Jump to content

GolfSpy MPR

Moderator
  • Content Count

    2,027
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

Everything posted by GolfSpy MPR

  1. I've got a plan. If all goes well, I'll have a new Tour Striker PlaneMate in my hands (and on my waist) next week. I'm excited; the reviews of it have been pretty universally glowing, and it's built to help in exactly the thing I struggle with: the feeling of shallowing through transition. So I'm going to roll in a PlaneMate review into my journey to single figures. (There is already a PlaneMate discussion thread here worth checking out as well.) I'm planning to follow all the outlined protocols and track my progress over this season. Obviously, the on-course results are what matter most, but I'm also interested in measuring the technical changes that will (hopefully) result. So with the help of a bunch of gadgets, I'm hoping to reconstruct the numbers I might get from a TrackMan. I have a SkyTrak, but the swing and club are invisible to it. A SkyTrak only measures ball data. It will give you swing speed, but it's a calculation based on the ball information. But I also have other gadgets at hand: a Zepp and a SwingByte sensor. These complement each other well. The Zepp attaches to the glove, and gives a good picture of hand path. The SwingByte attaches to the shaft, and tells you a lot about club plane, lie angles, and shaft lean at impact. Both of these also estimate clubhead speed. In addition, I have the swing speed radar used for SuperSpeed training. So I've got a spreadsheet built. My intent is to take 10 7-iron swings and compile the data from the four of these sources, using an average of the four that tosses outliers for swing speed. After I get the baseline, I'll remeasure after a month of PlaneMate drills. Here's my hope: Obviously, I'd like to see that downswing plane shallow out. I'd like to see a higher ball speed and higher spin, indicative of a cleaner strike. I'd like to see a tighter dispersion of the 10 shots. Those, along with on course scoring, will be the standards by which I measure whether the PlaneMate is working for me.
  2. By now, most of you are familiar with the badge system we've got here on the Forum. Most of our badges fit in four categories: forum ranks, golf accomplishments, careers, and countries. Recently, a member suggested a cancer survivor badge, which intrigued us. We decided to broaden it a bit, not limiting it to cancer survivors. We know there are forum members whose stories can't be told without recounting a serious battle for their lives, and this badge is a way to demonstrate that here. We thought that with the introduction of this badge, we'd create a thread for members to tell their stories of perseverance and victory. It's primarily a place for those who request the badge to be one of their two badges to tell their stories, but we're certainly not going to stop any member from sharing what they've overcome.
  3. It's a great question, and the data I have doesn't seem to let me get at it directly. My GIRs are up very slightly this year over last (22% vs 19%), so if anything, that should slightly increase my putts. But my chipping and pitching has definitely gotten better, so I imagine it's some factor, but without the accuracy of ShotLink, I don't know yet that I'm able to quantify its impact on my putting.
  4. Perhaps a good time for me to weigh in on my own question. Using April/May rounds last year versus my rounds this year, I'm currently seeing: 2019: 1.91 avg | 2020: 1.8 avg 2019 1 Putt: 23% 2 Putt: 63% 3 Putt: 14% 2020 1 Putt 28.7% 2 Putt 61.1% 3 Putt: 10.2% Putts per GIR: 2.0 So on the whole, this is looking quite promising. I'm not seeing in GG where to pull up putts per GIR, but moving percentage points from both 2- and 3-putts into 1-putts is very encouraging. Let's hope it continues and even improves as speed control on real greens (and longer putts) continues to get dialed in.
  5. So far, I have 4 birdies this season. But on only 2 holes. Not covering a lot of ground here
  6. So far this season, the putter in my bag has been an Odyssey Stroke Lab R-Ball. I love the alignment on it. Even the grip is nice: I can't remember the last time I bought a putter and actually kept the stock grip. My only complaint: if I wanted a putter that went "ping," I would have bought a PING. As an experiment, today I tried stuffing the cavities with pool noodles. That works, but it's obviously a pretty janky solution. What recommendations do you all have for a material for stuffing the cavities to dampen the sound, without massively altering the head weight and with a high likelihood of being a decent looking finished product?
  7. 2:44 - TaylorMade Driving Relief 13:55 - Has Callaway Golf Lost Their Mojo? 20:33 - The Truth About Made-For Shafts 45:10 - Vokey's Wedge Works K-Grind 1:03:24 - What Is The HYPE METER? 1:07:00 - #MyTubSpy 1:16:07 - CBD Debacle Listen to NPG: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/mygolfspy/no-putts-given-39 iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/has-callaway-golf-lost-their-mojo-npg-39/id1356729135?i=1000475503226 Watch NPG: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64PZdCt5U6M
  8. Certainly a very reasonable possibility. Every interaction I've had with Arccos customer service so far has been impressive, so I'm definitely willing to extend all benefit of the doubt. The counterargument: surely, course editing can be done remotely? But the counterargument to that: it's very, very likely that I'm the only person using Arccos at my course. If they prioritize updates by demand (which is certainly reasonable), I could be waiting a while.
  9. Yeah, I sent them a message on May 6. I listed all the yardages for each tee and created a graphic off a Google Maps satellite picture of the course with the tee boxes all marked. So far, nothing more than the automated response.
  10. Progress check in! So far this year, I've played 81 holes of golf: one 18-hole round and seven 9-hole rounds. I'm 78-over for the season—a bit better than bogey golf. And Arccos is assigning me a handicap of 19.3. This is interesting to me. I do not carry an official USGA handicap, so for me, my handicap is defined by whatever app I'm using. By the end of last season, Game Golf had me down to a 12.8. So why has my handicap gone up 6.5 strokes at this point in the season? The first reason is that it's early in the season. My putting in the first couple of rounds was atrocious, at least in terms of results. The greens were still fuzzy and debris-strewn. My stroke felt really good, but I had more 3-putts than normal. The rest of my game also requires, if not knocking off of rust, the adjustment from mats and a ceiling to turf and being outside. The second reason, though, is that Arccos (like GG, which I detailed earlier in this saga) has inaccurate data for my home course. We have four sets of tees; Arccos has two, and lists them both at the same yardage (only 5,100 yards). Our course is short: the back tees are only 6,100—but that's still more than 5,100. Arccos doesn't tell me what it's using for rating and slope, but I have to guess that it's punishing me pretty severely. The course website lists the rating at 67 and the slope at 113. Punching those numbers into the various handicap calculators online tends to give me a handicap a bit closer to the 13 I finished last season with. I've submitted the corrected tees to Arccos; I'm still waiting for them to incorporate the changes. That said, right now my game is looking a bit different than it did this time last year. Here are my GG numbers from last April/May: According to GG, I was driving the ball slightly worse than a 20-handicap, hitting my approaches like a 15 handicap, hitting short game shots 2 full strokes worse than a 25 handicap, and putting at the level of a 10 handicap. Arccos is seeing something very different this season. I'm driving the ball like a 24 handicap, hitting approaches like 25 handicap, chipping like a 14 handicap, and putting like an 8 handicap. It would be just like a golfer to think, "Wow, my short game is getting better, but Arccos is messed up in figuring out my driving and approach play!" But... On my wedge play, the clock system is paying dividends (though it did cost me a stroke before it dawned on my that, like an idiot, I made a wedge cheat sheet with the x and y axes reversed; sailing a shot over the green made me realize my mistake). Last year with GG, shots from 75-100 yards show 45% accuracy (36% short and 9% each left and right misses). This year in the same range, I've hit 3/4 from there, with one bladed wedge that went long. Small sample size to be sure, but it's been encouraging so far. Off the tee, some of the gains I've made last year seem to be sticking. The graphic here has April/May last year on top; this year on bottom: And this is before a driver fitting that opened my eyes to how a properly fitted driver can help compensate for a very poor swing. So the bottom lines: Until Arccos changes the tees, I've got an uphill climb to get my handicap down. My last round was a 3-over 39, so the potential for a good season is definitely in place. My short game has been a strength so far. I think my driving is going to improve significantly this season. I have a Plane Mate coming over on a slow boat from China right now. This should be a big help in my approach play.
  11. Congrats on becoming a millennial!
  12. I've got to be close to having the best golf lesson studio in the Upper Peninsula. If only I knew what I was doing....
  13. No, that I definitely get. On hole 13, I hit a weak fade off the tee that ended up rolling through a bunker that lines the edge of the fairway, so that the ball was perched on a hill under some branches. I get that Arccos is going to penalize the ensuing approach shot, when the drive was really the issue. My concern is that I've spent a good amount of time on SkyTrak and following Lou Stagner's stats on Twitter. Between these, I feel I've got a pretty decent grasp of proper expectations for how close a shot should be to the hole from various distances, and based on those, it seems that Arccos is really harsh on approach handicaps. Has anyone had the opposite experience: an approach number that is better than you would expect?
  14. Cheater! (Though I'm not saying whether you got the answer right or not.) In hindsight, the question is a little ambiguous. I guess I did ask what Arccos assigned. My bigger question (and I'll ask about your round): do you believe that that's a 20+ handicap approach performance? A 2016 article from MGS includes this graph: Hitting a third of greens in regulation already puts a golfer in single-digit territory. A 20-handicap rating there seems oddly high, and I'm trying to figure out how Arccos is calculating that.
  15. I've been a longtime Game Golf user, switching to Arccos for the first time this season. I've got fewer than 10 rounds (almost all 9-hole) on Arccos so far. Really liking a lot about the system. My biggest question so far is the difference between GG and Arccos in calculating approach handicap. In GG, my approach number was normally one of my stronger categories, typically playing between the levels of a 5-10 handicap. But so far on Arccos, my approach handicap is sitting at 24.5. To be sure: it's early in the season. But that still seems somewhat high to me, and I'm trying to figure out why. So I want to propose a test: here are the approach shots I hit during my last 9-hole round. I want you guys to guess what handicap Arccos assigned to my performance. First, the overall numbers: Here are the individual shots: Hole 10: From about 155, in the rough: missed just right of the green, pin high, about 30' from the hole Hole 11: From about 130, in the fairway: hit the green, about 8' from the hole Hole 12: From about 110, in the rough: chunked, finished short left of the green, in the rough, about 36' from the hole Hole 13: From about 140, out of position in the rough: punched a shot to the rough, about 60' from the hole Hole 14: From about 160, in the fairway: ball trailed just right into a greenside bunker, about 35' from the hole Hole 15: From about 130, on the tee: ball was pin high, on the left fringe, about 35' from the hole Hole 16: From about 110, in the fairway: hit the green, about 25' past the hole Hole 17: From about 50, in the fairway: hit the green, about 15' from the hole Hole 18: From about 120, in the fairway: hit the green, about 20' from the hole I shot a 3-over 39 for the nine holes. OK, stat nerds: what handicap rating would you assign to that performance?
  16. I haven't, though I've considered it. Over the past couple of years, I've had some good online discussions with Adam Young; he'd be my first choice if I went that route.
  17. Couldn't agree more, if lessons were available within an hour's drive. But I'm hoping the Plane Mate helps me learn what the shallowing part of the downswing feels like. I know what I need to do; it's getting my body to agree that gives me the trouble
  18. Great question! I did when it first came out, and I think it recommended me a Taylormade M4. But I'm pretty sure I fed it bad info: I didn't realize how aggressively I hit down and how abrupt my transition really was. I should do it again, now that I have a better grasp of my own swing.
  19. I loved the feel. It felt very, very stable. I'd almost like to give some of the absurdly stiff shafts (Hulk and similar) a try, just so I have a reference point for what "too stiff" feels like. The additional yards were carry: the LM he was using was only displaying carry.
  20. Swing speed sits right in the 96-97 zone. Need to get back to doing SuperSpeed training again and get that back up over 100. As for staying with Callaway: it's not something I'm locked into. But there's a level of familiarity and some opportunity there. Here's what my current stats look like from the rounds I've played this year:
  21. I'd never been fitted for any club in my bag, until yesterday. And I never, ever would have fitted myself into the specs I ended up with. I'm going with the long story version here; skip to the end if you just want to get to the point. Goals My hope this year is to replace my driver, for two reasons. The first is that I am a terrible off the tee (so it's gotta be the club, right?). Those who follow my single-digit-handicap thread know that last season, I was getting about 220 off the tee—and that that number represents about a 25 yard gain on the previous year. The second is that my current driver doesn't fit my current goal in building my bag, which is forgiveness. Ever since my G700 iron test, I've been working to make my club setup as friendly as possible for an average golfer. The Rogue SZ isn't known for being that club. I bought it for two reasons: it showed well in the 2018 Most Wanted testing and it was on sale on Callaway Pre-Owned. Fitting Attempts Initially, I had a fitting scheduled at 2nd Swing in the Twin Cities, to coincide with a trip I was taking there. That was canceled the week the world shut down. When that was canceled, I attempted a bit more formal home fitting. I currently own two Callaway heads: a Rogue Sub Zero, 10.5° a Big Bertha Alpha 816 DBD, 9.0° I also have three Callaway-tipped shafts: Project X EvenFlow Blue 65 Fujikura Speeder Evolution II TS 665 Aldila Tour Blue 85 And then I have multiple Callaway weights. Along with my SkyTrak, I figured I might try a whole bunch of combinations to find something that worked. I spent one Saturday hitting a bunch of balls, but it went terribly. One of the reasons I'm bad at driving is that I have no place to practice. My garage ceiling is too low to swing driver. I fear practicing outside, because pop-up drives are not unknown in my game. I absolutely don't want a drive that goes over the net in the neighborhood I live in. After hitting a bunch of drives with various combinations, my average looked something like this: That's pretty pathetic. I hit all over the face. The spin rates were very high; I was seeing shots in the upper 3000s with regularity. SkyTrak measures no head data, but I figured there was a very high likelihood that I'm hitting down on my drives. This explains the spin rates, the pop up drives, and the high launch angles. Given how poorly I was striking the driver, though, my inclination was to move from the Rogue SZ to the Mavrik Max. In every way, it looked like it was designed to help a poor schlub like me hit better drives. I was excited when Callaway announced their new distance-fitting program. My hope was to get a shaft recommendation from them. Given the numbers in my spreadsheet, it looked like my best shaft was the EvenFlow Blue, so I was looking for something similar for the Max. Looking at Callaway's shaft options, I had narrowed my options to about a half-dozen (mostly) mid-spin, mid-launch shafts, including the stock EvenFlow Riptide. After a couple emails back and forth (my local cell tower fritzed out the day of my scheduled call), it was looking likely that I would go with a pretty stock setup. A Local Fitting! Then I got an email from a course about an hour west of me: a Callaway fitting day! I called that day and booked a half-hour slot. The fitting was yesterday. I got to the course and got a couple buckets of balls, so I could warm up and Kirke could keep occupied. [Speaking of, how pretty is this?] I felt pretty good after my warmup swings. I was still waiting for my time slot, so the fitter built me a stock Max with a regular flex EvenFlow Riptide (I think it was the 50g version). And I couldn't find the ball. Small panic sets in. I am not a shaftoid (to use Mark Crossfield's term). I would not be able to tell you what my preferences are in a shaft. But I will say that the stock shaft felt very wobbly to me, and I was struggling mightily to make anything like reasonable contact with the ball. My biggest disappointment in the fitting was that it was being done with a Swing Caddie, rather than a Trackman or GC Quad. It was outdoors, which was a big plus: I can swing freely. But I was hoping to learn some of the numbers, especially the head data, that I don't get from SkyTrak. We began with a few swings from my current driver, and the numbers were worse than they were at home on the SkyTrak (I'm guessing a lot of this was due to the difference between a freer outdoor swing versus the cautious, don't-miss-the-net swing). My spin rate was in the upper 3,000s and my launch angle was around 20. My swing speed was just about where I would have guessed: 96-97. But putting all those together, I was carrying the ball just over 200 yards on the good shots. Not ideal, but pretty consistent with my on-course performance. When we swapped in the Max (he put in a stiff shaft), the spin number went up closer to 4,000, which is what you'd guess going from the SZ to the Max. But that's a totally unplayable spin rate. This became the mission, then: to lower the launch and the spin rate, to maximize the distance of the admittedly very imperfect swing I have right now. While I was fully expecting to go from Rogue SZ to Mavrik Max, the fitter decided to give me the Mavrik SZ. Eventually, he swapped in the 9.0° version of the SZ rather than the 10.5° I'm currently playing. Because of the roll of a driver face, because I'm hitting nearer the top of the driver, I'm increasing the effective loft. By lofting down, I'm counteracting that. I did have one shaft on my shortlist in the low spin category, thinking that it might be useful if the Max increased spin: the Aldila Rogue White 130 MSI. So we tried that, and kept seeing progress. The fitter went back into the tent and built up one more version, and that was the winner. I got my spin down from a high of 4,000 down to 2,700. My carry went from 205ish to over 230, with a launch angle around 15 or 16. I dropped my peak height from over 110 feet to a more reasonable 90 or so. So what was the magic formula in that last driver? Mavrik Sub Zero, 9° head geared down to 8° Heavy weight forward Aldila Rogue White 130 MSI 70g, in X-flex My jaw dropped when I saw the settings he had given me. I would never, in a million educated guesses, have even begun to think that these specs would work for me. That's a setup for the 115-swing speed crowd, not the middle-of-the-bell-curve hacker like me. But the rationale behind the decisions makes sense in hindsight, and the proof was in the ball flight. The fitter said he felt comfortable trying the X-flex with me because I have a fairly aggressive transition. That was interesting to hear, only because it wasn't something I had a good reference point to evaluate myself. This is a hybrid swing, but I can see the point he was making. I'm definitely not a "pause at the top" kind of guy. So there are plans in the works: I'm hoping to get my hands on this setup sooner rather than later. In the meantime, I'm probably gonna do some tinkering with the clubs I have on hand, seeing what I can do to drop my spin and lower my flight. Also, I am planning to work on my swing. I've got a Plane Mate coming. So there is a question: if I've got this driver so extremely tweaked to deal with such bad impact conditions, what happens if I get better? Here's my hunch: I think the shaft will remain just fine. If I begin to come into the ball with a neutral or even positive AoA, I should be able to loft the head up and move the weight back. So I'm not terribly worried about that. For now, I'm just enjoying the feeling of having my mind blown by the fitting. You guys know that I've never been anti-fitting, but just lacked opportunity. I can definitely add myself to the list of those who are now strong advocates of getting fitted if it's possible at all.
  22. 1:35 - 2020 Most Wanted Stand Bag 16:19 - 2020 Indoor Putting Mat Results 19:18 - Anonymous Golf Course Shows How Much They Are Hurting 23:25 - Sub70 Golf Releases New Irons 31:30 - WARNING: Are You Playing THIS Golf Ball? 42:44 - Will There Be A PGA Show 2021? 44:44 - Tom Brady and Peyton Manning 49:58 - Tony Joins a Clinical Trial + Chris Announces #MyTubSpy Listen to NPG: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/mygolfspy/no-putts-given-38 iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/warning-are-you-playing-this-golf-ball-npg-38/id1356729135?i=1000474804580 Watch NPG: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx7Y21ZIl_w
×
×
  • Create New...