shane_pech

He directly responded to that claim in the video linked at the beginning of this thread. It's simply not true. The shots that get shown on screen aren't the only shots that he hits. Same with Peter Finch or any of the other reviewers/channels. This is a classic case where it doesn't make sense to conflate testing and reviewing. MGS is the best at testing, no doubt. They don't have a monopoly on reviewing, and frankly this comment from their account helps me realize they might not understand the difference between the two.

MGS is accountable for the posts made by their account, even if this post is the sole opinion of one member of the team. In this case, the "5-10" shots is a low-blow insult that's obviously untrue, and that'd be bad enough. It's entirely possible that Rick could genuinely not see speed gains while the entire team did. Peter Finch had similar findings to Rick's, with a little ball speed bump but not enough to fully differentiate. Caping up for TM in this way really calls into question MGS's ability to be objective across the board. It shouldn't matter to a reviewer how hard or how long TM worked to create or test the club. If TM spent 20 years or 20 minutes creating the club, it now stands on its own and should be judged on its merits. Rick isn't their mom appreciating the gesture of a poorly made breakfast in bed on Mother's Day. They made a product and he's reviewing it on its merits. It literally doesn't matter at all how hard they worked on it. The post reads like someone trying to defend a sibling against criticism. That's not the relationship I want my reviewers to have with their subjects. This will cause me to view MGS's subjective reviews with a lot more suspicion than I did previously.