Jump to content

TimoTe

Member
  • Content Count

    177
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

110 Excellent

About TimoTe

  • Rank
     
  • Birthday 01/01/1977

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    92832
  • Interests
    Golf, music, piano, guitar, sourdough bread, Traeger smoker, gardening
  • Handicap:
    14.7
  • EBAY ID:
    8466849

Contact Methods

  • Referred By:
    Adam

Recent Profile Visitors

193 profile views
  1. If I had to buy golf balls then I would buy Snell MTB-X. They are all the quality of tour balls for 30-40% less. (I play what I find = more Titleist Pro V1/V1x's than I can lose. I have only bought the first 2 dozen balls when I started playing almost 3 years ago. I have since found over 5,000 golf balls, of which about 15% are tour balls ~ 750 or so. I have 6 or 7 dozen left after selling much of them. You all lose enough to keep me in fresh supply. I just buy batteries for my flashlight. It costs me about 6 AA batteries for 150 balls = 20 or so tour balls which are about 3/4 pro V's.)
  2. My favorite cheap ball for durability was the Titleist DtTruSoft which has been replaced by the TruFeel. I haven't had a chance to put the TruFeel through any on-course testing. However, I would assume it isn't too much different.
  3. There are a couple, or a thousand, schools of thought on chipping. One club with different length swings to control distance - like the clock system Two or three, maybe 4, swings and use the club for a distance with one of those swings - like putt stroke, 1/4 stroke, 1/2 swing = interval system The answer is what you feel more confident to get you closer to the hole more often. 1. One club Clock system - popular with Dave Pelz, is to pick a club you like to use around the greens and learn how far it goes with varying lengths of backswing as if your lead arm is the hour hand on a clock. 6 is the address position, 7 is slightly back, 8 is about 1/4 swing, 9 is left arm parallel to the ground and so on. The typical execution of the shot is to control the length of the backswing and follow through equal amounts, and use a smooth motion that is a simple gravity acceleration that doesn't flip the club nor decelerate. 2. Swing checkpoints using various clubs - seems to work well from 100-50yds better than 50yds to the green for me. Basically you practice 3 partial swings you feel you execute best, and practice that swing with all your short clubs to your 8 or even 7 iron. You put together a spreadsheet of your yardages with your clubs at different length swings. Even up close to the greens this can work if one of your swings is short enough - for me it is about 2 feet back where the clubhead is just outside my trail foot. Eventually, you figure out what works best for your skill and personal style. The more options you have can turn into option paralysis, so some people have one club as their go-to around the greens. Other people have a club and swing for every situation. Personally, I use a different club based on how much green I have to work with. Lots of green let's me roll it to the pin so I pick a less lofted club. Less green requires a shot with little run. I hit 2000 balls a month at the range. Half are less than 100 yds to practice these shots to save par around the greens.
  4. There is a best category of ball rather than one single ball: tour balls that have urethane covers, and 3, 4, or 5 piece construction. The shots less than 50 yards from the green don't usually spin near as much because it is a partial swing. Your best bet to get some green-side spin is a tour ball (as described above). Full shots, struck well, will perform relatively similar but tour balls go further much of the time, with more control. A couple price friendly balls are there Snell MTB balls, and Taylormade Project (a) balls. Another spinney ball is the Srixon Z-Star. Cheaper balls just don't have green-side spin like tour balls. People play them because they cost less. You will learn that sticking to one ball will let you learn from every ball you hit to increase your consistency even if it is a cheap ball.
  5. La Habra, CA (socal) 14.7 handicap Trace using sharpie and ball marking clamp Titleist AVX AlignXL, "EAGLE PUTT"
  6. I'm not looking for a video game format like holey-Moley. I am someone who questions things, conventions, logic, and tradition. I have a curious nature. Many people just accept things without questioning. I would really like to see: Smaller diameter golf balls that outperform today's golf balls in speed, spin, and distance No limit on grooves Hotter drivers without COR limits Basically removing all limits on equipment size and shape I believe the spirit of the game is not hurt one bit by exploring technology to attempt to subdue the course. In competition, the goal is to reveal who has the greatest skill, so it makes it reasonable for certain competitions to limit the tech in order to reveal the skill. My argument is that golf has always been a game of using your own equipment that is uniquely fit to the player. Also, the equipment has grown so advanced compared to hickory sticks and wood clubs that Pandora's box is open too far to shut. The playing field is leveled by all the players playing the same course. The only limitation I see necessary is moving parts being banned - like springs (or liquid filled bats in baseball). I don't even see a reason they can't adjust their equipment through a round - that is one of the stupidest rules ever.
  7. Contact click gear for replacement parts. It's cheaper than a new one for sure. Plus, if you bought it with a platinum credit card it might have a warranty replacement too. (Through the credit card company)
  8. I am on the fence. The short answer is, no. The long answer, I think golf on TV is extremely boring to watch most of the time. I would like to see a new broadcast style (off topic) and, why not another league that has no limits? If there are limits on equipment then it would have to be governed by the league. I like the original 13 rules of golf. Basically, strike a ball, play it as it lyes, and count strokes until the ball is holed. What would golf look like with a 2000cc driver that is 5 feet long, a ball that is only 1.5 inches, flying 500 yards? It would be interesting at the least. Back when the NBA had no 3 point line, a new league was created called the ABA that competed so well, pulling some of the key talent, that they merged and redefined basketball as we know it today by adding some of the unique ABA rules.
  9. I figured this one would show up. I can see a 90+ year old, distance challenged golfer, or disabled golfers using this and I would be fine with it for fun and even skins if there was some reason for using it other than novelty.
  10. Going back to early definitions of equipment being without contrivance, I would argue that any face that flexes in order to increase ball speed would be non-conforming. BUT, somehow innovation wiggled into mainstream where all drivers, many, irons, all hybrids and fairways all flex and propel the ball. Additionally, early definitions of golf equipment also specified the club head would extend from the hosel out to the toe and have a straight shaft. BUT, 98% of putters made today do not conform to that standard of old. The popularity of innovation that provided a statistical improvement was eventually allowed. When you read the equipment rules now, it says except putters when referring to head shapes and bent shafts. Putters are the biggest offenders at ignoring the "rules" when you see center-shafts that make it easier to make a mallet (aka croquet) style stroke which was one of the biggest offenses in early forms of equipment limitations too. All this to say, if you argue that strict adherence to the rules is a must then you are saying heel-shafted putters, solid blade-like irons, and solid faced (no flex) woods either made of solid wood or at least 4-6mm thick metal faces. (Perfect argument for bifurcation on male pro equipment) You are saying that the USGA is wrong in allowing modern equipment as much as I am saying they restrict equipment too much for the amateur.
  11. I'm more a fan of 5 woods and 4 hybrids than 2 iron clubs. Here's a couple links for some clubs to check out. https://www.golfworks.com/maltby-sth2-hybrids/p/pma0316hbp/ https://www.golfworks.com/maltby-stf2-fairway-kura-kage-black-2g/p/pma0315hbp/ Isn't a 2 iron about the same loft as a 3 hybrid and a 5w? I saw on TXG that the 3 in the same loft have very different flights. 2 iron had the lowest launch and spin. The 5w had the highest launch and spin. The hybrid was in between. The biggest factor was needing lots of speed to get the 2i in the air and it would have the lowest descent angle = not holding any greens. Seems like a one trick pony=stinger tee shots. The 3 hybrid or 5w seem much more versatile.
  12. I think you meant thegolfbike.com https://thegolfbike.com/shop-2/ Looks interesting. Seems like you could take any fat tire bike, put a rear cargo stand, and make a two sided golf bag to fit on it. The bike they chose had a low center of gravity and low step over height to make it easy to get on and off. The concern I would have is the stand to keep it from falling over. It would seem to need a large pad to keep it from digging into the turf. I would like to see a two sided support stand like in a moped. This would keep the bike upright and more stable. If I was designing something like this it would be an electric power assisted scooter with golf cart tires in front and back
  13. That's great commentary. I started laughing genuinely. Much appreciated.
  14. After reading the rules of golf in 1900, I found no reference to equipment at all. The entirety of the rules focused on playing and scoring. There was no club limit, no groove limitation, no ball regulation, no club Cor limitation or any reference to lie angles or club shape/design. http://www.ruleshistory.com/usga1900.html I remain convinced the USGA is limiting equipment for no reason that ought to be recognized by anyone other than the elite PGA players, if that.
×
×
  • Create New...