Opinion & Analysis
The Most Overlooked Parameter in Iron Fitting
In the chart below, you can see the average results for an iron fitting I did with one of my members at Biltmore Forest CC recently. Based on these three data points presented, which iron would you choose? Most golfers go with club No. 2. The club head speed is faster, the carry is the longest, and the dispersion is the second best. It’s a no-brainer, right? If you think this is a trick, you’re on the right track, and I’ll get back to that later.
Club fitting has become a very important of golf. Most golfers today are fitted in some way before they purchase clubs, but that hasn’t always been the case. Before club fitters could accurately measure ball flight and club delivery with launch monitors, they relied on static fittings that accounted for length, loft, and lie adjustments at setup. With the introduction of a lie board, they were then able to tell how the club was positioned through the impact zone. As a result, fittings became more based on impact and ball flight results. Fast forward to the availability of launch monitors like TrackMan, and fitters can see exactly what the golf ball is doing and how the golf club communicates a message to the golf ball. All of these advancements have made the fitting process more transparent, as well as enhanced a fitter’s ability to fine tune the clubs of each and every golfer. The bad news is that they’ve also made a lot of golfers completely obsessed with distance.
When it comes to club fitting, the conversation often revolves around the driver. Driver fittings are fun for both the player and the teacher, because who doesn’t want to see longer, straighter drives? While I completely concede that driver fittings and distance are very important pieces to golf improvement, I also think their focus can dilute the fitting process for the 13 other clubs golfers use. With a driver, fitters are almost always trying to help golfers achieve a higher launch angle while reducing spin. It’s a formula that’s great for longer drives, but not always better iron shots. Too often, I see golfers worried most about distance when they’re trying different kinds irons at a demo day, which often leads them to choose the wrong clubs for their game.
Equipment manufacturers have played a role in the distance craze, of course, promoting the additional distance their clubs offer compared to the previous model or a competitor’s product… and they have a lot to brag about. Advancements in engineering have allowed golf equipment manufacturers to move weight lower in their iron heads, which helps golfers launch the ball higher. They’ve made their iron faces thinner and more flexible, which also makes shots go higher, and increased the amount of shaft options available, particularly their lightweight shaft options, to give the vast majority of golfers a chance to find a stock shaft that works for their swing.
As a result of these changes, today’s irons have lower different lofts than those produced not even 20 years ago, as well as slightly longer shaft lengths to help golfers take advantage of the latest technologies. Below are the published lofts and lengths from two leading iron manufacturers (I’ve labeled them Company A and Company B) for the same type of iron sets: one released in 2000, one released in 2017. As you can see, there’s been an incredible transformation in 17 years. It’s great for some golfers, but not for others, and I’ll explain why.
Company A
Company B
As you can see, the leading equipment manufacturers have reduced loft by 2-6 degrees with each iron, and they’ve added as much as 0.625 inches to the length of each iron as well. This will no doubt help golfers hit longer shots, but it can also have a negative effect on the control some golfers have over the golf ball when it lands on the green.
Control over the golf ball when it lands on the green is known as “stopping power,” and it’s is affected most by land angle (the angle at which the golf ball hits the ground). Land angle is highly correlated with how much the ball will bounce and roll once it has hit the ground, as each degree of reduced land angle is responsible for about 3 yards more of bounce and roll.
So what is a good land angle? For irons, I like to think about it this way. Anything coming into the ground at an angle more than 45 degrees is going more down than out when it lands; anything coming into the ground at an angle less than 45 degrees is traveling more out than down when it lands. That’s why the rule of thumb is that iron shots should have a land angle of at least 45 degrees.
There’s a caveat with this rule of thumb, however, and it’s that many golfers don’t have the swing speed to achieve a 45-degree land angle with all their irons. They need to be able to swing a 6 iron at about 85 mph to make it happen, and in the example below, the golfer I was fitting did not have that ability.
Fitting Example
Here is the same example from above — a golfer I fit hitting five different 6 irons — that now includes peak height and landing angle.
With the most important data added, there’s no question that this golfer needs to use iron No. 5. It flew almost as far and as straight as No. 2, but shots with No. 5 had a landing angle that was almost 3-degree higher, which means that shots will stop 6 yards sooner when they hit the green. That’s a big deal when hitting a shot to a protected front pin. Remember, the goal with irons is to hit shots as close to the pin as possible. Yes, within reason we want to hit the ball as high and as far as possible, but not at the expense of stopping power.
Just because a set of irons has strong lofts doesn’t mean it will be bad for you. Some golfers need a 49-degree pitching wedge to perform their best, while others can perform their best with a 42-degree pitching wedge. The only way for you to know for sure what you need is to have an iron fitting that includes a focus on land angle. If it’s optimized, you will be a much happier golfer when you get out on the course with your new set.
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...
Speedy
Jul 3, 2017 at 4:50 pm
Shaft lengthening has done the most harm. Rather than pay for expensive custom ordering/fitting, make sure you choke down on each shot. Instill this in practice sessions.
Lloyd Jackson
Jul 3, 2017 at 1:25 am
Company A 2000 model: Those specs would have been rather unusual even then. More likely the specs of a blade from the 1980s.
As my very good friend, Jay Turner of RedBird/Avian Golf would say: With irons, it’s not HOW FAR, it’s HOW CLOSE.
The number on the sole has little meaning and the deceptive loft jacking and shaft lengthening began with Callaway’s S2H2 irons.
Hunter Brown
Jul 5, 2017 at 7:31 am
Hey Lloyd thanks for your response and interest. One set was a game improvement iron and the other was a more typical cavity back mid to low hdcp option
Dill Pickelson
Jul 2, 2017 at 11:52 pm
hi, can i ask why you extend your clubs? i’m tall too and used to have 1″ longer but every club is a different length anyway! i went back to ‘standard’ length and no issues. so, why bother changing shaft length?
TONEY P
Jul 3, 2017 at 7:43 pm
What did you do for the swing weight of each club extended. They had to feel heavier?
TONEY P
Jul 3, 2017 at 7:53 pm
Most golfers don’t have a clue what they’re doing or really need when buying clubs. If you can’t PUNCH your iron 3/4 it’s distance straight then the iron lie needs to be adjusted.. Good golfers know what to do so the other 97 % need to ask them .
Joshua Chervokas
Jul 2, 2017 at 6:56 pm
This is never overlooked by actual fitters. The problem is that what they do at big box stores is not a fitting regardless of what they call it. Go to any Golf Digest top 100 fitter like myself and an iron fitting will focus highly on landing angle and we will weaken and strengthen lofts all the time.
QV
Jul 2, 2017 at 10:44 am
You must be very lonely.
Jeff
Jul 1, 2017 at 10:36 am
I certainly agree with the article. Too much hubris in the world today to go back to higher lofts in irons. If your buddy hits a 7 iron and you need to hit a 6, well that’s just emasculating now isn’t it? I originally thought though the article was going to be about lie angles being too upright and not enough emphasis placed on that since you included the left stat. I see so many people I play with that have that issue and then wonder why they pull their shots so often.
CTGolfer
Jul 1, 2017 at 6:08 am
Why is Peak Height and Land angle not part of the “optimizer” in Trackman. What in the Optimizer correlates with peak height and land angle?
Me
Jul 1, 2017 at 6:55 am
When I do my club fitting clients, my trackman 4 has Height and landing angle in my front (top) page of my tiles used.
Recently I fitted one of the younger assistant pros at an exclusive club
When comparing recently the Titliest AP2 vs the Taylormade 770, both quality clubs. Both share the same lofts 33deg. It was clear visually even without the trackman the 770 went higher.
with the track man the 770 peaked higher by 12 feet, went more than 10 yards further (177) a much steeper landing angle. But here is where it got interesting, the 770 consistently was 4700-5500 spin. The ap2 was 6000-7500 spin. Both clubs had the KBS tour FLT 120 g shaft.
There was no question what the right club was based on peak, spin….the added distance was just a bonus.
Hunter Brown
Jul 1, 2017 at 9:08 am
Launch, Spin, and height are all included in the Optimizer. This determines land angle so although it is not expressly in the optimizer it will be a result of what is in the optimizer. You can also look at the ‘side/top’ view to see the trajectory window and optimized shot should travel vs what the trajectory it actually took
Adam
Jun 30, 2017 at 9:28 pm
Gofwrx’ers I agree, BUT we should thankful for all the marketing. 98% of golfers are awful, but love to play and love to hit all their clubs as far as possible. More marketing= more bad golfers spending more on gear and more money at the course, which keeps more golf courses open, more staff employed and better conditions for me. We need more people attracted to the game these days more than ever.
Now I have played the same specs as my original titleist 680’s my entire golf career and have known my exact lofts and lie’s and think its more fun hitting high cut 2,3 irons than jacked 4,5 irons any day. So I think it’s funny…
Thus
Jun 30, 2017 at 3:42 pm
The ball can have a huge affect on Landing angle and peak hieght some times more then the iron, dispersion is what I fit for the most, more front to back, then side to side, then height and spin..
One of the biggest myths is flex, difference between flexes is minimal.
Myron miller
Jun 30, 2017 at 3:19 pm
But almost, if not maybe more important is backspin on the iron. wHen I got fitted for my current iroons, The choice was between two different styles. Both had land angles less than 45 degrees, but the second one had over 3000 rpm more backspin even though its land angle was almost 4 degrees less. I just flat out spun that club way more. And having more backspin sometimes if more important in stopping the ball on the green than the landing angle.
I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen players use a club and chip it about 40 yards onto the green with a land angle of less than 25 degrees but with a ton of backspin and the ball literally bounces once and backs up 2-5 feet. One can play that particular pitch two ways, with a very low landing angle but a ton of spin or a very high land angle and minimal spin. If there is a bunch of wind, then the lower angle is definitely the better shot. Same applies to longer approach shots. With windy conditions, higher land angles will hurt you more times than not.
Land angle certain is important, but spin is easily as important and sometimes even more.
Hunter Brown
Jun 30, 2017 at 3:40 pm
This situation you describe is hard to fathom. 3000 more rpm of spin and 4 degrees less of land angle is almost impossible to happen on a full shot land angle is directly effected by spin. More spin higher=higher land angle
TR1PTIK
Jul 3, 2017 at 10:59 am
Gotta agree with Hunter on this on too. Also, the situations you describe are caused by the actions of the player, not the performance of the club. You can take pretty much any iron or wedge and the two shots you described. To see that much variation in spin on full shots is unlikely unless you’re looking at SGI vs. Player’s clubs.
Well now...
Jun 30, 2017 at 1:07 pm
Kind of the argument the latest try of Hogan irons when loft comes into the argument. The number on the club is all relative and a point of reference in the end – you can call a club with a loft of 25* anything you want, in the end it’s still 25*.
Iutodd
Jun 30, 2017 at 11:32 am
Good article.
I’m hoping to get fit next year for irons – this article is getting saved for the experience. Never thought about landing angle before.
Iutodd
Jun 30, 2017 at 11:44 am
Oh and I’m gaming MX-17s so my lofts are a lot closer to the “2000” lofts. I’m not sure how I’m gonna get a similar style – which is more “game improvement” but get lofts that work for me. The Z545s look similar to my clubs but the lofts are pretty different. I guess I’ll have to see if I’m good enough for the 745s which are much closer to my current lofts.
TR1PTIK
Jun 30, 2017 at 10:08 am
I had a pretty good idea this article would lead to peak height and landing angle. Following closely behind those two metrics IMO would be spin; dispersion next, and then carry distance when trying to fit a set of irons or wedges. For anyone who has yet to see them, these Trackman averages from 2014 should give some good insight about what the irons should be doing… https://blog.trackmangolf.com/trackman-average-tour-stats/
Hunter Brown
Jun 30, 2017 at 11:35 am
Good stuff here and you are exactly right. I will say that unfortunately not everyone can achieve “Tour Averages” because of the lack of speed. It is definitely better for most to look at the LPGA Average stats but understand that averages are exactly that and suitable for everyone
TR1PTIK
Jun 30, 2017 at 1:27 pm
I agree. In terms of landing angle though, either data set will apply.
SoonerSlim
Jun 30, 2017 at 10:05 am
One thing I don’t understand whenever WRX presents these examples is they always use a golfer with much, much more swing speed than the average golfer. How many average golfers have a 6-iron swing speed of 80 mph?? In the mid to high 60s is more accurate!
Hunter Brown
Jun 30, 2017 at 11:32 am
this particular gentleman was pretty average. He is in his mid 50s and about a 12 hdcp. His swing speed is maybe a little on the high end for his demographic but not by much
Grizz01
Jun 30, 2017 at 12:46 pm
I’m 54 and I still play my 1994 Lynx Parrallax irons. I don’t have a clue what my swing speed is but I still hit my 6 iron (normal conditions) 180-185yds. I don’t know what loft it is … but I do know that the PW is 50 degrees straight out of the box.
xjohnx
Jun 30, 2017 at 9:59 am
I really wish the masses would start incorporating more logic such as this to golf marketing. It’s unfortunate that there is only one rule that trumps all else. Seemingly by no coincidence it was most famously said to me once by a regional TM rep, “distance sells golf clubs”.
I can’t imagine anyone with any common sense arguing the message behind this article. The ability to hit your shots closer to the hole is always going to potentially lower your scored more than a few extra yards. I almost feel bad for people who get so caught up in hitting their irons longer. Whether you have 7 irons and 3 wedges, or 6 irons and 4 wedges that all go the same distances, does it matter what number is stamped on the sole?
Chris B
Jun 30, 2017 at 9:14 am
I would still go for iron 2, make them 1 degree weak if need be based on this. There is more to choosing the right set of irons than this data.
It is a shame that what Hogan did dint take off, putting the loft on the club rather than a number. I was looking at a thread the other day on 3 irons, one person commented on how they had made their 4 iron 1 degree strong – to 18 degrees!
Hunter Brown
Jun 30, 2017 at 11:39 am
Chris – you bring up some good points however EQM’s don’t just lower the loft and call it a day they know the irons would not perform if that was the case. Sometimes they account for the lower loft by lowering the cg, lighter shafts, etc. to launch the ball higher. Just because the loft of one club to the next may be different doesn’t necessarily make it a bad thing. I am glad you are thinking the right way though!
Daryl
Jun 30, 2017 at 9:09 am
Out of curiosity, would the 45 degree rule hold for the longer irons?
TR1PTIK
Jun 30, 2017 at 10:10 am
Yes. Follow the link in my other comment to view Trackman data. It is older, but plenty relevant for holding greens.
Hunter Brown
Jun 30, 2017 at 11:37 am
Daryl – good question. If possible yes this would hold true but most people do not have the swing speed in order to accomplish this. Also course conditions and where someone plays needs to be considered.
Jack Nash
Jun 30, 2017 at 8:21 am
Marketing indeed has taken over with the help of Media. GC is always touting how far X Golfer hits his driver. There’s part of the problem.
Scott
Jun 30, 2017 at 9:01 am
I agree Jack. No one should be able to hit 180 yard Wedges and 9 irons. A little truth in advertising would be nice. A 42 degree Pitching Wedge? That is between my 8 and 9 iron.
Lee Shaw
Jun 30, 2017 at 10:43 am
42 deg was my 8 iron in 1974, I hit it pretty good too, but saying that my 9 is now 40 deg and I’m not to shabby with that either.
Grizz01
Jun 30, 2017 at 12:50 pm
I still play with my 1993 Lynx Parrallax irons. I know the PW is 50 degrees. And I remember back then I thought wow! Technology has come along way. My previous clubs from the late 70’s were Wilson 1200’s. And I was suddenly using 1 -2 clubs less with the Lynx.
Turns out not much technology as much as just renaming an old 5 iron a 6 or 7 iron.
Jeremy Thompson
Jul 1, 2017 at 4:17 am
which opens up a market for gap wedges…….when the separation between PW and SW becomes exaggerated.