So disingenuous. And I'll bet I know where you got that idea. 

 

And that "long miss" Mavrik ? For higher handicappers, the target audience for those irons, who barely ever hit it flush, that long miss will get them pin high for a change rather than a club short all the time. How many times does a 20 handicapper hit the (effective) sweet spot ? 1 out of 10 ? So I disagree. That so called "long miss" makes the game EASIER for the higher handicapper. Actually the whole point of 'em.  👍

 

Now, I'm a registered member of the "Play whatever you want for whatever reason(s) you want" club, but,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

As an aside, while I know it's not gonna happen, I wish it was mandatory for posters to put their handicap, even if estimated, in their profile. You know, so I know who I'm (possibly) listening to.

 

Handicap isn't the be all and end all of course but it's a decent indicator. And of course there are usually exceptions but I'm far more likely to consider/believe something someone says about hitting the sweet spot who's a "2" than a "20". I mean the last thing I want to hear is some 20+ capper telling me why I should hit blades.

 

Seems to me that the more one CAN hit the sweet spot the more one is able to relate same in a meaningful way. Not exactly a resume' but,,,,,,,,,,,

 

Maybe I'm just too picky ? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯