Jump to content

Justin66

 
  • Posts

    873
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Justin66

  1. There's been people I've played with that when we've had a single or twosome come up, they just ignore them. "We're a foursome, so we have more standing" is what they say. I actually got into an argument on the course with a guy because of that... I was like "Really? What's the harm in letting them play through?" So, I haven't played with that guy in a LONG time... I don't really care what the Rules say on that issue- it's just common sense.
  2. I agree with the above (and the "more LH" comment).
  3. You said it! He also has another new fan: me. That selfless gesture should be a nice wake-up call (or a slap in the face) for the NFL/NFLPA.
  4. Gotta find some way to make the profit margins bigger. Pay less for labor, but keep the retail prices high.
  5. As much as I harp on Callaway, I really liked the I-Mix. It was simple. You either need a closed face (normal), open face (tour), and draw or neutral weight bias. The golfer should know this, but that's also assuming they're getting fitted and not just guessing. So all of the important variables (loft, face angle, etc.) were already figured out... the rest was just tweaking the shaft and grip to get that last little bit of optimization (which, as it pertains to launch conditions, is all the shaft does- tweak). These other adjustable drivers, I feel, leave too much up to the individual... and too tempting for some to cheat the Rules. No, that's not an across the board thing, because most golfer actually have integrity... however, there is the temptation for some to make a fade setting for the fade holes, and a draw setting for the draw holes. I don't like that Taylormade has a "TP" version... that's just stupid, in my opinion. Each head has so much adjustability, regardless of model. I feel like they're almost tricking you into buying a shaft upgrade you may not need, just so you can have the same driver the pro's use. At least with the Titleist version, it is what it is. Simple, but effective.
  6. I paid $10 on a special offer they had a few years ago (I had been a faithful buyer for about 3 years previous). Was about halfway through my subscription when I got into it with that Mike Stachura. I wrote the editor, asked them to cancel my subscription, which they wouldn't do. So, I let it run out. Even after blasting both Stachura for being a horse's @ss and Carney (the editor) for sticking up for him, they STILL send me offers... and there's no way to stop them. I've sent the "postcards" back with stuff like "please don't bother me" to no avail; emailing everyone- including all the little buttons at the bottom of the site like customer service and technical support, and they still send me offers. So, don't expect it to stop.
  7. From what I've studied, Matt's right- you'd theoretically lose ~2-3mph swing speed. However, if you're making more consistent impacts with the face center at the shorter length, you may actually pick up yards. Or at the least, make it an even trade. Another thing to consider when shortening the club is the swing weight issue that comes up. A 1/2" change in length will effect 3 swing weight points... so 1" will change 6 points! So, if you buy the RAZR w/ RIP, and for argument's sake it comes that way with a D2 swing weight, just cutting off the grip, knocking off the inch and putting the same weight grip back on will make it drop to a C6. Most of us, unless we're Tiger or Nick Faldo, can't feel a 3 sw point change... but 6 is pretty substantial. If this is a "problem", so to speak, depends on the individual, though... The balance point of the club would be closer to the hands. Some people like this, because they feel it gives them more control at the top. Others don't, but that's why they call it "personal preference". If you take the inch off and don't like the way it feels, you could add weight to the head, get a lighter grip, or do a combination of the two to get it back to where you like it (switching to a heavier shaft would effect swing weight, but may not actually help). Not terribly difficult, thanks to the invention of the light grips.
  8. Where's Geoff Shackleford when we need him? His "The Future of Golf" book talks about this. In a nutshell, he blames the USGA/R&A for failing to control OEMs, which lead to longer and harder courses that take too much time to finish. There's a LOT more... this doesn't really do it justice, because there's so much more to it than that. If anyone's inclined, it's a VERY good read. Anyway, we're all pretty much in agreeance. Pro's dink around, so amateurs do it. As an aside, I am surprised I didn't see anyone try to copy Villegas's "Spiderman" pose last year. Maybe this year LOL. Some amateurs, regardless of skill, want to play the back tees so they can "see the whole course". Why? I don't get how 10 yards give or take per hole is going to change anyone's perspective. I see people and their interaction with the cart attendant and that bothers me. If a group is going to take 5+ minutes to decide if they want either M&M's or a Snickers (while hitting on the poor girl), let the groups behind you play through. I don't think a stroke penalty will work here, but Dave's lynching idea might.
  9. Playing devil's advocate can be fun sometimes! I think you're right about the whole trying to sound smart thing. I've watched Mahan swing, and either he does the lean very fast, does it differently than how he described it in the article, or just doesn't do it at all. His swing, other than the finish, just doesn't seem to look the same compared to the article. I don't know why, but it's bugging me for some reason... I wonder if I'm missing something, or am I right?
  10. I especially would prefer the "near police stations"... to ensure the weed distribution center's integrity. These things are all well and good if used with the right intentions, but how many things in the world were started with good intentions that fell to the dark side? I'd also back Ping's comments of protecting their junior golfers, if said center were to fall to the wayside.
  11. I checked his site, and Hollas is still listed (in the "golf sponsorships" section). I tried to back that up with a Y! image search... nothing. There's a logo on the left sleeve of the red shirt he wore at the Honda, but even pictures of it straight-on don't help, because either Sab's too far away, or the pics themselves are too small. Why not try asking him yourself? I didn't look, but most celebs and athletes have a contact page, and I know Sab has a Facebook page. Why not try that, get an answer straight from the source?
  12. But is it really "working"? They give out cards to Nationwide grads and Q-School finishers... but how much is enough? There are some golfers that don't get to participate in all events (WGC's and majors excluded), which hurts their chances of keeping that freshly-minted Tour card, meaning a revolving-door policy at the bottom of the money list. I'm going the other way and say that this change could be a good idea. Limit the number of new entries on Tour. That way, the incoming class gets to enter in every tourney they qualified for, enhancing their chances of breaking the top 125. Besides, the Nationwide isn't a bad place to be, and based on what I've seen it seems like a great place to really prepare the new bloods for life on the PGA tour. Now, I'm not saying it's perfect... because I'd still like to see a Rickie Fowler-like story now and again. I also don't want to see another Ty Tryon story... so I'm kind of torn. If there were some way for a fair exception to be made. Maybe the three-win rule the Nationwide has could be kept. Win three, get an automatic pass the the big leagues. Just a thought...
  13. The first pic looks more like a mugshot... I hope.
  14. It looks like a Black Tour with new etchings and paintfill. Same face.
  15. I have to agree. Hunter had an instruction article in Golf magazine a couple of months ago... things sound good until they're practiced. He talks about staying centered. He also says to lean into the shot once the backswing is completed. The majority of the speed is done by the arms and hands... after that, the weirdest part (in my opinion) happens: he say to be at 100% effort at impact, but slow down through impact. This is so your finish is balanced. To me, this sounds like it encourages people to pull off the gas too soon, or worse yet, maybe lead to throwing the club to start the downswing, trying to make sure they're at 100% during impact. I've always have been taught to accelerate into impact. An example I was given is the distance discrepancy between a 95 mph swing that accelerates into impact and a 95mph swing that decelerates: the accelerating swing will always be longer, because the fastest point will be at (maybe even after) impact... not before it. Telling someone to go from 100% effort to 60% in what amounts to miliseconds after impact seems odd to me.
  16. Ok... I found this on YouTube. I tried a Penta-specific search, but nothing came up. I would think that something like that would be a useful marketing tool, but maybe that's why I'm sitting in front of my computer and not there. Anyway, this is a "Made in America" bit about Titleist. It's more of a lesson in the company, but there's a small part at about the 3:50 mark that shows a mantle layer being layered over the core. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy86YlsR0LU&feature=player_embedded#at=246
  17. I'm going to preorder the XF (not the Leggera) Friday. After rereading what I wrote earlier, I sound like a fanboy... Ugh.
  18. Excellent review! I have a soft spot for "informative yet makes you laugh" writings, which you pulled off expertly! I also liked your detail on the durability- it DOES make the pricepoint more appealing. Thanks for sharing this with us!
  19. As a Star Wars geek, I'm loving the Darth Maul reference. Very fitting and very pretty.
  20. I like this idea. Maybe chrome the soleplate, as well...
  21. From what I know about injection molding (I'm no expert, but we do a bunch of it for car parts at my shop) it'd be inline, from an operations standpoint, with how they add the cover. Only, the core would obviously be smaller, then however many layers needed would be added after the preceding layer was allowed to cool. If they don't let it cool, I imagine the layers would melt together, so instead of a 5-piece ball like the Penta you'd have a 2-piecer with a multi-colored core. A Top-Flite with a urethane cover, basically . I'm going to try and dig a little more... maybe something will come up.
  22. http://http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3wmg9_how-its-made-golf-balls_news How its made - Golf Balls by tamart1 This is a little older, but the process is still basically the same. The only difference in the manufacturing process that I'm aware of is their "offsetting" of the dimples. Bridgestone was the first, if I remember correctly, to slightly twist one half of the cover mold; this allows for a much less noticable seam and slightly more efficient flight. Pretty fascinating, if you ask me.
  23. How is it that pro athletes have these issues? Don't they have people managing their money? If they were doing as they say the do, this stuff would never come up!
  24. Not what I was getting at... and I think we're saying the same things differently. Stachura claimed that anyone gaming equipment 2+ years or older (back in '09) was "pretending" to golf. I took exception to that, and let him know. Big Stu, along with a good friend of mine, are the examples I've been using all this time to prove him wrong. It takes a LOT of skill to get to a single digit handicap. On top of that, he's doing it with vintage gear. As skilled as he is, how could he be "pretending" to golf, which is what he'd be doing per Stachura's statement? It isn't about the ad-driven "Hot" Lists (which is a whole different can of worms), it's about someone so pretentious- Stachura- being wrong.
×
×
  • Create New...