tucsonsean

2 or 3 years ago, I found a pristine set (2i-sw) of Ping original Eye irons (not Eye2) at Play It Again Sports. They had original shafts and grips, and looked as if they'd never been used. They were in a barrel out on the sidewalk with all the no-names and clones, with a price of only $39 dollars for the set. I bought them, and put on some new Lamkin grips (the grips were over 40 years old, after all). The lofts are a lot weaker (pw=51*), but the weaker lofts combined with the ZZ-Lite stock shafts (a bit stiffer than regular flex) seems to work ok for even a slower swinger like me (I'm 73). I take them out every now and then for "retro" days (along with a Ping Tisi-Tec driver and original O-Blade brass putter). Do I play better with them than my Cobra F9 single-lengths? Not really. But I don't play worse, and shoot about the same scores. At my age, I no longer compete and don't even carry an official handicap. I can't play as I did in my 40s, but every now and then, it's fun to get out and play with the clubs I played in my 40s.

As if you haven't gotten enough confusing (yet valuable) advice, I would suggest you also think hard about grips: size, texture, shape, etc. The grip can make all the difference in feel and weight. I own a lot (too many?) putters, some quite expensive. But I put a Ping midsize cord grip on an old $19 Anser 4 I found at Play It Again Sports, and it became my gamer. You might also check out The Putter Zone for a lot of good advice.

Nice distinction. I'll give you "gimmicky," but then, metal woods were gimmicky until someone on tour won with them. Lob wedges were gimmicky until Kite won the U.S. Open. Lofted hybrids were gimmicky until Yang came from behind to beat Tiger in a major. Armlock putters were gimmicky until they salvaged the careers of several belly-putting pros. DeChambeau makes SL irons 'gimmicky.' They'd seem less so in the hands of a less eccentric pro. The worst you can say about SL irons right now is that they're like chippers or easy-out wedges: Disdained by the seriously talented but a godsend to the less-skilled. I expect that, ten years from now, many more pros will be playing single-length irons.

You'll find the 3H easy to hit and very useful; I often include it with my other sets when I play. They'll probably have the Uniflex steel shafts, unless they've been 'customized' by the PO. These'll be fine for you, unless you're at the level where you challenge a left front flag two paces over a water-hazard. They'll get the ball up in a hurry, and I think Maltby missed the mark in his playability rating of these clubs. $150, if they're clean and undamaged, seems fair--maybe a little on the high side. I think you'll enjoy them. And, if you're the golfomaniac most of us are, it's not as if they'll be the last set you buy.

I was browsing the local Play-It-Again-Sports yesterday, and, out on the sidewalk with all the beat-up King Snakes, Spauldings, and faux-Big Berthas, I found a near-new set of Ping Eye irons, 2-SW, with what looks like the original grips and the original ZZ-Lite shafts for $39. (I'll try to post pics.) The serial #s all match. I was really amazed when I took them out to the range later that day. They are way easier to hit than my Ping I-10s or my Nike Slingshots. The head looks impossibly small compared to today's irons, but that makes the ball look impossibly large and impossible to miss. In 1981, when these were new, they cost $1250! Even today, they rate an 821 (super game improvement) on Maltby's Playability list. The 1981 lofts are much weaker (PW=50.5*) than today's lofts, but, in the end, it's just a number on the bottom of the club. Anyone have experience with these clubs or opinions?

I carry two: Adams Idea Tech #4 and #5. The rest of the irons are Ping I-10s. I had worked around my 'psycho' 5i for years, rationalizing longer or shorter club selections. I can't believe I let my pride keep the 5h out of my bag for so long--it's a weapon!

My wife has two clubs she'll never part with, and with which she is deadly: an original Adams Tight Lies Strong 7 wood, and a Tommy Armour W4 60* wedge. The oldest club I game is an Odyssey Tri-Hot #2 putter that she bought me about 15 years ago.

I get them occasionally. I try to remember that a shank is 1/4" from being a solid shot. It's a mystery to me--they come and go without much warning or correction. Good luck, and stay patient.

When I started playing golf 20+ years ago, I used the 10-finger grip with great success, improving rapidly to an 11.2 index. My single digit buddies and some well-meaning teachers convinced my that I would never reach my full potential using an 'amateur's' grip. Over the years, my handicap climbed and I attributed it to advancing age (and, in fairness, it partially was). But I had gotten to a point where I was struggling between relaxing my hands and controlling the club. I lost most of my dwindling confidence. A couple of years ago, I discovered Scott Hazeldine and SciGolf. Scott uses a modified 10-finger grip to great effect. I was barely breaking 100 at the time, so I figured, why not. My shots with the 10-finger grip have been solid and straight, albeit about 5yds. shorter (I attribute this to the additional 1/2" further down the grip the 10-finger grip puts your hands). I even adapted my putting grip to use all 10 fingers, and find that my distance control improved markedly. BTW, my wife got me a 42* Niblick for Christmas--it's been a game changer for everything from 110yds in. I liked it so much that I found a 56* to complement it. I'm a walking golfer who carries a Ping Moonlite bag and 8 clubs: D, 3H, 5i, 7i, 9i, 42* Niblick, 56* Niblick, putter-- and the 42* Niblick doubles as my PW/GW, and the 56* is my primary sand/pitching club.

I currently own the 2011 42* with graphite shaft and recently added the 2011 56* with steel shaft (Van's only had this demo and had none with the graphite shaft). I'm primarily a walking golfer, and I usually carry a Ping Moonlite bag with eight clubs: D, 3h, 5i, 7i, 9i, 42* niblick, 56* niblick, putter. The 42* doubles as my PW/GW on full shots, and is great for pitch and runs, and the 56* is my primary pitching/sand club. Ironically, I rarely use the 42* for chipping--it's too hard to judge the run with it--and usually I'll chip with my 9i, which was my chipping club before I got the niblicks.

That's my problem, too. I seem to blade the ball far too easily with it, especially on pitch shots, and chip shots seem to frequently roll out too far. My wife gave me every other club in my bag as well. I doubt if she'll mind if I bench the Niblick.

No, of course you're right--a little too sensitive, I guess. He was basically echoing Frank Thomas in his book, "Just Hit It, " where he reminds golfers like me that the equipment we have is probably as good as we need, and the USGA can make recommendations but its enforcement power is limited to its own tournaments. So Thomas encourages everyone to play whatever equipment he or she likes.

Ah, there it is: the mean-spirited vitriol I sort of expected. My handicap is honest and I play by the rules of golf. My question was out of curiosity, and my curiosity was satisfied. I'm bowing out of this discussion. Thanks to everyone who supplied constructive input.

Of course, I meant differentiate not discriminate. And I wonder what ruling the Monday qualifier playing with a marker would have had to deal with if he had had a boulder interfering with his shot.

There are very few rules I have a problem with actually. And few rulings I disagree with. But would anchored putting be out if Tiger were doing it (after all, when is a 300lb boulder a loose impediment? When you have 30 fans eagerto move it for you). Not picking on Tiger--when is a wheeled crane an immovable object? When it's Ernie Els lining up the shot. If you want to grow the game, you need to openly acknowledge that a pro and an elite amateur are different golfers than someone struggling to break 90 or even 100. I won't feel excluded if you acknowledge that I need more of abreak equipment-wise. At least I won't feel any worse than now, a so-so hacker on the fringes of 'true golf, ' using equipment the USGA grudgingly deems permissible until they 'revisit' the issues in 2016 and 2020. If I did have a vote, I would vote to discriminate between pros/elite golfers and the recreational sort.