GI or Players Irons and Your Swing?

[JB]

Why not just hire someone to hit the ball for you if it is all about the equipment and nothing about acquiring any skill.

Nobody has ever said that, but I could also say why make the game harder than it is. I was a 7 handicap playing blades. Then a 2.9 playing SGIs. Now back to a 6 because I play a different set every week.

Did my index go down because I switched irons? Maybe. Or maybe my ball striking got better. But sometimes its not about anything other than enjoying oneself and making this game easier if you can.

 

[Sean]

I'm curious.

What's beyond "Super Game Improvement"...having someone walk the ball out into the fairway for you, perhaps?

(I'm kidding)

If it lets you get your freak on, use whatever you're happy with. :thumb:


-JP

Indeed.

 

[bonknhead]

At most, the lies of cast clubs can be bent only 2* according to a couple of golf shops I've talked to. Beyond that, they tell me that they're not responsible for breakage.

That is not true. While bending them is not an option, you can order them to any spec you want directly from the manufacturer.

JB, are you saying that it's NOT true that the lies on cast clubs can't be altered more than 2 degrees, flat or upright, or that they can? I'm confused by you saying that what I wrote was not true, then saying that bending them is not an option. I know you can have the club manufacturers custom build new clubs to your exact specs.

 

[JPsuff]

JB, are you saying that it's NOT true that the lies on cast clubs can't be altered more than 2 degrees, flat or upright, or that they can? I'm confused by you saying that what I wrote was not true, then saying that bending them is not an option. I know you can have the club manufacturers custom build new clubs to your exact specs.

Cast clubs CAN be bent, but only by about a degree or two and in many cases they have to be heated first. Unless whoever is doing the bending is very experienced and familiar with the different types of alloys used in cast clubs, there is a possibility that the hosels can be broken by too much bending or weakened by too much heat being applied.

In the long run, it's better to find out first what your lies should be and then order cast clubs built to those lies.


-JP

 

[JB]

JB, are you saying that it's NOT true that the lies on cast clubs can't be altered more than 2 degrees, flat or upright, or that they can? I'm confused by you saying that what I wrote was not true, then saying that bending them is not an option. I know you can have the club manufacturers custom build new clubs to your exact specs.

What I am saying is that cast clubs can be bent a few degrees and if heated even more than that. But you can order any cast club to any spec so you do not have to worry about bending. The misnomer that they can only be bent a couple of degrees comes from places not wanting to bend them in fear of breaking them. Most only recommend a degree or two. We watched the TM tour van bend a set of R7 TPs 4 degrees with no issues.

We certainly do not think you should try that or have a store try that. However like I said, cast clubs can be ordered to any specs you would like, so it should not matter.

 

[bonknhead]

What I am saying is that cast clubs can be bent a few degrees and if heated even more than that. But you can order any cast club to any spec so you do not have to worry about bending. The misnomer that they can only be bent a couple of degrees comes from places not wanting to bend them in fear of breaking them. Most only recommend a degree or two. We watched the TM tour van bend a set of R7 TPs 4 degrees with no issues.

We certainly do not think you should try that or have a store try that. However like I said, cast clubs can be ordered to any specs you would like, so it should not matter.

Yes, I know that cast clubs can be ordered to a person's individual specs, but I was confused when you wrote, "bending them is not an option", because although not preferred, bending the hosel of a clubhead IS an option, if necessary. I was wrong in that I thought a cast clubhead can only be bent a couple of degrees.

 

[JB]

Yes, I know that cast clubs can be ordered to a person's individual specs, but I was confused when you wrote, "bending them is not an option", because although not preferred, bending the hosel of a clubhead IS an option, if necessary. I was wrong in that I thought a cast clubhead can only be bent a couple of degrees.

most of the time, you are technically correct, because whether it can or cannot, most places wont bend them. We bent my Nickent Arc wedge 5 degrees with no issues to try and see if it could be done. Do I recommend it? Of course not, but it comes down to the metals used and whether someone will do it.

 

[madmike]

Interesting discussion. As far as I can tell, both C-Tech and JB are in agreement that GI irons are 'easier to hit than' blades. Easier to hit means that instead of a slight miss-hit loosing 25 yards in distance, it only loses about 5-10. Maybe the distance loss is less because the ball was off the toe or the shot was a touch fat, doesn't matter.

C-Tech's argument that the difference here between GI Irons and blades is insignificant in terms of scoring may not be too far off- depending on what the definition of 'insignificant' is. For an average golfer, what is the increase in chances of getting up-and-down from a couple yards off the green vs. 10-15 yards off? Maybe they get up and down 1 in 3 times from the fringe to 5 yards off and 1 in 10 times from 10 to 15 yards off. That means that for this particular hole, playing GI irons that lost less distance on the misshit saved exactly 0.233 strokes vs blades. (1/3 - 1/10)

Over the course of 18 holes, if this situation occurs 10 times then the number of strokes saved over the entire round is just over 2. Let's also assume that the player hits 2 additional GIR with GI clubs where very slight misshits would have fallen just short of the green with blades. Assuming the average player has about a 70% chance of 2-putting on these long putts, and still 33% chance of getting up and down from just off the green, then the two additional GIR gives an additional savings of just under a stroke.

Is a difference of 3 strokes over 18 holes significant? I'd say so. I'd prefer to play clubs that saved me 3 strokes over 18 holes. Is the difference between GI clubs and blades going to turn a weekend hacker into a competent golfer? Clearly not- although I'm still not sure anyone ever claimed that. Could the average golfer save more than 3 strokes a round by not buying the latest iron set and instead taking lessons? Probably.

In the end you can't buy game. But modern clubs can help a little.

 

[thedue]

I like your way of thinking Mike. I'd have been in the money the last three time's with those odd's.

I can generally count on my short game! If I hit it straight getting there I have a chance.

 

[JPsuff]

Interesting discussion. As far as I can tell, both C-Tech and JB are in agreement that GI irons are 'easier to hit than' blades. Easier to hit means that instead of a slight miss-hit loosing 25 yards in distance, it only loses about 5-10. Maybe the distance loss is less because the ball was off the toe or the shot was a touch fat, doesn't matter.

C-Tech's argument that the difference here between GI Irons and blades is insignificant in terms of scoring may not be too far off- depending on what the definition of 'insignificant' is. For an average golfer, what is the increase in chances of getting up-and-down from a couple yards off the green vs. 10-15 yards off? Maybe they get up and down 1 in 3 times from the fringe to 5 yards off and 1 in 10 times from 10 to 15 yards off. That means that for this particular hole, playing GI irons that lost less distance on the misshit saved exactly 0.233 strokes vs blades. (1/3 - 1/10)

Over the course of 18 holes, if this situation occurs 10 times then the number of strokes saved over the entire round is just over 2. Let's also assume that the player hits 2 additional GIR with GI clubs where very slight misshits would have fallen just short of the green with blades. Assuming the average player has about a 70% chance of 2-putting on these long putts, and still 33% chance of getting up and down from just off the green, then the two additional GIR gives an additional savings of just under a stroke.

Is a difference of 3 strokes over 18 holes significant? I'd say so. I'd prefer to play clubs that saved me 3 strokes over 18 holes. Is the difference between GI clubs and blades going to turn a weekend hacker into a competent golfer? Clearly not- although I'm still not sure anyone ever claimed that. Could the average golfer save more than 3 strokes a round by not buying the latest iron set and instead taking lessons? Probably.

In the end you can't buy game. But modern clubs can help a little.

I agree with most of what you're saying, Mike.

The only thing that I think gets a bit glossed over when talking about GI clubs is the issue of distance. There is a misnomer that GI clubs have an enlarged sweetspot that the public believes will allow for a mishit with no discernible loss of distance which is not really true.

The main benefit to GI clubs is directional control. An off-center hit with a GI club will still allow the ball to fly relatively straight whereas the same mishit with blades will produce a severely off-line shot, but you'll still lose distance either way. Every object on this planet has only one true center of mass and perimeter weighting doesn't actually increase that area as much as it just lessens the severity (in terms of consequence) of an off-center hit. But to get the maximum distance from any club, one still has to hit the ball on the sweetspot regardless of whether it's a blade or a GI club.

I play an R7 driver not because of any claims of increased distance but rather because it allows me to keep the ball flying straighter on a mishit than a more traditional driver head would allow. If I mishit a drive, my first thought is that I'm not going to get as much distance as I'd like, but at least the ball will be somewhere on or at least near the fairway. But when I catch one on the screws, the distance difference is significant because I've struck the ball at or very near the club's center of mass.

But whether one uses blades or shovels, the single most common mistake I see in high handicap players is simply not hitting the ball before they hit the turf. Let's face it, one could be using the most technologically advanced club ever designed, but if they're squeezing a half an inch of bluegrass between the clubface and the ball, that technology doesn't amount to a hill of beans. So despite all of the claims made by manufacturers about how easy it is to play their clubs, one still has to actually hit the ball cleanly in the first place in order for any of those claims to be fully realized. No club design will compensate for a lousy swing and lousy mechanics and the only way to improve in that regard is by spending lots of hours practicing rather than spending lots of money on gear.



-JP

 

[Smallville]

Madmike may be comparing the distance loss on a straight line. Since the blades will go further offline when mis hit than the the GI's, couldn't that be where he is coming up with what he said?

instead of a slight miss-hit losing 25 yards in distance, it only loses about 5-10.

versus:

An off-center hit with a GI club will still allow the ball to fly relatively straight whereas the same mishit with blades will produce a severely off-line shot, but you'll still lose distance either way.

The way I read it was Mike was saying since it goes straighter you are going to be closer to the hole (less distance lost). Someone who hits a drive 225 but straight down the fairway is going to be closer than the guy who hits it 240 severely offline.

I may be wrong in my interpretation, but that's the way I took it.

 

[JPsuff]

Madmike may be comparing the distance loss on a straight line. Since the blades will go further offline when mis hit than the the GI's, couldn't that be where he is coming up with what he said?

versus:


The way I read it was Mike was saying since it goes straighter you are going to be closer to the hole (less distance lost). Someone who hits a drive 225 but straight down the fairway is going to be closer than the guy who hits it 240 severely offline.

I may be wrong in my interpretation, but that's the way I took it.

Same thing.

I was just pointing out the fact that many people believe that GI clubs can be hit any which way with no ill effects and that's not true and that the primary benefit of GI clubs is directional control.

Distance is still a function of hitting the ball on the sweetspot regardless of what club you're using. An off-center hit with a GI club will not result in as drastic a loss of distance, but distance will still be affected nonetheless.


-JP

 

[madmike]

I was just pointing out the fact that many people believe that GI clubs can be hit any which way with no ill effects and that's not true and that the primary benefit of GI clubs is directional control.

Distance is still a function of hitting the ball on the sweetspot regardless of what club you're using. An off-center hit with a GI club will not result in as drastic a loss of distance, but distance will still be affected nonetheless.
-JP

We're in 100% agreement on the net of this. GI clubs can help some, but it is still not a magic tool to turn a substantial miss into a GIR. They can help turn what would have been a substantial miss into a less severe miss, and may give and improved opportunity to recover and save score.

The net stoke savings is likely modest, particularly for the average golfer who likely can't break 100 when counting all the strokes on a CR of 71 or greater.

I disagree slightly on the mechanism- I don't think GI irons provide particularly improved directional control, but will give more consistent distance control over a larger face area- but that's a trivial point.

In the end technology helps, but it's still the indian not the arrow. Most playes aren't breaking 100 even with the SGI irons. But to think that technology can't help at all is unrealistic.

 

[JB]

Distance is still a function of hitting the ball on the sweetspot regardless of what club you're using. An off-center hit with a GI club will not result in as drastic a loss of distance, but distance will still be affected nonetheless.


-JP

I dont know a single company that boasts otherwise. In fact every company reports in testing that "less distance is lost" when doing these studies. Launch monitors back up their claims.

 

[thedue]

Same thing.

I was just pointing out the fact that many people believe that GI clubs can be hit any which way with no ill effects and that's not true and that the primary benefit of GI clubs is directional control.

Distance is still a function of hitting the ball on the sweetspot regardless of what club you're using. An off-center hit with a GI club will not result in as drastic a loss of distance, but distance will still be affected nonetheless.


-JP

Same thing? I don't think so. Smally makes a good point in that the distance control can actually gain yards versus a way right or left shot. Especially if your talking OB.

Also, do you really believe MANY people think GI clubs can be hit any which way with no ill effects?

 

[JPsuff]

Same thing? I don't think so. Smally makes a good point in that the distance control can actually gain yards versus a way right or left shot. Especially if your talking OB.

I don't understand what you mean by distance control versus left or right - those are two different things.

What I mean by "same thing" is that if you keep the ball pointed more or less in the right direction (directional control), that will get you closer to your target than if you're spraying balls left and right and I agreed with Smally in the sense of a shorter ball hit straight will get closer than a longer ball hit sideways. But "maximum" distance - what you're physically capable of producing - can only be realized by a dead-center hit no matter what type of club you're using.

Also, do you really believe MANY people think GI clubs can be hit any which way with no ill effects?

Well, everybody's idea of "many" may vary, but I've encountered quite a few people both on the range and on the course who seem to think that a GI club somehow absolves them of having to put in tons of practice or that if they make a bad swing, things will turn out OK anyway. I think a lot of people see GI clubs as some sort of magic wand and that's a direct result of the way in which they're marketed -- more distance, more control, more forgiving, etc.. I think people interpret that as being a substitute for actual skill, or that they can be successful without really having to try that hard.


-JP

 

[JB]

Well, everybody's idea of "many" may vary, but I've encountered quite a few people both on the range and on the course who seem to think that a GI club somehow absolves them of having to put in tons of practice or that if they make a bad swing, things will turn out OK anyway. I think a lot of people see GI clubs as some sort of magic wand and that's a direct result of the way in which they're marketed -- more distance, more control, more forgiving, etc.. I think people interpret that as being a substitute for actual skill, or that they can be successful without really having to try that hard.


-JP

In all my time at the range (daily) and all of our shoot outs, playing 3-4 times a week with different people, I have never once found someone that thought this way. People think, and are right, that the GI irons are more forgiving, but I have never encountered a single person in the thousands we have met since starting THP that believed that they are a substitute for practice or magic wands.

 

[JPsuff]

In all my time at the range (daily) and all of our shoot outs, playing 3-4 times a week with different people, I have never once found someone that thought this way. People think, and are right, that the GI irons are more forgiving, but I have never encountered a single person in the thousands we have met since starting THP that believed that they are a substitute for practice or magic wands.

OK, let me clarify this for those who don't speak metaphor.

I think that people who play GI clubs do so because they don't have the time to put into the game but still want to have a reasonably good time out on the course. I believe that they achieve what they see as good results overall, especially given that their swings are far from perfect or are even all that consistent. So in that sense, they see GI clubs as a way of being able to work around their flaws and still have fun without having to put a whole lot of effort into working towards perfection.


-JP

 

[JB]

OK, let me clarify this for those who don't speak metaphor.

I think that people who play GI clubs do so because they don't have the time to put into the game but still want to have a reasonably good time out on the course. I believe that they achieve what they see as good results overall, especially given that their swings are far from perfect or are even all that consistent. So in that sense, they see GI clubs as a way of being able to work around their flaws and still have fun without having to put a whole lot of effort into working towards perfection.


-JP

Other than the bolded part (which is absurd), the rest of it is what everybody has been saying in this thread for 2 days. Most golfers buy clubs without even knowing that players clubs exist.

Most people that buy clubs buy them off the rack without fitting and do so because they like the look and like how they perform when trying them at a store. MOST do not even know what a GI iron is vs a players iron. They buy the clubs that work the best for them when taking a swing or two. The amount of GI irons sold vs that of players irons is staggering because MOST GOLFERS NEED HELP and a GI IRON OFFERS THAT BECAUSE LIKE EVERYBODY HAS BEEN SAYING FOR PAGES NOW, THEY ARE EASIER TO HIT.

 

[Vegan702]

Define easier to hit.

 

[JB]

more forgiving and larger club head. Offset to please the masses and an overall straighter trajectory on missses.

 

[JPsuff]

Other than the bolded part (which is absurd), the rest of it is what everybody has been saying in this thread for 2 days. Most golfers buy clubs without even knowing that players clubs exist.

Most people that buy clubs buy them off the rack without fitting and do so because they like the look and like how they perform when trying them at a store. MOST do not even know what a GI iron is vs a players iron. They buy the clubs that work the best for them when taking a swing or two. The amount of GI irons sold vs that of players irons is staggering because MOST GOLFERS NEED HELP and a GI IRON OFFERS THAT BECAUSE LIKE EVERYBODY HAS BEEN SAYING FOR PAGES NOW, THEY ARE EASIER TO HIT.

And I haven't disagreed with that at all, so what are you yelling about?

And while it's true that most people buy clubs off the rack sans fitting, I believe that most people also buy a particular type of club because of trends, marketing and feedback from friends and other players. I also believe that most people know that blades are considered "player's clubs" and that those same people stay away from them unless they are very confident in their games in the same way that those same people stay away from "blue tees" because they believe that only really good players can use them.

The idea of trying out the clubs and choosing the ones with the best performance is also true, but are largely limited to only those clubs which aren't "player's clubs" to begin with and I doubt that they even bother to try a set of blades at all.


-JP

 

[vman]

An interesting debate.As a professional I`ve always used cast cavity backs.Why?Because there is no bag chatter or dings from being in the bag. There is also no good/bad distinguishable feel difference between forged or cast and the long irons are easier to hit.All independent testing(including my own)confirms that cavity backed irons especially the larger GI irons are more forgiving on misshits and thus more playable than blade irons.Using pure blades will not in the long run improve your golf by making you a better ball striker.I would urge all golfers to use some form of cavity back and get a hybrid or 2 in your bag.Believe me this is sound advice.

 

[JPsuff]

An interesting debate.As a professional I`ve always used cast cavity backs.Why?Because there is no bag chatter or dings from being in the bag. There is also no good/bad distinguishable feel difference between forged or cast and the long irons are easier to hit.All independent testing(including my own)confirms that cavity backed irons especially the larger GI irons are more forgiving on misshits and thus more playable than blade irons.Using pure blades will not in the long run improve your golf by making you a better ball striker.I would urge all golfers to use some form of cavity back and get a hybrid or 2 in your bag.Believe me this is sound advice.

I don't think there's a "right" or "wrong" to this argument because it boils down to personal preference.

I liken things such as this to woodworking (because I love woodworking). I can cut a mortise and tenon joint with power tools that will fit well and perform its function perfectly and I can do it all in minutes. I can also cut the same joint using nothing but hand saws and chisels. It will take much more time and in the end, it will do the exact same thing as the machine cut joint, but the difference is in the emotional payoff; that I "made" that joint instead of having a power tool make it for me.

I like blades because they're hard to master. And I will disagree with you on the topic of making for better ball striking because I believe that if one can hit a set of blades, then one truly understands what it is to hit a ball squarely. As for feel, that lies in the hands and mind of the beholder, but again I think that blades feel better and more importantly, they serve to better define a well struck ball from a poorly struck ball.

This is my opinion. It is what I believe and it reflects my rather traditional way of looking at this game. That said, I currently play a set of forged cavity back irons for precisely the reasons you've stated, but I do so as a matter of convenience rather than preference because unlike my "blade days", I don't have the time or the access to the game these days to keep my blade skills sharp enough to suit my expectations. But given the opportunity again - the time again - I would go back to blades in a heartbeat because to me, they represent "the real thing". They may not be practical to many, but to me they represent a challenge and a goal to be achieved.

That isn't "right" or "wrong", it's just the way I see it.


-JP

 

[vman]

I don't think there's a "right" or "wrong" to this argument because it boils down to personal preference.
I like blades because they're hard to master. And I will disagree with you on the topic of making for better ball striking because I believe that if one can hit a set of blades, then one truly understands what it is to hit a ball squarely. As for feel, that lies in the hands and mind of the beholder, but again I think that blades feel better and more importantly, they serve to better define a well struck ball from a poorly struck ball.

As you say there isn`t a right or wrong to this argument but quality of ballstrike and the flight of the ball is the ultimate reflection of a squarely hit golf ball.This is irrespective of the tools used whether it be blades or cavities.I can hit blades well but playability wise they are inferior to cavity backs and that`s why I don`t use them.They simply have no benefits over a cavity,none at all.