Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

what are cons of game improvement clubs (intended for high handicappers)


Note: This thread is 4644 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

hey guys,

i was wondering...(esp regarding irons)

what are the cons of game improvement clubs that are usually for people with high handicaps?

what are the actual differences compared to a higher-end forged irons?

thanks!


Posted
Originally Posted by moonducks

what are the actual differences compared to a higher-end forged irons?

Being forged or not forged has nothing to do with it.. There are forged game improvement clubs and cast player's irons...

Tristan Hilton

My Equipment: 
Titleist TSR2 Driver (Fujikura Pro 2.0 TS; 10.5°) · PXG 0211 FWs (Diamana S+ 60; 15° and 21°) · PXG 0211 Hybrid (MMT 80; 22°) · Edel SMS Irons (SteelFiber i95; 5-GW) · Edel SMS Pro Wedges (SteelFiber i110; 56°, 60°) · Edel Classic Blade Putter (32") · Maxfli Tour Ball · Pinned Prism Rangefinder · SuperStroke Grips · Flightscope Mevo · TRUE Linkswear Shoes · Vessel Player V Pro 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by moonducks

hey guys,

i was wondering...(esp regarding irons)

what are the cons of game improvement clubs that are usually for people with high handicaps?

what are the actual differences compared to a higher-end forged irons?

thanks!

There are no cons for game improvement clubs other than the look of them.  Better players don't usually play them, by and large, simply because they don't like the way they look.  AND, they don't require the help that those type of clubs offer people with lesser skills ... bigger hitting area, more forgiveness, that type of thing.

I fall in the middle ... I don't like the look of the biggest, bulkiest clubs, but I'm also still a bit intimidated by tiny blades.  My clubs kind of fall in the middle as well.  I think "technically" they are in the players category, but they really perform more like GI clubs.  A lot of forgiveness on my toe-hits. :)

  • Upvote 1
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I waa always under the impression that GI irons gave extra forgiveness at the expense of workability.

Jeff

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

What I hate most about the typical SGI irons is the offset on the mid to long irons.  I really can't stand to play an offset iron.  I know it's a mental thing, but all I can visualize is the shank I could hit with them.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by SloverUT

I waa always under the impression that GI irons gave extra forgiveness at the expense of workability.

And you're certainly not alone in that assumption.  I'm pretty sure that is just a myth though.

I think about it this way ... in all of the lessons I've received, or videos I've watched on here, or essays I've read about ball flight laws, ball trajectory, how to hook it, how to slice it, how to stop hooking it, stop slicing it, how to hit a draw, fade, and so on and so on, I have never seen a caveat regarding the type of club you are using.  It's always about the swing and the physics of the contact between the club and the ball, and nothing else.

The other bit of logic I use is that I know a lot of pros play GI clubs ... or at least clubs I would consider forgiving.  Lee Westwood and Mark Wilson, for example, play (or have played) i20s.  Lee Westwood is a top 10 in the world player so he certainly doesn't need the extra forgiveness ... so why would he play clubs that would not allow him to work the ball as needed?

Anyways, those are my thoughts.  Not positive I'm right, just what I think. :)

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by Golfingdad

And you're certainly not alone in that assumption.  I'm pretty sure that is just a myth though.

I think about it this way ... in all of the lessons I've received, or videos I've watched on here, or essays I've read about ball flight laws, ball trajectory, how to hook it, how to slice it, how to stop hooking it, stop slicing it, how to hit a draw, fade, and so on and so on, I have never seen a caveat regarding the type of club you are using.  It's always about the swing and the physics of the contact between the club and the ball, and nothing else.

The other bit of logic I use is that I know a lot of pros play GI clubs ... or at least clubs I would consider forgiving.  Lee Westwood and Mark Wilson, for example, play (or have played) i20s.  Lee Westwood is a top 10 in the world player so he certainly doesn't need the extra forgiveness ... so why would he play clubs that would not allow him to work the ball as needed?

Anyways, those are my thoughts.  Not positive I'm right, just what I think. :)

Yeah they both still play them.  The i20 clubs are slightly more forgiving(larger heads/soles) in the longer clubs, but the short irons are smaller and all of them are very workable.  I would call them a forgiving players club with the perimeter weighting and progressive sizing.

Originally Posted by SloverUT

I waa always under the impression that GI irons gave extra forgiveness at the expense of workability.

I put a GI 4i into my bag.  Someone was trying to tell me that I would hook it because of the offset.  That is bogus.  I hit it just fine with the same swing, and can easily work it left or right by adjusting the face angle/stance at address.  The biggest difference is the head is bigger so your distance is still OK on a slight miss-hit.

Nate

:tmade:(10.5) :pxg:(4W & 7W) MIURA(3-PW) :mizuno:(50/54/60) 

 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by Golfingdad

And you're certainly not alone in that assumption.  I'm pretty sure that is just a myth though.

I think about it this way ... in all of the lessons I've received, or videos I've watched on here, or essays I've read about ball flight laws, ball trajectory, how to hook it, how to slice it, how to stop hooking it, stop slicing it, how to hit a draw, fade, and so on and so on, I have never seen a caveat regarding the type of club you are using.  It's always about the swing and the physics of the contact between the club and the ball, and nothing else.

The other bit of logic I use is that I know a lot of pros play GI clubs ... or at least clubs I would consider forgiving.  Lee Westwood and Mark Wilson, for example, play (or have played) i20s.  Lee Westwood is a top 10 in the world player so he certainly doesn't need the extra forgiveness ... so why would he play clubs that would not allow him to work the ball as needed?

Anyways, those are my thoughts.  Not positive I'm right, just what I think. :)

The problem as I see it is, most people don't agree on what GI clubs are.  Some consider anything that's not a blade (Titleist MB, Mizuno MP-64/69) a game improvement iron.

I think many people confuse game improvment irons with SGI or UGI which do have thicker top lines and greater offsets.  I wouldn't consider Ping i20's or Mizuno MP-59's blades.  Both sets have a fairly thin top line and minimal offset but they offer more forgiveness from toe and heel hits than blades, which I'd think would be appealing to any golfer.

Joe Paradiso

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by Fourputt

What I hate most about the typical SGI irons is the offset on the mid to long irons.  I really can't stand to play an offset iron.  I know it's a mental thing, but all I can visualize is the shank I could hit with them.

aaaaabsolutely... i'm the same way

IN MY BAG
Driver: Taylormade SLDR Mini Driver
3 Wood: Calloway RAZR Hawk
Hybrid: Ping 19*
Irons: Mizuno JPX 825
Wedges: 52, 56 Cleveland
Putter: Odyssey White Ice

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
The SGI clubs (as opposed to GI) are probably NOT used by better players because the sole design limits the shots you can make. Those wide, fat soles and low CG takes away some trouble shots that everyone has to have in the bag. I picked my GI clubs because they have a thin top line and no offset, and I CAN work the ball a bit. It's a compromise for most players. Unless you are being paid to play golf, most casual or better players wouldn't mind some of the features of a GI club to make up for an occasional mishit.

Posted
Switching from a SGI to GI, then to a blade is an individual process. Ideally someone new to golf, starts with the SGI. Lower CG, Higher launching, wide sole, draw bias(prevent slicing), and a low leading edge. The GI irons have most of the same characteristics but less to the extent. As you get better, so should your clubs. They will hinder your progress and keep a good player from getting better. For example, my personal experience. Started playing 2 1/2 years ago. I'm very athletic, catch on very quickly, and I hate not being good at something. Therefore, I practiced religiously. Started with a set of TM game improving irons. In my first year I broke 90 a few times and started consistently hitting solid shots. Last year I was putting up #s in the mid 80s and shot 79 twice. I was ready for a little workability. So as I'm learning to hit high, low, draw, fade.....I realized that my irons were fighting against anything that wasn't high and straight. I had the misconception that blades were only for tour players. But with some research and advice, I found the forged Adams CMB irons. A player iron, with a small cavity. Forgiveness was still somewhat present, and I could actually hit a variety of shots. My distance was much more consistent, and I could get more aggressive when attacking the pin. My first round with them, I got steep on a 5 iron from 198 out and stopped it on a dime 5ft from the hole. That's how love happens! I dropped 6 on my h-cap just because I upgraded my irons. I know a couple of scratch guys that use GI irons because it fits their game. Irons are not their strong point. But they can hit a straight driver and sink putts. If ball striking is not an issue, I urge you to think about upgrading. Your bad shots will be slightly worse, but your good shots will be even better.

Posted

IMHO. The difference generally is ego related. Many seem to have this unusual malady of throwing up a little in their mouth at the mere sight of an SGI "shovel". This is generally followed by the winning lines, " i'm a great ballstriker, just can't drive or putt for Sh*t" and my 20+ handi would be single digits if only I had a bit more workabilty on my irons to help me get onto those tucked away pins.

All over these type of boards you see/ hear of tons of good low digit cappers playing Ping G- series irons, whilst all the 20 cappers want to justify buying forged blades.

It's like there is some unwritten credo that your not playing real golf unless you do it with a wafer thin butter knife of a set of blades.


Posted
Agreed. The guy who absolutely had to have the 60* vokey wedge because he saw a tour player hole out with it during the masters, is still cutting sod with it on the practice green.

Posted
Worst trade in was getting rid of my x-20's for McGregor forged. The forged didn't last long. I moved onto x-22 tours. Going into my 3rd season with them. Only thing learned I am inbetween reg and stiff flex. Enter 5.5 flighted shaft. Oh yeah and still nees a gi iron.

  :sunmountain: eco lite stand Bag
:tmade: Sim 2 Max driver
 :callaway: Mavrick 20 * hybrid
:tmade: M2 3HL                               :mizuno: JPX 923 5-gw                           

 Lazrus 52, 56 wedges

:scotty_cameron:
:true_linkswear:-Lux Hybrid, Lux Sport, Original 1.2

:clicgear:


Posted
You can find tour players with GI irons, which are most likely long irons. Some got Conventional ones, which you can find in shorter irons too. Then you got a lot of players with Classic irons, which are the hardest to hit. One thing to think about is how much you want to work the ball. Here is a quote from Erik from the [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/t/61391/shaping-the-ball]"Shaping the Ball"-thread[/URL]: [QUOTE]95% of the shots a pro plays (Tiger Woods may be one of a group of very small exceptions, and even he isn't as different as many think) are their stock shot. They don't curve much, but if a player is a drawer of the golf ball, 95% of their shots draw. It's the most reliable, dependable way to play - with a pattern.[/QUOTE] So, before you got out there with your blades and shape the ball every which way, remember that you are most likely better off playing the same shot 95% of the time. Clubs that are easier to hit will allow you to hit your stock shot more easily every time. Having GI, SGI or UGI irons does not mean you can't shape the ball or hit a stock draw or fade. They are made to be more forgiving and in many situations help you get lift on the ball. Comparing an amateur to a tour pro is still a bit weird. They got a consistency and ballstriking abilities you are not even close to. They can play less forgiving irons because they hit the ball consistently in the sweet spot almost every time.

Ogio Grom | Callaway X Hot Pro | Callaway X-Utility 3i | Mizuno MX-700 23º | Titleist Vokey SM 52.08, 58.12 | Mizuno MX-700 15º | Titleist 910 D2 9,5º | Scotty Cameron Newport 2 | Titleist Pro V1x and Taylormade Penta | Leupold GX-1

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Originally Posted by Golfingdad

I think about it this way ... in all of the lessons I've received, or videos I've watched on here, or essays I've read about ball flight laws, ball trajectory, how to hook it, how to slice it, how to stop hooking it, stop slicing it, how to hit a draw, fade, and so on and so on, I have never seen a caveat regarding the type of club you are using.  It's always about the swing and the physics of the contact between the club and the ball, and nothing else.

Gd, I agree with you, but I think you are unintentionally arguing against any differences between blades and GIs. IE, if it's all about the swing, what does it matter what kind of hunk of metal is at the end of the shaft?

In my experience, most misses are chunks or thins, which no amount of GI is going to change (yes I know about sole/turf interaction, but when you hit 1" behind the ball no amount of width/cambering/radiusing/chamfering is going put lipstick on that pig). The next most common miss is the bananna slice or duck hook, and those are issues of swing path and clubface orientation, and again, no amount of cavity/inverted cone/COG manipulation is going to turn OTT open face contact into ITO square face contact. So, why not go with clubs that will at least feel great and give you intimate feedback?

  • Like 1

dak4n6


Posted
Originally Posted by dak4n6

Gd, I agree with you, but I think you are unintentionally arguing against any differences between blades and GIs. IE, if it's all about the swing, what does it matter what kind of hunk of metal is at the end of the shaft?

In my experience, most misses are chunks or thins, which no amount of GI is going to change (yes I know about sole/turf interaction, but when you hit 1" behind the ball no amount of width/cambering/radiusing/chamfering is going put lipstick on that pig). The next most common miss is the bananna slice or duck hook, and those are issues of swing path and clubface orientation, and again, no amount of cavity/inverted cone/COG manipulation is going to turn OTT open face contact into ITO square face contact. So, why not go with clubs that will at least feel great and give you intimate feedback?

I don't really have anything to back it up but I actually think it does help a bit if you hit 1" behind the ball since most have the wider sole and increased bounce.  How could it not?  I don't know too many people that banana slice or duck hook irons so I don't really think that is as big an issue really.  Mainly they help in large part with off center hits.  Shot distribution would be better for most golfers with them, and most golfers don't need intimate feedback playing once a week or a couple times a month.  I can feel where I hit my 4i on the face just fine as well.

Nate

:tmade:(10.5) :pxg:(4W & 7W) MIURA(3-PW) :mizuno:(50/54/60) 

 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

There are very few cons using SGI irons. One would be they are more forgiving and thus you get spoiled and become a little more sloppy with your swing. Some also mute the bad shots and you think you have hit it well and it falls 10 yards short. For a high handicapper there is little wrong with them. The pros way out weigh the cons. Offset helps to square the club some and the lower center of gravity helps get the ball up in the air easily. Perimeter weighting makes the club more forgiving although that can be a pro or a con. They are a personal decision club. If you dislike offset or a thick top line or a wide sole that you might want to go with a GI club instead.


Note: This thread is 4644 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

    • Day 470 - 2026-01-13 Got some work in while some players were using the sim, so I had to stick around. 🙂 Good thing too, since… I hadn't yet practiced today until about 6:45 tonight. 😛 
    • That's not quite the same thing as what some people messaged me today.
    • Day 152 1-12 More reps bowing wrists in downswing. Still pausing at the top. Making sure to get to lead side and getting the ball to go left. Slow progress is better than no progress.  
    • Yea, if I were to make a post arguing against the heat map concept, citing some recent robot testing would be my first point. The heat map concept is what I find interesting, more on that below. The robot testing I have looked at, including the one you linked, do discreet point testing then provide that discrete data in various forms. Which as you said is old as the hills, if you know of any other heat map concept type testing, I would be interested in links to that though! No, and I did say in my first post "if this heat map data is valid and reliable" meaning I have my reservations as well. Heck beyond reservations. I have some fairly strong suspicions there are flaws. But all I have are hunches and guesses, if anyone has data to share, I would be interested to see it.  My background is I quit golfing about 9 years ago and have been toying with the idea of returning. So far that has been limited to a dozen range sessions in late Summer through Fall when the range closed. Then primarily hitting foam balls indoors using a swing speed monitor as feedback. Between the range closing and the snow flying I did buy an R10 and hit a few balls into a backyard net. The heat map concept is a graphical representation of efficiency (smash factor) loss mapped onto the face of the club. As I understand it to make the representation agnostic to swing speed or other golfer specific swing characteristics. It is more a graphical tool not a data tool. The areas are labeled numerically in discrete 1% increments while the raw data is changing at ~0.0017%/mm and these changes are represented as subtle changes in color across those discrete areas. The only data we care about in terms of the heat map is the 1.3 to 1.24 SF loss and where was the strike location on the face - 16mm heal and 5mm low. From the video the SF loss is 4.6% looking up 16mm heal and 5mm low on the heat map it is on the edge of where the map changes from 3% loss to 4%. For that data point in the video, 16mm heal, 5mm low, 71.3 mph swing speed (reference was 71.4 mph), the distance loss was 7.2% or 9 yards, 125 reference distance down to 116. However, distance loss is not part of a heat map discussion. Distance loss will be specific to the golfers swing characteristics not the club. What I was trying to convey was that I do not have enough information to determine good or bad. Are the two systems referencing strike location the same? How accurate are the two systems in measuring even if they are referencing from the same location? What variation might have been introduced by the club delivery on the shot I picked vs the reference set of shots? However, based on the data I do have and making some assumptions and guesses the results seem ok, within reason, a good place to start from and possibly refine. I do not see what is wrong with 70mph 7 iron, although that is one of my other areas of questioning. The title of the video has slow swing speed in all caps, and it seems like the videos I watch define 7i slow, medium, and fast as 70, 80, and 90. The whole question of mid iron swing speed and the implications for a players game and equipment choices is of interest to me as (according to my swing speed meter) over my ~decade break I lost 30mph swing speed on mine.
    • Maxfli, Maltby, Golfworks, all under the Dicks/Golf Galaxy umbrella... it's all a bit confounding. Looking at the pictures, they all look very, very similar in their design. I suspect they're the same club, manufactured in the same factory in China, just with different badging.  The whacky pricing structure has soured me, so I'll just cool my heels a bit. The new Mizuno's will be available to test very soon. I'm in no rush.  
×
×
  • 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.