Jump to content

DaveP043

Member
  • Content Count

    1,740
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by DaveP043

  1. I believe technically it classifies as "magic".
  2. Thanks, I wasn't aiming that at you. Rather, I'm hoping that @Golf Success Strategist will understand my particular issues with the way he introduced himself within the My Golf Spy community, and what I hope he might do moving forward.
  3. Oy, more data on Dean, results from his efforts on the West Florida Golf Tour. Shot a solid 94 in December 2010. http://www.westfloridagolftour.com/PlayerProfile.aspx?PlayerID=7273
  4. Many of us have an ax to grind of some kind, all I expect is transparency. If @Golf Success Strategist had introduced himself as an employee, had provided a link to the website, and said some nice things about the program, I wouldn't get my back up. If he comes back and engages in meaningful dialogue, I'll happily engage from my end. I admittedly know nothing of Mr. Chitren beyond what I can find online, and so far that hasn't enticed me to go any further than discussions here.
  5. I think when dealing with the Pelz stuff that its important to understand that he specifically markets himself as a short-game and putting guru, so he's always going to contend that short game and putting are the most important. Otherwise, he'd be pushing people away from his own business. Not to say he doesn't have many good ideas, he certainly does, but he exaggerates the importance of short game. Back to the topic, I do get to hit a fair number of short shots, so I specifically accept a large-ish gap between 180 and 200, but have pretty consistent 10-yard full-swing gaps down to about 90 yards. I've considered getting something to go 190 or so, and reworking my wedges to be able to drop a club, but that doesn't fit the course I play as well. I've also practiced a bit (not tons, not doing the "clock" system) for shorter wedge shots. Its not hard to learn to hit a 60 yard shot, or a 40 yard, or whatever, with only a small amount of practice. And you WILL get it closer, on average, than if you choose to lay back to a full-swing yardage. Shot selection is really another topic, so I won't hammer that idea here.
  6. Oy, I just looked at on of those 2010 videos, Dean practicing wearing a tee shirt and sweatpants. Not a great swing at that time, but he was working hard.
  7. I think most of us are here to discuss, rather than to argue. Posting testimonials from promotional literature isn't much of a discussion, as we can't ask questions of the guys who wrote those testimonials. If you look in another thread about instruction, you'll find mentions of Monte Scheinbloom and Erik Barzeski. I know Monte is active in discussions on GofWRX, you can read some of his instruction and evaluations, and get a sense of his personality. Similarly, Erik runs TheSandTrap, and provides a lot of instructional content there, as well as participating in a couple of other forums. From Mr. Chitren we have only his self-promotional stuff, no back and forth, no discussion. We CAN find that he quit smoking once, and became a "quit-smoking guru" for a time. We can find that in 2009 he wanted to become a PGA Tour player, and was trying to raise money to do that. He ran a golf "concierge" business for a while, setting up golf trips in the Tampa area. There are some YouTube videos from 10 years ago, and a few more from 2017, and now a recent bunch. But no dialogue. And there's no mention of him outside of his own webpages. Feel free to discuss, that's always more interesting than simply posting stuff off of the promotional website.
  8. Just looked up Fred Adler, playing out of Ventana Canyon in Arizona. In his last 20 scores, he's had exactly 2 in the 70s, 9.6 index. Now it IS his low index of the year, he's making progress, but the claims are a bit overstated. Willie Abston in Mississippi hasn't posted a score since September 2019. I hope he's making progress too, but its pretty hard to tell.
  9. Let's be fair here, oopen and honest, you joined here to advertise for the company that employs you. You chose not to disclose your association with Mr. Chitren initially. And you've posted testimonials specifically selected to appear on Mr. Chitren's promotional webpage. None of that says anything about Mr. Chitren's instruction, it may be really solid, but it says something about you. By association, it says something about Mr. Chitrren's advertising tactics.
  10. So if this guy takes a more common 30 or 32 putts he shoots 82 or 84. Obviously we can't tell where he started from, but 25 putts isn't sustainable over any amount of time. So you're here for 20 minutes, and posted 2 captures from Dean's website. Are you a shill for him, or a real person?
  11. The only way that I'm aware of is to use a good quality launch monitor. But be careful about what you shoot for, 2000 RPM isn't ideal for most of us normal people. My swing speed is around 100 mph or slightly lower, and my ideal spin rate with a driver is closer to 3000 RPM. You can find a chart published by Trackment here: https://trackman.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115006035208-Driver-Optimization
  12. One option is at https://evolvr.com/ Full disclosure, one of the lead instructors there runs another golf forum website, but I've found him to be really knowledgeable and helpful. Another poster mentioned Monte Scheinbloom, he's at: https://rebelliongolf.com/online-lessons/
  13. I don't know your friend, and don't want to say anything bad about him, but chances are that he doesn't have the skills to properly diagnose your faults. Chances are that, like most of us, he sees "symptoms" without having the training and experience to discern an underlying cause. I agree with @dlow206, a good instructor, including some who will do lessons based solely on your videos, will be much more likely to see the root problems, and be able to provide drills to address them.
  14. It might be informative to read the recent Member Reviews of the Titleist T100S and T200 irons. Yes, the lofts are stronger than what was "standard". But at least in my case, where I once carried 4-9+PW, now I carry 5--9+PW(43*)+ W(48*). The 5 replaced the old 4, the 48* replaced the old PW. Nothing has really changed except the "label" of the club. I've chosen to use that set-up, rather than add the new 4-iron and re-work my specialty wedges (currently 52, 56, and 60) to use only 2 clubs.
  15. I've never used a book like that, but I believe they could be helpful. But I think there are also some drawbacks. First, you need to locate the cup and your ball position pretty accurately on the map. But more important, what do you do with the information you get from the map? You determine that its a 2% slope, running 30* right to left and away form you. Where do you aim? Yeah, somewhere to the right, but how far? This type of data and analysis is the basis of the Aimpoint and Aimpoint Express systems, and I recommend you try to find a clinic to learn Aimpoint Express. You'll learn not only how to collect the required data, using your own sense of balance, but you'll learn how to use that data to determine where to aim. Clinics aren't inexpensive, but the Straka books are something like $50 apiece. So for the price of 3 or 4 books, covering 3 or 4 courses, you can learn the skills to read every single course you will ever play. And yes, the greens at those two courses can be a bit confusing at times.
  16. This was my thought as well. Practice swings may be exercise, but without knowing that you're doing things the way you want to do them, it seems like it could be counterproductive. You'd be better off with 30 or 40 practice shots, with feedback of some kind (launch monitor, video, ball flight). You might be better off with 15 or 20 minutes of no-ball slow-motion drills in front of a mirror, rehearsing specific changes, combined with occasional live practice on a range. I don't like the idea of practice swings as a swing improvement method.
  17. Chances are, you have technical flaws in your swing that you overcome with various compensations. That's common, most of us do that to some extent. The timing of those compensations can vary by really small amounts, but that small variation can be the difference between a hood and a fade. Instruction can help identify flaws, help you to learn to swing with fewer compensations, and develop a more consistent shot shape. On another website I submitted videos of my swing and got some very good instruction, so I know that video-based instruction can help. It can be less expensive than in-person lessons, although seeing a good instructor in person would still be my recommended course of action. I'm not big on simply following generic online instruction, for one primary reason. You don't know what you're doing wrong, and you don't have the knowledge to diagnose your own swing on video. What you will see in your own videos is most likely to be a symptom of something, and there can be multiple possible causes for any one symptom. That ability to diagnose is one of the real gifts of the best instructors. Generic online instruction, by its very nature, doesn't address YOUR problems, it addresses generic problems. The "cure" that you try might actually be the worst thing possible given your own specific faults.
  18. We're talking about two different entities. The only thing the R&A/USGA can control is equipment. Its up to the PGA Tour, or the European Tour, or individual event organizers to decide how to prepare the golf courses for the tournaments they run. Up until now, the pro tours have sold their events based largely on distance, on the super-human abilities of their players. They'd have to have a change in marketing strategy to routinely design conditions to encourage players to play shorter off the tee. I'm not opposed, the conditions you describe will still reward accurate length, its just something beyond the control of the Ruling Bodies.
  19. The simplest solution for the Ruling Bodies is to find ways to minimize further equipment-related distance gains, and simply accept that the game has changed and will continue to change. Modern top-level players are stronger and have better mechanics than the greats of the past did. Club fitting and computer-driven analysis has allowed players to optimize their launch conditions. The problem is basically one of image with the top players. They don't need to play in the same style that Jack or even Tiger had to, and many folks really dislike that change in playing style. Isn't the idea to get the ball in the hole in the fewest strokes, no matter how you do it? Courses are just fine for 99.99% of all golfers, pretty much nobody you or I play with overpowers courses. We don't need tighter fairways or longer rough or more trees and bunkers, golf is tough. I understand that there's pressure on owners and developers to make courses longer, based on satisfying the egos of players who think they need "tournament length" courses. Maybe those owners should grow some stones and resist temptation, market instead to the 99.99% of players for whom the current yardages are more than enough. Clubs are fine for 99.99% of all golfers too. Same with golf balls. So what if Bryson or Dustin or some of the others can overpower some traditional courses. I guarantee that Jack played golf a whole lot different than Bobby Jones did, the difference is that Jones never called for golf to limit Jack's distance off the tee. A course may have been designed based on the abilities of a golfer of the time, that doesn't mean golfers should be limited to playing them the same way. Golf evolves, players find different ways to use their tools. Bogey was once the standard score for a hole, now its par, in the future it might be birdie. That's evolution. I think the best thing for the R&A and USGA to do is to stop further distance increases from equipment, maybe even find additional facets of equipment to test. Rollbacks wouldn't be productive to the game as a whole, and bifurcation would be even worse, to me.
  20. I'll offer a completely contrary option. How are the gaps in your wedges? I've made a conscious choice to have about 10 yard gaps in my shorter clubs, even though it means I have around a 20 yard gap between 180 and 200 yards. I find that I have a lot more 90 or 100 or 110 yard shots than I do 190 yard shots. So your best choice could be to leave the long end of your bag as is, and fill in a gap at the short end.
  21. Ball speed is limited under a specific testing regimen. COR of driver heads is limited. Those are both intended to limit the distance that equipment alone can provide. But absolute distance is not limited, as that depends on factors that are completely beyond regulation, including a players physical attributes, swing techniques, club optimization, course conditions, etc. The Ruling Bodies have long had a role in regulating equipment, and will continue to do so, but they cannot regulate all of those other factors.
  22. Happy to do it, but you're not staying in my place when I'm there!
  23. Did you really stay in the one I own? I'm trying to remember if I've ever shared which unit is mine.
  24. As long as we golfers want to hit it further, they're going to market increased distance, even when the distance is limited by the rules. Never let the truth get in the way of selling golf clubs!
  25. It didn't take long for me to come back. I played in an interclub match on Sunday, and had a pretty solid day, 79 on 72.3/137 at about 6560 yards. Hit one driver off the course, but was otherwise pretty solid. I'm feeling much more relaxed with distance, much more able to just make normal swings. I did hit one iron shot over a green, but 2 of the other 3 guys were long too, we all misread the wind. A couple of holes later I picked a perfect club, 132 yards uphill, into the wind, a little 8-iron 3/4 swing with the ball a little back, in to 10 feet. That's a 150 club flighted down and hit smooth, me trusting the club. For most of the day it was improved trust, solid swings, solid contact, good results.
×
×
  • Create New...