Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

The Wedge Guy: In defense of blade irons

Published

on

I ran across an article this past weekend from March of 2020, which identified the irons used by the top ten players in greens in regulation on the PGA Tour (at the time). What I have always found interesting and enlightening is that the best players in the world overwhelmingly choose to play mostly traditional forged blade irons, while it is estimated less than two percent of recreational players choose them.

So, do these elite players choose blades because they are the best players in the world—or could it possibly be that they are the best players partly because they choose blade irons? I believe it is both. Playing blades somewhat “guides” you to more precise ball-striking because of the improved feedback–you can feel the slightest of mis-hits so you always know how you’re doing. But, blade irons also allow you to shape shots and be more precise in your distance control–in other words, they allow you to optimize your skills because of their design.

I’ve long believed that many more players could benefit from blades than are willing to play them–especially in the higher lofts. I’ll qualify that statement by sharing that I’ve seen robotic testing prove that the higher the loft of the club, the less perimeter weighting or a cavity back design will improve ball flight performance and forgiveness. In fact, the nod to trajectory consistency and distance control may well go to the blade design in the higher lofts.

While technology has allowed all iron designs to be better today than ever before, perimeter weighting in irons allows many more visual variations than are possible with a traditional one-piece forged design. Take a look at today’s offerings from major brands in the blade category and you’ll see striking similarities to blades from past decades. But in the “game improvement” categories, you’ll see a vast variety of cosmetic looks, though many of those design intricacies are no more than that and don’t affect performance all that much. This is a competitive industry and the big brands need to be able to repeatedly deliver something that looks different from the previous model so they can claim to have created something better.

But let me get back to the notion that blade-style irons can be “defended” for many more golfers than the number that choose to game that kind of design.

As a club designer, I’ve long admitted that there is only so much I can do for you by the way a club is designed. For example, I cannot help the shot hit fat. Or the one that is thinned/bladed. I can’t correct an over-the-top move through impact, a shut-down face angle or a face delivered to the ball laid wide open. I cannot affect your swing path nor your thought processes before you even hit the shot.

No, as a club designer, I cannot help anything but the quality of impact if, and only if, the ball is contacted somewhere reasonably close to the desired impact area of the face, and the face is delivered pretty square to the intended line.

Understand that with any golf club, there is only one true “sweet spot”–the exact pinpoint where the transfer of clubhead speed to ball speed is optimized. And, with any club, impact efficiency or “smash factor” begins to be compromised as impact moves away from that tiny pinpoint location. What perimeter weighting aspires to do is to mitigate that energy loss. While there is no question that a half-inch miss with a cavity-back 7-iron will likely go longer than the same miss with a forged blade 7-iron, the actual difference is smaller than you might believe.

I will share that the difference between that miss with those two different styles of irons is increasingly larger as the loft decreases. In other words, the difference you’ll experience with a quarter-inch miss with a 40-degree 9-iron is less than you will see with a 30-degree 6- or 7-iron. But there is another anomaly of your actual misses of which you should be aware.

For most golfers I’ve measured, misses with longer irons tend to range more from heel to toe, and with shorter irons those misses tend to range from low to high in the face. Because of the more consistent blade thickness from top to bottom, true blade-style short irons quite often deliver more consistent distance and ball flight than their perimeter-weighted counterparts, both with real golfers and on robotic testing.

Having written weekly posts as The Wedge Guy for nearly 20 years, I have addressed this subject numerous times, and again offer the following challenge to conduct your own experiments. Talk to one of your golf professionals or a buddy who plays pretty traditional forged blade irons and ask to borrow their 8, 9 and PW for a few rounds. Even though the shafts might be stiffer and heavier than you are used to playing, I think you will still be surprised at how good your shotmaking consistency is with those, as opposed to the cavity back irons that you’ve been gaming.

I’ll close today’s post by also asking a question you probably haven’t pondered at all: If you think you are not “good enough” to play a traditional forged blade iron favored by the world’s best players, why would you think you can meet your expectations with the same wedges they play? Robotic testing has continually proven to me that even modern “tour design” wedges are much less forgiving of mis-hits than the most traditional forged blade 9-iron or pitching wedge.

In my 40 years in this industry, it is one of those things that make me go “hmm…”

Terry Koehler is a fourth generation Texan and a graduate of Texas A&M University. Over his 40-year career in the golf industry, he has created over 100 putter designs, sets of irons and drivers, and in 2014, he put together the team that reintroduced the Ben Hogan brand to the golf equipment industry. Since the early 2000s, Terry has been a prolific writer, sharing his knowledge as “The Wedge Guy”.   But his most compelling work is in the wedge category. Since he first patented his “Koehler Sole” in the early 1990s, he has been challenging “conventional wisdom” reflected in ‘tour design’ wedges. The performance of his wedge designs have stimulated other companies to move slightly more mass toward the top of the blade in their wedges, but none approach the dramatic design of his Edison Forged wedges, which have been robotically proven to significantly raise the bar for wedge performance. Terry serves as Chairman and Director of Innovation for Edison Golf – check it out at www.EdisonWedges.com.

20 Comments

20 Comments

  1. Donn Rutkoff

    Mar 10, 2021 at 7:50 pm

    Ain’t nothing in the world like Mizuno GFF wedges. I’m a hi handicap, now 66 yrs old, but I rarely miss hitting the green with a 52 degree killer Mizuno.

    Now here’s a question. I got fitted for 8-9-W. Looking to replace Nike Vapor Fly irons up top. Very nice irons but I wanted more precision, narrower sole. I hoped the fitter would put me into Mizunos but he said I did best with Ping I 500. So I got ’em and I like them a lot. They have a forged face. Question is how much of the overall club is forged and do any of y’all think they give the same feedback as a 100% forged Mizuno? I also have an old Mizuno Fli-hi GFF 24 degree hybrid, nice feel, and went to add an 18 deg. But no GFF. I got a new Mizuno MMC 18. Feels very similar to the GFF 24 deg. Comments???

  2. Sean Foster-Nolan

    Feb 19, 2021 at 9:20 am

    I always thought the concept was a bit overrated, and the “mystique” surrounding blades a bit overblown.

  3. MJD

    Feb 19, 2021 at 9:01 am

    The feel, feedback and flight of a decent bladed iron vs a cavity iron is like comparing The Beatles to Milli Vanilli!

    Once you play bladed irons you NEVER go back for reasons of forgiveness or playbility. As Terry says, a bad swing will end up with a bad shot; doesn’t matter what you play…just embrace it.

  4. Delbert

    Feb 18, 2021 at 4:11 pm

    The PGA and LPGA tours should go to a standard club and ball spec like major league baseball. Then we would see who has the game. Interesting that we don’t see Vokey introducing a cavity back wedge. Great article.

  5. Ron Snyder

    Feb 18, 2021 at 11:53 am

    Years ago a monthly golf mag published an article on the results of they acquired after observing several strikes with a cavity back and a blade iron. Using Iron Byron set up to repeat strikes high toe, low heel and point of percussion. The blade was more accurate (20-30%) on heel toe strikes! CG strikes were equal as expected. I don’t remember the loft used but either 5 or 7 iron. Of the robot offered no feedback but had it been a cool autumn day it would have said ouch on those toe hits. Producing positive accurate feedback which is what thousands of golf facilitators look for. Now that pros are hitting thousand mile 8 irons(yipper I’m jealous) and their 8 irons are like my old Wilson staff 5 iron, there iirons are more consistent. Seems to me, merely observed, that most consistent winners are blade players. Feedback is so important for players, golfers not so much. Looks good feels good so must be good for golfers is a necessity. Here’s to blades and I like the fact that designers are bringing back the design of the Sting blades of long ago (tungsten can work wonders put in the right place)
    Thx for the great articles

  6. Bob Pegram

    Feb 18, 2021 at 4:18 am

    Terry’s explanation makes sense. I have RAZR X Forged irons (2011) which are cavity back one piece forged. The long and middle irons are very easy to hit and get up in the air, but I have to make sure I hit the short irons low on the face or they come up short. Now I understand why.

  7. Kourt

    Feb 18, 2021 at 12:17 am

    Correction, a lot of the best male players in the world choose blade irons, but not all. But most of the LPGA players choose cavity irons. I’d argue that most amateur golfers resemble the swing speed of an lpga player not a pga player. An interesting question is why do most of the lpga choose to not play blades?

  8. Lefthack

    Feb 17, 2021 at 6:53 pm

    My combo irons are blades from 8 to PW. I could likely play a full set, but my game wouldn’t be as pretty and I would have to work harder.

    I would love to rock a set of Nike VR Pro blades, those look awesome.

    • delbert

      Feb 18, 2021 at 4:08 pm

      I picked up a used set of VRII Pro blades a few years ago for $129. They were barely used and very easy to hit. The combo sets are great, too.

  9. Theoxii

    Feb 17, 2021 at 6:34 pm

    I am a recovering club junkie. I have 6 sets ranging from exotics game improvement, TM 790s, maxfli A10 combos to Reid Lockhart blades. Not a whole lot of difference in scoring average. I’ve shot at least 78 with each set; I’ve also been on the wrong side of 90 with each. I found that your course management adjusts to your capability with the set ie choking up on a fairway or hybrid rather than a full 3/4/5 blade. From 7i up- 165yds in I dont have a problem with blades.

    • Terry Koehler

      Feb 17, 2021 at 10:54 pm

      I gamed the Reid Lockhart RL Blades for 20 years, until I designed the Ben Hogan FT. Worth 15s, which I have had in the bag since the first prototype set in 2014. That said, I always thought the RL blades were close to the ultimate blade — precision + forgiveness of the toe miss, which is the most penalizing on blades.
      Have to admit I’ve been toying with a reprise of that RL Blade with some updating . . . Hmmmmmm, maybe there is an “ultimate” blade in Edison’s future . . . .

      • G

        Feb 18, 2021 at 4:49 am

        Hi Terry,
        The RL blades are a great looking iron.
        I used them for years and would be more than willing to try a newer version of them.
        Looks like you’ve got something to do in 2021?

      • Frank Walley

        Feb 20, 2021 at 4:51 pm

        I’d love to see the Edison update to the RL.

  10. SV677

    Feb 17, 2021 at 4:13 pm

    I started with blades because that was all that was available. I have a blade to practice with and find that after just a few swings I find the sweet spot more consistently. I would think ideally a split set might be the answer. The problem would be synching lofts. With today’s stronger lofts at around a 6 or 7 iron you would end up with two of the “same” clubs to keep consistent gapping.

  11. MarkM

    Feb 17, 2021 at 4:07 pm

    Terry, you have a very good way of frequently hitting the nail on the head. I’ve always thought “forgiveness” in irons was overrated and agree with your stance. I still want a 460 driver though so I can bash it as hard as possible and still find the course though.

    I’ve always preferred the look of a blade at address. Like Mr. Walsh, it’s probably because I grew up playing them. At different times in my golfing life I’ve gone to “more forgiving” irons and eventually made my way back to blades.
    I’m at that crossroads again. After playing a variety of cavity backs over the past 9 years I am back to playing a blade – the Honma Rose-Proto MBs, superb! This was after I experimented with a set of Hogan Grind blades after club season was over. In 3 months the ball striking improved enough with my irons to make my playing partners wonder if they were legal or not when I kept taking their money 🙂 As other say, to each his own but I’m pretty sure I’ll be playing blades for as long as I can get the ball in the air.
    Current hcp 7.0

  12. Robert Healey

    Feb 17, 2021 at 2:41 pm

    In an industry obsessing about COR,MOI and performance data lets not forget the most important metric of all, enjoyment.! Play what you like the look of, sound and feel of. For 99% or recreational gofers it doesn’t really matter if its a blade, game improvement or a combination.
    Go and enjoy whatever kit you have chosen.

  13. B_of_H

    Feb 17, 2021 at 12:43 pm

    Thank you. I have always thought that from 7 iron down blades are actually more accurate for me as I tend to miss a little high in the face at times and perhaps a bit on the heel. i’ve done a bunch of 7 iron fittings and blades had the most consistent distance and tightest dispersion each time.

  14. Michael Welsh

    Feb 17, 2021 at 12:35 pm

    I have found that my scores with blade irons are the same or better as cavity backs. Could be because I learned to play with blades nearly 60 years ago because that was my only option. Could be that they just plain look better to my eye because of that old historical tie. Or it could be because I get sloppy with a cavity back relying on that supposed forgiveness. So at this point I simply select a blade because it makes me happy. It makes me think about all the things I need to do to hit a pure shot, and when I don’t I only blame myself. Handicap 9.

    • Bob Jones

      Feb 19, 2021 at 12:40 pm

      I was going to write a response, but I don’t have to. You just wrote it for me. Every word, and I mean EVERY WORD, is my story, too.

    • EDWARD JOHNSON

      Feb 19, 2021 at 4:55 pm

      Exactly!

Leave a 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