Indian vs. Arrow...

[PiKapp23]

This is always one of the major questions and topics for discussion/arguments among hardcore golfers.

So, which is it? The Indian or the Arrow?

I have come to be a big believer in proper equipment and proper fitting for each individual player. I do believe that equipment can make a huge difference in a players game. However, players in the mid-handicap level are usually the ones that are most effected by equipment. High handicappers can become better with the right equipment, but for them lessons are step 1. Low handicappers usually are good enough that equipment is not as important because they tend to hit the sweet spot with a good swing no matter.

Mid-handicap players are the group who are most impacted by equipent and proper fittings. Having the correct shaft, lie, swing weight, grip and level of forgivness can help a players keep improving just as the wrong equipment and bad fittings can cause these same players to regress.

The difficult part if getting the 'correct equipment' for you and then getting it properly fit. The most common way of purchasing equipment is to go to retailer (either golf specialty store or not), find the clubs you like the look of (or have heard/read good things about), maybe take a few swings into a net or on simulator and purchase. Some stores will do a 'fitting' but that is usually a 'static' fitting based on swing speed, height, etc. and how those parameters match up to a predetermined list of recommendations.

Obviously, this is not a perfect fitting because you're probably hitting of a mat, indoors, in a section of the store reserved for this. I know my swing is always different in these situations than on course and I think that's probably true of most people. Addtionally, most players swing is not the same everyday. The perfect fitting would be over a few days and would be more dynamic letting players try different shafts, lies, models, etc. to see which that person players better.

For most players they end up wasting lots of money buying new equipment because they didn't get the right stuff to begin with (or their swing changed to compensate for the old 'incorrect' equipement). The main reasons for this are poor/improper fitting, bad advice, marketing hype and player ego. I do believe that if these conditions would were handled properly, clubs can make a huge difference for mid-hadicappers. This entire argument also includes golf balls.

So, is it the Indian or the Arrow? For mid-handicappers it's both. For high and low handicappers, I think the impact is less.

[zeg]

If the question is indian vs arrow, why are the options "indian" and "player"?

Anyway, I guess I agree that high-handicappers don't need to worry too much about equipment. If they've got a set of clubs that are good enough to be playable, that's all they need. Lessons/practice are key. Furthermore, spending time and money looking for the right clubs are almost wasted as the odds are good that the player's technique will change rapidly, rendering their clubs a poor fit as they improve. That's the approach I'm taking, anyway.

[PiKapp23]

Sorry, I was thinking too much when I created the poll and that never ends well. I have asked moderator to either change the 'player' option to 'Arrow' or delete the poll. Thanks for pointing that out.

[ks8829]

low handicapp golfer, I think the indian is 90% of the golf swing and the arrow is about 10%.

high handicapp golfer, I think the indian is 70% of the golf swing and the arrow is about 30%.

[golf_junkie27]

Assuming you are using proper equipment, meaning, equipment that is the correct length and lie as it relates to your swing, it will always be the Indian.

As good as low handicappers and pros are, physically, they are just as sharp, mentally. All these stories about how guys know that the weight is wrong or the flex is wrong or the shaft length is wrong leads me to this belief.

[telrod11]

This is always one of the major questions and topics for discussion/arguments among hardcore golfers.

Just to pick a nit here, but isn't it:

Indian - Bow - Arrow ? Sorry, have heard this for years, and it has always bugged me....

[PiKapp23]

Just to pick a nit here, but isn't it:

I admit I agree with you and have brought that very thing up in the conversations/arguments. 'Indian' is the player, 'Arrow' would logically be the ball, so I would think 'Bow' should be the club, but no one wants to argue that point. I actually started to put that in the original post, but decided to keep it simple. I always have to remember the definition of 'crazy' is doing the same thing and expecting different results. Isn't it this very thing that golfers do everytime they go out...

[telrod11]

I admit I agree with you and have brought that very thing up in the conversations/arguments. 'Indian' is the player, 'Arrow' would logically be the ball, so I would think 'Bow' should be the club, but no one wants to argue that point. I actually started to put that in the original post, but decided to keep it simple. I always have to remember the definition of 'crazy' is doing the same thing and expecting different results. Isn't it this very thing that golfers do everytime they go out...

I figured I would just bust your chops a bit; No one ever calls it "bow", even though the analogy is the closest to correct....

Good thread. Just ignore me...

[beisenhauer]

The tools have to suit the user. I answered "equal". Especially so with mid-to-high handicappers. Good players can adjust to anything; they may not be as precise, but they could score well with hickory, persimmon and balata. Us hackers need help from our equipment.

BTW, I agree it should be "Bow", not arrow.

[TommyD69]

Lee Trevino always said "It ain't the arrow... It's the Indian", but I think I have to disagree and say it is both...

I remember 15 years ago when Payne Stewart (bless his soul) was on top of his game. He played with Wilson Staff blades. He was very successful, and won a bunch of tournaments. His contract with Wilson Sporting Goods had expired. Payne went "for the money" and switched companies. Of course, the new company (I believe it was Spaulding) made Payne (under contract) play with their (Spaulding) clubs (some new game improvement model that Spaulding wanted Payne to promote via using them on tour). Payne’s game plummeted!!! He disappeared from the leader boards, his game was in shambles.

Why?? because Payne was not using his trusted Wilson blades anymore. The feel and control he once had were gone.

Finally, Payne talked Spaulding into making him a custom set of clubs (which looked and felt remarkably like his old Wilson Staffs). Payne was never really the same until he got out from under the Spaulding contract, and moved on to another manufacturer.

The exact same thing happened to Curtis Strange when he left Macgregor (I loved those old VIP’s).

It may not be as severe with the pro as it is with the rest of us, but BOTH the arrow and the Indian must be in tune with each other.

IMHO

[Henry]

i find that its the indian because you can put the ball in the hole with any club but if you dont hit the ball straight it will never go in

[microcrayfish]

i find that its the indian because you can put the ball in the hole with any club but if you dont hit the ball straight it will never go in

Well I dunno, eventually you'd get a breaking putt that went in

. I agree, it's the Indian. Good players can score well with any equipment. While equipment does make a difference it's the class of the man or woman that shows through in the end. I'd liken it to the old guitar analogy "tone is in the fingers", you can have the nicest, most expensive gear and still sound/play golf like crap if you don't know how to use it.

[MiniMoe]

not that hard to adjust to just about any club. Granted, you may not play your absolute best, but you can play. What's the old bet with the shovel, rake and *****.... I mean hoe?