Large chris

Is that different to last years Cleveland classic? I loved the idea of that club, but the ones I saw I couldn't believe how tacky and cheap they felt, rough edges on the sole, I got no impression of a wooden club at all from it.

Blimey 6'6 is really really tall to be playing standard length are you sure about that? You might need 2 inches on the clubs... And the clubs will feel a lot heavier, which if you are playing well at the moment wont be a good thing. I would have thought a reshafting with either dynamic gold super light or probably graphite shafts would be called for as a minimum

I agree on the annoyance point, 14 completely different clubs.... And if you see the pros warm up they will hit ten superb 3 irons in a row on the practice ground, but on course their odds are reduced a lot....

Interesting question - I DO NOT rate myself as any great ball striker, and I would have assumed there wasn't much difference, blade is a blade etc. But I've messed around with quite a few sets the past couple of years, and have found a considerable difference even after reshafting. My 1999 Hogan Blades are very unforgiving and have a straight leading edge, with very little effective bounce, so unless you are always playing off flat lies all the time I find them tricky. My 2010 Wilson fg59s appear chunkier than the Hogans, much more playable, very happy with them. The leading edge is still fairly sharp but rounded across the club. But after seeing a load of good reviews I've picked up some 2003 nike blades and found them to feel more 'solid' with better turf interaction, I think the leading edge is less aggressive than the Wilsons. The Wilsons feel /sound very slightly hollow or tinny by comparison. Just my opinion....

I think Logman that there is mileage in having just two lengths in the irons as you say, the range compression will come right down by doing this. Or even three lengths, which splits up 9 clubs neatly. My idea was that the 7 iron is the longest club I can consistently keep a flat left wrist with - don't know why....

I've been interested in trying single length irons for a while in an attempt at more consistency. There have been a few threads but mostly to do with buying specific single length sets, from the Tommy Armour EQs, Ostrich, 1irongolf etc. onwards. I also had a little correspondence with Dave Tutelman on a few club matching ideas. Instead of buying a set, I've just made my own equal length irons, based on some second hand nike 2003 blades. My normal specs are x100 std length, so I ended up buying 9 identical x100 SL DG shafts in the 7 iron, butt trimmed only. Basically I bent all the irons to the same lie as the 7 (yes 3 or 4 degrees for the 3 iron - no breakages), then added a load of lead (a lot, upto 50g in the 3 iron) to match up all the club weights. The swing weights do go up, no easy way to avoid that, because you are adding 1.5 inches to the PW / SW which adds a few points, and then matching the other clubs to that. I went with the super light shafts (very impressive by the way) to try and cancel some of that additional weight. I've just gone and hit them for the first time with mixed, though maybe promising results. For a start I've never hit so many shanks before. This maybe until I get used to the heavier weights. But there definitely were some nice shots in there. You would expect constant length sets to suffer from 'range compression', which is definitely true, but it didn't seem too bad. I had a worry because I tried a test club (hogan apex 3 iron trimmed and weighted to a 7 iron) and I could barely launch it. This set seems much more playable. I think it's too early to be definitive about the results, I need to do a fair bit of practice to get used to them. I know from previous comments another common concern is really 'long' short irons and wedges, particularly for chipping. I have a possible answer to that, which is that a legitimate chipping method is having the heel of the club raised up to lessen turf drag. So choking down on these longer short irons might still work for the short game.

I took the plunge on a 64 for the first time this year, got a Callaway Jaws for a decent price. I believe there was a magazine test somewhere that gave a 64 wedge to a range of ability players and most (or all) of them scored better with it than a 56.... Surprisingly. My suggestion is it works best out of longer rough around the greens, where a firm hit i believe increases your margin for area compared to a lower loft. I suspect that a 64 is of limited use if you are mostly playing chip and run shots from the fairway, but out of difficult lies (with little bounce, 7 degrees), particularly from below the level of the green, I have definitely saved shots. Tp 11 is great btw.

Mizuno DNA fitting is the most objective way to do it IMHO.

Great looking clubs, shame that a good company like that gets squeezed out by the big 5. Was looking at these when I got my first new set (Wilson Ultras - also great) about 1991 Can't remember why I didn't get them, they might have been slightly more expensive than the Wilsons, anyone recall 1991 retail prices? Lol.

There is some good reference material somewhere (sorry no idea where!) comparing shaft specs but I'm pretty sure yours is the equivalent of dynamic gold x stiff (x100) Which I don't think is a bad thing considering how many pros play with this shaft. Your swing speed is on the verge of a normal x100 recommendation, I would ask about your tempo though. If you have a slow transition at the top, then something a bit softer can work, if you are quite strong and snappy then I would have thought you have the right shafts. Trajectory, well in my opinion your technique ( can you keep a flat left wrist) and secondarily the weight distribution down the length of the club (swing weight and static weight) are the main factors determining trajectory. To be sure I recommend finding a store offering the Mizuno DNA fitting system (you don't have to buy Mizuno) which will give you a very accurate shaft recommendation.

Good tip I heard was that if you are a decent putter normally but your putting goes 'off' best bet is simply change out the putter for your next round. Basically stops you getting a complex about not being able to putt, got the yips etc. As for money spent, hmmm Got a Ping Pickmeup belly putter for the first time for my birthday, about 190 dollars, so expensive but not as much as some. Something about it, the sound off the clubface, the way the ball starts rolling quickly... I know it cost Ping 10 bucks to make it but I have this feeling there is some wizard R+D going on that makes it 'better' than a no name budget offering. What matters is that I have confidence in it, hole a bunch more putts than usual (and I wasn't a bad putter before), and win a few side bets that have more than paid for it in 4 months use. If I need to swap it in 3 months time... If I find a 5 buck putter that works the same then that is great as well, just haven't found one yet.

I'd say definitely there is a market for such a device, me for a start. The obvious points would be verification of the accuracy, does the golf ball need to be marked, does it work off grass, how can you use the data (iPad, pc etc.) If there are good answers to these questions then it would be way cheaper than something like the GC2 (probably cheaper than it needs to be in fact) and yes two thousand units is achievable BUT like most moderate or high volume products, a good investment in marketing is required to get the message out.

I use the cally ones, probably 4 years old now but still fine and stickier the wetter they get.

Some great answers here lots to think about thanks everyone, Sometimes I see guys claiming to hit 300 balls a day.... At the moment I hit about 250 a week, I mix it up, try to hit the 9 shots, chipping and putting etc. I enjoy practicing and get more time to practice than playing rounds, but I spent some time on trackman earlier in the year and it is really tempting to set something similar up at home. But I'd really like to set this up with the ability to tilt the mat for all different angles - don't know if any radar systems can cope with that? I totally agree that ideal would be playing a round every day but I dont have that opportunity.

I have just had to read how a USGA handicap is calculated, blimey that is complicated.... Seems a bit simpler in the UK, a 7 handicap means your par score is about 7 over ( actually normally more like 5 over for most courses) Anyway the Bob Torrance suggestion is interesting, I have great respect for him and his results, but (seriously) have you ever heard him speak? His accent is so strong most Scottish people would struggle to understand it, let alone English or American guys!

Just to say surprised at the miura fitter recommendation, I thought there weren't many of them and they were all really well qualified...... My view ( not qualified at all!) is that a flat launch is fine but more spin required to get the ball to climb. Pros are doing this by really compressing the ball with forward shaft lean, and I just think this is more achievable the heavier and stiffer you go..

When I say significant I mean that that extra 5 mph in his case sounds like it will cut down on the 180 yard approaches that seem to be damaging his score so much. We have at our course 3 par fours that can be tough to reach for almost anyone, but all the good players at my club can easily reach the others. Everyone else is effectively playing close to par 5s most of the time, tough to break 80 in that case.

Er, for the other 9 holes I am 7 over par, so 7 handicap is a gross 78 on a par 71. It is accurate, I play club competitions every week and won club championship a couple of weeks ago but I want to step things up. I appreciate the lessons advice but in the UK we don't have any sort of ranking system of instructors unlike in the US, and I haven't found anyone I'm totally happy with. So I'm still wondering how many balls scratch players hit to reach / maintain that level?

I think x100 is normally px 6.0 but my view is not to get too hung up on project x - simply because x100 is popular for a reason, I have spent some time getting opinions on forums before committing to them myself. What you will find is that very few (well no one really) people are unhappy when they go to the x100, but more doubt is expressed by some about px. X100 is cheapest as well, yes I know you are getting miuras, but you can take confidence from all those great players using the x100 including tiger. And I definitely agree on the driver dispersion as well. Like many people, you have been scared by continuous pro advice that too many golfers are using too stiff shafts. I am sure this is not the case for you on your figures - mizuno DNA to be sure. Just recently saw references to hogan and moe Morgan both using incredibly heavy and stiff irons, and they were not big guys.

Interesting on the GC2 I saw a unit being used at the British Open this year looks very neat, but really need Price to come down a bit.....

Hate to mention the g word but sounds to me if you could use the gym to get another 5 mph on your driver swing that would be significant - Grip strength, torso twists, crunches, leg pressing..... Doesn't matter how old you are by the way, in fact the biggest improvement will come the older you are

My immediate goal is to groove a flat left wrist, long term play county level golf. 20k is a fair bit of cash but golf is my main thing so I would use it and I enjoy practice.

Just to get better, enter a few competitions etc. Some scratch players are hitting hundreds of balls a day, but some say they don't practice at all... So I'm trying to get feel from better players what their regime is like

I think you have every chance because - (from experience) If your long game isn't too good, the short game gets more practice and it sounds like you are coping / improving in the short game Good short game helps the short iron approaches. So I suspect the missing link is probably driving distance / accuracy? Average distance please?