Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Most players I see and play with don’t realize that every time you hit a ball it should be a “shot”. The modern style and instruction is all based on swinging as hard as possible and then having to make a miracle shot to save the hole. A miracle shot with a lob wedge is just as hard or harder than a well placed shot with a 5 iron. From driver on down every swing should be made with a shot in mind. I use low offset blades because they allow the most shot making options. I can always knock down a higher lofted iron but adding loft to a jacked up low lofted iron is pretty difficult. Getting the face to square is also pretty hard with a gigantic iron swung out of control. Golf monitor distance might be a fun game but it’s a different game than golf on the course with varying lies and conditions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Mark pitted a 2020 Callaway Mavrik super-game-improvement iron against a muscleback/blade from the 1980s. He used a statistician to help, and tested a decent number of shots, though at the beginning h

I watched this video twice. I found it very interesting. Here's what I heard. First, I think the biggest point Mark was trying to make is that a golfer should in an ideal world built their bag o

He collects all the data hitting shots left handed to replicate a 20 handicapper since that's what all the comments were asking for in the previous video. Goes on to talk about how much "noisy" data y

Posted Images

1 hour ago, tinker said:

The modern style and instruction is all based on swinging as hard as possible

I don’t think that’s true. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 hours ago, tinker said:

The modern style and instruction is all based on swinging as hard as possible and then having to make a miracle shot to save the hole.

I 100%......... Disagree. 

If you look at Arnold, Jack, Miller... they hit the ball HARD!!! 

Golf is about risk assessment. On a hole where I know it's not in my shot shape, I will not go at it. If there is hole that is open and gives me a lot of room, I can let loose. I was never taught to just go all out. 

Now, I think there is benefit to allowing someone growing up to turn a lot and swing harder since it develops speed. Then later on, getting them to control it. I rather have speed than not to have it at all. 

In terms of what you are saying, that is game planning. 

2 hours ago, tinker said:

A miracle shot with a lob wedge is just as hard or harder than a well placed shot with a 5 iron.

Again, 100%.... Disagree. 

You can get a lob shot to end up inside 30-Ft way more often than hitting a 5-iron to inside 30-Ft. Also, being aggressive, doesn't mean lob shot is your next shot all the time. I can be aggressive, hit a 3-wood into a par 5 green and know the ball is not going to be short sided. 

2 hours ago, tinker said:

I can always knock down a higher lofted iron but adding loft to a jacked up low lofted iron is pretty difficult.

I agree that game improvement irons make it difficult to hit the ball lower. I swing too hard to even what to consider game improvement irons. For those who don't have the swing speed, they struggle to get the ball high enough. So, this maybe for you, it doesn't speak for those who would benefit from game improvement irons the most. 

2 hours ago, tinker said:

Getting the face to square is also pretty hard with a gigantic iron swung out of control.

It's hard to do when you swing out of control with muscle back irons. Its also hard to do when your a 30 handicap golfer in general. I rather that golfer get some distance, and proper yardage gaps on their irons than add more struggle to their golf game by playing muscle back irons. In the end, it's the golfers swing not he club that matters the most. 

2 hours ago, tinker said:

Golf monitor distance might be a fun game but it’s a different game than golf on the course with varying lies and conditions. 

It is pretty beneficial to know what your yardages are. Golf monitors are very beneficial. Especially when you can't get outside for 3-4 months out of the year. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 5/8/2021 at 10:19 AM, saevel25 said:

It's hard to do when you swing out of control with muscle back irons. Its also hard to do when your a 30 handicap golfer in general. I rather that golfer get some distance, and proper yardage gaps on their irons than add more struggle to their golf game by playing muscle back irons.

This right here is the heart of the discussion, and I'm not sure that I agree with this statement that muscle back irons necessarily add struggle to a golfer's game (at least at a certain point).

Game Improvement and Super Game Improvement irons certainly are more forgiving on most shots hit fat or in wet turf conditions simply because they don't dig into the ground the same way a thin muscle back does. Beyond that, however, the data and testing (in the original video and in others) seems to show that forgiveness in an iron is a very overrated concept for players who can get the ball off the ground with that iron in the first place.

SGI irons do definitely help with launch angle, and for somebody who regularly misses fat or who plays with soft turf conditions regularly they can provide a benefit. For people whose miss is thin/who play on firm turf, or for those who are at least generally getting the ball in the air every time, the SGI/GI style irons aren't helping you with anything and in fact can even be hurting your dispersion. That may not be the general 30+ handicap golfer you were referring to, but it does encompass most of the golfers 20 handicap and below.

I switched to playing MB-style irons 4 years ago after doing a lot of my own testing (100+ shots on simulators and 10+ rounds of golf using both my forgiving irons and 2 sets of blades side by side) and noticing that the horizontal and distance dispersions were tighter, even when you leave miss-hits in the dataset (and believe me, I can still miss-hit some irons surprisingly badly). I picked up those two sets of blades used for only around $200-300 apiece, and that was for 2 year old clubs in great condition (older models go for even cheaper). I think a lot of golfers would be surprised if they did a similar experiment with some used blades compared to their current clubs, especially if they have access to a launch monitor anywhere nearby to book an hour or two on several different occasions to get hard numerical data for their comparisons alongside their on-course data just hitting two balls for every iron shot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

32 minutes ago, Pretzel said:

Game Improvement and Super Game Improvement irons certainly are more forgiving on most shots hit fat or in wet turf conditions simply because they don't dig into the ground the same way a thin muscle back does.

Totally agree as I saw it in action for myself this past winter.   Played a number of days where the conditions were soggy at best.  I used my Diablo Edge irons solely (pun intended) for their fat soles.  Much less plowing around the course.  As it has greatly dried up I moved back to the SLDR irons - similar lofts, shafts as the Diablos.  They also look much better at address.  

 

35 minutes ago, Pretzel said:

SGI irons do definitely help with launch angle, and for somebody who regularly misses fat or who plays with soft turf conditions regularly they can provide a benefit. For people whose miss is thin/who play on firm turf, or for those who are at least generally getting the ball in the air every time, the SGI/GI style irons aren't helping you with anything and in fact can even be hurting your dispersion.

Interesting comment about dispersion and remember the original video talking about it.  I do have a mixed bag of older MB style irons from the 70's (aka Spalding/MacGregor/Lynx/Northwestern/etc.) that I have thought about bringing to the course, just need to get them regripped as this discussion has continued to pique my interest about the MB-v-CB debate.  The first few rounds I played were with those irons, as I did not start until the summer of 2017, which I "updated" to a set of Tommy Armour 845s Silver Scots from the late '80's (again this was in late 2017).   

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 3 weeks later...
On 5/8/2021 at 9:25 AM, tinker said:

 I use low offset blades because they allow the most shot making options.

I have never seen "offset blades". Every manufacturer sells their  blades as their players clubs and then move into more player improvement clubs for the average players like us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
25 minutes ago, snow bird said:

I have never seen "offset blades". Every manufacturer sells their  blades as their players clubs and then move into more player improvement clubs for the average players like us.

Sure you have. Even traditional blades tend to have some offset.

AL447_zoom_D.jpg

Each iron has been meticulously shaped to meet Tiger's discerning eye—longer blade length, thinner topline, progressive face height, and more.

Tiger's P7TW blades have around 2mm of offset right up through the 6I, and even his 9I has over 1mm.

Some blades (many blades, honestly, since these are some old Mizuno style blades) have more. Few have less.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Titleist blades designed for Adam Scott, up to the 718MB line, actually had more offset than the Titleist CB irons. It was only with their newer 620MB that they finally made their blades into a "low offset" design.

Blades do have offset, it's just generally designed to be less obvious and to be less than most GI/SGI irons. Clubs with truly zero offset will actually look quite strange to most people's eyes because they are so uncommon.

spacer.pngspacer.png

With the slight bulge on the leading edge of most irons, since it's not a straight line, it makes a true zero offset iron look like it actually has onset in most cases. By comparison, below are some photos of some blades with traditional/standard designs below (620MB, P7TW, MP-20):

spacer.pngspacer.pngspacer.png

  • Informative 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

3 hours ago, Pretzel said:

Clubs with truly zero offset will actually look quite strange to most people's eyes because they are so uncommon.

Cobra RF irons are good example of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is more important, the “right” head design or the “right” shaft? 

Obviously the trick is having both. I’m assuming the test means everything else being equal. Seems benchmark in success is when someone can finally say “yeah, I need X-100 shafts”

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
25 minutes ago, BHI 99 said:

Which is more important, the “right” head design or the “right” shaft? 

Obviously the trick is having both. I’m assuming the test means everything else being equal. Seems benchmark in success is when someone can finally say “yeah, I need X-100 shafts”

That's a valid question, but not the point of this topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

12 hours ago, billchao said:

That's a valid question, but not the point of this topic.

Relevant in the sense that blades vs. cavities doesnt matter as much if shaft is bigger factor?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
1 hour ago, measureoffsetinnm said:

Relevant in the sense that blades vs. cavities doesnt matter as much if shaft is bigger factor?

No. Did you read the OP and watch the video? The golf shaft is not a variable in either experiment. This topic is about blades vs cavity-backs, not whether the shaft or the club head is more important.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, measureoffsetinnm said:

Relevant in the sense that blades vs. cavities doesnt matter as much if shaft is bigger factor?

That was sort of the question.....but apparently off topic. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)
32 minutes ago, BHI 99 said:

That was sort of the question.....but apparently off topic. 

I saw how he maybe missed what you said so asked trying to clarify.

1 hour ago, billchao said:

No. Did you read the OP and watch the video? The golf shaft is not a variable in either experiment. This topic is about blades vs cavity-backs, not whether the shaft or the club head is more important.

Blades vs. cavity backs is itself not as important a question if the shaft is more important than the club head I mean. I get that it is technically off topic but seems close enough I personally wouldn't consider it completely off the rails.

Edited by measureoffsetinnm
Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn’t mention left and right dispersion, at least on the data posted. Or maybe I missed it in the video. He said himself his pulled his own “card tricks” when fitting. Regardless, it entertaining to see and probably got a lot of clicks. I suppose someone on the fence wanting to improve their game with blades or justify the purchase might appreciate it. There’s a reason tour pros play blades a reason 25HC’s don’t. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BHI 99 said:

 There’s a reason tour pros play blades. 

That's a bit of a blanket statement tho, innit?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    SuperSpeed
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo and the code "iacasjun21" for 10% off SuperSpeed.
  • Posts

    • Thanks, @boogielicious. I found it in the updated app and it seems to function fine. Nice big map image of the holes with distances to all hole features. I'll check it out on the course. My phone is already on my cart and running Arccos so it'll be interesting to see if, as @Shindig suggests, it places too much additional demand on the battery. I see the green maps are an additional charge. Probably not for me, at my skill level.
    • I am generally hesitant to do anything with my phone during a round (my previous phone, which I replaced over two and a half years ago, went through battery like it was candy), but I may check this out at some point, if nothing else so I have a backup for my laser and my GPS device.
    • I just opened and looked at my USGA GHIN app and don't see a GPS option. Where is it located? Ahhh, never mind. Found out that there's an app update that needs to be installed. I'll check it out after the update is complete. Thanks.
    • My course is a par 73 and plays 7081 yards. 1. SV (Par 4 – 335) - This is a great starting hole, it allows for clubbing down and getting out the gate without too many nerves. Driver also works fine, but it isn’t necessary, and can possibly even hurt your score. 2. Mammoth(Par 4 – 410) - This hole was not overly hard but it was just a fun hole to look at as you tee off over the sand dunes to a gentle right to left curving fairway. Apparently I love holes with a lone tree in the fairway which there is one the left side here. 3.  Mammoth(Par 5 – 518) – I thought this was one of the par 5s where you actually had to make a couple shots. I tugged my drive just slightly and just barely missed clearing the waste area that is more to carry the more you try to cut off to the left.  The second shot up hill also makes this hole a little longer and tougher than the 518 yards it is. It plays as the 3rd hardest hole at Mammoth and is a fun one. 4. Lac La Belle(Par 3 - 192) – Best hole on the course. 5. SV(Par 3 – 216) – Severely downhill par 3, wind is a factor, club choice and execution is very tricky here. 6. Lawsonia(Par 4 – 439) Big reveal after passing the first mound in the fairway, opens up to an amazing view. Just too many blind shots for me to this point, and this one was also partially blind, but playing it a second time will be even better.  7. Lawsonia(Par 3 – 161) Boxcar hole, hit the green or else.  Love it. 8. Mammoth(Par 3 – 198) Island green surrounded by sand, what is not to like. 9. Mammoth(Par 4 – 445) All the other number 9s are just okay, it’s probably between this and SV #9 but SV#9 is basically does not have much reward in going for the green from the tee and more or less forces a lay up off the tee.  Mammoth #9 is a neat par four that is an interesting green to play into up an to the right after your first shot. 10. SV(Par 5 – 563) I love the slopes on this par 5, play it right and you can get there in two with the right shot and a if you catch the downslope, miss a bit though, and you don’t have a chance. It also has a very cool bowl like green complex here that can lead to a close eagle putt or in my uncle’s case, an albatross. 11. Lawsonia(Par 4 - 510) I love the tee box here, 10 kind of stinks as a hole and then you walk up to 11 and you immediately are struck by the scale of the property on the back 9. It is a very long par 4 but I love the way it slopes and plays. I hit a decent driver and still had a 5 iron in. 12.  SV(Par 5 – 499) - Very getable in 2. Fairway tree count number 2, this time you can go right over it depending on your tee position.  Love it. 13. Lawsonia(Par 5 - 568) – This hole was not loved by all in out group but I think the design and choice you have to make on your second shot is brilliant to avoid death valley. It is also visually amazing. 14. Mammoth(Par 4 – 325) – Drivable downhill par 4 with a well-placed bunker which I managed to fly into. One of the most stunning holes on the course. 15. SV(Par 4 – 419). Waste area comes into play more than it appears to do so from the tee on the left and a miss right is maybe worse with uneven terrain and patchy lies. This hole is a blast to play and is much tighter than it appears. 16. Lac La Belle(Par 5 - 524) – Picturesque, with a tricky landing area of the tee, and a nice risk-reward choice. You have to really pay attention to the wind direction for your tee shot as well. Fairway tree count number 3. 17. SV(Par 3 – 236) – Possibly my favorite par 3 I have ever played even though I have not made par in 3 tries. It messes with your head and your state of exhaustion. 18. SV(Par 5 – 523) Up the hill, you’re exhausted and need to make 3 good shots here.  Love this finishing hole with the back right pin position.
    • I like RWC's approach to this question. I turned 65 this year after my 9-hole league began, so no switching to the gold tees for me this year, but it is something that is definitely in my future. From the white tees (not all that long at 5,800 yards) I'm playing most of my shots with Driver, fairway woods, wedges and putter, rarely using the rest of my clubs more than once or twice per round. Being able to hit more GIR in a round would result in increased "enjoyment factor" for me as well. It strikes me that handicap is not the best metric for which tees a golfer should use, that distance (driver, 5 iron, etc.) is a much better metric. It just takes getting the ol' ego out of the way....
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Duby27
      Duby27
      (38 years old)
    2. Joe Guastella
      Joe Guastella
      (37 years old)
    3. Ladysmanfelpz
      Ladysmanfelpz
      (31 years old)
    4. LarryEdwards
      LarryEdwards
      (42 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...