Lets assume that the correct shaft/lie/loft/swing-weight variables are fit perfectly to a player's Stroke. Pros and Cons of going with the blade versus a more "game improvement" type of iron?
It just seems that we discuss so much about precision alignments and the importance of sustaining compression that may be it would make sense at least from a training perspective to use a blade . . . if just for feeback.
Seems like the hands could be get a "masters degree" education with feedback from a blade. But I guess the flipside is this game is hard enough as it is.
Thoughts?
Originally Posted by 12 piece bucket
It just seems that we discuss so much about precision alignments and the importance of sustaining compression that may be it would make sense at least from a training perspective to use a blade . . . if just for feeback.
Thoughts?
Exactly why I purchased blades a few years back. I found a good clean practice set of MP14's, 2-PW and told myself if I could master the set, I could probably play anything.
It took me about a week before they found a permanent home in my bag. I love the feel, and that is a very subjective word. I can feel the clubhead weight and roll around the sweet spot better than anything else I've tried. The legendary cold day mishits give me a pause. Mishit feedback is not only felt but heard. The flip side is sweet spot compression where the feedback is sublime.
Now that the chrome and nickle is worn through to the copper in nickle-sized circles, I'm considering the next thing...
Bagger
Originally Posted by Bagger Lance
The flip side is sweet spot compression where the feedback is sublime.
Now that the chrome and nickle is worn through to the copper in nickle-sized circles, I'm considering the next thing...
Bagger
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Don't do it man! Those nickle circles are your "badge of courage and honor." Keep those clubs in the bag. You earned those circles.
I play blades...even my 2 iron. Gotta have the feedback, and I don't think they're that much harder to hit than some of the other non-blades I've played. I bought my first set of blades almost 2 years ago - a beat up set of MP14's...best set of clubs I've ever owned.
If you can consistently impact the ball in the middle of the clubface, blades are your club. If not, go with perimeter weighted.
Flame Suit on:
When the majority of the tour is using CAVITY BACKS, so should you! Simple as that. There are so few many TRUE BALDES in play is ridiculous. Plus the "blades" of today are nothing like the blades of yester years. They are basically game improvement muscle backs.
I have played everything from Callys to Clevelands to Hogans, and I have stuck with an old set of Hogan Directors, circa 1985, 2-pw (3-gap in todays lofts), and they are wonderful! They are about as blade as you can get, but I find 'em easier to hit than anything I've ever owned. Go figure.
Originally Posted by jim_0068
Flame Suit on:
When the majority of the tour is using CAVITY BACKS, so should you! Simple as that. There are so few many TRUE BALDES in play is ridiculous. Plus the "blades" of today are nothing like the blades of yester years. They are basically game improvement muscle backs.
Agreed that the blades of today are not even close to the same as older models.
Case in point - the difference between my FG-17's and Mac 1025M's. They may 'look' like they would play about the same, but the difference in better feel vs forgiveness (respectively) is dramatic and obvious.
That said, I'd still take the 1025's over any true cavity back because there is more feel. The 'mid point' of the spectrum IMO.
I will add one more thing to this thread:
If you play blades and truly SCORE BETTER WITH THEM compared to Cavity backs (you must've tried a set) then keep playing them.
HOWEVER
If your scores are inconsistent with the blades due to mishits/missed greens/etc, you should probably be playing some form of cavity back AT LEAST in the long/mid irons....from 6 or 7 on up, blades work great.
I have played everything over the years from butter knife blades to cavity back graphite shafted clubs. It seems to me, if you can get you right forearm on plane you can hit anything. I currently play a 1956 set of Spalding "syncrodyned" irons--2 thru 9. I did bore them out and install 6.5 rifle shafts. they are the softest irons I have ever played. I am not gifted by any means, but playing the blades has only helped my game.
I've always played blades then went to cavity back and that was a big mistake. I hated them. So I went back and bought the mp-32's and will never look back. I've had the mp-14's and 32's and will never play a different iron than Mizuno. Simply nothing compared IMO.
Hitting blades in the 80's was a lot different than todays. If you didn't hit the sweet spot you knew it. The hardest blades I ever hit were the Hogan Apex. I think the sweetspot was the size of a pin.
I do miss the balata ball because it felt so good hitting with a blade against one of those balls.
While I'm not a low handicapper, I have used blades since I began in 1976 and love the way they feel when hit on the sweet spot. I have tried cavity backs on the range and don't like the feel even when hit on the sweet spot. Feels dead to me.
Everyone who has tried my Hogan Musclebacks love the feel when hit right. Of course, you have to hit it right.
When I started playing(1970)I was using mass produced cast irons like the Wilson Sam Snead Blue Ridge. Drifted away from golf for a while but when I returned in the early 90's I played Hogan Redline's, BH Grind's and Titleist Tour Model's (bulletbacks). I now play Mizuno MP37's, SWEET. Once though I had a set of Hogan Edge's for a back-up set. I liked them but something was just missing. I find blades just force you to not get sloppy. You got to give them your full attention.
Hi All,
As I was reading thru the various posts on the pros and cons of blades vs. cavity backs, a thought struck me. I know, I know, a rare occurrence indeed!
In looking at the average handicap over the past 20 years, it would seem that there is really only an insignificant improvement.
That said, if the so called game improvement irons were really that much better, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the average national handicap should have decrease significantly?
I know that there are a lot of factors other than just the clubs that figure into this, but, and I am serious here, are game improvement irons really that much better for the mid to high handicapper or have we just become victims of the club manufacturing industry's advertising hype? Sometimes I wonder.
Although, I currently play a set of Armour 855s, I have a set of Burke blades, circa 1960, that I occasional play and other than the more harsh feel on mishits, the only real major difference between them and the 855s is that the 855s are about a club to a club and half longer due in part to the stronger lofts.
So my question to the group is, "Are the game improvement irons really that much better that the blades, or is it as it has always been the
Indian and
not the
Arrow?
Regards,
Magic43
Originally Posted by broberts5
I have played everything over the years from butter knife blades to cavity back graphite shafted clubs. It seems to me, if you can get you right forearm on plane you can hit anything. I currently play a 1956 set of Spalding "syncrodyned" irons--2 thru 9. I did bore them out and install 6.5 rifle shafts. they are the softest irons I have ever played. I am not gifted by any means, but playing the blades has only helped my game.
Hi brobert,
I also started with syncro-"Topflite" dished-back blades circa '50.These were underrated,advanced blades.
I retired them when distance became an overriding issue.
I tried delofting the 'Flites but it destroyed their look and created a "digger" front edge.( I reset them) The shafts were 3/4 " shorter than our current models.Also destroying perfect original slip-on leathers in order to lengthen the shafts was an esthetic no-go for me.I generally don't mess with Classic's,but
I wish I had the vision ,as you did,boring the hosel to suit Rifle shafts,because those heads are that terrific.
I strongly feel yours will play level to most current blades.
After playing "in the desert" for several years with a slew of cavity's(Burners,Armours,Pings)I stumbled across a complete set of mint Macgregor MUIRFIELDS 20th,including Persimmon woods.
I died and went to Heaven. Haven't looked at another since.The Best!
"There's no sting if you can swing".
Enjoy!
For those who love the look and craftsmanship of the blades of old, check out this site. I found out about from a neighbor who let me try his Wilson Bullet-Back Irons...I was just taking up the game so I had no appreciation for the clubs but they were very sharp looking.
http://www.houseofforged.com/
Well, I'll put my Sethistory in an order with ratin, if you don't mind:
Head Premise (a gift from my stepfather to begin with, low hosel technology with regular graphite shafts, 2 years later all shafts were broken) - cast iron with strong lofts
Golfsmith Forged (my first fitted set, since I had little clue about fitting then I totally relied on the clubfitter, hence he suggested sensicore in the apollo stepless stiff shafts) - great look and feel, that's what I love about Blades
Ping Zing 2 (after returning from long break I thought the fryingpan technology would compensate my lack of technique, little truth there but on the other hand I had no clue what to change) - yeah, feedback is quiet little maybe due to the large sweetspot? sold them after 6 rounds again
Mizuno Pro (or TRue) - forged Iron, half cavity with MB behind the sweetspot. I couldn't feel the clubhead at all, sold again after 4 weeks.
Maxfli Revolution - forged CB, great club, very soft feel, but I bought them with regular shafts (what a mess) - they are still here
Cleveland TA-7or 5? BP
Did not like the look of the clubhead, sold immediately after 2 rounds
Taylor Made Firesole - cast Iron, no feel, strong lofts, and a hack of a distance, but I feel a little like a girl, I always miss what is not there - this time feel
Wilson Deep Red II - not that bad set of clubs, wrong shafts in there
Wilson FI5 - great set from 8-P but I prefer not to have the CB'S from 7-3
Ping I3 Oversize - another trial into fryingpan section, sold them today again
Cleveland CG-1 Black perl - what a beauty, need to re-shaft them since they have regular shafts
Cleveland TA-1 bought them for the shafts, RIFLE 6.5, to put them into the BP's, couldn't resist to try to hit a few shots with them, and now there are currently in my bag
Well, I'll put my Sethistory in an order with rating, if you don't mind:
Head Premise (a gift from my stepfather to begin with, low hosel technology with regular graphite shafts, 2 years later all shafts were broken) - cast iron with strong lofts
Golfsmith Forged (my first fitted set, since I had little clue about fitting then I totally relied on the clubfitter, hence he suggested sensicore in the apollo stepless stiff shafts) - great look and feel, that's what I love about Blades
Ping Zing 2 (after returning from long break I thought the fryingpan technology would compensate my lack of technique, little truth there but on the other hand I had no clue what to change) - yeah, feedback is quiet little maybe due to the large sweetspot? sold them after 6 rounds again
Mizuno Pro (or TRue) - forged Iron, half cavity with MB behind the sweetspot. I couldn't feel the clubhead at all, sold again after 4 weeks.
Maxfli Revolution - forged CB, great club, very soft feel, but I bought them with regular shafts (what a mess) - they are still here
Cleveland TA-7or 5? BP
Did not like the look of the clubhead, sold immediately after 2 rounds
Taylor Made Firesole - cast Iron, no feel, strong lofts, and a hack of a distance, but I feel a little like a girl, I always miss what is not there - this time feel
Wilson Deep Red II - not that bad set of clubs, wrong shafts in there
Wilson FI5 - great set from 8-P but I prefer not to have the CB'S from 7-3
Ping I3 Oversize - another trial into fryingpan section, sold them today again
Cleveland CG-1 Black perl - what a beauty, need to re-shaft them since they have regular shafts
Cleveland TA-1 bought them for the shafts, RIFLE 6.5, to put them into the BP's, couldn't resist to try to hit a few shots with them, and now there are currently in my bag
i just got some mizuno mp 69s
My first real set of golf clubs were Ping i3's. I loved them. Then I tried Baggers' MP14's and thought I might like a set for myself. So I bought a set of MP29's. When I went back to try the Pings for fun, couldn't stand the lack of feedback - so those got sold.
I had the MP29's in my bag for about a year and really liked them. A couple of months ago I hit some Titlest 704's on the range and liked them so much I bought a set. I sold the MP29's.
I've found the 704's to be a good mixture of feel and forgivability. I can work the ball just as easily as with the MP29's, yet they are more forgiving on mishits.
Btw, MP29's are really muscle-back forged irons, not really true blades.
Is it easier to 'drag' or feel the sweetspot with blades? I have Cleveland TA7s, about as forgiving as they come. Do people use blades out of ego, or does one achieve better ballstriking with a well struck shot from blades?
Originally Posted by jim_0068
Flame Suit on:
When the majority of the tour is using CAVITY BACKS, so should you! Simple as that. There are so few many TRUE BALDES in play is ridiculous. Plus the "blades" of today are nothing like the blades of yester years. They are basically game improvement muscle backs.
I agree with this. I play the original Snake Eyes Smith and Wesson blades which were designed as a game improvement blade. They were selling at about $1200 in the US and over £1000 in the UK. When Snake Eyes went bust I waited a bit a located the UK distributor and bought two sets at £200 each . I don't have any problems hitting them and don't hit game improvement long irons better. I find the real benefit with blades is in the short game . Game improvement clubs such as bulky Callaways just seem like clumsy implements when chipping and the blades feel like precision instruments around the green. Matched progressive sets with long irons with game improvement features and short iron blades makes a lot of sense to me.
What i find a little humorous about those who commented about themselves playing blades and now hue's comment about the bulky callaway's is that if, in a perfect world, there were not endorsement contracts on tour A LOT of players would be using those weird looking Ping Eye 2s
What do you think the odds are that so many tour players who, as earlier stated, play cavity back/game improvement-type clubs do so because of sponsorship. I would assume that these are the style of club most marketable to the ever-growing population of new golf enthusiasts and that OEM's might 'sweeten the pot' for tour players to use these over what they might actually prefer.
Back to the topic at hand...I play an old ('79) set of Wilson forged muscle backs and I will take them with me when I leave this world. Have played Eye2's and Titleist 962b's in the past. I liked both these sets, but now cannot stand to look at anything offset and large. To me, lots of these new clubs belong in a gardener's tool shed.
Because of reasons listed above, I have not tried going back to cavity-back irons. However, I do know that in the time I have played my 'blades', my game has improved immensely. Reason? I think it is the fact that blades reveal more symptoms of my less-than-perfect swing. This has pushed me to be more of a student of the game, to work harder and more productively to improve.
Conclusion: The clubs you play should depend on long term goals. If you are just looking for what will help you improve NOW, cavity backs probably are the ticket. For long-term improvement from a committed golfer, go with the blades.
Sorry for the length of this, but it will probably fall on deaf eyes because the thread is a bit old. Just wanted a little rant in my first post on the A1 golf forum.
I would not like to sacrifice the feel of compressing the ball with a good blade even if it it shaved off two strokes.
Another funky reason is this:
A bad hit with a forgiving clubhead will send the ball FURTHER into the forest 
Originally Posted by hswells
Because of reasons listed above, I have not tried going back to cavity-back irons. However, I do know that in the time I have played my 'blades', my game has improved immensely. Reason? I think it is the fact that blades reveal more symptoms of my less-than-perfect swing. This has pushed me to be more of a student of the game, to work harder and more productively to improve.
Conclusion: The clubs you play should depend on long term goals. If you are just looking for what will help you improve NOW, cavity backs probably are the ticket. For long-term improvement from a committed golfer, go with the blades.
.
GSED Chuck Evans stated that the only true game improvement clubs are blades. I am not sure what the other two resident GSEDs say about this.
For the record, I have a HCP of 6.5 with a varying ball striking quality. It's the short game that regularly gets me under 80.
The MP 32s are not quite a blade but they do have a lower Maltby Playability factor then severeal of the Mizuno blades.
I've played the original 845s since 1990 so they have worked pretty well. But there were three things I didn't like about them. 1) Progressive offset. IMO, offset is just a disturbing factor at address. 2) Lie angle - too upright and 3) A slightly balooning tencency when I hit steeply down on the ball. The combination of fade and distance control was also very difficult to obtain. Also, hitting low punches was risky business unless I used a very easy stroke. A fourth moment that eventually developed, was a sense that the feedback was better than the result on certain shots.
The MP 32's have stiffer and heavier shafts, which probably accounts for several differences. There's probably a difference in center of gravity height as well. I bought them because of very good reviews - they looked slightly more forgiving than pure blades - and because Mizuno have a lie angle that suits me much better than for instance Titleist.
I haven't noticed any more penalty on off-center hits than before. But the feedback is corresponding better to the actual result than it used to be. At address, they look much better - so it's easier for me to do a good swing with these clubs. And fades and punches works much better. I've punched shots under trees with 6 iron that I previously would be anxious to do with a 3 iron. Also I can - and should - hit down more aggressively with these clubs - something I often was penalized for with the TA's
Only negative thing sofar - I haven't quite adjusted to chipping with the pitching wedge yeat. Whether it is due to stiffer shaft/heavier club or higher center of gravity I don't know, but I am struggling a bit with a low and hot trajectory on those little shots.
All in all I am very very very happy with the new clubs.
Originally Posted by DDL
GSED Chuck Evans stated that the only true game improvement clubs are blades. I am not sure what the other two resident GSEDs say about this.
I believe he is right. The forgiveness of forgiving clubs are IMO overrated. They may have a forgiving feeling, but the result often tells another story. Better then with clubs that tell the truth.
I believe tip stiff shafts are very game improving. Better stability combined with a more harsh feeling on off center impact. I recently built a 3 wood with a Harrison Ti shaft (Titanium reinforced - especially in the tip) What I can do with this club from the rough is amazing compared to my previous experience. It seems to cut through the grass like a knife. And when I hit it in the "hard" spot I really get a sting in the hands. But the result is probably better than it would be with a more "forgiving" shaft installed.
I rather missed this topic somehow. But here is a good story about relative feel. Picture this, a master craftsman talking to a pro about feel in the workshop.
Pro, " Heck you cannot feel a graphite shafts feedback"
Clubbie, "Here Jed, stick your hand on the vice there"
Pro being a ball crusher duely puts hand on the vise and Clubbie slaps it with his hand.
Pro "Hey that was not very nice"
Clubbie "stick your hand back back on the vice"
Pro not being very smart puts his hand back there.
Clubbie picks up hammer.....
Pro "Hey I may look stupid but..."
The point here is that the feedback was just going to be very different.
The same can be said for blades vs cavity backs vs vibration dampening devises built into clubheads. If you want more feel then you want a head design that will vibrate more, muscle backs.
As training tools a muscle back will take no prisonsers but the are probably not most players PLAYING tool of choise.
I noticed the Snake Eyes and Mizuno's mentioned above. They are as most blades not that forgiving. Maltby's came out with a heel and toe weighted blade that made them play like a cavity back....now Ping have followed the design idea into the G2 as an extreme. Point here is that a blade is not just a blade. Its how it is designed that counts COG wise that makes them possible for anyone to play with with a bit of thought.
Training wise use a hard task master, a muscle back. For the money end of things give yourself any break you can muster.
i personally have always played my best golf with blades they seem actually easier to hit with me. think about it if i gave you a callaway big bertha sandwedge and had you hit a 100 yard shot at a flag and a cleveland blade type sand wedge i think you would be able to really hone in on the flag with the blade obviously as the shafts get longer it gets harder to hit the center of the club but in the scoring clubs where its more about control i think blades will make you a more accurate player. really forgiving clubs just make you sloppy and it just makes your swing worse. blades keep your game sharp.
