Jump to content

DaveP043

Member
  • Content Count

    2,080
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

DaveP043 last won the day on May 22 2020

DaveP043 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,304 Excellent

About DaveP043

  • Rank
     
  • Birthday 01/03/1956

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Northern Virginia
  • Interests
    You mean I need interests outside of golf?
  • Handicap:
    3.9

Recent Profile Visitors

5,203 profile views
  1. This is one of the simplest solutions I know of, chip with a putting stroke. Same grip, same address, the heel will be a little higher so address it closer to the toe. Very little wrist action, so it should be pretty repeatable.
  2. This is off topic, but looking at your game plan it seems as if you're intentionally giving up distance off the tee on many holes. Obviously I don't know your game, but as you become a better player you'll definitely want to get the maximum distance off of every tee, as long as you can keep the ball in play most of the time. Back ON topic, about 15 years ago I developed my own yardage book for my home course. I used a CAD program, and traced most of the features from Google Earth. I used GPS to get one dimension, then used the CAD program to show the rest of the yardages I wanted to in
  3. Keep at it, you never know. A friend of mine qualified for the US Senior Amateur in Durham in 2019. He's playing off scratch at about 60 years old. He said it was maybe the coolest thing he's done in golf.
  4. I don't have a lot of different swing thoughts in general, but on the course I'd say I do things in order. I'll make some kind of rehearsal, a short practice swing, a slow-motion swing, an exaggerated drill, but something with a specific internal focus. But when I get to the ball, its all external focus, thoughts about the target, or visualization of the shot I want to hit.
  5. You mentioned a number of truly premium balls, and some lesser-priced balls from major manufacturers. In my experience, this is a niche for Direct to Consumer balls like Snell. I've been playing the Snell MTB Black and MTB X, and before that the original MTB. Before that, I played the ProV1 almost exclusively, and the Snell balls are extremely close in performance, at a price that's right in the range you mention, $33 for a single dozen, as low as $30 if you buy 5 dozen. Snell also makes a lower-price 2-piece ball. Its certainly a ball to consider, top-level performance at mid-level prici
  6. I think the words of the question speak for themselves. I'm not interpreting them to mean anything other than exactly what they say. The words say that a big majority do not want to see increasing distance on the pro tours.
  7. I'm not sure how I missed contributing here, but two of us wrote pretty lengthy reviews of the T200s last Spring.
  8. In general, mechanically sound swings produce better distance and more consistency. That doesn't mean its impossible to groove unsound mechanics, doesn't mean you can't hit it a long way with unsound mechanics, its just less likely. I've played with a bunch of different people, I can't remember a single one who played a 30-yard slice while having tight dispersion at the same time, and I can't remember a big slicer who achieves his real distance potential. In my experience, making positive changes to swing mechanics often results in widened dispersion in the short run. It takes a while to o
  9. Every touring pro uses a launch monitor BECAUSE their swings are so good. They need to understand exactly what's going on each day, and small variations really aren't visible to the naked eye. You can't tell whether that 7-iron went 185 yards or 192 yards when you're standing on the practice tee. A 20-handicapper is a completely different story. The ball flight tells a decent instructor all he needs to know about impact conditions. And again, a monitor tells you absolutely nothing about the CAUSE of those impact conditions. That requires human eyes and training and experience, and ca
  10. Please, don't make us read the entire effing document, give us a page number or something to help. I found it, but its in a chart, and can't be found using a simple search feature. Where does it indicate that fans want distance reduced? It DOES say that additional distance is not desirable to most, and I've never argued against that viewpoint, but says absolutely nothing about reduced distances. Its surprising, considering the bias that many felt was evident in the Distance Survey, that the USGA/R&A apparently didn't ask that particular question. I know I responded to the survey,
  11. I did see this, and noted that 67% of respondents said that distance is either not a problem, or a minor problem. Viewed the other way, 48% say distance is at least a minor problem. Its a matter of interpretation whether than means a most people think a roll-back will make viewing a tournament more enjoyable., as @LICC has claimed. Shackeford leaves out a portion of that sentence that you quoted: "By and large, there is a low level of interest in the elite/professional game being dominated by any one element -- be it tee shots, long drives or putting." Did he do that to ref
  12. Exactly where does the Report say that most fans think decreasing distance would make pro golf more fun to watch? Thats what you claimed.
  13. I don't claim to know my current numbers, so take this with a grain of salt. When I want to hit my driver a little higher, without making any real big changes, I simply try to feel like I'm bumping my lead hip towards the target at address. Not much, like an inch or two. I believe that probably gives me a little more secondary tilt, my spine is inclined a little bit away from the target, my chest a little further "behind" the ball. If I can simply maintain that spine angle, I've changed the center of my swing slightly, which has to produce a slightly more upward angle of attack.
  14. When you talk about cost, it makes me wonder what you pay for an hour with a good launch monitor. Around me in northern Virginia, its not cheap. I know it provides data, but simply observing ball flight can get you a significant amount of data as well. If you're hitting a shot that starts left and fades, you know your swing is out-to-in, and your clubface is aimed right of the path at impact. You don't need measurements to know that. And knowing the measurements doesn't tell you anything about the reason you're over the top. Your second paragraph seems to imply that you expect a swi
  15. What you are describing is your personal preference. Shorter distance would NOT make it more fun for all fans, only for a percentage of them. This is a line of reasoning I have an issue with, golf is about getting the ball in the hole, not a particular preferred style of play. I really don't mind that more modern players have come up with better ways of getting the ball in the hole, I don't care that distance has made the traditional shot values somewhat obsolete, or has at least changed the relative importance of certain skills. That's simply the evolution of golf. Bobby Jones said that
×
×
  • Create New...