Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


dru_ last won the day on January 27 2016

dru_ had the most liked content!

About dru_

  • Birthday 11/23/1971

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Milton, GA

Player Profile

  • Handicap

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

dru_'s Achievements





  1. count me in the visual category. That said, for me, minimalist logos and designs, and minimalist alignment. Bonus points for vendors that make an effort to align the alignment marks to the hemispherical seam on the ball ( Vice, Snell, Titleist ). That said, I absolutely LOATHE the Callaway's with the 3 lines on them, and though I tried to like the soccer balls from Callaway and TaylorMade both, I just find them distracting standing over the ball.
  2. dru_

    Is Maxfli DTC?

    FWIW, Buy Maxfli at maxfli.com ( a redirect to DSG online ), get discount on multiple boxes. Vice, Snell, Cut, etc. Same thing. At this point they really are essentially the same. The core difference is that Maxfli prices have to cover for the retail overhead that the others do not.
  3. This is an advertiser problem. A couple of the ads link to a server resource that is very slow, and blocking. If you are using an aggressive ad blocker, you won’t see the issue, but mags gets no revenue from the ads….. catch 22
  4. I am heavily involved in another sport where this same discussion and model exist, and honestly, I think using it as an example works better than what they are. Let's take a step away from Golf and TXG as specifics and abstract a bit. Let's talk about a completely different sport with many of the same dynamics. Cycling. High price tag, consumer goods products. Big box retailers, small retailers, broad internet offerings, paid and free fitters. Much like golf, anyone can walk into a store, throw a leg over a bike, pedal around the parking lot to see If it fits and how it feels, purchase it and go for a bike ride on. Maybe adjust a saddle, or handlebars, but really that's all you need right? But. There is a quick upper limit to what you can achieve in the process, just like golf, and if you hit that upper limit too quickly, you will never progress from that truly casual use / play, because your success has an upper limit based upon your equipment, and its setup. From there, you get to the 'fit' process. You went to a big box retailer an bought what you thought you wanted. You can ride it 8-10 miles at 12 mph, and it's great, but at the end of the ride, your genitalia is numb, raw, and your back and shoulders are killing you. This is your upper limit, and online forums tell you that you need a softer saddle, or some spandex padded shorts. Now you can go 12-15 miles at 13mph. But, you have hit your upper limit, and you will likely never progress further than that because your bike/skill/tolerance for discomfort 'is not good enough to warrant paying a $50 entry fee for a fitting'. However, a bike fit, can change that upper limit dramatically. The seat is too low. The saddle is too padded. The handlebars are too high. The seat and handlebars are probably too close together. The gearing might be wrong. These are all things a fitter can correct, much like a fitter can correct a hook or a slice by addressing lie, grip selection, shaft length or shaft selection, increasing the upper limit, increasing the likelihood of retention, and the likelihood of buying bikes, and consumables, for the rest of a person active life. Which has more value? $50 today. or, $50 every year for a lifetime? Well, it depends right? If you do NOTHING but fit bikes or golf clubs, then that $50 today matters more, because that is your only stream of revenue. However, if you are a store, a golf course, a mechanic, and you have revenue streams other than fitting, then that today money has a lesser value against opportunity cost. And this becomes the conundrum. For a company like TXG, GolfTec, Club Champion, etc, the fit *is* the revenue stream, even if it drives the purchase of custom clubs, it remains the primary *filter* point of contact, therefore, the other revenue streams have little value. However, for a company that derives it's revenue from all of the ancillary services, (gloves, balls, grips, tees, head covers, clothing, bags, and services like replacing grips), the fit is a loss leader that pays for itself multiple times over ( assuming a vendor does not foul up the relationship subsequently ). In the bike world, this is why more and more shops have brought in professional bike fitters, often with electronic measuring tools to get people into bikes with much higher initial upper limits. Those fitters are also coaches, and they now tend to get people into the right bikes initially, and then once they discover the difference in those upper limits, they come back in for the coaching and consumables that lead to even higher upper limits, with 40-60 miles at 15-16 mph become the new norm for an upper limit. In golf, a properly fit bag of clubs is easily 3-4 strokes for most 'off the rack' buyers, but that isn't even the tangible. For the average new golfer, getting through a round without losing a ball is a major milestone, and improperly fit clubs and ball choices are major factors in that. Being close to both sports, the similarities are a lot, but the biggest takeaway is that in both, there is the idea of needing to be 'better' to justify a fit, and that self defeating attitude absolutely kills both progression **and** growth of the sport.
  5. So, listening to the podcast, and it was interesting to hear Ryan's defense of TXG's business model, however, at no time does he ever really address the core issue in Adam's statement. They are both right, but they are discussing completely different arguments. Essentially, you have the 'you get what you pay for' argument, against the 'volume generates revenue to offset the cost' argument. What both manage to miss in their arguments is this: ( remember your basic economics, there is no such thing as a free lunch ) Regardless of if the fit is free or not, the consumer is still paying for the fit. It is either embedded into the cost of the clubs built and purchased, or it an upfront fee. The cost of the fit is still coming out of the consumer pocket, and even the best fitters, are limited to the products and brands they have ( and as I witnessed personally while trying a couple of different fitters in the area, often tend to drift towards higher margin products ). And therein lies the problem with Ryan's argument, that an upfront fee for a fit automatically means a better result. I had two fits at the bigger 'national' fitter companies, and bluntly, walked out unimpressed. They went through the motions. Ran a LOT of numbers. Both ended up pushing high margin builds, yet arguably neither offered enough gain to justify the cost. Both were upfront paid options. Meanwhile, what Adam correctly points out is this. The average handicap in golf is in 16.4. That means that amongst the golfers serious enough to maintain a handicap are are out there playing to 17-20 over on most courses, and that is the average. That puts the majority of golfers out there in then 12 or higher category, thinking that their game is not good enough warrant the cost of a TXG level fitting. To the point where a good friend of mine who plays to a 3 on his home course ( a Pete Dye track that is notoriously tricky ) frequently notes that even his game really cannot justify a fit, though 'if I was gonna be fit, I'd fly to Canada and have TXG do it.' is his exact phrasing. Meaning, that much as Ryan did, so does this friend. In arguing TXG's business model is the answer, they make Adam's case. Only already good, and serious golfers are going to embrace the paid fit, and this in turn limits the both the market for, and the potential of the professional golf fit as a consistent and viable tool to expand the game of golf by producing more, better golfers quicker that might become serious golfers who end up spending more on the and in the game.
  6. I read that too, but after about 20 rounds with them, my 7i distances continued to reflect it's use for the little half swing punches...
  7. Sorry, posted this, and then got sucked into a honeydo project that has eaten my life for the last month or so. The problem for me and the Arccos system is not any one thing, but death by a hundred cuts. Must carry the phone in the front pocket ( the newer device that removes this requirement wasn't available yet ) Because the phone uses the microphone you cannot use headphones while the app is active The Apple Watch app was prone to crash/disconnection ( other apps do not suffer this, Golfshot, GolfGameBuddy, The Grint, etc ) The screw in sensors had an odd fitment with the midsize Lamkin grips I used that led them to backing out over time and creating a pinch point gap Putting required frequent adjustments. Managing penalty strokes is a bit painful. The system always assumes full swings, and thus distance data is skewed, rendering many of its tools ineffective. The system is, sadly, tied to GPS data and suffers for accuracy in heavy canopy areas ( ALL of north GA ). Ultimately, what broke the camels back for me was the the mix of trying to deal with the myriad of quirks in the system. Knowing what I do now, I realize that many of the quirks can be solved by using the combination of the Caddie Link and the Smart Grips, a $300 investment, with a $100 recurring subscription is a pretty stout cost of entry for something that still requires a good bit of babysitting if you want to realize the benefit of the analytics behind the system.
  8. .. to like the Arccos Golf system. It is such a great idea in theory. It sounds amazing, but it just isn't quite there yet, and that is coming from a tech-nerd that is perfectly willing to deal with some of the things....
  9. So, oddly, swing speed, and nature of impact with my swing. I don't have an ego on this, I just want to play golf and keep the ball in the fairway. The problem for me is launch angle. No matter what shaft, or SGI I've tried, we cannot get the launch angle down to even remotely reasonable numbers. For example, right now, I am playing a blade ( Hogan Ft Worth's ). My 4i is a 210yd club, that launches high enough, and with high enough spin rates, that my carry is 195+, and unless it is landing on a hard green it's just not going to roll out, and that's with a setup that was tweaked to try and get launch angles down, and a swing rebuild to get to a point where I hit down on the ball, but still... I'll keep trying, because I could really use the forgiveness, particularly when I start to fatigue.
  10. Dude, you spelled that wrong. It's DREADmill. Not Treadmill. I have no idea where the word treadmill came from but it is a bald faced lie along the lines of the check is in the mail.\ and I'm from the government and I'm here to help
  11. IIRC, with Fitbit, you have to connect it manually on the Strava side. https://support.strava.com/hc/en-us/articles/216918087-Syncing-between-Strava-and-Fitbit ( note it does not go back in history though ) History can be done by exporting the files as .tcx files though.
  12. I hate running. I do it. But I'm not a fan :). But the bike... I have a a serious N+1 problem :).
  13. I'm not fast ( well running at least ), but I'm not afraid to do it. a lot. sobriety be damned.
  14. lol, just remember, Golf is just one of my damned expensive hobbies :).
  15. I am fairly certain that nobody actually wants me in this club
  • Create New...