Iron Classifications, Help or Hype?

[OldeDude]

So, I just went through the buying process on a new set of irons, researching, testing, fitting, the whole nine yards. I’m not the best golfer around, by a long shot, so I went into this pretty sure I’d be primarily looking at “Game Improvement” irons.

Well, that isn’t exactly the way it worked out, which raises the question, are current iron classifications Help, or Hype? The “industry” has come up with these loose classifications (my interpretations in parenthesis):

• Players Irons (Blades)
• Players Distance Irons (not Blades, but intended for low to mid-handicappers)
• Game Improvement Irons (cavity backs or hollow bodies with a good level of forgiveness)
• Super Game Improvement Irons (maximum forgiveness, big, wide soled, big offset, etc)

My last two sets of irons were “Game Improvement” irons, Taylormade Burner 2.0s, and Srixon Z355s, and I liked both a lot, they worked really well for me. This time around though, I tried a much larger variety of irons, both “Game Improvement” and “Players Distance” models. You know what, there really wasn’t much, if any, difference between the two categories when it came to performance. Personally, I think they have gotten so good at getting forgiveness into these things that the lines between these two categories has just about disappeared, as far as performance is concerned. I honestly think they are now more Marketing terms than anything else.

Make some irons that are cast instead of forged, a little bigger head, a bit wider sole, with a thicker top line, a bit more offset, and call them “Game Improvement Irons”. Target your marketing for these at higher handicappers, with all of those features promising high levels of forgiveness.

Make some forged Cavity Back or Hollow Body irons, maybe a bit smaller head, with a thinner top line, a little less offset, a forgiving sole that isn’t quite as wide, and call them “Players Distance Irons”. Market these to better players, you know you’re too good to bag “Game Improvement Irons”, these are just a step down from “Blades”, but with that little bit of help you need for slightly off-center hits, and more distance.

From my point of view, the categories should help direct you to clubs that fit your game. Honestly though, I think the two middle categories have evolved to such an extent that they are pretty much equal in performance and forgiveness. The only real difference now seems to be the look and feel, with that being marketed to appeal to the different skill levels. I was actually surprised that I hit the "Players Distance Irons" so well, as I had the preconceived notion that they wouldn't be nearly forgiving enough for someone of my ability. I ended up with Mizuno JPX 919 Forged irons, which for the most part are considered "Players Distance Irons", although I think I found one review that called them "Game Improvement Irons". I guess my point is, they can call them what they want, but don't get mentally pigeonholed into a "category", because you might be really surprised if you just try a little of everything.

What do you think?

 

[BigMac]

I agree that the line between "Players Distance Irons" and "Game Improvement" irons is probably the most blurred of all of them. For me, this is where I have to put my trust in a fitter to get me into a good place, but then ultimately rely upon how they look and feel to me. A lot of it is mental, IMO - if you don't feel confident standing over the ball with that club in your hand, it's going to be harder to put that out of your mind and commit to the shot.

I love the Apex 19 irons, even though I don't consider myself a "player". Absolutely love them. But I had better numbers on the launch monitor at my fitting with the Mavrik Standard, and mentally I felt just a little better knowing that I had "game improvement" irons in my hand because that's pretty much where my game is. I'd still love to have a set of Apex 19s to play with and maybe "play into", but as my gamers I was confident that the Mavs were the right decision.

 

[LLIB]

In my limited experience there’s a huge difference. I say that with the caveat that I’m not a very good ball striker. In the past year I’ve had Hogan Edge, Cobra Forged Tecs that I was fit for, Cobra SZ’s, Mizuno JPX900 HM, & Ping G400’s.

The Pings are the most forgiving by a mile. The Hogan’s way ahead of the others in terms of forgiveness but still behind the Pings. I hit the Mizuno’s well but not as well as the other 2. The Cobra’s, they just weren’t for me.

I’ve played 3 rounds with the Pings and had my best 3 rounds of the year and am finally hitting my irons solid. So for my game GI irons are definitely the way to go

 

[Flipit]

Yeah those are not game improvement irons. The Hot Metal is closer to GI. I think to each their own. GI irons never appealed to me, even when I was a 24 HC. I had a hard time swinging them. Actually had a hard time swing anything. I bought Apex 19 because they felt good to swing and I liked the look and performance. Now at a 12 HC I still love them but I’m thinking of blades as a second set.

 

[Tevenor]

At the end of the day, you hit what feels best and what performs best. I think the "classification" is more for manufacturers to help define market segments and product lines more than anything. Are clubs designed to fit into these categories? Yup, I would think so but at the end of the day, its about what performs not what category they are in.

 

[Snickerdog]

Fine line between players distance irons and GI irons now a days. Some of the best looking irons fall into the GI category (Srixon 565/585 series) I played 919 hot metals that fell into to the GI category and did just fine with them.
Play what you are fitted into and what meets your eye.

 

[Junkyard]

If you're like most people who are not members here at THP than the categories start you looking at clubs based on your comfort level and/or perceived skill. Of course, this could lead you to purchasing a set that might not be the best choice for you. But then again you could also chalk that up to the fact that you bought them without seeing how they perform (ie. not fitted)
I suppose that the T200 irons I was fit into fall into the "players distance" category. I commented several times to the fitter that they looked like a blade to me at address. At the end of the day if an iron labelled as a SGI had performed the best for me then that's what I would want to play. As others have stated, I think the line(s) between the categories are being blurred as the technology advances. And I'm okay with that.

 

[OldeDude]

Fine line between players distance irons and GI irons now a days. Some of the best looking irons fall into the GI category (Srixon 565/585 series) I played 919 hot metals that fell into to the GI category and did just fine with them.
Play what you are fitted into and what meets your eye.

Right there is an example of what I'm talking about, that to some degree this is marketing. The Z565 was listed in the 2017 Golf Digest Hot List in the Game Improvement category, the Z585 was listed in the 2019 list as a Players Distance Iron. Like the 919 Forged, most of the reviews I've seen on the Z585 classify it in the Players Distance category. :confused2:
I do agree though that today's "Game Improvement Irons" can be really good looking clubs. A few of note that I hit during my most recent search, the Homna XP1, the Ping G710 (if they weren't black), and the JPX 919 Hot Metal, looked every bit as good as many of the "Players Distance" clubs.

So back to my original point, try them all, the categories seem to be kind of fluid.

 

[ddstanford]

You know way more about all these categories than I did when I got fitted. I just tried a whole bunch of different irons until I found the one which gave me the best results. Wilson Staff was the winner. Sounds like you did the right thing and should have good luck with yours.

 

[blueonblack]

Agreed. Lotta times the lofts are a big difference, with them getting stronger and stronger with the larger MOI heads.
I saw the AP2 replacement (T200 is it?) has a strong loft option too.
I think loft helps make things easier overall, so there is a point of diminishing returns, for sure.

 

[Badger_Golfer]

Id say more hype than help. IMO, a lot of people get too caught up in iron classification and think that if they are a high handicapper they need an SGI iron or if they are a lower handicap they need a player's CB when something else might suit them better than isnt the, "right" iron for them according to handicap.

 

[scott.french3]

I ignore the category label and look for what works best for me. Five handicap playing G700.

 

[Gregman55]

I overlook all iron categories, I’m a mid to high handicapper, I’ve played several different irons, personally I don’t care for the oversized heads and just seem to like the small cavity back irons, I’m now playing the JPX 919 forged irons and like them, don’t always hit the sweet spot but find it really satisfying when I do. I work part time at my local golf store here and have a chance to try different things.

 

[DocTrussell]

I think it is more hype than help. The labels are (in my opinion) aimed at the folder of average knowledge that doesn't do a lot of research to get them started in the direction where they think they should be.

 

[dthrog00]

The golf industry is a tough one. There's a lot of competition, pressure to make money for share holders, and tight regulations by the ruling bodies. The industry works to produce equipment that will work for the various golfer skill levels. They also have to be able to tell a compelling story of why the equipment will help a given golfer. Golfers who are very good stereotypically know what they want and it has to meet an appearance/feel requirement. Golfers who are not very good stereotypically want the most help that is available under the rules of golf.

If you fall in those guidelines then the club segments established will likely work for you. People's opinions are all over the map though. You have low handicaps who want maximum help, high handicaps who want to use what Tiger uses, and everything in between.

I think this is a "Your Mile May Vary" type of question based off the golfer's skill and their likes/dislikes.

Dave

 

[Junkyard]

You know way more about all these categories than I did when I got fitted. I just tried a whole bunch of different irons until I found the one which gave me the best results. Wilson Staff was the winner. Sounds like you did the right thing and should have good luck with yours.

I think this is to the point that @OldeDude was getting at with his question. You did what is promoted every day on the forums - disregarded marketing and made a purchase based strictly on performance. That qualifies as the correct answer.