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. Either is great. You're literally splitting hairs with groove tech. Go look at the model posted above, 4 out of the top 5 have no groove tech...how many pros use it...how many amateurs are lighting up qualifiers with groove tech? I will say this for the 100,000 time, if groove tech allowed you to make .5 putt more over the course of a round or several rounds...don't you think that might come in handy to some pros that finish one stroke shy of making the playoffs and keeping their cards? Most will disagree, most will claim that grooves work - save it - I've tested it (I actually want it to work
  2. 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,
  3. 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!
  4. 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 bette
  5. 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
  6. I would agree. I would 100% agree with it being as close to being unbiased as we have out there.
  7. 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
  8. 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!
  9. 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 MS
  10. 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 tha
  11. 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!
  12. 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
  13. Long live groove technology in putters - it's the secret to making more putts.
  • Create New...