Sitting in the dentist’s office, waiting to start a root canal, I picked up a year-old golf magazine. It featured multipage review of 39 different sets of new and improved (for 2013) irons. Leafing through the pages was no more painful than what lay ahead (nor was it any less painful, Dr. Edgerton is deft). Assuming that the so-called reviews were no more than regurgitated marketing hype, the blather about players club, game improvement clubs, groove technology, forgiveness, pockets and inserts was just that--blather.
Sifting through it all, what the customer wants is an iron that hits the ball further during his round and, after his round, when he adds his score, yields a pleasant surprise.
The club makers have taken care of the first. Today's golfer can hit his seven iron as far as his Dad hit his five iron. Over and out. Not a problem anymore. As the great Robert Trent Jones said back in the days of hickory shafts, most men pull a club from their bag because of the number on its clubhead, not what they can do with it. So, it's simply a matter of increasing the clubhead loft and the length of the shaft. Voila, you can hit your seven iron as far your Dad hit his five iron because the specs of your seven iron are the specs of his five iron. Take pride in your ability to hit a four iron 200+ yards and that your 8 iron is your '150 yard club'. Just don't look too hard and the specs.
Of course, the result of this is a train wreck when it comes to the lofts of the long irons, but nobody can hit long irons and that's just another marketing opportunity--for hybrids. Sell hybrids at a buck, two bucks a stick. Take it to the bank. And while making bank at that end, at the other, the super strong pitching wedge opens a void at the short end of the spectrum, as well. That's another opportunity--for wedges. Shall we call the new club between the sand wedge and the pitching wedge a gap wedge, or, even better, an attack wedge. Three wedge sets are morphing into four wedge sets and the prices increase by, well, a third.
Life is good. Except for the shortage of golfers. Well, the shortage of customers.
That leaves the second problem. How to improve scores. If the clubmakers could make clubs that would actually improve scores, maybe the golfers would come back. Or, at least, the customers.
Now, improving your score by cheating with the equipment you use is as old as the game itself. That's why the USGA and the R&A get their panties in a wad over 'non-conforming equipment'. That's why Karsten Solheim and the USGA went to court over square grooves a quarter century ago. And that's why the USGA and the manufacturers negotiated a ceasefire at 460 cm cubed over the size of driver heads a decade ago. That's why the golf ball is the issue de jour. But back to irons.
Leave behind the marketing promises of 'game improvement'. What we're talking about is 'score improvement.' Score improvement is all about not paying the price against par for a poorly struck shot. Game improvement is all about feedback, positive and negative. And negative feedback is painful. The sting in your palms from a poorly hit shot is not fun. Neither is the resulting line drive veering ovv into a trap. Nobody goes out and buys those experiences. If the price of score improvement is satisficing performance rather than performance maximization in terms of ball flight, so be it.
Without a doubt, cavity back clubs are easier to hit. 'Easier to hit' means forgiving, which in turn means score improving. To a certain point, a golfer of a set skill level will score better with cavity back clubs than with any other iron. I think, but I'm not sure that the skill level point of diminishing value is somewhere around a 10-12 handicap. Above that point, a golfer gets a 'better' (in terms of a lower score) with cavity backs. Below it, and the improved feedback of muscle back clubs (and the resulting ability to shape shots, control ball flight, etc.) at least offsets the forgiveness of the cavity backs.
So, the size of the market for irons that require the focus, practice (and resulting skill) of a performance improving club, rather than a score improvement club, is rather small. Depending on whose statistics you wish to put weight on, something between one and five percent of golfers can shoot in the 80s. (Note--I think the keeps of the different statistics--the National Golf Foundation and the USGA--are honest, they are just measuring slightly different populations. The people who play an occasional recreational round of golf are a different and less skilled group than the crowd that posts scores to maintain a handicap.)
What's the take away on all this? Well, at the most basic level, don't expect disinterested technical information, advice or analysis for people trying to sell you shit. But you already know that. Maybe the tougher take away is, know yourself and your needs before you open your wallet. That's advice more often given than taken. And finally, be honest with yourself. But that is harsh medicine, indeed. How many of the world's great religions are based on confuting it?
No comments:
Post a Comment