As I was reading thru the various posts on the pros and cons of blades vs. cavity backs, a thought struck me. I know, I know, a rare occurrence indeed! In looking at the average handicap over the past 20 years, it would seem that there is really only an insignificant improvement.
That said, if the so called game improvement irons were really that much better, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the average national handicap should have decrease significantly?
Magic43,
For what it's worth I think this is an EXTREMELY GOOD POINT. Big drivers, high tech shafts, large sweet-spots, better greens keeping etc. etc. But on average nobody's gettin' better.
I have blades. I'm a club shorter. But what difference does it make. It's just a number on the bottom of a club. What if the put the actual loft number on the irons instead of pw-3. "Well yeah Dick . . . I hit my 32 degree iron there." What's the big deal?
My eye has adjusted to the smaller head size. Blades just LOOK LIKE REAL GOLF. Back in the day you didn't have a choice about buying the big waffle iron and gravy boat driver.
Great point. I have friends who swear by cavity backs but over the years, they don't play any better. What I like is the look on their faces when they use one of my clubs and hit it flush, they just love the feel. I actually had a guy try to buy my clubs on the course after hitting my 5 iron (he broke his on the previous hole (head came loose) so he borrowed mine. Hit it pin high from a bad lie, and offered me more than I paid for them back in 1989. Needless to say, they are still in my bag. Fortunately for me, I had to lay off of golf for a while (went back to school for about 8 years (slow learner) and they are in great shape. Only problem is I am starting to detect wear on the sweet spots on some of my mid irons. Thanks TGM, Yoda and Homer.
__________________
Kevin
------------------------------------------
Thomas Edison knew 1800 ways not to build a light bulb.
I have seen the advertisement "average handicap of the average golfer not getting better" in 40 years so many times. But where did this study come from...and why. Have the folks that conducted the study just used USGA Handicapping? Have they taken into account that the "average golfing population" changes every day. Every day a new hacker joins the ranks of the beginners and every day a seasoned cracker is lost from the ranks of the single digiters. And nobody is improving?
I am an average Joe. I started golf 10 years ago and can remember the first time I broke 50 on the 9-hole Par-3 course I started on. I am no Cracker...but I surely got better than when I started 10 years ago.
I bet if you took a random sample of 50 or so golfers in a point in time with a USGA Handicap and tracked those same 50 golfers 10 years later, their relative USGA Handicap will have indeed improved.
Disclaimer...I am not trying discount anyone's opinion or be critical of anyone in particular. I just find it hard to believe that I am not expected to be better at golf after 10 years of playing, countless hours of range time, better than a year of daily reading of these fantastic forums, playing a set of fitted Pings (instead of a Ping clones), easy to hit hybrids, and a 460cc headed Titanium driver. I have also taken lessons and gone to golf schools.
As a clubmaker and teacher I find it interesting to see how many poeple come to me for clubs and end up having a lesson instead to begin with.
The Indian has to be able to pull the bow and if they are really stuggling there I see it as a bad service if I do not offer then the choises on how to 'fix' the issue.
A game improvment club will help higher handicap players to a degree. That degree goes down as the playre gets a better swing.
Now on the topic of blades or cavity backs, we know we have to hit the sweetspot. An old muscle back blade is not forgiving in the off centre stingy finger area vs a cavity back, but the distance the ball travels is about the same off centre. It is still going to travel the same direction whether blade or cavity back.
However there are heel and toe weighted blades, lower COG than a muscleback that will play like a Cav Back. Anyone ever thought about the top line of the Cav backs and all the weight up there in that thick top line? Who hits it up there??? Thats where heel and toe weighted blades win more most middle handicaps as the cog is lower and so the ball will launch cleaner and higher.
So for those who wish to play a blade look at the cog position on the next sets you are comparing and find the easier blades that way.
Cavity backs or blades is personal preference. Just be aware there are different sorts of blades just as there are models of cav backs.
However there are heel and toe weighted blades, lower COG than a muscleback that will play like a Cav Back. Anyone ever thought about the top line of the Cav backs and all the weight up there in that thick top line? Who hits it up there??? Thats where heel and toe weighted blades win more most middle handicaps as the cog is lower and so the ball will launch cleaner and higher.
Guru,
Really good info.
What swing flaws are the game improvement clubs masking?
If you are a Dual Horizontal Hinge swinger, are heel/toe weighted clubs more difficult to hit than a blade? Or put another way, are these clubs encouraging Angled Hinging?
Do clubs with lower CoG help prevent early throwaway?
Just curious. I have an old set of forged Mizuno CompEZ's that my wife now uses. They were my first "real" clubs and I really enjoyed them. When I hit them now, I take a few swings and immediately put them down. Not sure why they feel so bad, but it could be the lack of a distinct sweet spot feel. Not sure.
Low COGs really hide a lack of down and out so allow for a less perfect strike to get the ball in the air.
Heel weights are known to help close the face - hence all these screw weighted drivers out there these days.
Best example of a heel and toe weighted blade was a Maltby M-03...One day I will work out how to post a pic on the site here and I will show you the look. On some of the custom gear sites they will list the height of the COG for irons. Not been on Golfsmith site for a bit but know the have it in their specs.
Generally look for wider soled blades are you are going to be close. Thin top line.
Talk to many of the guys on the senior tour. Many of them are playing as well or better than they did on the regular tour because of equipment and despite their aging bodies. Most all of them hit it further (or just as far) than they ever did when they were younger.
The newer drivers and more importantly the ball have been the biggest factors in this.
But as we all know, the better players differentiate themselves with their short games and putting. This is where it takes the most skill and finesse and it really doesn't matter much what kind of club you are using. I would say there are a lot of players benefiting from better equipment tee to green - but if they have no short game or can't putt then their scores will never show it.
My first clubs were Pings. Then I went to Mizuno MP29's and loved them. I'm now playing the Titleist 704 CB's which feel great and give me a tad more forgiveness and distance than the 29's. I'd rather hit an 8 iron into a green than a 7 iron because the shorter club gives me that much more control.
Having said all of that, blades sure do feel nice!
In looking at the average handicap over the past 20 years, it would seem that there is really only an insignificant improvement. 
Linear Mode
