Vanity With Your Clubs?

[JB]

I think we all desire to like equipment we like the look of. Be it any part of the bag of tools we are playing.

Recently I had a conversation with someone about Cobra One Length clubs and they got a chance to test a set out. Played ridiculously well and then we got to talking about going that way and what set and I asked would you go with this set (redacted right now) or Forged TEC and the answer was the latter, because of the look.

That answer resonating with me, because I think it is across the board, but more in line with the core golfer (THPer) than it is as the norm.

Do you test things outside of your comfort zone in appearance? Could you be losing out on performance? Why does smaller attract the core golfer more than technology forward? These are all questions I ponder and wanted to start a thread to serve more as a conversation than just a quick drive by Q&A.

 

[Jman]

Im one who believes we don’t have to sacrifice looks for performance anymore. There’s something out there that checks all the boxes for each person.

For me, if I don’t like the look, I’m not comfortable over the ball, and if I’m not comfortable then consistency and confidence will never fill be there. I’ve seen it play out time and again for me personally.

I can have fun testing a set out of my comfort zone, but testing and gaming have two different places for me.

 

[Bernoulli]

I played this season with T-Rails 5iron through Gap Wedge. I think that answers your question. They were originally way out of my comfort zone in appearance. But, as the year went on I tended to notice the shape of the irons less and less. And would assume the clubs and their ability to launch the ball relatively high and straight off most swings had something to do with my mind's ability not to focus on the looks of the irons.

 

[mpeterson]

I think some of it might be what you grew up/started playing. Back in the day, all we had was what would be referred to as smaller headed irons. So moving to a more tech-forward look is a bigger step.

I've got a bit of an internal dialogue going on with this very thing these days. I went and did a fitting, and got fit into the Titleist T300 irons. I think, moreso than a lot of the irons out there, they do the best job of keeping the profile I like looking at while just being a bit bigger than normal - and they flow into the wedges better than any GI iron I've used. Still, I don't love how they look, if that makes any sense. I understand this is very stupid, but it's a thing. Might be a bit of brand preference too.

Part of it might just be an itch to tinker now that it's getting cold - I'm actually in the middle of starting a thread on this - irons are my favorite club to muck around with. But I'm not sure if the tinkering there is productive, based on performance .

 

[jdtox]

It has to look good and perform. I will test things that don't look perfect to my eye but ultimately they don't make the bag.

 

[ddstanford]

Appearance doesn't enter into the equation for me.

 

[JB]

I've got a bit of an internal dialogue going on with this very thing these days. I went and did a fitting, and got fit into the Titleist T300 irons. I think, moreso than a lot of the irons out there, they do the best job of keeping the profile I like looking at while just being a bit bigger than normal - and they flow into the wedges better than any GI iron I've used. Still, I don't love how they look, if that makes any sense. I understand this is very stupid, but it's a thing. Might be a bit of brand preference too.

I think that is the million dollar question, right? Why does small look better in an iron? Obviously personal preferences are there and perhaps some of it is what we grew up on. You hear things like top line, etc and then they pull out a utility club and it has a much larger one, but ha no bearing on the mental mindset evidently.

 

[Hoosiermess]

Relative to your conversation, as a OL player the F9's are a little too chunky for my eye, specifically in the 4 and 5 irons. The back shows a little too much and no matter how often I tell myself "it's just kind of a hybrid" my eye is drawn to the back of the club. The F7's weren't as bad in that regard and worked pretty well for me. I do hit the F9's a bit longer and have started to get used to them but it's not easy to focus on the ball when the back of the club pulls your eye in.

Outside of the junk in the trunk they aren't bad looking clubs, especially 6,7-GW. I think for me part of it is that I've always seen better players playing with smaller clubs and I want to be a better player. I guess it bothers me less now that I'm making better contact and starting to see results.

I've tried a few clubs outside of what I normally would, with mixed results, and hope that I'll continue to lean towards what works vs pretty and shiny....Oh look! Forged Tecs over there...

 

[MarMill]

Im one who believes we don’t have to sacrifice looks for performance anymore. There’s something out there that checks all the boxes for each person.

For me, if I don’t like the look, I’m not comfortable over the ball, and if I’m not comfortable then consistency and confidence will never fill be there. I’ve seen it play out time and again for me personally.

I can have fun testing a set out of my comfort zone, but testing and gaming have two different places for me.

This... Even if something performs better during testing doesn't mean it will perform well on course if you are not comfortable with it. I don't know if one would eventually get used to or it or go in a different direction.

 

[Parrot]

Yes, I do and maybe.

I hit the Ping driver about as well as I did the MavSZ but didn't like the look of it. It looked unfinished.

I almost went with the Speedzone irons which, if I'm being honest, are probably a better fit for my game than the FTs. They looked too chunky, too something to my eye. And I thought I wanted something more player looking.

 

[OITW]

I think we all desire to like equipment we like the look of. Be it any part of the bag of tools we are playing.

Recently I had a conversation with someone about Cobra One Length clubs and they got a chance to test a set out. Played ridiculously well and then we got to talking about going that way and what set and I asked would you go with this set (redacted right now) or Forged TEC and the answer was the latter, because of the look.

That answer resonating with me, because I think it is across the board, but more in line with the core golfer (THPer) than it is as the norm.

Do you test things outside of your comfort zone in appearance? Could you be losing out on performance? Why does smaller attract the core golfer more than technology forward? These are all questions I ponder and wanted to start a thread to serve more as a conversation than just a quick drive by Q&A.

What is @JDax for $1,000

Do you test things outside of your comfort zone in appearance? Yes! I tested all three sets of hybrid irons earlier this year and last year and it was eye opening, I definitely think I would have been able to game two of them for a full season.

Could you be losing out on performance? Double edged sword though, in that I don't think consumers should make sleep on something visually unappealing, but I think with technology and manufacturing where it's at now, companies shouldn't make ugly equipment

Why does smaller attract the core golfer more than technology forward? This is a great question, I don't have a good answer, maybe it's less chatter in a bag, possibly lighter weight in the bag, they don't see a tour pro playing hybrid irons (OL is different animal and you see people flocking to Cobra based on the success of BAD) Maybe companies need to do a better job of communicating gains with said technology and combating the dreaded "marketing speak." I think with the tech it goes hand in hand with fittings, people used to not get fit, but now the focus is get fit and get more distance and accuracy.

 

[McLovin]

i've kind of done this, and although logically it makes no sense, emotionally i always gravitate back toward a smaller iron. i'm not one who thinks a smaller iron makes me concentrate more and play better, or the smaller iron is more consistent. it's just an emotional attachment, and yes a vanity/ego thing. i like the way a small player's iron looks in the bag. shooting low scores is fun, but that's not the only thing fun about golf. loving your clubs is part of the appeal, so if that love isn't there i totally get changing to something you like better even if it means you play worse. the only rational explanation i can come up with is we aren't playing golf to put food on the table; we're playing golf to unwind and take a break from the stress of life. because of that, lower scores don't have to be the end all for maximizing enjoyment.

 

[JB]

This... Even if something performs better during testing doesn't mean it will perform well on course if you are not comfortable with it. I don't know if one would eventually get used to or it or go in a different direction.

To be fair, something looking good to the eye doesnt mean it will perform better on the course either right?

 

[Parrot]

To be fair, something looking good to the eye doesnt mean it will perform better on the course either right?

It doesn't but if you have a comfort with what you see, isn't there an unavoidable inner sense of confidence, to some degree? How much does that contribute to performance? I believe it does but can't quantify it. I do know if I don't like the look of something that I don't feel as good with the club as something I do like the look of.

 

[#troy]

Looks are near the bottom of qualities I look for in clubs, but there are some steadfast opinions I have and avoid those clubs entirely.
Color for the most part, loud (color) driver heads are a no go. Think Cobra AmpCell orange or blue, no way would I game those, but the white or grey(whatever it was) yea sure I would try that.

Irons, I want to be good enough to play payer irons, I have a set of wilson blades I used to play decent with, but moved on to a beefier set to help consistency.

The club champion putter, I ended up with one I would have never considered based on looks, but won out in performance. #orderplaced

 

[dacatalyst41]

I definitely want both performance and aesthetic appeal. For some reason, smaller clubs tend to give me a bit more confidence in getting through the ball square. Some of that might be based on the fact that your GI and SGI clubs tend to have a bit more offset and for someone who's miss is left, that scary. I also think the better players clubs are designed with a more simplistic look and that appeals to a lot of golfers. Nowadays, we don't have to sacrifice tech to go into a slightly smaller package and that's where the sweet spot is for me.

 

[JB]

It doesn't but if you have a comfort with what you see, isn't there an unavoidable inner sense of confidence, to some degree? How much does that contribute to performance? I believe it does but can't quantify it. I do know if I don't like the look of something that I don't feel as good with the club as something I do like the look of.

Perhaps. Enough to overcome? I'm not sure I would agree with that.
To use an example. Take a low spin driver head and a high spin driver head. One looks great and the other looks like a Nike Sumo. Having more confidence will not change the high or low spin dynamic of the club head. And yes, that is an extreme example, but one that I thought would illustrate my point.

 

[mpeterson]

I think that is the million dollar question, right? Why does small look better in an iron? Obviously personal preferences are there and perhaps some of it is what we grew up on. You hear things like top line, etc and then they pull out a utility club and it has a much larger one, but ha no bearing on the mental mindset evidently.

Sometimes I wonder if "smaller" is a red herring. A lot of times the bigger irons come with a lot of offset, or a super chunky top line, or the back of the iron visible at address (though you do mention utilities, which very much have at least the latter). I think the AP1/T300 are nice in that they kind of remind me of my old 845s - they're just a midsized iron, for the most part.

Other clubs in the same vein that come to mind are the Bridgestone DPC/DPF and the Epic Forged. Crazy lofts aside on the epic forged, just a slightly larger iron with some forgiveness, with good looks. The Honma Beres too! Those are a fantastic profile for an SGI iron.

 

[tmarin802]

Im one who believes we don’t have to sacrifice looks for performance anymore. There’s something out there that checks all the boxes for each person.

For me, if I don’t like the look, I’m not comfortable over the ball, and if I’m not comfortable then consistency and confidence will never fill be there. I’ve seen it play out time and again for me personally.

I can have fun testing a set out of my comfort zone, but testing and gaming have two different places for me.

Couldn't agree with you more Jman! Well said

 

[Par5zN2]

Looks are definitely important to me. However, I've always been open to trying clubs that don't look appealing to me, and if I hit them well I'll play them. For example, years ago I didn't care for the Ping ISI look but I played them for over a year.

 

[Chef23]

I think that is the million dollar question, right? Why does small look better in an iron? Obviously personal preferences are there and perhaps some of it is what we grew up on. You hear things like top line, etc and then they pull out a utility club and it has a much larger one, but ha no bearing on the mental mindset evidently.

And why does a small iron look better when everyone plays big drivers.

Regarding your original question the one thing that I think is intriguing are the one length irons. I am unlikely to try them short term as I just bought new irons this year and don’t want to get a divorce. I would be very interested in trying them though.

 

[JB]

I definitely want both performance and aesthetic appeal. For some reason, smaller clubs tend to give me a bit more confidence in getting through the ball square. Some of that might be based on the fact that your GI and SGI clubs tend to have a bit more offset and for someone who's miss is left, that scary. I also think the better players clubs are designed with a more simplistic look and that appeals to a lot of golfers. Nowadays, we don't have to sacrifice tech to go into a slightly smaller package and that's where the sweet spot is for me.

I think some companies have done an amazing job with smaller clubs. With that said, mass does give more room for weight adjustment and other things. See driver heads as an example.

 

[mikeg_74]

I think we all desire to like equipment we like the look of. Be it any part of the bag of tools we are playing.

Recently I had a conversation with someone about Cobra One Length clubs and they got a chance to test a set out. Played ridiculously well and then we got to talking about going that way and what set and I asked would you go with this set (redacted right now) or Forged TEC and the answer was the latter, because of the look.

That answer resonating with me, because I think it is across the board, but more in line with the core golfer (THPer) than it is as the norm.

Do you test things outside of your comfort zone in appearance? Could you be losing out on performance? Why does smaller attract the core golfer more than technology forward? These are all questions I ponder and wanted to start a thread to serve more as a conversation than just a quick drive by Q&A.

I do test outside my comfort zone and I think it boils down to choices (good or bad) for the golfer. With so many out there, I don't think you need to sacrifice looks and at the same time sacrifice forgiveness or leave technology on the table. I do think core golfers (THPers) are more willing to test different things, but ultimately come back to what they are comfortable with and not so much for vanity. I am sure some vanity exists, but I think we are deep in the weeds with tech story that it becomes paralysis by analysis at times.

In the end I am sure many are losing out performance over stubbornness or comfort level is present, but if you are having fun, why not play what you like looking at.

 

[Par5zN2]

@JB I chuckled when I read your post. I'm still considering OL irons, however, I'm only excited about giving the Forged TEC irons a try. Not that I wouldn't try the others but because of the look, I'm not excited about trying the others.

 

[dacatalyst41]

I think some companies have done an amazing job with smaller clubs. With that said, mass does give more room for weight adjustment and other things. See driver heads as an example.

Do you think we'll see more GI/SGI clubs that have shape of better players irons, but with an overall larger footprint? I feel like that's what Ping was attempting to do with the G500 and G700 hollow body irons.