Opinion & Analysis
Why it’s hard to make good clubs for bad golfers
I read some of the 2015 GolfWRX Gear Trials and the comments. Recently, there was a also an analysis of the new Adams Blue line on the site.
The comments seemed to be: “OK, these are for average players. Fine. Let’s get to the real challenge, clubs for very good players.”
I know nothing about the Adams Blue line, have never seen a sample. But the idea that clubs for average players give way to the real challenge of making product for good golfers is, well, backwards.
It’s much harder to make clubs that can perform well for high-handicap golfers than it is for really good players.
That comes from years on the range as a custom fitter and designer of several models. I remember back in 1953 when I cleaned and stored clubs at Tuscorara Golf Club, which was near my residence in Marcellus, N.Y., and had a population of 700 at the time. What I specifically remember is that when I clean sets there were always clubs that hadn’t been hit.
Now, golf equipment was relatively expensive then, as it is now, and I couldn’t understand why people would buy clubs and not use them. For reference, the movie theater in Marcellus showed double headers, $0.15 admission and a bag of very stale popcorn from the machine for a dime. So yes, golf clubs were a luxury.
I remember thinking that maybe some of the clubs just weren’t well designed, and maybe that was why they were seldom used. At the time, I had no clue about the complexities involved it was just a thought that stuck with me.
Take the challenge of designing a set of irons. Historically, you would design a 4 iron and an 8 iron as the transition clubs and fill out the set. So if it’s the old school 3-PW set, or today’s set — 4 iron/hybrid through gap wedge — you have a set of clubs with different lofts, lies, weights, and lengths, all made in a sequence. All of these variables were designed to produce a parabola shape of shots, from the shortest club to the longest club, and the distance between the parabolas was to be consistent. It’s what we call gapping.
When you have all those variables, to achieve an objective of predictable results you must have some constants. In the golf world it’s speed, enough to make each club perform as designed. With the consistency of the hit, it’s the same objective. This is fine for the good player, but not applicable to the higher handicappers. So sets for those players were sold with “more forgiving” heads, but they still required the same striking speed and consistency of better players to obtain the results promised in the sale.
Standing on the range back in the early 90’s, I remember visions of my club cleaning days of the 50’s and the clubs that were never hit. They didn’t perform well enough to get in the lineup. I spent a great deal of time trying to figure how to make clubs for the average player. We made clubs for the good players, but the average market in those days was more of a step-child and I saw it as an opportunity. When we started designing full sets, we did not take the “set” approach, because the target market was higher handicappers.
This is where things changed.
It may not seem like much, but in reality it was backwards thinking. We started with the desired shot, resulting in a club design, then started over for the next one and through the set. The long iron (and now the hybrid) was an individual entity, and when it was done the next club in the set was not required to have the traditional sequence of differences or even look the same. Instead of clubs producing shots, we thought in terms of what the player was trying to achieve and went from the shot back to the club design. There were no traditional standards for lofts, lies, weights, lengths even center of gravity (CG) location.
Even then, what we really wanted to do was make a set of irons totaling about six clubs. We knew the slower speeds and imperfect swings were inefficient, but the buying market was trained on a full set and that’s what golfers wanted.
We wanted to take the longer clubs, which had 3-to-4 degrees difference in loft and slightly different lengths, split the difference, and make one club. We knew that the combination of slower swing speeds and less-than-perfect hits would make that a more useful club, and it would morph into a mix of mid and shorter irons. Except, of course, we were in the business of selling clubs and our idea wasn’t well received. Kind of reminds me of 30 years ago when Tommy Armour tried selling a set of irons all with the same 6-iron length called EQL. There are folks today that will tell you the concept was solid, and you can find same-length sets on the Internet.
A set of Tommy Armour’s EQL irons, all of which were the same length.
Whether they are or not, golf equipment today is marketing. It takes millions of dollars, and no one wants to gamble on a 30-year-old concept that had marginal success. Especially when it won’t be played on the PGA Tour.
The marketing formula features the Tour, getting players to play the product and parlaying that into retail sales. But I’d be remiss if I didn’t remember some of the swings I saw on the range, which were the farthest things from the PGA Tour. They’d fall back, twirl with the left foot doing a dance and I’d think to myself, “OK big boy, let’s see you design a long second-shot club for that!”
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
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!
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
“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.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
linh vat phong thuy
Jul 7, 2017 at 3:12 am
I spent a great deal of time trying to figure how to make clubs for the average player.
vang ma ha noi
Apr 5, 2017 at 11:54 am
Funny you say that. I made almost that exact set for my wife, and it works perfectly. 7 clubs is PLENTY for beginners and many amateurs.
14-degree driver, 5-wood (22), 6-hybrid (30), 7i, 9i, SW, putter.
I don’t know why companies like Adams don’t make 7-club sets that are good quality, obviously cheaper than 14-club sets, they are light, easy to carry, etc… Seems like it would be a no-brainer for growing the game. Sell them with a sweet carry bag and promote the fitness aspect. But as Mr. Adams has stated above… they don’t want to sell 7 clubs. They want to sell 14.
tienamphu.com/category/vang-ma
Apr 5, 2017 at 11:53 am
We cant assume he is a terrible ball striker because it takes the same impact with a hybrid as it does with a long iron when played correctly. I too often do not use 5 iron on up but I still do carry a 5 and 4 iron in the bag for those occasional long par 3’s. I also carry a 22 degree hybrid which covers my 220-230 yard shots on shorter par 5’s if I have that option. I used to carry a 3 hybrid which I took out of the bag in lieu of a 52 degree gap wedge mostly because I found more use out of the wedges and no the 3 hybrid. I as
may photocopy ricoh
Mar 10, 2017 at 10:31 pm
I need 5 wedges to average around 76. I think Phil and myself are the only two people left on the planet playing a 64 degree wedge. For consistency I like to put nearly full swings on my wedges
Pingback: Could the clubs make the golfer? - Golf Slot Machine
JH
Oct 8, 2015 at 12:44 pm
I think the problem is the “tour” mentality. Honestly who cares. Go find me an average golfer who follows the tour like a good player does. Chances are you won’t. The average golfer or high-handicapper, is the guy least likely to follow the sport or even know what is best for him. It doesn’t have to work for the tour. It has to work for the average guy. Until someone makes that gamble and it will pay off, GI clubs won’t benefit anyone.
golfiend
Apr 16, 2015 at 10:00 pm
i personally believe beginning golfers should learn playing blade irons. Not just because I learned to play golf with blades, but because i’ve tried cavity backs (higher moi) and even super game improvement irons and the club feedback is not always there. The weight ratio (from top half to bottom half of the iron sans shaft) distribution of game improvement irons (and stronger lofts) does not promote a higher launch which is not conducive to someone who “traps” (hit down on) the ball. I guess for the flipper, it would work, but that’s no way to play golf or get better at ball striking. The hybrid as a replacement for long irons is an unqualified success except in windy conditions. Marketing as you say helps to make the golfers feel good about his clubs and his confidence and we should not discount its effect on the golfer from a mental perspective.
Pingback: Could the clubs make the golfer?
Larry111
Apr 13, 2015 at 11:38 am
Would irons be easier to hit if they didn’t have built in shaft lean?
Ol deadeye
Apr 11, 2015 at 5:48 pm
Some thoughts. Most players carry 14 clubs but may only use 8or 9 in a round. My old men’s club in Hawaii used to have 7 club tournaments. At most only a one shot variation in average scores. Then 5 club tournament, same result. Finally a 3 club event. One club had to be a putter. The other two, your choice. Almost no drivers appeared. Scores went up by about 2 shots. Mostly by the higher handicappers. And, it was fun. You can “build” your set by knowing your game. Take me, average drive, 225. So I play the gold tees, makes most par 5s about 485. That’s leaves 260. Six iron is 155, lay up to 105. My pitching wedge goes 110. That’s 490 yards. Close enough. Two putts, take my par and move on. On my 6000 yard course par fours average 350 yards or less. That leaves 175. I can’t reliably hit any iron that far so my #4 hybrid comes out. I can hit it it 185 so choke down slightly and I’m center of the green. Two putts then to the par 3. Some are long, 195, some short, 145. My hybrid covers the long ones, 7 iron the others. Oh, but what if I miss a green? I do, a lot. So I carry two wedges, a 54 and 58. Let’s see that’s driver, #4 hybrid, 6,7,PW,54,58, putter. Eight clubs. Covers 90% of holes on my course. I carry 14 so that’s 6 clubs to cover 10% of play. Well, I love my 8 iron and my 4 wood. I’m sure you have your favorites. Club manufacturers are cringing. They would sell you a 25 club set if marketing could convince you that you need that. Oh, there’s the rules of golf. Have a good round.
Double Mocha Man
Apr 10, 2015 at 9:28 pm
I need 5 wedges to average around 76. I think Phil and myself are the only two people left on the planet playing a 64 degree wedge. For consistency I like to put nearly full swings on my wedges… half swings and less end up as chunks.
Tom Wishon
Apr 10, 2015 at 6:01 pm
It’s not hard at all to make good performing clubs for high handicappers. No driver would be longer than 43 1/2″, drivers would come with a variety of closed to very closed face angles and be offered in real lofts as high as 15-16*. There would be no fairway woods of lower loft than 17*, fwy sets would offer up to a 9 wood, even 11 wood, and there would be no irons with a loft lower than 30*. And retailers would train and incentivize their sales staff to be NICE and RESPECTFUL to the high handicappers.
Or better yet, there would be no clubs in any retail store or shop for high handicappers and instead, all stores would send the high hdcps to the very best professional custom clubfitter in the area who most certainly would fit and build the clubs to specs to perfectly fit the high hdcp player so he/she could reduce the frequency and severity of their bad shots to see that it is possible to play a little better and enjoy the game a little more.
It is SO EASY to fit and make clubs for high hdcps that will play better for them that the clubs being sold off the rack with their std specs that so much prevent the high hdcp players from playing to the best of their ability and which make it more difficult for the high hdcp player from benefitting as much as they could/should when they do decide to take lessons. Every experienced clubfitter knows this all too well.
gorden
Apr 12, 2015 at 12:42 am
I would agree making clubs for the higher handicap player would be easy if you could get them into some lessons first….I think everyone out playing would have a much better time if the beginers would take a few lessons before playing and we all tell the highest handicap players it is 100% ok to bend the rules enough to make the game faster and more fun as they learn.
larrybud
Oct 13, 2015 at 7:06 pm
But that’s the difference, right? I mean, for the mass market, it IS hard to make “generic” clubs that perform well for high handicappers, because it has to be a one size fits all, and higher handicapped players have a higher variety of swings than a low capper.
The low capper generally is pretty close to on plane, and the face is fairly square at impact, and contact is more or less around the center.
But then make a one-size-fits-all club for the guy who either comes across it 15 degrees out to in, or instead of a 1″ radius of impact, he hits it all over the face, it’s going to be much more difficult to do that.
Greg V
Apr 10, 2015 at 9:55 am
Check out the Bridgestone Dual Pocket Forged irons.
Sean
Apr 9, 2015 at 11:01 pm
I really think that building clubs for high handicappers is all that difficult. I think the restrictions of confirming specs are the problem. I really think we need to take into perspective that golf is a game and not a sport. A sport allows unconditional specs until achieving pro status. Take baseball, we have aluminum bats until you go pro. Relax the rules for amateur equipment. Look what DeMarini did for the sport of softball…….
Reeves
Apr 19, 2015 at 12:35 am
You can relax the rules all you want but that 5 some of 20 plus handicaps playing in front of you on a Saturday (drinking beer and smoking cigars) all thinking they are one driving range visit away form their invite to the Masters , have to follow every stinking rule or the $5 dollar bet is off.
marcel
Apr 9, 2015 at 2:21 am
Barney – as always spot on. the golf is facing one major problem… it wants to grow but with giving impression “it is that easy”… which is not… clubs for high handicappers does not exist – you need to know how to hit a ball and then most clubs (shaft) will do the job…
other paul
Apr 8, 2015 at 6:24 pm
Always fun to read what Barney writes. Keep it up. Love my tightlies 3W mr. Adams.
Steve
Apr 8, 2015 at 1:11 pm
High handicap players tend to have more flaws in their game; Faulty grip, posture, swing-plane, etc. A good player can swing essentially any club and make the ball travel a consistent line. A bad player needs a set of clubs and Hogan’s Modern Fundamentals of Golf (and after that a few lessons can help). Learning how to swing a club CANNOT be replaced by spending all of the money in sight.
Tim
Apr 8, 2015 at 12:17 pm
I believe one of the other editorial contributors to this site has promoted the single length set of golf clubs. I have to say if i could try a set I would but as with all these potentially good ideas without the ability to get it to the masses they fall flat and will never achieve market share enough to prove if the concept works.
other paul
Apr 8, 2015 at 6:21 pm
the long drive guy, jaacob… cant remember his last name.
Greg V
Apr 8, 2015 at 12:00 pm
The article sort of begs the question: if high handicap players can’t hit long irons, or fairway woods, or even hybrids, why have them in the bag at all?
Perhaps the logical set make-up would be: lofted driver, 5 or 7-wood (?), hybrid (?), 7, 9-iron, or 6, 8-iron; and PW, SW, Putter.
Brian
Apr 8, 2015 at 1:57 pm
Great concept but no body wants to try and market that. Look at some WITB though and you’ll see a whole bunch of different brands and models or iron in the pro’s bag.
I have considered buying individual irons. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 48, 52, 56 and 60 wedges. I rarely hit a 5 or longer iron. I go to a 3 or 4 hybrid. But I have a 4 and 5 iron sitting in my basement from my Taylormade Rocketbladez Tour set. And I’m 33 with a 113 mph swing speed. I just don’t love hitting long irons. Wish I did!
Jack
Apr 8, 2015 at 11:27 pm
113 MPH swing speed? You’re either hitting your driver too far and not needing to hit long irons or you’re a terrible ball striker because you are swinging too fast. Most guys who can swing that fast love the long irons since the hybrids go too far. I don’t even swing that fast and my long irons go. It’s all personal preference I suppose, but most people don’t like long irons because they can’t swing the club fast enough to make it go anywhere.
Egor
Apr 9, 2015 at 1:05 am
You’re making quite a few assumptions about Brian ‘eh?
I’ll concede that it does sound odd that a 33y/o with 113ss doesn’t like to hit 5i or less, but hitting his driver too far?? Can anyone really hit their driver “too far” and if so, what is “too far”?
If my two choices are – I hit the driver too far, or.. I’m a terrible ball striker, I’ll take driver too far please and thank you.
Lowell
Apr 10, 2015 at 10:06 am
We cant assume he is a terrible ball striker because it takes the same impact with a hybrid as it does with a long iron when played correctly. I too often do not use 5 iron on up but I still do carry a 5 and 4 iron in the bag for those occasional long par 3’s. I also carry a 22 degree hybrid which covers my 220-230 yard shots on shorter par 5’s if I have that option. I used to carry a 3 hybrid which I took out of the bag in lieu of a 52 degree gap wedge mostly because I found more use out of the wedges and no the 3 hybrid. I assume Brian still carries a 3 wood as his bag almost mirrored mine and I would often take 3 wood off the tee box. You can carry whatever club make up in your bag if you know your proper distances for each and can manufacture shots for the yardages needed. To each their own. We all just want to hit the green in regulation.
Greg V
Oct 7, 2015 at 4:23 pm
I only buy individual irons. At present I am playing AP1 6 and 7-iron, and AP2 8-iron to PW.
Next year I might buy a new 6-iron. The 7-iron to PW will be in the bag for a few years, as will the 54* and 60* wedges.
By the way, when I walk, I only carry 7 or 8 of the 13 clubs that are in my bag for when I ride a cart. I score about the same.
DB
Apr 10, 2015 at 11:26 am
Funny you say that. I made almost that exact set for my wife, and it works perfectly. 7 clubs is PLENTY for beginners and many amateurs.
14-degree driver, 5-wood (22), 6-hybrid (30), 7i, 9i, SW, putter.
I don’t know why companies like Adams don’t make 7-club sets that are good quality, obviously cheaper than 14-club sets, they are light, easy to carry, etc… Seems like it would be a no-brainer for growing the game. Sell them with a sweet carry bag and promote the fitness aspect. But as Mr. Adams has stated above… they don’t want to sell 7 clubs. They want to sell 14.
Bob
Apr 10, 2015 at 11:36 am
I play with seven clubs — driver, 17* and 24* hybrid, 6i, 9i, sand wedge and putter. I shoot in the low 80s and break 80 occasionally.
DB
Apr 10, 2015 at 11:47 am
I totally agree. I play around the same as you, average score is 80. Let’s be honest, I have 14 clubs but at times I have played with significantly less and end up shooting about the same scores.