This week’s post is somewhat of a continuation of the recent path we’ve been on, discussing the nuances of those high-loft clubs at the short end of our sets – those specialty clubs we call “wedges.” The real question might be:

“What is a ‘wedge’ anyway?”

Can that name be given to any iron-type club simply based on its loft? And if that’s the defining criteria, where do “wedge” lofts begin? And can clubs of all different design configurations still all be “wedges” just because they fall into that arbitrary range of lofts?

To the first question, my historical research indicates the term “wedge” first came into common use in the 1930s with the invention of the original sand wedge, generally credited to Gene Sarazen. As the legend goes, after flying with Howard Hughes and observing the use of flaps to make the airplane go up or down, he conceived the idea of a downward angle on the sole of a niblick to make it “reject” from the sand. So, after numerous prototypes and testing, the club that came to be known as the “sand wedge” was born.

Those clubs were about 55-56 degrees of loft, and quickly became widely adopted because of this revolutionary performance from bunkers. My guess is the term “wedge” was applied to that club because that’s exactly how you used it – you “wedged” the club between the ball and the turf – loft made the ball go up and the sole made the club “bounce” off the turf.

The professionals of the 1940s and 1950s began to use their sand wedge for more specialty shots around the greens, but most often relied on their highest lofted iron for most routine pitch shots. In sets back then, that club had 50-52 degrees of loft and was often called a “pitching wedge,” but some labeled it simply a “10-iron,” or in Ben Hogan’s case, the Equalizer.

But that club looked like the irons it matched, bearing little resemblance to the specialty “sand wedge” with its big flange and heavy sole, but I really don’t know why it was also called a “wedge.”

As iron lofts began to strengthen in the 1980s, the need for a “gap wedge” came about, as that valuable 50- to 52-degree iron was disappearing. Then at the other end of the set, the “lob wedge” appeared. Both of those clubs bore some resemblance to the sand wedge because they were most often presented as loft extensions in manufacturers’ wedge product lines.

So, now let’s fast-forward to 2023. Most iron sets have a “P-club” of rarely more than 45 degrees, and we’re seeing more and more with as low as 42 degrees of loft. Many of the iron models offer set-matching “wedges” labeled “A”, “G”, “S”, etc. to extend the iron design up into the higher lofts. These all look almost identical to the 6-iron in that set, because this industry is still caught up in the notion of “matched” sets. (But that’s a topic for another day)

In the “wedge” category, product lines can be confusingly broad, with lofts from 46 to 64 degrees and all kinds of specialized sole configurations. So, back to the original question — what is a “wedge?”

Think about it this way.

At the long end of your set, the club with 22 to 24 degrees of loft might be configured as a fairway wood, or a hybrid, or a hollow high-tech “driving iron,” or simply the 4- or 5-iron that matches your irons. Each golfer can determine which configuration serves him or her best at that loft and the distance it produces.

Likewise, the clubs at the higher loft end of your set might look like your 6-iron, or might look like a traditional wedge, or might look like one of the numerous specialty wedges with a wider sole. My “wedge” designs for Edison Golf don’t really look like any of those.

But just like those options you have to build out the long end of your set, each of those various ways to configure a higher-lofted club will produce different results.  So, can we really lump all of these high-loft options into a singular category and call all of them “wedges?”

Or is it time to come up with a totally different word to describe those high-loft clubs in our bags that have the assigned task of delivering consistent results at a range of distances as we get closer to the green?

I’m not sure I have the answer, but it should be fun for all of us to stop and ponder the question? Your thoughts, everyone?

Recommended Bets:

• Emiliano Grillo 
• Chez Reavie 
• David Lipsky 
• Carl Yuan

One side-effect of the relentless effort by major iron makers to win the “launch monitor wars” that pit one 6- or 7-iron against another is that the lofts throughout sets of irons have been continually strengthened to a point of what I consider ridiculousness. There are two major problems with this trend in specifications for sets of irons. The first is that to try to win the “launch monitor wars,” iron makers have to try to make their 6- and 7-irons go farther than the other guys’. That means making those mid-irons stronger in loft and using a bit of “trickery” by increasing the loft gapping between your higher-loft scoring clubs so that your “P-club” doesn’t get too strong, too (though modern “P-clubs” of 43-45 degrees of loft are really not “pitching wedges” at all).

Historically, iron lofts progressed through the set at four-degree loft intervals, and .5-inch length differentials. This wasn’t happenstance at all, it was the result of rigorous testing by professionals and average golfers. Those technical differences typically delivered consistent distance gapping from the pitching wedge down through the set.

A review of the specifications of almost every set of irons on the market today, however, will reveal that loft differentials are now five degrees between the short irons and as little as two degrees at the long end of the set. This is totally counter-intuitive to how you can improve your short iron and wedge precision. Why in the world would you want to increase the distance differences between your shorter irons, which is where you most need distance control precision? After all, a 6-iron shot that is 25 to 30 feet long or short is pretty darn good, but it sucks if you have a 9-iron or wedge in your hands.

Understand that the “holy grail” of distance in golf club design is the combination of high launch and low spin. Achieving this is relatively simple – put as much mass in the bottom of the golf clubhead as possible.

So, the second major problem caused by the “launch monitor wars” is how modern irons are designed. The early “solution” to longer-hitting mid-irons was extreme sole-weighting with thinner faces. The newer technologies we’re seeing in irons combine even faster faces with heavy tungsten inserts in the sole of the club.

But the problem with almost all irons on the market – especially in the “game improvement” category – is that this same design and technologies are applied throughout the “matched” set of irons and even into “wedges” that display that same design concept. And that’s where your prime scoring clubs are being compromised.

High launch and low spin are great in a driver or fairway wood, and maybe even desirable in your middle irons — but that is the exact opposite of what you need to achieve consistent distance precision in prime scoring range when you have a short iron or wedge in your hands.

Almost all accomplished players have learned to hit their short irons and wedges with a penetrating ball flight and lots of spin to stop the ball in its tracks once it hits the green. So why would you ever want to play short irons and wedges that have all their mass at the bottom, which is designed to deliver the exact opposite of what you should be seeking?

Now, let’s go back to the title of today’s post.

Either your 6- or 7-iron is 28 to 30 degrees of loft – but have you ever stopped to think that this loft is closer to that of your driver than to where your “wedge” lofts begin (around 45 degrees)? I feel certain that no golfer in the history of the world has ever proclaimed

“I really like my 7-iron. Can you make me a driver that looks just like it?”

In fact, from your 7-iron down to your driver, you likely have at least four, if not five, completely different clubhead designs in order to optimize performance at a given range of lofts. That iron design might evolve to a driving iron design a few degrees lower, then most likely to a hybrid design a few degrees lower than that, then to a fairway wood as lofts get below twenty degrees, and finally to a driver at 9 to 12 degrees.

So, if it takes four to five completely different clubhead designs to optimize performance at the long end of the set, how realistic is it that only one design throughout your set of irons can deliver the performance and precision you need at the short end?

I’ve always believed that every club in your bag has a specific purpose and expectation. Fairway woods, hybrids, and long irons are to get you close to or maybe even on the green from a long-distance approach. With middle irons (5 through 7 or 8), your goal is to get on the green within a reasonable distance, or certainly not to leave yourself a tough greenside save.

Your “money clubs” are those with lofts above 37 to 40 degrees, as this is where you have a chance to get close enough for the occasional one-putt, whether that is for a birdie, par, or bogey. And this is the end of your set where you likely have not spent the time to make sure it’s just right.

To accent just how important this part of your set really is, did you know (if you discount the fact that almost all so-called par-5 holes on the tour are really just long par 4s for those guys) the entire PGA Tour is over par outside 9-iron range?

Something to think about, for sure.