First, of the models you mentioned, there is only a 22 point variation, which is insignificant and would not be noticeable in playability difference. Ralph states that for most players, it would be difficult to notice up to a 100 point differences in playability. Second, simply put, playability is forgiveness. You hit a higher playability club slightly off center and because it is more stable, the results are not as bad as if you had hit a lower playability club off center. MPF does not discriminate against the age of a design. Good mass and dimensional characteristics are good, no matter when they were designed. It also does not recognize commonly used terms to describe a clubs so-called playability, like “cavity back” or “perimeter weighted” or “muscle back”. Clubs will have features like this, but it is how the mass and dimensional characteristics actually are that determine the stability and playability of the design. That is why you can have cavity back designs that are not as playable as muscle backs, or visa versa. It is true that those features do lead one to believe that weight will be distributed in a certain way, but if the horizontal cg, the actual vertical cg and the rearward cg locations are not designed to produce the stability required to produce a highly “playable” club, the playability will not be what the design may have intended.