Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 5455 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

I'm debating whether adding a 56* sand wedge to my bag would be worth it.  I currently have a 48* PW, a 52* AW, and a 60* LW.

Never had a sand wedge and it would bring my set to a complete 14.  Is it worth it?  You guys all know well that it ain't free. :P


Posted

Might not be the wedges you would play, but the Adams set I got were only $9 each. Given that I would def. add a 56* to round out your bag. If you are looking at Vokeys or something similar then I would just step back and ask yourself when/if you could have used a 56 in the past several rounds. I use to use my 52 for chipping and 60 for bunkers but I like having a 56 to split the gap for approaches.


Posted

I find it rather difficult to hit 70%-90% distance shots with wedges.  Its FAR easier to hit a full wedge (realizing that a full wedge is an 80% swing) then one where you have to "take something off or hit it out of your shoes."

The sand wedge fills the gap between the lob and gap wedge.  I also use my 4 wedges in the bag for difficult pitches around the green.  Each wedge goes a specific height and roll depending on the shot I need with the same swing.  I use all my wedges alot!!

Driver Callaway Diablo Edge --- Custom Sonartec 3, 5 and 7 woods made +1" stiff shafts --- Irons 5-L Ping G10 +1" 4.5* upright reg shafts --- ---Putter Tiger Shark


Posted


Originally Posted by tws1098

Might not be the wedges you would play, but the Adams set I got were only $9 each. Given that I would def. add a 56* to round out your bag. If you are looking at Vokeys or something similar then I would just step back and ask yourself when/if you could have used a 56 in the past several rounds. I use to use my 52 for chipping and 60 for bunkers but I like having a 56 to split the gap for approaches.


Luckily, I'm only looking to spend around 45 dollars on a used Nike VR wedge.  Well, I haven't played in months because of the weather, but I got very tired of trying to pinpoint control half-swing attack wedges.


Posted


Originally Posted by adamgoodman

Quote:

Originally Posted by tws1098

Might not be the wedges you would play, but the Adams set I got were only $9 each. Given that I would def. add a 56* to round out your bag. If you are looking at Vokeys or something similar then I would just step back and ask yourself when/if you could have used a 56 in the past several rounds. I use to use my 52 for chipping and 60 for bunkers but I like having a 56 to split the gap for approaches.

Luckily, I'm only looking to spend around 45 dollars on a used Nike VR wedge.  Well, I haven't played in months because of the weather, but I got very tired of trying to pinpoint control half-swing attack wedges.



Yeah that gets old, when my 60* was left behind and then someone took it my short game suffered.  On the bright side I learned to chip with my 52 and am much much better with it.  It is nice to have a 60* back though because I was money with it from 80 yards which I always seem to find myself at on those 350 to 380yd par 4s.


Posted



Quote:
Originally Posted by tws1098 View Post



Quote:
It is nice to have a 60* back though because I was money with it from 80 yards which I always seem to find myself at on those 350 to 380yd par 4s.



Is anyone else doing this math?



Quote:
Originally Posted by 596 View Post

I find it rather difficult to hit 70%-90% distance shots with wedges.  Its FAR easier to hit a full wedge (realizing that a full wedge is an 80% swing) then one where you have to "take something off or hit it out of your shoes."

The sand wedge fills the gap between the lob and gap wedge.  I also use my 4 wedges in the bag for difficult pitches around the green.  Each wedge goes a specific height and roll depending on the shot I need with the same swing.  I use all my wedges alot!!

More wedges might lower your score right away, but fewer wedges in the bag can make you a better player.



Quote:
Originally Posted by adamgoodman View Post

Never had a sand wedge and it would bring my set to a complete 14.  Is it worth it?  You guys all know well that it ain't free. :P


And you got down to a 4.8? Stellar!! May I suggest dumping the 52 in favour of a 54* SW ? You'll never go back.

Edit: or, get the 56, have your 52 bent to a 50, and the leave the PW at home.

Mizuno MP600 driver, Cleveland '09 Launcher 3-wood, Callaway FTiz 18 degree hybrid, Cleveland TA1 3-9, Scratch SS8620 47, 53, 58, Cleveland Classic 2 mid-mallet, Bridgestone B330S, Sun Mountain four5.


Posted

umm what math? that is a 270-300 yd drive...nothing outrageous


Posted


Originally Posted by tws1098

umm what math? that is a 270-300 yd drive...nothing outrageous



I didn't say there was. Stretch your range a couple degrees on either side and I'm right there with you.

Mizuno MP600 driver, Cleveland '09 Launcher 3-wood, Callaway FTiz 18 degree hybrid, Cleveland TA1 3-9, Scratch SS8620 47, 53, 58, Cleveland Classic 2 mid-mallet, Bridgestone B330S, Sun Mountain four5.


Posted

If you've been playing consistent rounds under 80, you should know where your strokes are coming from and what gaps cost you the most.

I play most approach shots within 125 yards with a PW, 52 or 60.  The 56 has higher bounce and is most useful in thick rough and sand.

In the Bag: TaylorMade R11 TP - TaylorMade R7 TP TS - Cleveland Halo - TM TP 2009 3-PW - Vokey SM 52 - Vokey SM 60 - Rife Barbados CS - ProV1x 


On the Computer:  Analyzr Pro 
 


Posted

ok then.

anyway, to the OP, good luck and I think Sean is right about going with a 54*. It would make sense and you can sell the 52 to make some of the money toward the 54. I considered going 54 and 58 myself but got a good deal on a full set.


Posted

You should get yourself a SW that has a different bounce from your other wedges, for different lies. So if you have a low bounce LW and GW, get a higher bounce SW for soft turf and fluffy sand. I think that would round out your bag.


Note: This thread is 5455 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

    • My next golf trip will probably be a short one, but I’m really looking forward to it. I’m thinking of staying relatively close, picking a spot with a few solid courses and making a long weekend out of it. For me, the best golf trips are about good courses, relaxed vibes, and time away with friends.
    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
×
×
  • 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.