My old Macgregor 1025m blades are rated as game improving, with a rating of 600. I never found them to improve my game at all. Quite the opposite.
I changed to Titleist ZB, which are way easier to hit than the Macgregors. Nope, these are harder, are described as conventional, with a rating of 495.
If I changed at all, the Nike VR pro combo's look nice. Should be a bit like my ZBs, but a tad more forgiving given they have a bit more technology in the long irons. Nope, wrong again. Described as classic, with a rating of 342.
I love the way MX25's and MP57's are considered conventional but the Cleveland CG7 Tour and the MP52's are classic.
And what constitutes more playable anyway?
Ping S56 more playable than TM Burner???
S57's more playable than MX-200's???
Not sure how some of these fall into game improver. I'm not overly fussed by the Maltby factor and it never plays any part in my consideration when buying a new set.