Ping Eye 2 Wedges!!

[irvtrain]

Tour Players are buying!!

With the new groove rule apparently players have found a loop hole for square grooves and are looking for the pre-April 1990 versions of the Ping Eye 2 wedges on Ebay.
I just saw a couple of them going for over $100!!

From GeoffShackelford.com

Whenever Daly gets a new Ping-Eye 2 wedge, he calls the company and reads them the serial number. Ping has a catalog of its wedges and can confirm if the wedges were manufactured prior to April 1990.

"Ping said the ones I have are all good to go," Daly said. "I think a lot of guys are going to switch. I know a lot of guys are buying them off eBay."

[MtlJeff]

it's pretty cool to see Daly playing them, but i don't see many guys doing it. A lot of top guys have minimum club requirements with sponsors, plus the Eye 2 wedges look really different from your standard modern wedges, and might not suit everyone's eye. You'll see more than you used to, but not many all things considered IMO

[chris9594]

i think pros will initialy play them but get bored and go back to there vokeys etc.

[j-daniel]

right this whole Ping eye wedge thing is intruiging me.

could anyone explain the differences in the pre 1990 and after as i have no clue.

could someone also post pics of an eye 2 wedge s i hve never seen one in person but would like to see what one looks like to see if i might try get one?

also what are the grooves like on these things considering they are 20 ish years old?

[Caldymat]

crazy,

gonna be on the hunt for some now!

[DavePelz4]

There are two major differences. First, the E2's actually are square grooves. Ping won a lawsuit vs the USGA and PGA that started in the 80's and was settled in the 90's. If memory serves, it deemed Ping clubs as legal for play in USGA and PGA events. The second differential is the number of grooves. There are something like 4 or 5 more grooves on the E2's as compared to others.

Working off of memory here but think this is the gist...

[parpar41]

[quote name='j-daniel' date='16 January 2010 - 10:45 AM' timestamp='1263656715' post='2184914']
right this whole Ping eye wedge thing is intruiging me.
[b]
could anyone explain the differences in the pre 1990 and after as i have no clue.[/b]

could someone also post pics of an eye 2 wedge s i hve never seen one in person but would like to see what one looks like to see if i might try get one?

also what are the grooves like on these things considering they are 20 ish years old?
[/quote]

The differences relate to the settlement of some brutal litigation between Ping and the USGA from 20 years ago. The differences are not really related to club design but to litigation.

If I recall correctly, about 20 years ago the USGA [unilaterally?] adopted a new rule of golf that would have outlawed clubs with a certain groove design [which probably would have made all Ping irons illegal] . The litigation got pretty brutal, apparently. My best guess is that it was settled in the end with a stipulation that all Ping irons before a certain date [ pre 1990 ] benefiting from a "grandfather" clause that made them OK for use in, among other things, Tour events and, perhaps, USGA competitions.

[mat562]

[quote name='j-daniel' date='16 January 2010 - 03:45 PM' timestamp='1263656715' post='2184914']
Could anyone explain the differences in the pre 1990 and after as I have no clue.
[/quote]

According to what I was told by a Ping UK employee many moons ago, Ping instituted the square groove in the mid '80s becasuse it was easier to accurately cast and produce grooves to the required specs than it was to produce the more common 'V' groove. The initially-produced square grooves on the Eye 2 irons had sharp, unradiused edges that had a side effect of maximising spin, particularly from grassy lies. The professionals tried and liked the clubs but found that they caused a great deal of damage to the balata covers of the balls of the time. For professional golfers, for whom performance was paramount and who had an unlimited supply of golf balls, it was no problem; for the average handicap golfer though, the cost was felt to be excessive.

For that reason, Solheim modified the design of the groove by radiusing (i.e. [i]rounding off[/i]) the groove edges to produce an edge that was less damaging to the cover of the ball. Under the then USGA/R&A rules, the modification was legal and achieved the desired result. However, by radiusing the groove edges the ruling bodies asserted that Solheim's design made the grooves overly-wide and too close together on the face of the club in terms of the required separation between adjacent grooves. Solheim, an engineer by profession, maintained that under accepted engineering principles the groove should be measured from the vertical (or near-vertical) wall of the groove and [i]not[/i] from the point at which the groove started to make an indentation upon the surface of the club by virtue of the raduised edge.

The issue essentially reared it's head publicly after a couple of high profile incidents involving tour players. For one, Mark Calcavecchia hit a miraculous shot from deep rough at Eagle Trace in his 1987 Honda Classic win that had the blazers up in arms and many high profile names - including Jack Nicklaus and Tom Watson - calling the grooves 'unfair' and clamoring for them to be banned.

Karsten and the governing bodies disagreed over the method by which the grooves were measured and a messy affair began in which Solheim asserted that the organisations were wrong and were prejudiced towards the Ping brand in the way that they applied the rule. All sorts of legal challenges resulted over the matter (which represented a distance less than the thickness of a human hair and which was capable of being worn away within a couple of rounds of golf) until such time as a settlement was reached; reportedly in the region of $100 million in damages being paid to Karsten. A condition of the settlement was that Ping would alter their groove design to one that conformed to the new regulations but included a stipulation that clubs manufactured before the changeover, which would ordinarily be classed as non-conforming, were 'grandfathered' and deemed to be conforming, in an unmodified form, for the lifetime of the club. The changeover trook place in April 1990.

In the case of Ping Eye 2 irons - around which the case revolved - there are several types of groove. Early Eye 2s manufactured between approximately 1982 to 1984 have 'V' grooves. Latter models, produced for a time during the mid '80s, have the first generation 'square' grooves with unradiused edges; and the latter Eye 2 models have radiused 'U' grooves.

Subsequent models of Ping iron (including the Eye 2+) had a modified design which met the new standard that was introduced following the whole episode when radiused edges were formalised and regulated by the game's ruling bodies.

In terms of playing Ping irons from that period now, the differences are minimal and the controversial grooves play second fiddle to modern, aggressively grooved designs in terms of the amount of spin they generate and the advantage they provide in certain circumstances. For the pros, now limited to grooves similar to the old 'v' groove designs, there may be a tangible performance benefit by using the older design of Ping grooves and thus a causal link to the apparent rise in popularity of classic Ping wedges on the tours due to the grandfather clause.

[DavePelz4]

Mat...

Far more detailed and articulate than my meager attempt. Thanks for a great explanation!

[Caldymat]

Anyone got any pictures of the best type of Eye2's?

[Huskypride28]

This is gonna be funny. Now watch everyone jump on the Ping Eye 2 wedge bandwagon. I got an old one my dad handed down to me. Maybe I should sell it on Ebay.

[mat562]

I've got two 9.5/10 condition beryllium Eye 2 sand wedges in my cupboard that I was lucky enough to blag from a friend, a Ping staffer, a few years back. Little did I know that they'd become the hot club to have a few years hence. Other than the odd clonk around the chipping green they've spent the last eight or ten years loafing in a bag in the cupboard with a load of other clubs and have spent their days turning a lovely shade of dark brown.

[i]"Shall we start the bidding at two hundred a apiece? Do I hear two hundred? Yes... man at the back there. Thank you sir. The bid's with you Mr Calcavecchia..."[/i]

[wedge1]

So who on tour has chased these down and actually put them in their bag who did not use them before? The soles on those things are a moose... big switch going from a Vokey to that.

[mat562]

Hunter Mahan's gone to an Eye 2 L wedge and Daly's playing a trio of them after recently being a Vokey/588 man.

There are a few other diehard Eye 2 wedge men on the tours but those are a couple of pros I can think of who've changed relatively recently.

I'd be interested to see a pro go on the record and state that he's bagging an Eye 2 wedge specifically to get the benefit of the grooves rather than simply because it's a great wedge.

[idiotbox]

If you stay out of the rough, you don't need square grooves.

[OldSkoolTexan]

You're a PING guy or not a PING guy. Daly used to be a PING guy, so using the old wedges is not a huge change for him. Calc the same, probably even Lumpy. Most of those guys are spoiled by the soft, juicy wedges that they change monthly. I doubt they will jump to a hard cast wedge that effectly will never wear out and has not so pleasing profile at address.<br><br>Grooves will not be as big of an issue once each manufacturer releases a "spinny" tour ball.

[elrey23]

[quote name='mat562' date='16 January 2010 - 03:49 PM' timestamp='1263678543' post='2185509']
Hunter Mahan's gone to an Eye 2 L wedge and Daly's playing a trio of them after recently being a Vokey/588 man.

There are a few other diehard Eye 2 wedge men on the tours but those are a couple of pros I can think of who've changed relatively recently.

I'd be interested to see a pro go on the record and state that he's bagging an Eye 2 wedge specifically to get the benefit of the grooves rather than simply because it's a great wedge.
[/quote]

I thought Mahan had an Eye2 in the bag at the President's Cup?

[dlygrisse]

[quote name='OldSkoolTexan' date='16 January 2010 - 08:48 PM' timestamp='1263692920' post='2185974']
You're a PING guy or not a PING guy. Daly used to be a PING guy, so using the old wedges is not a huge change for him. Calc the same, probably even Lumpy. Most of those guys are spoiled by the soft, juicy wedges that they change monthly. I doubt they will jump to a hard cast wedge that effectly will never wear out and has not so pleasing profile at address.<br><br>Grooves will not big as big of an issue once each manufacturer releases a "spinny" tour ball.
[/quote]
I am sorry I don't get this spinnier ball thing. First off the only real advantage the bigger grooves gave you was out of the rough. How does a spinnier ball give you more spin out of the rough? It is the pre 2010 grooves that cut through the grass that gave spin, I don't see how a spinner ball is going to give more grip on the club out of thick rough. Secondly the grooves don't make much of a difference if any from a good lie from the fairway, in fact most pros are trying to reduce spin from the fairway not increase it. Someone please explain this makes no sense to me at all.

[OldSkoolTexan]

[quote name='elrey23' date='16 January 2010 - 07:51 PM' timestamp='1263693081' post='2185982']
[quote name='mat562' date='16 January 2010 - 03:49 PM' timestamp='1263678543' post='2185509']
Hunter Mahan's gone to an Eye 2 L wedge and Daly's playing a trio of them after recently being a Vokey/588 man.

There are a few other diehard Eye 2 wedge men on the tours but those are a couple of pros I can think of who've changed relatively recently.

I'd be interested to see a pro go on the record and state that he's bagging an Eye 2 wedge specifically to get the benefit of the grooves rather than simply because it's a great wedge.
[/quote]

I thought Mahan had an Eye2 in the bag at the President's Cup?
[/quote]

Sure did : http://blogs.golf.com/equipment/2009/10/hunter-mahans-presidents-cup-clubs.html

[Gehly]

anyone out there that according to the rules could play any wedge they want till 2024, but won't because they want to play by the same rules the pros do...now get some Eye 2s?

I find it amusing so many who will never sniff a PGA tourney or qualifier care about playing new grooves.

[gticlay]

[quote name='Gehly' date='16 January 2010 - 06:42 PM' timestamp='1263696165' post='2186081']
anyone out there that according to the rules could play any wedge they want till 2024, but won't because they want to play by the same rules the pros do...now get some Eye 2s?

I find it amusing so many who will never sniff a PGA tourney or qualifier care about playing new grooves.
[/quote]


I find it amusing that anyone would consider it real golf if they aren't playing with competition rules. Playing non-conforming grooves to a +3 handicap, for example doesn't mean as much... yeah you are good, but what your handicap if you are using C-C grooves, what would you shoot on Pinehurst the day after they have the Open there? If you get to play on Augusta and shoot a 71 with non conforming grooves, you cannot compare your score to what the pros shoot at the Masters because they are using different equipment. Of course it matters Gehly.

[dlygrisse]

[quote name='gticlay' date='17 January 2010 - 12:57 AM' timestamp='1263707829' post='2186375']
[quote name='Gehly' date='16 January 2010 - 06:42 PM' timestamp='1263696165' post='2186081']
anyone out there that according to the rules could play any wedge they want till 2024, but won't because they want to play by the same rules the pros do...now get some Eye 2s?

I find it amusing so many who will never sniff a PGA tourney or qualifier care about playing new grooves.
[/quote]


I find it amusing that anyone would consider it real golf if they aren't playing with competition rules. Playing non-conforming grooves to a +3 handicap, for example doesn't mean as much... yeah you are good, but what your handicap if you are using C-C grooves, what would you shoot on Pinehurst the day after they have the Open there? If you get to play on Augusta and shoot a 71 with non conforming grooves, you cannot compare your score to what the pros shoot at the Masters because they are using different equipment. Of course it matters Gehly.
[/quote]

I find it amusing that anyone would consider what .0001% of the golfing population did was real golf. The rules are the rules and the rules state that the old grooves are good for almost 100% of the golfers in the world. If you really want to compare yourself to the pros when you get to play Augusta make sure you play the back tees always, even if you only hit it 220. Make sure you bring a gallery to boucne the ball off of , make sure they put the grandstands up so you can bounce it offof them and get a free drop. Make sure you bring a tour caddy, make sure you have the gallery, a forecaddy, and TV announcers help you look for the ball. Make sure Butch Harmon, Dave Pelz, Dave Stockton, and Bob Rotella follow you on your round. Make sure you take your clubs to the equipment van and get them tweaked before the round, need I go on?
When it comes down to it the grooves don't make much difference to the pros, look at the scores at Kapalua, and they surely won't make a hill of beans worth of difference for the average hack. In fact Geoff Ogilvy said he thinks it often times makes the game easier with the new grooves because now he knows when he will get a flier and when he wont, with the agressive grooves it was always a guessing game.

[mat562]

Crikey.

The new grooves have got all of seven rounds under their belt and already a plus handicap amateur, playing with perfectly legal equipment for his level of play, is a con artist with handicap that's not worth the paper it's written on. I was giving some thought to spectating at the Amateur Championship this year but I don't think I'll bother now.

[dlygrisse]

[quote name='mat562' date='17 January 2010 - 06:40 AM' timestamp='1263728429' post='2186555']
Crikey.

The new grooves have got all of seven rounds under their belt and already a plus handicap amateur, playing with perfectly legal equipment for his level of play, is a con artist with handicap that's not worth the paper it's written on. I was giving some thought to spectating at the Amateur Championship this year but I don't think I'll bother now.
[/quote]
No doubt, you would think we were taking a cannon to the first tee and dropping the ProV1 down the barrel and launching it 500 yards with no need for those silly clubs. I thnk I am going to take up bowling.

[floyd]

I think its going to be interesting to see who all starts playing the Eye 2.

[2downpress]

if the pros are grabbing them up off of ebay, that's wonderful, but i really can't see how a wedge that has been played off and on for some 20+ years has that much bite left on the grooves. Seems to me that they would play pretty similar to the conforming wedges....

[HeadonaStick]

[quote name='Gehly' date='16 January 2010 - 09:42 PM' timestamp='1263696165' post='2186081']
anyone out there that according to the rules could play any wedge they want till 2024, but won't because they want to play by the same rules the pros do...now get some Eye 2s?

I find it amusing so many who will never sniff a PGA tourney or qualifier care about playing new grooves.
[/quote]
1. Any wedge or iron introduced after January 1 will have to conform to the new rules, so unless you are going to continue to play the wedges in your bag for the next 15 years, the rule effects you.

2. For many it isn't about playing by the same rules the pros do, it is about bifurcation of the game. It is about playing by the same rules, period. While we will never play the same game the pros do, there is value to many in getting as close as possible.

3. Just a reminder, Ping Eye 2's are only legal where the USGA is the governing body. Our European friends don't get to play them in competition

4. My Eye 2 sand wedge is magic out of the sand. And useless everywhere else. I carry it because I suck out of the sand without it; I can't imagine pros switching just to get more bite from the rough. Unlike me, they are more multidimensional in their game

[gticlay]

It's like thinking you are hot chit because you can dunk it at the elementary school baskets

[cardoustie]

I played with the BeCu SW and LW versions of these for 3 or 4 yrs ... ending approx 4 yrs ago. Stopped as they simply looked too different from rest of my set, Mizuno mp-37's at the time

They were close in loft as well ... 57.7* and 61* ... and Ping will not bend them for you
Those Eye2's are the best out of the sand (I do miss them from the bunkers) but the bounce makes them a little unruly off of tight or firm lies. They were great out of the rough on 60-120 yard shots

If you hunt these down, buyer beware, there are many versions that are not the grandfathered in grooves (ie drill dot in top corner of rear cavity, plus, etc etc) Also the first version of the Eye2+ had no + ....

I agree with what the poster said .. a pro that can get new C of C vokey's every month will find these spin more than an old Eye 2

[Gehly]

don't worry, 99% of us that don't care that we play the same stuff as the pros will be able to buy our "illegal" (yet still conforming for us) for years to come. but I'm grabbing some current wedges now anyway to get me through the next 15 years. I need all the help I can get...that's why I don't hit the same blades and XX-Stiff shafts the pros do either (maybe if I played Augusta I would )