Equipment Question

[swingobsessed]

I am currently a 5 handicap and play cavity back irons (Taylor Made R7). I think these are referred to as “game improvement irons”. My question is when do you know when it is time to move to a players iron, and why would you do that? I was under the impression that players irons are less forgiving and harder to hit, so what would be the benefit of switching?
Thanks.

 

[Brian Manzella]

That's why they make TrackMan, and why they have fitters like Cool Clubs

I am currently a 5 handicap and pay cavity back irons (Taylor Made R7). I think these are referred to as “game improvement irons”. My question is when do you know when it is time to move to a players iron, and why would you do that? I was under the impression that players irons are less forgiving and harder to hit, so what would be the benefit of switching.
Thanks.

I played my best golf back in 1994 & 1995.

I shot 59 twice at the New Orleans City Park South Course, 64 on the City Park North, 139 in one day at the East & West, 66 at Pontchartrain Park, 63 at Audubon Park, etc.

I did it all with Ping Eye 2's.

I had had blade irons several times before, but nothing was like these Pings.

Since those Pings I have had MANY sets of irons, and none as good.

My current set is from Cleveland with an assist from Cool Clubs—the Scottsdale, Arizona-based high-end clubfitter of choice for the Manzella Academy.

I really like 'em.

But I want a set of G15's.

Why?

Well, I saw about 10 guys playing with them at the Zurich and many of them were NOT Ping staff members.

But how do I know if they are better for me?

Ah....

TrackMan.

You see, you can test these sorts of things out on TrackMan.

And you will get a clear winner.

So, should you switch to blades?

Only if they make you hit the ball closer to the hole.

 

[scandres]

PING

I'm still a bit sore from my fitting at PING last Monday.

I'm convinced that they are the best in the business, company wise and product wise.

Looking forward to the summer season with 14 PINGs in my bag, and I'm not getting paid to use them.

 

[Whiteflash]

I played my best golf back in 1994 & 1995.

I shot 59 twice at the New Orleans City Park South Course, 64 on the City Park North, 139 in one day at the East & West, 66 at Pontchartrain Park, 63 at Audubon Park, etc.

I did it all with Ping Eye 2's.

I had had blade irons several times before, but nothing was like these Pings.

Since those Pings I have had MANY sets of irons, and none as good.

My current set is from Cleveland with an assist from Cool Clubs—the Scottsdale, Arizona-based high-end clubfitter of choice for the Manzella Academy.

I really like 'em.

But I want a set of G15's.

Why?

Well, I saw about 10 guys playing with them at the Zurich and many of them were NOT Ping staff members.

But how do I know if they are better for me?

Ah....

TrackMan.

You see, you can test these sorts of things out on TrackMan.

And you will get a clear winner.

So, should you switch to blades?

Only if they make you hit the ball closer to the hole.

They were playing the G15 and not the I15's? I dont doubt you but that really suprises me?

 

[goley]

I notice that KJ Choi uses the g15s. Its a good selling point when a 75-80 shooter is wanting only the s57 or the i15's. They must be better than KJ!!!

 

[Richie3Jack]

I'm a big believer in blades over cavity backs. My first set was blades and after that as a junior golfer I would switch off and on a bit between the two, but looking back I always went with blades because I just seemed to strike them better.

Now I think I have a good reason why.

For starters, there was a Golf Digest study on CB vs. blades. It wasn't exactly scientific, but I agree with the point that mis-hits with blades were more *accurate* and more *consistent*. The misses with CB's were everywhere and every once in a while the robot could hit one well with a mis-hit or hit one pretty long with a mis-hit. Again, not exactly a scientific study, but I think it was in the right direction.

The second part is I eventually started reading a book that I think would benefit everyone and doesn't go against Brian's teachings and its called 'Whole Brain Power' by Michael Lavery.

The book is about how to become ambidextrous and the benefits it has. One of the things that Lavery explains is that we don't test our fine motor skills as much as we used to. Penmanship has been replaced by typing. And if we do write something down, it's almost never in cursive anymore.

Lavery's main point is that when we stop using and testing motor skills, they eventually erode.

I believe this holds true in golf. CB's are designed to be more forgiving. The soles are really big so the golfer doesn't have to control the low point as well as they would with blades. The lofts are lower and the shafts are longer and lighter so they can hit it further without being forced to have a swing that legitimately increases its clubhead speed.

IMO, what happens with *most* golfers that use CB's is that eventually they lose that precision that they have in their golf swing over time because they are not testing that precision like they would with blades.

Plus, we use the big titanium drivers these days which don't really test our precision like the persimmon drivers did. Now, we use titanium because the results are just too much better than anything persimmon could offer.

But with blades...*if* I strike a blade iron well I can hit it just as well, if not better than when I catch a CB flush.

So for me, the last thing I ever want to hear is how forgiving an iron is. I want to hear how good an iron performs when I hit it flush because that is my goal with every shot...to hit it flush.

I usually play with some Hogan Apex PC's and in large part because I've started using them I really don't have many mis-hits with them. However, when I do mis-hit them they usually go quite alright. But because they force me to be precise, that eventually makes my swing more precise.

Now, I wouldn't tell a 20 handicapper who is a weekend golfer to go out and get some blades. But I would tell a golfer who is pretty decent who is serious about getting better and has some decent teaching to look out for blades. These golfers have a plan and know enough about the swing and are in tune with their own swing to take the feedback from blades and use it to swing better. The weekend hackers just don't have that IMO.

If anything, go on eBay and buy a forged blade 2-iron for cheap and use it on the range. You'll notice right away that when you can consistently hit that well on the range, you'll hit the rest of the clubs in your bag flush. I also find that it's usually because the mechanics of my swing have to be spot on, not just my timing and hand-eye coordination.









3JACK

 

[Brian Manzella]

Yeah, but...

I'm a big believer in blades over cavity backs.....not just my timing and hand-eye coordination.

That all may be true, but TrackMan can TEST it to see if it is.

I hear where you are coming from, as I tend to recommend slightly CB blades, but the whole Hybrids thing blows all of that up.

Really.

 

[Richie3Jack]

I carry a hybrid. A 3-hybrid. I also carry a 3-iron.

Reason being is I'm much longer off the tee with the hybrid and I can hit it varying distances depending on what shot I want to hit. Plus it's far better out of the rough. I don't get too bogged down on hybrids being bad, mine looks similar to a 5-wood I used to have. I do think that getting 2, 3 or even 4 hybrids is a bad idea if you want to get better.

I can understand why PGA Tour pros prefer CB's. Today's PGA Tour courses are more carry oriented and I think you have to hit a lot more shots higher or they won't hold greens, etc. Though I think with the technology they have on hand, they could keep the blade head, change the shafts, tweak the lofts and still get the window traj. that they want.

I think it's neat that Trackman can test it, but I think it avoids my point that *over time* you will likely be less precise with using CB's than using blades. Let's say you're striking the ball well enough to average 14 GIR on a 130 slope course with blade irons. You may possibly hit CB's on Trackman and test out better that day than with blades, but my theory is that if you switched to CB's permanently, you will become less precise over time, be it a month or 3 months or 3 years from now. And in the future you could test yourself again and find that you hit CB's better, but now your hitting the ball well enough to hit 11 GIR on a 130 slope course.

But, had you stuck with blades, even though Trackman shows you can hit better shots with CB's, I think you'd keep the precision in your swing over time and the overall results would be better.

Of course, these are my theories. Great strikers of the ball like Kenny Perry, Heath Slocum, Hunter Mahan hit the CB's quite well and have used them for quite some time. Although I believe Sergio's ballstriking has dipped the past 2 years and I think part of it is due to the contant switching to Taylor Made CB's.

But on the flip side, the great ballstrikers of all time...Hogan, Moe, Trevino, Johnny Miller, Snead, Nicklaus, Tiger pre-Haney...all used blades.

It's tough for me to tell anybody that they must go to blades, but I certainly see where Dr. Zick was coming from.






3JACK

 

[gmbtempe]

Richie,

Practice with blades, play with cavity backs?

 

[Richie3Jack]

Richie,

Practice with blades, play with cavity backs?

I don't think it's a bad idea. If I were to do this, I'd suggest playing most of the casual rounds with blades as well since the range and the course are two different things. I actually believe if people understood the eroding of the motor skills and precision with GI irons and then decided to practice with blades and play with GI's, they'd most likely switch to blades and find them not that hard to hit.

But I think the problem is that golfers don't understand why feedback that blades provide is important and then there's the terrible fear of mis-hitting a shot.

A big part of the reason why I also wanted to go back to blades is every single really good ballstriker I have become friends with in golf all grew up playing blades. Every single one of them. Now, some of them are playing CB's now, but I think that this is not just some coincidence.






3JACK

 

[Frans@France]

I don't think it's a bad idea. If I were to do this, I'd suggest playing most of the casual rounds with blades as well since the range and the course are two different things. I actually believe if people understood the eroding of the motor skills and precision with GI irons and then decided to practice with blades and play with GI's, they'd most likely switch to blades and find them not that hard to hit.

But I think the problem is that golfers don't understand why feedback that blades provide is important and then there's the terrible fear of mis-hitting a shot.

A big part of the reason why I also wanted to go back to blades is every single really good ballstriker I have become friends with in golf all grew up playing blades. Every single one of them. Now, some of them are playing CB's now, but I think that this is not just some coincidence.

3JACK

3JACK : If you need some support for your idea have a look at the discussion about high MOI putters or better the putters where the weigth is transfert both to the left and right.

The same arguments will be found : When hitting a putter left/right weight the feeling of the miss-hit is lost and slowly you will tend to be less precisive. Solution : during exercise using a vintage style putter and for the money : the left/right weighted putter

 

[birly-shirly]

That all may be true, but TrackMan can TEST it to see if it is.

How would you use Trackman to compare 2 different club designs?

I can see the application to shaft fitting, but I don't understand how you would use it to choose between 2 different clubheads.

 

[Richie3Jack]

Frans - I've actually been thinking of doing that. The best putter I ever putted with was an 8802 with the old wrap grip. My dad and friend Jeff could tell you that one summer I didn't miss ONE putt from 5 feet and in. It was a great summer of golf.

Unfortunately some thief stole it out of my bag as I was eating lunch.

Most of the old blade irons have the weight much higher up on the face. This causes the ball to fly lower, so they have to increase the loft. And generally the sweetspot is closer to the heel than the modern blade because the neck is much longer. Some goof on another board tried to claim that Hogan his 'heel cuts.' No, he hit it flush...that's just where the sweetspot was located back in the day with those irons.

Also, the shafts are much different these days. Lighter, launch higher and go further. Part of all of this is golfers want to hit irons further (even the PGA Tour pros). I can see it from the PGA Tour pro perspective, mainly because the par-3's are so long on tour these days that you have to feel better hitting a 5-iron into a green instead of a 2-iron or a hybrid. I'd definitely suggest with vintage irons eventually changing out the shafts, but probably only to the Dynamic Gold shafts or you'll lose the characteristics of the club.




3JACK

 

[niblick1]

But on the flip side, the great ballstrikers of all time...Hogan, Moe, Trevino, Johnny Miller, Snead, Nicklaus, Tiger pre-Haney...all used blades.

But Richie, when you dissect this remark all it really says is that in golf's ""wooden racket era," players used wooden rackets plus Tiger, who was a kid learning golf at the end of the wooden racket era, also used a wooden racket. Granted the wooden racket analogy applies even more to persimmon drivers compared to a G15 driver.

There is a certain purist view about blades that is based on aesthetics and, well, nostalgia. 99 per cent of the amateur purists would get waxed by Jiyai Shin playing graphite shafted hybrids from 170 and 7-woods from 180 yards out. Sort of the way Wie got waxed yesterday (playing blades). I think if you can win at Augusta with "game improvement clubs," which has happened, it's hard to argue that the clubs are bad for fine-tuning your golf skills.

I'm not saying it's impossible that a some people will benefit or that people at the most elite level might sometimes play better with blades or that there might be some small practice advantage to practicing with certain clubs, but I am sceptical. I'd bet some will play better with blades, but I will bet that is a very small universe. The science on this issue will be interesting to follow. But in tennis, I don't see purists trying to play with a Jack Kramer racket anymore.

 

[vjsinger]

I'd like to see the science on this stuff as well and I do think Rich has brought up very good points. I have 3 sets of blades now and play with a Hogan Apex set. I have an old Macgregor MT 1 iron that I hit everyday to work on the precision, or should I say not hitting the damn thing very precise. I'm going to get some new irons next season and will go the TRACKMAN route for that. I won't insist on blades CB's or GI's, I'll just get what works best for me and I'll still work on not being precise with that damn chicken stick everyday.

 

[Richie3Jack]

Like I stated earlier, part of the problem is that courses are designed differently. They call it 'target golf' which makes no sense to me because golf is always a target game. I call it 'carry golf' because many of the newer courses are designed where you have to hit the ball higher because distance rules (off the tee) or you can't hold the green as well unless you hit it high.

Ryan Moore recently switched from his SB-1 blades (Scratch Golf) to their Cavity Back line just for Augusta because he wanted to get the ball flying higher for that course. Anthony Kim says he really likes the new Nike blades because it allows him to hit the ball higher and keep up with guys like Tiger and Phil who can hit those high shots.

I think it's safe to say that the older golfers hit the ball lower and mostly because that's what the courses from back then called for. Although I don't like what they've done to Augusta, I generally have no problem with new course design...it's just different.

But like I said, I think you can change the shafts and/or the lofts if you worried about hitting blades too low.

The reason why I don't think blades fit into the 'wooden racket' analogy is that they are still prevalent today. I did a look at the top 50 players and IIRC, 30 of them were using CB's, 17 were using blades and 3 of them were using a mixed set. So it's not like the beginning of the titanium era where a select few were still holding onto their persimmon driver like Justin Leonard and DL III were...about 35% of the top 50 players are still using blades. Plus, you have to remember that endorsement deals have a lot to do with it. Get a good endorsement deal, but with a company that doesn't make good blades or blades that you like or you want to be a 'team player' to put you in better position for future endorsement deals, it's easy to see why they would put CB's in their bag.






3JACK

 

[Chip Putterman]

Rich, I have been saying this for the longest time. That is: a good number of Tour Pros use cavity backs because of their endorsement deals. In my opinion, the avid golfer with a sound swing, will enjoy the game a lot more due to the feedback they get from forged blades. Their is no better feeling in the golfing world than a crisply struck shot with a blade iron.

 

[birly-shirly]

Most of the old blade irons have the weight much higher up on the face. This causes the ball to fly lower, so they have to increase the loft. And generally the sweetspot is closer to the heel than the modern blade because the neck is much longer. Some goof on another board tried to claim that Hogan his 'heel cuts.' No, he hit it flush...that's just where the sweetspot was located back in the day with those irons.




3JACK

Richie - do you think that blades are better with the CoG closer to the heel?

Or is it just that you like old blades, and the heel bias doesn't bother you?

 

[Frans@France]

How would you use Trackman to compare 2 different club designs?

I can see the application to shaft fitting, but I don't understand how you would use it to choose between 2 different clubheads.

euh... by just hitting them and looking at the end-results??

 

[birly-shirly]

euh... by just hitting them and looking at the end-results??

yep - that would tell you which club you hit closer to the target.

in the same way, but for a fraction of the cost, you could draw smiley faces on half of your practice balls and conduct head to head tests yourself.

so my question is, what functionality does trackman add to the mix? because, I assumed that brian was talking about a somewhat more sophisticated level of testing.

heck, for all I know, TM has whizzy statistical functions that will take a particular batch of shots (say 30 6-irons) and report back your mean, median and mode misses and a dispersion pattern. which would be quite labour-saving and a cool tool to play with - but not fundamentally different to what you could achieve with a felt-tip pen and some patience.

or, maybe, you can use TM to separate out the effect of the design parameters of a particular club from the character of a particular swing and impact factors.

to me, those are 2 quite different levels of testing. and there might be others. so I'm curious to know what brian had in mind.