Jump to content

Philly Golf Guy

 
  • Content Count

    314
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

433 Excellent

About Philly Golf Guy

  • Rank
     

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Handicap:
    13

Contact Methods

  • Referred By:
    jlukes

Recent Profile Visitors

743 profile views
  1. The putter is real. I owned a studio select and there is light milling on the face and the shaft label is correct. The head shape is correct as well. Finally, most counterfeits are circle T's, I haven't heard of any selects being counterfeited. It may happen but it's extremely rare. You are good. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  2. By far most creative logo. GL! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  3. I reviewed SC when I played it back in 2015. Really liked it to the point of almost became a member. Lots of good things and a great example of what happens when guys with a lot of talent are free to design the course as they see fit. Here's my review of each hole. http://bestphillygolf.blogspot.com/?m=1' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'> http://bestphillygolf.blogspot.com/?m=1
  4. Great thread. 5 best: 1. Sun Mountain 2.5 stand bag. It makes walking so easy. 2. M2 woods. Exactly the feel, distance and ease of use I've been looking for in woods. 3. PM grind wedges. Transformed my short game, total confidence now. 4. Shaft puller. Saved a ton of money doing my own club work. 5. Recycled golf balls (literally cut my spending on balls in half, with better quality balls too) 5 worst 1. Ping G15 driver. An example of hitting it great in the simulator means nothing. 2. Altitude irons. Gave these two seasons but they just weren't the elixir for me they were for a lot of others. 3. Callaway jaws forged vintage wedges. Couldn't hit these and held onto them for too long. 4. Zepp swing analyzer. Didn't work all that well, didn't help all that much, I returned it. 5. Titleist 910h hybrid. More a story here of probably way too much club for me at the time. I had it in 20 degrees and was happy to get 150 out of it.
  5. Here you go: Given the association with farming, it isn't difficult to conclude, little to no alteration of the existing ground condition are key factors when considering something a "true links". This is inaccurate. Your conclusion here on alteration of ground is the misinterpretation. Plenty of "true links" were altered substantially. And it's not a key factor at all. Rivers, lakes and streams often play vital roles in farming. They deposit sediment along their banks that create ideal conditions for agriculture. Salty bodies of water do not fall into this category. Countless waves deposit seas/ocean-spray in the "links" just beyond the beaches rendering those "links" worthless in terms of agriculture but ideal in cultivating golf courses. I don't disagree with this, but to be clear, a true links does not have to be on the ocean. Even looking at the list of true links courses referenced, there are many set in harbors, sounds, etc.
  6. Lol you're right it's not much of a discussion at this point. Just you posting gif's and links as you fumble your way to a point. I thought the posting of the R&A guidelines was helpful although interpreted incorrectly and unfortunately, you took it as validation. Once you decided to take the opportunity to celebrate the fact that the R&A was misinterpreted, I decided to jump back in and explain how 90% of what you posted on this was flat out incorrect, you know, in case others came here for edification. Enjoy the the thread everyone. It's like they say, a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing and in this case, under shooter or whatever the name is can wow everyone with Wikipedia skills and a whole lot of pretending. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  7. Lol this is a discussion? Again just some inaccuracies thrown around here and I think some are getting minimalism and links courses confused. Nothing wrong with it, but just not accurate. For example, going off of one of the blog lists being used as authoritative here, North Berwick is listed. The famous Redan hole there was made. It wasn't natural, they didn't simply put grass seed on the land and call it a golf course. Just because the land wasn't farmable doesn't mean it wasn't moved to make the course. Look at the bathtub green at Cruden Bay; again, made. Maccaranish, made. And on and on. Old Mac, made and elevation differences. Someone tried to argue that Chambers is not a true Links because of its extreme elevation differences. That's just inaccurate. Again using the list, there are countless at even first blush that extreme elevation differences. So again, that's inaccurate. Can you also please explain how Sand Hills ‘plays' like a Links course? A Donald Ross parkland can play like a Links course too, so I'm not sure of the relevance. So why point all of this out? To show even ‘true' links courses take many forms, not just out and back, not just treeless, or on oceans, or minimalist. It's important to go beyond simple google searches and actually look at the courses. And for me, the concept of links courses is most important. Moving away from target golf to using the terrain and battling the elements, whether wind, rain, hills, blind shots, etc. Many minimalist courses have succeeded in using links concepts and while it's easier to say they're Links style, I think it's better for course architecture to point out how each course plays and differentiate the style altogether. Trinity Forest is a minimalist course with many of the above components. Yet it's not Links. And anyone who thinks the ball shouldn't be rolled back because it forces the players to hit the ball straighter and some how thinks that makes for interesting golf is a lot different from my standpoint on architecture. But I mean, go back to being abrasive and thinking you know more than everyone. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  8. Sorry man we'll just have to agree to disagree. First, plenty of dirt has been moved on a number of links courses. While the Old course is essentially untouched, there are countless in Scotland and Ireland where a lot of dirt was moved. Also, it doesn't have to be set on an ocean. In fact, most are set alongside seas. The type of body of water is not really a factor. NGLA indeed ‘touches' the coastline. The fourteenth actually features tide pools on the right side. Or maybe you mean it doesn't touch the coastline of an ocean, which is true. A quick look online showed there's some contention where Chambers is actually a true Links. I think it just depends on what definition you want to go with. Rory thinks it is and after playing it myself, I would say it is as well. Lol as I write this, the GC is on and the headline is, ‘Links golf in Texas.' So we've come full circle. At any rate, good discussion but I'll be moving on from it.
  9. NGLA is set on a body of water. The right side of the Eighteenth is coastline as well. Chambers is likewise, it's on the coast of Puget Sound. Whether there are trees or not, or whether dirt is moved doesn't affect whether it's links or not. I mean, that list has Old Mac on it which only has one green near the water and multiple trees. And a course is not necessarily links because it's set on a body of water. I think it's a good list but not authoritative or complete. Really though, these are just ways of characterizing courses. Wide, dry and fast courses, preferably on fescue, where the wind comes into play and strategy and options are at a premium is solid, enjoyable, adventurous golf to me.
  10. Good list of the links courses but I always thought NGLA was links as well as Chambers Bay. And of course Cabot Cliffs is on there as well now. But it's correct that North America doesn't have many true links. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  11. An inland links course is called a heathland course. While a true Links course must have some of the components mentioned above, it must also be set alongside a body of water. Links style is one of those phrases probably used too much, usually any time the course isn't a parkland or have a ton of trees on it but it's also a phrase open to a lot of interpretation IMO. As for Trinity Forest, I'm very interested to see it on television and how it's played and received by the players. It's going to play a bit different than the other courses, requiring more strategy and decision making. As for Shinnecock, I can't wait. I was debating going up there to watch but would only consider going for the practice rounds.
  12. Price cut here let me know if any interest.
  13. I recently bought a set of MMC's and am switching out the 4 and 5i with Fli his. I've used the 4 Fli hi for a few range sessions and rounds now. Compared to the MMC 4i, there's more distance, a little more than my 5h as well. It's easier to hit than the MMC as well. I like to measure clubs by how I miss with them and this where the Fli hi really shines for me. Hits near the heel still get out there with a left to right flight that ends up in play albeit short. The combination of being able to hit this like a hybrid and see bad shots still yield playable shots is impressive for a long Iron. Will this replace the hybrids on my bag? I need a lot more time with them before deciding that but considering how accurate they are at this point, I could see getting all these in the bag and leaving a 3h in. I could also see getting Fli his up to the 6i. They look like nice from address so that's not an issue and being able to shape the ball is a plus as well. Lots to like here.
×
×
  • Create New...