Blades or cavity backs? Which type of irons truly gives you more control and feel in your game?

[Beezerk]

The only view of a golf club that matters is from above at address.
Most of the better “players CBs” look just like blades from above.

I tend to look at the ball.when I'm over a shot, the club isn't even in my thoughts
Regarding lack off feel on CB irons, I play Mizuno Hot Metal CB irons, I know instantly from the feedback of the club if I've hit the middle, heel or toe

 

[Captain_Black.]

For me, the best compromise is a combo set.
CB's up to 8 or 9 irons, then blades.
Around the green, or from about 125 yds, blades give phenomenal feel & control if hit pure.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

For me, the best compromise is a combo set.
CB's up to 8 or 9 irons, then blades.
Around the green, or from about 125 yds, blades give phenomenal feel & control if hit pure.

So do CBs

 

[harpo_72]

I have used all 3 types…
Blades .. nice, beautiful to look at, create more demand on the short game. More appealing to those concerned with appearance ( no score card has a picture (yet)) ..
Cavity .. no difference on centre strike to blades (good strikes are good strikes.. to suggest otherwise is inexperienced) off centre less dispersion front to rear so better. Pragmatic clubs for those concerned about scoring, the engineering solution.
Hollow irons.. different central strike feeling, dispersion front to rear huge .. vanity sticks for those who want to look good but cannot hit a cows backside with a banjo

There you have it .. middle is middle on cavity and blades .. hollow backs it’s that super hot one !

 

[Orikoru]

I do think people overrate the looks aspect of blades. I don't think modern cavity backs look ugly for the most part. Whether it's a cavity or a blade it's simply a tool to hit the ball with - and when you're looking down at your shot you can only see the face and the top line anyway. I probably wouldn't use a club that was so hideous the looks of it put me off, but that's not going to be the case with 99% of clubs. So ultimately I went for the irons that go straight and far as often as possible with my limited ability.

I do wonder if there are tennis forums where people are fawning over the wooden rackets and still using them for 'feel'. I doubt it somehow but you never know.

 

[Backache]

I do think people overrate the looks aspect of blades. I don't think modern cavity backs look ugly for the most part. Whether it's a cavity or a blade it's simply a tool to hit the ball with - and when you're looking down at your shot you can only see the face and the top line anyway. I probably wouldn't use a club that was so hideous the looks of it put me off, but that's not going to be the case with 99% of clubs. So ultimately I went for the irons that go straight and far as often as possible with my limited ability.

I do wonder if there are tennis forums where people are fawning over the wooden rackets and still using them for 'feel'. I doubt it somehow but you never know.

I suspect wooden tennis rackets is more akin to using hickory shafts than blades, there are plenty of professional and high level golfers using blades I suspect there are no professional tennis players using wooden rackets.

PS I am not decrying your reason for using cavity backs , I use them as well.

 

[sunshine]

Surprised at the number of people who prefer to have a worse golf score for the benefit of looks and the occasional feel. I am not sure the feel is even a thing - yes, the off-sweet-spot hits with a blade feel worse, therefore the contrast with with perfect strike stronger and rarer. But perfect strikes on either will feel the same. To each his own, though I feel golf is about scoring not feel. And we know must feel is actually sound.

Blades are really only still with us because marketing needs segmentation, aspirational, and pathway product ranges. Super game improver - cavity back - 'player' irons (the term is laughable - are the rest of golfers not players too) - fake blades (hollow ones, camouflaged as blades, for those who aspire to the blade story, but deserve credit for recognising that they harm their game), and blades. Blades the pinnacle of the narrative.

And yet professional golfers, who are entirely focused on marginal gains and will do anything to gain extra control or distance, don’t use super game improvement clubs.

There must be a reason for this. I imagine the majority of tour pros would play with a hideously ugly club if it meant they were in contention.

 

[Backsticks]

And yet professional golfers, who are entirely focused on marginal gains and will do anything to gain extra control or distance, don’t use super game improvement clubs.

There must be a reason for this. I imagine the majority of tour pros would play with a hideously ugly club if it meant they were in contention.

They would in the main, although sponsorship sways them a little. But the reason they dont play sgi is that with their swing speeds, they would launch the ball too high. But they play almost everything else designwise. They know it makes little difference to their performance, and can sign with whoever offers them the best deal to play their clubs. They play cavity back, blade, hollow, muscleback. If the top 0.0000001% of worlds golfers are playing a variety of them for their millions, then there is no functional difference between any of them.

Even the perceived aesthetic - I love the look of a slim top line on a blade - type view is only a creation of the marketing departments. They are selling aspiration. Callaway Apex tcb for example, widely played by the top pros, and sold with the ubiquitous tag line (whether 'review', advert, or description from a retailer) "Apex TCB Irons are specifically designed for Tour players and elite golfers", are funnily enough...sold by just about every golf club retailer. Unless the average golfers and 'tour and elite' golfers are now the same thing, it doesnt take much to smell a rat. Not too many tour player going into American Golf to pick up a new set. But average golfers are, because the tour player is playing them, pictured with them, whats-in-the-bagged with them.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

They would in the main, although sponsorship sways them a little. But the reason they dont play sgi is that with their swing speeds, they would launch the ball too high. But they play almost everything else designwise. They know it makes little difference to their performance, and can sign with whoever offers them the best deal to play their clubs. They play cavity back, blade, hollow, muscleback. If the top 0.0000001% of worlds golfers are playing a variety of them for their millions, then there is no functional difference between any of them.

Even the perceived aesthetic - I love the look of a slim top line on a blade - type view is only a creation of the marketing departments. They are selling aspiration. Callaway Apex tcb for example, widely played by the top pros, and sold with the ubiquitous tag line (whether 'review', advert, or description from a retailer) "Apex TCB Irons are specifically designed for Tour players and elite golfers", are funnily enough...sold by just about every golf club retailer. Unless the average golfers and 'tour and elite' golfers are now the same thing, it doesnt take much to smell a rat. Not too many tour player going into American Golf to pick up a new set. But average golfers are, because the tour player is playing them, pictured with them, whats-in-the-bagged with them.

Westwood spent years using Ping shovels

 

[Robster59]

I started off with blades as there was no alternative (yes, I'm that old). I moved over to more forgiving clubs and now play Callaway XR16 irons. I have an old set of Maxfli Revolution that I bought just because I always wanted them. Not true blades but not the forgiveness of a modern CB.
My experience is that a good shot feels like a good shot whatever the head. However, I know a badly hit shot on a CB will go further and straighter than that on a blade.
And aesthetics is surely a matter of taste anyway? To me, most blades all look the same. With Cavity Backs, at least there is some variation in the look.
I don't like really thick top edges, but I'm not offended by the slightly thicker edges of my clubs, they're not offputting in any way. And as somebody said, when I am playing my shot, I am looking at the ball, not the club head.
And what is "feel"? Mizuno once referred to the "Sound of Feel" which was actually more of a cast vs forged argument.
At the end of the day, you play what is suitable to you. I just resent the snobbery of blades vs cavity backs (e.g. the use of the term "shovels". Really?)

 

[Backsticks]

Westwood spent years using Ping shovels

Nice. Proves the point even more I guess. You can play world class golf with anything, and even when you livelihood or legacy in the game is at stake, it doesnt really matter what brand or design you are using. But marketing needs to sell the illusion of segmentation, progress, aspiration, 'upgrade' path, price differentiation, 'tech' development. The golf gear industry's closest industry relation is creative fiction litterature.

 

[Backsticks]

'Shovels' would have the marketing men doing a dance of delight.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Nice. Proves the point even more I guess. You can play world class golf with anything, and even when you livelihood or legacy in the game is at stake, it doesnt really matter what brand or design you are using. But marketing needs to sell the illusion of segmentation, progress, aspiration, 'upgrade' path, price differentiation, 'tech' development. The golf gear industry's closest industry relation is creative fiction litterature.

It actually disproves your point that Pros don't use SGI clubs

 

[Backsticks]

It actually disproves your point that Pros don't use SGI clubs

Yes, but that rarity or exception proves the substantive point even more, that gradations of clubs for different golfers are a fiction.

 

[D-S]

Yes, but that rarity or exception proves the substantive point even more, that gradations of clubs for different golfers are a fiction.

Just to understand your point - do you think that I will be able to hit all clubs exactly the same - blades, cavity backs, different manufactures, graphite, steel, stiff, soft etc.etc.?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Another thread started by the AI bot also known as annasmithgolfer…same AI bot as before gathering our thoughts to build and inform its AI database so that it can chat with ‘us‘ intelligently and seemingly on the same page as us - and so duping us into thinking that we are conversing with a real person. Well of course it is as we are telling it our thoughts - and giving them for free into the bargain

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Grew up on blades from my first half set (Petron impala) through Dunlop Maxfli Australian blades and Ben Sayers "Ray Floyd" iron. Pretty sure my first cavity back was a set of Cally X14 and not had any blades in since then. Closest I got since were TM Tour Preferred Irons or my Ping I series. Wouldn't go back to a set of blades and best I would consider would be a more bladed 8, 9 and PW as part of a combo set. I feel I get enough control, subject to my variable swing, and my distances are consistent. I am happy with the feel around the greens and as I get older why make it harder?

 

[RichA]

Yes, but that rarity or exception proves the substantive point even more, that gradations of clubs for different golfers are a fiction.

A totally nonsensical response for absolutely every situation, regardless of topic. It's almost impressive.

 

[Voyager EMH]

The result of the vote is very clear.
52.2% cavities and 47.8% blades.

That is an "overwhelming majority".
We have until 31st January 2026 until we must all abide by the majority and "take back control" of our clubs, our balls and our rules.

And blade remainers and supporters will just have to lump it.
Na na na-na nah.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Just to understand your point - do you think that I will be able to hit all clubs exactly the same - blades, cavity backs, different manufactures, graphite, steel, stiff, soft etc.etc.?

He doesn't think. He just posts!