At what point is playing blades an advantage?

[black bnr32]

9 hours ago, Wayside said:

Typically for this subject, that’s been ‘proven’ both ways. 
 

I think a lot of it has to do with the models they pick for testing and comparison. And maybe a little to do with what point they’re trying to prove 🙂

Well the data I posted earlier was pretty definitive.

[SnowmanShanks]

another reason to play blades is to get normal lofts.

some would call them a dinosaur. but why do i need 5 clubs that go between 215 and 230

[SDG90]

I recently made the switch to Mizuno blades after using Vapor Pro Combo's, Z565's and P770's. For me, the problem with the CB's and HH irons is the bounce and sole width. Blades just cut through the turf like a warm knife through butter. The Z565's, even with the V Sole, got kind of stuck in the grass or would bounce off of tight lies. 

 

Sure, bad strikes tend to come up shorter and make you feel like you just hit a concrete floor with a crowbar. But the good strikes are way more predictable.

I'm not a long hitter at all, but with the P770's my 7i could go anywhere from 155 to 190 yards, depending on the lie and strike. With my MP4's this range is much tighter (160-170 yds).

 

Also, I was able to hit a fade and a draw with my P770's, but I could never really hook or slice the ball when necessary. With the MP4's it is much easier to curve the ball around a tree.

[Wayside]

10 hours ago, black bnr32 said:

Well the data I posted earlier was pretty definitive.

Maybe for the pro who did the testing, but overall I’d disagree. Sorry 🙂 Sure, it’s interesting, but it’s not really scientific or comparable with an Iron Byron type test. 

The overall averages in the blade and players categories were similar, but that implies you’ll get similar results regardless of which category you pick, but that’s not the case. You don’t buy a category, you buy a specific club. 
 

The P7MB lost 15 yards compared to the TR20V losing 4. Big win for the cavity. But if you compare the 639MB, it only lost 7 yards against the T100 which lost 17! Big loss for one of the most popular players clubs out there. Does a T100 really lose 10 yards more on a mishit than the 639? 

 

A really definitive test would need to be done by machine, with everything matched including impact positions. Not just a variety of clubs, with different specs, with a random array of strikes. 

[beckk10]

On 9/10/2022 at 4:56 PM, Douglsss said:

Hypothetically speaking

 

All things being equal - loft, lie, etc - If I have a level of ballstriking to where playing blades vs player distance vs GI irons clubs each have similar average distances, why wouldn’t you play blades?

 

IMO - easier to work multiple trajectories, easier to remove spin, better consistency( no hot faces ). 
 

Another argument could be made that in this scenario - what are you losing in the scoring clubs, say 8i - pw, by not using a bladed club?

If you hit the middle and compress the ball just about every time with ease, blades for life. They look better, way better feedback, easier to control ball flight, more proper lofts as well. Increased spin. There is nothing better than a blade. Specifically the Mizuno MP4 is super good. I played the taylormade MB TP 2006 earlier this year as well and my distance control was just "Chefs Kiss". Granted they are square grooves. Blades are for a higher spin, middle hitting, compressor in my opinion at this point. This is due to the way the golf ball is constructed which is pretty low spin these days opposed to the early to mid 2000's. 

[MattC555]

32 minutes ago, Wayside said:

Maybe for the pro who did the testing, but overall I’d disagree. Sorry 🙂 Sure, it’s interesting, but it’s not really scientific or comparable with an Iron Byron type test. 

The overall averages in the blade and players categories were similar, but that implies you’ll get similar results regardless of which category you pick, but that’s not the case. You don’t buy a category, you buy a specific club. 
 

The P7MB lost 15 yards compared to the TR20V losing 4. Big win for the cavity. But if you compare the 639MB, it only lost 7 yards against the T100 which lost 17! Big loss for one of the most popular players clubs out there. Does a T100 really lose 10 yards more on a mishit than the 639? 

 

A really definitive test would need to be done by machine, with everything matched including impact positions. Not just a variety of clubs, with different specs, with a random array of strikes. 

 

I agree that the test isn't definitive, but it has more data than just about anything else I've found.  The reality in these threads is that opinions are formed on anecdotal evidence and whatever an OEM spoon feeds out of their marketing department.  These threads are a case study in confirmation bias.   

 

My anecdotal evidence:  I found the same dispersion when comparing MP20 MB to the MMC and HMB.  There was no benefit in my fitting to the MMC or HMB even in the 5 iron.  The MB had better flight numbers.  T100, ZX7, P770, i210 and more were all hit in the fitting.  Nothing worked as a well as the MP20's.  I was gaming Ping G series for years prior to the MP20's.  My scores have dropped since switching.  The lower scores are a result of practicing more.  I could probably maintain my handicap with either set, but very much prefer the MP20s.  

 

My opinion is that if you're fighting for par or better you might get along with blades.  If you're hoping to break 90 this season blades are probably a bad idea.        

 

Here is the link again for those who don't want to dig it out of this thread:

 

https://Not allowed Per Todaysgolfer's UK request/equipment/best/golf-irons/

[Wayside]

20 minutes ago, MattC555 said:

 

I agree that the test isn't definitive, but it has more data than just about anything else I've found.  The reality in these threads is that opinions are formed on anecdotal evidence and whatever an OEM spoon feeds out of their marketing department.  These threads are a case study in confirmation bias.   

 

My anecdotal evidence:  I found the same dispersion when comparing MP20 MB to the MMC and HMB.  There was no benefit in my fitting to the MMC or HMB even in the 5 iron.  The MB had better flight numbers.  T100, ZX7, P770, i210 and more were all hit in the fitting.  Nothing worked as a well as the MP20's.  I was gaming Ping G series for years prior to the MP20's.  My scores have dropped since switching.  The lower scores are a result of practicing more.  I could probably maintain my handicap with either set, but very much prefer the MP20s.  

 

My opinion is that if you're fighting for par or better you might get along with blades.  If you're hoping to break 90 this season blades are probably a bad idea.        

 

Here is the link again for those who don't want to dig it out of this thread:

 

https://Not allowed Per Todaysgolfer's UK request/equipment/best/golf-irons/

Yeah, I totally agree that it was a good test, I just wouldn’t personally make any conclusions based on it. The pro seems to have hit some irons better than others. I’ve been party to a Byron demo, back at the R7 launch, and it really opened my eyes to testing (and adjustable equipment) and it’s something I’ve been fascinated in ever since. 
 

Today’s Golfer is a good read. It used to be aimed at the beginner, but they’ve had a lot of interesting gear features lately. I’m not sure if TG is available in the US. Readly is good for getting all the golf mags (and other mags) cheaply, if anyone is interested.
 

If you’ve been for a fitting and blades were best for you, then I’d 100% agree they’re the best clubs for you. I’m not against them per se, but I was trying to answer the OPs question about when they’re beneficial. But, as usual, these threads always get derailed to a basic ‘blades v cavity’ theme.
 

As fitters, our aim should always be to help the golfer get the clubs which will allow them to enjoy our sport the most. Where that enjoyment comes from has to be taken into account. I wouldn’t get uppity if a high handicapper wanted to play blades, as it’s their choice - if it’s what they’ll get the most joy from, I’ll help them find the best one. 
 

I fancy a set of PXG STs myself, and I know I might not hit them great but I’ll enjoy hitting them. Well, occasionally 😀

Edited September 16, 2022 by Wayside

[Doaner84]

On 9/10/2022 at 7:50 PM, nino44 said:

I play blades from a fitting perspective since I get best contact and turf interaction with the thinest sole I can find. If they made a super thin sole CB, I would play it (looking currently for my unicorn) because I wouldn't mind the marginal extra benefit from a players CB on mishits. I've tried players CBs like Mizuno 223 for example and didnt like that the vertical dispersion was way wider than what I thought was worth for a little thin miss forgiveness. To me, ill at least know a blade came up 5 yards short because I miss hit it, but I won't know if I went long because of my swing or the variance in the players CBs that I have tried.  Its all personal preference at the end of the day. 

 

From your argument, I think it would come down to whatever the player has the most confidence looking at. 

I think the last thin sole CB I can remember was the bridgestone j33cb.

[camgriff2]

As a 20-22 hcp I made the switch to blades this year and I've enjoyed golf more than ever with my blades. I was using Apex 19s and as a member of the NLU board started browsing the Year of the Blade thread on there. It was full of stories of golfers from scratch to 25+ hcps that switched to blades and fell in love. I bought a set of Ben Hogan Apex PCs from 1984 for $100 as a backup set and test set.

 

I immediately fell in love with the look of the clubs and will never go back to shovel-y GI irons. The first time I hit a pure iron shot I was hooked. It was a feeling I'd never felt with an iron, and the feedback on mishits has made me a much better player. I tried to play a few rounds with the Apex 19s and hated every second of it. They were ugly to look at and I couldn't get any feel on good vs bad swings. I ended up listing them on FB Marketplace and traded them for a Rogue ST Max and $200 in cash, best trade of all time.

[Red4282]

3 hours ago, Wayside said:

Maybe for the pro who did the testing, but overall I’d disagree. Sorry 🙂 Sure, it’s interesting, but it’s not really scientific or comparable with an Iron Byron type test. 

The overall averages in the blade and players categories were similar, but that implies you’ll get similar results regardless of which category you pick, but that’s not the case. You don’t buy a category, you buy a specific club. 
 

The P7MB lost 15 yards compared to the TR20V losing 4. Big win for the cavity. But if you compare the 639MB, it only lost 7 yards against the T100 which lost 17! Big loss for one of the most popular players clubs out there. Does a T100 really lose 10 yards more on a mishit than the 639? 

 

A really definitive test would need to be done by machine, with everything matched including impact positions. Not just a variety of clubs, with different specs, with a random array of strikes. 

While i dont disagree with what you are saying, perhaps just look at the big picture of the test. Theres enough data in there to at least see a trend if there is one. The trend I see is there is no discernible difference in “forgiveness” between them. I use “forgiveness” in quotes because people seem to have different meaning for that. Ball speed retention? Consistency? Dispersion? By my definition, dispersion and predictability on all strikes is king when it comes to irons. After all the goal is getting it close to the hole as possible. I do think the results start to shift the lower the loft, under 35*.

Edited September 16, 2022 by Red4282

[MelloYello]

To the robot testing stuff...my point a page back was that it's not a safe assumption to isolate just the club as the only variable in a golf shot and to say one club is superior because of improved outcomes with robots.

 

Humans will perceive differences in design features like MOI, sole width, CG, etc. and they will react to those differences. They will either feel they can lean into their swing tendencies because a given design feature meshes well with their tendencies or they'll feel they have to fight the design features.

 

While robot testing might indicate correlations between design features and outcomes, it assumes humans are robots who'll swing 2 distinctly different clubs in exactly the same way. Nobody thinks that actually the case in reality with humans. 

 

Like anyone else, I will very quickly start changing my swing to account for a new club being different to what I'm comfortable with. After all, there's a reason fitters won't have someone hit 50 balls with a new club. Players aren't robots. People naturally begin to modify their swings to what they have in their hands for better or worse.

Edited September 16, 2022 by MelloYello

[BirdieBob]

Bill Horschel testing the PXG Gen3 T irons (internal cavity iron) vs PXG ST blades.  Also shown is his current Gen2 irons....this is several years old now, but the comparison of cavity vs blade is shown.  He did not carry a 4 iron.

YRMV...Your Results May Vary

 

Edited September 16, 2022 by BirdieBob

[me05501]

Gotta love it when someone comes into a 9 page thread and posts "I'm not going to read any of the earlier posts, but you should read what I have to say on this subject." That's peak interwebz right there. 

[Kmagnuss]

If the rain holds off this weekend (and my old, achey back pain holds off also), I'm going to do a very non-scientific test.  I'll test how many shots out of 10 with each club I can hold a green with at about 150 yards.  That will be between a 7 iron and a 9 iron depending on the club in my hand. 

I'll do the test again two more times on different weekends and see if the results are similar.

The candidates:

MP33 - 7i

MP18SC - 7i (maybe 8i)

718 AP2 - 7i (maybe 8i)

PXG 0211DC - 9i

 

I'm always rotating these in/out of the bag on how I feel that day but maybe this will make me stick with two of the four.  😆

 

[nsxguy]

9 hours ago, SDG90 said:

I'm not a long hitter at all, but with the P770's my 7i could go anywhere from 155 to 190 yards, depending on the lie and strike.

 

Only a 35 yard flier ? 

 

I could be misremembering but we've got claims of 40+ in this thread alone.

[chisag]

1 hour ago, me05501 said:

Gotta love it when someone comes into a 9 page thread and posts "I'm not going to read any of the earlier posts, but you should read what I have to say on this subject." That's peak interwebz right there. 

 

 

... Not really much different than those that read posts but basically ignore them because they are biased and post the same thing in every MB thread. Without reading any posts I think I could tell you with 99% accuracy that this thread includes some form of:

MB's get through the turf like a scapel and CB's really struggle to take a divot
There is no difference in divots taken by players cb's and mb's, just a difference in feel

MB's are more accurate
Jin Young Ko hit 63 greens in a row with wider soled CB's

CB's and especially players distance irons produce 30-40 yd fliers from a good lie
Played hundreds of rounds with players distance irons and never experienced a flier from a good lie

MB's make me a better ball striker due to their feedback
CB's make me a better ball striker due to watching the flight/distance and dialing both in

MB's are the only clubs I can score with
CB's give me the best chance of scoring with playability and a hint of forgiveness

Only idiots with big ego's use MB's
Only hacks and those looking to overcome poor technique use players irons and players distance irons 


... Adding of course more than a few love playing MB's and freely admit they may not produce their best scores but will play them for a myriad of other completely valid reasons. Play whatever makes you enjoy the game to it's fullest is also probably shared by 90% of WRX members. 

[Red4282]

56 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Only a 35 yard flier ? 

 

I could be misremembering but we've got claims of 40+ in this thread alone.

Probably a dispersion, not a flyer, from mishits to flushed. Also, when someone says a 40 yard flier, i think they mean on the course. It actually was only about a 15 yard flyer, but hits a downslope behind the green and kicks another 20 yards forward. 

[2Down]

at what point ?

When you hit the vanishingly small sweet speck often enough to slow play, cause when it happens you have to stop and have an after sex cigarette.

 

 

 

[SheriffBooth]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

Only a 35 yard flier ? 

 

I could be misremembering but we've got claims of 40+ in this thread alone.

 

I caught my P790 9-iron flush once and it went a quarter-mile.  That never happened with my 1969 Wilson Dynapower blades.

[MtlJeff]

is it terrible that i saw @SheriffBooth booth posted in the thread and came here wanting to see a car crash?

 

I was like, what did someone say....How BAD has it gotten in there??????

 

But alas, a normal post.

 

See you fools in 3 more days!

 

Jeff Out

 

Flyers are real , hot spots are not y'all peace!

[phizzy30]

I play blades albeit these are more GI blades with the longer heel to toe and more offset.  I get consistent distance control and predictable spin provided I'm not in some gnarly rough. 

[Jifmoli]

On 9/11/2022 at 12:46 PM, MtlJeff said:

 

40yd fliers are not real. I'm sorry but they are not real.

 

This thread is silly

 

Yes, lol, he probably 'bladed' it out there..😄

[Wayside]

4 hours ago, Red4282 said:

While i dont disagree with what you are saying, perhaps just look at the big picture of the test. Theres enough data in there to at least see a trend if there is one. The trend I see is there is no discernible difference in “forgiveness” between them. I use “forgiveness” in quotes because people seem to have different meaning for that. Ball speed retention? Consistency? Dispersion? By my definition, dispersion and predictability on all strikes is king when it comes to irons. After all the goal is getting it close to the hole as possible. I do think the results start to shift the lower the loft, under 35*.

The only thing I can honestly take from that test is that good golfers, even pros, are still very inconsistent. And we should all be using Honma 😀 
 

I mean, look at the dispersion for the T100s (85 yards sq) vs T100 (300 yards sq)! Is there that much difference between them? Do all the T100 guys on Tour use a club which has a dispersion area hugely worse than the T100s which they could easily use instead? 

 

3 hours ago, MelloYello said:

To the robot testing stuff...my point a page back was that it's not a safe assumption to isolate just the club as the only variable in a golf shot and to say one club is superior because of improved outcomes with robots.

 

Humans will perceive differences in design features like MOI, sole width, CG, etc. and they will react to those differences. They will either feel they can lean into their swing tendencies because a given design feature meshes well with their tendencies or they'll feel they have to fight the design features.

 

While robot testing might indicate correlations between design features and outcomes, it assumes humans are robots who'll swing 2 distinctly different clubs in exactly the same way. Nobody thinks that actually the case in reality with humans. 

 

Like anyone else, I will very quickly start changing my swing to account for a new club being different to what I'm comfortable with. After all, there's a reason fitters won't have someone hit 50 balls with a new club. Players aren't robots. People naturally begin to modify their swings to what they have in their hands for better or worse.

I understand the point that you’re making, but I guess this is the reason some folk use science and data and others go with their gut. That’s all fine. I have no disagreements with that at all.
 

But if you think people can feel differences in, say, MOI, and compensate for that with their swing to somehow make it better, you’re maybe a little mistaken. MOI doesn’t change. A golfer with a better sense of feel could arguably get a better result out of a specific club than another golfer with a poorer sense of feel, but the club’s performance will remain constant. 
 

‘Feel’ is hard to quantify. I’ve been at an event where a major OEM (the one that most people would associate with feel) took a bunch of well-regarded fitters and club pros to a range and taped over the clubs, used unmarked shafts, and made us hit balls with ear plugs in to prove how peoples perceptions of ‘feel’ affected their results. I can readily admit they made us all look foolish. 
 

I’m enjoying the good natured debate though chaps, thanks 👍🏻 

Edited September 16, 2022 by Wayside

[SheriffBooth]

43 minutes ago, MtlJeff said:

is it terrible that i saw @SheriffBooth booth posted in the thread and came here wanting to see a car crash?

 

I was like, what did someone say....How BAD has it gotten in there??????

 

But alas, a normal post.

 

See you fools in 3 more days!

 

Jeff Out

 

Flyers are real , hot spots are not y'all peace!

[Red4282]

37 minutes ago, Wayside said:

The only thing I can honestly take from that test is that good golfers, even pros, are still very inconsistent. And we should all be using Honma 😀 
 

I mean, look at the dispersion for the T100s (85 yards sq) vs T100 (300 yards sq)! Is there that much difference between them? Do all the T100 guys on Tour use a club which has a dispersion area hugely worse than the T100s which they could easily use instead? 

 

I understand the point that you’re making, but I guess this is the reason some folk use science and data and others go with their gut. That’s all fine. I have no disagreements with that at all.
 

But if you think people can feel differences in, say, MOI, and compensate for that with their swing to somehow make it better, you’re maybe a little mistaken. MOI doesn’t change. A golfer with a better sense of feel could arguably get a better result out of a specific club than another golfer with a poorer sense of feel, but the club’s performance will remain constant. 
 

‘Feel’ is hard to quantify. I’ve been at an event where a major OEM (the one that most people would associate with feel) took a bunch of well-regarded fitters and club pros to a range and taped over the clubs, used unmarked shafts, and made us hit balls with ear plugs in to prove how peoples perceptions of ‘feel’ affected their results. I can readily admit they made us all look foolish. 
 

I’m enjoying the good natured debate though chaps, thanks 👍🏻 

Yea and thats why without seeing the actual full data, that test should be taken with a grain of salt. The reality is, with all this debate, the truth is somewhere in the middle. Everyone is so set on “i am right, because this is my experience”, they fully ignore anything that might go against that even if its legit. 

[DixieD]

3 hours ago, me05501 said:

Gotta love it when someone comes into a 9 page thread and posts "I'm not going to read any of the earlier posts, but you should read what I have to say on this subject." That's peak interwebz right there. 

Most of this site, and frankly the rest of social media is just people talking to themselves.

Bit like the clubhouse after a round where everybody just wants to take you through their round shot by shot with no interest in listening to anybody else's shot by shot account.

[me05501]

33 minutes ago, DixieD said:

Most of this site, and frankly the rest of social media is just people talking to themselves.

Bit like the clubhouse after a round where everybody just wants to take you through their round shot by shot with no interest in listening to anybody else's shot by shot account.

That’s a perfect example. 

[Wayside]

30 minutes ago, DixieD said:

Most of this site, and frankly the rest of social media is just people talking to themselves.

Bit like the clubhouse after a round where everybody just wants to take you through their round shot by shot with no interest in listening to anybody else's shot by shot account.

Try being the guy in the shop. I still have PTSD. 
 

“If I put my thumb a bit to the right, every drive goes straight. My irons were like lasers to the pin. I was stiffing my wedges all day. Putter was a cheat code. Shot 102”

[DixieD]

5 minutes ago, me05501 said:

That’s a perfect example. 

I was replying to someone's post I had read, therefore not really, but good one edge lord.

[me05501]

4 minutes ago, DixieD said:

I was replying to someone's post I had read, therefore not really, but good one edge lord.

I meant you used a great example to make the point. 

I used to work with a guy who subjected everyone in the office to a blow-by-blow recount of his Sunday round every Monday morning. He wouldn’t gather us together to all hear it at once either. He would repeat it over and over again. He used his old boney fingers to show how many strokes over or under par he was after each hole. 
 

It was traumatic. 

Edited September 16, 2022 by me05501