RacineBoxer

I agree. And it doesn't seem like the LAB concepts are really all that protected by patents, I mean, Odyssey, TaylorMade, PXG... everyone is just going to copy their ideas and retake that market share. I would imagine this has happened a few times in the golf industry in the last 30 years. I mean... Adams tight lies is one that comes to mind. They had a huge hit there for a short period of time because their fairway woods performed in a way that was super helpful to a ton of people. Then everyone started offering shallow (or shallower) fairways and their products didn't really evolve. I somewhat struggle to see how LAB is going to evolve from what they already have.

Similar to a few others in this thread, I wouldn't necessarily recommend replacing your driver with a mini. I think every single player on the PGA tour plays a driver. I can think of one LPGA player that doesn't play a driver. Sure you might find a few anecdotal cases of people not playing a driver but these are pretty unique outliers. I'd recommend playing a driver that is higher loft and shortened shaft. Ping does a 12* driver with a 3 wood shaft. Essentially, the best of both worlds: forgiveness of a 460cc head and control of a 3 wood shaft. Meet the Thriver – the new ultimate fairway finder from Ping Mini drivers are usually for really good players with a lot of speed. Say you drive the ball 320 and you have a few holes at your home course where you'd like to only drive it 280-290 (say bunkers or OB pinches in at 300-320). And you want the forgiveness of something bigger than a 3 wood. As long as you use it a couple times per round there's a solid case to make that the mini makes sense to add to the bag. But in your case I'd go 460cc "thriver".

I really don't think 10 yards matters much, it's really the tee shots with driver that end up in trouble (trees, deep rough, water, OB, etc.) that have the larger impact on SG with the driver. I think I saw somewhere that 10 yards was worth about 1 stroke. So it's not completely meaningless.

People have been confused and misled a bit on the i230's. There's a post in this thread where someone is saying the i230's spun slightly more than the i210's. I think this is because of they hype that Ping put around those tightly spaced "micro max" grooves. I mean... I kind of makes (common) sense - more, tightly spaced grooves = more spin right? But I was a i210 player (for a short time). I spun them too much. I watched a bunch of the reviews when the i230's came out and noticed they were spinning a little less, so I bought them. And there were a few arguments about their spin in 2023-2024 (I'm not one to argue forever) because people were saying the i230's spun more. They didn't. Hovland even said he liked the i210's because they spun a little bit more. Now, finally, Marty Jertson explains it in black and white for us - the i230's did actually spin a little less off the fairway or tee. So reality is, the i240 is just, likely, going back to i210 levels of spin. We're only talking about couple hundred on a 7i, for us mere mortals it's basically imperceptible. Why? Well that's what the best players in the world want. Again, Marty talks about the process they go through. The i240 doesn't give two craps about distance. It's all about spin = control. And consistent yardages. This is an iron for everyone but in some ways it almost feels tailor made for the LPGA. Those ladies hit perfect delivery (AoA, shaft lean,etc) tight little draws all day long. For them, with their speed, their launch, their tour conditions/greens, 150-200 more spin is a good thing. For me, with my slightly over the top, too much dynamic loft, high launch, high spin delivery... it's not a great fit. I think the i240 will be another smashing success on the LPGA. The i series has probably been the #1 iron on the LPGA the last 5 years and I think the i240 squarely keeps Ping in that spot. Similar to Knudson, I wish I didn't have the male ego talking me out of such a great iron.

So I've never played the CB's or really any iron like that. Typically been in larger midsized irons or even GI's. But I've typically seen about 5 yards of lost distance going to a specialty wedge compared to the set wedge. For me it was usually a 50* gap wedge (set) going 120 and when I swap in a 50* specialty wedge I only get 115. You might be better off buying a 46* vokey than trying to bend the 48.

Yeah, I was just about to ask, how many yards does -500 spin add. Thanks for doing the math, I knew it was a tiny amount.

Well a t350 is more svelte than a hybrid!!!