Vanity With Your Clubs?

[Nappy]

I want to say that as I've gotten older I've started to care less and less about looks, but that's probably not the case. I think we all want to believe we're a tour player and if more of us just took our medicine and played what was best for us - we'd ultimately enjoy the game a helluva lot more.

 

[jdtox]

You know the more I think about this its funny...the sole of the club being too big bothers me more than the topline...yeah I said it

 

[mulegolf]

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.

I agree with that. I remember watching a series of seven tapes by Ken Venturi. One of his items that he accented was exactly that. You must like what you are looking at when you stand over a club in order to get the best out of that club. If you don't like the looks of a club you will never hit it as well as you should. He said that he could give a person two different sets of clubs. One was perfect for him but not so perfect in looks and the other was not quite as good in being matched up to the golfer but the golfer loved the look of the club. I most cases the golfer would hit the set he liked the looks of better than the set that was matched to him in all other ways. When I was in the business of custom clubmaking, I always determined what the customer needed and then picked out two or three clubeads that met those needs. I then asked the customer which of those they liked the looks of best. In most cases, that's the set that I built for them. I never had a complaint on a set that I built in the 30 years that I was in business.

 

[mpeterson]

You know the more I think about this its funny...the sole of the club being too big bothers me more than the topline...yeah I said it

That makes sense though, right? That actually has more of a role in the actual contact with the ball.

 

[jdtox]

That makes sense though, right? That actually has more of a role in the actual contact with the ball.

To me it does but to many you don't see the sole at address so its not as big of a deal as the topline. Take the Cobra F9/SZ 4i I love that club, its got some junk in the trunk but it doesn't bother me because I use it as a tee club mainly. I've only hit it off the turf a handful of times and the results have been mixed. To me a thinner sole cuts through the turf easier which is what I'm looking for.

 

[Snickerdog]

I am probably missing out on tech/forgiveness because if it doesn't look good to my eye I won't try it. Good example would have been the Mavrik Max irons, fitter had me try it, took one swing and handed it back because of to much offset. It probably would have been a good iron for me.

 

[orchard53]

One item not mentioned is how they play on the course. Some of the larger irons I tried hit well of mats and good lies in the fairways. But not so well where grass is spotty or the bermuda is raggedy. So I'd play a less good looking iron if it played well on the course. I tend to get to find all the varieties of possible lies.

 

[golfinnut]

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.

Probably why I don't carry hybrids Too much behind it for only a 3 or 4 iron distance.

 

[xThor]

I'll add on, if something looks awful to me, I absolutely will not try it out on my own. Someone would have to hand me the club to take a swing, even then i'll have an icky feeling. Example: PXG clubs. While they may look fine at address, I would not be able to stand them in the bag, looking full of bullet holes as if I just brought them from the shooting range instead of the driving range. They might actually drive me to using iron covers, and that's a dark hole I really don't want to fall into.

 

[donny475]

now as far as vanity for my clubs, no, I have lead tape on the back of them, so to stay pretty? nope. they are tools, not rings and watches

 

[PKorf]

The lighting is completely different to say which is smaller, although the darker will always appear that way.
With that said, both of those are very thin top line clubs.

thats true. but thats my point i guess.

one of them is a Titleist T100 (right) and the other is a Mizuno MP20 mb. (left). when i tested them in hand i actuall thhought and felt the T100s had a thinner topline eventhough the Mizzys were smaller overall. Not a great example i guess. but trying to explain my thoughts above.

Obviously if youre comparing within brand models this might not be the case. But comparing different oems and very similar categories (GI vs Super GI, Micro cavity vs Blade). I think you can find instances where one could appear thinner on top but still be slightly bigger overall.

 

[Canadan]

sometimes I wonder if I have ENOUGH vanity in my clubs.

Then I hit the CBX2 wedges and stop being an internet golfer again.

 

[JB]

Probably why I don't carry hybrids Too much behind it for only a 3 or 4 iron distance.

How do you hit FW woods then?

thats true. but thats my point i guess.

one of them is a Titleist T100 (right) and the other is a Mizuno MP20 mb. (left). when i tested them in hand i actuall thhought and felt the T100s had a thinner topline eventhough the Mizzys were smaller overall. Not a great example i guess. but trying to explain my thoughts above.

Obviously if youre comparing within brand models this might not be the case. But comparing different oems and very similar categories (GI vs Super GI, Micro cavity vs Blade). I think you can find instances where one could appear thinner on top but still be slightly bigger overall.

I would counter that and say that you are comparing very similar from the vanity perspective than two different types of things.

sometimes I wonder if I have ENOUGH vanity in my clubs.

Then I hit the CBX2 wedges and stop being an internet golfer again.

That video that I watched again this morning on a live stream with a tech guy, really got me thinking about this again.
Compounded with the conversation with @JDax yesterday

 

[DataDude]

I am pretty flexible with looks outside of a lot of offset. It would take me a while to get used to that. Other than that I don't care what clubs look like unless I get a choice in colors like wedges often have.

 

[golfinnut]

How do you hit FW woods then?

It's a distance thing I guess. If I know I'm laying up on a par 5 or hitting it off the tee for position, I have no problem looking down & hitting a 3 wood. But If I only have to hit it 4 iron distance, I will always ease up on the shot because I think there is more club there with a thick tip line & back to it. I know .... it's all psychological in my head. I should probably see a golf psychiatrist ... it might help my game.

 

[MarMill]

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

I agree with that too. I am trying to do the "get the most forgiving club I can look at" I really liked my JPX 919 tours esthetically but I need more forgiveness on miss hits. I think a lot of people are able to make things look good from address now but have loads more forgiveness. I am really excited about the new products coming out this year. The Srixon ZX5 and ZX7 really interest me from a combo set and they have exactly the same top line. For some reason for me top line and offset are things I look at in a a golf club. Be it good or bad.

 

[PKorf]

I would counter that and say that you are comparing very similar from the vanity perspective than two different types of things.
@JDax yesterday

I understand your point. Although not sure i totally agree. Similar yes but they are different and one most definitely provides more forgiveness than the other. With that said, you are correct in that its not even a comparison to discuss if we are talking about GI irons vs the other two. But, when you are finding what fits you best im fairly certain youd agree that this type of comparison matters when fitting a club to an individual.

 

[Joshnoble01]

I am fine playing a more GI club. I am not going to pick a SGI. But I also don't need a tiny blade. I currently playing an X2 Hot and it definitely has a little chunk to it. But it's not huge.

When I choose my next iron I will use the same thought process. Even more so. It has to be the best club for my game. I want something I can grow into but I am not going to go out and get old school blades because they are the best looking.

But I definitely will check the looks box in my choice.

 

[JB]

I understand your point. Although not sure i totally agree. Similar yes but they are different and one most definitely provides more forgiveness than the other. With that said, you are correct in that its not even a comparison to discuss if we are talking about GI irons vs the other two. But, when you are finding what fits you best im fairly certain youd agree that this type of comparison matters when fitting a club to an individual.

To some extent, although both irons are very compact and sole sizes similar.
That goes back to the original questions about smaller being desired...to the core golfer, regardless if it is the best for them or not.

 

[Muchmore]

So this is a really interesting thing to think about for me. Specifically related to my handedness and what my options are for where I live as well. While my course has options for LH, it's usually not a very robust selection so I either have to go with what they have or buy blind. I could also drive three and a half hours to some "bigger" areas and test there but it's never a guarantee they have LH stock either.

Buying my Forged Tecs this year was hugely based on how much I loved the look of them. Don't get me wrong, I did my research and read everything I could about them to see if they would be a fit for my game. Reading up on those and the Recoil shafts last year is actually how I found THP But back to my point of options for me are, at times, very limited if I want to try in hand. So a lot of my decision is based on aesthetic and how much I'd enjoy looking at the clubs in my bag and while I play.

Then there are options for me that I love the look of, Cobra King Tour MIM irons, that I don't even have the option of in the first place. I'm sure my views would change if I had easy access to hit whatever club I wanted and truly test things but that's just not in the cards for LH players where I live. So my club vanity is real. I do take looks of the clubs in to consideration when I'm buying because sometimes that's the only thing I can "test" when I have the limited options I do.

 

[PKorf]

To some extent, although both irons are very compact and sole sizes similar.
That goes back to the original questions about smaller being desired...to the core golfer, regardless if it is the best for them or not.

haha well thats why im so weird. I chose the Mizuno. Smaller package and slightly thicker perceived top line. Not sure where that puts me in the vanity catagory. Probably something like a unicorn.

 

[Tevenor]

Looks, feel, performance, cost. They all play a role in the decision making process. In what proportions is really up to the individual.

For me, looks are the first thing I am drawn to. If this is something I am going to stare at for 18 holes a round, 50 rounds a year, not including practice swings in my office and driving range time, I better like how it looks. But it doesn't have to be the best looking iron for me to appreciate it visually.

Next is performance and feel. To me these are somewhat tied together. THey have to perform to a certain expectation and they have to feel a way that I will enjoy hitting them regularly.

I will give up some level of aesthetics for a better performing club and will give up a bit of performance if it means much better aesthetics.

Cost is the final piece. That may trump all. Like my desire to purchase P7-TW irons. So pretty. So much feels. So good off the center of the face. So much money and so not foregiving.

 

[Duffer Waldorf]

I've played something that looks 'better' to my eye, and sucked doing it.

Give me what works better.

 

[JB]

haha well thats why im so weird. I chose the Mizuno. Smaller package and slightly thicker perceived top line. Not sure where that puts me in the vanity catagory. Probably something like a unicorn.

We have played together, I know you have a game that can hit most, but you are not one that moves the ball around flight wise. So the next logical question is if you can look at the larger clubs in your long irons, why go to something much less than in the shorter ones?

 

[Stemmy66]

As long as the clubs don't look like shovels I'm pretty much open. I would say my visual bias really applies more to the traditional style irons... I can't wrap my head around the visual of say HB Launcher irons, but pretty much anything else, thick top line, long blade, etc., wouldn't bother me for the most part.