USER1999
Grand Slam Winner
Why is back spin so desirable? (not the sort that gets the ball airbourne, but the silly stuff).
As an average golfer I am puzzled as to why I ‘need’ back spin. Apparently according to the ball and club makers, if I use the newest balls (designed to offer unprecedented levels of spin combined with distance), and the latest irons with their zip mack spinmill daddy grooves I will get more spin.
Is this a good thing?
As an average golfer I rarely pitch the ball past the pin, with my irons or wedges. It would be nice, but somehow I don’t ever seem to be able to bring myself to do it. Now my ball striking is average, so on the odd occasion that I do hit it properly, I get 20 feet of back spin that I really didn’t need, as I hadn’t got past the pin in the first place.
Now I read recently that if you use an old sand wedge you are potentially missing out on about 3000 extra rpm of spin. Now again, if you have never had this, you base your bunker play on having some run afterwards. So you buy a modern wedge because apparently you ‘need’ this extra 3k, play your normal shot, and suddenly get a load of unwanted spin, (but only on the odd well hit shot, so not consistently), this surely would be detrimental as you would not have made allowances for this. Therefore the more consistent shot is the one where there is less spin, so it runs out a consistent distance. I don’t feel comfortable ‘firing at the pin’ and relying on spin I may or may not get to hold the ball on the green, and for me, the harder I have to hit the shot, the more inconsistent the contact is.
Around the greens, if there is nothing to go over, I will chip with a variety of clubs, none of which require spin (utilities, 7 irons, etc). If I have to go over a bunker, then the most lofted club is employed, but again, I get inconsistent spin, which makes it very unpredictable. It also means I have to hit the shot harder, to get it to the pin in case I get a bit of check, which makes hitting a thin a complete disaster, and for me, a shank is never out of the equation.
Apparently the bigger, square cut grooves on our irons are designed to clear more grass from the club face when hitting out of the rough. Again, if this wasn’t the case, you would just go down a club and hit it shorter, letting it run on.
Apart from a macho ‘did you see how far I dragged that back’ factor, do we really feel this emphasis on spin is a good thing. It seems to me to be directed by watching tournament play from the states, where the emphasis is on ‘target golf’, form professionals (who have to try to take spin off – however that works) and may not suit the average player at all.
And yes, I do have spin milled wedges, and square grooved irons, and I do play provs (where actually, the much derided top flight might be more predictable for the average player).
Comments?
As an average golfer I am puzzled as to why I ‘need’ back spin. Apparently according to the ball and club makers, if I use the newest balls (designed to offer unprecedented levels of spin combined with distance), and the latest irons with their zip mack spinmill daddy grooves I will get more spin.
Is this a good thing?
As an average golfer I rarely pitch the ball past the pin, with my irons or wedges. It would be nice, but somehow I don’t ever seem to be able to bring myself to do it. Now my ball striking is average, so on the odd occasion that I do hit it properly, I get 20 feet of back spin that I really didn’t need, as I hadn’t got past the pin in the first place.
Now I read recently that if you use an old sand wedge you are potentially missing out on about 3000 extra rpm of spin. Now again, if you have never had this, you base your bunker play on having some run afterwards. So you buy a modern wedge because apparently you ‘need’ this extra 3k, play your normal shot, and suddenly get a load of unwanted spin, (but only on the odd well hit shot, so not consistently), this surely would be detrimental as you would not have made allowances for this. Therefore the more consistent shot is the one where there is less spin, so it runs out a consistent distance. I don’t feel comfortable ‘firing at the pin’ and relying on spin I may or may not get to hold the ball on the green, and for me, the harder I have to hit the shot, the more inconsistent the contact is.
Around the greens, if there is nothing to go over, I will chip with a variety of clubs, none of which require spin (utilities, 7 irons, etc). If I have to go over a bunker, then the most lofted club is employed, but again, I get inconsistent spin, which makes it very unpredictable. It also means I have to hit the shot harder, to get it to the pin in case I get a bit of check, which makes hitting a thin a complete disaster, and for me, a shank is never out of the equation.
Apparently the bigger, square cut grooves on our irons are designed to clear more grass from the club face when hitting out of the rough. Again, if this wasn’t the case, you would just go down a club and hit it shorter, letting it run on.
Apart from a macho ‘did you see how far I dragged that back’ factor, do we really feel this emphasis on spin is a good thing. It seems to me to be directed by watching tournament play from the states, where the emphasis is on ‘target golf’, form professionals (who have to try to take spin off – however that works) and may not suit the average player at all.
And yes, I do have spin milled wedges, and square grooved irons, and I do play provs (where actually, the much derided top flight might be more predictable for the average player).
Comments?
