...amazing how clear and comprehensive a speech is when the speaker actually knows what he is talking about... thank you very much Tom, for the time you took sharing your thoughts... for the kindness to offer your expertise... really enjoyed all of your videos... cheers mate

Thanks Tom always like your honesty about golf design.

Mr Wishon is a master of his art. I use his irons (565MC) and they are the best I have ever played.

Informative and honest advice, as always. Thank you. Peter (UK)

Great stuff. So much good sense. Thanks.

Superb video, as always.

All good stuff Tom; however I have never heard anyone in the industry discuss differences in iron head designs, in respect of how difficult or easy it is to square up the club face at impact. Seems to me, despite all the effects you talk about and the blurbs from all manufacturers, this aspect is completely ignored, so should everyone assume that somehow a club head always squares itself? or all club heads, regardless of design, rotate to square at exactly the same rate? That cannot be correct! The fact is that due to centripetal swing forces together, with any additional rotational force applied by a golfer, a club face has to rotate from , usually, somewhat open to the path AND more than 90 degrees open to the target line at halfway through the downswing, to ideally, square at impact, a split second later. If you look at adjustable driver design, the template used by all manufacturers is put the weight towards the heel side of the CG to promote a draw and to the toe for a fade. [ more toe weight = slower closing/squaring rotation, causing the club face to stay open a bit longer in the downswing ] Seems to me that the larger and more toe weighted an iron head is [ or more mass is outside the CG ], the harder it is to rotate that club back to square at impact. Taking that a bit further, if larger, toe weighted club heads are harder to square up, then the less skilled golfers who are encouraged to use these clubs, are those least likely to benefit from the marginal improvements in face "forgiveness" because those benefits don't exist if the face is open at impact. So one conclusion that could be drawn is, if you want a slicer to remain a slicer forever, give him a set of large cavity backs with peripheral weighting that he will struggle to square up! The issue does not go away with more compact cavity back designs, despite the center of mass being at the center of the club face, because if you have virtually no mass behind the center of the face, then there must be more mass in the extreme toe than traditional MB blades. There would be other aspects of club design having a bearing on rates of rotation; eg offset and amount and distance of weight behind the shaft center line. Does initial rotational inertia suddenly turn into quick over rotation from these additional factors? Does this combination of design features actually shorten the time the club head is square to the path? or do some features like these stabilize club head rotation? Ben Hogan designed many clubs in his time and you would know that a unique and repeating feature of those designs was a desire to get some weight high in the toe area, yet even he refrained from moving much to the outer toe end of the club head, so most of his muscle backs had variable thickness in the high toe area. If you are particularly perceptive to what is going on in the industry, you only have to consider the implications of TM's recent statement about the reason they designed their newest muscle back blade, the 730. They said their players wanted low inertia club heads! Think about it! Now in all the tests I have seen comparing OEM's new offerings...take the current Titleist and Mizuno club head options, the testers invariably say, "oh these blades look sweet, then they hit them well with tight dispersion and consistent distance, then say something like " oh but they are a lot smaller and I don't think I can game these" Their comments about the more game improvement irons are all about presumed forgiveness, but their dispersion is often not as good as the blades but the distance is greater, if less consistent, because of jacked lofts and low spin. Then you look at side by side shots of these club heads and the MB's are at least as long heel to toe as many of the other club heads. The differences are mainly where the weight is located. MB's tend to have more mass behind the hitting area, so .... it is my contention that they rotate more naturally because they have less inertia [ less resistance to movement ] than other designs! That is a good thing! There was a test by a Robot of TM PSI clubs a year or so ago on Utube. Toe hit, center hit, heel hit all went the same distance. Impressive. Got to get some of that slot technology eh? What I didn't realize at the time was that this may have been a bit of a "3 card trick" because the robot may have had a vice like grip on the shaft and so always kept the face dead square to the path. That is not replicating any person's swing that I know of, including DJ's and would eliminate the toe lag effect I am talking about here. It is my belief that many more players would actually play better with traditional MB blades. The reasons they don't play them is; a] The OEM's and golfing press have scared them away with tales of difficulty and promises of more help with different designs, because if blades were seen to be the best designs for the majority of golfers, there would be fewer club sales because you just cant differentiate MB designs nearly as much as you can with cavity backs ; and b] Most blades have been made with shafts that are too stiff and too heavy for Joe average, so if he tries a set, new off the shelf or second hand, it will be the shaft that doesn't work, but he wont realize that!. He will hand them back and wont know what he is missing unless he gets the opportunity to try some with say XP 95 Regulars or Modus 3 105 Regulars, or has the good sense and the access to a good fitter like yourself who can fit a set of MB blades properly. I am a senior golfer with a long, past parallel swing who played off 9 - 11 handicap for decades. I now game a set of Titleist 680 MB's [ yes the club heads still played by Adam Scott that are supposed to hit low shots..but actually they don't ] with 95 gram regular steel shafts and they are the easiest clubs I have ever swung [ of the 30 odd sets I have owned over the years ]. My handicap now? 5.6 I enjoy your videos Tom. Keep up the fine work.

Tom. Give us your opinions on " one length irons"🤔 it's seems to me it would take a lot of variables out. Plane and ball positions mostly. + lie angles would be more consistent. It seems One would become more comfortable as to where the ball should be in their setup most of the time? Your thoughts on this would be most helpful 🙂🤔👂👂👂

Those 771s are nice looking clubs Tom.

If I might ask a question based on your comments regarding fitting. What happens to the action of the club as your game improves if you’re fitted as a beginner? The same thing as one gets older and ones game deteriorates owing to age. I’ve always bought used clubs when I started to play at 55 am now 65 and play off 12 but now struggling with health issues. I play your 770s but my wife has started to play and is a quick learner. How would you fit for her? Thank you.

another excellent video. thanks Tom

Hello Mr. Wishon, I'm aware that you are now semi-retired and I am not sure if you or someone associated with you checks these comments but if by chance you see do you believe that this video is still current?

Hello Tom, I work for a golf retail business in the UK. A certain company says that although their lofts have been decreased they still hit the peak trajectory for control due to new technology. So is the loft decrease essential to stop the ball travelling too high ? What are your thoughts ? MANY THANKS

Hi Tom, superb explanation. Is the Ping "core eye" technology related to the variable face thickness concept you described?

I am curious what are your thoughts on Back weighting on an iron, and a wood butt end , is it a good idea, or just a fad?

Not gonna lie, my brain read Iron Maiden and I clicked on it. Stayed and watched the whole thing. lol