DeChambeau doesn't hit his 8 iron 200 yards

[cnosil]

On 6/17/2024 at 4:44 PM, RetiredBoomer said:

As a kid, I was handed-down my uncle's 1954 Wilson Staff DynaPowered set, a premium club played by many of the era's most celebrated professional players.  These were the lofts:

2-iron:   20°
3-iron:   24°
4-iron:   28°
5-iron:   32°
6-iron:   36°
7-iron:   40°
8-iron:    44°
9-iron:    48°
PW:        52°
SW:        56°

 

And in the 60's those numbers changed.  Note that the "standard" lofts were stronger and Hogan went even stronger.   And degrees between clubs ranged from 2 to 6 

Edited June 19 by cnosil

[NM01]

2 hours ago, RetiredBoomer said:

They correlate the club number according to something else...perhaps it's length...perhaps it's launch angle...something.  Maybe it's what marketing department suggests.

I already told you it’s about the launch window. If they marked them with the lofts people wanted then balls would be falling out of the sky because the launch window would be out of whack. This has been discussed over and over in the jackets thread. It’s not just marketing or to create distance. There’s no need to debate about it, it’s all out there on the internet.

 

[fixyurdivot]

On 6/17/2024 at 8:14 AM, GolfSpy_APH said:

Okay I am going to rant here a little bit. 

It is an 8 iron - sure traditionalists will say it's the loft of a 6 or 7 iron from years gone by, but that is exactly it. The times have changed, clubs have evolved and yes he is in fact hitting his 8 iron 200 yards or whatever crazy number. He still has a 3,5,6,7,8,9,PW,GW,SW and LW in his bag. So no he doesn't have a 4 iron, but that is a decision he has made. Bottom line is his 8 iron is that, an 8 iron regardless of the loft. If we go by the logic of the OP then he really has a 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 and PW. Which he doesn't. 

I really don't get why the loft police come out and raise their pitchforks on this. Clubs have evolved so has the technology and truly the stated lofts are only a fraction of what matters. 

Gapping matters, consistency matters and knowing your numbers matters. However the stated loft on a club, not really. Technology has changed the way we look at loft and spin and everything else making the loft numbers just that a loft number.

Well, other than getting past traditional thinking as it pertains to club numbers and lofts (even the more recent "jacked lofts"), this is spot on.  So as rants go, this is a good one.

I actually opened the thread thinking the OP was going to answer the title by saying "...he hits it 220 yards" .  

 

[cnosil]

8 minutes ago, fixyurdivot said:

Well, other than getting past traditional thinking as it pertains to club numbers and lofts (even the more recent "jacked lofts"), this is spot on.  So as rants go, this is a good one.

What era is “traditional”?  

[NM01]

5 minutes ago, cnosil said:

What era is “traditional”?  

Exactly. As you pointed out things have changed starting in the 60s but even before that hogan did what he needed.

and if we look at golf traditional would be where they started so clubs and lofts have changed from the beginning of the game

[cnosil]

3 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Exactly. As you pointed out things have changed starting in the 60s but even before that hogan did what he needed.

and if we look at golf traditional would be where they started so clubs and lofts have changed from the beginning of the game

Yep, Hogan played with loft jacked clubs and I don’t hear people complaining about that.  

[NM01]

2 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Yep, Hogan played with loft jacked clubs and I don’t hear people complaining about that.  

Nope. Wonder if the jacked lofts is what made him a great ball striker since he was basically cheating with them

[RetiredBoomer]

On 6/17/2024 at 8:22 PM, RickyBobby_PR said:

I already told you it’s about the launch window. If they marked them with the lofts people wanted then balls would be falling out of the sky because the launch window would be out of whack. This has been discussed over and over in the jackets thread. It’s not just marketing or to create distance. There’s no need to debate about it, it’s all out there on the internet.

 

I know the theory, and I also know why it doesn't make sense.  

If they don't stamp a "5" on the bottom of a thirty -two degree iron,
they're still nevertheless making a thirty-two degree iron (or thereabouts).
Are balls falling out of the sky?

It's not about the engineering.
The engineers are doing a great job.
It's about the cosmetic stamping.

When I took up golf, 
"5" on the bottom of an iron referred to a thirty-two degree mashie.

It now refers to the fifth club in my bag after driver, driving-iron, and two fairway woods.

It's clearly not a horrific problem.
I just liked the old way better, that's all.
 

 

 

 

 

 

[cnosil]

15 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

 

It's clearly not a horrific problem.
I just liked the old way better, that's all.
 

So this has been a personal complaint since the 1950s since lofts have gotten stronger every decade since? 

[Philpug]

We are having a similar discussion on our ski site talking about ski boot flexes and the incostancies and lack of standardization. Parallel conversation and very frustrating for everyone. 

[NM01]

56 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

I know the theory, and I also know why it doesn't make sense.  

If they don't stamp a "5" on the bottom of a thirty -two degree iron,
they're still nevertheless making a thirty-two degree iron (or thereabouts).
Are balls falling out of the sky?

It's not about the engineering.
The engineers are doing a great job.
It's about the cosmetic stamping.

When I took up golf, 
"5" on the bottom of an iron referred to a thirty-two degree mashie.

It now refers to the fifth club in my bag after driver, driving-iron, and two fairway woods.

It's clearly not a horrific problem.
I just liked the old way better, that's all.
 

 

 

 

 

 

You’re stuck in your ways, you don’t like change, we get it, some people don’t like change and don’t accept the data or facts behind certain things. But lofts have been changing by the decades and for the most part have been pretty consistent for each type of club over the last decade to 1.5 decades.

Length of irons have also gotten longer as well.

Some of these changes are to market distance but there is plenty of engineering and development that goes into irons and not just some cosmetic stamping.

You say you understand the design yet you don’t think that if clubs were stamped how people want them based on some previous era or whatever they deem traditional the spin and launch wouldn’t match so yes the ball would fall out of the sky because of the spin associated with the stamping of yesteryear 

[Shankster]

I just thinned my 54° wedge 136 yards the other day.  A 220 “8” iron is possible, trust me. When I was doing my swing speed training I got up to around 180 with my T100S “8” at 36° iron and could push it to around  200 if I really went after one.  I’m just a weak amateur golfer.  
 

When I went for my fitting I asked my fitter if I could play the CB 620, numbers were similar with the T100S, but  I’m a high spin guy and any tech that can curb some of that is welcome.  High spin as a 5 iron would back up on a green on occasion.

I don’t think of them as which club the number says anymore, we’ll sort of.  It’s more of a (need a 140 shot or 200 carry shot).  

[MuniGolfer]

On 6/16/2024 at 4:09 PM, Hook DeLoft said:

I wonder why he felt compelled to label his 5 iron as a 7 iron.  Obviously, it doesn’t really matter.  He can call them all wedges if he likes. 

I agree. The only time it annoyed me was when he mentioned in an interview that he asked Tiger what he hit into 11 at Augusta in ‘97. Tiger said, “pitching wedge.” Then Bryson mentioned in the interview that he did too, so he felt pretty good about that. I was thinking, “yeah, except on loft and length, your pitching wedge is pretty much Tiger’s 7- iron since Tiger runs very weak lofts by today’s standards.” 

Edited June 19 by MuniGolfer

[FrogginBullfish]

This discussion point is so tired lol. Dechambeau also plays a 5° driver, is his driver not a driver because it's not 9°?

He has to play less loft on his clubs to keep his spin rates and launch conditions in the right windows. Does the lower loft help contribute to further distance? Yes, obviously, but it also helps him create a gameable trajectory for that club. That's what it comes down to really.

And as far as loft jacking as a whole goes, we've been over this numerous times in other threads, but the entire idea of "jacked lofts" is about getting the right launch angle based on how people deliver the club to the ball. GI irons flex a lot more than a blade does at impact. So you can get a similar launch angle with a SGI iron that's say 5° stronger in loft than a blade iron stamped with the same iron number. It's about getting the right launch conditions for your game and further to that the right gaps between clubs in your bag. But again there's never been a definitive standard to what constitutes iron lofts or lengths. Play what you want and what works best for you. That could look very different from player to player but that's actually a good thing given how everybody swings the club differently.

[I like to hit bombs]

1 hour ago, FrogginBullfish said:

This discussion point is so tired lol. Dechambeau also plays a 5° driver, is his driver not a driver because it's not 9°?

He has to play less loft on his clubs to keep his spin rates and launch conditions in the right windows. Does the lower loft help contribute to further distance? Yes, obviously, but it also helps him create a gameable trajectory for that club. That's what it comes down to really.

And as far as loft jacking as a whole goes, we've been over this numerous times in other threads, but the entire idea of "jacked lofts" is about getting the right launch angle based on how people deliver the club to the ball. GI irons flex a lot more than a blade does at impact. So you can get a similar launch angle with a SGI iron that's say 5° stronger in loft than a blade iron stamped with the same iron number. It's about getting the right launch conditions for your game and further to that the right gaps between clubs in your bag. But again there's never been a definitive standard to what constitutes iron lofts or lengths. Play what you want and what works best for you. That could look very different from player to player but that's actually a good thing given how everybody swings the club differently.

This. His spin and launch would be hurting him without upping the lofts. For most manufacturers, the inside of a 9 iron doesn't look the same as an 8 iron. There's a lot going on internally too. Look at the P790s for an extreme example of this. This kind of thing is where the 3-d printing and rapid prototyping is going to be huge for high level players. They can move weights and channels around internally by the club to get highly optimized gear to fit more of their shots.

[GaDawg]

Bryson or anyone else could put the A,B,C's on the bottom of their clubs. The numbers, etc. only matter to each golfer and how far they hit each club.

[fixyurdivot]

9 hours ago, cnosil said:

What era is “traditional”?  

The one you associate with the most.  If you have one, great... if not that's cool too. I think the first time I heard the term "jacked lofts" was here on MGS (2018).  Ultimately play what you can hit most consistently with whatever ball flight you prefer. 

[RetiredBoomer]

10 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

 

You say you understand the design yet you don’t think that if clubs were stamped how people want them based on some previous era or whatever they deem traditional the spin and launch wouldn’t match so yes the ball would fall out of the sky because of the spin associated with the stamping of yesteryear 

They're making that 32° club, Ricky, with all the modern weighting and tech.

They're making it and people are playing it.

No matter what they stamp on the bottom of it, the spin and launch is what it is,
and people are playing it right now.

It's got a "7" stamped on the bottom of it, and that stamping is not affecting the spin or the launch.   The stamping is only changing the name of the club from "5" to "7." 

People are fine with it, and I understand that. 
I'm simply saying what I would have preferred. 

 

[RetiredBoomer]

11 hours ago, cnosil said:

So this has been a personal complaint since the 1950s since lofts have gotten stronger every decade since? 

Yes, for the most part.

Just a "personal" complaint. 

Just discussing what I would have preferred.  

I think a numbering system where most people don't use numbers 1 through 4 anymore is silly.

I think stopping the numbers at such a strong loft and then carrying a whole bunch of add-on wedges is silly.   

I'm not trying to convince anybody to agree.  I'm just sharing what I think.

,
 

[NM01]

8 hours ago, RetiredBoomer said:

think stopping the numbers at such a strong loft and then carrying a whole bunch of add-on wedges is silly.   

I'm not trying to convince anybody to agree.  I'm jus

More prof that you choose ignore the design aspects to rest about a preference while at the same time saying it’s not a big deal and that you get it.

Anyways, I’m out 

[RetiredBoomer]

1 hour ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

More prof that you choose ignore the design aspects to rest about a preference while at the same time saying it’s not a big deal and that you get it.

Anyways, I’m out 

You seem to be a little upset about it, Ricky.
I'm just somebody describing something different that I would have liked.

It really isn't a big deal.

I do have to disagree about ignoring the design aspect when I'm not advocating changing ANYTHING about the design except for the number stamping....even if it's only for me.  The engineers know how to build the clubs.  I don't pretend to know that.

Perhaps I haven't expressed myself well enough.

 

[GolfSpy_APH]

1 minute ago, RetiredBoomer said:

You seem to be a little upset about it, Ricky.
I'm just somebody describing something different that I would have liked.

It really isn't a big deal.

I do have to disagree about ignoring the design aspect when I'm not advocating changing ANYTHING about the design except for the number stamping....even if it's only for me.  The engineers know how to build the clubs.  I don't pretend to know that.

Perhaps I haven't expressed myself well enough.

 

I think you are pretty well known for your thoughts and standing on sets and having a preference to the old ways. Nothing wrong with that. Whether on this account or your older account as NiftyNiblick.

There is enough new tech that clubs shouldn't support traditional lofts because they are able to create stopping power using all metrics not just loft.

All good to have or be in favor of traditions, but the loft one still boggles me why ppl get upset over it. 

Those times are gone, we know better than to pick at what this irons loft is vs the loft of a club 15 years ago.

Do we compare gas milage of cars now vs cars 15 years ago and complain that they are better now? 

Time to just enjoy hitting better clubs that are easier to hit longer and more forgiving and forget about what loft clubs are, especially when the perform better.

[RetiredBoomer]

14 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Time to just enjoy hitting better clubs that are easier to hit longer and more forgiving and forget about what loft clubs are, especially when the perform better.

I AM hitting modern new clubs--four grand worth. 

I still enjoy golf, even as my game deteriorates with age.
I know that there won't be a lot left for me, so I really enjoy the fresh air socializing with my friends.  

I just have my own ideas about the numbering system, and wish that I could share them without upsetting people!  

Maybe I should just go all-in and play with hickories.  
Louisville and Tad Moore have that covered nicely.

Nifty who? 

 

 

 

Edited June 20 by RetiredBoomer

[GolfSpy_APH]

2 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

Nifty who? 

We have our ways of matching accounts

[RetiredBoomer]

Just now, GolfSpy_APH said:

We have our ways of matching accounts

Matching what?

[cnosil]

1 minute ago, RetiredBoomer said:

 know that there won't be a lot left for me, so I really enjoy the fresh air socializing with my friends.  

Maybe I should just go all-in and play with hickories.  

Louisville and Tad Moore have that covered nicely.

 

Id personally just say you are nostalgic for older times when you were younger and were able to get around the course better.  
 

maybe playing a nice set of those older clubs or hickories is what you need to do since that is what you like and gives you the numbering that you desire.

[skraeling]

I just play a yardage assigned to a number.  Yeah my 8i is what my 7i of old did... I still call it an 8i because I know itll go about 145 every time.  Who cares call it a 3.141 iron for all that it matters.  Itll go what it goes.

Its just a system to organize them.  The number on the bottom has never had to go a specific yardage. 

[cnosil]

1 minute ago, RetiredBoomer said:

Matching what?

It’s called an IP and MAC address

[RetiredBoomer]

1 minute ago, skraeling said:

I just play a yardage assigned to a number.  Yeah my 8i is what my 7i of old did... I still call it an 8i because I know itll go about 145 every time.  Who cares call it a 3.141 iron for all that it matters.  Itll go what it goes.

Its just a system to organize them.  The number on the bottom has never had to go a specific yardage. 

I agree.  To me it's a cosmetic issue.  I care about the aesthetics of things for some reason.

[RetiredBoomer]

1 minute ago, cnosil said:

It’s called an IP and MAC address

I've heard of them.