why blades?

[wedge player]

You really don't think that there is a CB with a similar feel and similar control? Try the MP-57s. They're pretty close to the same control. A couple Miura CB's as well. I said similar control...not same control.

im going to have to dispute your point on cavitys being further than blades.i was playing with nike sumo irons and switched to the 690.mb.when i made this transition i simply added 10 more yards to each club and,to dispute your new technology what about titliests new blades with th z for a more effective weight transfer would that not be a new tech??

[denver_nuggs_15]

im going to have to dispute your point on cavitys being further than blades.i was playing with nike sumo irons and switched to the 690.mb.when i made this transition i simply added 10 more yards to each club and,to dispute your new technology what about titliests new blades with th z for a more effective weight transfer would that not be a new tech??

According to physics, cavity backs of the same loft and same head speed will hit the ball farther (assuming everything else is held constant-shaft, lie, ball, etc.) Neither of us can dispute that. I'm assuming the 690s were fitted more properly and that you made better contact with the ball. If you were fitted with the same specs for the Sumos, they would inherently be longer. That's physics. Plus, Golf Mag or Golf Digest did a study that proved this definitively. SGIs were the longest of the bunch. GI's were number 2 and players clubs were dead last for distance.

[wedge player]

According to physics, cavity backs of the same loft and same head speed will hit the ball farther (assuming everything else is held constant-shaft, lie, ball, etc.) Neither of us can dispute that. I'm assuming the 690s were fitted more properly and that you made better contact with the ball. If you were fitted with the same specs for the Sumos, they would inherently be longer. That's physics. Plus, Golf Mag or Golf Digest did a study that proved this definitively. SGIs were the longest of the bunch. GI's were number 2 and players clubs were dead last for distance.

guess again same evrything in the bunch cept 960s have 2 degrees less loft

[denver_nuggs_15]

guess again same evrything in the bunch cept 960s have 2 degrees less loft

What are you referring to? The clubs tested? Or your clubs? Either way, physics isn't wrong. It's one thing to debate opinion, but debating facts is kind of impossible. There has to be something different with your swing. Or the shaft. Or the clubhead speed. Or something. A xx* cavity will hit the ball farther than a xx* blade assuming everything else is constant. That's a fact sir.

[Laxplayer201092]

Nuggs-Im not so sure on that. If i hit my blade 6 iron, and a SGI/GI Iron with similar loft.. i hit the blade much higher..and about 5 yards consistently farther. No lofts or lies are tweaked here.. Thats just how it is.

And the goal of golf is NOT to hit the ball straight. When was the last time you said, "im just gonna hit this one down the middle, dead straight" I certainly cant remember the last time i did that..

As for the MP-57 debate. sure, there nice irons, but if you cant tell the difference between them and my 32's, your really not a good enough golfer to be playing blades.

As for the magazines doing tests of which are longest, How often are any of those tests even Accurate? Every persons swing is different, but again, some people will hit blades farther. I hit my R7TP 4 iron right on about 195. but that was its yardage. Whereas my stock draw (same shot shape as with theR7) goest nearly 200-205, but i can vary that yardage with my 32's from 190, up to 210 if i want. THATS the reason i play blades. It affords more options to get hte ball to the hole. So what, you seem to play that 14 handi pretty hard with your I10's, thats great, if you play a straight shot, thats great. But thats not how every single golfer has to play. If i want to fade a shot, im going to fade it. Just because i cant do that with your I10's with the level of control that i desire means nothing about my EGO, it means that my clubs would not be doing what i am wanting them to do. If you want to work the ball with cavitys, it requires a much larger swing change than if you want to work the ball with a blade, Because the club is in essence fighting you to hit the ball straight.

Nugg's, i dont see where you have an arguement here. Woods: Blades. Kim: Blades. Els:Blades. Phil:Blades. All of these players work the ball..Now you take a guy who plays Cally X20's like Rocco, who hits a stock draw every single time, He can play the cav's because he likes the offset, he likes the forgiveness. He was brought up to play the game one way, (by playing one shot and getting darn good at repeating it) and someoen like Tiger was brought up to hit the shot that will get him closest to the hole, be it a stinger, draw, fade. Anythign. Point is, people play the clubs that help them the most. I gurantee, GURANTEE! that my scores would go up if i played your I10's for a round. Just as yours would go up if you played my 32's.

I like my blades, your not taking them away from me.

[wedge player]

Nuggs-Im not so sure on that. If i hit my blade 6 iron, and a SGI/GI Iron with similar loft.. i hit the blade much higher..and about 5 yards consistently farther. No lofts or lies are tweaked here.. Thats just how it is.

well said

[whip_it_out]

Quite frankly...because I want to. And I truly couldn't care less about what the person next to me thinks. Nor do I care what he or she plays. It's golf--an individual game/sport where a person can/should decide for him/herself. Sorry to sound like an ass, but too many people concern themselves way too much with what someone else chooses to do. If it's not hurting you, personally, then live and let play! --LBB

Said absolutely perfectly.

And I agree one-hundred percent.

[iacas]

According to physics, cavity backs of the same loft and same head speed will hit the ball farther (assuming everything else is held constant-shaft, lie, ball, etc.)

Dead wrong.

I haven't been following along much - I've always greatly preferred blades - but denver, you're not gonna win many points by just making stuff up.

[birdiemachine]

i think its funny what people call new technology. Whatever you wanna call it, you hit a little white ball with a club. I hardly would consider blade technology drastically increasing in the last 10-15 years.

That being said, i dont think the top players in the world would put themselves at a disadvantage by using blades. Whether you call it ego, confidence, or ignorance, some people prefer blades, others prefer really ugly clubs that are too big.

[Awsi Dooger]

I don't think while playing blades. As mediocre as I play these days, that's a huge benefit. Aim and fire. With cavity backs I'm overly mechanical. And when I mishit a shot with the darn cavity backs it's annoying as heck because supposedly they fix things. What a joke.

I'm playing very old blades and to my surprise haven't sacrificed anything in distance, even with the weaker lofts. Once I lengthened the clubs to fit my 6-4 frame the distance is identical to cavity backs purchased new in this decade. There are a couple of specific par 3s with water carry that I was certain I would have to move one club longer, but not the case.

I agree with a couple of recent posts in this thread. Who the heck cares what anything else thinks, or what equipment is best for them? I'm playing recreationally a couple times per week. I managed to get my handicap down from 11 to 9 over the last year by moving to longer shafted blade irons and shorter shafted smaller drivers. I can't tell where a cavity back is going and there is no way I can get through the ball with a 45 inch 460cc driver.

[Jenks465]

There are several disadvantages to blades.

In my opinion there are many disadvantages to cavities (the big spade type ones) too, especially for the advanced player who isn't just hitting the same shot every time. Ball flight too high, impossible to move the ball through the air (try to hit a five yard cut and you have to feel a twenty yard slice), harder to get a 'real' strike on the ball (the fat soles won't let you take a crisp little two inch divot) but that is who these clubs are aimed at, players who are still developing the basic skills of the game and haven't moved on to the more advanced ball control aspects. And in terms of forgiveness there is really no performance difference between any clubs if you miss the sweet spot by quarter of an inch or so, the only differences come when you miss by half an inch or more and growing up playing persimmon and balata taught me not to do that very often!

[michaeljames92]

Dead wrong.

Yeah they won't necessarily go further but when talking 'physics' the cavity clubs should launch the ball higher than a blade since there is more weight towards the sole of the club.

At the end of day, irons are pretty much relative anyway. Whether you hit a green with an 8 iron in one set of clubs compared with a 7 in another set, does it really make a difference? Some like blades, some like cavities all for different reasons. I don't care if another guy is using blades, if they work for him then good on him.

[denver_nuggs_15]

Yeah they won't necessarily go further but when talking 'physics' the cavity clubs should launch the ball higher than a blade since there is more weight towards the sole of the club.

My friend's father is a physicist. Actually, he was a physicist; he got bored of it he said. I asked him. Due to the increased MOI, deeper and lower CG, and some other term I forget, a cavity back will hit the ball farther assuming everything else is help constant. If you want to argue physics because it doesn't make sense to you, we can do that. Physics isn't wrong. Cavities are longer according to physics. Maybe it's in your head or something, but if you hit a cavity and a blade the same exact way, the cavity will go farther. Fact.

I agree that blades could improve your ballstriking. I don't think that they necessarily will, but they could. Having said that, I want to know if ballstriking matters that much. If you can be an OK ballstriker and play cavities or be a good ballstriker with blades, and the effect on score is the same, what's the difference? Saying that the top xx golfers in the world play blades is kind of irrelevant. They are the best in the world and have the most repeatable swings on earth. They can play blades without punishment. For most of us, that's not the case. It's called the falacy of composition. What's good for one is not always good for all. I agree that blades offer more control than cavities. I don't think that many people on the planet actually need that increased control. Nor do I think that many can use that control. I know all of you will say "Not the case" but think about the difference in your shots if you played something like the MP-57s or AP2s. I'm not talking about comparing a blade to an SGI. Rather compare a blade to a player's cavity.

[wedge player]

I agree that blades could improve your ballstriking. I don't think that they necessarily will, but they could. Having said that, I want to know if ballstriking matters that much. If you can be an OK ballstriker and play cavities or be a good ballstriker with blades, and the effect on score is the same, what's the difference?

there is a direct effect actually using blades your swing must and i mean must be a very good swing causing good results with a good swing right?ifyou use a cavity back your allowed more mistakes through a swing possibly producing bad swing habits.

[Eeryck]

My friend's father is a physicist. Actually, he was a physicist; he got bored of it he said. I asked him. Due to the increased MOI, deeper and lower CG, and some other term I forget, a cavity back will hit the ball farther assuming everything else is help constant. If you want to argue physics because it doesn't make sense to you, we can do that. Physics isn't wrong. Cavities are longer according to physics. Maybe it's in your head or something, but if you hit a cavity and a blade the same exact way, the cavity will go farther. Fact.

Higher MOI and lowered CG only come into effect when you make an off center hit. The perimiter weighting used to accomplish this reduces club rotation (higher MOI) that would bleed energy off the shot (Energy used torquing club instead of propelling forward).

The down side to a high MOI club is that it always resists rotation about the shaft axis, even during release. You have to create more release than you would for a more traditional club to square the club face, that is unless you intend to strike with a slightly open face club. If you are going to continue to quote physics of the Cavity Back distance over blade distance as fact please link up diagrams and some equations, also please list some of the basic assumptions being made. Otherwise we may get this sort of physics error happening Tacoma Narrows by not taking into account all the factors of design. Regards, -E

[michaeljames92]

If you have the same loft of a cb iron and a blade iron, the cavity will just launch it higher which may go further or not. it's all relative. it won't necessarily go further

[Stuart]

I'm kind of surprised this topic has received so much attention, given the topic. I don't think it makes sense to get so far into MOI and all the other jargon, when at the end of the day, if you like what you see when you look down and what you feel when you make a good swing, then I'm not sure the other means of measuring success are relevant. If you were to test out several different types and brands of club, you are not necessarily going to hit the one with the highest MOI or whatever else, the best. If that is true, then there can't be any one single means of determining what is best for an individual. I believe golf is more mental than physical. I believe that when I go out to play with the right attitude I can play any shot and any course. I also believe that when I talk myself out of something or have a crappy attitude there isn't a golf club invented that can save me from myself.

[Spackler-esque]

What's wrong with a little (or a lot of) forgiveness to a bad golfer? I will agree that many blade players have a serious advantage over bad golfers. However, I don't think that it's because of the blade. I think it's because they are better golfers all together.

But how did they get to be better golfers? Lots of practice. I know that's your argument. As I've said before, practice does not make perfect, perfect practice makes perfect. Practicing with blades is better practice than practicing with a shovel. Playing a practice or casual round of golf is still practice. Why not use blades then? And once you get into a more serious round, why not play with what you're comfortable with? A player practices with blades. They are comfortable with the clubs they practice with. They play with what they're comfortable with. Therefore, they play with blades.

You are wrong. I don't know how to get you to believe in physics, but here's my best try.

It's not a matter of believing in physics. It's believing your claim. You have presented no real information to back it up and, to be honest, I trust iacas much more than I trust you.

Show your work and someone might believe you.

Assuming that you hit it directly in front of the CG, there will be no rotation about that axis.

So... Hitting a CB on the sweet spot will send it farther than hitting a blade on the sweet spot because... ? You still don't give an real information to prove your statement. You can claim anything you want, but until you show proof all that amounts to is a bunch of conjectures that have no rigor and that aren't sound. Show your work.

Since distance really doesn't matter all that much

You mean because distance is moot because you haven't proven a thing? Okay.

and feel is in the eye of the beholder

Let's change the word we're using for feel here. Change it to feedback, because that's what feel is in a golf club. Feedback is not in the eye of the beholder. You get more feedback with a blade than a CB. That's why a lot of people don't like them.

we are left with control vs. forgiveness.

Stop simplifying everything down to one point alone. It isn't that simple.

However, for most people, I think that forgiveness (even just a bit) is needed. How many people can actually make consistent enough contact with consistent enough release to benefit from control over forgiveness? My guess is that many people make slightly bad contact every once in a while.

How profound! People make bad contact? Impossible! Oh, wait, we're all human. Even the pros mess up shots. So what?

Is there anything wrong with striving to be consistent enough to be able to fully take advantage of blades? But, how do you get there and how would you know if you are if you don't use them? Conundrum. You're still missing the point: It is irrelevant what you think about other people playing blades. There are plenty of people who disagree with everything you've said. It is about how the clubs fit an individual. Until you bust out your mad "physux skillz" and show your work, you haven't proven anything. Until you bring in some objective facts, well, good luck because it's a primarily subjective argument.