JMiller

I guess I like to split the downswing into two sections mostly because it is so dynamic and really a lot going on in the downswing that needs isolated in my swing. Transition to thigh high part a then release and impact positions part b. part a gets you into position for part b, so I worked on it yesterday exclusively at the practice tee 'range'. Sequence the swing Weight shift, passive shoulders, pull down to thigh high... I then had to start getting a little rotation in the pull down to thigh high from 9 0'clock where the lead arm is parallel to the ground, the rotation is just a slight bow of the left wrist to get the shaft parallel with the target line and club head square at thigh high. I was experiencing my driver the club getting laid off behind me and open at thigh high, hard to square the face from that position consistently at impact. That is where I left off yesterday was working on my feeling of the left wrist starting to rotate a little without losing my wrist set to thigh high So it would put me in a position to really fire the right arm into impact. Long ways to go but getting their, I know their is at least two things I need to tweak about my impact and release, left elbow position (pointed at the dirt rather then down the target line at impact at risk for injury in that elbow) and i tend to hold onto the club with the right hand, after impact, need to practice letting it release a little more freely. If you all have questions about RST or my swing I'd be happy to answer what I can, but you can get same information as I have on their website. If you want to talk about you own experiences with the RST model swing then feel feel to hop in the discussion and tell us about your experiences and what you think about it.

I think this swing (RST) is something between a one plane and a two plane. RS1 is pretty much a one plane from the things I have looked at about it. Move 1 in RST the takeaway really is a simple little amount of movement. I was surprised just how little movement it took to get the club parallel to the ground and in a good position just to hinge the right arm 90* to get to the top. I was able to hit a few punch like shots just from the takeaway position and firing the right hand forward after setting into my left side. Move 2 in RST is another little movement, if you flex the right elbow 90* upward then you get to the top with a little laid off shaft, so a little rotation up to the top with the left arm and the club is pointed straight down the line. I would call the top position something between one plane and two plane more of a hybrid depending on your build and where you are conferable in the top positions. Think of Tiger Woods in 2000 he was a Hybrid in terms of plane at the top. Move 3 well I would split this into Move 3a and Move 3b personally. Move 3a being from the top with passive shoulders, hands and weight shift two the left. high handicap casters will find this weird at first. Low handicaps it's pretty natural for most of us, might need a small tweak but not bad in general. Move 3b is where high handicappers and a lot of lower handicapper might struggle and take some time with. I am talking about from about 9 o'clock position with the lead arm parallel to the ground into impact. I would say even after you master the move 1, 2, 3a, 3b is still going to take a lot of practice in getting the release / impact position timed well and natural, that is pretty much where I am in fixing my swing based on information with RST. Like I said I got down to a 1.1 handicap at one point I didn't do it with bad swing mechanics, my misses back then worse pulls and hooks (same as what I see now) so pretty much back to where I was then in terms of ball striking, short game and putting not so much. Move 4, natural forward momentum will pull up up and out of the shout like they show, I like to let my hands and arms drop down like they rest on my left shoulder, they finish more up around my ear but then come down to the shoulder just feels better to me to let the hands get lazy at the very end as I look up for the ball. A follow through doesn't really matter to me it changes based on the shot trajectory and shape I try to hit, just another dynamic part of the swing.

INTRO So for those of you that haven't read my posts lately in the Ben Hogan thread I have been working my way through the RS Tour swing model on their website. I paid the $20 for a month membership just to get a good understanding of their view on their golf swing. I am not affiliated with them at all, I just like studying swing methods and as a hobby I like to watch video of others swings and understand what can cause problems with consistency in their swing. I am always interested in something that is completely based on bio-mechanics and honestly they use Tiger Woods from 2000 on their website as a reference a lot point out the things that he has done correctly in the golf swing and the things that are not so correct why he misses like he misses. From working with Burnt Edges Consulting on putting and I'll probably start doing some full swing stuff with Bruce as well, I know that you have to understand the HOW and WHY you do something to have convection in a stroke of swing in golf. This way when someone comes along and asks you about something you know how to answer them and ignore and filter out the good swing advice and the bad swing advice for your body and swing mechanics. BACKGROUND Rotary Swing has two basic models that they teach on their website Rotary Swing 1.0 (RS1) and Rotary Swing Tour (RST). The RS1 is targeted at players that are a high handicap and have little time to practice, it is a very one plane golf swing that uses the body to generate power and consistency in a little amount of work / time. The RST swing is all based on bio-mechanics and how to make the body work the most efficiently in the golf swing. It is targeted at players that take their game seriously (I would have to assume that is a majority of MGS posters and readers) that have about 2 hours of practice time a day or at least even 1 hour of practice time to dedicate to the moves that they teach. Don't get discouraged about RTS model that I say 2 hours a day I'll explain this more bellow. The RST model has 4 basic divisions and premium members get videos in five phases, there are a TON of videos to view it is crazy, it took me 2 or 3 days just to get through the Phase 1 through Phase 5 and take notes. The have bonus sections that are avilible to paying members that includes a swing analysis of top professionals, including Ben Hogan, Tiger Woods, etc. I found the videos and information to be worth $20 just as a trial and information basis. Phase 1 covers 'how to learn' and 'truths of teaching', it is just information videos and why they built the RST model swing. It is 13 videos in total and has some really good information if your goal is to understand the ideas and methods behind the moves and stuff they are trying to teach. Phase 2 covers 'the setup' and will start to give a drill for 'the takeaway' it is a total of 17 videos. It really goes into a great amount of detail on posture and setup positions including weight distribution and spine tilt. There is a video titled 'faults caused by poor setup' that talks in detail about swing faults caused by poor setup, another titled 'faults caused by poor ball position'. They really start to build their model from the ground up in Phase 2 from the very very basics. Phase 3 covers 'move 1' or the takeaway. There are a total of 19 videos just on how to make the first move off the ball. They go into a lot of details and give drills on what they call 'the shoulder glide' and 'pulling from the right shoulder'. Honestly this move is not hard to master, if you just think about pulling your right shoulder behind your head in the backswing the takeaway becomes a one piece takeaway and gets you into a perfect position at about 7 or 8 o'clock where the shaft is parallel to the ground and your shoulders are turned about 45* already with no hip turn.your hands haven't crossed the center line of your body either. Phase 4 covers 'move 2' or completing the backswing. There are only 9 videos as this back of the swing is nothing much like 1" more shoulder turn and right elbow pitting the bend upwards. This is the first time the hands cross the center line of the body. They talk about how to get into the perfect position at the top and give drills to get you in the habit of rotating, bending the right elbow where it stays close to the body (no flying right elbow) and what to do with the arms to get the club pointing more towards the target line and not crossing the line, possibly even a little laid off at that top. Phase 5 covers 'move 3', 'move 4' or downswing and follow through. There are a total of 39 videos for this one section. They really start small and talk about the first move being a weight shift to the left leaving the arms and shoulders passive. A 'squat' so to speak tiger does this the most noticeable but all tour pros do it a little if you watch there legs move at the start of the down swing they all get slightly more knee flex for the most part 'sitting down' into the left side. This section is targeted at 'hip spinners' or people that rotate their hips and shoulder way to fast / drive from the right side rather then pull with the left. A lot of low handicaps have this issue and will feel 'suck' on the downswing because better golfers understand how to use the body but tend to over do it. Out of the 39 videos only 2 videos are even classified as move 4, and they are more a check point for move 4 and impact positions. 27 videos in the 'Bonus Videos' section, this includes sections named 'bomb your driver', 'Golf Instruction Myths', 'Course Management' 21 videos in a 'golf fitness' section, if you like to work out why not taller your work out to your golf game? 35 videos in a section titled 'tour pros', this is where they take a tour pros swing and analyze what they do well and what they don't do well, love this section. 19 videos under a 'short game' section, found the 'wedge play' stuff useful honestly, it was a good refresher course for me. MY REVIEW AND PROGRESS AFTER ABOUT 1 WEEK So what is my progress in working towards the perfect RST swing, well Move 1 and Move 2 came to me very easily as my normal takeaway from studying a little hogan was almost the same. I made close to the same movements just didn't know the HOW and WHY to make them and how setup and ball position effects the swing that was something nice to learn about. Really where I am at is in Move 3 the downswing / impact. I am a hip spinner and tend to get stuck behind myself a lot before reviewing these videos, in practicing sitting down into my left side i started hitting the ball a lot better and not once have a felt 'stuck' or trapped when my first move is a weight shift onto my left side. I used to do this without knowing it back in 2007 when I played to a 1.1 handicap but somewhere over time I started driving with the right side instead of sitting and pulling with the left side in the down swing. Currently my biggest fault now that sitting into the left side is become pretty much a natural movement to start my down swing (not perfect yet but getting closer) my misses have become a pull hook. This is caused from two things in my swing and I can feel both of them happen. I am so used to making a hard flip release to square the face late from being stuck (if I got late I would hit a block a little early a push hook or snap hook or duck hook), the arms are actually over rotating form what they need to to make a solid swing. I have Bubba's 40 yard hook with out problems lol. the other issue is my right shoulder is still wanting to driver through the ball and push the club through impact rather then let the hand freely release at times. This is working my left should up and out and opening my shoulders at impact. I have to really feel like i am driving the left shoulder down and through the shot for as a long as possible and make the right should feel passive in the hitting area. When I have executed everything properly, my body 3 feet behind the ball (from where the hands get to the right thigh) to past the ball my body feels like it is literally limp and doing nothing at all it's job has been completed. My hands and arms swing freely in front of me allowing for a smooth good full release and ability to work the ball properly. To work the ball properly the right hand is only power the left hand controls the face. A cup left wrist will promote a fade if you hold off the release a little as well, the more hold and cup you have bigger cut you will have. Draw is the opposite, if the left hand gets bowed out and the back of the left hand starts pointing straight at the ground will determine how much draw or hook you have. There are some other things that will control trajectory and shot shape that they will go over in their Phase 5 videos towards the end of them. When you execute the swing properly you not only have a consistent golf swing you can build on for control and consistency you also have a golf swing that will leave you injury free and you can play a lot more golf over longer periods of time. The whole thing is based on bio-mechanical body movement and to reduce injury and support you body to make it work effortlessly. A lot of people will talk about 'effortless looking power' and how tour pros have it but they really can't tell you the WHY and HOW to make it happen in your own swing. I haven't made many perfect swings to their RST model, but I did make one two days ago and damn near aced a par 3 for the first time flew it right over the pin just a little strong had 8 foot putt left, it was based feeling strike / release I have felt since probably 2008 when I shot my -1 under 71 round. There are a total of 97 videos as of this posting for Phase 1 through Phase 5 they add more as they get stuff on the forum and a lot of questions on a given topic. They have other videos out there for viewing but that is just specific to their drills, methods and demonstrations for the swing. CONCLUSION AND SCORE Just from knowing the swing and being able to replicate a couple of the swings perfectly or at least felt perfect to me without a video camera on me that resulted in passive body with free arms through the hitting area, this swing works, it might not be the easiest thing to master as a high handicap but once you do you won't have to worry about striking again, the dreaded PS off the tee and from irons will start to vanish and more GIRs will start to show up. Over the last few 9 hole rounds i have played working on things I have increased GIR from 4 or 5 per 9 holes to 5 to 7 per nine holes, yesterday I had 5 of 7 FIR (two I missed were 3 yards off fairway in play) and 6 of 9 GIR. This is with the right shoulder pushing to much, so can't wait to see what happens when I get that passive. I really think this is one 'swing method' that actually works really well. They give the HOW and WHY and that has HUGE props in my book. To me when someone gives you the HOW and WHY they want you to learn how to improve and continue learning on your own, not continuously pouring money into their instruction. They really lead you through it and encourage you to build your swing up piece by piece at slower speeds then a full swing. They talk about crawling, then walking, then running in terms of speed to master the moves, some people it takes longer then others. With majority of their drills starting without a club you can do them just standing around on lunch break or just bored. If you are an instructor and just like studying swings I recommend the videos, you out of everyone will probably start to think about what they teach more and how to teach yourself. I have studied a lot of golf swings and understand how the golf swing works, but the key thing I was missing was the HOW and WHY to do things in the golf swing and why and how I do things in my own swing. Convection about the swing gives some piece of mind that it will be reliable under pressure. Score ~ 9.9 out of 10 I have to give them a great rating, they went the extra mile to help their viewers understand the swing they are teaching, they have tools provided to help you learn the swing better in uploading video, they admit that there is no 'quick fix' to a good golf swing. They modeled the swing after bio-mechanics and making a swing work the most effortlessly possible preventing injury. Really, if anything it gave me a better understanding of my own golf swing and what is causing my misses in my swing and possible ways to fix them. Hope you enjoyed the read, I'll answer as many questions as I can but don't want to really get into a lot of detail about a given video that is not available without paying, these are golf professionals (instructors) trying to make a living.

I am not getting paid by the company in which the bag is for and I do not pay a caddy to carry my equipment for me. I walk my home course 100% of the time when I go play other places and they offer walking then I walk. I don't like to ride in a golf cart unless I have to i tend to play better when I walk and not feel rushed to get my ball and hit. So for me I have a push cart that I use but I try to keep the bag weight down as much as possible on the push cart, a staff bag might bend the dang wheels from the weight inwards towards the frame. A cart bag probably would work as well but, the carry bad is the least weight. Always just use a carry bag and be done with it as I don't really pack beer or anything other then a couple things of water and some flavor packets. Probably gonna switch to tablets that were reviewed on MGS this summer and see how they do for flavor and getting energy back in my body.

I know that one person in this thread mentioned buying a set of W/S FG62s after reading my review on feel and performance. Anyone that has tried the W/S FG62 and wants to provide a little feed back on your experience and how you think it compares to what you currently play that would be amazing. I want to hear what others are saying about the W/S Fg62 because it is the small fish in the ocean of golf equipment.

I hear that. The DG s300 Taper is 130 grams raw (is the same as the length changes through the set) the Parallel DG s300 is 130g at 41" (tip trim and butt cut to length reduces this more) You probably could have gone with a s400 which the parallel is 134g @ 41" after tip trimming and butt cutting to length you should have gotten closer the the 130g Taper Tip. For a lot of players that have a good load on a shaft a lighter shaft then the rest of the set will feel a touch weaker then the rest of the set. A lot of players will also sometimes need different frequency in the long irons then the short irons. If you get fit for a full set of parallel tips properly each shaft frequency is matched to your average swing speed with that club. Could be anything from 7.0 in the 3 and 4, 6.8 in 5-8, 6.6 in 9-L (it would be player specific more then that) The issue with parallel is normally the weighting through the set is not consistent and people well feel that in the swing so consistent weighting in the Taper tip gives a person more confidence in the feel of each club and same swing weighting in the set. Both have ups and downs I tend to like the weighting in taper tips, but like a said parallel has more room for custom fitting to exact frequencies for a golfer in each club. EDIT: I got to thinking about it, I wounder if they tried to install a 0.370 into a 0.355T hosel. If that happened then there is not way for the full tip on a 0.370 to make it into the proper depth of the hosel. You would get weird results in this case. You can always put a 0.355T into a 0.370 with the proper shims, but the other way 0.370 into a 0.355T doesn't work unless you bore out the hosel. Also, with lighter shafts some players tend to think they feel weaker then the heavier shafts in their swing. Could have been a feel thing involved as well that the 4 iron Parallel shaft is lighter slightly then the taper in the same flex. Plus some people find that the Parallel tips have a weaker tip section then the taper tip counter parts. This might be true as well causing higher ball flight and more spin from a parallel tip, but in the end I would think with the manufacturing process they would get the tips about perfect on each model if they are going to make a parallel along with a taper tip. KBS C-Taper still has not even mentioned bringing out a parallel tip model still only the 0.355T and brass shims if you want to play them in a 0.370 hosel. From the True Temper website (http://www.truetemper.com/golf/faq.php?cID=1) Anyways, back to the muscle back clubs, this is more of a club building topic then a muscle back review

This is slightly OT but wanted to mention it. You get the same 'control' on a shot from 0.355 Taper as you would in a 0.370 parallel shaft. A lot of manufactures use the 0.355T because of it's characteristics in consistent weighting in the shafts. Heck all taper tipped shafts start life as a parallel shaft. 0.355T is built to be put into a specific iron head and weight optimized for that iron so that the set of clubs between the wedges and 1 iron are all the same iron weighting regardless of length. This is why 0.355T come in shafts ranging from 37.0" to 41.5" (wedge to 1 iron). You really can't tip trim a Taper shaft more then 1/4". You would have to soft or hard step them to fit someone that would be in-between flexes. Not really a lot of room for custom fitting a person in a Taper Tip. The issue with soft and hard stepping is that the calculation is an approximation of flex charismatics. soft or hard stepping changes about 1/3 between flex. So if you have a 6.0 and a 6.5 flex then it is (0.5)*(1/3) = 0.1666666... (repeating 6), so about 0.167 the flex soft stepping in a 6.5 is roughly 6.5-0.167 ~ 6.3 a hard step would be roughly 6.5+0.167 ~ 6.7. Unfortunately this doesn't allow for exact fitting in this situation. Only one that gets close to perfect. Parallel shafts come raw at approximately 43.5" blanks for all iron heads. They are GREAT for perfectly custom fitting someone to an exact frequency in stiffness because the flex is determined mostly by the weight of the blanks you ordered and how much you tip trim the shaft. The down fall for some people is that a Wedge shaft is going to weight a lot less then the 1 iron shaft that you might build for someone. The more material removed from the tip and butt sections to get the club to playing length and flex the lighter the shaft will be. It would not be optimized for weighting on each individual shaft in the set but you could make it to perfect flex for a golfer. For example your L-P could be 6.6, 9 6.7, 8 and 7 6.8, 6 and 5 6.9, 4 and 3 7.0 if that fits you it is easy to do in parallel tips. That is why a lot of club builders love 0.370 Parallel over 0.355 Taper the flexibility in fitting is endless. Only have the minor issue in weighting of shafts not being the same in the set.

I do what I can and I felt it was important that W/S FG62 got the recognition for feel that they have earned. I'd put them right up there with Mizuno and Miura in terms of feel as some of the best I have ever hit, just like butter.

Happy I could help in convincing the 'boss' to approve the new purchase, I know the feeling mine just kind of lets me do whatever she just says 'as long as the bills get paid first i don't care what you spend your money on via golf'. The W/S FG62 are a different beast altogether from the FG Tour V2s, most people probably like the Mizuno line for the cavities but i think in the blades W/S FG62 has Mizuno MP69s slightly edged out.

Nah it is fine, makes me go more in depth with what I am talking about and gets more people thinking and learning about stuff that they might not previously have known. Think I have said that once before in my other review. i agree with you also that materials change the results, I am just looking at it from a perspective 'same materials' for this assumption, One less unknown element in the theory. For the off line and distance issues in the cavity they test (and I have no scientific proof to speak of only my logic) I think it would have to do with an inconsistency in the COR. All clubs will have a COR and on blades the mass is right behind the dead center 'sweat spot' of the club allowing for it to be more easily duplicated with a lower COR variances on exact same swings. I would have to assume as the parameter weighting increases the COR variances would also increase causing more in-consistency in the shot. Like I said I have no proof of that theory however I think that what the numbers support in the articles, espesually with the distance issues they saw. As for the line this also would do about the 'trampoline effect' of a club, if the left side recovers faster then the right side it will go slightly off target or visa verse, the golf ball and club face interaction are an imperfect relation ship. The Blade seems to have a little better result as it has a smaller area of recovery.

Little more explanation on 'efficiency' Lets look at this theory from a scientific view taking common objects and golf products completely out of the equation all together. We have 3 cylinders that are in total 150 grams in mass. One is 1.5" circumference labeled A, 3" circumference labeled B and a 6" circumference labeled C. Weight is even on the 1.5" then the weight is moved slight towards the parameter for the 3" and more so on the 6". We take the 3" labeled B and 5" labeled C cylinders and remove the center 1.5" circumference section from them and then put all three cylinders on a scale that started at equal mass of 150 grams. I'm sure you know that the mass will be reduced when removing only the center 1.5" cylinder from each B and C. A would remain at 150 grams it never changed B would be slightly less, maybe 130 grams or 140 grams (i don't know this is an example) C would be even less, maybe at 120 grams or 130 grams (i don't know this is an example) Take all three of these cylinders and attach them to a stick/shaft/etc to use to drive an object, which one is going to be the most efficient in generating energy at impact? Obviously the one with the most mass in the 1.5" area would have the most force when it is swung and stuck using the exact same speed at impact. A represents the dead center of a blade, B represents the dead center of a players cavity, and C represents the dead center of a GI.

Now I agree with you 100% that the Players CB and GI are more efficient when it comes to not dead center hits as that article says. But on your dead center on the perfect hit, the blade does the job the best. That is the point that I am getting at, on the best hits your Players CB and GI might not give you a consistent distance and line of play thanks to perimeter weighting, it probably do a better job if the weight was more evenly distributed across the entire sweet spot however it still would have less mass in the larger area then the blade in the smaller area. As a tool to strike something obviously a more concentrated CG would be more efficient then one spread out over larger space, more mass away from the impact point the worse of energy transfer you have period. In my testing between blades and cavity backs I actually hit the blade about 3 to 5 yards longer on pure shots then my players cavities. Interesting concept and a wait a minute here how is that gonna happen type moment i updated that post you quoted by the way to be a little more clear.

I think you are thinking about the example in the wrong way, think about transfer of energy and mass distribution not the physical objects I listed. You have an object that has a mass of 150grams across a 1.5" diameter, then you have another object that 3" in diameter of 150grams, then you have an object that is 6" in diameter that is also 150grams. All three objects are EVENLY WEIGHTED ACROSS THEIR SURFACE. These diameters represent the weight distribution for the sweet spot of a golf club. in the act of striking an object the energy transfer between a more concentrated mass is going to be a lot more effectuate then a mass spread out across a larger area. The object I listed were a simple way of given a visual nothing more. The mass in a pin point (size of a nail head) in any given location on the 6" diameter is going to be less mass to drive the nail into the board being the least efficient in transferring weight energy into a pinpoint location. The mass in a 3" diameter is more concentrated so when the nail is hit (and not completely missed) outside of that radius then more energy is transferred in any one given location within the 3" circle. Obviously when the entire mass is set behind a 1.5" circle and you actually hit the nail there is more weight being placed on the nail head at any given point within that 1.5" circle. blades are not forgiving because majority of this mass is placed right behind the sweet spot of the club, players cavity has slightly more weight distribution behind the sweet spot, GI has the most weight distribution behind the sweet spot. And as for the data it was based on dead center 'pure strikes' hits not off center. the dispersion of dead center hits was tighter in terms of line and distance to the target in a blade then a cavity. Which makes since based on math and physics. That is just assuming the weight is evenly distributed, on a lot of golf irons the club has "perimeter weighting" so less mass is in the dead center then on the edges of the club. Players CBs have slight perimeter weighting, GIs obviously have the most adjusted weighting away from the center. Now all irons will very in their weighting this is just a general concept. UPDATE I found the article that first got me thinking about this (well two of them, the first is the research part on it. The second is the example (i changed it a little) as to the analogy. http://www.oobgolf.com/content/the+wedge+guy/golf+equipment/5-2032-Blades_Versus_Cavity_Backs_A_Golf_Club_Epiphany.html http://www.oobgolf.com/content/the+wedge+guy/golf+equipment/5-2090-Blade_Irons_Are_They_More_Efficient_Than_Cavity_Backs_.html

This was posted in the WIYB section under the photos of my bag (link in my signature) I wanted to make this response but it is better to be in here then in the WIYB section Blades are not that horrific, I was being serious in my review on them more people can play them then you think. If you swing is in check and you hit a Player CB like a Mizuno MP-60 or MP-63 with no issues a blade wouldn't be that hard of a step into them. I had Mizuno MP-60 loved them but they got warn out, then got the Titleist AP2s hated them for last couple of seasons and knew I wanted to go back to a MP-60 style but figure WTH been playing serious golf since 2007 or so (played not so serious in my youth learned golf at 4years old originally I think) if I can't control my swing, tempo and contact I need to look for a new hobby One thing that I have noticed is the blades have keep me more honest in my tempo, I can't go gripping and ripping at a blade not gonna happen. I still get about the same distance on my clubs from full shots, but honestly lately i have been playing 'more controlled' shots where I will club up and swing 3/4, or if I do hit the club I know I can for that distance then i swing smoother making sure i get good contact. Let me explain the energy transfer to the ball on Blades, Players CB, and Game Improvement Clubs in a general grouping. If i hand to a hand you a carpenter hammer, wooden mallet, and frying pain then tell you to drive a nail into a board, which one would you select for efficiency? Obviously you would pick the carpenter hammer as it has the most centralized mass behind the head of the hammer if you make good contact on the nail it will drive it the farthest into the board. As logic would say the wooden hammer would be 2nd in efficiency and then the frying pan would be last. You can swing harder with the wooden mallet, and make hte frying pan heaver and swing harder but the transfer of energy in terms of efficiency is always going to have the carpenter hammer win out. Now picture these tools to drive the nail as golf clubs where the carpenter hammer is a blade (most centralized mass behind the sweet spot), the Players CB is the wooden mallet (slight redistribution of weight for slightly more forgiveness), Then the obvious frying pan as the game improvement club (complete distribution of weight to transfer as much as possible when the ball is hit anywhere on the head). Golf is a ton like trying to drive a nail into a board with a moving object into a stationary one. Heck the ball only touches te face at about the size of a nail head at initial contact before compression of the ball happens. I thought I read somewhere over the years that on a robot swinging the same on pure strikes, the blade they tested had tighter dispersion in off line and distance results then a players cavity. The Players cavity had better results then a game improvement iron. Guess we should add that a blade is more efferent and consistent MARGINALLY then the Player CB.

Well a lot of modern blades have more 'forgiveness' then the real old school blades. The sweet spot on a modern blade is around the size of a 50cent piece so 1/8" or 1/4" off center is not going to hurt you. The old blades were like a sweet spot of a dime, so something off center just a little was going to hurt you a lot. I chose to change from my AP2 (2008) model to a blade set for the following reasons --> Blades offer more feedback then the AP2s (2008) model i had been playing. It is just easier for me to control trajectory, distance and shape of a shot when I know where the ball is striking the face most of the time. The AP2s didn't have a good level of feedback it was one or the other it felt like a good hit or a complete miss nothing in-between at all. So the AP2s i would call 'dead' in terms of any feedback on striking abilities. --> Blades offered me better turf interaction through the hit. I tend to change my angle of attack based on the shot I'm hitting. This is in thanks to a narrow sole width and bounce less then 8* it lowers the leading edge closer to the ground. The Blades tend to have a sharper leading edge. The narrow sole width, small amount of bounce and the sharper leading edge allows for better spin conditions when attacking the ball and easier contact from tight lies or firm conditions. The AP2s just simply didn't work well for me only in the wet conditions did they preform since they just didn't dig enough for my liking I contribute this to a wider sole width and bounce being slightly larger then my blades now, place the leading edge was very beveled, seemed to work well for diggers and pickers. --> Blades offered me a smaller offset on the club, this is good as my natural shot shape is a draw ans miss is a hook with irons. I needed a club that when i had my hands in front of the ball the head wouldn't become 'hooded' or 'shut' the AP2s would tend to 'over cook' them a lot and miss way left of my intended line. Now my miss is when I am attempting to play a draw it will go straight. Which is okay I just have to get used to the fact that the big snap hook with my new blades is no longer in my bag unless i set the club slightly closed at address. Now if you are looking for the following things in a club then a blade might be the way for you to go --> ultimate feedback from impact on where the ball strikes the face --> narrow sole width, less bounce and slightly sharper leading edge for crisper contact and better turf entry --> small amount of offset for the ability to work the ball (fade, straight, draw) --> Controlling trajectory on blades can be slightly easier (low, middle, high) SIDE NOTES --> Players CBs can control trajectory and shot shape as well obviously not everyone on tour plays a blade. Thus why i said slightly easier for a blade. --> A Blade will have slightly higher CG making the ball flight slightly lower then a Players CB --> A Blade will be harder to hit high on long irons, where a Players CB might be harder to hit low on short irons (why some play a mixed set)

A little tour talk for the W/S FG Tour V2, Padraig Harrington set a course record today playing them. I know that is not a good reason to buy them, figured i would mention it as we have been talking about the W/S versus Mizuno a lot in this topic. http://www.pgatour.com/golfers/020766/padraig-harrington/scorecards/#!/r475/2012 (PGA Tour Scorecard) http://www.padraigharrington.com/in_the_bag.php (His current WITB)

Mizuno does something neat and gives people a GENERAL idea as to what handicap range they are targeted for. I personally have a 8-12 handicap currently. I played to a 1.1 in college and over last 2 season only had a range pass and not a lot of time to play golf. My short game left me but my ball striking did not. So for me my iron striking is more on par with a 0-5 handicap (i think it has room for some improvements) then a 6-10 or 11-15. I think it is more individual then what Mizuno provides in their handicap charts. If you have really good ball to face contact and don't miss the sweet spot very much on your current clubs then you can fit into something that is suggested to be "for lower handicaps" for instance a blade that we have been reviewing and talking about. MP-53 is a good mix between a players cavity and a full cavity. I tend to like the MP-63 a touch more myself when it comes to their non blade models. I think that the MP-68 and MP-69 are great blades for what they are designed to do. I haven't hit the W/S FG Tour V2 but I know that if it has some soft feel like the FG62 Blades I have then it has to be a great playing iron, If I were looking for a new Players cavity set then i would look at the W/S FG Tour V2... MGS has done a review on them here --> http://www.mygolfspy.com/wilson-fg-tour-v2-irons-review/

As for the Titleist feeling firm to me i was compering them to the Mizuno line as a base feel. Like i said Mizuno is regarded in the same sentence as Miura on feel so I figured it was a good place to start. If you notice all the irons I hit were forged. Everything is relative yes the Titleist MB would feel softer to someone in a cast club (unless it is cast carbon then that's not as bad). I had a bad tempo day yesterday and hit a lot of balls off center on the W/S FG62s. Some thin and it wasn't as much of a bell ringer as I expected. However, it was 80* F yesterday when I got off work so that might have soften the blow a few times. I also hit a few really high on the blade which didn't result in too bad of a distance robber that surprised me as well. It was a day that was 'playable misses' and 'not my day' for scoring, but over all it gave me a good idea what they act like when you have a bad striking day which was 100 times better then i had expected from a MB club. We can play well 100% of the time we are not tour players and even those guys blow up to shot high 70s or low 80s at times. The biggest difference between a players cavity and a MB is are --> Players cavity has SLIGHTLY more forgiveness --> MBs have SLIGHTLY lower trajectory --> MBs generally are a SLIGHTLY easier to control shot shape and distances --> MBs tend to dig more into the turf (they have narrow soles and sharper leading edges in general) It comes down to your swing and your preference to what is better for your game. Diggers might not want the sharper thinner soles on a MB so they should stay in a players cavity. Pickers might also like a players cavity as it will help them launch the ball a little higher. I like MBs mostly because I change my angle of attack based on my shot I'm hitting. For the W/S FG62 is gets into the turf really well without digging to deep on my normal swing, the AP2s for me tended to bounce a little bit and not feel really good to me on turf interaction (was better when I took a super step angle of attack more of a digging hit for the AP2s).

no problem, you might be surprised at just how soft the W/S FG62 feels, like I said to me it feels softer then the Mizuno which is a very bold statement way off the common 'mizuno best feeling musclebacks under $1000' type mentality.

I got to thinking about it, I am missing the Cobra MBs from this review as well. Not sure how they play but it seems a lot of people have them in one model or another. If someone has a good amount of experience with the TM TP MB, Callaway Razer X Mb, Cobra MB then feel free to add it here.

Here are the key differences that I felt and saw in the clubs when i was testing them, from what I can recall. --> The MP-69 is weighted better then the MP68, the 68 is more a players blade and the 69 offers slightly more forgiveness, for a blade. --> The MP-69 will launch the ball just a little higher on the long irons (which you don't play anyways) --> The feel of them both is the classic Mizuno feel, when hit on the sweet spot. --> The MP-69 has 1* stronger lofts then the MP-68 (46* PW in the 69 versus a 47* in the 68, nothing that couldn't be changed) so if you leave them at stock lofts you will obviously hit the 69 longer by 2-4 yards. --> If you wanted to go with the MP-69 they would have to get bent 1* weak form a 46* to a 47* PW, that would add about 1* of bounce to them so I am not sure how they would interact with the turf when doing that. So My over all impression is that the MP-69 is a good blade for people looking to get into a blade that are not used to playing them. The weighting is better, the forgiveness is slightly better, the feel is the same as the MP-68 on pure hits. The MP-68 is also a good blade for those people that are used to traditional blade weighting and traditional blade forgiveness. A lot of people hate the MP-68 and love the MP-69s I think it is a personal preference thing when it comes down to it. I didn't hit them enough to see much other then that. That is just from the 20-25 balls i hit in the testing with each one. Honestly if your ball striking is good and you like the flight of the ball on the MP-68 then there is no real reason to run out and get the MP-69 just because they are new. But if you are struggling with the solid strike on the ball with the MP-68 then you can give the MP-69 a try for your low irons see if that helps you with the balance and weight change. For people that want to play a split set that don't know this, you can custom order from Mizuno and W/S the set you need. For instance W/S will send you 4-6 in FG Tour V2 and 7-P in FG62 if you wanted. If anyone has any other questions about blades I will try to answer them to my best ability, I currently playing the W/S FG62s and have the most playing time with that set then any other.

No problem they are for sure worth a try, if you buy them make sure to do two things 1) get them fitted for loft and lie (one of my irons came out 1* weak to the lofts they were supposed to be) and also I had mine bent flat 60.5* lie on a 6iron, the set is 59.0, 59.5, 60.0, 60.5, 61.0, 61.5, 62.0, 62.5 currently, my wedges I play at 61.5 (on partial swings 62.5 is too upright for me) lie angles are tailored to you it's whatever fits your swing for that club. 2) make sure that they are not too long for you, the specs say they come in at a 39.25" 3iron which is 1/4" longer then normal for OEMs @ 39.00" 3 iron, I play them to the club builders standard at a 38.75" 3 iron and 1/2" step down to a 35.25" PW EDIT, like i said in a previous post I think that they play SOFTER then Mizuno. That is a crazy statement to make for some people because Mizuno is often compared to Miura Blades in feel and being the standard. I really think that W/S hit this one out of the park. Great feeling, very workable, and pretty darn easy to hit for a blade.

I hit the Titleist 710, just felt firm in comparison to others that i hit the firmest / click sound at impact out of all of them. From the sounds of it that the Titleist 712 feels about the same way. I have never been a TM person (I owned the r7 Superquad 460 and the Rescue Dual TP nothing since then) so I didn't even give them a second look honestly but like i said if i had been open minded more I could have added them to the review. I hate to say this but IMHO the W/S came out softer then the Mizuno and a little easier to hit but that might just be bias since I play them and have gotten them custom built at 1 degree flat (60.5* lie 6iron). W/S made a great product with the FG62 and are worth giving them a try if you are looking for a new set of blades. I am not sure how the Titleist ZB play, I think those could have completely different feel then the new 710 and 712 MB models that they have out currently. The main reason I wanted to write this review is to get people thinking about companies that they normally might not hit their product. When you are looking for something new BE OPEN MINDED you never know what gem you may uncover from hitting something that is off your radar. So like I said the clubs I hit were (in no order) Adams MB2, Mizuno MP68, Mizuno MP69, Nike VR Pro Blades, W/S FG62. They had TM TP MB and Scratch in there at the time i was testing clubs but the Scratch was a $1200 price tag just a little over my wallet. TM and Callaway I didn't think about until writing this review. I looked in the PGA Superstore I referred to in my review over the weekend since I was in Myrtle Beach again, the have the TM TP MB but not Razer x MB. EDIT It might be nice if the MGS crew got a hold of some MBs and put them to the test, I know that MGS has done review of the Adams MB2, would be nice to have some more blades to read about besides what i have written here.

This quest to play a knife is not for everyone I will be 100% honest when i first got this crazy idea to take the leap in play knifes I was very skeptical this was going to be a good decision. However I knew a couple of things that I wanted in my iron set that the AP2s just could not offer me. First was the ability to feel where the ball was striking the face of the club, with a lot of players cavity you only can tell when it was hit good or poor not specific elements "that was two groove high on the face and a 1/4" towards the toe". This is important for me to be able to feel where the ball is hitting on the face so that i can make adjustments to my swing to get better contact on the ball, call it a training aid you have to hit a blade pretty well to get good results. Secondly, i felt that the AP2 I just couldn't work the ball as much as I wanted to or as consistently, it was hard to dial in exact distances on partial swings at time for the fact that on a blade you can purposely hit it 1/2" towards the toe and take off 5 yards. Yes that sounds nuts and you might ask "why would you want to purposely miss the sweat spot of a club?" the answer is simple Spin and distance control you can still take a full swing but slightly miss the spot and change the ball flight characteristics. Finally, I told myself that as a single digit handicap even a high one, if i can't hit the pure sweet spot then I probably need to stop playing golf, it is time to take the leap and see where it lands me in terms of skill and ability. Plus I played the Mizuno MP-60 LOVED the look and feel of the clubs those were pretty close to a blade without being one before I switched to the AP2s I started out by just looking up as many blades as i could online and getting an idea of what I wanted to test hit based on appearance mostly. I went over to the PGA Superstore in Myrtle Beach SC prior to when i moved to NC recently. The Clubs they had included Nike VR Pro, Titleist 710 MB, Adams MB2, Mizuno MP69, Wilson FG62. I did not test the TM TP MB, Callaway Razer MB or Scratch SB-1. The scratch have a price tag that I wasn't willing to pay for a set $1200 plus tax all of the others that I tested were $900 plus tax. I am not sure if i saw the TM or Callaway's in the store, I'll admit I didn't look extremely hard in either of the sections that had those brands as I am not a fan of either one majority of the time. In hindsight i probably should have given both a chance if they had them in stock. The PGA Super store is a super high volume store right near Broadway at the beach so they have A LOT of equipment on the racks and can custom order you anything. If you are an equipment junkie and go to myrtle beach stop in there and just look around at the sea of golf stuff they have in that store. Plus then they had radar based launch monitors to get a good compassion off of, they have now switched to the photograph based ones that are less accurate so be aware when testing clubs in there you need a base line for what you hit now compared to what you are testing. I started where most people would Mizuno MP69 in the fitting cart with a KBS Tour X in it, I hit a 6iron to 195+ carry. This was my bench mark to compare all other blades that I would be testing. It is pretty well known that Mizuno makes some of the best feeling irons for under $1000. I then hit the Titleist 710 and they felt WAY too firm for me, had a click sound to them at impact just all around not a good feeling blade even when hit pure in comparison to the MP69. Next I went ahead and hit the Nike VR Pro Blades, I would rate these to have had a medium feel not firm but not supper buttery either. This was a good middle ground between the super soft blade and the firm click blade that the Titleist offered. Afterwords, I then pulled out the Adams MB2 and hit that blade like pure S**T. I have to say that it was most likely the fact it had a KBS Tour Black S in it, WAY too soft of a shaft for me. I couldn't get a pure hit to save my life on those heads, the one or two I did get after a lot of tries felt really good. I would have to say with the proper shaft I would have to agree with the folks here at MGS that it is one heck of a good blade for the average golfer. It was softer feeling then the Nike but still not anywhere close to the soft feel of a Mizuno. So My last club that I ended up hitting was a few days later from on a suggestion from the club builder that I go to in Myrtle Beach. He suggested the W/S FG62 at this point i was leaning towards the Mizuno MP69 for sure. I get the club off the rack it had a DG s300 in it still too soft a flex shaft but i can at least tolerate this one in comparison to the KBS Stiff shafts. First swing i purred it and OMG!!! I was blown away by how soft these irons felt. They feel just as good as the Mizuno MP69... So now the battle was on, I got the MP69 rebuilt from the fitting cart with the MP69, now it was down to two clubs everything else i tested got tossed out of my in consideration thinking. End the end W/S the little guy the unknown guy beat out the MP69 in the following categories. --> Distance on center hits the FG62 was slightly better even with a too weak of a shaft for my swing. --> Distance on slightly off center hits for the FG62 didn't lose as much distance in comparison to the MP69. --> Feel on off center hits was amazingly butter soft but still you could tell that it wasn't exact for both clubs W/S felt only a touch better to me. --> Workability on both clubs was amazing really couldn't tell you a clear winner on that category. --> Appearance on both clubs is just sexy, they really engineered both heads to look amazing, this wasn't a factor at all when I made my decision. --> Price tag wasn't really a factor either as they both retail at $900 this never came into my decision. --> The offset on the FG62 is actually less then the MP69, win for W/S as I miss with a hook for this category. If you have read my signature by now you know that i bagged the little guy W/S FG62 and here is how i ended up rating the blades I tested best to worse. 1) W/S FG 62 (offset, feel, distance gave it the slight win over the MP69) 2) Mizuno MP69 3) Adams MB2 (felt softer then the others the couple times i hit it good, offset is huge however on them so not for me anyways) 4) Nike VR Pro (yea this sucker preformed a lot better then i expected for a Nike brand club) 5) Titleist 710 MB (this was just too firm of a blade but if that is you thing check it out) Here are the stats for the clubs that I researched before testing on the launch monitor in comparison to what i was hitting in the AP2 (2008 Model) CLUB LOFT LIE OFFSET LENGTH BOUNCE Consistent Offset Models Adams Idea Pro MB (1.5mm converted to inches) 3 21 60.5 0.059" 39.00" IDK 4 24 61.0 0.059" 38.50" IDK 5 27 61.5 0.059" 38.00" IDK 6 31 62.0 0.059" 37.50" IDK 7 35 62.5 0.059" 37.00" IDK 8 39 63.0 0.059" 36.50" IDK 9 43 63.5 0.059" 36.00" IDK P 47 64.0 0.059" 35.50" IDK Progressive Offset Models Wilson Staff FG62 3 21 59.5 0.095" 39.25" 4.5 4 24 60.0 0.092" 38.75" 5.0 5 27 61.0 0.089" 38.25" 5.5 6 31 61.5 0.086" 37.75" 6.0 7 35 62.0 0.083" 37.25" 6.5 8 39 63.0 0.080" 36.75" 7.0 9 43 63.5 0.077" 36.25" 7.5 P 47 64.0 0.074" 35.75" 8.0 Mizuno MP-69 3 21 59.5 0.110" 38.75" 2.0 4 24 60.0 0.110" 38.25" 2.0 5 27 60.5 0.110" 37.75" 2.0 6 30 61.0 0.110" 37.25" 3.0 7 34 61.5 0.110" 36.75" 3.0 8 38 62.0 0.102" 36.25" 4.0 9 42 62.5 0.102" 35.75" 5.0 P 46 63.0 0.094" 35.30" 6.0 Mizuno MP-68 3 21 59.5 0.110" 38.75" 2.0 4 24 60.0 0.110" 38.25" 2.0 5 27 60.5 0.110" 37.75" 2.0 6 31 61.0 0.110" 37.25" 3.0 7 35 61.5 0.110" 36.75" 3.0 8 39 62.0 0.102" 36.25" 4.0 9 43 62.5 0.102" 35.75" 5.0 P 47 63.0 0.094" 35.30" 6.0 Mizuno MP-67 3 22 59.5 0.110" 38.75" 3.0 4 25 60.0 0.110" 38.25" 3.0 5 28 60.5 0.110" 37.75" 4.0 6 32 61.0 0.110" 37.25" 4.0 7 36 61.5 0.110" 36.75" 4.0 8 40 62.0 0.110" 36.25" 5.0 9 44 62.5 0.100" 35.75" 6.0 P 48 63.0 0.100" 35.50" 7.0 Nike VR Pro Blade 3 21 59.0 0.115" 39.00" 2.0 4 24 60.0 0.100" 38.50" 3.0 5 27 61.0 0.090" 38.00" 4.0 6 31 62.0 0.085" 37.50" 5.0 7 35 62.5 0.080" 37.00" 6.0 8 39 63.0 0.070" 36.50" 7.0 9 43 63.5 0.060" 36.00" 8.0 P 47 64.0 0.060" 35.75" 9.0 Titleist Muscle Back (MB) 3 21 60.0 0.125" 39.00" 2.0 4 24 61.0 0.120" 38.50" 3.0 5 27 62.0 0.115" 38.00" 4.0 6 31 62.5 0.110" 37.50" 4.5 7 35 63.0 0.100" 37.00" 5.0 8 39 63.5 0.090" 36.50" 6.0 9 43 64.0 0.080" 36.00" 7.0 P 47 64.0 0.075" 35.75" 8.0 Adams Idea Pro MB2 (given in mm I converted it to inches) 3 21 60.5 0.180" 39.00" 0.7 4 24 61.0 0.168" 38.50" 1.7 5 27 61.5 0.156" 38.00" 2.5 6 30 62.0 0.144" 37.50" 3.4 7 34 62.5 0.132" 37.00" 4.2 8 38 63.0 0.120" 36.50" 5.2 9 42 63.5 0.108" 36.00" 6.0 P 46 64.0 0.096" 35.50" 6.5 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Titleist AP2 (2008) --> http://www.titleist.com/golfclubs/irons/2008ap2.asp 3 21 60.0 0.160" 39.00" 0.0 4 24 61.0 0.145" 38.50" 1.0 5 27 62.0 0.130" 38.00" 3.0 6 31 62.5 0.120" 37.50" 4.0 7 35 63.0 0.110" 37.00" 5.0 8 39 63.5 0.100" 36.50" 6.0 9 43 64.0 0.090" 36.00" 7.0 P 47 64.0 0.085" 35.75" 8.0 The last few things that I want to add are that for high single digit handicap or the 10-15 guys DO NOT BE SCARED TO HIT A BLADE. The Mizuno MP69, Wilson FG62, Adams MB2 were all very easy clubs to hit, you could miss a 1/4" off and be only 2-3 yards short of sweet spot. You had to miss it really bad at more then 1/2" to see > 5 yards loss but that is with a players cavity as well. I can post some pictures of my equipment after this weekend if you all request it, I'll put it in the WIYB section. I hope this has been helpful to anyone in the market for a new set of knives this season.