Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

Do you really need to buy new wedges?

Published

on

I’m as guilty as the rest of the golfing population when it comes to replacing my wedges too infrequently. Quite frankly, the only time I’ve changed them over the last few years is when I’ve been sent new clubs to test by my equipment sponsor.

If I was left on my own, I’m sure I would use my wedges until the paint fell off. It’s NOT the best idea, but my attitude has been like a lot of you in the golfing world: “It really doesn’t matter for as little golf as I play.”

This story was prompted by a few new wedges I was sent to try. We all hear about how often PGA Tour players change their wedges, and how much spin we’re losing by not changing our wedges more frequently. It is true?

To help you understand the real impact of worn grooves, I put it to the test. I hit four common wedge shots with three different wedges on Trackman that included:

  • A new, 58-degree wedge
  • A worn-out, 58-degree wedge (used for one season)
  • A “super” worn-out, 58-degree wedge (used for multiple seasons)

The New Wedge

Screen Shot 2015-03-30 at 1.15.18 PM

The Worn-Out Wedge

Screen Shot 2015-03-30 at 1.15.30 PM

The “Super” Worn-Out Wedge

Screen Shot 2015-03-31 at 1.27.49 PM

The Results

10-Yard Flop

  • Super Worn: 3398 rpm
  • Worn: 4262 rpm
  • New: 4226 rpm

25-Yard Stock Shot

  • Super Worn: 5249 rpm
  • Worn: 4613 rpm
  • New: 5291 rpm

40-Yard Stock Shot

  • Super Worn: 6739 rpm
  • Worn: 6195 rpm
  • New: 6710 rpm

The only thing I can tell you about the 25- and 40-yard shot is that the super worn-out wedge seemed to have a sharper leading edge, and it felt like it was digging perfectly for my motion. As you can see in the Trackman screen shots at the bottom of this story, the ball was coming out flatter than the worn-out wedge, which decreased my spin loft and added spin. 

For more information on spin loft with wedges, see “The Wedge Project” by Andrew Rice at www.andrewricegolf.com

Full Shot (80 Yards)

  • Super Worn: 9435 rpm, peak spin rate of 10,117 rpm
  • Worn: 10,260 rpm, peak spin rate of 10,400 rpm
  • New: 10,641 rpm, peak spin rate of 11,121 rpm

The numbers tell us that wedge gurus are correct in saying that new wedges work better than the old ones when it comes to creating spin. The older the wedge, the less it will likely spin at all distances. 

For that reason, I would suggest changing your wedges when you begin to see the initial effects of wear so you can keep your “grip” on the greens. The first signs include wedge shots that launch higher than normal — particularly from the rough — and don’t stop or spin back as much as they once did. 

Tom F. Stickney II, is a specialist in Biomechanics for Golf, Physiology, and 3d Motion Analysis. He has a degree in Exercise and Fitness and has been a Director of Instruction for almost 30 years at resorts and clubs such as- The Four Seasons Punta Mita, BIGHORN Golf Club, The Club at Cordillera, The Promontory Club, and the Sandestin Golf and Beach Resort. His past and present instructional awards include the following: Golf Magazine Top 100 Teacher, Golf Digest Top 50 International Instructor, Golf Tips Top 25 Instructor, Best in State (Florida, Colorado, and California,) Top 20 Teachers Under 40, Best Young Teachers and many more. Tom is a Trackman University Master/Partner, a distinction held by less than 25 people in the world. Tom is TPI Certified- Level 1, Golf Level 2, Level 2- Power, and Level 2- Fitness and believes that you cannot reach your maximum potential as a player with out some focus on your physiology. You can reach him at tomstickneygolf@gmail.com and he welcomes any questions you may have.

32 Comments

32 Comments

  1. cody

    Jul 2, 2015 at 2:11 pm

    This article makes no sense. your data does not back up your conclusion.

  2. Steve Daniel

    Apr 18, 2015 at 8:24 am

    I would rather know the difference in “raw” vs “chrome” or other finishes. the golf ball I use has a bigger influence on spin than this test with new vs. old.

  3. A

    Apr 9, 2015 at 1:53 pm

    So, a super worn wedge spins just as much or up to 1000 rpm less than a brand new wedge? That’s the real take-away, right? I suppose that can be also regarded as a 0% or 10-20% reduction.

    How much spin does the ball have when it lands?

    My understanding, I can’t reproduce the trackman article as I can’t find it at the moment, is that on full shots the spin rate of a ball when it hits the green will roughly be the same (about 500 rpm) and the “lift” aspect has worn off and so it descends.

    My understanding is that the more spin that is generated at the start of the ball’s flight, the higher the launch, the shorter the distance the ball flies and the steeper the landing angle. And that it’s this last element, the landing angle, that allows the ball to land and spin back.

    Not every player wants or needs that. Did this “study” compare the deviation in spin rates shot to shot? Did the new wedge spin the ball more consistently at the same rate vs the super old wedge, or was there more variance shot to shot? I’d rather know my shot will react similarly on each shot than be concerned solely with the quantity of spin. It’s rather frustrating when you hit the middle of the green and it spins back off the front, or you expect it to spin with your brand new wedge so you hit it 10 yards past and it just stays there. At least in the process of wearing down a wedge, you’ve become familiar with how it reacts. But if you have access to a tour van and you’re familiar with how a brand new wedge reacts, than by all means, swap ’em out every round.

  4. Gary Gutful

    Apr 7, 2015 at 3:41 am

    There are some super smug gits that comment on these articles.

    Personally, I am glad that there are contributors that bother with these experiments (even if the methods aren’t accredited by the Society of Data Crunching Golf Noobs).

    Loving the rusty look of my Mack Daddys but would happily replace if/when they stop cutting the pistachios in the spin department.

  5. marcus

    Apr 6, 2015 at 9:49 am

    This study is scientifically un-measurable. Thanks for trying though.

    • TheCityGame

      Apr 7, 2015 at 10:31 am

      I love it when a guy thinks he’s sounding smart but ends up saying something completely stupid.

      “This study is scientifically unmeasurable”.

      What the hell does that even mean, dude? Are you trying to measure the study? The STUDY is scientifically unmeasurable?

      Is there a way that it is measurable but just not in a scientific way?

      Do you mean the spin rate on the clubs is not measurable?

      If you’re going to be that smug about it (“thanks for trying though”), you better be able to come up with better reasoning than “this study is unscientifically unmeasurable”. Nonsense.

      • Bob Pegram

        Jun 15, 2015 at 6:36 pm

        Maybe he means that there are so many variables in how each player’s swing, angle of attack, etc. reacts with the club and ball, that it is impossible to make general conclusions. Even the author of the article mentioned that he was used to the sharper front edge of his most worn wedge which may explain the high spin from that wedge. It works for his swing – or he has gotten used to it and made his swing work with it> – who knows?

  6. MRC

    Apr 4, 2015 at 12:20 am

    Love my Mizuno wedges even after two years.
    The grooves look a bit tired but they come alive on the course.
    Thanks for the article Tom.

  7. Dave

    Apr 2, 2015 at 7:28 pm

    So in order to prevent hitting shots that don’t spin, we need to change our wedges when we notice that they’re not spinning? What a waste of a read.

  8. Ken N

    Apr 2, 2015 at 4:52 pm

    I just wrote to Barney Adams about this very topic a couple of weeks ago, so I was pleased to see it addressed here today. Part of my question that was left unanswered, though, was: aren’t today’s wedges made of tougher stuff, to last longer, than previous generations of wedges? If the limit was, say, 5,000 strikes per wedge five years ago, shouldn’t I expect to get 25% more out of today’s space-age-materials club? The Big Names are marketing them that way, and they’re certainly priced that way.

  9. Scott

    Apr 2, 2015 at 2:55 pm

    Tom,
    Tom,
    Were you surprised that the differences were not more pronounced? Maybe I just can not comprehend the difference in 400 to 600 rpm, it does not seem like a lot. Although 1000 rpm on the full shot seems substantial, it would be nice to see was this means on the green in various conditions. I guess that is something that I can play with on my own.

    A side question. I have used a grove sharpening tool. Are there tests at a USGA event to see if the wedges comply? If not, do you know of anyone getting call out for illegal grooves?
    Thanks

  10. other paul

    Apr 2, 2015 at 2:33 pm

    I like that the clubs are different but all the same loft. Because not everyone buys a new set of vokeys every year or two. Lots of people buy different brands each time. I played Cleveland two years ago, now vokeys, thinking of Mack daddy’s next time. This is probably more realistic for the majority of golfers.

  11. other paul

    Apr 2, 2015 at 2:07 pm

    Well Tom, I look forward to the same article in 5 years when you have had time to spend $450 on 3 identical wedges. I hope you enjoy storing one, hitting one 10,000 times to wear it out, and hitting one 30,000 times to really wear it out. And then rewriting this article for all the angry people.

  12. AndyP

    Apr 2, 2015 at 1:22 pm

    What I got from the article is go source some really old worm wedges from the bargain bin. Cheers

    • petie3_2

      Aug 23, 2015 at 7:40 am

      My wedges of choice are 30 year old pre-Vokey Titleists; they’re almost identical to Vokeys but slightly heavier and better in the wet, long grass and sand. I had to pay $9 for one. (sob, outrageous).

  13. mark

    Apr 2, 2015 at 1:00 pm

    All the statements are correct. The article is correct in that a new wedge will give you more backspin. If it doesn’t interest, you then don’t buy a new wedge. Sandblasting the face is a cheaper alternative and makes the old wedge spin like new and you keep the same feel of the familiar wedge.

  14. Philip

    Apr 1, 2015 at 11:56 pm

    I wonder if this is why we see so many PGA players with rusty wedges. Maybe the rough surface gives them a consistent spin that doesn’t tend to change as they replace wedges.

  15. Mike

    Apr 1, 2015 at 7:30 pm

    According to Andrew Rice in The Wedge Project, it’s actually the surface area on the clubface between the grooves that through friction impart the majority of the spin on the golf ball. Andrew recommends to find a local business that does sandblasting and have them sandblast the face of your wedge a few time per year with aluminum oxide. I found a place that does it for $5 a club after which it spins like day it came off the rack.

    • Philip

      Apr 1, 2015 at 11:53 pm

      Same reason why some PGA players do not clean the sand out of their wedge grooves after coming out of the bunker – extra spin. I could put some water on my wedges and do a few practice shots in the sand before play to get them ready. I guess I could always empty the sand out of my bag after a few weeks or so.

  16. Tom Stickney

    Apr 1, 2015 at 5:04 pm

    RG– I take umbrage that you feel this way; I do articles based on facts. I don’t sell clubs nor do I get paid to do these articles. Thus I have no bias other than the facts.

    • RG

      Apr 1, 2015 at 10:53 pm

      OR
      The other thing is you can over spin a wedge. Sam Snead said,” I never made any money with my ball coming back at me.”
      Jackie Burke still plays the same wedge he used to win Augusta in the 50’s.
      The”facts” that you represent in your article are based on a data set from a machine, and from the photos you attached three dissimilar clubs. .Empirically speaking your data sets are flawed. In addition here are more “facts” that go into visualizing and creating good wedge shots. other than new grooves and more spin. Touch and feel have a lot to do with it and new wedges can be counter productive to this end.
      Thank you for sharing and I do not mean any rudeness toward you and your findings, but your experiment is flawed,

    • Steve Daniel

      Apr 18, 2015 at 9:10 am

      Tom, don’t take offence.
      as a retired engineer I like data, but there are too many things left unsaid in this review. for this to be a valid test you would need several sets of documented clubs with several samples of balls, people, and etc. that doesn’t mean that I didn’t enjoy the article. I do the same types of things myself.

  17. Nathan

    Apr 1, 2015 at 5:04 pm

    Brand New Pro V1 Ball makes my wedges feel new again

  18. Perry

    Apr 1, 2015 at 12:58 pm

    The only way I’d buy this is that if all 3 clubs were the exact same model with the exact same shaft. It’s an awesome idea, but I don’t think you’re comparing apples to apples. You’d get similar results if you had three different head/shaft combinations of new clubs.

    • Dave S

      Apr 1, 2015 at 2:42 pm

      Took the words right out of my mouth. From the pics, it’s pretty clear they are not the same brand.

    • RG

      Apr 1, 2015 at 4:54 pm

      You are 100% correct. This “article” is another in a long line of “you need to go buy new clubs” articles.
      OR
      The other thing is you can over spin a wedge. Sam Snead said,” I never made any money with my ball coming back at me.”
      Jackie Burke still plays the same wedge he used to win Augusta in the 50’s.

  19. Brody

    Apr 1, 2015 at 12:15 pm

    Tom,

    Nice article, I enjoyed it. Would you foresee those Groove Sharpener tools making any difference on spin rates? Replacing wedges every season can certainly get expensive; I’d be interested in seeing if those tools make any difference on Trackman.

    • Steve

      Apr 1, 2015 at 1:00 pm

      +1

    • Jon

      Apr 1, 2015 at 1:56 pm

      The only problem with groove sharpeners is if you cut the grooves too deep that club becomes non-conforming. Since I don’t play in any USGA sanctioned tournaments and no longer maintain GHIN, I use the groove sharpener at the beginning of every season (Golf Works part no. GW1111) and it does a pretty good job. It saves me $120/year which buys me about 3 rounds of golf.

  20. Mikko U

    Apr 1, 2015 at 11:56 am

    Interesting to read that there wouldn’t be much difference on partial swings. For me there was a huge difference going from three years old wedges to new ones even on 40-yard chip/pitch shots. They turned into hop and stop rather than hop and roll out.

    Also, isn’t there quite a lot of slippage from any 58* wedge? So wouldn’t some 50-52 degree wedges have worked better as there’s less slipping due to the loft and the grooves would have probably made a bigger difference (or showed more precisely that there isn’t a difference)?

  21. Chuck

    Apr 1, 2015 at 11:42 am

    I don’t doubt the data; but almost as important to spin, is the feel I have developed with older wedges. Weight, balance, bounce, etc. Before the groove rule went into effect, I bought a handful of the kind of gap wedge (Vokey 452.08) and sand wedge (Vokey 258.08) that I love, and I nurse them as much as possible. So while the grooves do get worn, at least they are pre-rule grooves. Legal for me until 2024.

    This all gives real meaning to the short-lived (why???) TaylorMade solution, which was to supply exchangeable faces for its XFT series wedges.

    http://www.taylormadegolf.asia/bn/xft-wedge-specifications.php

Leave a Reply

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Opinion & Analysis

The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

Published

on

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!

Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.

Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.

One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?

Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.

Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.

Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”

For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…

Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.

Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…

That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.

@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic

Continue Reading

Podcasts

Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Published

on

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Published

on

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by BBC SPORT (@bbcsport)

“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”

Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.

That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.

As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.

I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.

One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.

The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.

If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.

Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.

As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.

It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.

David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.

In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:

“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”

Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”

Eventually, though, something shifts.

We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.

Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.

Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.

Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.

So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.

I see someone evolving.

He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.

It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending