Will Ping make One Length Irons?

[grantc79]

27 minutes ago, bluedot said:

Correct.

 

I don’t dispute it when advocates of SL clubs say they are practicing with every club when they practice with ANY club.  I have a set of Edel SL’s, and I get the advantage.  For players who don’t get to practice very much, or who struggle with longer clubs, or struggle to repeat the same swing thru the bag, I see the potential benefits.

 

But it’s a VERY different contention to claim that SL is superior to VL for 99% of golfers, or that they’d hit a SL 4i 15 yds farther.  While I do change ball position slightly from club to club, I’m trying to make the same swing on EVERY full shot with EVERY club in my bag; I do not have a diver swing or a 7 iron swing or a lob wedge swing.  My setup posture, my intended shoulder and hip turn, the intended internal rotation of my lead knee and external rotation of my trail shoulder and the finish position are exactly the same from club to club throughout the bag.  
 

When SL advocates take the advantages of SL clubs and then claim that those advantages make SL inherently better than VL clubs for the majority of golfers (much less the vast majority!) that’s where the discussion goes off the rails.  I’ve played enough with SL clubs to know that they aren’t for me, and the idea that I’m just “used to” VL clubs doesn’t fly, just like it doesn’t explain why golf clubs evolved in variable lengths to begin with.

 

Look, I think everyone is different but my 11 year old (playing for about a year and a half consistently) just made the switch to junior one length clubs and saw dramatic improvement just about instantly.

 

I think a young kid is a pretty good case study due to lack of access to biases such as Golfwrx. 

 

His longer clubs specifically hybrids were near impossible for him to hit solid, now he's got a one length hybrid that just feels natural to him. He doesn't hit it quite as high or as far but he does make solid contact and hits it where he wants it to go dramatically more often. He probably lost 10 yards or so on perfect strikes and for sure some height but it was more than worth it. 

 

Believe it or not his wedge game also got a lot better. 

 

Do I think anyone can learn in either way? Yes.

Do I think its easier to learn with less variables? Yes.

Do I think many might learn one way and then switch to another? Absolutely.

Do I think if given the option many beginners would try SL first? 100%, it just makes sense

Would a lot of them stay that way forever? Likely yes.

 

I think what would stop most people from trying it is pressure from a coach, the internet, or lack of sets to experiment with. 

 

I think many (like me) would get good enough to play both ways and decide the consistency is better than hitting long irons a little higher. 

 

I'm not going to force him to do anything, didn't force him to switch wont stop him from switching back. But so far its been a dramatic improvement because ball position and different feels are gone. 

 

He just started seeing James Leitz one of the top 50 in America who has pictures of him with Tiger Woods all over the wall, Leitz didn't have an issue with it. 

 

Not sure who we are to overrule them. 

 

 

IMG_1235 (1).mov

Edited January 21 by grantc79

[Drrussell]

4 hours ago, Tree Levino said:

This is a brutally misinformed post. First off, there is no such data supporting your assertions regarding average distances, and further, the idea that inherently swinging harder at the longer clubs is a horrible way to get better gapping. By your logic, you should play a 37” driver and just swing harder. 
 

A good player has similar tempo and hand speed through the bag and the club length automatically assists with correct speed variances to gap your clubs. 
 

Please share your data that shows 1/10 shots going the correct distance with VL and OL adding 15 yards on average due to consistency. Would love to see it. 

I used Arccos data across 5, 20 something’s  and 5 “more senior golfers” and myself. Originally, it had nothing to do with single length, it was just an experiment using Arccos, at first.. We thought it would be fun to compare our shot data and try to get better. We were all playing variable length to start. When I saw the data from arccos for my game, I decided to try single length. The inconsistency on the long-irons was killing me. It turned out, it was killing most of the guys, so they all agreed to do a little experiment specifically with the 4i.

 

Anyway, the OL test was an afterthought because of the variability and much lower average distance when compared to what the club “could” go. For every stripe show 4i, there were more that were below average to flat out disastrous. 

 

Do you have access to DeWiz or HackMotion? I don’t care if you are playing single length or variable length. Your hand speed and club speed differ drastically throughout a round of golf. I know that my club speed will vary from about 80mph to 92mph for all reasonable distance shots…depending on the shot I am hitting. That club head speed variation isn’t happening because of the shaft since my clubs are all the same length, it happens because I am hitting different shots. Hand speed will vary similar to club head speed throughout a round. If I am hitting a 100y PW that hand speed might be 14 mph. If I am hitting it 160 it will be closer to 18 mph. If you use DeWiz, you can see your own shot data over the course of a round and so can anyone reading this thread. Same applies for 4i. If I am only trying to fly it 180y and let it run out, hand speed will be around 16-17mph. If I am flying it 220, it’s going to be in the 18-19 mph range.

 

Golf isn’t played on a range. Rarely in a round of golf do you have your “perfect” yardage for any club. As a result, the entire round of golf has slight changes to hand speed, length of backswing, etc. For good players, tempo does remain consistent, but speed does not. Speed is moderated for every club in the bag based on distance, height of shot, etc. For me personally, that is true of every club other than driver. For Driver, I am pretty much always the same. However, I have seen the data on some of my plus handicap buddies and they even very hand speed, club speed on driver depending on the desired shot. 

 

As far as your swing being the same on every club. Geometry proves this is not true. You should not have the exact same setup, swing plane, posture when the lever changes sizes as does the lie angle for each club. The math doesn’t work out. Maybe you do, but if you do, then you are swinging off plane, both above and below plane for every club in your bag, except one. You may “feel” like they are all the same. But again, get on DeWiz which will show what you are actually doing. My bet is you are changing the swing plane as the club head gets further away from you.  

 

You are correct that my max hand speed will be max for every club. There are limits to how fast your body can move. That’s true. That’s why the math doesn’t work out to make every club pitching wedge length. The math just doesn’t work out to get all the way through a bag. There is a balancing act for which length lever gives each golfer enough speed to get appropriate gapping throughout irons before employing other tech, like a hybrid. That’s also what I saw with the data with the testing I did. For some of the guys, while OL 4i was better than VL 4i, a OL hybrid was better than both. 

 

Every person reading this thread knows exactly what it’s like to be between clubs. You can hit a hard 8 or a soft 7. Every person reading this thread knows exactly what it is to say, “It’s 150 yards, I have to take a little off X club.” In a round of golf, the golfer is constantly making that adjustment for how much speed to give it. For myself, I use the clock system for how long my backswing gets. That’s how I control hand speed and club speed. I prefer to play at the 87-88mph 10 o’clock swing throughout the bag. It’s no a problem at all, however, to go to 11 o’clock and add speed without any extra effort or without messing with my tempo. That same is true for 9 o’clock, or 8 o’clock shots. 

 

If you have DeWiz, you can track all of your shots in a round and will see exactly what I am saying. Maybe it’s true for you, maybe it’s not.  

Edited January 21 by Drrussell

[TiScape]

Without reading thru the multiple pages I’m gonna guess it has gone from ‘will Ping release one length irons’ to the merits/disadvantages of one length irons and other technological mid numbing jargon.

 

Back to the original question. I’d say a definitive, highly unlikely. A lot of OEMs won’t produce/release much LH stuff bcs of dollars and sense. I’m sure there is even less demand for one length irons than LH gear. 

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

4 hours ago, bluedot said:

Correct.

 

I don’t dispute it when advocates of SL clubs say they are practicing with every club when they practice with ANY club.  I have a set of Edel SL’s, and I get the advantage.  For players who don’t get to practice very much, or who struggle with longer clubs, or struggle to repeat the same swing thru the bag, I see the potential benefits.

 

But it’s a VERY different contention to claim that SL is superior to VL for 99% of golfers, or that they’d hit a SL 4i 15 yds farther.  While I do change ball position slightly from club to club, I’m trying to make the same swing on EVERY full shot with EVERY club in my bag; I do not have a diver swing or a 7 iron swing or a lob wedge swing.  My setup posture, my intended shoulder and hip turn, the intended internal rotation of my lead knee and external rotation of my trail shoulder and the finish position are exactly the same from club to club throughout the bag.  
 

When SL advocates take the advantages of SL clubs and then claim that those advantages make SL inherently better than VL clubs for the majority of golfers (much less the vast majority!) that’s where the discussion goes off the rails.  I’ve played enough with SL clubs to know that they aren’t for me, and the idea that I’m just “used to” VL clubs doesn’t fly, just like it doesn’t explain why golf clubs evolved in variable lengths to begin with.

 

Admittedly the post you're referring to is light on evidence. 

 

That said, I do think that for a lot of mid-high handicappers, the benefits of SL would outweigh the drawbacks. IMHO the problem in that category is FAR more from inconsistent / poor quality strikes, and the area where SL helps most is players that may not get enough practice, may not be as naturally consistent, etc. 

 

I can say I'm an example. I'm an outlier in that I'm a giant, so my previous VL set was +1.5" with a 36.5" sand wedge. Going up from there (this was 2001 so traditional lofts and no GW) with standard 0.5" gapping took me to a 3i that was 40.5". Even being tall, a 40.5" iron is a HELL of a hard thing to swing when you don't get a lot of practice time or play often enough. When I hit the center and hit it straight, it was wonderful and long. But it was so rare that I was afraid to swing it. And I don't think there's a corresponding downside on the "short irons" being longer--so many golfer typically practice with 7i/8i that the scoring clubs being longer doesn't make them appreciably harder to hit. It seems there's a point of diminishing returns on shortening clubs below a certain level. 

 

I came back to the game in 2020 and I'm trying to actually devote time to getting better. I went SL partly due to believing that the concept works, but also due to my height. Anything shorter than about 36.5" feels like a junior club to me. Knowing that VL with massively extended short irons and then 0.5" gapping does NOT work for me, and not wanting to mess with some sort of weird custom build based around 0.25" or 0.375" gapping when I have bigger fish to fry (practice and swing improvement), SL just made sense. 

 

And it's worked. I have decent gapping between clubs, albeit giving up a little distance at the long end. But it's not like I can't launch those clubs--they launch just fine. And the important thing is that I feel MUCH more confident standing over the ball with my 4h or 5i than I would with my equivalent clubs in my old set (3i/4i, respectively). 

 

So the pros play SL? Do many + or scratch golfers? No. But the pros and those golfers are spending a LOT more time practicing. They don't need the advantages of SL (easier to consistently find the middle of the clubface). And one of the downsides of SL is that in blades/CBs, it's hard to work around some of the inherent CG and launch deficiencies of an SL build, as companies like Cobra or Wishon have done. Since a lot of those players play blades/CBs, they might be giving up some of the things they value.  

 

Which leads to this: I think there are a lot of people that reflexively dismiss SL because pros (outside of BDC) don't play them. But should we always base our decisions on what the pros play?

 

Just as we say most average amateur golfers probably aren't good enough to play blades/CBs, moving to a player's distance or even GI/SGI iron gives club designers much more flexibility to work around the deficiencies of SL, opening up the advantages of SL for the players who would benefit the most. 

[m d g]

They already do.

 

One is 36.75"

 

One is 36.25"

 

One is...

[Strugglingpro]

I'm going to share my feedback on SL clubs when I spoke with Barney Adams about it because this topic seems to be a very heated topic that I have zero dog in the fight. I have played in a few qualifiers with both ways of playing. Yes, I think it's a lot different playing with single length irons and wedges and big grips, than conventional clubs and grips that are designed to help you control trajectory and ultimately trajectory is one large component that determines distance. 

Barney Adams said," horses for courses," applies to both the single length theory and then he referred to Bryson winning the US Open with the single length setup and the distance he was getting off the tee. He said that people don't realize that Bryson has developed a swing that inherently makes him straighter with the driver. When he added distance, it didn't affect his accuracy. If you want to optimize SL clubs, I personally believe that you have to swing like Bryson. I am sure that is not going to be a popular statement, but that's what I learned from my 4 and a half year experiment ( necessary because my back was messed up) with single length. That's the one thing that I can say. Swinging with upright lie angles and big grips and the clubs that allowed me to stand taller, kept my back from killing me after a round of golf. So, I guess that's one positive. If you can find more positives than using variable length clubs, then you have done something no one else has been able to do. Even Bryson admits that he had to make major adjustments to his chipping and pitching in order to use the bounce correctly. One of those adjustments was to hold his hands considerably lower and he changed the ball position... That makes the argument for SL null and void in my opinion. But if you have more fun playing with single length irons and wedges, by all means, do it. That's why we play this game - no matter what level.

[grantc79]

1 hour ago, Strugglingpro said:

I'm going to share my feedback on SL clubs when I spoke with Barney Adams about it because this topic seems to be a very heated topic that I have zero dog in the fight. I have played in a few qualifiers with both ways of playing. Yes, I think it's a lot different playing with single length irons and wedges and big grips, than conventional clubs and grips that are designed to help you control trajectory and ultimately trajectory is one large component that determines distance. 

Barney Adams said," horses for courses," applies to both the single length theory and then he referred to Bryson winning the US Open with the single length setup and the distance he was getting off the tee. He said that people don't realize that Bryson has developed a swing that inherently makes him straighter with the driver. When he added distance, it didn't affect his accuracy. If you want to optimize SL clubs, I personally believe that you have to swing like Bryson. I am sure that is not going to be a popular statement, but that's what I learned from my 4 and a half year experiment ( necessary because my back was messed up) with single length. That's the one thing that I can say. Swinging with upright lie angles and big grips and the clubs that allowed me to stand taller, kept my back from killing me after a round of golf. So, I guess that's one positive. If you can find more positives than using variable length clubs, then you have done something no one else has been able to do. Even Bryson admits that he had to make major adjustments to his chipping and pitching in order to use the bounce correctly. One of those adjustments was to hold his hands considerably lower and he changed the ball position... That makes the argument for SL null and void in my opinion. But if you have more fun playing with single length irons and wedges, by all means, do it. That's why we play this game - no matter what level.

respectfully, it’s basically just hitting a seven iron for everything

 

if you can ship with a seven iron and hit pitch shots with a seven iron, that’s all it is

 

there’s no need to overthink it and get crazy with it. It’s just simple.

 

I think some people like myself will find Short game easier with the longer clubs, and some people will find it a lot harder. Just depends on the person.

 

Bryson Swing is nowhere near what it used to be when he came in

 

He is no longer playing 10° upright and staying completely stacked over the ball now he is moving around a lot more in generating a lot more speed

 

 

Edited January 21 by grantc79

[Rich Douglas]

On 1/13/2024 at 10:41 AM, Tree Levino said:

Wedges are super easy to hit as is. Genuinely glad you enjoy your OL irons. Scientifically, they make very little sense but do work for some. As above, I make the same swing with slight setup changes on all clubs to determine trajectory and shape. 
 

If people are swinging a 4i the same speed as their 6i they need lessons and theoretical understanding of how to swing a club not an equipment bandaid. 

I've been doing this for 7 years. I am WAY more accurate with my wedges (PW, GW, and SW) than I was with traditional wedges. Way more. It's from grooving one iron swing. In fact, my traditional LW, although necessary, feels strange to hit. (Necessary because the SW is too flat (because of its length) to open up the face and choke down. You get to do one or the other. Thus, high lobs and most sand shots are better accomplished with a traditional LW.)

[Rich Douglas]

4 hours ago, grantc79 said:

respectfully, it’s basically just hitting a seven iron for everything

 

if you can ship with a seven iron and hit pitch shots with a seven iron, that’s all it is

 

there’s no need to overthink it and get crazy with it. It’s just simple.

 

I think some people like myself will find Short game easier with the longer clubs, and some people will find it a lot harder. Just depends on the person.

 

Bryson Swing is nowhere near what it used to be when he came in

 

He is no longer playing 10° upright and staying completely stacked over the ball now he is moving around a lot more in generating a lot more speed

 

 

Or, in my case, an 8-iron.

 

You can choke down on chips, which is what I did with traditional irons anyway.

 

Bryson's one-plane, upright swing and his use of single-length irons are separate concepts. You don't have to do one to have the other.

[Rich Douglas]

On 1/20/2024 at 11:32 AM, Drrussell said:

I have found that you don’t swing them at the same speed.

I do. I've been hitting single-length irons for 7 years, and I swing every club in the back (4-iron through SW) exactly the same. 

 

In the beginning, this wasn't the case. But the problem wasn't with the low-lofted irons and trying to hit them harder. Nope. The opposite was true for me: I was backing off the wedges. I didn't realize this at first, of course, and was really puzzled by their lack of distance. But once I realized I was backing off of them (subconsciously afraid of hitting them too far), I got aggressive with them and ended that. Now, ever iron in the bag feels the same and I put the same swing speed on all of them.

[Rich Douglas]

11 hours ago, bluedot said:

just like it doesn’t explain why golf clubs evolved in variable lengths to begin with.

But this does: When golf became a thing around the beginning of the 20th century, it was an elite sport. Golf clubs were made by hand by skilled craftsmen. They were expensive. And they were usually made to one length. (See Bobby Jones for a good example of that.) 

 

But as mass manufacturing got into the game, it became necessary to make irons at variable lengths to achieve the gapping needed. Changes in length made it a lot easier to fit mass-produced clubs for off-the-shelf buyers, where customer clubmakers were no longer able to achieve this through individualized fitting.

 

Are single-length clubs superior to variable-length clubs? I don't necessarily think so. And the revolution predicted has not occurred, with only one major OEM making them. I do know that there is a lot of misinformation floated around about single-length clubs, usually by people who haven't used them or have done so only briefly. Personally, I've been using them for 7 years (Wishon Sterling first, then the EQ1-NX after that) and I'll never go back to variable-length clubs. These made my iron game--particularly my wedges--way more reliable than ever. To what extent this has improved my game is hard to say since I'm now in my 60s and am battling other issues affecting my performance. But, again, I have zero desire to go back.

[Rich Douglas]

About 85% of distance with irons is generated from loft. The other 15% is from shaft length. Good single-length irons compensate for this by moving the CG and by changing COR through the set.

[Rich Douglas]

8 hours ago, TiScape said:

A lot of OEMs won’t produce/release much LH stuff bcs of dollars and sense. I’m sure there is even less demand for one length irons than LH gear.

This seems to be the case, since only one OEM has even tried to introduce them.

[Rich Douglas]

6 hours ago, Strugglingpro said:

If you want to optimize SL clubs, I personally believe that you have to swing like Bryson.

There is zero reason to believe this. If the clubs are manufactured properly and professionally fitted, you can maintain effective distances and gapping using your regular swing, whether it is a one- or two-plane swing. I've been putting the same 8-iron two-plane swing on every iron shot for 7 years. 

 

I've strived to improve all aspects of my game. But one thing that is gone is striving for consistency among the irons.

[bluedot]

9 hours ago, Rich Douglas said:

But this does: When golf became a thing around the beginning of the 20th century, it was an elite sport. Golf clubs were made by hand by skilled craftsmen. They were expensive. And they were usually made to one length. (See Bobby Jones for a good example of that.) 

 

But as mass manufacturing got into the game, it became necessary to make irons at variable lengths to achieve the gapping needed. Changes in length made it a lot easier to fit mass-produced clubs for off-the-shelf buyers, where customer clubmakers were no longer able to achieve this through individualized fitting.

 

Are single-length clubs superior to variable-length clubs? I don't necessarily think so. And the revolution predicted has not occurred, with only one major OEM making them. I do know that there is a lot of misinformation floated around about single-length clubs, usually by people who haven't used them or have done so only briefly. Personally, I've been using them for 7 years (Wishon Sterling first, then the EQ1-NX after that) and I'll never go back to variable-length clubs. These made my iron game--particularly my wedges--way more reliable than ever. To what extent this has improved my game is hard to say since I'm now in my 60s and am battling other issues affecting my performance. But, again, I have zero desire to go back.

I’ll quibble with this just a bit.

 

I’ve never read, nor could I find in an admittedly brief search, the history that you give for the development of variable lengths in golf clubs.  Your narrative of the evolution of iron length might be tru, but I can’t find it.  Maybe handmade clubs were all the same length, but I don’t know that, and sets certainly don’t look to be the same length in pictures.  Which proves zero, I realize.

 

Also, I don’t think it’s entirely correct to say that Jones used SL irons.  My understanding is that he used a set in which 2 or 3 irons were grouped in single lengths.  Jones was, I think, still using handmade clubs, but I think it’s correct to say that most clubs used in America by the 1930’s were mass produced.  What I don’t know is the extent to which Jones was either an outlier or the norm among elite players of his day, either in terms of SL vs VL, or handmade vs mass produced, just like I don’t know that handmade clubs were SL.

 

 

[grantc79]

12 hours ago, Rich Douglas said:

I do. I've been hitting single-length irons for 7 years, and I swing every club in the back (4-iron through SW) exactly the same. 

 

In the beginning, this wasn't the case. But the problem wasn't with the low-lofted irons and trying to hit them harder. Nope. The opposite was true for me: I was backing off the wedges. I didn't realize this at first, of course, and was really puzzled by their lack of distance. But once I realized I was backing off of them (subconsciously afraid of hitting them too far), I got aggressive with them and ended that. Now, ever iron in the bag feels the same and I put the same swing speed on all of them.

 

I'm still working on this. I tend to become very feel oriented with wedges which is kinda not the point of these clubs. 

I know I occasionally overswing long irons a touch but I also know I frequently under swing wedges. 

[Drrussell]

Bryson was one of the hottest players on the planet at the end of the year. If he has a big year and wins a major then it’s all together possible that Ping will decide to make single length irons. If he doesn’t win a major, I suspect it’s unlikely. 

 

I do expect that he’s going to partner more with Krank this year to release some special equipment. I also think it’s possible that someone like LA Golf expands. They already have the shafts he’s playing and so it could be easy for them to create single length irons. 

Edited January 22 by Drrussell

[Rich Douglas]

7 hours ago, bluedot said:

I’ll quibble with this just a bit.

 

I’ve never read, nor could I find in an admittedly brief search, the history that you give for the development of variable lengths in golf clubs.  Your narrative of the evolution of iron length might be tru, but I can’t find it.  Maybe handmade clubs were all the same length, but I don’t know that, and sets certainly don’t look to be the same length in pictures.  Which proves zero, I realize.

 

Also, I don’t think it’s entirely correct to say that Jones used SL irons.  My understanding is that he used a set in which 2 or 3 irons were grouped in single lengths.  Jones was, I think, still using handmade clubs, but I think it’s correct to say that most clubs used in America by the 1930’s were mass produced.  What I don’t know is the extent to which Jones was either an outlier or the norm among elite players of his day, either in terms of SL vs VL, or handmade vs mass produced, just like I don’t know that handmade clubs were SL.

 

 

The sources for Jones using single-length clubs in his 1930 grand slam are replete. Are they accurate? Since we don't have first-hand observations, it's hard to say. But a lot of people have noted this as fact.

 

But I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong. The history of this is hazy and multiple interpretations of the little direct evidence available are common.

[ChaosTheory]

Every thread about SL irons ends up as a debate thread.  For some reason, the naysayers can’t just sit on their hands.

 

 I suppose that’s okay though. 🙂  It’s just that it’s every_time.

[jarediogolf]

On 3/17/2023 at 12:57 PM, dz14 said:

I reached out to Ping out of curiosity last weekend to see if they can build a single length set similar to Bryson's and they said it can be done 😀 Here's what they said: 

 

Thanks for your email!

 

If you have any custom specifications you’d like for a set of irons, you are always able to include those modifications when ordering through an authorized Ping retailer. In this case, if you would like a set of irons all at one length, you can definitely do so as long as you include the exact playable length you want to achieve. With that being said, our fitters and data analysts will always recommend using progressive lengths in your irons. That is what we have always found to give the best performance for the majority of golfers. 

 

I hope this helps, but if you do have any further questions don’t hesitate to give us a shout!

 

Best regards,

 

Braden Taylor 
Direct: 905-829-8004 ext. 3230
Fax: 905-829-1588
Email: [email protected]

 

 

I’m quoting what I think was the most useful response in this thread. Thank you @dz14 It’s cool to see that Ping can fulfill VERY custom orders. 
I personally do not want to see another Single Length vs Traditional length debate. 

 

Would I ever go full OL? Probably not. But I do like the idea of bunching clubs. 

 

I put a 22* Sim DHY in play and have an 25* on the way and I’m thinking of making both 6 iron length. 
I have specialty wedges from 43*-58* that are essentially the same length. 

I would definitely consider selling my iron set and filling the gap with a 7, 8, 9 iron set of G430 irons at 8 iron length if Ping could match head weight. 

[Drrussell]

14 minutes ago, jarediogolf said:

I’m quoting what I think was the most useful response in this thread. Thank you @dz14 It’s cool to see that Ping can fulfill VERY custom orders. 
I personally do not want to see another Single Length vs Traditional length debate. 

 

Would I ever go full OL? Probably not. But I do like the idea of bunching clubs. 

 

I put a 22* Sim DHY in play and have an 25* on the way and I’m thinking of making both 6 iron length. 
I have specialty wedges from 43*-58* that are essentially the same length. 

I would definitely consider selling my iron set and filling the gap with a 7, 8, 9 iron set of G430 irons at 8 iron length if Ping could match head weight. 

I might have done that if I would have known it was an option. 🙂 I ended up building a custom set of Edel SMS Pro irons as single length. I had a pretty similar response from Edel when I first started the project. 

[bluedot]

13 hours ago, Snowman9000 said:

Every thread about SL irons ends up as a debate thread.  For some reason, the naysayers can’t just sit on their hands.

 

 I suppose that’s okay though. 🙂  It’s just that it’s every_time.

It’s a two-way street.  
 

Just in the last few posts, it was claimed that Arrcos data shows that 99% of golfers would hit a SL 4 iron an average of 15 yards farther, and that the vast majority of golfers in the world would benefit from SL clubs.  There is no such Arrcos data, and the second statement is just an opinion, and a pretty radical one at that.  

 

I’ve tried SL, and the set of Edels I bought are in the shed as a spare set.  That they did NOT work for me is just me; I’ve NEVER said that SL isn’t a valid way to play golf, or that there aren’t people that have done it successfully.  At 71, I’m still playing all the competitive golf I can (28 tournaments in 2023) and I’d use ANY equipment that would help me shoot better scores, including SL irons.  I work with a teaching pro and a TPI-type training facility, have a Flightscope Mevo+, video myself, and one and on.  EVERY club in my bag is fitted TO ME, and I’ll drop $600 on a new driver, or $350 on a new shaft without a second thought if the numbers show it’ll help.  I did an iron fitting in September for the express purpose of figuring out if a “blended” set of irons (T200, T150, and T350) would help me (they didn’t).  So I’m not just guessing when I say that SL did not help ME.  And it isn’t just irons; I made a set of SL hybrids a few years ago with Ping G30s b/c Ping doesn’t tip their stock shafts and I could get aftermarket weights to make the 3, 4, and 5 hybrids EXACTLY identical.  I didn’t see any benefits from that, either; I didn’t hit the 3 far enough or high enough.  
 

It’s one thing for someone who plays SL irons to say, “Hey, this works for me; I’ve benefited from one ball position, setup, etc.”   But it’s another thing entirely to claim that it’s a better way for “the vast majority” of golfers in the world to play your best golf.
 

This thread started with the question of whether or not Ping would make SL irons, so it was an invitation to debate at the outset.  But the debates aren’t just one-sided rants by “naysayers”, though I agree with you that there is plenty of that.  The logical fallacy of going from the instance to the generalization is 100% in play by the advocates of SL as well.

[ChaosTheory]

30 minutes ago, bluedot said:

It’s a two-way street.  
 

Just in the last few posts, it was claimed that Arrcos data shows that 99% of golfers would hit a SL 4 iron an average of 15 yards farther, and that the vast majority of golfers in the world would benefit from SL clubs.  There is no such Arrcos data, and the second statement is just an opinion, and a pretty radical one at that.  

 

I’ve tried SL, and the set of Edels I bought are in the shed as a spare set.  That they did NOT work for me is just me; I’ve NEVER said that SL isn’t a valid way to play golf, or that there aren’t people that have done it successfully.  At 71, I’m still playing all the competitive golf I can (28 tournaments in 2023) and I’d use ANY equipment that would help me shoot better scores, including SL irons.  I work with a teaching pro and a TPI-type training facility, have a Flightscope Mevo+, video myself, and one and on.  EVERY club in my bag is fitted TO ME, and I’ll drop $600 on a new driver, or $350 on a new shaft without a second thought if the numbers show it’ll help.  I did an iron fitting in September for the express purpose of figuring out if a “blended” set of irons (T200, T150, and T350) would help me (they didn’t).  So I’m not just guessing when I say that SL did not help ME.  And it isn’t just irons; I made a set of SL hybrids a few years ago with Ping G30s b/c Ping doesn’t tip their stock shafts and I could get aftermarket weights to make the 3, 4, and 5 hybrids EXACTLY identical.  I didn’t see any benefits from that, either; I didn’t hit the 3 far enough or high enough.  
 

It’s one thing for someone who plays SL irons to say, “Hey, this works for me; I’ve benefited from one ball position, setup, etc.”   But it’s another thing entirely to claim that it’s a better way for “the vast majority” of golfers in the world to play your best golf.
 

This thread started with the question of whether or not Ping would make SL irons, so it was an invitation to debate at the outset.  But the debates aren’t just one-sided rants by “naysayers”, though I agree with you that there is plenty of that.  The logical fallacy of going from the instance to the generalization is 100% in play by the advocates of SL as well.

 

 

My frustration is simply that it is not possible to discuss SL irons here, in any fashion, without it turning into a debate.  I'll grant that this particular thread is not the best one to use as an example of my gripe.  But any time anyone wants to talk about SL, the anti-SL people chime in.  It's annoying.  If I want to discuss the best ways to do the shafts for an SL set,  or what to do with the wedges, I don't want to hear from someone who thinks SL is stupid.

[Rich Douglas]

On 1/23/2024 at 8:01 AM, ChaosTheory said:

 

My frustration is simply that it is not possible to discuss SL irons here, in any fashion, without it turning into a debate.

The debating originates and is sustained by one side of the question. The other really doesn't want to change anyone's minds but, rather, to correct certain misinformation about the use of single-length irons.

[bluedot]

15 hours ago, Rich Douglas said:

The debating originates and is sustained by one side of the question. The other really doesn't want to change anyone's minds but, rather, to correct certain misinformation about the use of single-length irons.

I think that is  true of you, but not really of all the SL advocates.  I agree with you that dismissing SL because of a lack of presence on Tour, or because of sales figures, or whatever, isn’t helpful.  But like every coin, there are two sides to these debates.

 

It is one thing to say that with SLs you are trying to use the same setup and swing with every club, and that it simplifies practice.  It is quite another thing, though, to say that 99% of all golfers would make better contact and on average hit a SL 4i 15 yds farther, or to say that there is Arrcos data to “prove” that.  Those are contentions that have been made on this thread, and they are absurd on the face of it.  
 

I think there is also an implied criticism of VL in the discussion of one setup and one swing, etc.  While I understand the value of SL to some players, it is a big leap to go from there to the conclusion that it is a superior way to play and practice.  When I practice, especially the short game, I try to hit shots from every lie and stance I’m likely to face when I play.  Moving the ball up or back, gripping down, etc, are of value and help me play better golf, and FOR ME those shots are easier to play with VL clubs.  (Please remember that I have trie SL and still have my set of Edels).  If I had less time, or inclination, or locations to practice specialized shots, it might be different, and SL might be more attractive to me, but that’s another issue.
 

 

Edited February 1 by bluedot

[grantc79]

10 minutes ago, bluedot said:

I think there is also an implied criticism of VL in the discussion of one setup and one swing, etc. 

 

I think there in lies the problem. 

 

If SL users say this has less variables and is a simpler way to do things, but it might not be for everyone because it definitely takes some getting used to. Which is exactly what I said by the way. 

Is that an implied criticism? If you have to read between the lines and search around to find criticism are you really being criticized?

 

Maybe the VL crowd are snowflakes 😁

 

Edited February 1 by grantc79

[Rich Douglas]

On 2/1/2024 at 6:27 AM, bluedot said:

I think that is  true of you, but not really of all the SL advocates.  I agree with you that dismissing SL because of a lack of presence on Tour, or because of sales figures, or whatever, isn’t helpful.  But like every coin, there are two sides to these debates.

 

It is one thing to say that with SLs you are trying to use the same setup and swing with every club, and that it simplifies practice.  It is quite another thing, though, to say that 99% of all golfers would make better contact and on average hit a SL 4i 15 yds farther, or to say that there is Arrcos data to “prove” that.  Those are contentions that have been made on this thread, and they are absurd on the face of it.  
 

I think there is also an implied criticism of VL in the discussion of one setup and one swing, etc.  While I understand the value of SL to some players, it is a big leap to go from there to the conclusion that it is a superior way to play and practice.  When I practice, especially the short game, I try to hit shots from every lie and stance I’m likely to face when I play.  Moving the ball up or back, gripping down, etc, are of value and help me play better golf, and FOR ME those shots are easier to play with VL clubs.  (Please remember that I have trie SL and still have my set of Edels).  If I had less time, or inclination, or locations to practice specialized shots, it might be different, and SL might be more attractive to me, but that’s another issue.
 

 

I'm not sure why you posted all of that as a response to my post. I didn't say any of it.

 

I do know that many posters who have not played these irons post a lot of untrue--and even nonsensical--stuff about single-length irons. In my opinion, the argument is pretty imbalanced.

[Rich Douglas]

On 2/1/2024 at 6:37 AM, grantc79 said:

If SL users say this has less variables and is a simpler way to do things, but it might not be for everyone because it definitely takes some getting used to. Which is exactly what I said by the way.

This has been the take I've seen the most. I seldom see single-length players argue that variable-length irons are inferior, or even that single-length irons are superior.

 

If those were universally (or even largely) true across the board, you'd see a huge migration at all levels. And OEMs--always trying to convince players that the latest is the greatest--would be all over it. But they're not, and no mass migration is occurring. 

 

And I don't blame this merely on inertia. Yes, there is a lot of resistance from people who are put off by the concept and simply won't do what it takes to switch. But that doesn't describe it all.

 

I was in this game when the first steel-headed drivers came on the scene. There was a huge resistance to them. Then the Big Bertha came out and the game changed overnight. Persimmon and laminates disappeared, replaced by metal woods forever. Why? Why did players make such a switch despite the inertia resisting change? Because the advantage was overwhelming. Same with graphite shafts and solid-core balls. Players switched because the advantages were totally obvious.

 

That's not the case with single-length irons. Are there people who would benefit from them and yet never try them? Sure. But if the industry as a whole moved in that direction, even they would get on board. But there's simply not that universal compelling case that makes the "old" way obsolete. 

 

Blade putters, blade irons, balata balls, steel driver shafts, wooden woods. They're gone (or nearly so for the blades). But variable-length irons are a different story and offer a different value proposition. They're staying.

 

I love playing single-length irons. I've done so for 8 years. I'll never go back. I play Wishon EQ-NX now. And if a major OEM could make a single-length set with a distinct advantage over them, I'd consider those. But that isn't happening, and I don't think it will. 

[grantc79]

3 hours ago, Rich Douglas said:

This has been the take I've seen the most. I seldom see single-length players argue that variable-length irons are inferior, or even that single-length irons are superior.

 

If those were universally (or even largely) true across the board, you'd see a huge migration at all levels. And OEMs--always trying to convince players that the latest is the greatest--would be all over it. But they're not, and no mass migration is occurring. 

 

And I don't blame this merely on inertia. Yes, there is a lot of resistance from people who are put off by the concept and simply won't do what it takes to switch. But that doesn't describe it all.

 

I was in this game when the first steel-headed drivers came on the scene. There was a huge resistance to them. Then the Big Bertha came out and the game changed overnight. Persimmon and laminates disappeared, replaced by metal woods forever. Why? Why did players make such a switch despite the inertia resisting change? Because the advantage was overwhelming. Same with graphite shafts and solid-core balls. Players switched because the advantages were totally obvious.

 

That's not the case with single-length irons. Are there people who would benefit from them and yet never try them? Sure. But if the industry as a whole moved in that direction, even they would get on board. But there's simply not that universal compelling case that makes the "old" way obsolete. 

 

Blade putters, blade irons, balata balls, steel driver shafts, wooden woods. They're gone (or nearly so for the blades). But variable-length irons are a different story and offer a different value proposition. They're staying.

 

I love playing single-length irons. I've done so for 8 years. I'll never go back. I play Wishon EQ-NX now. And if a major OEM could make a single-length set with a distinct advantage over them, I'd consider those. But that isn't happening, and I don't think it will. 

 

I guess here's my thing. 

To any outsider who doesn't know golf they can look at amazing changes in club design and ball design and see the immediate differences through science without even playing the game.

To any outsider who doesn't know golf if you explained single length clubs vs variable length clubs in a completely unbiased way I think most of them would reach for the single length clubs vs variable length. 

At the end of the day its the bias that keeps people from giving them a true shot. 

People copy what the pros do and the pros don't play them. Then again the pros can hit a sweet spot the size of a dime on a 4 iron which none of us can do and pros want to hit their long irons very high. The average golfer would be thrilled to hit the 4 iron remotely solid and the correct direction. 

 

 

[Strugglingpro]

1 hour ago, grantc79 said:

 

I guess here's my thing. 

To any outsider who doesn't know golf they can look at amazing changes in club design and ball design and see the immediate differences through science without even playing the game.

To any outsider who doesn't know golf if you explained single length clubs vs variable length clubs in a completely unbiased way I think most of them would reach for the single length clubs vs variable length. 

At the end of the day its the bias that keeps people from giving them a true shot. 

People copy what the pros do and the pros don't play them. Then again the pros can hit a sweet spot the size of a dime on a 4 iron which none of us can do and pros want to hit their long irons very high. The average golfer would be thrilled to hit the 4 iron remotely solid and the correct direction. 

 

 

Ok, I'm going to attempt to end this thread by saying that there's no substitute for,A. Practice,B. habits that are already developed, and 3.(lol.) talent. I can 100 percent say that single length irons have a flaw that is not even arguable. The long irons are not suited for good gapping, and the ball just does not have a high enough trajectory. They also have a flaw that is somewhat arguable, I guess. It's very difficult to flight the wedges. In fact in the wind it's difficult to flight the 9 iron and then on the other side, the 5 iron. I know I am going to get someone who says, just move the ball back in your stance. It would take me a while to explain why that is not the simple fix, especially when you have played with variable length irons and know how to use the length of the shaft, the clubface and weight of the clubhead, which are all optimized for variable length irons. Even Bryson, who I think is great for the game, and has been influential in my life and my chasing the dream of playing at the highest level, has realized that the weights of single length irons are NOT all supposed to be the same, and the lie angles have to be adjusted in order to get optimized speed and compression. In closing, I truly believe that there is a small percentage of people that would play their best golf with single length irons.