- Thread starter
- Admin
- #26
Sometimes I wonder if "smaller" is a red herring.
A perfect illustration of this is if Smaller was all people wanted, every iron would be a darker finish, because it definitely shrinks the image to the eye.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Sometimes I wonder if "smaller" is a red herring.
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.
To be fair, something looking good to the eye doesnt mean it will perform better on the course either right?
That makes sense. I'm sure sales don't exactly line up with the opinions and preferences of internet golfers.Genuinely? Probably not much more than we have the last couple of years. Most golfers are not as attracted to smaller as the core golfers are, based on sales year over year.
I have tried to play with many different sets that felt good hitting a few balls one the range, only to gravitate back to my players clubs design.
Mentally I believe (probably incorrectly) that a smaller, players looking club means I will concentrate more on a good swing and finding the middle.
Do you test things outside of your comfort zone in appearance?
The simple answer here for me is no. Ill expand the appearance bandwidth a bit when testing. Sure. But if it doesnt fit my eye for whatever reason i will move right along pretty quickly.
Could you be losing out on performance?
Tough to answer. Maybe, maybe not. If i dont like the look of it, i wont have full confidence in its ability or my ability to hit the shot i want.
Why does smaller attract the core golfer more than technology forward?
Im not sure this is totally accurate. I think some golfers prefer thinner top lines, that doesnt always mean smaller overall packages. If the tech helped me specifically hit it straighter id take a hard look. If it gave up some distance to do so, i might be intrigued. But the curent trend is distance. I dont necessarily need more distance in my own game. I need workability and more precision. Give me that....WITH distance and my eyes open up pretty wide.
I was thinking more along the lines of two clubs, one attractive to the player's eye and the other not, in something that was in line with what fits player's swing. Any extreme can make something seem untenable.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.
By that reasoning yes, but I think the visual change in the woods is different to the irons. Do you feel like you have more of a chance finding the middle with a 460cc vs a smaller driver head?This adds another layer then, right? Why would you choose to not play a smaller driver?
I was thinking more along the lines of two clubs, one attractive to the player's eye and the other not, in something that was in line with what fits player's swing. Any extreme can make something seem untenable.
Im curious some examples here.
ironically, if the top is thinish.....i dont care how thick the sole is. lol. I know that helps in overall forgiveness. But if its too thick on top.....Maybe. Yet I would argue that sole size is one of the most under thought aspects of golf equipment.