Shorter Irons?

[ShankinPlumber]

I dont want this to come across as a brag post by any means. I am a fairly new, terrible golfer (usually play in the mid 90's) but i was wondering if there was a set of modern irons that played a little shorter? I have played di9's, big berthas, and adams a7os irons and to me they are all ridiculously long. I dont want to hit a 9 iron 170 yards! It seems that manufacturers are obsessed with lengthy irons and i would like to hit something a little more traditional in shot length. Thanks for any suggestions.

[xmanhockey7]

  ShankinPlumber said:

Originally Posted by ShankinPlumber

I dont want this to come across as a brag post by any means. I am a fairly new, terrible golfer (usually play in the mid 90's) but i was wondering if there was a set of modern irons that played a little shorter? I have played di9's, big berthas, and adams a7os irons and to me they are all ridiculously long. I dont want to hit a 9 iron 170 yards! It seems that manufacturers are obsessed with lengthy irons and i would like to hit something a little more traditional in shot length. Thanks for any suggestions.

If you switched to irons that were more for lower handicaps you'd probably see a little loss in distance. I know with Titleist you can order the lofts to be "weaker" or "stronger". How do you hit your irons now? Do you hit them well and just have a bad short game or what? Maybe consider dialing it down and swinging easier. You'll find it easier to hit it straight and control your distance.

ETA: You could get your irons bent if you wanted more loft added if you REALLY wanted to.

[ShankinPlumber]

I just seem to hit my irons a lot longer than my playing partners. I have learned to take a nice easy swing but when i get a hold of one ( i am currently using a7os irons) the ball just really flys. And yes my short game really really sucks.

[xmanhockey7]

  ShankinPlumber said:

Originally Posted by ShankinPlumber

I just seem to hit my irons a lot longer than my playing partners. I have learned to take a nice easy swing but when i get a hold of one ( i am currently using a7os irons) the ball just really flys. And yes my short game really really sucks.

That can happen with game improvement irons. I'd suggest looking at something like the AP2s or Mizuno or Ping S56. Something that is not game improvement would probably help with that assuming you hit the ball fairly solid. And work on your short game!

[Shorty]

You will hit your irons more appropriate lengths if you stop delofting them at impact.

You will probably find that your 9 iron is more like a 6 iron at impact.

Correct technique will solve your problem.

[WUTiger]

  ShankinPlumber said:

Originally Posted by ShankinPlumber

I dont want to hit a 9 iron 170 yards! ...

Is this a distance average over several shots, or is "170 yards" a substitute for "really long?"

Also, do the iron shots have good loft, and come down where you want them to? Or, is there a chance you're hitting thin shots (low shots that hit and roll)?

Have you had any lessons? If not, a pro might be able to advise you on your shot quality, and what irons you need.

If you work in the skilled trades, and are strong in the upper body, you may simply hit the ball farther than others. I played golf with carpenters and steel workers in our area, and they all tend to outdrive me.

If you hit the irons a long way and have control problems, a stiffer shaft might help you out. Again, a pro or clubfitter can help you on this.

[Mr3Wiggle]

I'd be curious to know how far you hit your 5 iron.

[onthehunt526]

When I was a younger *(I'm still pretty young, 25 anyway...) I used to hit my 9-iron about 165-170... and my 5-iron went 210 ish (I also carried a 2-iron... but that's a story for another time)... I played weak lofts and as a matter of fact I still do... If you don't wanna hit it 170 with a 9-iron I would suggest 3/4 everything from 7-iron down to LW)...

[Gresh24]

This makes no sense.  Who cares how far each club goes as long as you know and are comfortable hitting them?

Getting caught up by the "number" on the club seems ridiculous to me.  Especially when someone claims they want less distance...

[onthehunt526]

  Gresh24 said:

Originally Posted by Gresh24

This makes no sense.  Who cares how far each club goes as long as you know and are comfortable hitting them?

Getting caught up by the "number" on the club seems ridiculous to me.  Especially when someone claims they want less distance...

True... in the old days... Pros used to play by feel... They might play a 5-iron from 150 yards on one hole and The next play a 7-iron the next... or even a 3-iron... who cares how far it goes with a particular club...

Set up a flag at your average 9-iron distance... and try to hit all of the irons in your bag that distance... (It's tricky trust me)

Basically it doesn't matter what you play persay it's what you are comfortable with...

[sean_miller]

  Gresh24 said:

Originally Posted by Gresh24

This makes no sense.  Who cares how far each club goes as long as you know and are comfortable hitting them?

Getting caught up by the "number" on the club seems ridiculous to me.  Especially when someone claims they want less distance...

It does make sense. I sure wouldn't want to be hitting my 9-iron 170 yards, which would require delofting at impact and swinging a bit harder. Distance and spin control go out the window, whereas at 145-155 control increases and scores go down.

[Gresh24]

  sean_miller said:

Originally Posted by sean_miller

It does make sense. I sure wouldn't want to be hitting my 9-iron 170 yards, which would require delofting at impact and swinging a bit harder. Distance and spin control go out the window, whereas at 145-155 control increases and scores go down.

So, he just hits a different club from 145-155.  A higher loft (or softer swing) that he can (better) control distance and spin.  The number on the club has little relevance.  Everyone has less distance and spin control at 170 yards vs. 145.

I know some depends on ball flight and his actual shot.  That we don't know.  You seem to be assuming his swing and ball flight have to be wrong.  Maybe they are.  170 for a 9 iron is long, but not crazy.  I golf with more than one guy that this would be typical for them.  They have no problem with keeping their score down with their distance.   They have better control with their 9 from 170 than I do with my 6.

Regardless, if his problem is with his swing, different clubs aren't the answer anyway.

[Golfingdad]

  Gresh24 said:

Originally Posted by Gresh24

So, he just hits a different club from 145-155.  A higher loft (or softer swing) that he can (better) control distance and spin.  The number on the club has little relevance.  You, and him, have less distance and spin control at 170 yards vs. 145, regardless of the club.

I know some depends on ball flight and his actual shot.  That we don't know.  You seem to be assuming his swing and ball flight have to be wrong.  Maybe they are.  170 for a 9 iron is long, but not crazy.  I golf with more than one guy that this would be typical for them.  They have no problem with keeping their score down with their distance.   They have better control with their 9 from 170 than I do with my 6.

Regardless, if his problem is with his swing, different clubs aren't the answer anyway.

Assuming that he's swinging decently and hitting it solidly, it seems to me that it does you no good to be hitting a 9 iron 170.  If he has normal distance gaps, then he's probably hititng his 3 iron about, what, 230?  And on the other end, even if he goes all the way down to LW, with normal distance gaps he's hitting that thing maybe 130?  That means he has a much larger range at the bottom where's he gonna have to hit 3/4, 1/2 and other various 'feel' shots.  (And if the wedges aren't going that far, then he still has bigger gaps in between to deal with)  And with that distance (assuming it carries over to the driver), even if he plays the back tees, how often is he going to have over 200 yard approach shots?  Wouldn't he be better off having his range of full shots for his irons go from 100-200, than 130-230?

So, while I generally agree that its silly to get caught up in iron numbers ... in his case, it sure seems like he could benefit from dialing it back a bit (either with swing or clubs).

[Gresh24]

  Golfingdad said:

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Assuming that he's swinging decently and hitting it solidly, it seems to me that it does you no good to be hitting a 9 iron 170.  If he has normal distance gaps, then he's probably hititng his 3 iron about, what, 230?  And on the other end, even if he goes all the way down to LW, with normal distance gaps he's hitting that thing maybe 130?  That means he has a much larger range at the bottom where's he gonna have to hit 3/4, 1/2 and other various 'feel' shots.  (And if the wedges aren't going that far, then he still has bigger gaps in between to deal with)  And with that distance (assuming it carries over to the driver), even if he plays the back tees, how often is he going to have over 200 yard approach shots?  Wouldn't he be better off having his range of full shots for his irons go from 100-200, than 130-230?

So, while I generally agree that its silly to get caught up in iron numbers ... in his case, it sure seems like he could benefit from dialing it back a bit (either with swing or clubs).

If he wants to change his entire approach and swing and 'dial it back', so be it.  I'd rather have the distance "problem".  The best players I play with do hit 3 irons 230, and 8 or 9 from 170.

Again, I'm just saying that changing irons is pointless (without changing his game, like you have mentioned).  To just get more traditional or different clubs is not the answer.  I took that to be the OP's original thought, (I saw the debate more about clubs and not distance) maybe I missed that.

[sean_miller]

  Golfingdad said:

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gresh24

So, he just hits a different club from 145-155.  A higher loft (or softer swing) that he can (better) control distance and spin.  The number on the club has little relevance.  You, and him, have less distance and spin control at 170 yards vs. 145, regardless of the club.

I know some depends on ball flight and his actual shot.  That we don't know.  You seem to be assuming his swing and ball flight have to be wrong.  Maybe they are.  170 for a 9 iron is long, but not crazy.  I golf with more than one guy that this would be typical for them.  They have no problem with keeping their score down with their distance.   They have better control with their 9 from 170 than I do with my 6.

Regardless, if his problem is with his swing, different clubs aren't the answer anyway.

Assuming that he's swinging decently and hitting it solidly, it seems to me that it does you no good to be hitting a 9 iron 170.  If he has normal distance gaps, then he's probably hititng his 3 iron about, what, 230?  And on the other end, even if he goes all the way down to LW, with normal distance gaps he's hitting that thing maybe 130?  That means he has a much larger range at the bottom where's he gonna have to hit 3/4, 1/2 and other various 'feel' shots.  (And if the wedges aren't going that far, then he still has bigger gaps in between to deal with)  And with that distance (assuming it carries over to the driver), even if he plays the back tees, how often is he going to have over 200 yard approach shots?  Wouldn't he be better off having his range of full shots for his irons go from 100-200, than 130-230?

So, while I generally agree that its silly to get caught up in iron numbers ... in his case, it sure seems like he could benefit from dialing it back a bit (either with swing or clubs).

Pretty much what I was talking about right there.

[ShankinPlumber]

  Golfingdad said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gresh24

So, he just hits a different club from 145-155.  A higher loft (or softer swing) that he can (better) control distance and spin.  The number on the club has little relevance.  You, and him, have less distance and spin control at 170 yards vs. 145, regardless of the club.

I know some depends on ball flight and his actual shot.  That we don't know.  You seem to be assuming his swing and ball flight have to be wrong.  Maybe they are.  170 for a 9 iron is long, but not crazy.  I golf with more than one guy that this would be typical for them.  They have no problem with keeping their score down with their distance.   They have better control with their 9 from 170 than I do with my 6.

Regardless, if his problem is with his swing, different clubs aren't the answer anyway.

Assuming that he's swinging decently and hitting it solidly, it seems to me that it does you no good to be hitting a 9 iron 170.  If he has normal distance gaps, then he's probably hititng his 3 iron about, what, 230?  And on the other end, even if he goes all the way down to LW, with normal distance gaps he's hitting that thing maybe 130?  That means he has a much larger range at the bottom where's he gonna have to hit 3/4, 1/2 and other various 'feel' shots.  (And if the wedges aren't going that far, then he still has bigger gaps in between to deal with)  And with that distance (assuming it carries over to the driver), even if he plays the back tees, how often is he going to have over 200 yard approach shots?  Wouldn't he be better off having his range of full shots for his irons go from 100-200, than 130-230?

So, while I generally agree that its silly to get caught up in iron numbers ... in his case, it sure seems like he could benefit from dialing it back a bit (either with swing or clubs).

the main problem im facing is that i really dont have a full swing club from 120-130 in. I dont average 170 with my 9 but if i hit it on the screws, then it is a definite possibility. In no way am i suggesting that i have a good swing, but i do get a good ball flight.

[Golfingdad]

  Gresh24 said:

Originally Posted by Gresh24

Again, I'm just saying that changing irons is pointless (without changing his game, like you have mentioned).  To just get more traditional or different clubs is not the answer.  I took that to be the OP's original thought, (I saw the debate more about clubs and not distance) maybe I missed that.

Nope, you didn't miss it.  You are absolutely right.  I'm speaking to an issue with his swing (of which I know nothing, just going off assumptions) when really all he asked about is clubs.

OP, I just went and looked at Adams website.  The a7os 9 iron is 40*.  A "normal" 8-iron is typically 39*.  an 8 iron 170 doesn't sound nearly as unreasonable.  (I hit mine that far once - a long long time ago)

So in that sense, Gresh is right, if you want to get caught up in the number on the bottom of the club, you should probably subtract one from each of yours and compare that way.

But in general, I still think that you would be better served figuring out a way to have your range of iron distances closer to 100-200 instead of much higher.

[Gresh24]

Ok, think I got it now...

When I said "this makes no sense", I was simply referring to changing clubs with different lofts.

I understand the swing argument.  Technically it makes sense , but I'd still learn to deal with the distance "problem", and work on the short game.