DeChambeau doesn't hit his 8 iron 200 yards

[cnosil]

58 minutes ago, ILMgolfnut said:

I had not found this site, but it didn't matter. My irons aren't listed there either.

What were the clubs?

[ILMgolfnut]

Just now, cnosil said:

What were the clubs?

Slotline Inertials. Circa 1985 (see below). Very early examples of perimeter weighting. Slotline was a hot putter brand in the 80s, their venture into irons didn't go so well. I went for a golf lesson in Houston, probably about 2003, the pro asked to hit one of my irons and I handed him my 7-iron. He whacked one, handed it back to me and said "I don't know how anyone could ever hit a slice with these." Over the next 30 minutes, he found out differently.

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, ILMgolfnut said:

OK, I was imprecise. Shaft flex doesn't matter, but kick point does. Also, the irons I was trying to find the specs for are well over 10 years old (I had taken my prolonged break from golf 20 years ago, and the clubs were before that) and the manufacturer is long since out of business.

Actually that isn’t accurate either. That only matters for those with later releases.

pretty much every concept from the old days has been debunked by actual measurements and data. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

57 minutes ago, TK_ said:

So, a 4 iron at 24 degree versus a 5 iron at 21 degree isn’t hustling the uninformed buyers? It absolutely is. “Far from correct”, think again man. Especially when they tell you “these are top of the line, look how much further you hit ours.” I think you are not considering the misinformed or uninformed. Golf boomed during Covid. There is more in this lane than ever before. Understand, this is just to protect the misinformed or uninformed from wasting their money on a product that won’t help their game. That is all.

Nope a 4i with 24° loft is a 4i from the manufacturee that made it and has nothing to do with any 5i in a different set even from the same manufacturer.

lofts have been getting stronger since the 60s and none of it has to do with hyping distance or whatever those who argue about it say.

the design and launch window along with what the manufacturer want to call it are what determine the number stamped on whatever loft they choose.

A 44° pw in and set is a pw in that set.

[MattA72]

Totally agree with the comments that we should only be interested in how far we can hit each club. 

BUT….

surely we all like to compare ourselves to the scratch players/ pros as we’d love to be that good?  Therefore having no parameters on the lofts seems a shame - shaft length is different as that can be determined by the player’s height.

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 minute ago, MattA72 said:

Totally agree with the comments that we should only be interested in how far we can hit each club. 

BUT….

surely we all like to compare ourselves to the scratch players/ pros as we’d love to be that good?  Therefore having no parameters on the lofts seems a shame - shaft length is different as that can be determined by the player’s height.

Theres no industry standard for every aspect of clubs and shafts. Trying to compare anything is near pointless.

As for shaft length and height that’s not really true either. There are tall guys who play a manufacturers standard length or even shorter. Shaft length is determined by how a golfer delivers the club and not their height. Their wrist to floor measurements are just a starting point. I know fitters who use length rather than lie angle to adjust contact point on the club. And we really don’t know a persons shaft length because manufacturers have different ways to measure as well as different depth of hosels or adapters 

[cnosil]

14 minutes ago, ILMgolfnut said:

Slotline Inertials. Circa 1985 (see below).

 

Unfortunately not a common brand so you would have had to put them on loft lie machine.  

3 minutes ago, MattA72 said:

surely we all like to compare ourselves to the scratch players/ pros as we’d love to be that good?  Therefore having no parameters on the lofts seems a shame - shaft length is different as that can be determined by the player’s height.

Used to do this; have gotten past comparing what club I hit versus the club someone else hits.  “Good” isn’t about the club but how you actually perform.   Good golfers are both longer and shorter than me from a length perspective.   I want to better understand the strategy those good golfer use.  

[RetiredBoomer]

2 hours ago, cnosil said:

So why take the position of lofts need to be this and not
this is how design influences loft?      

This is the main point of all the loft jacking discussions.  
 

 

Design isn't even an issue, cnosil. 
That last thing I would do is presume to tell highly skilled engineers how to design golf clubs.  I'm not sure why design even comes up in this discussion.

Let's say that the clubhead under discussion is a hi-tech modern design made exactly as it is made right now.  We're not challenging the design of the club, and that's INCLUDING the loft.

The only thing we're discussing is the number stamped on the bottom of the club after it's been made.

There are many ways that they could have gone if they had chosen to standardize.

They could have tied the numerical designation to a certain loft.

They could have tied the numerical designation to a certain length.

They could have tied the numerical designation to how far a mechanical golfer 
hits the ball at a given swing-speed.

They seem to have tied it to the angle that said mechanical golfer launches the ball with it,
although even then, to no fixed standard.

I'm not talking about "jacked lofts" at all.
All that I'm doing is saying that if it were my call,
I'd have tied the numerical designation to loft.
It's nothing to do with any aspect of the club except the cosmetic number stamping.

If I got to have my own custom set made from scratch,
I wouldn't eschew the new technology being offered today.
I would just number them differently or leave off the numbers altogether as I don't particularly need them.

It's a purely academic / aesthetic discussion from my perspective.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TK_]

9 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Nope a 4i with 24° loft is a 4i from the manufacturee that made it and has nothing to do with any 5i in a different set even from the same manufacturer.

lofts have been getting stronger since the 60s and none of it has to do with hyping distance or whatever those who argue about it say.

the design and launch window along with what the manufacturer want to call it are what determine the number stamped on whatever loft they choose.

A 44° pw in and set is a pw in that set.

Saying it is the PW in that set is exactly what the issue is. You’re buying into what the manufacturers want you to buy into. It should be the same across the board. Show loft/degree on the club and make it easier for everyone to see the truth. If a PW is 44 degrees, you gonna buy a 48 degree to go with you actual gap wedge, or you gonna just leave that huge gap and go feel for the 30 yard difference?

[67BUDFAN]

Interesting discussion. The power and shot making world Bryon lives in is astounding to me and far beyond my comprehension, regardless what's stamped on his 3-D printed irons. I just turned 66 and the past few years have seen a 10 yard drop on my clubs, and I admit that I'm still slowly learning to listen to one of my dad's mantras; It's not how far David, it's how many. I often wonder if in the end the pros think that way as well.

[cnosil]

7 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

Design isn't even an issue, cnosil. 
That last thing I would do is presume to tell highly skilled engineers how to design golf clubs.  I'm not sure why design even comes up in this discussion.

 

From one of your posts “I'm not an engineer, but I'm interested in club design.“  never said you should tell them how to design clubs,  even though telling them what loft to make and what number to put on the bottom is part of “design”.   

[cnosil]

12 minutes ago, TK_ said:

Saying it is the PW in that set is exactly what the issue is. You’re buying into what the manufacturers want you to buy into. It should be the same across the board. Show loft/degree on the club and make it easier for everyone to see the truth. If a PW is 44 degrees, you gonna buy a 48 degree to go with you actual gap wedge, or you gonna just leave that huge gap and go feel for the 30 yard difference?

So you hate everything in the golf industry due to  the lack of standardization?   Do you think all clubs with the same loft and length go the same distance?  For example an iron that is considered a players club  versus a club that is game improvement?   I have done an MGS test and they do not go the same distance as there are other design aspects that influence how the golf ball comes off the face.  

[GolfSpy_APH]

17 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

Design isn't even an issue, cnosil. 
That last thing I would do is presume to tell highly skilled engineers how to design golf clubs.  I'm not sure why design even comes up in this discussion.

Let's say that the clubhead under discussion is a hi-tech modern design made exactly as it is made right now.  We're not challenging the design of the club, and that's INCLUDING the loft.

The only thing we're discussing is the number stamped on the bottom of the club after it's been made.

There are many ways that they could have gone if they had chosen to standardize.

They could have tied the numerical designation to a certain loft.

They could have tied the numerical designation to a certain length.

They could have tied the numerical designation to how far a mechanical golfer 
hits the ball at a given swing-speed.

They seem to have tied it to the angle that said mechanical golfer launches the ball with it,
although even then, to no fixed standard.

I'm not talking about "jacked lofts" at all.
All that I'm doing is saying that if it were my call,
I'd have tied the numerical designation to loft.
It's nothing to do with any aspect of the club except the cosmetic number stamping.

If I got to have my own custom set made from scratch,
I wouldn't eschew the new technology being offered today.
I would just number them differently or leave off the numbers altogether as I don't particularly need them.

It's a purely academic / aesthetic discussion from my perspective.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I guess my question is why does it matter what loft a club is in correlation to the designated number if the clubs are gapped well and the player knows their distances?

[RetiredBoomer]

5 minutes ago, cnosil said:

From one of your posts “I'm not an engineer, but I'm interested in club design.“  never said you should tell them how to design clubs,  even though telling them what loft to make and what number to put on the bottom is part of “design”.   

It's no more than a mere opinion,
but calling the number on the bottom a part of the club's basic design 
seems like a bit of a stretch to me.

I'm sure some would see it differently.

[RetiredBoomer]

2 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

I guess my question is why does it matter what loft a club is in correlation to the designated number if the clubs are gapped well and the player knows their distances?

Why does one's wife care what color the drapes are if they all block the sun from fading the furniture or prevent passers by from looking in at night? 

Every choice in life isn't tied hard to practicality.
Sometimes, it's just what one wants.

[cnosil]

7 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

It's no more than a mere opinion,
but calling the number on the bottom a part of the club's basic design 
seems like a bit of a stretch to me.

I'm sure some would see it differently.

So back to what we have said, whatever is put on the bottom of the club; number, loft, made up name, is irrelevant and really just a preference of the OEM as it provides zero value to the golfer other than a reference. 

[RetiredBoomer]

1 minute ago, cnosil said:

So back to what we have said, whatever is put on the bottom of the club; number, loft, made up name, is irrelevant and really just a preference of the OEM as it provides zero value to the golfer other than a reference. 

Agreed to an extent, but what's relevant is subjective.   
I prefer myself rather than the existing OEMs making the cosmetic choices.

My basic problem is not being in position to buy a company so at least one model in the line could be exactly what I wanted for myself.  

 

[TK_]

21 minutes ago, cnosil said:

So you hate everything in the golf industry due to  the lack of standardization?   Do you think all clubs with the same loft and length go the same distance?  For example an iron that is considered a players club  versus a club that is game improvement?   I have done an MGS test and they do not go the same distance as there are other design aspects that influence how the golf ball comes off the face.  

No, I do not think they go the same distance (thank you for actually telling me if they did or not, that was just my assumption). However, they are strictly labeled game improvement when they are game improvement irons, right? That’s all I am getting at. I think more clarity would encourage smarter shopping and keep players around more. I think we can agree that clubs that are represented and fitting the golfer, would make a golfer better more times than not. So, would it not be to the benefit of the growth of the game, to advertise clearly and geared towards improving their actual game? 

[cnosil]

2 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

Agreed to an extent, but what's relevant is subjective.   
I prefer myself rather than the existing OEMs making the cosmetic choices.

My basic problem is not being in position to buy a company so at least one model in the line could be exactly what I wanted for myself.  

 

So you have just as much issue with the font the OEM chooses, the paintfill color they choose, the grip color,  where all the branding and logos are placed, the size of everything, etc.?  

[golfr]

1 hour ago, Hook DeLoft said:

Or he could stamp 6 on the club with 30 degrees of loft and still have the same trajectory, spin and distance.

 

No!  

That would make his 8-iron 8 degrees weaker and hence way too high with way too much spin (especially with his one-length shafts)!

The 8-iron loft from 1980 is not going to work for him; it creates ridiculously unnecessary stopping power.  And it did back then for some players too.  Do you need 9000 rpm's, 150 foot heights, and 55 degrees decent angles with an 8 iron?  Heck no, launch monitors have taught us that.  In fact, it gets harder to play as balls zip off the front if you do that.  That's why the lofts are not "standard" and never have been.

That's the whole point!  It's about securing the trajectory a player needs in each club to optimize the gapping in their bag.  

Edited June 20 by golfr

[StrokerAce]

I don't understand why people get so wrapped up with this.

You're allowed 14 clubs and it's up to you how you want to manage your distance gaps within the rules of the game; the number on the bottom is absolutely and completely irrelevant.

What if, instead of numbers, he just put the names on the bottom. Would that help? Or would the criticism be that Bryson doesn't his his Tin Cup 205... ?

Gamma    
Azalea    
Juniper    
Tin Cup    
8-ball    
Jackie    
Herman Keiser    
Jimmy Demaret    
Mr. Ward    
King

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/golf/news/bryson-dechambeau-club-nicknames/e74df0ab26e4438a93433cb8

[golfr]

5 hours ago, GolfSpy_KFT said:

I guess I really do not understand why numbers on clubs matter SO much. If you know what distance the club you hit goes, isn't that what it really boils down to? It's easier for me to say "I'm going to hit my 8 iron here" instead of "I'm going to hit my 8 iron, but it's a game improvement iron so the loft is a little stronger, so it's actually more like a 7 iron if I were playing a player's iron." If someone I am playing with asks me what club I am using for a shot, I'll say which club it is and what distance I usually hit it. 

I think we all play the game to enjoy it and not over analyze what lofted club is stamped what. Just my two cents. 

 

 

It's just a perspective thing I guess. 

I've been paired with lots of random people at my home course and when we head to the first par 3 they will sometimes ask "what club are you hitting here?".

I always answer the same way, what does it matter?  I don't know how far your clubs go, you don't know what mine go?  Plus, I could be hitting a soft shot, a punch, a half shot....you don't know.  You SHOULD be asking, what DISTANCE are you playing this as.  

But they never do??  It's always "what club are you hitting?"

[RetiredBoomer]

6 minutes ago, cnosil said:

So you have just as much issue with the font the OEM chooses, the paintfill color they choose, the grip color,  where all the branding and logos are placed, the size of everything, etc.?  

Let's say that I wouldn't mind options! 

Back in the 1960s and early 1970s, Spalding actually offered such things on their Top Flite models.  Since they're out of the golf business now, I guess that they didn't benefit that much from it. 

[cnosil]

2 minutes ago, TK_ said:

No, I do not think they go the same distance (thank you for actually telling me if they did or not, that was just my assumption). However, they are strictly labeled game improvement when they are game improvement irons, right? That’s all I am getting at. I think more clarity would encourage smarter shopping and keep players around more. I think we can agree that clubs that are represented and fitting the golfer, would make a golfer better more times than not. So, would it not be to the benefit of the growth of the game, to advertise clearly and geared towards improving their actual game? 

I would say OEMs incorrectly label the club categories as well.  When I am doing most wanted testing I see irons in a category that probably belong in a different category but that is where the OEM requested them to be placed.   There is no “standard” that puts a club into any specific category.  
 

Also handicap or anything other than how a player swings that particular club that is a determining factor in the best selection for a golfer even though OEMs categorize them by handicap.   There are touring professionals that play the super forgiving drivers because they work best for them and high handicap recreational players playing players type clubs.   
 

what really needs to be done is educate golfers not to pick clubs off the rack, actually go through some type of fitting, and ignore what professional golfers are using and thinking it is what they should play.  

[cnosil]

7 minutes ago, golfr said:

 

I always answer the same way, what does it matter?  I don't know how far your clubs go, you don't know what mine go?  Plus, I could be hitting a soft shot, a punch, a half shot....you don't know.  You SHOULD be asking, what DISTANCE are you playing this as.  

But they never do??  It's always "what club are you hitting?"

And I just answer that question with I played it as X yards.   

[RetiredBoomer]

As soon as we say, "

"What difference does the stamped number make
as long as we know the distance that we hit each one
and the gaps are good,"

we've completely missed the point.

The reason doesn't matter. If a person cares about such things,
then it matters to him or her.  Nobody else really needs to understand.

Our entire lives involve making purely subjective choices,
but somehow, to some, golf clubs are supposed to be different.

Sometimes, we like to talk about things we would like.
"Really? I wouldn't think about that." is a totally reasonable answer.
But there's nothing weird about having preferences.

 

 

 

[cnosil]

14 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

Let's say that I wouldn't mind options! 

Back in the 1960s and early 1970s, Spalding actually offered such things on their Top Flite models.  Since they're out of the golf business now, I guess that they didn't benefit that much from it. 

It’s not completely dead.   There are numerous companies that offer custom stamping, colors, logos, etchings, etc on balls and clubs.   You could even reach out to the foundry’s and get them made.  

[TK_]

15 minutes ago, cnosil said:

I would say OEMs incorrectly label the club categories as well.  When I am doing most wanted testing I see irons in a category that probably belong in a different category but that is where the OEM requested them to be placed.   There is no “standard” that puts a club into any specific category.  
 

Also handicap or anything other than how a player swings that particular club that is a determining factor in the best selection for a golfer even though OEMs categorize them by handicap.   There are touring professionals that play the super forgiving drivers because they work best for them and high handicap recreational players playing players type clubs.   
 

what really needs to be done is educate golfers not to pick clubs off the rack, actually go through some type of fitting, and ignore what professional golfers are using and thinking it is what they should play.  

The issue is, the uneducated. I see it as aggressive marketing and sales tactics to trick them. Is it easier to tell someone and convince them they’re uneducated, or easier to require manufacturers accurately represent their product they are selling? To keep people in the game longer, they should be required to clearly represent the club they are selling. I do wish fittings were pushed more and more common for all golfers. It should only benefit their game.

[cnosil]

16 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

As soon as we say, "

"What difference does the stamped number make
as long as we know the distance that we hit each one
and the gaps are good,"

we've completely missed the point.

The reason doesn't matter. If a person cares about such things,
then it matters to him or her.  Nobody else really needs to understand.

Our entire lives involve making purely subjective choices,
but somehow, to some, golf clubs are supposed to be different.

Sometimes, we like to talk about things we would like.
"Really? I wouldn't think about that." is a totally reasonable answer.
But there's nothing weird about having preferences.

 

I completely agree with you when you say it is a subjective personal preference.   However, Many follow up with the industry is lying to and deceiving golfers making it objective.   This entire conversation started because someone said brysons 8 iron isn’t an 8 iron.   We know it is because his preference is to label that club as an 8 so it is an 8 and it shouldn’t be questioned.   

Edited June 20 by cnosil

[cnosil]

4 minutes ago, TK_ said:

The issue is, the uneducated. I see it as aggressive marketing and sales tactics to trick them. Is it easier to tell someone and convince them they’re uneducated, or easier to require manufacturers accurately represent their product they are selling? To keep people in the game longer, they should be required to clearly represent the club they are selling. I do wish fittings were pushed more and more common for all golfers. It should only benefit their game.

Yes.  But this isn’t limited to the golf industry.  Additionally even when people attempt to educate they are ignored and people do what they want.   Heard too many stories from golf people where they advices people that they should be doing X but the person says that isn’t right and they do Y.  
 

 What you are asking for is basically why MGS started.  The companies goal is to educate golfers and get beyond the marketing.   People still say what MGS says and does isn’t true and they are bought by the OEMs to say specific things and manipulate the data.