Jump to content

cnosil

 
  • Posts

    8,967
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    57

Posts posted by cnosil

  1. 14 minutes ago, Chip Strokes said:

    41 

    4/7 fairways

    5/9 greens

    16 putts 

    3W was awesome off the tee today.  irons were ok but i’m still costing myself strokes with partial wedge shots. 

    first round trying out left hand low for putting. no 3 putts all day. stroke felt really smooth and the ball was coming out of the center of the putter face 

    How did it go with your playing partners?

    • Like 3
  2. 2 hours ago, Michael M. said:

     

    Why am I telling you my life story?  Because I wonder if the coach who has committed this much time to me and knows me . . . wouldn't be a better choice for me and a fitting even though he is at the dreaded GolfTec?

     

    Does your coach say you need different clubs or a different setup?  How qualified of a fitter is your coach?  

  3. 5 minutes ago, Billy-Bo-Jim-Bob said:

    Mizuno QC at about the 6 minute mark...1*tolerance 

     

    How does you loft lie machine compare to theirs?   There is a tolerance for the machines as well. If yours reads 1 degree flat and theirs 1 degree upright there is a 2 degree difference.    Not saying that they shouldn’t meet your specs but there are a lot of tolerances to deal with.  

    • Like 1
    • Hmmm 1
  4. 10 minutes ago, Golfspy_CG2 said:

    Just for clarification, it's radar based units such as Trackman that have some issues inside.  The camera based such as Foresight usually don't have as much of an issue.  

    I’d say different “issues”. Camera based LM have flight limitations as their algorithms calculate based on a few feet of information and don’t consider the balls aerodynamic properties.  Radar units look at flight but as you mentioned struggle to capture things like spin.   Was an interesting answer during the last MGS ball test when they explained why they were using both a GC Quad and a Trackman.  Independently they are both good but  In tandem they provide a more complete picture.  

    • Like 1
  5. 14 minutes ago, LICC said:

    I'm not sure why you think these support your argument. Fowler carried it 275 with modern balls. Take at least another 10 yards off for the ball, and that is substantially shorter than he hits it with modern equipment. Same with DJ. He hit it 290 with a modern ball. Take back more yardage based on the ball and he hit much shorter than he hits it with modern equipment. 

    It shows that the video that you posted isn’t  really  100% accurate the  numbers in the videos I posted are pretty close to the carry distance with today’s 46” drivers; not the total distance shown  on the pga tours website, and with practice players would continue to hit them better and longer. The 46” limitation is a step to limit the the use of club length  to increase distance  and it is the ruling bodies being proactive  to try and limit distance.  Even if we stop all equipment advances,  players will continue to swing faster and more and more players will hit the ball farther.  While a handful of players will be impacted by limiting driver length the overall impact of the change is negligible if any at all.  The only reason this is a topic is because it is a new change; probably won’t even be discussed at any depth in 6-8 months because the impact is so small.  It won’t make a course play differently, it won’t change strategy, it won’t impact scoring, and for those that think distance is a problem it won’t reduce distance.  

    • Like 2
  6. 17 minutes ago, LICC said:

    We have discussed this plenty and I respectfully entirely disagree. I've posted plenty showing that the predominant cause of distance increases are equipment advances. Here is another thing that I posted a while back in another thread:

    Here is more data to support my view that distance gains are predominantly from equipment technology. Here is the same person, same balls, using different drivers from different years from the same company. There are substantial distance gains from the 2004 version to the 2013 version, and again significant increase from the 2013 version to 2021. 

    https://golf.com/gear/drivers/how-far-has-distance-increased-5-drivers-from-different-years/

     

     

    While it is an interesting test,  few metrics were provided to show contact locations and swing numbers.  I have also shown “tests” of older clubs that show no significant distance differences that you dismissed as being invalid.  provide all the data that can be captured on a GC Quad and it would be a more compelling story.   
     

    I don’t disagree that equipment has helped players more consistent hit longer shots.  But there are other factors that contribute to lower scores and longer distances.  As technology has advanced manufacturing processes have improved as well making clubs more consistent.  
     

    but here are some other tests of old technology:
     

    https://golf.com/gear/drivers/paul-casey-persimmon-driver-modern-golf-ball/

     

    https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/tour-news/dj-hits-nicklaus-persimmon-driver-163339

     


     

     

    • Like 1
  7. 42 minutes ago, LICC said:

    Statistically, a 2 or even a 1 shot decrease over that many tournaments with that large a group of players is significant. Add the fact that these declines have happened as courses have added hundreds of yards in length and the statistical significance is even greater. 

    Now you may think that decreased scoring on longer courses isn't a bad thing or anything that needs to be addressed. But we shouldn't deny that it has happened.

    Personally I would prefer to see the pros play in a way that 300 yard drives still mean something, where par-5s are still par-5s where the average length pros have to decide whether to lay up or take a risk and go for it, where most of the par-3s don't have to be 200+ yards, and where long par-4s exist that require long iron shots to get to the green. You rarely see these things anymore and I think as a fan the game would be better to watch.

    Yes technology in drivers has resulted in allowing increased distance when there are slight miss hits, but increased swing speed by players has also added to that distance increase.  I’d personally say that increased swing speed and better understanding if the swing is a bugger contributor to that increase.  

    you also talked about scoring average for tournaments going down even though course lengths have increased.  Is there any any data that totally separates the equipment from the quality of the players playing in the events?  Meaning are tournament fields comprised of better overall golfers?  While the advertised distance of courses are increasing what is the actual played distance of the courses on each tournament day.  
     

    can’t believe I am taking this side but everyone talks about jacked lofts and how the 5 iron from the 70s and 80s has become the 7 iron of today.   So maybe they still are hitting that long iron into the green, it is just that the number on the bottom doesn’t equal what you want to see.   
     

    Even if we somehow rolled back the distance I believe your hope for risk/reward type play is also a thing of the past as playing strategy has changed.  Played now have access to detailed stats that show hitting the ball as far as possible on every shot is what should be done.  Looking at course architecture, they are mostly built based a formula that supports that strategy.   Players coming up through the playing ranks are simply better when looked at as a complete group.   Like it or not, I think strategies founded from stroke gained metrics will cause scoring averages to continue to go lower.   
     

    Golf has changed over time and some people like it and others don’t.  

    • Like 3
  8. 5 minutes ago, Tincup_19 said:

    Anyways at the end I decide to hit some drivers to see what my distances were because I’ve never really known for sure.  After switching from my standard 10 finger grip to interlocking (which is a whole different matter) my club head speed was hovering right around 113 mph but the ball speed was right around 152-153 and the ball was carrying about 265-270. So my question is does that ball speed seem low and should the ball be carrying further? If so, what culprits are most likely the cause of my loss of distance? 

    Basic info:   Obviously club speed is how fast the head is moving at impact.  An ideal ball speed would be 1.5 time times the club head speed.  You will see this called smash factor. So for a 113 mph club head speed you would ideally be near 170.   Ball speed is impacted by where you hit the ball on the face; misshits result in lower ball speed.   Ball speed and things like launch angle and spin influence how far the ball carries.  Launch angle and spin can be influenced by your angle of attack into the ball and where on the face you hit the ball.  

    • Like 1
  9. I think the answer to your questions is…maybe.  Lots of things to look at such as how you use your wedges and are you able to accomplish the shots you need.  If you use them for full swing shots then maybe it makes sense to more closely match the shafts.  If you are only using for partial shots you may not need to.   There are no set rules on how you configure your setup; you have to try and see what works. 

    • Like 1
  10. 7 minutes ago, vandyland said:

    Also found this website - https://www.golfrankingstats.com/strokes-gained-calculator/

    I have no idea if these numbers are accurate but seem to point to maybe things aren't as dire as I am making them out to be, for my skill level. Still feel like for the amount of work I have and am willing to put in, this should be better:

    image.png.3d63830c7ee402ecf6db88110b8eaa38.png

    The numbers aren’t that hard to compute so this is relatively accurate.  Correct, you aren’t doing poorly in that round.  What are you long term trends?   

    • Like 1
  11. 3 minutes ago, Lacassem said:

    Yea If I am having a bad tee day, accuracy wise anyway I am not hitting driver on this hole but by hole 9 I usually have worked out those issues.

    Picture doesnt do the tee shot justice, its a lot tighter now. That was at original construction the houses were not even in yet.

    Squeezing a driver into a spot that narrow is tough even if hitting  it well. As long as laying back to the widest spot takes away some of the danger it is the smart play. Something like a 3w or hybrid won’t be that much more accurate you just have more space especially since both left and right are dead and those misses result in a penalty.  If the trees on the right were something that allowed you to advance down the fairway then maybe take the driver and just accept that you will be right sometimes.  

    • Like 1
  12. 1 hour ago, Lacassem said:

    I like this idea of "how would you play this hole", I feel like this is going to be one of those long term threads.

    The first circle is 300 out from the green, and 200 from the 2nd circle. 2nd circle is 100 out from the green roughly. The window is very tight off the tee no matter where you tee it from (see below) the widest point is about 35 yards and tightest about 20.

    image.png.e61a89da8b416a7c1e39514c61cbf6f1.png

    I’m playing whatever club gets me to the wide part of the fairway off the tee.  I am assuming that if I am outside of the 35 yards I am OB or deep woods.  Hard to tell on the right but in the tee shot picture it looks somewhat open on the right.   Second shot is to the wide spot short of your second circle.  Don’t know green width and depth but based on plan I should have short iron in which should setup for par. Difficulty on this hole seems to be the tee shot.  

    • Like 1
  13. 4 minutes ago, vandyland said:

    As always, thank you for your questions and interest! I know it is hard to care/empathize with someone's game so thank you!

    - Try to control distance based on feel. Putter speed is the same but longer back stroke for longer putts. That said, I will take suggestions as I have no real control there.

    - I practice putting from 40 ft at the end of putting practice and try to get down in 2 on 4 out of 5 balls or I have to do it again (and again) and I putt to different holes for each ball. Of course, the rub there is that I have been putting for 30 minutes at that point so I know the speed of the green. Does not transfer on to the golf course sadly.

    - I am chasing the ratio of back stroke speed to thru stroke speed (should be 2:1) and face angle at impact (shooting for a range of -0.3 to 0.3 but I am currently ranging from -0.9 - 1.4. Ideally I am really chasing face angle because that is going to be the difference in making a straight 8 footer or not. 

    - I do a "round analysis" on every round I play. The distance of each hole (based on GPS), fairway hit/missed (if missed is it left or right of landing zone), tee shot distance, distance in for approach (also if it is "blocked or not"), GIR hit/missed (left, right, short or long), first putt distance from hole, total putts on each hole. Last round had 12 GIR with an average distance of 29 ft on GIR. I three putted from 17 feet, 50 feet and 39 feet. I also missed a 4 foot birdie putt and two 3 footers for par. NOT GREAT! My make percentage inside 3 feet the last 10 rounds is 75%. My make percentage for 50/50 falls around 5 feet or so. I don't know my putt dispersion (I like that!). Also, I play fairly flat, benign greens so it is not like I am getting a bunch of 5 foot downhill sliders. These are typically right or left edge putts. 

    I like to talk and learn as much as I can about putting and putters.   

     

    -  You say you try to feel different stroke lengths with the same putter speed.  I'll assume you mean tempo and not speed since you refer to the 2:1 ratio.  Putter should move faster in longer strokes to have the same tempo and timing.  

    - I might work in more than one distance into your practice.  Maybe drop balls into the center of a practice green and putt to the edges since that would be different distances and different slopes.   Goal is to learn the stroke that will hit the ball X distance on that speed green.  When you travel,  you see how for the ball goes when you make your 10 foot stroke and make adjustments.   Just like you make adjustments for wind on full swing shots.  

    - I personally wouldn't worry about your tempo as much as face control since you really seem to struggle there and it is the primary reason you miss short putts.  You should be 99% or better inside of 3'.   Controlling face will also help you as you move out to 10 feet.  At 5 feet,  your face angle can be up to  2* open or closed and still make the putt so if you are missing that many putts you have a huge issue in your stroke.   Seems like something deeper than just the putting stroke. 

    - I mention dispersion because everyone talks about never being short of the hole,  but just like with our irons we have a dispersion pattern.   If you can be within 3 feet long and 3 feet short with your first putt then you can almost guarantee a 2 putt.   If you missed everything long then you would probably be facing a bunch of 4-6' comeback putts that have a higher miss rate.  

    Here are a couple of videos that talk about dispersion and putting:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxHPmAYVpec   go to the 50 minute mark in this one:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xlk70PFwyJI

     

    The question is how are you working on face control?  Gates, ruler, some thing else?  You definitely have a 2 way miss so I am guessing you are getting to the point of trying to fix/adjust the stroke when you miss to one side.  Since you have blast,  try something.    roll 5 putts with your eyes closed for each putt. setup with your eyes open but  I want to know what happens if you don't look at the results  on blast;  also stop the ball after a couple of feet.   After the 5 putts,  what is the face angle? 

     

    • Like 2
  14. 6 minutes ago, PapaStark said:

    My last few rounds plus a sudden urge of wanting to buy a new club has me questioning my current putter.

    Some background on my game since I'm still new here, I've used the same Ping classic Anser 2 for 16 years now (best garage sale purchase I've ever made). I would say I'm an average putter, 33-37 putts a round. I am curious how much the technology has changed and looking to try something new.

    The questions I am hoping you all could help with is what caused you to jumped from a blade style to a mallet head putter? Did you stay with it or did you switch back to a blade putter?

    Finally, any recommendations you all may have for me to try out, blade or mallet, I am kind of at a loss here figuring out where to start.

     

    Number of putts doesn’t tell us a lot.  If you hit 18 greens it is a good number; if you only hit 1 then it might be a terrible number.  It is better to assess your putting based on make percentage from distances, feet of putts made, or strokes gained numbers.  It enables you to compare against some baseline.   
     

    that said putting can be very individual.  Some pick and play putter based strictly on looks and haven’t change putter in 50 years.  Some change daily based on mood of the day.   There has been some technology advancements in putting but not a lot.  Evnroll face technology is probably the biggest for someone that misses the center of the face.   The use of technology like puttlab, quintic, or capto for analyzing putting stroke and doing fittings is where the big gains have been made. Shafts seem to be the big new area but I haven’t seen a good case made to justify the price. 

    i have played blades and mallets and haven’t found anything larger than a mid mallet that really works well for me so I tend to stick with blades.  Trust me when I say I have tried most putters/styles available in the market.  I switch just because I wanted to try something different and wanted to see how the various putter configurations fit with my stroke.   Playing a mid mallet right now so it is kind of an in between 
     

    the first question would be what are you trying to fix with a new putter?  Do you have a consistent miss? Or are you just wanting to get something new and different with no improvement goals?  

  15. 6 minutes ago, vandyland said:

    I started doing heads up putting a few months ago because my distance control was horrible. I was getting set over the ball after rehearsing and looking at the hole and once I looked at the ball it was like I had no idea where the hole was. Like my mind instantly erased all the data it had been gathering beforehand. Heads up seemed to help with that for a month or two. Amazing results the first few rounds and then gradually falling off and now we are back where I started...sucking. 

    Putting, on a round by round basis, historically, is a roll of the dice for me. I hit a decent number of greens (median GIR over the last 10 rounds is 13) but that typically means I have a lot of 20-40 foot putts. My putting does not TRAVEL like the rest of my game. I have to say that when I watch tour players 2 putt from 70 feet fairly regularly, it is the most impressive thing to me. It is like witchcraft. 

    I am rambling here but putting is really just the thing in golf I cannot get close to figuring out. I have an instructor that I take from and he has done wonders (WONDERS I SAY) for my swing but my putting is still all over the place a year later. I'm searching, @cnosil , and whenever I think I have something it's gone in a few weeks. I know some of that is just how golf is but putting seems, on the surface, like it should be so easy. I have been grinding on the putting mat for like the last four nights with my blast motion sensor trying all different types of grips, setups, etc and I can't find anything that gives me a consistent stroke. 

    So averaging 13 greens in regulation is an amazing stat.  I do think you need to manage you expectations on putting. PGA pros 3 putt 29% of the time from 70 feet. What you see on TV isn’t a good indication of overall performance.  
    https://golf.com/instruction/putting/fascinating-chart-shows-how-likely-3-putt/

    In your post, you have indicated that you have a distance problem and then said you have a stroke problem.  Don’t know how far your approaches are from but 20-40’ first putts isn’t a bad number.  Questions:

    • how do you control distance?  Stroke length, putter speed with same stroke,  or just feel?  
    • How do you practice distance control?  
    • when you are working on your stroke with the blast motion, what numbers are you chasing? It seems like you are chasing some “consistent” values based on your comment. 
    • How are you evaluating your putting performance?  What makes you say it is bad?  What is your make percentage inside 3’?  Where does your make percentage fall to 50/50?  What is your putt dispersion from 20 feet?  How far left and right do you miss a straight 20 foot putt?  

     

    • Like 2
  16. 10 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

    For the most part. The difficulty of the hole is the second shot in. Bunker on the left comes into play and what’s hard to tell is on the right side is pretty thick rough and it’s a hill.

    You are coming in from 180+ so green target is Basically a strip down the green center about 12 yards on to about 12 yards from the back of the green since you indicated you want to avoid the bunker and the hill beyond. 

    • Like 1
  17. 19 hours ago, dlow206 said:

    Has anyone played a par 4 hole regularly that you have a very low probability of reaching in 2?

    Thinking about he course I play, there is a hole that is a dogleg left that plays 422/448/465 from the white/black/gold.  You could even play the back tees and stretch it to 480.   To be able to reach in 2 you have to draw it down the left side which generally leaves you with a downhill lie.   Fairway isn’t hard to hit but the farther right you go the longer the shot.  It used to be harder but over the past year they took down some of the trees on the left side to open it up a little.  It has a large green but there is a good amount of back to front slope.   @Jmikecpacan give his thoughts since he plays 16 at RNK pretty regularly. 
     

    rnk16.jpg.c68dffdd37261d8046f65e1f8f7c7f3a.jpg

    • Like 2
  18. 17 minutes ago, DiscipleofPenick said:

    What's the difference between DG X100 and DG Tour Issue X100?

    You can throw numbers and terms at me. I currently play X100 in my irons after playing S300 for the previous 15ish years. And I'm really happy with the shafts. I'm looking at a newer set on eBay and they have the tour issue shafts.

    Thanks spies

    As I understand,  it is tighter tolerances.   They are the same shaft, the tour issue are just more consistent

    • Like 1
  19. 2 minutes ago, dlow206 said:

    I definitely just play my normal flight. I just aim towards the black circle and sometimes the ball flight is straight, sometimes it fades a bit naturally. Once in a while i will hit a pull on this hole (not on purpose), and it usually ends up in the fairway, but just makes the hole long. 

    That is all you can do. 

    • Like 2
  20. Just now, dlow206 said:

     

    230 or even a bit longer club will work if you can hit a cut on command that starts on the black line. But if the cut turns into a slice, then you might be ok, just depends on how far right it ends up. the worse though is if you try to hit the cut and double cross it on this hole. 

    Play your normal ball flight.  Sometimes you are going to hit a bad shot;  just don't compound it will a bad second shot.  

    • Like 3
  21. 9 minutes ago, Chip Strokes said:

    @dlow206 @cnosil @RickyBobby_PR 

    there seems to be some room right of that black dot before you get to the trees. 

    what about a cut with a 230 club starting at that dot? could cut down the approach by 10-30 yards depending where the pin is. 

    if you naturally hit a cut then that works.   There is a decent amount of room before the curve in the fairway so tee shot isn't impossible it just leaves a long shot.  Be happy with par but avoid worse than bogey.  

     

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...