Post by Richie3Jack on Jan 20, 2010 13:34:58 GMT -5
I grew up in the Ping Eye 2 era. Back then it was thought that Pings made probably the best irons in golf and because they were forgiving, this would result in lower scores. Plus, this was in the time of square grooves craze. I remember people thinking square grooves meant lower scores, but I've never been too sure on that. As you can see, the pros aren't exactly struggling with V-Grooves right now.
Plus, the one thing I always thought is that the ball could spin too much or you could hit a pretty good shot short of the flag and then the spin on top of that would put you further away from the hole.
In fact, I saw a Nicklaus clinic with Zach Johnson and both said they don't like Square Grooves for their game. Zach and Jack both stated that too much spin was a bad thing because if they were a little off with their shot, that would create more side spin and make a more wayward shot. And Zach stated that the only time he really needs backspin is with the short irons and he felt if he needed backspin with those irons, that was something he could create himself if he wanted to.
Despite that, I never owned a set of Pings. I had the Ping 1-iron which was a great club. Had a Ping SW which I broke after a poor performance cost me a chance to go to the state HS championship in 10th grade (also cost me a medalist spot, which in 10th grade would've been HUGE).
I then owned a set of Tommy Armour 845s, but I didn't like the offset with the longer irons. I then switched to some Taylor Made ICW5's, which were designed like a blade, but really a cavity back and had minimal offset. I hit them really, really well.
It wasn't until I got into college and bought some Founders Club blades that I got more interested in equipment specifications and design. This was because I had ordered True Temper X100 shafts and after struggling heavily with them, we found that the frequencies of the shafts were all over the place.
Plus, I had grown quite a few inches and found myself unable to consistently strike the ball flush and after seeing a clubfitter for the first time, we found a cure in making my lie angles more upright.
It eventually started getting crazy....5* upright lies...then +1" graphite shafts with 1* upright lies. Doing everything to make sure that I didn't hit the ball off the toe.
Thankfully I started to go over to the iseekgolf.com Web site and started to read Lag Erickson's insight on equipment.
I generally agree with his main concepts on equipment:
1. Shafts are too long
2. Shafts are too light.
3. Swing weights are too light
4. Lie Angles are too upright.
And more importantly, Lag believes that the changes in equipment have caused changes in golfer's swings for the worse.
I started investigating this more and I found that I agree with his notions. Certainly, clubs are longer these days. In the 70's it wasn't uncommon to see 5-irons with a standard shaft length of 37.5 to 37.75" long. Now it's at least 38" long and more like 38.25" inches long. Standard lie angles are 1* upright.
Combine those two and you get an 'effective lie angle' that is much more upright with today's modern equipment.
One of the things that struck a chord with me was when Lag mentioned that he felt upright swings are more or less 'riskier' than a flatter swing.
As Lag mentioned, if you're playing from a lie where the ball is well above your feet, it's almost impossible to come over the top because your downswing has flattened out so much.
Upright lies alone will cause the swing to get more upright. Adding length to the shaft just effectively makes the club more upright causing more upright *downswings* and puts the golfer at more risk with their results.
Now, I don't think you have to go with drastic 5* flat lie angles, but I would shy away from upright lie angles, even if they are 1* upright and for the most part, unless you have an abnormally short wingspan, I'd stay away from lengthening shafts as well.
Also, one of the things I see is a lot more people standing close to the ball. Look at golfers like Snead, Hogan, Nicklaus, Arnie, Mickey Wright, etc. and almost all of them stand further away from the ball than about 90% of the golfing public.
One of the things that this effects is waist bend. Stand close to the ball and you cannot bend the waist properly. Stand further away and now you have room to bend the waist. Homer Kelley goes into waist bend a bit in TGM and it's importance. I think the key factor is it helps provide a better and more effective pivot motion.
I'm curious to know what the club specs are for the members of this board.
3JACK
Plus, the one thing I always thought is that the ball could spin too much or you could hit a pretty good shot short of the flag and then the spin on top of that would put you further away from the hole.
In fact, I saw a Nicklaus clinic with Zach Johnson and both said they don't like Square Grooves for their game. Zach and Jack both stated that too much spin was a bad thing because if they were a little off with their shot, that would create more side spin and make a more wayward shot. And Zach stated that the only time he really needs backspin is with the short irons and he felt if he needed backspin with those irons, that was something he could create himself if he wanted to.
Despite that, I never owned a set of Pings. I had the Ping 1-iron which was a great club. Had a Ping SW which I broke after a poor performance cost me a chance to go to the state HS championship in 10th grade (also cost me a medalist spot, which in 10th grade would've been HUGE).
I then owned a set of Tommy Armour 845s, but I didn't like the offset with the longer irons. I then switched to some Taylor Made ICW5's, which were designed like a blade, but really a cavity back and had minimal offset. I hit them really, really well.
It wasn't until I got into college and bought some Founders Club blades that I got more interested in equipment specifications and design. This was because I had ordered True Temper X100 shafts and after struggling heavily with them, we found that the frequencies of the shafts were all over the place.
Plus, I had grown quite a few inches and found myself unable to consistently strike the ball flush and after seeing a clubfitter for the first time, we found a cure in making my lie angles more upright.
It eventually started getting crazy....5* upright lies...then +1" graphite shafts with 1* upright lies. Doing everything to make sure that I didn't hit the ball off the toe.
Thankfully I started to go over to the iseekgolf.com Web site and started to read Lag Erickson's insight on equipment.
I generally agree with his main concepts on equipment:
1. Shafts are too long
2. Shafts are too light.
3. Swing weights are too light
4. Lie Angles are too upright.
And more importantly, Lag believes that the changes in equipment have caused changes in golfer's swings for the worse.
I started investigating this more and I found that I agree with his notions. Certainly, clubs are longer these days. In the 70's it wasn't uncommon to see 5-irons with a standard shaft length of 37.5 to 37.75" long. Now it's at least 38" long and more like 38.25" inches long. Standard lie angles are 1* upright.
Combine those two and you get an 'effective lie angle' that is much more upright with today's modern equipment.
One of the things that struck a chord with me was when Lag mentioned that he felt upright swings are more or less 'riskier' than a flatter swing.
As Lag mentioned, if you're playing from a lie where the ball is well above your feet, it's almost impossible to come over the top because your downswing has flattened out so much.
Upright lies alone will cause the swing to get more upright. Adding length to the shaft just effectively makes the club more upright causing more upright *downswings* and puts the golfer at more risk with their results.
Now, I don't think you have to go with drastic 5* flat lie angles, but I would shy away from upright lie angles, even if they are 1* upright and for the most part, unless you have an abnormally short wingspan, I'd stay away from lengthening shafts as well.
Also, one of the things I see is a lot more people standing close to the ball. Look at golfers like Snead, Hogan, Nicklaus, Arnie, Mickey Wright, etc. and almost all of them stand further away from the ball than about 90% of the golfing public.
One of the things that this effects is waist bend. Stand close to the ball and you cannot bend the waist properly. Stand further away and now you have room to bend the waist. Homer Kelley goes into waist bend a bit in TGM and it's importance. I think the key factor is it helps provide a better and more effective pivot motion.
I'm curious to know what the club specs are for the members of this board.
3JACK
