I have noticed that the USGA has a conforming club list for drivers and a separate list for all other clubs (irons, hybrids, and fairway woods).  Maltby clubs seem to be listed under the manufacturer “The Golfworks,” so alphabetically the “T” is important in the USGA’s database.

Whereas the current offerings for irons, wedges, and drivers are listed there is nothing for fairway woods.  The only hybrid listed is the KE4 Tour FDI.  I am probably an outlier compared to most of your customers but this does deter me from purchasing these clubs from The Golfworks.  I am sure they conform, but obviously your sales volumes make the cost of submission prohibitive.  (I am aware that the groove rule does not apply to the lower lofts typical of fairway woods, but there is probably some other testing, such as COR, which would be relevant.  Other manufactures have fairway woods on the list.)

Let us know if I am missing something.  At this point I won’t purchase anything not on the list.  A few years back you produced a beautiful driver in the KE4 ST-1, which for one reason or another never made it to the list.

Here is the link I use to the database:  https://www.usga.org/rules-hub/grooves/informational-club-database.html

If you click the first link on that page “Search the Database” and select the club type and manufacturer (The Golfworks) at the bottom one can quickly find all Golfworks submissions within the category.

Britt Lindsey Answered question June 27, 2022

Until Britt gets back to you with more current info:

Britt Lindsey5.35K Posted April 23, 20200 Comments
Basically clubs with lofts of 25 deg. or higher would be tested for groove conformity and lofts of 35 deg. or lower are now tested for COR or CT (spring like effect). It was only recently that the USGA set a test standard for the CT check of clubs with lofts of 35 deg. or lower, principally because of the claim of some manufacturers of enhanced ball speeds due to spring like effect on some iron designs. It is a different test than is performed on Drivers. In recent years, we have not submitted Fairways and Hybrids. Our plan is to send in fairways and hybrids in models that are most likely to be used by players in events where conformity might come into question. All of our designs are produced to be conforming and we are extremely confident when submitted they will be placed on the Informational list. The USGA has recently increased the cost to submit clubs, and it’s not cheap. We currently have the STw2 drivers and irons submitted, as well as the new TSW wedges. Once those are done, our plan is to start the process of sending in the TC Fairways and Hybrids and the STf2 Fairways and STh2 Hybrids. It is taking much longer to get results due to the current situation we are all in. The USGA is working, but with reduced staff, as I understand it.

Our priority has always been the Drivers, since it is required to be on the USGA list, and the irons. There is not “iron” list and manufacturers are not required to send in irons, but they should be on the “Informational” list the USGA publishes so IF a player or Tournament director, etc. has a question they can reference the list. Drivers and golf balls are the only clubs that MUST be on the list, and Irons are much more likely to be questioned about conformity. That being said, of course all clubs should be manufactured within the guidelines, which we do. There is a protocol a player or a manufacturer can follow for sending in an iron, fairway wood or hybrid that is not on the Information list, if a question arises.

Hope this helps clarify the often confusing issue of club conformity and what actually is required.

Britt Lindsey

Thanks Britt.

It makes sense to give your iron and wedge models priority over metals. High quality, customizable forged heads that except 0.370 shafts are limited.

You’ve clearly given the TS-x lineup considerable thought and should have the market covered for years to come. Elegant looking clubs for sure. I think the Maltby Trademark is classy looking.