Trying Something New, Purchasing Clubs Purely on Function

[WristySwing]

I am looking to try something new where I am purchasing clubs purely on function.  I know this is nothing new and kind of the whole basis of fitting, but I am looking at it from a different way.  I want to analyze each club as its own functional standalone product vs. a set of irons, for example.  I don't think I want to do anything as extreme as buying say a ZX5 5i, a Pro 225 6i, a Forged Tec 7i, etc., but I think its worthwhile to examine each wedge and each segment of the bag (short irons, mid irons, long irons) for their function and utility.  At the extreme ends of the bag, like the woods and wedges this is exceptionally true.  I also think there's a point to be made for the long irons (i.e. the 4i could be a driving iron like T200 Utility, the 5i a T300, the 6i T200, 7-PW T100, as an example).  

 

What do you think?  Has anyone done this?  What got me thinking is the Ping, Srixon, and Titleist staffers tend to have a mixed bag of goodies.

[Kmagnuss]

I thought everybody did this.

[MattC555]

That's what I've done.  Blended sets are very normal these days.  Recently swapped a 2H for a 7 wood, and I now go back and forth with adding a 223 5 iron to my set and dropping my MP20 5-iron.  Everything else is as good as its ever been. 

[OnTheBag]

1 hour ago, WristySwing said:

I am looking to try something new where I am purchasing clubs purely on function.  I know this is nothing new and kind of the whole basis of fitting, but I am looking at it from a different way.  I want to analyze each club as its own functional standalone product vs. a set of irons, for example.  I don't think I want to do anything as extreme as buying say a ZX5 5i, a Pro 225 6i, a Forged Tec 7i, etc., but I think its worthwhile to examine each wedge and each segment of the bag (short irons, mid irons, long irons) for their function and utility.  At the extreme ends of the bag, like the woods and wedges this is exceptionally true.  I also think there's a point to be made for the long irons (i.e. the 4i could be a driving iron like T200 Utility, the 5i a T300, the 6i T200, 7-PW T100, as an example).  

 

What do you think?  Has anyone done this?  What got me thinking is the Ping, Srixon, and Titleist staffers tend to have a mixed bag of goodies.

This is a very common strategy amongst better players.  Think of each segment as a tool with a specific job.  As you mention, few take it as far as Bernhard Langer with every club by a different manufacturer but many treat segments differently.

 

My woods and hybrids are all from different manufacturers and are chosen based on performance alone.  6i-9i or 6i-PW (depending on the set) are usually the same model so that loft and bounce are consistent.  Wedges are performance only.  

[Roejye]

I love it, I do think that a lot of people do it already. The top of my bag in particular is something that looking at specs doesn't make sense, but it works well for me.

[driveandputtmachine]

Driver, then Mini, 19* UW, then 22* SIM DHY. 5 iron in ZX5, 6-9 in ZX7 and then bladed wedges.

 

My clubs look wonky and everyone probably thinks I have huge gaps at the top, but this setup works great for me and I do not have any huge gaps.

[iknowbagu]

This is a ridiculous premise. You should be playing the most demanding set of clubs you can find because they will make you concentrate more. 

 

Now that that's out of the way (sorry, I'm clearly spending way too much time in that blades thread), this is how I've always approached my bag. Every club / group of clubs should have a very defined purpose and end goal in mind. 

[Puttersaurus Rex]

3 hours ago, WristySwing said:

I am looking to try something new where I am purchasing clubs purely on function.  I know this is nothing new and kind of the whole basis of fitting, but I am looking at it from a different way.  I want to analyze each club as its own functional standalone product vs. a set of irons, for example.  I don't think I want to do anything as extreme as buying say a ZX5 5i, a Pro 225 6i, a Forged Tec 7i, etc., but I think its worthwhile to examine each wedge and each segment of the bag (short irons, mid irons, long irons) for their function and utility.  At the extreme ends of the bag, like the woods and wedges this is exceptionally true.  I also think there's a point to be made for the long irons (i.e. the 4i could be a driving iron like T200 Utility, the 5i a T300, the 6i T200, 7-PW T100, as an example).  

 

What do you think?  Has anyone done this?  What got me thinking is the Ping, Srixon, and Titleist staffers tend to have a mixed bag of goodies.

#Be Like Bernhard Langer!

[Puttersaurus Rex]

I have a goal of making each club a favorite.  Ping Driver, TM mini, Titleist fairway, TEE hybrid, Srixon irons, and cleveland/vokey wedges. 

[Jeff58]

Fitting, analyzing, and attempting to implement each club separately, rather than forming a cohesive set that requires a single optimal swing mechanic, is the root of all club ho-ing. I can’t hit my 5 iron, so I replaced it. Then I couldn’t hit my hybrid, then I couldn’t hit my driver but I hit my wedges really well, to infinity and beyond.

 

The optimal set is the ideal espoused by TrueSpec. The individual optimization idea is a demand for chaos on a semi-biblical scale. It’s not possible to randomly perform 13 different swings in practice much less than actual play conditions.

[ShortGolfer]

What I learned from getting fit at Club Champion is the idea of  having a matched set with the same shaft through my woods, and then again through my irons/wedges.

After I built my 58/06 wedge with my iron shaft, I tested it against my 60/12 to make sure the lie angle was functionally the same. 

I hit off a mat for repeatability and made sure that the the ball went in the same direction for both clubs.

 

With my new clubs I'm finally hitting both Par 3s and Par 4s in regulation.

I define a Par 3 as any hole I can reach in one stroke and Par 4 is anything outside the range of my driver.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 12, 2022 by ShortGolfer

[Albatross Dreamer]

 I sort of think of looks as an extension of function. Meaning if I like the look at address I'm typically going to hit it better. But if something looks good and I can't hit it then not gonna bother with it.

 

To me there's levels too, and it'll be different for everyone. The only real things I'd probably keep the same throughout are irons and wedges, just because for me I like having that consistency. But drivers, fairways, hybrids, driving iron, whatever could all differ.

[A.Princey]

Doesn’t everybody do this??? 🤨

[Puttersaurus Rex]

12 hours ago, A.Princey said:

Doesn’t everybody do this??? 🤨

In theory, yes.

 

Yet there are people buying new clubs because they are FOMOing.  Also, we have people NOT buying clubs (that may work for them) because of the font or other insignificant design aspect that they don't like.

[WristySwing]

Thank you for all the replies, everyone.  Let me clarify.  In theory, yes, everyone should be doing this and/or have a set that does this.  A driver that both maximizes distance and reduces dispersion with a slight tradeoff on one side or the other depending on the goal of the player, woods that do the same, hybrids and irons that cover yardages, wedges that cover yardages and allow the player to hit a variety of different and difficulty level shots.  Most can do this at I would wager a C+/B- level, they get most of the way there.  They have a driver that maximizes distance and they have irons that they hit mostly well.   Many do not get fit for wedges and tend to play Vokey or Cleveland exclusively.

 

My idea is to start at the poles of the bag.  Driver first.  Looking at my data I can say that when I hit a fairway, I am the odds on favourite to make a par.  If I miss the fairway, I am usually staring double or worse in the face as my misses are not small, they almost always lead to a penalty stroke.  The same can be said for my wedges.  If I have a short shot (sub 100 yards), my proximity to the hole is embarrassing and pitch/chip shots would make Seve weep and run away screaming.  I figure if I can cover the shots that the majority of the time I will see with my wedges and a driver that will help me hit a few more fwys per round I am off to a great start.  I can then slide the rest of the clubs into the slots to fill in these gaps and statistically look at each slot for its purpose from that point forward.  Most of my bag is done on what looks and performs well individually in the fitting bay (say looking for a new driver I have not tested to see how that slots against my 3w, for example).  I have not done a holistic approach to the bag which I think is what is needed.

 

As someone said above, the goal is to #BeLikeBernhard

Edited September 13, 2022 by WristySwing

[Wayside]

I admire your effort but I think, in the end, unless you have a temperament like good old Bernard, you may end up committed to an asylum somewhere, banned from the internet and all driving ranges, muttering stuff along the lines of “But I was so close, so close”. 
 

Make sure you have a very good clubmaker. Lots of spare cash. Tolerant partner. Loads of alcohol.

Edited September 13, 2022 by Wayside

[Thumper604]

Wait, what is the functionality you speak of? People say I have more money than brains. Which isn’t saying much. I hope to be considered lower middle class some day.. but that’s another story.

We all know if the club doesn’t look cool, it ain’t got no function. 
And let’s not get started on the OCD type golfers, clubs have to match, 4 degree gaps, bag match the clubs, I only play this brand, never stock shafts, etc.. 

so we just spend baby! 💰

[tofur99]

lol my bag is mostly Titleist at the moment and I feel a bit self conscious about it lest I be judged for being a company fan-boy that doesn't pick the best clubs for my game

 

 

[Cactus Jack]

My setup is based on gapping. I anchor off my 56* then gap up from there until I reach my 6 iron, which is the lowest iron I play. From there, I focus on functional gapping and pick clubs based on trajectory off the tee, usability from the fairway etc. Each of my long clubs are from different brands, have different shafts, but they hit my intended distance and the ball gets there how I want. 

[Barfolomew]

Function or bust

 

Waaaaay to many golfers care about:  Looks, feel and sound

 

Looks based on how cool they look.... not I like how the club looks sitting open at address cause that's function etc

[ChipNRun]

On 9/12/2022 at 12:11 PM, WristySwing said:

What do you think?  Has anyone done this?  What got me thinking is the Ping, Srixon, and Titleist staffers tend to have a mixed bag of goodies.

 

If you think this will benefit you, go for it. If you have time to do it, go for it. Caution: The staffers that do this are pros, and have the tour van crew to help them out. You don't.

 

I could see going for more robust heads in the scoring irons, more user-friendly in maybe 7i and below.

 

But there's a point at which limits on time and $$ make this counterproductive. I could get in 10 more rounds of golf without all this hairsplitting.

 

Let's go back 15 years when I realized it was time to dump stiff shafts in favor of regulars. In irons, lots was available. What I found was this: many of the OEMs made a model of irons I could play well, as long as it had the right shaft for me. So, looking for the magic club seemed like a false mission. Find clubs that work, and go out and play.

 

Golf is a cyborg activity: The golfer and club merge into a machine for playing the game.

[WristySwing]

On 9/14/2022 at 8:11 PM, ChipNRun said:

 

If you think this will benefit you, go for it. If you have time to do it, go for it. Caution: The staffers that do this are pros, and have the tour van crew to help them out. You don't.

 

I could see going for more robust heads in the scoring irons, more user-friendly in maybe 7i and below.

 

But there's a point at which limits on time and $$ make this counterproductive. I could get in 10 more rounds of golf without all this hairsplitting.

 

Let's go back 15 years when I realized it was time to dump stiff shafts in favor of regulars. In irons, lots was available. What I found was this: many of the OEMs made a model of irons I could play well, as long as it had the right shaft for me. So, looking for the magic club seemed like a false mission. Find clubs that work, and go out and play.

 

Golf is a cyborg activity: The golfer and club merge into a machine for playing the game.

 

Luckily, I work at a fitting studio so I am able to get a bit more nitty gritty than the average bear.  I do agree though, there does have to be a point where I can safely call a cutoff vs. looking perpetually for something better.  Funny, I did play better when I just said "F it", played GI irons with lighter shafts, a hybrid down to the 5i (26* at the time I think), square hybrids, a single fairway wood, and a square driver.  Maybe I should just embrace my inner 36 handicap?

[ChipNRun]

59 minutes ago, WristySwing said:

Funny, I did play better when I just said "F it", played GI irons with lighter shafts, a hybrid down to the 5i (26* at the time I think), square hybrids, a single fairway wood, and a square driver.  Maybe I should just embrace my inner 36 handicap?

 

Don't get down on yourself. A benefit of a stable bag mix: You sense what works and what doesn't. This makes it easier to grab a club and focus on setup and alignment. This avoids nagging worries about "maybe this shot would fly better if I had bought the TM 3W/HL with the purple grip."

 

A stable bag mix helps lessen "beehive brain" with invasive worried about what might have been versus what is.

[texcellence86]

Just recently did this with my set.

 

Once my Driver became automatic I found myself no longer using a 3w and would then use a 5w/7w/Hy when having to layup off the tee. Even at that point I would most likely go for my 5w, which made the decision easy to fill the spot after the Driver. I could not stand using my SM6 52* as it would dig way too much on full shots and would come up short nearly every time. I found with my Set PW I was more comfortable, I liked the T100 profile and ordered a set from 5-50* (bent to 52*). Realized I exclusively used my SM6 56* over the 60*, got rid of those and put in a 58*. Final step was to decide between a 7w/Hy/Di/4i. Preferred the dependability of a Hy over the other options but needed more launch. Tested a 4Hy with a heavy shaft and done. Launches like a 4i but has the carry of a 3Hy if needed.

 

No going back now!

[WristySwing]

7 hours ago, texcellence86 said:

Just recently did this with my set.

 

Once my Driver became automatic I found myself no longer using a 3w and would then use a 5w/7w/Hy when having to layup off the tee. Even at that point I would most likely go for my 5w, which made the decision easy to fill the spot after the Driver. I could not stand using my SM6 52* as it would dig way too much on full shots and would come up short nearly every time. I found with my Set PW I was more comfortable, I liked the T100 profile and ordered a set from 5-50* (bent to 52*). Realized I exclusively used my SM6 56* over the 60*, got rid of those and put in a 58*. Final step was to decide between a 7w/Hy/Di/4i. Preferred the dependability of a Hy over the other options but needed more launch. Tested a 4Hy with a heavy shaft and done. Launches like a 4i but has the carry of a 3Hy if needed.

 

No going back now!

 

I'm jealous!  Sounds like you got it down.  I'm making some headway though.  The TSR3 15* with Ventus Black 7S was automatic for me today.  Straight on straight.  I am going to wait for the new stuff to come out since the season in Canada is basically over now anyways.  See what Ping, Callaway, TM, and Cobra have for 2023 before I get too itchy.