Watermark

Ah-ha! That makes more sense to me, but I wonder why I've been told otherwise by so many sales people? Very weird. I knew in my heart the second I heard it that it didn't sound quite right, and it seemed to be confirmed when I tried out a couple of display putters - I felt way more comfortable with a couple of Odyssey putters as long as 38"-39" than I did with any of the standard length (32"-33") putters made by others. Oh well! Sounds like I'll need to take my three new Vokey wedges with me when I go in for the fitting, so that I can have them fitted with the proper length shafts too. Boy, this little proposition is startin' to get pretty deep! ;-)

And frankly, that raises yet another key question that I forgot to ask earlier . . . If a guy's irons are all supposed to be custom fitted with respect to length, shouldn't his wedges also be custom fitted for added length? I'm being told 'no' by virtually everyone I've asked. In fact, I've been told repeatedly that regardless of their skill level or their personal dimensions/measurements, most players simply buy standard length wedges right off the shelf, but something about this just doesn't seem logical to me. For example, if a proper fitting leads to the conclusion that you need irons customized to +1" added length, I would have thought that you would need +1" on your wedges as well. Can someone address this topic for me? Many thanks

Thanks SolarBear. Yes, I'm definitely learning a lot in this process and enjoying it all too! My wife often tells me that I tend to enjoy the 'hunt' more than the goal or the endpoint, and I think she's probably right on that score. I do enjoy the pre-purchase research that goes into such an adventure, and there's no doubt that it can yield some dividends. When I was a younger man, I didn't bother to put much research into things before I bought them, and as a result, I stepped in a few puddles along the way, so I consciously approach things a little bit differently these days. Anyway, this week ended-up being busier than expected, so I still haven't gotten a proper fitting, but I'm looking forward to getting it done this weekend or early next week, and I believe I'm getting closer and closer to the right choice of irons. None of the local dealers have the actual clubs (or heads) in-stock, and they're probably still considered by most to be a tad too far in the GI/Player direction for a beginner like me, but I'm leaning towards the Mizuno MP-53s. A young neighbor friend of mine (16-18 handicapper) has a full set, and although they seemed a bit short for me, I hit 100+ balls with them yesterday at the driving range and they felt pretty sweet - good-looking club too! I didn't care for the PW much, but I've already got a set of three (46/08, 52/08, 58/12) Vokeys, so if I go with the MP-53s, I'll probably just get 4-9 or maybe even 5-9. Anyway, my neighbor has graciously agreed to let me take a couple of them with me to the golf shop when I go in for the fitting, just in case they want me to use them there in the fitting process somehow. They're apparently still being made by Mizuno and available via custom order, but they're a 'cavity-back' (which is good), and the young man who owns this set doesn't seem to think they're overkill for me, so who knows? I guess I'll see what the guys at the golf shop all say.

Mmmm, I can't really tell you with any degree of certainty which of your two 'categories' I might belong in (?), but I can say with confidence that I'm not inclined to be obsessive or "frustrated" by any of it. There's simply no fun in that for me, and I won't ever let it get to that either. I don't have any aspirations to turn pro, no real edgy or competitive spirit, no launching of clubs out into the airspace - I just wanna have some fun out there. I hope that helps. Also, I never really thought about posting this until now, because until recently, I never even paid attention to what the term 'handicap' meant, but the very first round of golf I ever played (18-holes), using rental clubs back in 2000/2001, I shot a 97, and here about 2-years ago, I shot a lifetime low of 89, so I'm probably not the all-time worst golfer to ever grace the course! 'Jus sayin' . . .

Thanks everyone. I know its starting to sound like a broken record, but it really is a quandary, because the experienced golfers among you are absolutely correct when you suggest getting an entry-level iron. That advice simply cannot be wrong for all of the great reasons already mentioned. And yet, as a beginner who hits most irons reasonably well and a driver really well, if I were to purchase a set of GI- or intermediate-level irons, I've either gotta learn to hit 'em or I'm faced with selling them, right? And I just can't see that happening. I know how I am, and I just don't see myself spending $700+ for a 5-9 set of GI-level irons (or to some extent, even player-level irons) and getting so frustrated that I'm forced to sell them. Rather, as I believe I may have said earlier in this thread, the more mis-hits and the more frustrated I get, the more I see myself striving to improve, and rapidly getting to the point where I'm hitting those irons properly or the way they were intended to be hit. I'm sure mileage my vary for others, but that's just who I am, and I think this may be why others here on this thread have suggested that I simply buy what looks and feels good to me, and stop obsessing about groupings or ratings or handicap classifications. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean that I'm inclined to run right out and buy the MP-69s or even the MP-64s, but it does mean that I'm more inclined to buy the MP-64s (or something like them), and eventually learn to play 'up' versus buying something for $300 at Sports Authority and floundering (playing 'down') out there indefinitely. Anyway, the weekend is rapidly approaching, so rest assured, this saga of mine will end, and soon. I'll finish up a proper fitting, talk with a few more sales folks about the various GI vs. SGI offerings, and hit a few balls. Then at that point, I'm just gonna go with my hunch (go with what feels right), pull the trigger, and start hitting the driving range in the evenings with my new purchase. At some point, you've just gotta stop the nonsense and jump, right? After all, we're not talkin' about a zillion dollars. I've already got my three wedges and putter sitting here - its high-time to get going.

Excellent - thanks for the reference (and link) BostonBrew. Unfortunately, as you've said, the description of the physics behind it all is a bit brief in that video, but I think I get the gist of it. If I understand it right, they appear to be saying that beginners routinely mis-hit the ball (which is certainly true), and that the bulk of those mis-hits are concentrated in the 'toe' region of the club, somehow causing fully forged muscle-back type irons to tweek or pivot off-axis (L/R) at impact, more so than cavity-backed irons, leading to greater deviations in final trajectory? And, that cavity-backed irons are less prone to this 'tweeking' phenomenon, because they are designed with more of their weight concentrated in the very bottom or toe of the club? Have I got that right? If so, then something about that assessment seems fundamentally upside-down to me. I'm certainly no physicist, and given all of the clu recommendations that have been made here for me as a beginner, I'm sure I'm wrong, but I would have thought that the club with the higher overall mass (the muscle-back) would be less prone to such tweeking when mis-hit, than the lighter (cavity-backed) club. Wouldn't you? What have I missed?

O.K., so just to make sure, do I have this right . . . SGI = Beginner (Entry-Level) GI = Intermediate P (Player) = Advanced (Semi-Pro/Pro) Also, could someone please clarify something for me? Why is it that the hollow or so-called "cavity-backed" irons are recommended for beginners rather than the solid-backed or muscle-backed" irons? What is it about the hollow-backed design and its physical or performance attributes that is structurally conducive to learning the game for a beginner? Or, to put it somewhat conversely, what is it about a muscle-backed iron like the MP-64 or MP-69 (other than the smaller surface area of its face) that is functionally 'detrimental' to a beginner's swing or beginner's game? I presume that a hollow-backed iron is significantly lighter and with larger surface area to help minimize mis-hits or to maximize the sweet spot, but why is the lighter weight (less mass) helpful? I would think that a beginner would want the exact opposite - I would think that a beginner would need the added mass in order to achieve greater distances? Anybody? And by-the-way, I don't dislike the look of the JPX-825 or JPX-825Pro - not at all. I'd probably be perfectly happy with them, but it would be awfully nice to understand the physics of it all.

Thanks Buki! By the way, my apologies for not thanking you previously for your earlier and nicely detailed post - it was quite helpful. Its been particularly hectic here today, but I have a number of comments relative to yours, so I'll try to respond properly tomorrow. Until then, thanks for your patience. ;-)

Thanks SolarBear. I see these terms "GI" and "SGI" bantered about all the time, and after a while, I figured out just what they actually mean, but in my travels to the local golf shops, I've honestly seen no mention of these terms or any correlation of them with specifics sets (or makes) of clubs (I don't know if I've simply missed it or what?). So I don't really know how best to use them in a shopping context. I like the look and feel of the MP-64s, but I'm guessing they're "SGI" level (?) and therefore beyond what's recommended for me. I'll have to corner one of the sales people and ask them to clarify this for me one day, by showing me some specific brands and models that fit into each of these classifications.

Yup, many thanks Mordan! Word-for-word, what you've said here makes plenty of sense. I guess I need to rethink things and perhaps reshape my introductory conversations with sales people by asking " where are the better beginner's clubs " as opposed to " where's the best clubs ". Thanks again for the guidance. I should have a full and complete (better) fitting behind me by the weekend, which will help a lot, and then I'll proceed from there with the better beginners-grade irons.

1) Yup, I too happen to believe that regardless of the outcome of a fitting with respect to swing type or speed, it makes more sense for someone who is an absolute beginner, especially an aging beginner like me, to start-off with 'regular' (or perhaps even 'senior') flex, but with 'regular being the safest bet. Its just common sense. 2) I didn't mean to imply that all Ping irons were of lesser quality than Mizuno or that Mizuno was better-suited to pros. What I meant to say was that I (personally) preferred the look, weight, feel and swing of almost all Mizunos to the Ping G20, G25, i20 varieties of irons that I saw, and that the 64s and 69s in particular appeared to be of slightly superior craftsmanship. The comparably positioned or priced Ping's (at least to my eye) were of a fundamentally different design and too 'busy' in terms of graphics and gadgetry. However, I fully understand that this doesn't necessarily mean that the Mizuno brand makes the 'right' club for me (as a beginner) or even for many of the pros - I understand the distinctions. 3) I'm not quite sure what to make of this statement. To me, it certainly follows that most of the 'best' (i.e., most popular/most respected) irons are probably made by the 'big brands', but I'm not sure that all of the big brands make great irons. In other words, I'm not sure that all models of Pings are all models of Mizuno are necessarily of "great quality", and I'm not sure if that's even what you meant? But for me, at least based on what I've been learning, that grouping would probably be a little too inclusive. For example, Taylormade is a very well-recognized brand, perhaps one of the top 3 or 4 in all of golf (it was my father-in-laws favorite), and they certainly make irons including their high-end 'RocketBladez' which are hundreds more than the best Mizunos, yet you won't find a lotta love for RocketBladez out there. Don't ask me why, because to me and my amateur eye, they look and feel great! Who knows?

Yup, I knew that was comin', almost as soon as I used the word "forgiveness" - just a poor choice of words I guess. In a round-about way, what I meant to say (without having to write a 1000-word dissertation) was this . . . that if experienced (veteran) players tend to move-up from 'regular' flex to 'stiff' flex shafts as they become better or more skilled, as they often report (rather than the other way around), then it stands to reason that regardless of one's age, gender, height, weight, power, and maybe even regardless of the results of a custom fitting, a 'regular' (not stiff) shaft might be "best" (overall) for an absolute beginner? That's essentially what I was trying to ask or say. As for the MP-64s and Mizuno's in general and their suitability for beginners, there's literally going to be dozens of opinions on this subject and the various models, no matter what any of us prefers or says, but the bottom line is this . . . I'm simply not good with spending hours of my time in fittings and developing a custom order (for length and lie), and spending $600 or $650 for Pings vs. $750 for Mizunos, just because the latter might be harder to hit for the first few months?!@#%&? This makes no sense to me and my schedule simply doesn't allow for it. I'd rather get it all done now, with as good an iron as possible, now, and suck for 6-12 months, than have to revisit all of this again in just a few short weeks or months, leaving that complete and first (but lesser quality) set of irons un-used in the garage somewhere. It might not be the optimum approach, and it might not be the most cost-effective approach, but doing otherwise makes zero sense to me.

Thanks for the continued feedback here, guys. Honestly, starting off as a complete beginner with a 'regular' flex (vs. 'stiff') shaft just makes more sense to me on its face, because I imagine it would be a bit more forgiving and perhaps even add some distance for someone who's swing has not yet been perfected. Anyway, I'm going to go back down there this week sometime and try a different golf shop altogether to see what happens, and I'll follow-up from there. So thanks again. Oh, and by the way, just so everyone knows, I took a good look at the Ping G20s and G25s the other day, some of which had steel shafts while others were graphite, but competitively speaking, the pricing on them was all that great (at least not here locally), and they simply didn't feel as good to me as the MP-64s and other Mizzy's. However, after researching it a bit further, it doesn't that the Mizuno model MP-H4 irons that I mentioned above, get much love here on The San Trap or anywhere else. In fact, it appears that they're a model of club that I should probably stay far away from, and so, its back to the drawing board for me on that score. ;-)

Nope, it was awfully hectic in there today, so I didn't come away with much, and they didn't have the Cobra driver or #4 wood in regular or stiff in-stock in the silver color that I wanted anyway. So I think I'll go back again during the work-week, when its a lot slower, just to see if I can get a better fitting/assessment before moving forward. And from what I understand, a lot of guys apparently prefer to play 'up' in stiffness when they can - that is to say that they apparently strive to move up from 'regular' flex to 'stiff', so presumably, if I start-out with 'stiff' it won't be a serious impediment. However, the trip wasn't entirely wasted - I gained a fair bit of knowledge about putters and drivers, and perhaps most importantly, I think I've been permanently swayed-away from the fancier MP-69 irons in favor of the more practical (but just as nice) MP-H4s. I was really impressed with the MP-H4s.

Well, I completed a custom fitting today, which helped to answer a lot of questions for me, but I have to admit, even after the fitting, I'm still a bit confused about the driver. I like the 460 cc Taylormade (Rbz) and Cobra (Amp Cell) drivers, but I couldn't get a good feel from the guys there at the golf shop as to whether I should be using a 'regular' or 'stiff' shaft? To me, regardless of whether the driver was TM or Cobra, both shafts (graphite in each case) felt about the same in terms of flex, and consequently, I just didn't feel good about making a purchase. Same applies to the Cobra adjustable #4/5 wood. Perhaps someone here can help with this decision? What does the typical 6'2" (240 lb.) male beginner require in terms of shaft stiffness or flex on a driver, 'stiff' or 'regular'? All other things being equal, if I don't feel any real difference between them, which of the two should I opt for, and why? Thanx

Excellent! The earlier clarifications by "GolfingDad" and this detailed follow-up summary of yours (Hacker101) are both awesome! Thank you both for that! Honestly, I've learned so-so much this past few days, its nothing short of amazing. I've assembled a comprehensive spreadsheet of all the various parameters per club type, including the various offerings by different manufacturers, so I feel better-than-ever about my knowledge base now, going into a fitting (despite being a beginner). And yes, we do in-fact have a Roger Dunn store here locally, so I think I'm well on my way now. In fact, I think I know enough at this point to effectively close this thread. I'm sure that I'll post some additional questions in different threads here down the road, as I begin to learn and experience more out on the lawn, but until then, my sincere thanks to all who participated and contributed here, and thanks also for making the entire learning process so enjoyable. Its been instructive and great-great fun! All the Best Watermark

Nope, nope . . I'm not (wasn't) "upset", not at all, but again, looking at his comment, he didn't say " his " setup (as you've indicated here) . . . he said " this is his" setup, and it wasn't (isn't) clear what he meant by "this"? What is " this "? Do you see what I'm saying? I wasn't trying to be argumentative or derogatory, and perhaps he'll respond again, but until he does, I'm afraid I'm at a loss as to what specific setup he felt was the same as "his". However, thank you for the rest of the clarifications - now that the connections have been made, they're all quite simple and all make perfect sense now. Cheers!

Huh? You say . . . " THIS is my set up"? Forgive me, but what . . . is your setup? What are you referring to? Also, my apologies, but you're responding to a "beginners" thread here, so none of these acronyms that you've used means much to me at this point . . . the "HC", the "18+", the "SCF", the "50/54/58 S"? I'm afraid its all drivel to a beginner. For example, I have no clue what "HC" is . . . no clue what "+18" refers to . . . and unless I'm mistaken, wedges are typically specified by loft and bounce (i.e., 50/8, 54/10. 58/12, etc.), so I'm afraid the "S" is nonsensical to me. I might be able to make sense of the rest of it (i.e., 16.5 degree 4-wood, 20-degree hybrid, etc.), but that's about it. Sorry.

Yup, I still need plenty of polishing when it comes to my overall swing, regardless of which club is being used, but I'm reasonably happy with my use of a driver, because its pretty danged consistent relative to the irons. However, in purchasing this new set of clubs, I'm still going to need to buy a new driver along with the other 10-12 clubs, so I've still got some things to learn when it comes to drivers too. For example, I'll see 'fixed-loft' drivers classified as low as 9.0 or 9.5, and I'll even see some adjustable-loft drivers (like the Cobra) that are capable of being widely adjusted from 8.5 all the way to 11.5, but then I'll see recommendations (like the one you made above) for beginners to use something as radical as 13? Why is that? What is the thought process there? I don't really know enough yet to make a rational decision on this, but a loft of 13-degrees seems awfully high to me? The shear 'physics' of it all would seem to imply that the higher the loft, the higher the lift, and therefore, the longer the flight " time " (but not necessarily the flight distance ). To me, at least by extension, the greater the flight time (in seconds), the longer the surface area of the ball is exposed to the frictional forces of the air, right? In other words, to my way of thinking, the higher the loft (i.e., the higher the lift), the shorter the distance of the overall drive. If this rationale is accurate (and I'm not saying that it is), I would think that a guy would want a driver with minimal loft (say 8.0 or 9.0), to keep the trajectory reasonably flat and fast, but have I missed something there? Put somewhat differently, why would I want something as high as 13-degrees of loft, that seemingly, would cause a prolonged flight time and put so much air up under the ball?

Wow! Lot of great information has been shared here by several people, but rather than trying to address each of them and the info they contain on a individual basis, I'll just try my best to cover everything here in a single post. So, here we go . . . First off, let me clarify that my wife isn't necessarily a "great" golfer. If I said or implied that anywhere, then I apologize. She's definitely a 'veteran' golfer (been playing for decades), but she's not all that serious about it. She's still playing with the same set of clubs she had twenty-years ago, and if she doesn't stay focused on the course, I can outscore her by 3-4 strokes on any given day, and I'm essentially a beginner. So I guess the point is, she's not really in a position to help me too much, other than to witness some of the things I do right and wrong (in terms of stance, swing, etc.), and share her observations with me. And she is of no real help at all in terms of selecting new clubs, other than cosmetics or appearance (i.e., bling), which is typically female. Now, regarding drivers and woods, most of the people I've consulted so far (right or wrong), seem to discourage the use of woods altogether other than of course the #1 wood (driver). However, including at least one wood (whether its a 3w or 4w) makes perfect sense to me, because they definitely seem to have their own character to them relative to hybrids. I mentioned earlier that I hit hybrids pretty well, and that many people seem to prefer them to woods, but I honestly hit woods pretty danged well. In fact, someone (above) mentioned that drivers can be the most difficult to hit, but generally speaking, this has not proven true for me. I tend to hit the driver more consistently than any other club in the bag, and I'm often told by other experienced golfers that I have respectable distance with a driver for a beginning player. For example, let's say I'm playing a typical 5-par hole somewhere . . . I'll often be within 20-25 yards of the pin within the first two strokes, but I'll finish 4-7 over-par because of a lousy short game (back and forth overshoots, ad nauseam), and this type of performance is very typical for me. I won't say that they're always 'true' or straight up the line (that's where the consistency wobbles a bit), but they're not ridiculously off the mark even when mis-hit, and its usually to the left of center (using rental clubs). Regarding my "ideal" club length and lie, and this business of being potentially 3+ with +1/2 added length, its obviously far too early to know all this for certain. That's going to require an actual fitting to determine, which I'll try to do this weekend or early next week, but yes, no matter what on-line technical reference I consult, the initial so-called 'static' assessment for my personal specs calls for an added length of +1/2 to + 1.0 and a minimum lie of +2 upright. Also, regarding Mizuno's purported practice of etching U = Upright and F = Flat on the heel of their irons, I have honestly not witnessed this on any current-day Mizuno irons that I have seen (64s or 69s), but I will certainly investigate it, and what you've said about selecting the "U" type (if I can identify such a thing), makes good sense. So far however, none of the retailers or on-line sources that I've seen show anything but "standard" lie as being available off-the-shelf I.e., without custom ordering). Anyway, I hope this added information helps and I can't thank all of you guys enough for your continued participation and contributions to this "Beginner" thread. I'm very grateful to all.

O.K., so, I'm slowly zeroing-in on things, but I've got another meaningful question to ask of everyone here before I go hitting the local shops. Based on the fact that golfers typically carry anywhere from 10-14 clubs by tradition (maximum of 12 apparently for tournament purposes), I'm going to try and put together a complete set (used or new) comprised of approximately 12-14 total clubs. And of course, the driver and putter are exempt from omission, but that said, which 2 or 3 clubs from the following list of 14 total clubs would you choose to omit from a collective 'beginners' set, and why? NOTE: I've already determined that I tend to hit hybrids somewhat better than woods. [DRIVER = Exempt] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3H 4H 5H 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 PW (46-48) AW (50-52) SW (54-56) LW (>60) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [PUTTER = Exempt] Thanks for your continued assistance and participation.

Interesting! That is valuable information to stow-away for the future. I'm leaning towards a full 1+ over (not 1/2"), but the actual fitting this weekend should tell-the-tale. Thanks for sharing that with me.

Yup, I'm beginning to really wonder about my direction on these things, and here's why. I phoned a local gold shop and spoke with a very experienced (elderly) player, and his thoughts were to some extent the exact opposite of where I've been heading on this. In fact, he basically said to " stop researching and worrying about things like length and lie and shaft stiffness,etc., and stop trying to solve it all based on a 'static' (desktop) assessment - just come down to the shop and get fitted properly ". Obviously, he and the others here who have suggested this very same thing are right - this is the ideal approach, and that's exactly what I'll do this coming weekend. However, he had some additional comments or suggestions that also made perfect sense: 1) He tells me that even if the static assessment of my optimal "3+ upright" lie is accurate, none of the mainstream manufacturers offer custom clubs with a lie that high. He says that even when custom ordered, the maximum lie adjustment typically offered is 2+. 2) He indicated that even if a static assessment of my optimal lie shows "3+ upright", its essentially meaningless for a beginner, because the average beginner's swing is typically so inconsistent (heel to toe) that the initial lie adjustment is pointless. In fact, he argued that the typical, everyday player (most of whom don't have the time or commitment necessary to optimize their swings), will simply buy "standard" lie irons and adjust their swing to the lie, rather than the other way around. 3) He had similar thoughts on shaft length and stiffness, saying that regardless of my height, weight or power, I should probably opt for "standard" or "regular" length and "standard" or "regular" stiffness, rather than "stiff". And then, if need be, after playing with the clubs for a few months (or years?), look further into adjusting the shaft length, stiffness and lie, to further optimize my swing later-on. Any thoughts on his assessment?

O.K., I just did some more reading, and from what I can tell from the relevant reference tables for determining 'lie', it appears that in all likelihood, given my 6'2" height and my 38.5" wrist-to-floor measurement, I am going to need something on the order of a "3+ upright" lie adjustment from standard lie. Does that sound right?

1) No, to be honest, I had not looked at the MX-200/300s, and yes, I suspect those are indeed meant for someone like me of higher handicap. I just happened to like the look of the Mizzy MP-64s and particularly the MP-69s, and yet, I know that the average fitter or salesman will tell me that they're way inappropriate (overkill) for a beginner. 2) I'm not saying that 'new' clubs will positively need to be altered. In fact, I would have expected the opposite. In other words, right or wrong, given their high cost, I would fully expect a seriously high-quality set of clubs like the Mizuno MP-64s or MP-69s to be perfectly playable for the average golfer right outta the box. But, what I am saying is this . . . if those brand new Mizunos are not playable right outta the box, then presumably nothing else will be either, regardless of brand, regardless of whether they're new or used, right? In which case, modifications would need to be made to any set I buy. As far as shafts go, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't imagine that the 'stock' shafts (i.e., the one's Mizuno typically ships their MP-64/69s with), would be inferior or ill-suited for a relative beginner like me, which means that the shafts shouldn't need to be changed. In my view, this would apply to grips too. As I understand it, at least with irons, that leaves only the 'lie', and I can't conceive of someone needing to change the lie on a high-dollar set of polished chrome Mizuno MP-69s? I should also add that as a beginner, I'm fully aware of what 'loft' is and its implication to the performance of a driver, wedge, etc., and this is why (for example), I've been focusing on the Cobra Amp Cell driver which has an adjustable loft. However. I must confess that I do not yet fully understand the term 'lie' and what it means to performance. I'm going to continue researching it, but I'll assume that much like 'loft', it relates somehow to the angle of trajectory, perhaps left to right (?) : shank vs. hook (?), rather than the up vs. down variable of loft. However, if so, I have no clue how clubs with serious showroom 'bling' like the MP-69s could or would be effectively altered with respect to their 'lie', without somehow doing serious damage to the club's appearance. Is it simply a matter of the positioning of the shaft-tip into the head of the club when it is glued or epoxied? No clue! It appears that the 'lie' relates to the 'length' of the shaft, rather than anything to do with angles, but I'll keep reading. And thus, the learning continues.