cool BAG COVERAGE & SET MAKEUP article

[Stacey_E]

Here is an interesting article on bag coverage. This is one guy’s take on the distribution of the clubs in your bag. I thought I'd share the information. I have to say I strongly agree with most if not all of the article. I think it brings home how modern lofts dictate that the savvy golfer consider something other than what was once a standard set of clubs.

I especially like his take on using wider distance and loft gaps at the top of the set. I read this page a year or two ago and now when re-reading it I realize…I've basically rebuilt my bag to his exact recommendations. Now I hit every club in the bag during an 18 hole round, and I'm never found to be lacking the exact club I need.

http://www.kcsportspaper.com/golf0606-2.asp?sort1=golf

[onthehunt526]

It is an interesting article, it looks like this guy is like a 230 hitter though... my set make-up is 5 degree driver... 15 deg 3-wood (though my signature says 13 deg)... 2-iron thru 9-iron, a 47-degree pitching wedge, a 52-degree gap, and a 56-degree sand wedge, and obviously putter... I've thought of driver, 5-wood maybe and taking the 2-iron out for a 60-degree wedge... but we'll see

[hawkeye]

Interesting article - though it won't be for everyone.

I have just ordered a strong 3 wood and strong 5 wood (14.5 and 17.5) - The 5 wood goes 230 and the 3 wood goes 250. Maybe I could do without the 3 iron though I like it as an alternative off the tee. Wedgewise, I'm comfortable hitting 3/4 shots and 1/2 shots, but maybe a 47, 51, 55, 59 combination (currently have 47,54,58) would better suit my game. However, this would mean removing a club from the bag. I'll see how the new 5 wood goes and if i've room for a 3iron.

Thanks for sharing!

[Harry Longshanks]

I'm no physicist, but it seems to me that the "stronger lofts are to make us think we are hitting the ball further" is flawed.

Perhaps it's partly true, but isn't it also true that, because of the dramatic changes in club design since the 1950s, stronger lofts are required to keep the ball down? That is, the development of the cavity back and perimeter weighting - specifically, massive amounts of weight in the rear bottom of the club in order to increase MOI and to assist beginners with "getting the ball up." Wouldn't balls just balloon with the old lofts on the new clubs?

[Stacey_E]

It is an interesting article, it looks like this guy is like a 230 hitter though...

That's a valid point. I'm kinda of the opinion that strong hitters, say 270+ with the driver, are more apt to build their sets from the top down. This makes perfect sense to me. At these distances and clubhead speeds you actually have larger distance gaps with 4 degrees than a slow swinger. Thus you probably have more of a need for those longer clubs.

Interesting article - though it won't be for everyone.

I'd bet that at single digit skill level, those 1/2 and 3/4 wedges are just more "doable". I agree this philosophy isn't for everyone. At your skill level I'm sure you hit more greens than the average golfer. Also I bet your course management is above average and it keeps you out of those awkward distances. I wish I could hit a 3/4 shot! Since I can't I had to get a 64* haha!

I'm no physicist, but it seems to me that the "stronger lofts are to make us think we are hitting the ball further" is flawed.

That's a point I never thought of before. I think the strong loft evolution started as a marketing gimmick, but undoubtedly your theory on the lower center of gravity makes a lot of sense. Loft is just a number, much like having a "7" stamped on the bottom of a club is just a number. The loft of a club doesn't tell the whole story. What angle will the club actually launch at? What angle will the golfer deloft it to? What effect will the spin of the ball have on the launch angle?

I suppose this article would be better suited to the mid-high handicapper or anyone with a clubhead speed that doesn't balloon the ball. These guys, myself included, gain no advantage by adding a ton of long game clubs. If anything they hurt themselves by wasting club slots in the bag. If anyone in this catagory didn't want to add more wedges they still might benefit themselves by pulling some of those long clubs anyway. Having long irons and low lofted woods in the bag that they can't hit leaves their options open for those 1 out of 20 hero shots. I think It'd be better to pull some of those clubs and just carry 10 or 12 then having the temptation at your disposal. Just my thoughts. Thanks for the input guys!

[hawkeye]

I absolutely agree with your set makeup - a lot of golfers could learn from this set up. A 64 degree wedge would be most useful if you can pull it off. (though be aware of overusing it - something I see a lot in higher handicaps)

[jmoc]

The 64* is a tough call, you can really get yourself in trouble with that wedge. I use 4 just for that reason, so I can hit full wedge from 50 yards out. Now that I have played more, I rarely get into that 40 to 75 yard zone anymore, better course management I guess. I only use the 60* for chipping around fast greens to give me more roll out space. I think the basic premise of the article is sound... jmoc