GI Irons

[joshtpa]

So I was at the Championsgate Resort last week for a day or two and was watching quite a few tour players practicing. Every one of them had some sort of GI irons in their bag. I then pick up the new Golf Digest and the WITB is also someone with GI clubs.

Yet all us amateurs still say that to be a "real good" player one should go with blades. I grew up playing with blades. Hogan Apex blades to be exact. From there I moved around between blades and GIs, and just recently I made the switch back to a GI club after a couple more years with blades. My scores went down again.

In doing my research (which I must admit is just a lot of reading and asking 20 or so local pros), I really think the reason is ego. Amateurs love the way the blades look and feel. We love the fact that only the best can hit them. We love the way it feels at impact. But technology has changed so much over time. The cavity back clubs do have feel now.

Im just curious to what others think about this. I know it has been debated time and time again about which one is better. I dont think either is better for the record. Just that people have a misconception about GI irons because of the name. Any input is appreciated.

Im not trying to get into some sort of flame war over why someone chose what. Just a friendly conversation over the real reason that some shifted over to a blade rather than a GI or vice versa.

[Harry Longshanks]

You are dead on B-Man. It's all ego.

I know more than one person with the same story as you - very low capper switched to cavity backs from muscle backs, and index dropped to the lowest it's ever been.

Muscle backs do feel great, but few people have the talent to hit them on the sweet spot every time, and few really have the talent to work them to the degree necessary to justify the loss of forgiveness of a CB club. And those that do . . . are on tour. I can't remember the percentage, but each year Golf Digest publishes it's Hot List with a survey of players still using Muscle Backs. And it's small. GD's point, and yours too I think, is that if the best players in the word - the ones who play for money at the highest level, and who have the talent to work the ball on command, choose a cavity backs, why would an amateur even consider a muscle back?

[joshtpa]

That is it Harry. I absolutely love the look and fee of the blade. But my index has come down much more using the cavity backs than anything else. I am really curious to see what others think. I know on this board many people feel as though if they swing is right, then the blades just give you more control. And to an extent, that is true. But with the technology today, the CB's seem to do the same or close to the same. With the custom fitting options, people dont have to get them offset as much anymore.
Todays golf ball is designed to fly straighter than ever before. I just heard an interview with Corey Pavin in which he talks about that very thing. How working the ball is just not as easy anymore because of the golf ball of today.

[yeis20]

  The Birdieman said:

I really think the reason is ego.

Bingo

Nail, meet head... Head, meet nail

[rebby]

Personally I like the "traditional" look (I hate to use "traditional" but it fits in this case). I like irons with a smaller head, thinner top line and narrower sole. The largest iron that I'm really comfortable with is the legacy PING eye-2 that I used for a number of years.

My smaller/traditional preference carries into woods as well and I've been reluctant over the years to accept larger and larger drivers. I didn't go over 250cc until just this August when I bought my FT-5.

Many irons are no longer made like this, just like woods. When I replaced my old PING eye-2's in late 1999, I had a hard time finding a cavity back iron that fit this mold. The vast majority of the cavity backs had grown in every dimension which resulted in a very large, bulky head that I just wasn't comfortable with. Another thing that I didn't like was the offset seemed to be increasing with these new irons as well (relative to my eye-2's which had quite a bit of offset to start with). At this time, I refused to look at anything other than cavity backs and I ended up with the PING i3 blade's. These clubs served me very well and looking back, the i3's were a good buy (I even played to a + handicap with them for a few years, alas that was life before kids).

I'm not really a major gear hound and I don't feel a need to replace my irons every few years. It's more like every 5-10 years so I was due for a new set sometime this year or next. I've been very happy with the i3 blades so, again, I wanted something similar in size, shape, offset, etc. However, I wanted something that would provide a little more feedback and feel since I don't get to play/practice everyday like I could before I had kids. I wanted something that would help me play better by helping make my practice time more beneficial even if that meant that my new set of irons wouldn't be as forgiving.

I looked at a lot of different irons this time around but mainly stuck with brands that I was comfortable with. After a lot of time swinging a lot of different clubs I really gravitated towards the Titleist ZB and ZM's. These clubs just fit my game and provided the feel, workability and forgiveness that I needed and desired.

For some guys the muscle back is the better choice, it's not all about ego. If anything I've tried pretty hard over the years to avoid blades always thinking that they weren't right for my game. I grew up playing PINGs so I really bought into the idea that I NEEDED the perimeter weighting that you could only get with a cavity back iron. So far anyway, that just hasn't been true.

As for dealing with the loss in "forgiveness" well, that just boils down to fundamentals. Keep your swing fundamentally sound and you'll find that you don't need the higher level of "forgiveness". If anything I'm far more consistent with my ZM's than I've ever been with any cavity back iron. Working the ball is easier and more predictable with the blade and my distances have been more consistent as well. As a result I'm finding that I hit just as many greens, even on slight miss hits, but with the added consistency/predictability I can be a little bit more aggressive and end up with shorter puts in the end.

The improvements that I've seen over since making the switch to blades could be due to technology improvements over the past 9 years or they could be due to the whole blade vs cavity back thing. I don't know and frankly, I don't care. In 5-10 years when I decide that it's time for another new set of irons, I'll give cavity backs another try but I won't be surprised if I stick with the blades either.

[bIGwIRE]

I switched to MBs about 6 months ago.

I know my handicap would drop lower if I went to CBs, because it was lower when I was playing CBs, but I hope that if I stay with MBs till I'm down around a 5 again and then switch back it will help me get lower than if I would have stayed with CBs all the way.

They really make you focus on your ball striking, and you can work the ball more, even if its a little less with the new ball technology. Both of these were the weak spots in my game, which I'm looking to improve.

[bobsuruncle]

I write with the weekend warrior (or once a week golfer) in mind. What's the point of making this game any harder than it actually is? If you read the forum/review pages of GI clubs on the GolfWRX website, you'll find 5-hcappers playing the Ping G10s or Cally X-20 (non-tour version) for example. That just about sums it all up really.