Tomboys

I think most of the time, it's a question of trust. Forums, such as this one, are great in the sense that you can get more information from a larger, more diverse group of people. The downside is that it's hard to assess what is good information and what is bad information because you really don't know anything about the person that's providing it or where they're getting their information from. As a result, people make the assumption that success equals knowledge in attempts of sorting the good information from the bad. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, I'm just saying that this tends to be human nature. DT

Something similar happened to my bud. He went to China 4 years ago and came back with the (then) newly introduced Titleist 983K. He was pretty sure it was a knock-off (he paid something silly like $25 USD for it, so you don't have to be an Einstein to figure that one out). Since I had one, we compared it. It was close, but the differences were noticeable. Paint color, sole plate design and lettering fonts were all just a little off. And, there was no serial number. So, he put it on ebay. Sure enough, it sold and he never heard back from the buyer. DT

If I am interpreting your verbiage correctly, "skying" more of your drives than you "pound into the ground" has nothing to do with the loft. Those are the results of bad swings. So, the loft of the head is immaterial on those swings. Shaft flex is as important (perhaps even more) than the 1* difference in loft between the two heads. That being said, without knowing your clubhead speed, I would opt for the 10.5* loft because it's going to be a little more forgiving until you can dial in your swing. When I first started golf (twelve years ago), I bought a driver that had 11.5* of loft with an EI-70 stiff shaft. It had a Callaway knock-off head and cost me $80.00. The first time I used it on the course, I hit it 250 yards straight down the center of the fairway. I loved that club. DT

Agreed. While I thought about discussing feel in detail, I didn't because of the way I interpreted FakeMontana's question. To me, I thought that the question was more of, "Can someone explain to me the differences in clubheads and how that affects the flight of the ball." So, I wrote my post based on that assumption. No offense, but I respectfully disagree with this statement. How will using blades always keep your fundamentals in check? Is it because of the small sweet-spot? The intensity of feedback on mishits? I played 690.mb blades for four years (just bought a set of 735.cm irons last weekend). There would be times that I would flush a shot with my 690's. The only problem was that I pulled it 20 yards to the left of where I was aiming. Blades didn't tell me I did something fundamentally wrong, the ball flight did. There would be other times that I flushed a shot and the ball flew fairly straight down my target line. I had the right club for the distance I was hitting yet, I came up short of the green. So, in this scenario, both the club and the ball flight didn't tell me what I did wrong. I looked at my divot and it gave me my answer. It was deep and pointed left of my target line. In this case, I stopped my rotation, which caused me to have a slight out-to-in swing path resulting in a divot that was pointing to the left. Also, I chopped at the ball, which gave me a steep angle of attack resulting in a deep divot. The loss of distance was due to a slightly glacing blow to the ball instead of one that would go "through" the ball. I had a habit going slightly past parallel on my backswing. Yet, I still manage to hit most shots near the center of the clubface. So, blades didn't tell me that I broke parallel, my instructor did. So, every so often, I will set up in front of a mirror and practice my backswing to ensure that my backswing isn't getting too long. Finally, just because blades generate the most intense feedback on mishits doesn't mean that all the other types of clubheads are devoid of any feedback. As stated above, I just switched to 735.cm irons. I can still feel shots that are thinned, toe'd and "fat". If I combine that information with the feedback of my ball flight, my divots, maybe an occasional peek at my swing in the mirror or video camera, then I should be able to keep my fundamentals always in check. DT

I fully agree with this statement. And, to take it one step further, some golfers don't recognize that the yardage markers in most fairways are measured to the center of the green. So, if their ball ends up on the front of the green, they could be anywhere from 5 to 10 yards shorter than they think. I would use a 5 iron...and an old golf ball . DT

No, it's not a dumb question. It's a very good question, but I think you meant to ask; blades (muscle-backs) vs. cavity backs--and there's already a thread for that. If you want to compare forging, then you have to compare it to casting because both describe the manufacturing process. So, it's either blades vs. cavity backs or forged vs. cast. As noted above, forging is a manufacturing process of the head. So, there are forged blades AND forged cavity backs. The other manufacturing process is cast. There are no cast blades (well, I'm not counting Vokey wedges because we're talking strictly about irons--I'll address these clubs later), but there are cast cavity backs. I'll give you a rough idea of the differences between forged and cast--and trust me, it's going to be very rough because I'm not that smart. At any rate, here it is. When a clubhead is forged, the metal is compressed to make it harder (more dense) and formed into a particular shape. When a clubhead is cast, the metal is melted and poured into a mold to make a particular shape. This heat treatment (and ensuing cooling) hardens the metal. Manufacturers discovered that by casting, they could make clubfaces that were much thinner, yet would be just as hard (or harder) than their forged counterparts. This allowed clubhead designers more descretionary weight to move around the clubhead. Manufacturers found that by moving more weight to the perimeter of the clubface, they were able to increase the size of the sweetspot and the ball would fly straighter. Also, they found that by placing more weight to the sole of the club would lower its center of gravity. This design combination resulted in a clubhead that hit the ball straighter and higher. So, the major differences amounts to this: Forged blades = clubs that are the most workable because their overall design allows the player to put more sidespin on the ball because of the lack of perimeter weighting (so it travels left or right easier). Also, they could only move so much weight to the bottom of the club, so the center of gravity tends to be higher. This yields a lower trajectory overall. Most players that chose blades tend to be high-ball hitters, so they need a clubhead that allows them to hit the ball lower. Forged cavity backs = clubs that are still workable because most of the weight is still behind the ball. But, the presence of perimeter weighting makes the ball want to fly a little straighter, so it's a little harder to work left and right. Also, the center of gravity is slightly lower than the blade, so shots will tend to fly a little higher and / or want to "get up" a little easier. This makes it a little harder to hit the ball low. Cast cavity backs = clubs that tend to hit the ball straighter and higher because of their design. They have more perimeter weighting and a lower center of gravity than their forged counterparts because the manufacturing process allows more weight to be moved around when compared to forging. The problem that I see when people debate forged and cast stems from comparing apples to oranges. In my opinion, if you took two clubheads that had the same design (weight distribution) and had the same clubface hardness, it would be very hard to tell the difference between well-struck shots by either club. Suffice to say, if forging was "better" than cast for feel, etc., why is it that Vokey wedges (a cast head) one of the top wedges chosen by pros and very good amateurs alike? I'm not saying they're the best, but the numbers don't lie. I've read a lot of different posts about why certain pros play certain equipment. Yes, they make money from endorsements. No doubt about it. Many top players have equipment contacts that are very lucrative. However, none of that money counts towards your earnings from tournaments. And, it's that earnings number that determines whether or not you stay on the tour. Bottom line: Lose your PGA card, lose your endorsement deal. At the very least, your deal will not be renewed. Also, I see a problem when people compare blades to cavity backs. Again, it's apples and oranges. Blades are for people who want maximum workability and require little, if any, forgiveness. Cavity backs, by their design, allow for less workability and a little more forgiveness. Cast cavity backs again, by their design, allow for even less workability and even greater forgiveness. I know I'll probably get some heat about this next statement, so I will merely say that this is my opinion; nothing more, nothing less. At the end of the day, the quality of the golfer is determined by the score, period. So, (again, please see disclaimer in the above paragraph), I would choose a set of clubs that helps you shoot the lowest score. Hope the above helps, DT

My buddy lost his 735.cm PW. He called the store that he bought it from and gave them the serial number (located on the hosel) of his other clubs. They ordered the club from Titleist and it showed up in about a week (with a matching serial number). I think it cost him about $120.00. Otherwise, you can always call Titleist directly and speak to their customer service department. I'm sure they'll be able to give you some direction. I've called them in the past for some general information and they've been great. DT

Wow, you've had more than your fair share of set-backs. I congratulate you on even being able to play golf at all. On top of that, you're playing well. With that being said, you're not the same player you were when you bought the Zings. So, you need to be fitted for the player you are now. The first thing I see is that you've gone to regular flex shafts on your new clubs, yet your Zings still have stiff shafts. They may be too stiff for the club-head speed you now produce. That would somewhat explain the reason for the "shortness" and harshness of your shots even when you hit them well. I would suggest calling around to see if you can find a place that specializes in re-shafting clubs. If you have one around, then pay them a visit and have them check out your swing. From there, I'm sure they'll be able to find something that will make your Zings more playable and comfortable. High quality (read; well-made and consistent) graphite iron shafts are pretty expensive when compared to their steel counterparts. For consistency, dampening and cost, you may want to check out the TT Sensicore steel shafts. According to their website, they have better dampening than graphite. As far as going back to blades, I would tend to steer you away from them (but, if you want them, then go for it). The only reason why I say this is because blades tend to yield a lower ball flight. With the decrease in club-head speed that you now have, you may end up with a ball flight that's too low (even with the correct flex shaft), so your approach shots to the green may end up releasing when you need them to "sit". Given the fact that your home course has small greens, this could hurt your game more than it helps. Lastly, Mizuno makes very good irons. Some would say they are the best. But, all that is subjective. Don't discount them because of their cost (Callaway and Titleist tend to be even more expensive). Take a few of their offerinigs for a "test drive" before you decide. If you find a model that is everything you wanted in an iron, then you can always justify the higher cost by saying, "I'm worth it." Good luck, DT

ericm is correct. It's the camera angle. I'm not positive where I got the information, but I think it was during a golf tournament on television. The announcers were answering viewer's questions and somebody asked the exact same question. They explained that a lot of golfers don't like the cameraman standing directly behind them (on their extended target line) because it's distracting. So, they set the camera up off to the side. The angle makes the player's shot look like it's going dead right (for a right-handed player), but, in reality, it's going pretty much straight down their target line. DT

This is a great thread. I'm in the same boat as you in that when I bought my Titleist 690.mb blades 4 years ago, I had the swing for them. Unfortunately, I've experienced some of life's ups and downs, and was only able to muster about 7 to 10 rounds per year for the next couple of years. As far as practice time, well, let's just say that's what I use my front nine for. I've been able to get out again about 3X per month now for the past year or so, and my game is coming back, albeit slowly. Recently, I got a chance to play 9-holes with my buddy's Titleist 735.cm irons. All I can say is; wow. Playing with those clubs felt like I was cheating. To me, I think the long irons in this set are as easy to hit as any fairway metal I've owned. As far as feel, well, face it. The only type of club that will duplicate the feel of a well struck shot with blades is another blade, period. However, the feel of these clubs is very good. And, this was the stainless steel set. From what I've read, the carbon ones should provide a slightly softer feel. I tried the 755's at an outdoor driving range once, but I'm not sure I like them. As far as performance, they were right there. Both the 735's and the 755's seem to hit the ball on the same trajectory (just a little higher than my blades), but they felt a little harsher and vague at the same time. Not really sure if I'm describing that correctly, but that's the feeling I got. Maybe the difference is that on the 735's, the shafts are DGS300 (same as my blades) and the 755's have TT Tri-Spec shafts. Dunno. Another one that you may want to consider is the Cobra Carbon CB. I hit about 25 balls into one of those similators and it felt really good. Again, they come with the DGS300 shafts, so maybe that has a lot to do with it. The plus side is that you'll feel like Tiger Woods (or John Daly, depending on your daily beer consumption) because their lofts are a little stronger, so you will be anywhere from a half to full-club longer compared to your normal set. Lastly, since your current shafts should be the DGS300 shafts (those were the default shafts when the MP-30 came out), if you decide that you want the 755's, you can order them with the same shaft at no additional cost. Good luck in your search, DT

Good point, Erik. You did indeed qualify your statement. LOL. Jeepthrills: LOL. That's a good one. DT

Uh oh. Don't say anything to Billy Mayfair. He plays the 804.OS

I agree with the statement that after a certain point, the game is almost entirely mental. Just look at David Duval. How can a guy go from a former #1 and shooting a 59 to struggling just to make the cut? Or a guy like Johnny Miller sitting in a booth for all those years when he should have been competing in the Senior / Champions Tour? Rumor has it that Ben Hogan stopped competing for the same reason Johnny doesn't play anymore; the "yips" with the putter. The reason why I cited these guys is because if the mental game is off, the rest of the game follows. And it affects everybody, pros and hacks--like me--equally. We become so consumed by the results that we don't concentrate on the process. It's at that point our minds screw up our bodies. Case in point. I didn't take up golf until I was 32 (you know the story; career and starting a family when I was young). I'm 44 now. I've always had a great-looking swing, so it was very difficult to diagnose why I was so inconsistent. When I took lessons, almost all my instuctors said my swing was great and only needed a minor tweak here or there. I even had one instructor tell me that with my swing, I should be a 5 handicap. Still, once I got on the course, hello 90's or at best, high 80's. So, I started pressing and trying to will the ball into the hole desperately trying to score where I "should be" scoring. Once that didn't work, I tried forcing the ball to the hole by swinging harder and harder. Eventually, the more I tried, the worse I got. I tried taking lessons. I tried changing instructors. I tried practicing a lot. I tried not practicing at all. I tried playing a lot. I tried not playing at all. Nothing worked. This continued until one day, I went to get fitted for a new set of irons ( I have great friends, they bought me a new set of irons for my 40th birthday). As I was warming up on the range, I was hitting the ball well, but just a tad "heavy". The head pro looks at me and said,"You have a great swing and you can hit the ball far. But, if you shorten your backswing and either speed up your arms or slow down your hands, you'll hit the ball better." So, we spent about 30 minutes getting my timing down. Sure enough, I am just piping the ball. How well am I hitting the ball? Suffice to say it must have been pretty good because it was at his suggestion that I use blades. At first, I thought he was crazy because I was a 15 handicap at the time. I asked again to which he simply replied, "You hit blades like a pro, so if you have a 15 handicap, it's because of your head, not your swing." Whoa. While I would like to say that I am now a scratch golfer, I'd be lying. If I said I now have a single-digit handicap, again, I'd be lying. Unfortunately, I ended up going through quite a nasty divorce. So, for the past two years, life has been Hell. However, we seem to be on the back-nine and I can finally see the light of the clubhouse. For the past 6 months, I've able to get on the course @ 3 times a month. Still, no time for practicing (you know, the whole shared custody of the kids). At first, I had the same problem as before. Again, I was hitting fat shots, thin shots and some really God awful pull hooks because I was trying to will the ball to the hole and swinging way too hard. One day, I strained a back muscle. Since I had committed to play that day, I decided that I would just take it easy. I didn't think about the results, I just tried to put a smooth pass at the ball and whatever happened was fine by me. I just wanted to be out playing with my friends. Lo and behold, I started hitting the ball better. Then I remembered what the head pro said to me about my swing. I shortened it and concentrated on moving my arms faster. I'm happy to say that I've been scoring in the low to mid-80's (most of the time) and I even carded my career best 9 hole score (38 on a par 36). I've made more birdies in the past 3 months than I've made in the past 11 years combined. So, now that I'm trusting my swing more, my mental game has improved. I concentrate more on the process rather than dwell on the outcome. I take what the course gives me instead of trying to fight a certain number out of the course. All in all, I've finally learned how to enjoy golf for what it is; a game. DT

Iacas is correct; you can write a check on a napkin if you wanted to. You need to write in your bank's routing number (ABA#), your account number, and a check number (these are the numbers you see at the bottom of your checks). However, I'm not sure those giant checks have that information on them. If they don't, then they are not legal tender. If they do, then you are good to go. DT

In the Pro segment, Titleist seems to be the most used overall. If you factor in the golf ball, as Bo the Golfer stated; Titleist by a landslide. If you look at the not-good-enough-to-be-sponsored category (read: the average Joe-Golfer), it's harder to track what we use because we tend to gravitate towards the latest and greatest in hopes of buying a low round of golf. I think the main reason why you don't see that much Titleist equipment at your local golf store is because Titleist targets their equipment to the low-handicap, serious player. If you look at their entire product line, almost everything they make is played by a pro--the lone exception is their 775 irons. I've asked a few shops in my area why they don't seem to carry a lot of Titleist equipment and pretty much, the answers are the same. Their equipment is just too hard for the average player to use. And the ones that are good enough to buy them aren't at the store each week or month looking for the latest and greatest. They're on the golf course or at the range working on their short-game. So, it's simple business 101. Lack of sales results in lack of inventory and shelf space. While nobody admits it, I would imagine that many companies are only stocking the bare minimum required by Titleist because their golf balls sell well, and they want to ensure that Titleist keeps sending them their orders. DT

This wasn't my best shot of the week because I don't play every week. However, this was my best hole recently: @480 yard par 5, dogleg left. Hit driver over the edge of the dogleg leaving me a 186 yard second shot to the green. Hit a 6-iron to about 10' from the flag. Drained the left to right "slider" for an eagle. My golfing buds were cheering and we all went to dinner afterwards to celebrate. They stuck me with the bill. LOL.

You may want to check out the following as well: Callaway X-20 / X-20 Tour Cobra FP / Carbon CB Titleist 775 / 755 The former are listed as Game Improvement and the latter are Player's clubs. I would suggest that you find a local shop / outdoor driving range and test all the clubs. If at all possible, test them on grass. Hitting off the mat may give you a false sense of "playability". Regardless of what you choose, get fitted. It doesn't have to be the full-bore 1 hour fitting session with the launch monitor. Just get the basics like shaft length, flex, lie angle and grip size. That should suffice for now. Good luck, DT