Golfzilla70

What i'd REALLY like to purchase is the $7k Foresight GC3. It's a stupid purchase for some weekend warrior like myself, but it's just THAT CLOSE to being an achievable purchase without breaking the bank. Cool data, i could set it up with my Net Return, and just basically have a ball every evening with it

Great topic. This is one of those things that is really just an issue for the lower handicappers out there, and it's actually something that's played into how i've shaped my own game (i'm about a 3 handicap that loves to play and practice, but knows his limitations). I've found that the really high-end urethane balls (such as the Pro V1 class) are absolutely awesome fresh out of the pack. Slick paint, flight through the air fast, and spinny as can be around the green. But after just 8 or 9 holes, you can start to see the wear. Now i assume this might be different for some folks, because if you're playing very-well-manicured courses that have lush fairways and actual grass where the fairways end and the rough begins, your ball's cover is going to last longer. I'm not so well-off that i can play such prestigious places, and here in northwest North Carolina we generally play all year round. Fairways go dormant, and the balls land in much harder spots - which just accrues the damage even more. The problem i see with the covers on those balls is primarily in the long game, like driver. They just don't fly as far, and i assume it's mainly to do with wind resistance since the cover is no longer slick. Add to that my confessed inability to regularly control my spin on approach shots (i really don't seem to be able to know when these things are going to sit or bounce forward or back up 30'), and i've just really quit trying. I'm sure with practice i'd get better at it, but in my 50's now i practice less and play more. The absolute most consistent balls i've played (and play right now for the past several years) are balls like the Titleist TruFeel and the Titleist Velocity. Other companies have similar offerings, i've just stuck with these. They're not urethane, and they don't spin like it. But the covers on those balls can take what anyone would consider massive damage (cart path scuffs, etc.) and STILL play just about the same as if new out of the box. And i'm talking MULTIPLE 18-hole rounds. You literally can't wear them out. I'm sure they would suffer noticeably if left laying outside, or in a pond, just like any other ball would. You won't see a one-hop-stop check on a chip around the green with these balls. But you'll NEVER hit a shot right at the flag and have it back up 30' on you. They always bounce forward just a little, or stay close to where they land, depending on club and distance. Now the MGS guys hate these balls, because they feel like the masses MUST hit a urethane ball because of the spin they have around the greens. And i don't dispute that chipping advantage. It's there and it's fun if you know how to do it (i do, but i can't reconcile the advantage the ionomer balls give me on approach shots). The "ionomer"-type balls fly higher, they also fly STRAIGHTER, and for a low-handicap golfer, that actually means FEWER chips are needed. I feel like you're probably unlikely to ever see anyone that has a clubhead speed of 110 mph ever hit one of these ionomer balls, because they'll just muscle a urethane ball right on through whatever cover defects it has. And also likely over-compress an ionomer ball. But for guys like me, with a clubhead speed around 100 mph with driver, these balls hit the sweet spot. They're cheaper, they absolutely WON'T wear out from play (assuming you play one you bought, and not one you found and don't know its history), and are much more forgiving for whatever swing faults you have due to their lower-spinning nature. Spin can be awesome around the greens, but what you never hear is the more a ball spins, the more curvature it'll have in flight (if you have any swing fault that will cause a hook or slice) and the more a headwind will just kill its distance. JMHO So to answer the original question, i'll play my ionomer balls until i lose them, or until they accrue enough damage that they undboutedly can't fly true or putt straight.

I wouldn't have thought i'd ever do it a few years ago, but i reckon about $500 is what i'd spend on one (and i did just a few years ago, on a custom LAB DF 2.1 putter). I never really intended to do it, but i had the putter in my hands on two different occasions over the course of about 18 months, and both times i rolled it, it just seemed to roll so effortlessly and accurately. So i took the plunge. It does seem to be a waste on a club that doesn't hit the ball very far, but in all honesty, it's probably wiser than buying a driver brand new at $500-$600 every few years. The drivers made nowadays are absolutely fragile, and they do have a "hit limit", assuming you swing the club 95+ mph. Putters don't. And you're touching a ball more often during a round with a putter in crucial situations than a driver. So when you step back and look at the big picture, a high-tech putter is probably a wiser investment than a driver. But ONLY if you plan on keeping it for a long time. Not a problem for me; i stuck with a Ping Pal from about 1985-2010, and only changed to the Ping Karsten TR Pal from 2010-2020

I've got a Bushnell range finder that i use in addition to Arccos. I've just about decided that you can NEVER trust a GPS system (it's failed me at the worst times), so what i do is look at Arccos' "adjustments" to GPS, and laser the target (straight-line, no slope) and use the Arccos adjustments off the laser reading. HAVING SAID THAT, something is up with Arccos here of late --- their wind readings are nowhere near as accurate as they were a year ago. I don't know what's happened, but golf courses i usually play (where i know for a fact the wind reading used to be spot on) are no longer spot on. Of course if you're in the mountains, or have a wind tunnel effect, that could render it useless. But that's not the case with these other courses. It's quite disconcerting

I gotta say i've got several, but i've found you can boil all of them down into one big generalization: etiquette. If golfers had etiquette, they'd let faster players through. Or they'd recognize how slow they are in holding up their entire group. Having etiquette means you wouldn't be talking, shuffling about, or generally making noise while someone is hitting. Just generally thinking about others when you take any action whatsoever. The ones i've listed here used to always be my biggest pet peeves, but a new one has taken hold over the past few years that i never would have thought possible 10-12 years ago - music on the course. I totally understand WHY some folks like to listen to their favorite tunes while golfing; it's certainly something that people do in a lot of activities (while you're working in a factory, or at your desk if you've got an office job, etc.). But you just can't play music on the course without the sound traveling outside of your little space (unless you're wearing earbuds). This goes right back to etiquette, because if the guys playing the music were at all concerned about the guys that didn't want it, they'd never turn it on. Not everyone likes the same thing, and a large portion of regular golfers just don't want to hear anything of the sort while they're playing. Sure, there's the little "disclaimer" of "asking your playing partners if it's OK" on the first tee - but they always operate under the assumption that everyone is cool with it. Because 99% of the time, the other guys in the group will say it's OK so as not to appear to be jerks even if they don't want it. If you don't think this is true, and you're the guy that asks the group if it's OK to play music, ask yourself how many times anyone else has said no. And ask yourself IF they said no, how did that make you feel about them --- perhaps they were jerks, don't want to play with them anymore, maybe something else? It'll put a chill on the teebox, that's for sure. I'm not getting into a flaming war here, it's just a forum topic asking for folks' opinions and that's all i'm doing here

It's absolutely the best way to get "relatively new" equipment --- get the previous year's model (already marked down) and ALSO find it very slightly used (i'm talking drivers here). But if it's heavily used, i wouldn't touch it -- these drivers are fragile, and if someone's been beating range balls with theirs for any significant amount, that face could crack at any moment. Fairway woods are another story; i've never had a fairway wood crack on me. heavily used or not, the prior generation or so is easily an awesome deal to get.

well, i used to be quite a bit longer off the tee than i am now (shoulder injuries and age have taken their toll). Having said that, i've also lived through the days of persimmon / laminated woods, right on up to the equipment that's out there now. I've seen how golf has changed. I know the game people play today is different than 30 years ago. The real question is, i suppose, what do you consider to be golf? Up until about the 80's or 90's, hitting it long was a bonus, but was absolutely NO good to you if you couldn't hit a fairway. Today (it happened right about 2000), the equipment made it so the pros were more concerned about hitting it long than hitting it straight. All of a sudden, they could decide to either hit a wedge out of the rough or an 8 iron out of the fairway. There were always behemoths able to move the clubhead at ridiculous speeds, but not without penalty if they didn't hit it in the fairway. It was a no-brainer. The huge heads on the drivers, with their wider area of sweet spot (no the sweet spot isn't bigger BUT the mis-hits don't hurt nearly as much) made it so that accuracy could still be somewhat there, but you could swing like John Henry on the train rails at it and still make decent contact with the ball. And the ball itself went from the high-spin balata (the pros could choose a 2-piece ball if they wished, but no way it would stop on those firm fast greens they played) to a ball that spins just a little less but is long like the 2-piece balls. All of a sudden you've got Rock Flite performance with the driver and haven't lost much spin control with the wedge. All i'm saying is that i support a rollback because the game is rewarding a smaller segment of golfer that can move a driver at ridiculous speeds without much worry of the consequences of misdirection. I love to see the long ball, and i'd love to see it continue. BUT i want to see these guys do it with accuracy. Don't give them a way out if they miss the fairway. Today they can hit 350-yard bombs, and if the miss the fairway, they've probably missed it so badly that they're getting free drops because the TV people have made grandstands all over the golf course and they get crazy free drops. It happens all the time. This is NOT a situation you see in regular golf from regular people, ONLY the tour guys. And thus, i believe ONLY the tour guys should have to suffer the rollback.

You'll definitely get away with some fat shots on a mat that you wouldn't on grass. But having said that, any kind of swing practice you do can't be all bad. I know it's a common saying that bad practice is worse than no practice, but that's not really applicable here. Assuming you're working on solid fundamentals, I'd hit to my heart's content on the mats, knowing that you're getting away with misses that you wouldn't in real life. And concentrate on KNOWING that you hit the ball solid - if you can come close to hitting the ball with near-perfect contact on a mat, you'll be fine when spring rolls around. You just have to recognize by feel when you don't hit it perfect, and make adjustments where necessary. Be slightly upset with yourself when you feel that clubhead vibrate on mis-hits, and work to make those shots the exception. And by the way, that's great progress going from the 110's to the 90's in scoring. You're well on your way if you continue to work at it.

I never have used them, primarily because I've played Ping irons almost all my life - those things are tough, and you never seen bag chatter on them. But the softer forged players irons are another story. I recently bought a set of Miura TC-201's, and there was no way i was going to let those rattle around and get dinged up. I've seen so many awesome used sets that just look horrible because of that (but they're probably still very playable). So those have the iron covers, while my regular gamers (Ping iBlades) do not.

The bifurcation thoughts are all about strategy. At one time, probably as late as 2000 or earlier, it was very important to be able to hit the ball both long and accurate (in the fairway). With the advent of the prov1-ball types, and the 460 cc face-flexing drivers that technology has given us today, the game has gotten imbalanced. It's a given that all the guys on tour can chip and putt. You have to almost have mastery of that to even be on the tour. That hasn't changed. Abilities to hit irons accurately hasn't really changed. Sure, with science we have irons that are able to launch higher or lower, and spin more or less, are out there, but just because a number is stamped on the bottom of an iron hasn't really changed player skill levels. But the pros ability to just swing a driver with abandon, seemingly without worry about accuracy, is where the game has gone. Sure, they could fix the courses to punish inaccurate shots. But with the "temporary immovable object" rule allowing those guys to take free drops basically sideways, it's a problem.

I play better, but it's something i had to gradually build towards. I've got a regular weekend group that i play with, and they won't ever be competing in stroke-play games. While i will go enter some individual stroke tournaments. i'm not winning club championships or anything, ,but i'm about a 3 or 4 handicap, and i've generally played to that, and do decently enough in flighted matches. What helped me is going out of my way to play in these things with folks i don't usually play with. Doing this helped me get comfortable in what i consider uncomfortable situations, which helped me far more than just about anything else has. Of course, when i play with my weekend "slack rules" group, i try to play as hard as i can for my score just for me, to help me keep focus.

Good luck. From what you stated, you're obviously in great shape already. But coming from me (a guy whose handicap has hovered from 1-3 off and on over the past several years), you might want to pour some energy into core flexibility. I'm in my 50's, and it's a constant battle to remind myself to get my core activated and to move my trail side through the swing. It's something i've picked up on over the past couple of years, and it does have a dramatic effect on both clubhead speed and accuracy. At least for me anyway.

I'm about a 3 handicap, and FWIW, here's what i see (and i do play more golf than I should, at least according to my wife): Brand new Titleist Pro VI's are awesome off the tee, UNTIL their covers start taking wear. For my part, I notice an immediate drop in distance on the new slick covers compared to worn covers through the bag. As for spin, any of the premium balls tend to get a little "out of control" for me - I just don't have time to fine-tune the practice required to control my spin on the 100-150 yard shots, and SOMETIMES i'll launch those things and they spin backwards 30', and sometimes they don't. That's a major problem because there is a world of difference between a 20' putt and a 50' putt. And it requires skill to control that spin, and regular practice to maintain that skill. That just can't be over-stated enough. I'm not the longest hitter; about a 100-104 mph driver clubhead speed. So i play the Titleist TruFeel and Velocity balls. They fly plenty far enough comparatively speaking, they actually go further off my irons, and they're highly durable. Their covers can take scuffs, and you won't see a noticeable performance difference (i'm sure the other brands have similar balls, i just liked what i got out of these over years of different trial and error efforts and stopped on these). And it's very rare that I have a shot that I absolutely HAVE to hit a "one-drop-and-stop" chip shot. Those types of shots are awesome to behold and fun to play, but they're hard to hit with consistent results on command for common working-class amateur golfers. A simple "chip-and-let-the-thing-roll-out" is 99% of the time all anybody needs. I truly believe the guys at MGS do a disservice to their readers when they constantly drone on about the need for everyone to play high-performance golf balls. And Titleist is guilty of this too. They're constantly stating how the spin of the Pro V's gives you control around the green, and of course everyone's short game could be better, and what's better than more control? Except that spin thing causes weekend golfers to hit balls that sometimes check and sometimes they don't on shorter pitches and chips around the green. It's just my opinion, but in my mind that brings variables into play that most could do without. And one other thing: The Titleist TruFeel is about $22 at retailers. The Titleist Velocity tends to run $29. I CANNOT see the difference between these two balls in the normal course of play. I'm sure the Velocity has something in it that makes it more expensive, but everyone should be bottom-line results oriented, and be objective about what any given ball brings to your final score.

OK, i understand where you're coming from --- but try to think back before the electronic gadgets were here --- you were confused on new golf courses then, just like you are now. No one needs the fancy electronics for their home course, it's highly likely you intuitively know how to play a given hole. But courses that are strange to you, well, the electronics give a helping hand and that's OK in my book. We're not pros, but the pros on TV definitely get help from their caddies or wherever when they play courses they're unfamiliar with, and that happens all the time. And they were getting MASSIVE help from the caddies in the old days, just like we're getting help from our gadgets today. I don't think anyone can just "eyeball" a course they've never played at and hope to be competitive against others that are familiar with the course.

I 100% understand where you're coming from. I get aggravated by the same thing; i can't control my spin well enough to know when it's going to "zip" and when it's not. But i do usually put loads of spin on it. Here's what i did: i tried some balls, specifically the non-urethane balls. The Titleist Trufeel is a fine ball that fits exactly what you're talking about. No, it's not going to do a "one hop and stop" from a chip off the side of the green, but it NEVER spins backwards, sometimes it stops where it lands, and usually it rolls out forward a couple of yards at the most (except for chips, it'll roll out further depending on trajectory). The REAL plus side to them, besides the reliability of knowing what they'll do when they hit the green, is their durability (i suppose the fact that they're only half as expensive is a major deal too). You can play several rounds with one of these, but your Pro VI won't make it through 18 holes due to cover abrasions (and those cover abrasions on the Pro V's seem to affect it WAY MORE than cover abrasions on the Trufeel's). Just my two cents; and i'm a 4 handicap for what that's worth.

Just my two cents' worth: i see markings there for sure, but that carbon face will outlast their super-thin titanium faces, over the life of the driver. And that's primarily because they get right to the very limit on the thin face so a golfer can get that rebound. But 90% of golfers rarely hit the driver so often that they'll see such a breakdown before they're buying a new driver anyway.

Wildthing, i haven't heard of studies dealing with shoulder torque, but i 100% agree that it's got to have something major to do with the swing. Back in my teen years playing heavier persimmon-headed clubs with steel shafts, i could swing a driver over 120 mph. And too much golf with bad technique ruined the rotator cuff of my lead shoulder. At least that's what i think caused it; it's possible something else did but i can't imagine what it was. Nowadays, i'm 51 years old, and the best speed i can achieve with the modern drivers are in the 100-105 mph range. Doctors told me they could fix the rotator cuff, but there was a chance i'd have less mobility. So i opted not to have the surgery. And i've tried the speed training programs, over the course of a couple of years. I wound up hurting myself on separate occasions and just making my lead arm useless for a few weeks. It's been a hard pill to swallow, that's for sure. Old age sucks

It's just about a guarantee you'll find a driver/shaft combination better than your current 2007 model. the current tech is definitely better than that. Having said that, finding the proper combination can take time, unless you're going to a fitter. You can do like i did, sort of hit different clubs with different shafts a few at a time at Golf Galaxy, pay attention to the spin and dispersion #'s, and you'll see for yourself what works best after a while (of course, you may need to do some research to know what your proper spin #'s should be for your attack angle, but that's all part of the process)

i 100% agree. I'm about a 3.5 handicap, and while it's fun to make a urethane ball "drop and stop" on wedges and chips, that takes WAY more proper practice time to get really consistent at doing it. The Titleist TruFeel ball, while it doesn't spin as much, is VERY durable, and its spin rate is fairly consistent no matter how i hit it. Easy to predict what it's going to do. And at $22/dozen at Walmart, it can't be beat.

Well, here's my two cents' worth: i'm a 3 handicap, and i can tell real quick when my Titleist Pro V's cover starts getting a little dinged up that the driver distance is immediately affected. Pulling out a new glossy one immediately shows improvement. Having said that, it seems to me that the glossy balls are more aerodynamic just because they're slick. Those matte balls aren't slick, so i have to believe they'd suffer in flight. I confess i've never hit one; just feeling the cover makes me think they're shorter than their glossy counterparts so i haven't experimented with them at all.

I prefer the Lie Angle Balanced (LAB) putter myself. Having said that, the putting stroke is definitely a very individualized part of the game. Lots of different ways to get it in the hole. I do believe a lot of amateurs put too much pressure on themselves in the 5'-10' range though. I firmly believe that's a range that the only time practice will really help is if you have the exact same putt on the course, which is seldom. I think most folks would be better off working on their speed control so they two-putted from longer distances more often.

Just my two cents' worth: Putting expectations for most people are way too high. You can go to the green, basically master 5' putts, and then go to the course and get robbed because of a blemish in the green, or perhaps just misread the green itself. The pros are in another class, and they have to be because it's their livelihood at stake. I'm about a 3 handicap myself, and while i see golfers that are better than me regularly, they putt only marginally better at close range. It's truly amazing, when you look at stats, how close everyone is in their putting between 3' and 10'. I truly believe an area that you can practice in putting that really makes a difference is in your ability to 2-putt from longer ranges. If you rarely 3-putt, you're probably gaining strokes on just about everybody.

Go to the Goodwill store, and buy an old persimmon driver from the 70's or 80's. Tee it up, hit it at the range about a dozen times, then go with that big bulbous 460 cc driver. The benefits should be obvious, whether your attack angle is good or not. Just my two cents worth

i guess i'm sort of biased on this --- i've only had Arccos, and i got it almost 2 years ago. The data analytics are awesome, stats are awesome, the strokes gained thing is awesome. I'm just really impressed with the whole package. And i know it's got its shortcomings, especially on shot detection in sand traps and putting. But outside of having my own caddie keep up with that stuff for me, i'm fine with it. i'm a single-digit handicapper, and the highest praise i can give it is when i go on golf trips to strange courses and i completely rely on the caddie function to tell me what's best for me in the situation. I haven't really thought about any of the others because from what i've read the others don't seem to have the analytical features of Arccos.

well, I for one like the Titleist TruFeel balls. I like the Titleist Pro VI's off my driver (when new), but man, those things wear out way too fast. And once they wear out, for my swing I see a serious loss in distance off of driver (i'm typically around 100 mph on driver, and i think i probably back off of top speed on all my irons for the sake of contact). On top of that, i have a hard time predicting just how much i'm going to spin it. I'm very capable of hitting "drop and stop" chip shots, and they're fun to hit, but RARELY is that shot ever a necessity. But with distance approaches, i'm just not good enough to be so consistent not to accidentally hit a big-time spinner that backs up off the green (and i'm about a 2 handicap). The TruFeel ball doesn't spin as much, but that's perfect for me. It seems to "spring" off my irons giving me about a half-club more distance (but it's slightly shorter than the Pro V's when i hit them good with driver, if they're new with slick covers). I think Tony at MGS hit on something about the covers being a little firmer, with softer cores, on those non-urethane balls. They certainly work for my swing, they're cheaper, and they're WAY tougher. I've been playing the same ball now for about 4 or 5 rounds, and it's still performing like it did when it was new.