Jump to content

Eric Cartmenez

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I personally have tried almost every putter out there - SIK, Evnroll, Bettinardi, Scotty, Odyssey, Ping, Directed Force (LAB), YES!, Taylormade, Cleveland, Seemore, Axis, etc. You name it, I have tried it more than likely. As a former Scotty Cameron hater, I tried all the other putters, gamed a few, and ultimately kept coming back to a Scotty - they are by far the most well-balanced, purest feeling, best looking at address (and not at address - not that it matters). Say what you want about marketing, hype, name, but he makes great putters and there's a reason pros use his putters - news flash, it's not because they get paid a ton to use them. I have several friends on tours - across the board - and they use them because they've told me they feel they're the best putters. Now if you haven't been fit for the right one and you're randomly pulling one off the rack, maybe you would disagree. Will it save you 2-3 strokes a round - maybe, but I know they 100% aren't going to COST you 2-3 strokes per round. The goal in golf is to eliminate the variables - find the best club possible, it's up to you obviously to perform, but I believe they give you the best chance to perform your best...that being said, your best not be great, but it will assist in helping you play your best. If a pro could use a putter and save 1 stroke or .5 strokes per round by benching their Scotty, they would - and so would I. Some may putt best with their Odyssey or Bettinardi - whatever it is, go with it if it's the best fit for you. I'd just say pay attention to what the guys on tour use to a degree, I promise they aren't playing clubs because they're paid an extra grand to game it. I'd advise looking at "free agent bags" to see what's in play - they're playing what they think can win them money and tournaments. I'd also take a look at what's going on with companies like SIK and LAB putters - I believe in the technology and can attest to the quality of them first-hand. If you're worried about a pro playing those for any money, they aren't - playing them because they're quality putters that help their game. Bottom line, you can't go wrong with a Scotty Cameron - I promise these will not hurt your game - just help.
  2. HA! totally agree. I think they're great putters and would absolutely game one - i've tested them, i just don't make more putts with them than my scotty/bettinardi. If i did, it would be worth the $400 + price tag, otherwise, if i am just making the same amount or maybe less, it isn't worth it. Love the look of his putters though!
  3. Evnroll putters are great putters. That being said, I do not make anymore puts than I do with any other putter. I think they are highly touted here because of the "roll tech/grooves". If it made that much of a difference, I swear to you, more college and pro players would use them (as they all test extensively). I promise you, if it saved a stroke a round or even .5 strokes around, they'd be using them. It MIGHT help save you a stoke a round or more...who knows? You have to try it - they aren't better putters than SC, Bettinardi, Odyssey, TM, or Ping though IMO. I believe SIK putters are better than Evnroll putters - I've hit both and those are my opinions. I prefer a SC to them all based on looks, feel, and roll the putters put on the ball. I am not a SC fanboy, I never liked them until I did extensive testing. Play what's best for you, but don't buy the hype of all the tech - though it may help minimally, it doesn't make that much of a difference. Read this great article by a great putter maker (Cure Putters): https://cureputters.com/blogs/news specifically read the sept 30th blog and august 25th blog. NO I do not work for Cure, just tired of false claims of putters making you a better putter. Enjoy the read!
  4. Thanks for the response. I hear you on all of this and understand the mission of MGS - they do good work and work hard at what they do. As I have mentioned, I'm on here, search the site, follow them and keep up so I do enjoy the information! Just thought I would point out a discrepancy that I perceived to be at least mentionable and wanted to see if anyone else echoed or could see from a potentially different view/angle. Anyway, I enjoyed the constructive dialogue and hearing the opinions of others in a civil manner! Very well could have been 1000% off on my opinion, but had to check to see if I was just "seeing" things. Appreciate the kind response!
  5. I would agree. I would 100% agree with it being as close to being unbiased as we have out there.
  6. My point was you can still successfully and sometimes (two years in a row) beat the latest and greatest "face tech". I'm not saying face tech hurts, but I am not saying it will make you make more putts - I am not even disputing the "roll" on the ball - not here to dispute that..simply here to state that you don't need face tech to be a top performing putter...that's all I was looking for anyone to say? There have been other studies outside of MGS - go look at what Bob Bettinardi says about face tech - they've done some research as well. Also, I happen to love Evnroll putters, I simply just don't make more putts with them than I do a SeeMore or a Cleveland. As for my research, as I am sure you will be asking about. I have a state of the art beachfront facility in Arizona that I perform my tests at and their results will be published in the near future.
  7. Got you. Again, I'll leave 5 alone - it was just a joke but understand the nature of our world now. Just thought I'd ask, but I'll go away silently!
  8. Understand I hear you on all of this - just pointing out the discrepancies and potential "bias" I do see. A definitely lean towards the smaller guys - not saying they don't publish when a major manufacturer succeeds. I've just noticed, and it would be silly to think there isn't somewhat of a bias after they clearly state they would prefer to "level the playing field"...seems like...they're trying to level the playing field lol. Only point with the TA winning was to point out that if your putter doesn't have face tech then you aren't necessarily playing an inferior putter - as MSG would prefer us to believe. I just call it like I see it and thought others might have seen the same - I guess I'm alone in the opinion and I got about the response I figured I would get. My bad on the political reference - it was a joke.
  9. I have long suspected that MGS has "favorites" in the golf manufacturing community. Please, guys, if this doesn't tell you they do - I don't know what else will - straight from the mouth: "MyGolfSpy reaches over 7+ Million golfers every year. We also accept $0 advertising dollars from any of the major golf manufacturers. This allows us to maintain our high level of integrity and ensures our content is never in conflict with our business interests. Delivering the unbiased truth to you is our only business. MyGolfSpy does, however, allow small and medium-sized golf companies that maintain a proven track record of performance to advertise. We believe this benefits both the consumer and the industry. It helps level the playing field by giving small budget companies with above average performing products a place to compete. It also helps expose the golfing consumer to a wider array of brands and products." I think they might want the "little guys" to succeed - they're telling you their biased opinion - "we believe this benefits both the consumer and the industry". I'm not saying it DOESN'T - just stating there IS at least some bias with MGS. I pay attention to how they always leave off or don't have "glowing" reviews for Scotty Cameron Putters (regadless of where they finish, top five or not) or other major manufacturers at times (they're the first to point out Evnroll putters whether they finish in the top 5 or not - they'll create a category in which they can finish "near the top in" if they don't already in initial testing). They swear by face tech, yet a Tommy Armour putter won their mallet test two years in a row - with NO face tech and basic alignment tech - standard for all putters - no mention of the lack of face tech putters are just as good if not better at times than "high tech" putters. All I'm saying is, "give me a break." If you are going to be totally unbiased, then great. If not, it's OK to say you would prefer to see light shed on other smaller groups or medium sized golf manufacturers (because they're just as good sometimes, if not better - I believe that!) - just don't say otherwise. You can deny it and fight it all you want but I'm not going to take every test MGS does for the "gospel". All that being said, I enjoy MGS, I just don't appreciate people claiming one thing and then it actually not being true. I'll still support and watch, but go test all equipment for yourself. I appreciate the testing they do, I'll just come to my conclusions and I won't be swayed whether it's a large or small manufacturer - I could not care less about "leveling the playing field for small and medium-sized golf companies." Wake up guys - this isn't the bible - it's MGS. Am I the only one that notices this?
  10. This is exactly what I mean! U hit the nail on the head. Every single player would be using grooves if it gave them an advantage. I'll stick with what I put with - whether that's grooves or not - whatever you make more putts with!
  11. Although grooves may help the ball roll end over end consistently (some would argue they roll the ball end over end just as well without grooves), I will stand by the greatest putter of all time using a smooth faced Scotty Cameron putter - even experimenting with grooves - only to go back to his Scotty. Say what you want, Mr. Rife, Ping, Odyssey, Bobby Grace, etc., if grooves made that drastic of a difference, I don't care what they say, every single pro would be using them. And after years of experimentation, you would think that I (not a pro golfer), would be able to make more putts with a grooved or technology filled putter. As it turns out, I make more puts with a newport Scotty Cameron, white hot pro Odyssey, Bettinardi milled face, and a Cleveland milled face. I can also make putts with groove tech - which obviously doesn't hurt to have, but it by no means makes me a more consistent putter or makes me hole more putts. I wish someone would come out and say that they don't matter as much as they want you to believe they matter - they certainly can't hurt your game, just like a smooth face or milled face won't hurt or make you make exponentially more putts...just my thoughts - im sure others out there share the same!
  12. Long live groove technology in putters - it's the secret to making more putts.
  • Create New...