Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

golf-forums.net
Promoting golf discussion.

Main

Date: 04 Sep 2006 21:05:34
From: gp
Subject: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
1960's weak-lofted irons??!!

Tiger, Vijay, and Phil don't use wooden drivers, so why would a
20-hcp'er use one? Sure, they're probably trying to be "purists" who
overdo the addage about the Indian and arrow, but this is not how the
game is played anymore. A Kt Golden Bear starter set with metal
woods and cavity back irons will perform much better than a Louiseville
or old McGregor persimmon wood and old Spaulding forged irons that some
hackers play with.

Date: 22 Sep 2006 14:16:45
From: Schwachgolfer
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

gp wrote:
> Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
> Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
> paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
> players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
> on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
> 1960's weak-lofted irons??!!
>
> Tiger, Vijay, and Phil don't use wooden drivers, so why would a
> 20-hcp'er use one? Sure, they're probably trying to be "purists" who
> overdo the addage about the Indian and arrow, but this is not how the
> game is played anymore. A Kt Golden Bear starter set with metal
> woods and cavity back irons will perform much better than a Louiseville
> or old McGregor persimmon wood and old Spaulding forged irons that some
> hackers play with.

I`m one of these hcp-20-persimmon-indians. As a casual golfer, I`ve
several reasons to prefer persimmon:
Sometimes I hit it a bit shorter than the metals I`ve tried, but
everytime without slice. I don`t care about 10% more or less length.
Much better feeling at impact than metal, even on misshits. But if I
get it right, it`s gorgeous!
I like the look of the persimmon. You may laugh about, but it makes me
confident.
Sure, I never get a pro, but on my level, to have fun on the course,
persimmon works great.

Date: 07 Sep 2006 14:07:21
From: jeffc
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

Date: 07 Sep 2006 09:26:27
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

In article <tIVLg.12522$lk6.11093@tornado.southeast.rr.com >,
"jeffc" <jeffc226@yahoo.com > wrote:

> "gp" <gopher70@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:1157429134.411161.278770@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
> > Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
> > paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
> > players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
> > on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
> > 1960's weak-lofted irons??!!
> >
> > Tiger, Vijay, and Phil don't use wooden drivers, so why would a
> > 20-hcp'er use one?
>
> Because they enjoy it, the same way some people enjoy driving vintage cars
> around.

And just for info, Louisville Golf made a persimmon driver for TW, he
even used it to win a tournament...

Date: 06 Sep 2006 12:27:59
From: EdSmithers
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

gp wrote:
> Bottom line -
> my "Pet Peeve" is when hackers (20 hcp and more) use inferior
> equipment.

How on earth can it make any difference to you? You have seriously got
to focus on something that might have some real impact on your life and
the lives of your loved ones. Anything else is vanity.

Ed

Date: 05 Sep 2006 17:55:13
From: gp
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

Lloyd

Thanks and I stand corrected. My use of Louiseville golf clubs was a
bad example, as their drivers are comparable in size and performance to
today's metal drivers.

My complaint was with regards to people who use antique persimmon
woods from the '60's and '70's, and still hit a BIG FRIGGIN' SLICE (ie
they still f*ckin' suck) that they probably wouldn't hit (as bad) if
they dished out some sweet moolah for a modern driver. Bottom line -
my "Pet Peeve" is when hackers (20 hcp and more) use inferior
equipment. If a scratch golfer used a wooden driver, chances are he'd
probably hit it well.

Lastly, thanks for the lessons in the economics of manual versus
machine labor. My day job (when I'm not hackin') is in Manufacturing &
Process Engineering. ....You were barkin' up the wrong tree there,
Lloyd, :)

..and lastly, lastly... how are you so sure that the metalwood was
motivated purely by economics? Are you a golf equipment expert and
historian? Not being condescending here - just had to ask. If you
think about materials in general, I'd venture to say that metal
outperforms wood in most applications (a good example is the Space
Shuttle). Wouldn't one think that THAT's the motivation in the advent
of the metalwood? Performance, and advancements in materials science
and technology?

Lloyd Parsons wrote:
> In article <1157432058.898615.48380@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "pete z" <pz0326@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > sfb wrote:
> > > You may have a point about Persimmon drivers, but not about the irons. It
> > > shouldn't matter than today's five iron is yesterday's six iron or vice
> > > versa as you hit the iron in your bag for the distance to the pin regardless
> > > of the number engraved on the sole.
> > >
> > > "gp" <gopher70@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> > > news:1157429134.411161.278770@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > > > Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
> > > > Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
> > > > paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
> > > > players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
> > > > on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
> > > > 1960's weak-lofted irons??!!
> > > >
> > > > Tiger, Vijay, and Phil don't use wooden drivers, so why would a
> > > > 20-hcp'er use one? Sure, they're probably trying to be "purists" who
> > > > overdo the addage about the Indian and arrow, but this is not how the
> > > > game is played anymore. A Kt Golden Bear starter set with metal
> > > > woods and cavity back irons will perform much better than a Louiseville
> > > > or old McGregor persimmon wood and old Spaulding forged irons that some
> > > > hackers play with.
> > > >
> >
> >
> > Very true. If you look at old assembly manuals, you'll see that the old
> > standard
> > lengths and lofts are about 1 to 1 and 1/2 club weaker. That's why sets
> > are now 3-PW,
> > and you now need a gap wedge, which is equivalent to a PW from 20 years
> > ago.
> >
> > With the woods though, I play with a guy who uses real woods, the old
> > ones,
> > and has tried my 440 cc Cobra driver, and hits it the same distance,
> > and same
> > ugly big fade. But he hits his woods more consistently on the center of
> > the face.
> > Go figure.
>
> IMO there are two major differences between the persimmons and
> metalwoods.
>
> First is the shafts. Almost all the new, and certainly all the old
> persimmon woods use metal shafts. How they flex is very much different
> from the more usual graphite shaft of today's 'woods'.
>
> Second is head size. Other than the newer Louisville golf drivers, the
> heads are smaller than is the current rage. While this makes the sweet
> spot smaller, it also gives your eye a smaller target, which makes it
> easier for me to hit that sweet spot more often than not.
>
> I find that for me, the combination of the steel shaft and the smaller
> head gives me better results. Straighter, if not longer, shots are a
> hell of a lot nicer than the longer, but less controlled ones I was
> getting with my metalwoods. Especially the driver, as the fairway woods
> seem to be nearly the same distance.
>
> Is the difference in my head that causes me to do better with them? I
> don't know, and frankly don't care. The result is better for me
> regardless of reason.
>
> Lastly, if you look at the history of clubs, you can see that the advent
> of the metalwood was as much an economic move as anything else. It
> takes more hand labor to make a persimmon wood than it does a metalwood,
> hand labor costs more than machine labor.
>
> Lloyd

Date: 06 Sep 2006 02:41:45
From: Carbon
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 17:55:13 -0700, gp wrote:

> My complaint was with regards to people who use antique persimmon woods
> from the '60's and '70's, and still hit a BIG FRIGGIN' SLICE (ie they
> still f*ckin' suck) that they probably wouldn't hit (as bad) if they
> dished out some sweet moolah for a modern driver. Bottom line - my "Pet
> Peeve" is when hackers (20 hcp and more) use inferior equipment. If a
> scratch golfer used a wooden driver, chances are he'd probably hit it
> well.

How can good equipment help bad golfers if nearly every shot is a mishit?

I know a guy who is a 20+ handicapper, averaging 105-110. He just got some
pretty decent sticks, Cobra woods and irons. I can hit his new driver way
better than his old persimmon, but as far as I can tell he cannot.

Date: 05 Sep 2006 21:28:55
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

In article <1157504113.853625.161640@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com >,
"gp" <gopher70@sbcglobal.net > wrote:

> Lloyd
>
> Thanks and I stand corrected. My use of Louiseville golf clubs was a
> bad example, as their drivers are comparable in size and performance to
> today's metal drivers.
>
> My complaint was with regards to people who use antique persimmon
> woods from the '60's and '70's, and still hit a BIG FRIGGIN' SLICE (ie
> they still f*ckin' suck) that they probably wouldn't hit (as bad) if
> they dished out some sweet moolah for a modern driver. Bottom line -
> my "Pet Peeve" is when hackers (20 hcp and more) use inferior
> equipment. If a scratch golfer used a wooden driver, chances are he'd
> probably hit it well.
>
> Lastly, thanks for the lessons in the economics of manual versus
> machine labor. My day job (when I'm not hackin') is in Manufacturing &
> Process Engineering. ....You were barkin' up the wrong tree there,
> Lloyd, :)
>
> ..and lastly, lastly... how are you so sure that the metalwood was
> motivated purely by economics? Are you a golf equipment expert and
> historian? Not being condescending here - just had to ask. If you
> think about materials in general, I'd venture to say that metal
> outperforms wood in most applications (a good example is the Space
> Shuttle). Wouldn't one think that THAT's the motivation in the advent
> of the metalwood? Performance, and advancements in materials science
> and technology?

No problem. My particular pet peeve in all this is so many
automatically discount the usefulness of real wood vs metalwoods. I
know how it happens, none of the major winners are playing them anymore.
For lots of reasons, but probably because they can take full advantage
of the improvements made over the years better than us daily hackers,
and of course, they get paid big bucks to play them! ;-)

I would agree that if they are slicing and hooking bad with the
persimmon, they might want to see if a change in equipment will help.
In my case, going the other way was an improvement. Tonight's weekly
9-hole scramble is a good example. Every drive with the driver was dead
on straight down the fairway. That was never true with any of the
various metal drivers I have tried. Distance was short, but well, I'm a
short knocker, and those distances were nearly as long as my previous
metal driver useage, but again, straight down the middle.

I'm now working on which way I really want to go with fairway woods.
Tomorrow starts that quest. I've got some old MacGregor WXD fairway
woods that I'm hitting pretty good, but I think I might do better with
some changes. I'll know better in a few days.

And I didn't say it was purely motivated by economics, just that it was
a big part of the decision. Some of the readings I've done indicate
that. Lots of the mfg process for metalwoods can be done by machine,
almost none of the mfg of persimmon woods can be done that way. And
yes, some improvements were more possible with metal than with wood.

But that begs the question. If all these new clubs are so improving,
how come the average golf score hasn't changed much? Is it because
those improvements really only help the lower index and pro types? Or
is it because the real difference in score can only be done with the
'feel' strokes. You know chips, pitches and putts. Since feel is so
much a part of those strokes, maybe equipment differences really don't
help there. I don't know.

Lloyd

Date: 07 Sep 2006 14:28:46
From: jeffc
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

"Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons@mac.com > wrote in message
news:lloydparsons-E5C5B9.21285505092006@individual.net...
>
> No problem. My particular pet peeve in all this is so many
> automatically discount the usefulness of real wood vs metalwoods. I
> know how it happens, none of the major winners are playing them anymore.
> For lots of reasons, but probably because they can take full advantage
> of the improvements made over the years better than us daily hackers,
> and of course, they get paid big bucks to play them! ;-)

It's not really for "lots of reasons". It's for one major reason and one
trivially minor reason. The major reason is they get far better results
with this equipment. The trivially minor reason is the manufacturer bucks.
The top pros really could not care less, since their results are so much
more important than their endorsements (in fact, their endorsements
completely rely on their results.) Furthermore, Titleist doesn't really
care what gets endorsed. If Tiger wanted a wood driver, Nike would make him
one and pay him a bunch to use it. Then they would start selling a ton of
them.

> But that begs the question. If all these new clubs are so improving,
> how come the average golf score hasn't changed much? Is it because
> those improvements really only help the lower index and pro types? Or
> is it because the real difference in score can only be done with the
> 'feel' strokes. You know chips, pitches and putts. Since feel is so
> much a part of those strokes, maybe equipment differences really don't
> help there. I don't know.

You are right in one thing - the better equipment helps the pros more than
it helps amateurs. There are many reason the average score hasn't changed,
but it doesn't imply the equipment isn't better. (I will speak for
Americans here.)

1) People are working more and have less free time (this has been shown in
many surveys). When people have time to play, they do just that, they don't
practice. In other words, the new equipment is needed to simply keep their
scores the same.

2) More people are now playing, meaning more new golfers are playing, which
tends to keep the scores up (older golfers basically keep playing the same.)
Also, some players simply hit it farther out of bounds and this can't be
measured in score. For example, if they hit a slice that went 50 yards off
line before and 220 yards, they now hit it 240 yards and 40 yards offline,
which translates into the same distance into the woods (because the vector
is longer). i.e., no help.

3) People buy new equipment that is actually worse for them. They buy
shafts and lofts which are ill suited to them, because it's the macho thing
to do. So the equipment is better, but it fits worse, negating the benefit.
(The titanium head adds distance, but they are now using an 8 degee driver
instead of the old 11 or 12 degree persimmon drivers, which hurts them.)

4) Courses are longer (due to equipment, a vicious cycle) and players are
playing "pro tees" more often (due to the higher popularity of golf and
wanting to play like the pros.) Also, courses are more often built with pro
tournaments in mind, or at least top amateur competition as an option, so
more courses add even longer tees.. In the "old days", there might be white
tees at 6,000 yards and blue tees at 6,500 yards. Now, there are white tees
at 6,200 yards, blue tees at 6,700 yards, black tees at 6,900 yards and
championship gold tees at 7,200 yards. Not only is the average yardage
increased for the same set of tees, there is also a tendency to want to play
tees even farther back, more than negating the equipment advantage. It's a
wonder scores have not gone up.

Date: 05 Sep 2006 09:10:47
From: Miss Anne Thrope
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

This post is a perfect example of why golfers should be forcefully
sterilized.

Date: 05 Sep 2006 09:12:49
From: Henry
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

Miss Anne Thrope wrote:
> This post is a perfect example of why golfers should be forcefully
> sterilized.
>
So you ARE a proponent of positioning sand trap rakes tips up!
Henry

Date: 05 Sep 2006 07:47:28
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

On 4 Sep 2006 21:05:34 -0700, "gp" <gopher70@sbcglobal.net > wrote:

>Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
>Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
>paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
>players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
>on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
>1960's weak-lofted irons??!!
<clip >
My pet peeve is the amateur golfer who gives a shit about others'
equipment.
___,
\o

Date: 05 Sep 2006 11:46:25
From: Stratman
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

Date: 04 Sep 2006 22:41:23
From: gpsman
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

gp wrote: <brevity snip >
> Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
> Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
> paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
> players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
> on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
> 1960's weak-lofted irons??!!

What possible difference could that make to you? It seems an odd pet
peeve... and I suspect your own "amatuer" status remains intact, and
always will.

> Tiger, Vijay, and Phil don't use wooden drivers, so why would a
> 20-hcp'er use one?

Obviously, I think, one must consider it may be because they are
unaware you don't like it.
-----

- gpsman

Date: 05 Sep 2006 05:17:27
From: rich
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

Date: 04 Sep 2006 21:54:19
From: pete z
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

sfb wrote:
> You may have a point about Persimmon drivers, but not about the irons. It
> shouldn't matter than today's five iron is yesterday's six iron or vice
> versa as you hit the iron in your bag for the distance to the pin regardless
> of the number engraved on the sole.
>
> "gp" <gopher70@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:1157429134.411161.278770@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
> > Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
> > paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
> > players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
> > on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
> > 1960's weak-lofted irons??!!
> >
> > Tiger, Vijay, and Phil don't use wooden drivers, so why would a
> > 20-hcp'er use one? Sure, they're probably trying to be "purists" who
> > overdo the addage about the Indian and arrow, but this is not how the
> > game is played anymore. A Kt Golden Bear starter set with metal
> > woods and cavity back irons will perform much better than a Louiseville
> > or old McGregor persimmon wood and old Spaulding forged irons that some
> > hackers play with.
> >

Very true. If you look at old assembly manuals, you'll see that the old
standard
lengths and lofts are about 1 to 1 and 1/2 club weaker. That's why sets
are now 3-PW,
and you now need a gap wedge, which is equivalent to a PW from 20 years
ago.

With the woods though, I play with a guy who uses real woods, the old
ones,
and has tried my 440 cc Cobra driver, and hits it the same distance,
and same
ugly big fade. But he hits his woods more consistently on the center of
the face.
Go figure.

Date: 05 Sep 2006 11:13:55
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

In article <1157432058.898615.48380@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >,
"pete z" <pz0326@aol.com > wrote:

> sfb wrote:
> > You may have a point about Persimmon drivers, but not about the irons. It
> > shouldn't matter than today's five iron is yesterday's six iron or vice
> > versa as you hit the iron in your bag for the distance to the pin regardless
> > of the number engraved on the sole.
> >
> > "gp" <gopher70@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> > news:1157429134.411161.278770@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > > Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
> > > Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
> > > paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
> > > players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
> > > on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
> > > 1960's weak-lofted irons??!!
> > >
> > > Tiger, Vijay, and Phil don't use wooden drivers, so why would a
> > > 20-hcp'er use one? Sure, they're probably trying to be "purists" who
> > > overdo the addage about the Indian and arrow, but this is not how the
> > > game is played anymore. A Kt Golden Bear starter set with metal
> > > woods and cavity back irons will perform much better than a Louiseville
> > > or old McGregor persimmon wood and old Spaulding forged irons that some
> > > hackers play with.
> > >
>
>
> Very true. If you look at old assembly manuals, you'll see that the old
> standard
> lengths and lofts are about 1 to 1 and 1/2 club weaker. That's why sets
> are now 3-PW,
> and you now need a gap wedge, which is equivalent to a PW from 20 years
> ago.
>
> With the woods though, I play with a guy who uses real woods, the old
> ones,
> and has tried my 440 cc Cobra driver, and hits it the same distance,
> and same
> ugly big fade. But he hits his woods more consistently on the center of
> the face.
> Go figure.

IMO there are two major differences between the persimmons and
metalwoods.

First is the shafts. Almost all the new, and certainly all the old
persimmon woods use metal shafts. How they flex is very much different
from the more usual graphite shaft of today's 'woods'.

Second is head size. Other than the newer Louisville golf drivers, the
heads are smaller than is the current rage. While this makes the sweet
spot smaller, it also gives your eye a smaller target, which makes it
easier for me to hit that sweet spot more often than not.

I find that for me, the combination of the steel shaft and the smaller
head gives me better results. Straighter, if not longer, shots are a
hell of a lot nicer than the longer, but less controlled ones I was
getting with my metalwoods. Especially the driver, as the fairway woods
seem to be nearly the same distance.

Is the difference in my head that causes me to do better with them? I
don't know, and frankly don't care. The result is better for me
regardless of reason.

Lastly, if you look at the history of clubs, you can see that the advent
of the metalwood was as much an economic move as anything else. It
takes more hand labor to make a persimmon wood than it does a metalwood,
hand labor costs more than machine labor.

Lloyd

Date: 07 Sep 2006 14:12:46
From: jeffc
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

"Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons@mac.com > wrote in message
news:lloydparsons-733FC5.11135505092006@individual.net...
> IMO there are two major differences between the persimmons and
> metalwoods.
>
> First is the shafts. Almost all the new, and certainly all the old
> persimmon woods use metal shafts. How they flex is very much different
> from the more usual graphite shaft of today's 'woods'.

Any head can be outfitted with any shaft, obviously. So that has nothing to
do with clubhead technology. Shaft technology is another issue.

> Second is head size. Other than the newer Louisville golf drivers, the
> heads are smaller than is the current rage. While this makes the sweet
> spot smaller, it also gives your eye a smaller target, which makes it
> easier for me to hit that sweet spot more often than not.

So basically you've only identified one difference, and it's not that big a
difference. Metal per se is not really the major factor, since early
metalwoods were the same size as the wood woods. Titanium brought about a
bigger change, with lighter weight, bigger sweet spot and/or less problems
with off-center hits, coefficient of restitution, and reduction in spin
being the biggest changes. The spin changes are related to ball changes
too, though.

Date: 07 Sep 2006 09:24:42
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

In article <yNVLg.12524$lk6.9840@tornado.southeast.rr.com >,
"jeffc" <jeffc226@yahoo.com > wrote:

> "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:lloydparsons-733FC5.11135505092006@individual.net...
> > IMO there are two major differences between the persimmons and
> > metalwoods.
> >
> > First is the shafts. Almost all the new, and certainly all the old
> > persimmon woods use metal shafts. How they flex is very much different
> > from the more usual graphite shaft of today's 'woods'.
>
> Any head can be outfitted with any shaft, obviously. So that has nothing to
> do with clubhead technology. Shaft technology is another issue.
>
While that is true, when was the last time you went into a pro shop or
golf store and saw a steel shaft on a driver? Hell, even fairway woods
for that matter.

You can order them, but steel shafts aren't seen on what is selling
today.

> > Second is head size. Other than the newer Louisville golf drivers, the
> > heads are smaller than is the current rage. While this makes the sweet
> > spot smaller, it also gives your eye a smaller target, which makes it
> > easier for me to hit that sweet spot more often than not.
>
> So basically you've only identified one difference, and it's not that big a
> difference. Metal per se is not really the major factor, since early
> metalwoods were the same size as the wood woods. Titanium brought about a
> bigger change, with lighter weight, bigger sweet spot and/or less problems
> with off-center hits, coefficient of restitution, and reduction in spin
> being the biggest changes. The spin changes are related to ball changes
> too, though.

In your opinion that head size isn't a big difference, but to me it is.
Smaller target to focus on.

Date: 05 Sep 2006 00:52:14
From: Martin Levac
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

"gp" <gopher70@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:1157429134.411161.278770@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
> Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
> paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
> players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
> on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
> 1960's weak-lofted irons??!!
>
> Tiger, Vijay, and Phil don't use wooden drivers, so why would a
> 20-hcp'er use one? Sure, they're probably trying to be "purists" who
> overdo the addage about the Indian and arrow, but this is not how the
> game is played anymore. A Kt Golden Bear starter set with metal
> woods and cavity back irons will perform much better than a Louiseville
> or old McGregor persimmon wood and old Spaulding forged irons that some
> hackers play with.
>

You are confused.

Date: 05 Sep 2006 00:35:15
From: sfb
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

You may have a point about Persimmon drivers, but not about the irons. It
shouldn't matter than today's five iron is yesterday's six iron or vice
versa as you hit the iron in your bag for the distance to the pin regardless
of the number engraved on the sole.

"gp" <gopher70@sbcglobal.net > wrote in message
news:1157429134.411161.278770@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
> Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
> paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
> players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
> on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
> 1960's weak-lofted irons??!!
>
> Tiger, Vijay, and Phil don't use wooden drivers, so why would a
> 20-hcp'er use one? Sure, they're probably trying to be "purists" who
> overdo the addage about the Indian and arrow, but this is not how the
> game is played anymore. A Kt Golden Bear starter set with metal
> woods and cavity back irons will perform much better than a Louiseville
> or old McGregor persimmon wood and old Spaulding forged irons that some
> hackers play with.
>

Date: 07 Sep 2006 14:08:35
From: jeffc
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

"sfb" <sfb@spam.net > wrote in message
news:zOidnTNzCeQYY2HZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> You may have a point about Persimmon drivers, but not about the irons. It
> shouldn't matter than today's five iron is yesterday's six iron or vice
> versa as you hit the iron in your bag for the distance to the pin
> regardless of the number engraved on the sole.

Yeah, today's irons are all fucked up. But as you say, it really makes no
difference ultimately. You hit a club with a certain length, loft and lie,
period. The number painted on the bottom is just a way to keep track of
which one you're hitting in your custom set.

Date: 04 Sep 2006 23:22:52
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: Re: Some Amateur's Equipment, my Pet Peeve

In article <1157429134.411161.278770@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com >,
"gp" <gopher70@sbcglobal.net > wrote:

> Expounding on 5-iron's thread, "True Golfers Talk About the Indian and
> Not the Arrow", one pet peeve I have with some amatuer partners I get
> paired up with - why the F*CK do some guys, who obviously are frequent
> players, and have enough sweet moolah to play the game of golf, insist
> on using Persimmon wooden drivers??!!?? ...and in some cases, vintage
> 1960's weak-lofted irons??!!
>
> Tiger, Vijay, and Phil don't use wooden drivers, so why would a
> 20-hcp'er use one? Sure, they're probably trying to be "purists" who
> overdo the addage about the Indian and arrow, but this is not how the
> game is played anymore. A Kt Golden Bear starter set with metal
> woods and cavity back irons will perform much better than a Louiseville
> or old McGregor persimmon wood and old Spaulding forged irons that some
> hackers play with.

Have you actually used a Louisville Golf driver, or are you just blowing
smoke?

I have and use one every day and like it better than any of the
metalwoods that I have tried. I'm straighter and have better distance
control with that driver. I give up about 10 yds in actual distance,
but I'm most likely in the fairway or 1st cut with it, instead of in the
woods or deep grass.

Tiger and all the rest of the pros don't use wooden drivers for many
reasons. One would be the small distance loss, the other would be that
none of the sponsoring mfg's make them.

As to the 'weak lofted irons', maybe they don't feel the need for
something else. The difference would only be in club selection as that
would overcome whatever 'weak lofted' might cause.

I play a Louisville Golf St II driver and MacGregor WDX2 fairway
woods along with my very modern, forged MacGregor M565 irons.