Moose4282
-
Posts
61 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
FAQ
Tests
Classifieds
Store
Group Buys
Posts posted by Moose4282
-
-
58 minutes ago, chisag said:
... A robot will tell me little if anything. Even ball speed doesn't tell me much because trajectory, spin and swing speed can negate any increase in ball speed. That said it is good information to have and the more info the better. But as you said that info is not just technical aspects a robot can reveal but I wanna know how it plays. I remember the original remake of the Big Bertha and at that time it was the best feeling and sounding driver I had hit. A wonderful dense feel and muted sound. Some reviewers and especially younger wrx members commented how it just felt dead and lifeless compared to the explosive driver they had been playing so they really disliked it. One player looks at a Max head and thinks they can't hit something that large and the next guy thinks it gives them added confidence.
... And while a robot can be very valuable and reveal many truths it cannot emulate average golfers swings. Just taking one over the top, out to in, face open, negative angle of attack, 89mph driver swing and if you change one of those variables like how open the face is, everything changes. Now the combination of incremental changes for that one swing has to be in the thousands if not millions. And we haven't even touched on shafts because unless you have carbon copy of Byron Nelsons swing, how you swing any given shaft cannot be duplicated by a robot, just the swing speed.No technology is helping that swing… truth
-
1 hour ago, cnosil said:
Don't disagree that that will give you information about one configuration of the club. But just because the club is the fastest using a robot that doesn't mean it will be the fastest when it is in your hands. There are multiple truths and you have identified one particular truth.
Well actually yea. If its fastest with a robot butnot the fastest in your hands, then something is off… too much loft, etc. would need to make adjustments to maximize it. Or you just have a mental block and well…
-
38 minutes ago, cnosil said:
What you are missing is that a robot doesn't react to feel and looks; it swings on the plane that is setup. People react to feels, I may leave the face open because of how it feels or because of visual queues hit snap hooks.
I don't know the makeup of the testers as the testers are different for each club type. The spectrum is pretty wide as there are + handicappers all the way to 20+ handicappers. Ages range from 20s to 70s. As mentioned by someone else's response, handicap isn't really a great indicator if the clubs works for you. I'd probably look at things measured on a launch monitor as a you can have a scratch golfer that hits it 230 and a 20 that hits it 300.
No doubt an actual golfer introduces random variables that a robot cant replicate. But all we want to know here is it faster. In certain parts of the face. Control all variables and make them equal, chs, dynamic loft, face angle, aoa, strike location. Let the chips fall where they may. Thats where the truth resides.
-
5 hours ago, Rob W. said:
In my opinion neither MGS nor Rick are reporting testing results, they are reporting reviews. If they wanted REAL testing, set up the robot, and let it swing away with every driver that comes out. They did it with the ball test. Why? because the robot gives you the most consistent & controlled data points.
The reply that a robot doesn't represent the average golfer is BS. You can set up the robot to replicate off center hits, steep and shallow hits. Any swing fault can be simulated. But we don't ever see that data because it would end the debates and would make marketing hype transparent.
As far as this squabble goes, Rick never claims to be doing controlled tests. He does the kind of tests that you and I can do at the PGA superstore or Golf Galaxy. MGS is the place that executes more controlled tests, so they needed to take the high road on this one. The response needed to be less personal in nature.
Bingo. To do anything less is get lost in clouds
-
21 hours ago, MNUte said:
After a 1 mph average increase and highest overall of 2mph, your takeaway from this is to bash Rick?
Regardless of whether he's your flavor or not, he's a single data source, one of many. You're right, he tends to be a fairly skeptical source. But so are plenty of people. And the majority of reviewers who are public with their results didn't show much increase. As a countering data point, Alex Etches showed significant increases. So you review the sources and take any particular one with a grain of salt.
Rick said that to him there was no difference in ball speeds. His numbers reflect that. And again, many also show no or negligible differences. You yourself state that you think MGS's claims are a tad inflated and that for you the speeds were fairly negligible (I'm assuming you're over 100 mph ball speed and so the 1 to 2mph increase is at most 1 to 2 % increases). So how does all of that that justify the MYGOLFSPY Response and some of the low blow statements. Similarly, how does that justify your comments that his skepticism equates to him not understanding data or science?
Because what sheils does (and many other yt) is so unscientific in nature. You cant call it a test or comparison of you dont understand how science works. There are variables and constants that have to be accounted for. His approach is incredibly simplistic. Another thing that seems to be happening is ALL reviews im seeing that use trackman has stealth clubhead speed UP 2-3mph and smash actually a bit lower than other drivers, even tho ball speed is up. They all bumble around this fact having no clue what is actually happening. Its sad.
- Larryd3 and RickyBobby_PR
-
2
-
Man I cant stand Rick Sheils, Im glad someone finally called him out. Theres people who believe all the hype every year and theres people who are completely skeptical of everything (like sheils). Imo, he he was biased going into his test (all his tests really). Leave the judgements to someone who actually understands the data, and science of whats going on. I think MGS claims were a tad inflated but multiple people have shown an increase in BS, particularly retention on mishits. I tested the stealth against several drivers (no SIM2) and it didn't blow it away but it did give me my highest average by about 1mph and highest overall BS by 2mph.
-
SOLD
in Archived BST
For sale: new out of plastic (carpet rolled) Bettinardi Studio Stock #17. Measures 34” standard lie and loff. Comes with HIVE limited release Waste Management “party on” headcover. Together all these new would cost $550+. Asking Sold shipped CONUS. Paypal only, no trades
Thanks for looking!
-
4 minutes ago, jlukes said:
The graphic is scientifically incorrect
Its from scottys website. I believe odyssey has the same theory. What about reacting to the toe hang? A player feels that toe wanting to open, therefore is more likely to rotate it. If im opening up a face balanced putter, i may not be able to “feel” it, there for i never rotate it closed? Its an interesting topic.
-
Rebooting this thread because im curious about the contradictory information. More toe hang seems at first glance to want to leave the face open at impact but then i came across this:
Totally opposite of some common “suggestions”
I typically take my putter outside my arc and struggle with pushes, or an open face, and according to scotty cameron, i would need more toe hang, the opposite of what i thought....
so why is this? One theory i kind of have is, everyone says the putter with more toe hang has more torque and will want to open when transitioning from back stroke to forward. But i think it also helps keep the face closed on the backstroke, because of the same torque like forces are applied from address to starting the backstroke... if that makes sense? Hmm..
-
7 hours ago, cnosil said:
I understand what you are saying and what you are saying is correct. The point of my original post was that counterbalance does not have to be above the hands with a longer shaft. extending the shaft adds weight on the other side of the fulcrum. This means I can put a lighter weight in the end vs a heavier weight in a shorter shaft. You are now getting into swingweight which is influenced by the weight above and below the balance point of the putter. As for the "feel", some people prefer to feel the weight in the head of the putter because they try to swing the head of the putter. Others, like you describe, want to feel their hands move the putter so putting more weight near their hands provides that feel. Also, swingweight is a static measurement that can be influenced in a lot of ways; what it doesn't take into account is total weight, both of those influence the feel and how the player responds with the club in their hands. There is a lot more to weighting putters and golf clubs; for example I can give you a putter swingweighted at E2 that weights 2 pounds and one at D2 that weights 100 pounds, the lower swingweight putter won't feel lighter to swing.
No i agree, just wish there was a better term to seperate the two, yes technically they are both counterbalanced, but they are different concepts.
-
No brainer, the balls.
-
2 hours ago, cnosil said:
??? Your hands aren't the axis. In the putting stroke (or golf swing for that matter) the body doesn't rotate around the hands. Counterbalancing is simply about moving the balance point of the club. That can be accomplished by adding weight above or below the balance point. Slight or not, it is still counterbalancing and that depending on your sensitivity to weight even a gram or two could influence the feel.
I used the wrong term, its fulcrum not axis. Imagine a seesaw. The middle triangle where in connects is the fulcrum. Thats where your hands connect to the club. If there is no shaft on the other side of the fulcrum, it dont matter how the weight is distributed, its all on one side of the fulcrum. Now if its swinging, more weight away from the fulcrum would “feel heavier”. So by moving weight to the handle, right on top of the fulcrum or near, you lighten its swingweight, it will “feel” lighter to swing. Now if we put weight on the oppisite side, the effect is MUCH greater, you now have a force counter acting the force in the other side of the fulcrum. All in all its supposed to “quiet” any wrist action one may have. I know people say “ my wrists are locked”... well they think they are, but they arent
-
2 hours ago, jlukes said:
I believe the word you were looking for was fulcrum, not axis
Yes sir thank you
-
26 minutes ago, cnosil said:
I disagree on your definition: counterbalance is to neutralize or cancel by exerting an opposite influence. You counterbalance the grip to reduce the feel of the headweight. Stroke lab does have a counterbalance, but the strokelab concept is more about distribution of weight from the shaft to the head and grip ends of the putter. Counterbalance weights can be placed anywhere above or below the balance point. Typically it is placed above to help players better handle the heavy putter heads.
But weight at or below the hands doesnt really count. Your hands are the axis in which the club swings. If the weight is directly under the hands, There will be a very slight counterbalance effect, but not even close to having significant weight above the hands.
-
For the last time loft jacking isnt magically giving you distance... its the apperance of distance. Anyone who says otherwise Is not using their thinking cap well.
-
3 hours ago, DaveP043 said:
I've seen this claim before, that more demanding clubs will somehow make you a better ballstriker. I've just never seen it proven, and don't really believe it. Just because the ball feels and performs worse on mis-hits doesn't make you better, it just makes your hands hurt and your scores higher. Improved ballstriking comes from making better swings, either from practicing and grooving your flaws, or working to eliminate those flaws.
I cant “prove” it but ive experienced it. When i first got into golf, i had one of my grrat grandfathers OLD bladed 6 iron laying around my house after he passed. Started taking it out as a kid, and if you have ever tried to hit a club that old... it will literally make you strike it well or just quite there wasn't really any in between. When my dad purchased my first set, big chunky cavities- they were sooo easy to hit! Im convinced that little blade improved my hand eye coordination. Feel is another aspect. Some of those big forgiving cavities mask strike so well. Ive seen it before where someone is constantly hitting it out in the toe but couldnt really tell. They are leaving yards and performance on the table.
edit: i will add this concept is used in other sports as well, unsure of the name..the cuban and dominican baseball baseball players hitting small rocks with a stick to fine tune hand eye coordination
-
13 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:
My comment wasn’t about lofts or hot faces. I was replying to a comment about distance. I’m saying that for me if I was able to hit my current 8i another 10-12 yards which would equal the distance of my 7i I wouldn’t turn that away and the second part of my comment was referring to any amateur and their current set wouldn’t mind have extra distance as well, as long as it was consistent.
i can hit my 8i further if I went after it but the consistency in strike and distance each time may not be there.
There are low capper with p790s, g series irons in their bags with no issues. I knew a guy that was around a 3 hdcp that play the old Cleveland hi bore irons. The notion that low or mid cappers don’t benefit or wouldn’t use hot faced or forgiving irons is silly. I hover between an 8 and 10 hdcp and played p790 for the first year they came out. Only reason I got rid of them was to play Pxg
It is certainly possible to be a lo capper and not be a good ball striker. Ive see rounds with 4 greens in regulation and the score was still like even par. So perhaps there are some low cappers who may benefit from a more forgiving iron. On the flipside, they may be doing themselves a disservice, By not playing something more demanding which can lead to better striking. Maybe they wont ever possess the talent to do that, who knows for sure. Does everyone want more distance- well sure- how you get it is another thing. What the other poster was eluding to was accuracy is priority number 1 when it comes to irons. The equipment that produces faster ball speeds and lower spin rates will almost always be less consistent to any decent ball striker.
-
2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:
But I do want to hit my 7i further as I do my 4,5,6,8,9,pw. If I can consistently hit my current 8i the same I’m getting from my 7i and my 7i as my current 6i and so on then it’s a good thing as I have an easier club to hit into greens.
Find me an amateur that would not like to hit their current irons further.
There is one way to do that and thats bagging a full set of hi cor thin faced hot irons. Lofts are simply not giving you anything extra. If thats what you feel you need go ahead, but mid to low cappers actually get worse with these type clubs and MGS has data to prove it.
-
5 hours ago, Apolloshowl said:
Nike had an amazing counter balanced system that gave the ability to adjust where the counter balance point was.
Stroke lab has done a good job with a newer counter balanced system. That all being said I believe there is just a preference to normal length putter rather then the long ones. ?
I think the name counterbalanced is being used for two different things. Technically “counterbalancing” is a club that has its weight moved more towards each end, and away from the middle. Stroke labs certainly have this. Then there are the type with the longer shafts and weight above the hands. This was designed to stabilize the head much like a belly putter used to. In my opinion, putters like the stroke lab, while Technically are counter balanced, they don't really do that.
-
-
3 hours ago, Pingistheanser said:
Heres an interesting watch. I think that one thing that people forget when it comes to jacked lofts is that its not so much that the newer clubs are longer. Theyre actually pretty comparabe on center strikes. The real advantage comes in when you miss the center of the clubface. The old clubs penalized you much more when you missed the middle. With new clubs, especially the ones with jacked lofts, you can be all over the clubface and still get pretty good ballflight.
Yea thats two seperate things- moi and forgiveness doesnt have to be married to strong lofts
-
3 hours ago, Pingistheanser said:
and I still think youre wrong about that. Distance matters with ALL clubs, as long as you can control it.
Is perception of distance important?
-
4 hours ago, NRJyzr said:
Interesting, I didn't know there might be others in that same zipcode.I'm afraid I can't do Titleist, though. Balls, gloves, clubs, just can't. It's a thing with me.
Well thats a shame!
-
9 hours ago, NRJyzr said:
Yep, I'm the guy with "that driver." I have a few others that are somewhat similar. I also have a King LTD, Fly-Z+, SuperDeep, SLDR, Covert Tour 2.0, etc, with Motore Speeders, Black Ties, HZRDUS, RIP Alphas, even a couple ProtoPypes.
Your attempted characterization of me is certainly colorful. Fairly inaccurate, though, LOL.
If you care, or honestly, even if you don't, what's in my bag is there because I find them interesting to hit. I'm playing them because it's how golf used to be played, and it's something I don't have in my background. I didn't play persimmons in Ye Olde Days, largely because I began playing golf around the fall of 1998, after the start of the titanium era. My Gateway Persimmon was a Louisville Smart Driver that was in the Miscellaneous Driver rack at 2nd Swing, and over time, I've picked up a few more here and there.
I don't hold the belief that what I'm doing is how golf *should* be played. I just do it because it's interesting to me. Every so often, I spend a couple months playing old drivers and fairways, right now is one of those. At some point, I'll work my way through the last of my wound ball stash, another aspect of golf I largely missed due to my relatively late start. Once they're gone, I'll move back to my Wilsons, Snells, and Kirklands.
It's also kind of interesting that I tend to hit the persimmons less offline than my modern sticks. <shrug>
Eventually, my inner golf nerd will kick in and I'll dig out metal woods. I've been thinking of going backwards there, also, for different reasons. I have a couple Dynacraft Grand Limited drivers from the late 90s, might be fun to play them again, if only for the comedy factor. They sound like a cowbell when you hit them. LOL
I started playint around the same time as you... you should pick up a titleist dci starship 3 wood.... one of my first “name brand” clubs. The sound that thing made was incredible!
MGS Beef with Rick Shiels? He addresses on his new podcast
in General Equipment Talk
Posted
Sooo change the balance of the club… shafts, weights, grips… pretty standard stuff. If you are talking about cog placement… thats silly. Now i will say there can be placebo. For example if a club seems to not go left on a player, then they are more apt to swing harder because they dont fear that miss. Still doesnt invalidate a robot test to see of a face is faster or not