LeftyRM7

Right now I get Trackman sessions for free through my club champion membership. Which is a pretty big perk for me. I’ve only been on Trackman a half dozen times but it’s enough to see patterns and how my swing has evolved. Most of my lessons were at a higher end club with a respected local pro, at $75 an hour. Last 2 lessons I had he felt my path was too far out to in and had me working this figure 8 motion to get me more in to out. Every time I’ve been on a launch monitor, my path has been zero to slightly in to out. I play a fade typically and my miss is generally a push fade, I have a hard time starting the ball inside my target line so I typicality set up quite open. So right off the bat, I was skeptical. I also know that trying to swing more in to out, I tend to get more behind the ball and hit it fat. In my opinion, my club face control is the issue, and a quick Trackman session proves it. My path doesn’t change much but my face to path can be erratic at times. Now, as you said, it’s possible that I could keep working at it and paying for lessons and eventually I’ll get it down BUT there’s no guarantee that that will even translate into scoring better. There’s a difference between a better swing and more playable swing. It’s all about matchups in the swing. I don’t see how this path change will work with the rest of my tendencies. Overall my point is you can really go down a rabbit hole to nowhere if you’re not careful. If you’re going to pay for lessons, I would much rather have it based on data than someone making an educated guess. Coaching is very much trial and error, data and technology just make it extremely more efficient. If my coach had a launch monitor, he could then prove what my path/face was really doing and then show me the results post change. A simple exchange like this that takes 20 minutes could be weeks of lessons without the monitor. I’m not into the idea of building a swing by hitting certain positions. Im much more about learning my tendencies and how/why they work for me, which in turn will make me better suited to make adjustments. It’s easy to say, oh you’re an early extender, you have a chicken wing, you have too much shaft lean. But the trick isn’t in fixing these perceived issues, it’s understanding why you do them and the sequence of events that happens to make it all fit together. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Old school golf coaching is incredibly inefficient. Why trust someones eye an opinion when you can have the real data instantly. The technology and information is all there for the taking if you want it. Sure good coaches have their place but it’s not cheap and it’s really like playing the lottery, you can dump a lot of money and get very little out of it. I’ve heard some well respected coaches talk about how behind the industry is as a whole and how unwilling to change it can be. If I try something and it doesn’t work, I still learn from it and get better. Plus I didn’t pay for bad advice. I think a lot of people have this idea of building the perfect swing when in reality it’s more about learning your swing and tendencies and managing it. How many people talk about playing for years without much improvement and spend gobs of money on equipment and lessons. I have had a few lessons and have certainly gotten a few nuggets out of them, but I’ve also left lessons worse off. Been playing for almost 4 years and my handicap has come down a few strokes every year. Down to a 15 last fall, so I think I’ll keep doing my thing. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A launch monitor to me is always better. No pro, no matter how good they are, could ever give you a fraction of the information. I’d take a launch monitor by itself over a coach without one. It’s hard to find the right coach and I’d rather know I’m not just blowing time and money on some cliche swing tips. The trick obviously is having the ability to apply that information. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My question for the bifurcation crowd would be where do you draw the line? I think many think of the Bryson’s and DJs of the world when talking about this distance debate but even on tour those guys are the 1% of the 1% of golfers. The same arguments that are being made for amateurs vs pros can be made for shorter hitting pros. I mean nobody believes LPGA or Champions Tour pros are overpowering golf courses. Do we really need to tell 5’ 4” Brooke Henderson she can’t use her driver anymore? So then you say it could be a PGA tour only bifurcation but then you alienate the guys that play multiple tours. Do we really want to push guys like Furyk, Stricker, and Mickelson off the PGA sooner than they’d like to because they can’t compete? There are so many issues to deal with and wherever you draw that line of bifurcation, there will be a group of golfers that end up with the short end of the stick. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would say it’s, like a lot of things, player preference. What are you more comfortable with? For me, fairway woods are tee clubs. Just can’t ever get the consistency out of a fairway that I can a hybrid. Now for a better player the difference might be very small, for me it’s pretty substantial. What are the real differences in the shots you hit with each and where do they fit on your arsenal, that’s the question I’d ask myself. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed, but in the context of solving a “distance problem” it’s really not a measurable change. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree 100% with Rory. It’s great to do all of this research but if your goal is to strengthen the future of the game, surely there are much better ways to spend that money. Especially considering years later we sit here with nothing but ideas like 46” drivers, local rules, and tighter tolerances. I feel like after all of the hype, this proposal is honestly laughable. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I carry a 5i and 5h, both at 24°. Distance wise the hybrid plays like a 4i but I don’t really look at gapping as the biggest factor. I look more at the type of shot I need out of them. 5h is better from rough or if I have to go high and/or draw it. When it comes to building a bag, a lot gets made of gapping but I look more at what shots I need to hit on the courses I play and making sure I have a club for that shot. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good information but nothing surprising. Tee it high and let it fly as they say! Consistency is key also, I always use my index finger as a gauge every time I tee up so know exactly where I’m at. Also a good tool when you’re wanting to flight the ball down or work it a certain direction. I disagree with the idea that it could solve any distance problem on tour. It would turn driver technology and design in a whole new direction but they would fairly quickly get that 15 yards back. Hell, Bryson would have his delivery changed by the weekend lol Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gamers 99% of the time. I do have a few old wedges around the house I’ll chip with in the living room/ back yard. I feel like the knicks/scratches on my gamers are more like badges, never really cared to keep them brand new. Plus, the sooner they seem worn, the sooner I can justify buying new ones [emoji23] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This, to me, is the core issue with this debate. They have no cohesive target or goal. We really don’t know what they’re trying to “fix”. The headline is always “distance problem” but there are so many moving parts to the debate. Are they worried about longer courses, longer hitters, longer equipment? Each aspect has its own set of issues and anything you change will effect everything else, and ultimately change the trajectory of professional golf. Like I said before, it feels like they don’t know what to do but feel pressure to do something, and that is a recipe for disaster. Personally I don’t think any significant bifurcation will happen because the players and the OEMs will push back hard. Maybe some small tweaks to club specs if I had to guess. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rory is a great spokesman for the game and his voice carries a bit of weight so hearing this from him makes it that much better. Hits the nail on the head and says what most of us are thinking! You can tell it was on his mind and he means what he’s saying. Good stuff!

This topic really is a mind-boggling one. Decades of research and studies and data, yet opinions always seem to prevail. To me it’s not a debate, the research clearly shows what’s happening and the USGA and R&A choose to not follow it. It’s been a year since they released their own report detailing everything related to the “distance problem” and nothing has changed. They clearly have no idea what they’re doing and feel pressure to “do something”. Every bit of information I have seen shows that equipment limitation(club or ball) will create a disproportionate advantage to long hitters. To me, that’s just the laws of physics. Length comes from speed, no matter what equipment is used. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’d like some of whatever Adam is smoking here [emoji23] Unless ShotScope releases V4 next year fully equipped with Trackman and a Mizuno shaft optimizer, online fittings aren’t passing real fittings any time soon. The technology is just not there. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good topic here. I tend to come up short the majority of the time but that’s including when in clubbing up. I tend to go for the correct club for the number with a full “normal” shot. Clubbing up I find that i tend to slow down and mess my timing up, and I tend to hit it fat or my fade becomes a pull or draw. It’s very situational too, sometimes the pull/draw would be a better miss so clubbing up makes sense. I do find all the stats on being long vs short very interesting. I tend to see short as a much better miss the majority of the time so I don’t worry about it too much. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Shot Scope requires you to press a button over the pin location to record it. If you use manual putt mode, you do the same for each putt. I find it fairly accurate that way. Editing is still a thing because their will be times it doesn’t pick up the location correctly but that’s just where the technology is at right now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From what I understand, it’s coming in phases. Right now it’s just enough for them to say they have strokes gained. If you’re familiar with Arccos or Golf Metrics platforms for strokes gained, this is nothing in comparison. It gives you strokes gained averages for the current season for driving, approach, short game, and putting vs a pro. The picture you see in their add is literally all you get right now. I use shot scope and have been begging them to add strokes gained. I’ve been using Golf Metrics for strokes gained but it’s incredibly annoying to have to go back and manually enter every shot for every round. I can’t wait until they get it fully up and running, which they say should be this summer. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I get that the newer phones have better Bluetooth technology, but I don’t see how it’s a phone issue. I’ve used countless Bluetooth devices, none of which had similar range issues. I may be wrong but they have to be using cheaper/weaker Bluetooth technology. I can turn on my Bluetooth speaker and go outside without losing signal, or leave my phone inside on the charger and go outside for a few hours and my whoop strap never disconnects. Disappointing at the price point of the product. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

After emailing their tech support, I got a response within a few minutes, I updated my phone and the app. Gave it another try on the range this week with no change. Can’t step away from my phone to record a swing. They informed me that my iPhone 7 was too old and that they recommend iPhone X or newer at a minimum to help with Bluetooth connectivity. I’m not a tech expert so I don’t know why this device is different than any other Bluetooth device, but it is. They offered me a full refund, which I will be taking. Overall I think they have a great product and great customer support. I would check the FAQ page on their website for recommendations on phones before you buy, I know I wish I would have. I’d be interested to see how it performs with a newer device as recommended. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

One thing I can never grasp, and I’ve seen a few people mention it here already, is the idea that miss hits will turn out better with an iron over a wedge. Does a bladed 7 iron really roll out much less than a bladed wedge? Does a chunk go further? Does a shank go less off line? Really don’t think there’s much to be had there, it’s more about player ability and comfort level with a particular shot. There’s always the hero shot that Tiger/Phil will use and then there’s the best shot in your arsenal. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’ve been using whoop for a few months now and from what I’ve seen, the halo is far from competition for the whoop. After a little research, I quickly dismissed the halo as an alternative. It’s Amazon’s version of a basic fitness tracker, packaged to look like a whoop. Great marketing but that’s why it’s $20 less a month. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wedge is the play the vast majority of the time given their versatility. Bump & run with an iron is situational, have to have the right lie, nothing to carry, and plenty of green to work with. To me you’re comparing one shot to an endless combination of shots. It’s a great shot to have in your arsenal when needed. If you’re not good with wedges, practice, practice, practice, loft and bounce are your friends around the green. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Personally I couldn’t stomach spending that chunk of money on a cart. It’s really personal preference, depending on if you’re looking for something that does the job or if you really want the extra bells and whistles. I bought a $35 bag cart off of Amazon a year and a half ago, it lives in the bed of my truck and I have no complaints. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here’s an interesting topic I’ve given a bit of thought to recently while struggling with my swing. Is it better to forget about it and maybe take some time off or go right back to grinding and practicing to work through whatever issues you’re having? I’ve seen pros on opposite ends of the spectrum. Bryson is known for heading straight to the range post round while Bubba has said if he’s off then why waste time making more bad swings. Obviously this is player specific so I’d like to hear everyone’s thoughts. Personally, when I’m off, I want to go to the range. It really eats at me and all I can think about is going to the range to work things out. I really just need to hit some good shots to get some confidence before I move on. Sometimes I find something and other times I just need to reset and go back to a feel or thought that has worked in the past. Last week I felt like I had lost my swing, bad enough I was embarrassed at the range. Had a lesson with my coach and felt like what he had me working on was making things worse. Couldn’t help but spend time chipping around in my backyard and was able to kind of reset my swing. Played yesterday with no expectations and was pleasantly surprised to be swinging really well. I feel like I had to reset before trying to move forward with what my coach was having me work on. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t believe the lead foot pressure is that different between the two at impact, looks can be deceiving. Bryson ends up on his heel because of the pressure he puts into his lead toe sending him backwards, and so he doesn’t blow out his knee. I’d love to see actual pressure traces though. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk