Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 6476 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted
During my round of golf today I had a thought, there is a wedge company (the name escapes me) that designs 'shank proof' wedges where the hosel of the golf club is set well back from the leading edge of the golf club. Better players irons are known to have minimal offset but still more offset than the wedge, so should in theory be slightly easier to shank than the 'unshankable' wedge. Game improvement irons however have a lot of offset (meaning the hosel of the club is in front of the leading edge of the club) so does this in theory make game improvement irons easier to shank?

Anyone else agree/disagree?

Discuss.

In my Ping UCLAN Team Bag

Nike Sasqautch 9.5 - V2 Stiff
Cleveland HiBore 15 - V2 Stiff
Ben Hogan Apex FTX, 2 - PW - Dynamic Gold StiffNike SV Tour 52, 58 - Dynamic Golf StiffYes Golf Callie - 33 inchesBall - Srixon Z star X


Posted
No. My dad's forged Taylor Made blades are much easier to shank that my Taylor Made RAC OS.

Driver Ping G10 10.5*
Hybrids Ping G5 (3) 19* Bridgestone J36 (4) 22*
Irons Mizuno MP-57 5-PW
Wedges Srixon WG-504 52.08 Bridgestone WC Copper 56.13
Putter 33" Scotty Cameron Studio Select #2


Posted
Are you reffering to the f2 wedge?

Thats the one

In my Ping UCLAN Team Bag

Nike Sasqautch 9.5 - V2 Stiff
Cleveland HiBore 15 - V2 Stiff
Ben Hogan Apex FTX, 2 - PW - Dynamic Gold StiffNike SV Tour 52, 58 - Dynamic Golf StiffYes Golf Callie - 33 inchesBall - Srixon Z star X


Posted
yeah i dont think i believe that, by move it forward it doesnt really make sense. But, i could be wrong seeing as ive never tried one

Posted
I'm not entirely sure. Pretty much regardless where the hosel is in relation to the rest of the clubface, if you push the club too far to the outside, it's going to hit the hosel anyway.

However most offset clubs, when I do try them, are hook machines.
"Shouldn't you be going faster? I mean, you're doing 40 in a 65..."

Driver: Burner TP 9.5*
3 Wood: 906F2 15*
2I: Eye 23I-PW: 3100 I/HWedges: Vokey Spin-Milled 56*06, MP-R 52*07/60*05Putter: Victoria IIBall: Pro V1xCheck out my new blog: Thousand Yard DriveHome Course: Kenton County...

Posted
Not sure if this still applies to days, most blades/clubs back in the day had the sweet spot really close to the heel of the club. Most GI have them right in the middle and bigger for the player to hit. If the blades now a days still have that same sweetspot set up as they did in the past, I would think it would be easier to shank a blade than a GI.

Driver: Tour Burner 10.5*
3 Wood: Hibore 15*
3 Hybrid: 3dx DC 20*
Irons: i5 4-PW
Gap Wedge: cg12 50*Sand Wedge: cg12 54*Putter: g5i anserIn my grom bag :)


Posted
Not sure if this still applies to days, most blades/clubs back in the day had the sweet spot really close to the heel of the club. Most GI have them right in the middle and bigger for the player to hit. If the blades now a days still have that same sweetspot set up as they did in the past, I would think it would be easier to shank a blade than a GI.

When talking about the possibility of shanking I am talking about the pronounced position of the hosel on a game improvement club. Although your right sort of, it is favourable to strike the ball slightly favouring the heel rather than the toe.

In my Ping UCLAN Team Bag

Nike Sasqautch 9.5 - V2 Stiff
Cleveland HiBore 15 - V2 Stiff
Ben Hogan Apex FTX, 2 - PW - Dynamic Gold StiffNike SV Tour 52, 58 - Dynamic Golf StiffYes Golf Callie - 33 inchesBall - Srixon Z star X


  • Administrator
Posted
I think it's like this: if you shank it, you shank it.

Musclebacks tend to be a little smaller, and the sweet spot closer to the heel, so I think they're a bit easier to shank.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 6476 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Day 470 - 2026-01-13 Got some work in while some players were using the sim, so I had to stick around. 🙂 Good thing too, since… I hadn't yet practiced today until about 6:45 tonight. 😛 
    • That's not quite the same thing as what some people messaged me today.
    • Day 152 1-12 More reps bowing wrists in downswing. Still pausing at the top. Making sure to get to lead side and getting the ball to go left. Slow progress is better than no progress.  
    • Yea, if I were to make a post arguing against the heat map concept, citing some recent robot testing would be my first point. The heat map concept is what I find interesting, more on that below. The robot testing I have looked at, including the one you linked, do discreet point testing then provide that discrete data in various forms. Which as you said is old as the hills, if you know of any other heat map concept type testing, I would be interested in links to that though! No, and I did say in my first post "if this heat map data is valid and reliable" meaning I have my reservations as well. Heck beyond reservations. I have some fairly strong suspicions there are flaws. But all I have are hunches and guesses, if anyone has data to share, I would be interested to see it.  My background is I quit golfing about 9 years ago and have been toying with the idea of returning. So far that has been limited to a dozen range sessions in late Summer through Fall when the range closed. Then primarily hitting foam balls indoors using a swing speed monitor as feedback. Between the range closing and the snow flying I did buy an R10 and hit a few balls into a backyard net. The heat map concept is a graphical representation of efficiency (smash factor) loss mapped onto the face of the club. As I understand it to make the representation agnostic to swing speed or other golfer specific swing characteristics. It is more a graphical tool not a data tool. The areas are labeled numerically in discrete 1% increments while the raw data is changing at ~0.0017%/mm and these changes are represented as subtle changes in color across those discrete areas. The only data we care about in terms of the heat map is the 1.3 to 1.24 SF loss and where was the strike location on the face - 16mm heal and 5mm low. From the video the SF loss is 4.6% looking up 16mm heal and 5mm low on the heat map it is on the edge of where the map changes from 3% loss to 4%. For that data point in the video, 16mm heal, 5mm low, 71.3 mph swing speed (reference was 71.4 mph), the distance loss was 7.2% or 9 yards, 125 reference distance down to 116. However, distance loss is not part of a heat map discussion. Distance loss will be specific to the golfers swing characteristics not the club. What I was trying to convey was that I do not have enough information to determine good or bad. Are the two systems referencing strike location the same? How accurate are the two systems in measuring even if they are referencing from the same location? What variation might have been introduced by the club delivery on the shot I picked vs the reference set of shots? However, based on the data I do have and making some assumptions and guesses the results seem ok, within reason, a good place to start from and possibly refine. I do not see what is wrong with 70mph 7 iron, although that is one of my other areas of questioning. The title of the video has slow swing speed in all caps, and it seems like the videos I watch define 7i slow, medium, and fast as 70, 80, and 90. The whole question of mid iron swing speed and the implications for a players game and equipment choices is of interest to me as (according to my swing speed meter) over my ~decade break I lost 30mph swing speed on mine.
    • Maxfli, Maltby, Golfworks, all under the Dicks/Golf Galaxy umbrella... it's all a bit confounding. Looking at the pictures, they all look very, very similar in their design. I suspect they're the same club, manufactured in the same factory in China, just with different badging.  The whacky pricing structure has soured me, so I'll just cool my heels a bit. The new Mizuno's will be available to test very soon. I'm in no rush.  
×
×
  • 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.