Jump to content

TwoCoatsOfWax

Member
  • Content Count

    121
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

148 Excellent

About TwoCoatsOfWax

  • Rank
     

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Illinois
  • Handicap:
    16

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Buy a couple cheap used drivers and have them cut down. Or, buy some knock-offs from a place like GigaGolf. They may not provide max performance, but would at least give you a sense of what hitting a shorter driver is like.
  2. Personally, I don't have an issue with bifurcation of the rules. I'm still going to play and watch golf if that's put in place. Different rules/equipment at various levels of other sports don't seem to affect their popularity. Yes, golf is unique with its equipment rules as is, but changes appear necessary at this point. I think standardizing the ball would be a no brainer whether its rolled-back or held at current status quo. For example, watch a Formula 1 race and the teams/drivers have choice of 3 different tire compounds: soft, medium, and hard. Have a standard range of golf balls that are lower, medium, and higher spinning. Maybe even design a range of 5 or 6 balls all with different characteristics so players still have choices. It might help drive the cost of balls down too.
  3. I play most of my golf as a single. I've left the pin in while putting for years mostly as a matter of convenience. Obviously, there's no one to tend the pin. I never understood why that was a penalty in the first place. It saves some time, but in reality not that much over an 18 hole round. Every little bit helps though.
  4. It seems to me that the discussion/debate can get a little muddled due to the size/scope of the report. It has some interesting stuff in it for sure. Yes, there are many reasons tour pros are hitting it further and further (club tech, ball tech, fitness, etc). and there are many reasons why golf courses can't be lengthened (cost, environment impact, etc). All of them have merit, but they are still secondary considerations IMO. Ultimately, the bottom line is that golf courses cannot be perpetually lengthened as a method of accommodating continually longer shots hit by tour pros. Something has got to give. I thought that was the original reason which caused the USGA and R&A to undertake this report. I go back and forth on what that “something” should be. I have ideas and opinions like everyone else. There’s only so many weapons governing bodies can use to address the issue anyway. Whatever changes are implemented, I guess that the following will happen: Tour pros and aspiring pros will still want to play on the PGA Tour for all that PGA Tour prize money People will watch about the same amount of televised golf as they do now Most of us will play about the same amount of golf as we do now I think we'll all be fine.
  5. Fair point. I can see that as a disadvantage. The Start mat is just wide enough to line three balls across and putt. If you have a putter with a very wide clubhead the balls may even sit too close to each other. The Start mat suits my purposes well enough and I got a good deal on it. I would've loved to get the 26' mat Wellputt sells though!
  6. I started playing the Q-Star Tour last year and will continue to do so this year. Like many others, I tried out several different balls after the ball test. The QST wasn't the highest performer in the test, but the price point for a 3-piece urethane ball caught my attention. The short-game performance and the durability are what sold me on it. Short-game, I could not discern a difference between the QST and Z-Star. The ball test had QST spinning less then Z-Star, but at my skill level I have had no issues stopping the ball on the green. It also seems to take quite a bit during normal play to scuff these up; a real plus IMO. The QST is a heck of a price vs. performance balance particularly when you catch a good sale. At one point last year, Golf Galaxy had the QST at $10/dz. I couldn't beat that.
  7. Another option is the Wellputt Start mat. It doesn't have as many markings on it as the Puttout mat but it is longer. DSG sells the Wellputt now. It's even $10 less than the Puttout.
  8. I would watch reviews for the 2017 clubs and comparable 2019 clubs on YouTube done by the same reviewer. I can't imagine most of them have changed their swings that much in two years. That would be closer to what you're looking for.
  9. I'd guess some use MGS tests at times but may not acknowledge it publicly as management wants the perception to be that it's their company doing it all. In other instances, MGS gets brought up in discussion and management/executives dismiss it outright. Sorry for the cynicism. I guess I've been working in a corporate environment too long. Good article! Before reading the article, if I had to guess the number of employees at MGS I would've guessed more than 12.
  10. That's the first time I've heard Golftec referred to as the "Natty Light of golf lessons". I'm curious as to why some people say that. In any case, glad to hear you had a good experience. My plan is to get a fitting or a swing analysis from them in the spring . The motion vest and what it adds to the video and resultant data really intrigues me. It's actually a big reason I was thinking of making the 2+ hour drive to the nearest Golftec.
  11. I would be partial to courses we regularly see on TV. And if picking a US destination, there are lots of great courses everywhere so try not to ignore flyover country.
  12. As a current Wilson irons player I look forward to the article. I'm not sure what their growth plans are, but I would think they don't necessarily have to aim to be the top selling golf brand again; just a profitable one. I've never hit any irons like the Launch Pad. I don't have issue getting the ball airborne so I'm not really the target golfer. I'd still like to have a go with a set.
  13. Both manufacturers are running a sale through 12/24/19 on their respective website. If you've been wanting to pick one up, now is a good time. Shot Scope = $119 (Reg. $159) Arccos = $199.99 (Reg. $249.99)
  14. I just pulled the trigger on a Shot Scope. Both systems have their pros/cons. I thought the ability to "tag" the hole-location was a big advantage and I didn't really want to rely on my phone either. The Caddie feature would be nice but wasn't the main reason I wanted a tracking system. I haven't used it yet so I can't speak to what I think of its functionality. FYI - Shot Scope V2 is on sale through 12/24/19 for $119 vs. regularly $159.
  15. This is a good point. I believe the Shots Gained data support the idea that approach play is slightly more correlated to lower scores than putting. Both are quite important obviously. I guess it depends on which part of your game you feel is weaker and what your practice goals are that determine your focus. With limited time, maybe that's smart. It's easier to get in a quick putting/chipping practice session. And if 21 putts per round is your average there's plenty of gains to make there. Good luck!
×
×
  • Create New...