Jump to content

Will Par

 
  • Content Count

    244
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Will Par

  1. I've never owned an adjustable driver so if there is a benefit, I certainly wouldn't know. I have tried going to a couple of driver fittings in the past but neither produced any positive results, so I'm winging it as far as fitting goes. I recently won a UST Mamiya ATTAS T2 S6 shaft so I had to decide if I should install it in my Titleist 909D2 or purchase a new driver for it. I considered buying adjustable, but settled on a "like new" Titleist 909D3 that I found on eBay. I now have a driver/shaft that I'm thrilled to hit every time I tee up. I don't know if it is the clubhead or the shaft (or both), but I now hit a penetrating ball with less spin that just bores through the wind. I've actually achieved the kind of results I had always hoped for when I went to a fitting. (I've had three different shafts in my 909D2 driver and none match this new combo.) Would an adjustable head make it even better? I don't know but I doubt it. I can't thank UST Mamiya enough. This is a great head/shaft combination for me. And I don't have to worry if there is a better setting.
  2. Breathing properly is the answer to getting settled down when you are nervous on the course (or anywhere). Google "four count breathing" or "tactical breathing" for specifics. Used in military and police training. This really works and it's easy!
  3. I'm a retired IT guy and I've tracked stats on my computer for over 15 years. I've used different database apps over the years but most of my rounds (over 600) are in an Access database on an old computer. I keep current rounds in an OpenOffice spreadsheet. I designed and programmed these myself. I track score, GIR, Fairways, putts, putts on GIR, eagles, birdies, pars, bogies, others, sand saves, one-putts, three-putts, and I keep an average of all stats for the year. I enter every round after I get home. I enter score on each hole, putts on each hole, fairways hit, and sand saves. All the other stats calculate automatically. I've got some rounds all the way back to 1993. I've had some periods when I didn't record rounds, but I think I have over 85% of all rounds I've played since 1996. I don't often use the stats to find any tendencies or for any game improvement benefit. But I do have a section for notes and I put swing thoughts and what worked or didn't work for each round. Sometimes it's beneficial to go back and read the notes from previous rounds.
  4. I like everything except the white swoosh on the top of club near the hosel. I guess they couldn't resist. To me, that just screws up the look of what otherwise would be an awesome looking club. I'm not in the market for a driver, but if I was, this would certainly get a close look (even with the swoosh).
  5. Live streaming of the Nike release tonite at 7PM ET. http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-equipment/blogs/hotlist365/2012/11/nike-goes-live-to-debut-its-ne.html Oops. Didn't know this was already posted elsewhere.
  6. This is an analysis of the issue as I see it. The mechanics of an anchored stroke does two things: (1) it takes the wrists out of the stroke, and (2) it stabilizes forearm rotation during the stroke. In a non-anchored stroke, the two most likely areas for mechanical issues (other than head/body movement) are wrist breakdown and excessive forearm rotation. The anchored stroke automatically corrects two critical points of mechanical failure. Does this make it a superior way to putt? No. I don't think anchored putting offers any advantage over a standard stroke when both are mechanically sound. Good putting involves a lot of things other than mechanics. You can have perfect mechanics but if you don't have the other skills that lead to good putting you won't putt well. But... if you are an instructor, coach, parent, or anyone else recommending the best way to learn to putt, you will never go wrong recommending an anchored method. It automatically corrects common faults that most golfers struggle with when using a standard length putter. It is not a better way to putt, but it is a better way to learn to putt. Take that thought one step further and ask this question: Fifty years from now, what method will the majority of golfers be using? Common sense tells me that almost everyone will be using an anchored method because it is an easier method to learn and an easier way to avoid common faults. That is what we are already seeing... an increase in the number of players using an anchored method. So if you agree with this analysis, it becomes a question of whether you want the game to evolve and change naturally, or if there is a benefit in preserving traditional methods. I've got a lot of time and effort invested in my traditional stroke. I wish I had known years ago what I know now. I wonder how many putts I've missed because I had a little too much wrist break, or a little too much forearm rotation? Maybe anchoring really is a superior way to putt. I hope someone will convince me it's not.
  7. I'm in favor of a ban on anchoring. It is clear that anchoring eliminates some of the challenges inherent in putting. It eliminates some of the moving parts and it offers advantages in very windy conditions. I think putting should be a challenging aspect of playing golf and I think everyone should have to face the full challenge without shortcuts. It is the challenge that makes the game fun, eliminate the challenge and you eliminate some of that fun. Several have commented that the long putter has been permitted for 25 years and it would be wrong to make it illegal after that length of time. For most of those years, the long putter was considered a crutch and was only used by those who couldn't solve the challenge of using a standard putter. It is only in recent years that the long putter and anchoring has changed from a crutch to a potentially better way to putt. I remember watching the US Amateur Championship at Chambers Bay in 2010 and being surprised that so many college players were using long putters. Coaches had started recommending the long putter to students who whose putting was below average. That recommendation would not have been made to young players just a few years earlier. The acceptance of long putters and anchoring has only occurred in recent years. I just want to see the full challenge of putting returned to the game and see that all golfers are required to face the full challenge. I think Keegan Bradley--and others who want to fight a ban--are taking the wrong approach by saying they will bring lawsuits. They should be taking a professional stance that says they are good enough to putt well using either method. If they are already doubting their ability to compete using a standard putter they have more to worry about than how they are going to fare in a court case.
  8. I carry a 15* 3-wood and a 21* hybrid. These are my clubs of choice for 2nd shots on par 5s. I'm seldom going for the green in two, but I've learned that I'll make more birdies when I'm as close to the green as I can get. I'd rather hit a 60 yard shot than an 85 yard shot, I'd rather hit a 100 yard approach than a 120 yard approach, etc. I'm going to hit the 3-wood every time unless I have a poor lie or if the ball is on a down slope. In those cases I'll hit the hybrid or an iron if I'm in a really bad spot. I don't carry a club between the 15* and 21*. Depending on conditions that can be a 30 yard difference. Being 30 yards closer to the green is something that I'm going for every chance I get. I almost always use a driver from the tee. The only time I use the 3-wood from the tee is if I encounter a hole that is difficult to get the ball in play with a driver. I don't have any holes like that on the courses I normally play.
  9. 32g is a LOT of weight to try to add to a putter head. It will take many layers of lead tape covering the entire sole of the putter, so many that the putter will be sitting significantly higher when soled. Or you may be able to put some in the cavity behind the face or on the flange if you don't mind the looks. I once took a one ounce (28g) lead fishing weight and cut it into tiny pieces and corked it in the bottom of the shaft. If you putted with that putter, I doubt you would know the weight was there, but for some reason I was never satisfied with the result. The putter never felt really solid at impact. Honestly, I never found a satisfactory solution other than layering as much lead tape as possible on the sole of the putter. Added weight on the sole maintains the balance of the putter without changing impact feel. Weight in the cavity behind the face is OK too. In my experience about 20g of lead tape on the sole is about as much as you can realistically add before the thickness becomes excessive. You can experiment and see how it works for you. My experience tells me that some putters just can't be adjusted to the optimum weight and balance without drilling and adding tungsten plugs. And that's something most of us can't do at home.
  10. I recently got a different driver and tried it for one round at 45 inches. Came home and immediately cut it back to 44.5. I think 44.5 is perfect for me.
  11. I do that quite often. Today I was teeing up on a par three and one of the guys was shooting the distance with a laser. I said, "What is it... about 170?" and he said, "169". Now I don't just eyeball the distance. I knew it was 162 to the middle of the green from that tee placement and with the pin on the back I knew that added about 8 yards. I do the same from the fairway by getting the distance from a nearby sprinkler or 150 marker... visually calculating the distance from that to my ball, and then making another calculation for either a front, middle or back pin. From several years playing the same course I also remember the distance on most of the sprinklers, so I don't even have to walk over to look at them. For me it's just mental calculations that I can do quickly. But without those markers, I doubt I would be very accurate just eyeballing the distance.
  12. Congrats to all! Looking forward to the reviews and photos...
  13. I love 100% cotton for comfort! The Player's Shirt in white would be my choice.
  14. The first round of the Grand Slam of Golf was played yesterday. I saw only one advance ad for this event. It's played on a Tuesday and Wednesday when we are not accustomed to watching live golf. And it's broadcast on a TV channel (TNT) which seldom broadcasts live golf (you are not likely to stumble on it channel surfing). When I remembered to turn it on yesterday, the players were on the last green. This was a big event long ago. I'm debating if it is worth the trouble to DVR today's program since only two of this year's major winners are playing and the scoring format is seldom exciting. Am I the only one who is wondering why they even continue to play the Grand Slam of Golf?
  15. Here is an article that gives a recent appraisal on the effect of the new groove rule on tour. http://golfdig.st/OJgEjZ
  16. I was given a dozen NXT Tour balls a year or so ago and played them. That was before the new version came out earlier this year. Fine off the tee and into the green. They will stop and even spin back with a good wedge shot. But on short chips and pitches they will run out six or eight feet more than a premium ball depending on the shot. Once I learned they roll out more on shots around the green, I didn't mind playing them. I just had to adjust my landing area. But you may encounter a shot now and then that you can't stop as close to the hole as you would want... or as close as you could with a premium ball. I didn't like them enough to keep buying them. I buy the ProV1 or sometimes the ProV1x.
  17. Since this is the first time I've received test balls, I've got several questions. I'm wondering if we ever find out for certain exactly what ball we received? Is it certain that the black number ball is the new ProV1 and the red number test ball is the new ProV1x? Are these the final version of the new balls Titleist will release in February, or do they tweak them again based on feedback from the tour players? I'm guessing this is the final version. And while I'm sure they have some method of evaluating the survey responses, I'm thinking they send these test balls out more as a promotion of the Titleist brand than to collect survey data. If they really analyze feedback, I'm thinking they primarily use feedback from their tour players. (I was involved with compiling the results of a corporate survey once, and top management seemed have very little interest in it... which was not surprising. When you get a large number of replies, a high majority of those replies are positive and it's almost impossible to isolate any useful information from the survey. I'm sure Titleist already knows from computer simulations exactly how the balls perform in different conditions.)
  18. Played 18 holes today with one of my test balls (black number). I feel certain this is the ProV1 and my first impression is that it's an improvement over the current ProV1. I like this ball better off the driver... seems to have a little less spin. I've always felt the ProV1 normally spins a little too much off the tee. Ball feels really solid and good off the irons. And it is really solid and flies well when hitting a hybrid. I hit a wedge shot that landed, hopped forward, and then spun back just as you would expect from a premium ball. I didn't really get a good test of how it plays on short shots around the green. I had a really good day tee to green hitting every fairway and 14 greens in regulation. I hit mediocre pitch shots on the four greens I missed so I can't make a judgement on ball performance from those few pitch shots. But I don't have any reason to think the ball will perform any differently than you would expect from a ProV1 on pitches and chips.
  19. I'm really curious about this one. You normally don't see extra distance claims in the premium line of golf balls. The USGA has initial velocity limits and an overall distance standard that they test before approving balls. Unless TM has a new dimple pattern that they are going to claim does magical things, I don't have any idea what it is. I would think that the aerodynamics of dimple patterns has already been researched to the nth degree by every ball manufacturer. So I'll be watching to see what all the hype is about this time.
  20. My URL ends with Prototype1. There is a /s3/ in the middle of the URL. I'm guessing the survey will ask what type of ball is currently being played and used for comparison to the test ball. I don't know how they track who gets what type of ball. Maybe, as you speculated, they know based on the URL for the survey. I'm scheduled to play on Thursday and I'll try out one of the test balls during that round.
  21. I received a sleeve of these test balls today. Mine have the black number. I normally play the ProV1 and list the ProV1 as my preferred ball on the Team Titleist website. The dimples on these test balls match exactly the dimples on the ProV1 balls I've been playing.
  22. Titleist introduced the new Velocity and updated the NXT line last February. It was Feb 2011 when they last updated the ProV1 line. It appears to me that Titleist is on the same 2 year cycle for ball upgrades that they use for drivers. New drivers every two years in November, new balls every year in February with ProV1 line and the NXT and Velocity line each having a two year period before upgrading. That would make next Feb.(2013)the release date for the new ProV1's, with NXT and Velocity due for new versions in Feb. 2014.
  23. I didn't get any (yet) but new ProV1 and ProV1x prototype balls were given to Titleist players at Las Vegas this week. You would think that since they are also sending these prototypes out at the same time that these would be the new version of the ProV1 and ProV1x that will be coming out next year.
  24. Any time I put new wedges in the bag--or any new irons for that matter--I'm prone to hit them left of where I'm aiming until I have the lies adjusted two degrees flat. That always solves the problem for me. So if these are new irons, one possibility is the lie angle may be more upright than you are accustomed to playing.
  25. If you go from a bad fit to a good fit, your good shots should get better, and your bad shots... well bad shots are just that. There should be no expectations from a bad swing. A bad swing can produce any face angle and any type of shaft load and no fitting can anticipate and fix that. If you expect your bad shots to get better from a fitting, you have unrealistic expectations. A fitting shouldn't be a process where someone tells us what is best... it should be a process were we obtain information that allows us to decide what is best. I would have expected a single digit handicap player to know if he liked the shafts that were chosen at the end of the fitting. But that's just my opinion. Finally, there is nothing wrong with the shafts, but there may have been something very wrong with the fitting. Three hours??? That is an immediate concern. I think the OEM should provide another free fitting performed by another expert fitter. Only after that has been done should a decision be made on how to replace the shafts if that is necessary. It would be better to get fit by someone other than the OEM, but that doesn't provide a path to resolve the issue. One of the worst things we can do as golfers is to start doubting our equipment. If you think you can't hit a club, you'll never hit it well. But if you take that same club and decide it's just as good as any other, then you'll be able to hit it as well as your skills allow. If I were in the same situation I would have to shoulder some of the blame myself. If I couldn't get any satisfaction from the OEM, I would decide how to proceed and get the shafts replaced at a reasonable cost. Sometimes fighting to prove you are right and someone else is wrong is more trouble than it's worth.
×
×
  • Create New...