Why Would I Not Play the Longest, Most Forgiving Irons?

[saevel25]

10 hours ago, ColeThornton said:

 In fact many tour pros are using the PXG irons.  These are some of the features-

8  players by their website, not really that many.

Also, there are 4 models of PXG irons. Here are the list of features for Zach Johnson's irons.

1. Compact, blade-style head design with minimal offset.
2. Narrow sole width allows for extreme workability for golfers with a shallower angle of attack
3. Small internal cavity injected with TPE provides exceptional feel and forgiveness for a traditional blade-style iron.

Basically, it's close to the opposite of what you listed. When you inject the hollow cavity with a thermoplastic, you are lessening the effects you would get if the club was hollow.

Are better players hitting clubs with a bit of GI tech, sure. They value distance control, dispersion, and consistency way more. Sorry to say, GI tech can start to adversely influence those three things.

10 hours ago, ColeThornton said:

Would you not agree that regardless of how it does it, the point of offset is to encourage the ball going more left than right?

It's negligible.

At most you are seeing .1 to .15 inches in offset difference between blades and GI clubs. With a 7 iron that produces a delay of contact of 0.0001 seconds. Even if you had a closure rate of 1000 degrees per second, the clubface would only close down 1/10th of a degree.

Can you nit pick and claim it does encourage the ball to go less right, sure. It's not something anyone should really be considering. It's not significant.

10 hours ago, ColeThornton said:

They won't know until they try one.   At one time every type of club ever invented was not tried yet.   And once again most Gi/SGI features have nothing to do with offset!

You don't think they haven't tried?

The issue is, there isn't a market for it.

GI/SGI features introduce inconsistency for better ball strikers. Do they maintain ball speeds better, sure. But, better players hit the center of the club way more often, which negates majority of the benefits of a GI/SGI club. Also, those type of clubs produce inconsistent ball flights.

That is why you see PGA Tour players introduce these clubs in very specific instances. Replacing a long iron, which is already very tough to hit. That isn't enough to warrant investing in a whole product line for consumers.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, saevel25 said:

The issue is, there isn't a market for it.

GI/SGI features introduce inconsistency for better ball strikers. Do they maintain ball speeds better, sure. But, better players hit the center of the club way more often, which negates majority of the benefits of a GI/SGI club. Also, those type of clubs produce inconsistent ball flights.

Right. Better players are willing to accept a few GI improvements, particularly in their longer irons, but they want vertical workability and very precise distance and flight control from their 6-irons and shorter.

He wants a unicorn.

That's been my only point - a company isn't going to just take an SGI club that offers "all the help [he] can get" and then reduce the offset to zero or that of a MB. Plus, in reducing the offset that much, the clubs would no longer be "all the help [he] can get."

That's all.

P.S. Talked with two club engineers today and they confirmed that reducing the offset would negatively affect the GI performance of the club.

[ColeThornton]

6 hours ago, saevel25 said:

It's negligible.

At most you are seeing .1 to .15 inches in offset difference between blades and GI clubs. With a 7 iron that produces a delay of contact of 0.0001 seconds. Even if you had a closure rate of 1000 degrees per second, the clubface would only close down 1/10th of a degree.

 

Saevel 25 since you posted the above, do you agree with this statement-

"Super game improvement clubs, as a rule, have a lot of offset because that's integral to how they work."

And if you do agree that it is "integral" can you tell me why these GI features have anything to do with offset-

Perimeter weighting, larger heads, flexible faces, higher MOI, wider soles...

I don't see where the majority of GI features have anything to do with offset and if it is indeed "negligible" would you agree it can't be "integral" to how they work.   How can something that is "negligible" be "integral"?   By definition it can't be both.

I think "you" are right.   And I think GI hybrid irons without offset "PROVE" all these GI features work fine without offset.

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

And I think GI hybrid irons without offset "PROVE" all these GI features work fine without offset.

GI hybrids move the CG back by having really large club heads.

11 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

And if you do agree that it is "integral" can you tell me why these GI features have anything to do with offset-

You’re missing the point.

Offset improves the game improvement nature of the club. It doesn’t “have to do with” those other features.

A wider sole is a GI feature. You could build a flexible face without a wide sole but why would you?

Also a CG further back enhances the MOI. So that one does relate.

I’m done here man. You want a unicorn.

[tinker]

It’s not about smashing the ball as hard as you can with a shovel. It’s about squaring the club head at impact and hitting the sweet spot. Forgiveness is about getting away with miss hit shots. Good golfers are concerned with results of well struck shots. 

[ColeThornton]

6 hours ago, tinker said:

It’s not about smashing the ball as hard as you can with a shovel. It’s about squaring the club head at impact and hitting the sweet spot. Forgiveness is about getting away with miss hit shots. Good golfers are concerned with results of well struck shots. 

"A good round of golf is if you can hit about three shots that turnout exactly as you planned them."

"This is a game of misses. The guy who misses the best is going to win."

Ben Hogan

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, ColeThornton said:

"A good round of golf is if you can hit about three shots that turnout exactly as you planned them."

"This is a game of misses. The guy who misses the best is going to win."

Ben Hogan

You’re taking Hogan too literal. If Hogan was aiming for a flag from 140yds...playing a slope and expected to hit it to 10’ and ended up 20’ he’d say it was a bad shot. It isn’t. Really good golfers, @iacas, @mvmac, @Phil McGleno and tour level golfers want precision and have great feel for trajectory and workability. Their main focus isn’t forgiveness for all the bad shots they’re gonna hit. Again, ‘misses’ for those guys are nothing at all like ‘misses’ for me or higher hcp golfers for certain.

[ColeThornton]

1 hour ago, Vinsk said:

You’re taking Hogan too literal. If Hogan was aiming for a flag from 140yds...playing a slope and expected to hit it to 10’ and ended up 20’ he’d say it was a bad shot. It isn’t. Really good golfers, @iacas, @mvmac, @Phil McGleno and tour level golfers want precision and have great feel for trajectory and workability. Their main focus isn’t forgiveness for all the bad shots they’re gonna hit. Again, ‘misses’ for those guys are nothing at all like ‘misses’ for me or higher hcp golfers for certain.

If one of the best ball strikers of all time says-

"This is a game of misses. The guy who misses the best is going to win."

Then it is even more true for those of us who miss it worse and more often.   If some tour pros are using GI irons and hybrids for their long irons, I think the vast majority of players would be better off using them for their mid irons too.   These are the best players in the world, they wouldn't be using them if it didn't work!

I agree with Hogan!

"If Hogan was aiming for a flag from 140yds...playing a slope and expected to hit it to 10’ and ended up 20’ he’d say it was a bad shot. It isn’t."

And with a modern club with some GI features that same swing would have ended up closer than 20'

GI simply means Game Improvement.  Steel shafts were a "game improvement" feature.   Metal heads instead of persimmon was a "game improvement" feature.   The cavity back or perimeter weighting was a "game improvement" feature.   The flex face on an iron is a "game improvement" feature just like it was on a driver.   There were those playing persimmon who turned up their nose at those with the original metal head drivers and then switched to them later.   There were those who thought nothing compared to a muscle back iron and now even most pros are playing cavities.   They all use to carry a one or two iron and now it's hybrids instead.   Some use to look down at a 5 wood, they called it an old man's club, but guess what as soon as you find you play better with it, it's a different story.   It's funny how if you like a certain GI feature then it's all fine, but if another player likes one you don't like then it's a shovel.   Why can't we simply understand that different features work for different players and their's nothing wrong with that.   It doesn't make one bad or good, it doesn't make one cool or not, it doesn't mean a certain range of handicap can only play one or another... they're simply different.

Edited January 24, 2019 by ColeThornton

[Vinsk]

6 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

 These are the best players in the world, they wouldn't be using them if it didn't work!

Right! Yet despite advanced technology, countless hours of research and the best players being just fine with using a GI long iron...you want a unicorn club. Rickie isn’t asking for a GI iron with no offset but wait...you are...so let’s get busy making one despite the above mentioned.

[ColeThornton]

18 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Right! Yet despite advanced technology, countless hours of research and the best players being just fine with using a GI long iron...you want a unicorn club. Rickie isn’t asking for a GI iron with no offset but wait...you are...so let’s get busy making one despite the above mentioned.

I asked for one with no or "less offset" and ping just introduced a new GI iron with less offset.   Those of you who think a GI iron with less offset is impossible( a unicorn lol), were just proven wrong by Ping.   I can't believe the irony of the announcement the day after my original post.   Before you say, it, I realize it still has offset, and you should realize that more than once in my original post I said "less offset".  I think other manufacturers will also be offering GI models with less offset if they aren't already.  The market may be starting to trend towards less offset in GI irons.

PS Rickie is using GI features without offset... in his driver and others and how would you know what he's asking for?

Edited January 24, 2019 by ColeThornton

[Vinsk]

8 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

I asked for one with no or "less offset" and ping just introduced a new GI iron with less offset.

Titleist AP1 has less offset than the Pings. So I assumed you were asking for less which would be approaching none.

On 1/21/2019 at 9:00 PM, iacas said:

The 7-iron has 0.18" of offset. That's almost 4.6mm. A Titleist AP1 has only 3.5mm.

So, yeah, it seems to be quite a bit.

Did you miss this from the other thread?

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

I asked for one with no or "less offset" and ping just introduced a new GI iron with less offset.

Their G410 has ~25% more offset than the AP1. And you want a club with "little or no offset." (even though muscle backs have a little offset, too).

On 1/21/2019 at 5:45 PM, ColeThornton said:

That being said and from reading golf forums there seems to be maybe as many as 10 - 20% of the players using game improvement irons that would prefer one with no or little offset.

I don't think your 10-20% number is anywhere near accurate. We have no real way of knowing, though, so it's not even something to discuss. Manufacturers sometimes miss markets, but we've had SGI irons for a while now… I feel as though it's pretty likely that one of the companies would have made a club that appealed to a market that large if they could have by now.

---

Certain features tend to lead to certain kinds of features/benefits.

SGI clubs (again you've said you want "all the help you can get," so we're not talking about AP2s or something, we're talking SGI level stuff) tend to have the extremes of all GI features, which include (but aren't limited to):

• wide soles
• lots of offset
• cavity backs and other perimeter weighting
• thicker toplines
• springy faces
• stronger lofts (to combat some of the above)
• etc.

Players irons tend to have:

• thinner soles
• less offset
• smaller cavities
• thinner toplines
• more rigid faces
• higher lofts
• etc.

Think of the SGI stuff as black paint, and the players irons stuff as white paint. If you want a really black club ("all the help you can get," then you don't want to add any white to it. If you want a grey club, you're by definition not in the SGI land anymore. You're in some middle area, which isn't what you've said you want.

Offset improves the GI nature of the club. It pushes it further toward that end of the spectrum.

3 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Titleist AP1 has less offset than the Pings. So I assumed you were asking for less which would be approaching none.

Oh, he is, but either he really misunderstood the PING thing, or he's changing his tune.

On 1/21/2019 at 5:45 PM, ColeThornton said:

That being said and from reading golf forums there seems to be maybe as many as 10 - 20% of the players using game improvement irons that would prefer one with no or little offset.

Doesn't exist. Even muscle backs have some offset, so "no" is completely out the window, and a club with little offset isn't going to be an SGI club.

Move on to something else @ColeThornton. You want a unicorn, and this is no longer a please, but a request by the moderation team.

P.S. In case you haven't noticed, none of the people you're arguing with are in any position to do anything to make your unicorn clubs for you. Take your please elsewhere.

[ColeThornton]

2 minutes ago, iacas said:

Their G410 has ~25% more offset than the AP1. And you want a club with "little or no offset." (even though muscle backs have a little offset, too).

I don't think your 10-20% number is anywhere near accurate. We have no real way of knowing, though, so it's not even something to discuss. Manufacturers sometimes miss markets, but we've had SGI irons for a while now… I feel as though it's pretty likely that one of the companies would have made a club that appealed to a market that large if they could have by now.

---

Certain features tend to lead to certain kinds of features/benefits.

SGI clubs (again you've said you want "all the help you can get," so we're not talking about AP2s or something, we're talking SGI level stuff) tend to have the extremes of all GI features, which include (but aren't limited to):

• wide soles
• lots of offset
• cavity backs and other perimeter weighting
• thicker toplines
• springy faces
• stronger lofts (to combat some of the above)
• etc.

Players irons tend to have:

• thinner soles
• less offset
• smaller cavities
• thinner toplines
• more rigid faces
• higher lofts
• etc.

Think of the SGI stuff as black paint, and the players irons stuff as white paint. If you want a really black club ("all the help you can get," then you don't want to add any white to it. If you want a grey club, you're by definition not in the SGI land anymore. You're in some middle area, which isn't what you've said you want.

Offset improves the GI nature of the club. It pushes it further toward that end of the spectrum.

Oh, he is, but either he really misunderstood the PING thing, or he's changing his tune.

Doesn't exist. Even muscle backs have some offset, so "no" is completely out the window, and a club with little offset isn't going to be an SGI club.

Move on to something else @ColeThornton. You want a unicorn, and this is no longer a please, but a request by the moderation team.

You know as well as I do that the phrase "all the help you can get" is subjective at best.   Someone has just said I took Ben Hogan too literal as you did me.   I do want a club that has all the game improvement features that help me with as little offset as possible.   Vinsk just pointed out the AP1 has so little offset less would be approaching none.   So could you please tell me why you think it is impossible to have a GI iron with little or no offset(a unicorn as you like to call it).  I've never seen the new AP1s, the unicorn may aready exist!

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

You know as well as I do that the phrase "all the help you can get" is subjective at best.

It puts you toward the SGI end of the spectrum.

2 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

Someone has just said I took Ben Hogan too literal as you did me.

Nope.

Because if all you're after is a GI iron with a medium amount of offset, there are a ton of those out there.

2 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

I do want a club that has all the game improvement features that help me with as little offset as possible.

Offset is a game improvement feature.

2 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

Vinsk just pointed out the AP1 has so little offset less would be approaching none.

No he didn't. And the AP1 has the most offset of any club Titleist currently makes:

Titleist 718 AP1 Golf Irons | Titleist

---

718 AP1 game improvement irons provide players with maximum distance and maximum forgiveness, all in the look and feel you've come to expect from Titleist.

2 minutes ago, ColeThornton said:

So could you please tell me why you think it is impossible to have a GI iron with little or no offset(a unicorn as you like to call it).  I've never seen the new AP1s, the unicorn may aready exist!

It has the most offset of any club in their lineup.

This is the second and now final time I'm posting this: Move on to something else @ColeThornton. You want a unicorn, and this is no longer a please, but a request by the moderation team.

[mvmac]

On 1/21/2019 at 7:03 PM, ColeThornton said:

1) Hollow for extreme perimeter weighting, more than just a cavity.

2) Individual weight screws, primarily low on the club, which creates a lower center of gravity.

3) Wider sole.

4) A flexible high COR face which increases distance.

5) Fill to increase COR

It's called the PING i500. G tech with iBlade look at address.

On 1/21/2019 at 8:04 PM, ColeThornton said:

And once again most Gi/SGI features have nothing to do with offset!

That's incorrect. Offset and game improvement go hand in hand. It's just not talked about because offset has a negative connotation and it's something they can market. It's much sexier to talk about hot faces and cog location.

[mvmac]

Just want to point out Fowler is still using a muscleback 4-iron, the SGI 4-iron he'll be using as a hybrid/driving iron, as @iacas said.

 

It doesn't make sense for most pros to us game improvement irons, if anything it would hurt them. They would hit it way too high, wouldn't be able to control trajectory, the hotter faces would lead to worse distance control through the bag and gapping problems with the wedges. They want faces that will give them control and cg locations that allow them to hit it low, medium and high. Distance with irons isn't an issue because they hit it solid and swing it fast enough to hit a 5-iron/6-iron 200 yards with a muscle back or players cavity back. 

Yes, you'll see some pros throw in a SGI iron but it's going to be used more as a hybrid, something they'll need to launch high from 230-250 on a par 5 or long par 3. Much different club than they would want from 130-200 yards.

[tinker]

The whole reason you practice or go to the driving range is to grove your swing in an attempt to hit the ball in the middle of the club. I don’t do ranges much, I like to go to an empty course in the afternoon and practice on a real hole. I’ll drop a ball under a tree and work on a low cut shot. I’ll take an 8 iron from 100 yards and work on a low punch to the pin. I already know what a swing like a wild man miss hit looks and feels like. My goal is to play the whole game and make the right shots. That’s game improvement. Continuing to make the same swing flaws and trying to buy equipment to improve probably won’t work long term.