Jump to content
Forum Structure Change: Equipment, University, and *Community* Read more... ×
Win a Custom Wedge Wizard Wedge: MGS Trick Shot Challenge Read more... ×
tony@CIC

MGS Naughty or Nice list

Recommended Posts

Good call MGS on publishing the names of those manufacturers that want to participate in testing and those that don't. Are they afraid.😨

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I liked that too. The only company I'm surprised about is Hogan. They've done fairly well before and might have won a few "best value" awards. I'm sure Scotty won't play, MGS proved a fake was better than their $500 putters. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was interesting to see Titleist is participating, but Scotty Cameron is not. Guess it just shows how much he's in control of "his" business. Not sure what he's afraid of though. I love my SC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting for a few reasons. Titleist has had years where they would not participate (I think they are over the K-Sig ball test by now). I'm betting they are hoping their new drivers will perform well as part of their motivation for participating. Scotty's don't often score well so it makes sense they would bow out.

Callaway and TM are ridiculous to me, because they send tester clubs out to anyone with a plus but draw a line in the sand at MGS. TM had the #1 driver in 2016 and #3/4 in 2017, Callaway was #2. They are just mad they can't control the narrative.

Ben Hogan makes zero sense to me unless they are in really bad financial shape. They did forum tests in 2018 with wedges and irons, but aren't doing most wanted? Very weird indeed. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I liked that too. The only company I'm surprised about is Hogan. They've done fairly well before and might have won a few "best value" awards. I'm sure Scotty won't play, MGS proved a fake was better than their $500 putters. 



Yeah that one got me too. I would think they rely on the feedback from places like MGS to get their name out there more.

I mean check out the Ft. Worth Hi...

Weird.
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surprised that Callaway and TaylorMade refused to participate, I'd imagine some of their equipment will figure quite high in the rankings.

Scotty Cameron doesnt surprise me, I'm sure the policy is to be as elitest as they can. There's an air of arrogance surrounding their putters. Works for them I suppose.

That shopping list cost is quite something. I'll be donating shortly to help out. Good work MGS guys.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Shankster said:

 

 


Yeah that one got me too. I would think they rely on the feedback from places like MGS to get their name out there more.

I mean check out the Ft. Worth Hi...

Weird.

 

 

My only guess is that Hogan is having some financial trouble and are really trying to cut costs. If the products perform well though, I'd think the marketing benefit far outweighs the upfront cost.

Edited by GB13
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, GB13 said:

My only guess is that Hogan is having some financial trouble and are really trying to cut costs. If the products perform well though, I'd think the marketing benefit far outweighs the upfront cost. 

Whatever.

I don’t know what their current situation is but just a couple years ago they close up then re-opened under their current model and at a cheaper cost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My only guess is that Hogan is having some financial trouble and are really trying to cut costs. If the products perform well though, I'd think the marketing benefit far outweighs the upfront cost.


If you read all he comments beneath the article one guy reached out to Hogan to ask why they did not participate. In a nutshell they replied by stating the testing requires submissions by 1/1/19 and that did not work with their new product timing. They didn’t want to have u finished product tested essentially. If you care to see exactly what they said it is towards the bottom of the comments.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Wedgie said:

 


If you read all he comments beneath the article one guy reached out to Hogan to ask why they did not participate. In a nutshell they replied by stating the testing requires submissions by 1/1/19 and that did not work with their new product timing. They didn’t want to have u finished product tested essentially. If you care to see exactly what they said it is towards the bottom of the comments.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

 

Thanks! 👍 

I'm glad to see Hogan is going okay financially. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Copy and pasted from the comment section:

Ben Hogan Golf

1 hour ago

Hi Jackson – We couldn’t accommodate MyGolfSpy’s testing schedule. Our new products will be launched after they have been thoroughly tested and are worthy of Mr. Hogan’s signature. MyGolfSpy needed products on 1/1/19 for testing, and we weren’t going to submit any product that we didn’t believe was ready for market.

MyGolfSpy

49 mins ago

The actual response we got from Ben Hogan Golf for not participating is below:

1.Their new product launch schedule is fluid.
2. They were very concerned and disappointed by the editorial coverage and negative comments in the Ben Hogan Equalizer wedges in our recent wedge review.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Off Topic 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So reading the last line in that is odd to me. I was apart of that test I think most of us are still gaming them and gave pretty high reviews. The only negative thing I had was the shaft but that was before they had true temper.

 

If they are talking about the most wanted results that's a different story. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tommc23 said:

So reading the last line in that is odd to me. I was apart of that test I think most of us are still gaming them and gave pretty high reviews. The only negative thing I had was the shaft but that was before they had true temper.

 

If they are talking about the most wanted results that's a different story. 

From the MGS "How we test" page: "The result is what we believe to be the largest, independent, 100% Datacratic golf club tests conducted on an annual basis."

I don't know what datacratic means.  My spellcheck here doesn't recognize it and google can't give me a definition.  I interpret that to mean that they let the data speak for itself.

There have been some recent requests that have asked for more of the tester feedback.  I recall some push back to this, but the last few tests have let some of this creep in.

Out of 21 wedges in the test, 6 wedges got a mention in the tester feedback section. 4 were positive comments.  Two were negative.  One of these still received a "best value" award.  The other was The Ben Hogan Equalizer. "The Ben Hogan Equalizer was also unpopular with testers. They described the feel of the wedge as “thin” and “clunky.” Others commented that the head was perhaps to compact, and didn’t sit properly at address."

So were those the only comments about the Hogan?  The article implies that they were unanimous or convincing.  Are the heads actually more compact than all the others? What do the numbers actually say?

I would guess that the blog gathers a ton more regular traffic than these forums.  Each tester in the official forum review had glowing reviews and these wedges booted one of the bigger brands out of all four bags (at least temporarily).  I guess I can see where they are coming from.  If you leave the SG data and Truerank data as it is in the Most Wanter review, do they have a problem?  Or does the problem arise when they get the only negative subjective comments in the whole test not countered with some award?  Does 100% datacratic still hold true?

It is interesting that their paraphrased response gets published with nothing from the other companies declining to participate.  While we also know that there aren't any new products for 2019 released yet that would even be eligible for testing.

Oh, and if bounce makes a difference on a wedge, I am not sure that a test off of a range mat holds water.  Although I am open to be convinced otherwise. And I'm a Hogan homer to a small extent.  So I am also open to hear if this is just a view obscured by the homer glasses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, romeopapazulu said:

Oh, and if bounce makes a difference on a wedge, I am not sure that a test off of a range mat holds water.  Although I am open to be convinced otherwise

I hate hitting wedges or irons for that matter off mats. I'm not sure what the data says about the performance difference of hitting off of mats but for me its significant.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, romeopapazulu said:

I would guess that the blog gathers a ton more regular traffic than these forums.  Each tester in the official forum review had glowing reviews and these wedges booted one of the bigger brands out of all four bags (at least temporarily).  I guess I can see where they are coming from.  If you leave the SG data and Truerank data as it is in the Most Wanter review, do they have a problem?  Or does the problem arise when they get the only negative subjective comments in the whole test not countered with some award?  Does 100% datacratic still hold true?

I think what I was trying to get at here is that I would guess that being the one clubmaker getting singled out with entirely negative subjective feedback in an MGS Most Wanted test does much more damage for a non-big-five company than the benefit of four glowing reviews in the forums for the same product.  If that is the case, then declining to participate seems like a smart move.

Edited words in bold.

Edited by romeopapazulu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think what I was trying to get at here is that I would guess that being the one clubmaker getting singled out with entirely negative subjective feedback in an MGS Most Wanted test does much more damage for a non-big-five company than the benefit of four glowing reviews in the forums for the same product.  If that is the case, then declining to participate seems like a smart move.
Edited words in bold.

The reality though is that MGS will still end up testing those manufacturer's clubs so the reviews will be there whether they like them or not.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×