Maltby Playability Factor

[dbleber]

Does anybody know how to read this and what it means? I found my clubs under classic and a rating of 359, but what does this tell me?
Denny

[1972Apex]

It tells you very little. MPF is the Maltby formula for calculating the 'playability' of clubs. There is a detailed explanation of how it works on the Golfworks website.
As MPF is based on the theories used by Golfworks to design their clubs, naturally Golfworks clubheads score very well, as do the new Tommy Armours which were also designed by Ralph Maltby.
It's fine if you want to compare one Golfworks model to another but I'm not sure of the objectivity in evaluating clubs from other manufacturers. How would you like to use a Nike rating system to evaluate Callaway clubs? Mostly hype IMHO.

[Big Johnny69]

I agree and disagree w/ Proforged. I had a set of Nike Slingshots and on the Playability Factor their rating is around 500-600 which according to their rating system is not a very "playable" club. But I found them one of the easiest clubs to hit I have ever held in my hands. Ball went high and straight, fat and thin shots went relatively well. All in all a very easy club to play for the masses. So in that respect I think the Playability factor is a little skewered. But on the other hand they rank X-16 irons high on their chart and I find them very easy to play as well. But they do rank X-14 high as well and I don't find them very easy to hit clubs. So take the Factor for what it is worth. If you are looking for clubs it doesn't hurt to look a the chart to get a feel for what is a game improvement club and what is a more workable club.

[1972Apex]

Actually their highest ranked clubs last time I checked were the original Callaway S2H2s. MPF rates them higher than any other Cally for playability. Having owned just about every Callaway iron ever made, including the S2H2s, I would have to disagree. You can't tell how an iron plays by measuring it.

[LobWedge]

Actually Proforged, MPF is one of the most highly regarded technical manuals in the golf industry and is used by many OEMs and component manufacturers. It is a proven method of measuring the playability of any manufacturer's club to determine it's playabity for the average golfer. Many OEM clubs score quite high as well, such as Callaway.

dblebler, the rating number for your clubs means that although they may be an extremely well built and quality product, they are most likely meant for a player who can hit the sweet-spot the vast majority of the time and take advantage of a shallow and/or high cg, and will not perform well on mis-hits.

[Big Johnny69]

LobWedge, I agree with you that the Playability is highly regarded in the clubmaking business but to generalize all clubs with a formula leaves yourself open for critisism. Alot of how you play with a club is confidence which can't be measured by a formula. I am an 8-10 handicap (depends on the short game) and am pretty confident I can hit almost anything out there. And like I said I can hit the Slingshots much better than the X-14s but the X-14s score well above the Nikes (approx. 600-1100). And Golf Digest editors rank the Nikes as a very forgiving and easy club to hit for all handicaps. So why such a low score on the Playability Factor? I have played and hit some of Golfworks highest scoring clubs based on their chart and I find my Ping I3 Blades much easier to play with than some of their clubs that scored into the 900s. I am pretty sure the I3 Blades are around the 450-500 range. But in their defence I am not aware as to what is a significant difference would be between the numbers. For all I know a significant jump would be from 400 to 800, where perhaps a jump of 100 points would be negligable.

[LobWedge]

I’m not saying that MPF is the be-all & end-all in clubmaking and design. Of course there are other factors involved like shafts, grips, balls, and swing dynamics. MPF is mainly a design tool that provides information to club builders which designs are going to be the most forgiving when you don’t hit it perfect, which is the majority of us, the majority of the time. Mike Weir uses cavity-back irons, so do Mickelson and Els. They probably don’t need to but they’re comfortable with the style of equipment. Tiger and Vijay use blades because they can. But make no mistake, their clubs are engineered to the N-th degree to maximize their swing potential. It’s all science. MPF is just a tool to help you work towards the desired results.

BTW – Speaking of Vijay. His Cleveland 460 Comp driver sits 4º open and has 15 grams of lead tape on the toe! Talk about not wanting to hook the ball.

[1972Apex]

I stand by my earlier statements....

[LobWedge]

I stand by my earlier statements....

So do I...

[Matthieu06]

As I can see from the previous posts here, people have different opinions regarding the MPF.

My father baught the book a few days ago and while going through it, I noticed that the irons I play are rated at 163 which means a Player Classic (Not recommended - very few if any tour professionals still play clubs in this category). I mean I didn't know my swing was that good!! Now that I've seen this i'm thinking of going on tour.....

No but seriously, I was amazed to see the Ben Hogan Apex Plus rated that low. I knew these clubs were not ment to be played by beginners but cheez that's pretty wicked. The Apex blades are rated 334 and the Apex Edge Pro, which are basically the same as Apex plus (a bit more forgiving...) rated 471. Even if you go on Golfreview.com, the Apex plus are rated really good. They can't be that hard to hit ?!

Considering that I hit my irons farely well, should I buy more forgiving irons hoping to lower my handicap a bit and hit other irons even better??

[TourIQ]

I think the MPF is more 'fiction' than 'fact'. In other words, value close to 'nil'.

[Chieflongtee]

The bigger the shovel with very large sole and very low centre of gravity the higher the MPF factor. Plain and simple.

[danscustom]

Sorry but Ralph's system is nothing but Fact.
This system is highly regarded by many OEM's which is the reason they send their new models to him - to be rated. He doesn't ask for these clubs, they send them to him.
If you have a good design and gets Ralph's stamp of approval, you just increased the possiblity of sales.
Everything is a dimensional measurement that gets a corresponding value assigned to it - total of these measurements is the factor.
Not everyone agrees with his system, but that doesn't make it fiction.
Yes, his signature clubs do rate high, but that is because he is a designer looking to help the common golfer enjoy the game as much as possible.
Calloways are very playable as everyone knows, and the get rewarded with a very high MPF.
Taditional blades - with long hozels - COG not in the center of the face, are tough for everyone to play - and get labeled with a low MPF.
He is not saying that clubs in the lower ratings are bad clubs, just that it does take a quality player to make this style work.
Nothing wrong with having an enlarged sweet spot, with good playability.
The MPF helps everyone understand that if they purchase a club from the higher ratings that these heads will benefit you.
If you are a player who likes to work the ball then an ultra game improvement head is not what you want, but you still get the advantage of finding a playable head - rated in the mid categories. It simply helps in decision making.
Try a low rated blade and you will understand why your hand is stinging by a small miss.
Fiction, I don't think so.

I think the MPF is more 'fiction' than 'fact'. In other words, value close to 'nil'.

[iyell4]

Does anybody know how to read this and what it means? I found my clubs under classic and a rating of 359, but what does this tell me?
Denny

CLASSIC and PLAYER CLASSIC: These clubheads should be reserved for expert players with the ability to adapt their swing by feel to suit the club. Most golfers are cautioned that these irons can be extremely sensitive and must be hit on their (smaller) sweet spots to achieve proper trajectory and distance. Name brand clubs in these categories include the Titleist DCI 762 (Classic), the Mizuno MP-37 irons (Classic), and the Cleveland TA3 (cast and forged) irons (Classic). (MPF points are 399 and below; negative points are possible!)

Please keep in mind that Maltby Playability Factor (MPF) does NOT say one golf club is better than another. It simply indicates what Playability level a specific model meets when analyzed.

[dbleber]

Funny when old threads are revisited. I had a hard time thinking which club I was even asking about then! To be honest I have always played a club based on looks and feel and when I first started playing I was def. playing irons that were not for me,according to the MPF, but I was still able to play them and improve so i think that's the most important thing.