Jump to content
txgolfjunkie

MGS Golf Ball Test

Golf Ball Test Results...Pre-Reveal  

56 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Which brand do you think performs the best in MGS Golf Ball Test to be revealed Monday? (I have no idea what balls are being tested but this is my best bet)

    • Bridgestone (e6, e12, Tour B X, Tour B XS, Tour B RX)
      11
    • Callaway (Chrome Soft, Chrome Soft X, ERC Soft)
      1
    • Cut (Red, Green, Blue, Black, Brown, Mauve, Burgundy, Candy Apple, Cyan, Golden Rod)
      0
    • Maxfli (Tour, Tour x)
      0
    • Mizuno (RB Tour, RB Tour X)
      0
    • Snell (MTB Red, MTB Black, MTB X)
      11
    • Srixon (Q Star, Z Star, Z Star XV, LGBTQ Star)
      4
    • TaylorMade (TP5, TP5x, Project (a), Project (s))
      8
    • Titleist (Pro V1, Pro V1x, AVX, Tour Soft, Velocity, DT TruSoft)
      15
    • Vice (Drive, Pro, Pro Plus, Pro Soft)
      5
    • Volvik (I don't even know if they're in the test)
      0
    • Wilson (DUO Soft, DUO U, FG Tour)
      0
    • Other
      1

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 04/29/2019 at 10:00 PM

Recommended Posts

I'll try leaving a comment on the youtube video posted in regards to post article discussions. I really want to hear their thoughts on the used ball market.
 

I think I remember hearing them discuss the used ball market in the YouTube video. In summary, don’t play used balls because you don’t know if they were in the water or how they were kept. If price is a consideration play Kirkland or similar as they are about $1 per ball and we’re not poor performers
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never delved into the ball data quite this deep, and it does make you wonder if something is holding you back in the slightest. I remember noticing When Kevin Na switched to Callaway from Titleist the entire bag changed. But the ball stayed a Pro V1X. Keving isn't the longest hitter and is a good short game player. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2019 at 1:36 PM, sixcat said:

I think it was Sam in the live chat yesterday that said something to the effect of "why play a junk ball when Kirkland Signatures are $12 a dozen!"  They may not be the best ball on the market but they are certainly better than something dredged off the bottom of a lake and likely cheaper to boot.

 

23 minutes ago, z1ggy16 said:

I'll try leaving a comment on the youtube video posted in regards to post article discussions. I really want to hear their thoughts on the used ball market.

 

As I said last week (quoted above), the Youtube live chat has a ton of information.  They go into some detail about the used ball market. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read the report several times and still have no plans to change my golf ball.  I regularly play TP5X or Snell Black and only reason it isn't completely Snell is that I have some TP5X left over from last year.  I'm satisfied with Snell Black, although I will likely shift to Snell MTB-X when I buy new balls.  Although ProV1 is a fine golf ball, I don't think my handicap would drop one iota by shifting to ProV1 rather than Snell (My pocket book would notice the change, but likely not my average scoring).  I've probably played all the better golf balls on the market in my years of golf.  My errant shots have little to do with the ball and more to do with my swing faults.  What I want from a golf ball is consistent performance on and near the green.  That's where I need to know how the ball will react and that's why I stick with one ball.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sixcat said:

 

As I said last week (quoted above), the Youtube live chat has a ton of information.  They go into some detail about the used ball market. 

Yeah just getting there now, been listening to it on and off over the past few hours.

 

Seems that the used balls will be going into my short game bag...Sigh. Wish this test came out before I bought like 5 dozen balls last year!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, cnosil said:


I think I remember hearing them discuss the used ball market in the YouTube video. In summary, don’t play used balls because you don’t know if they were in the water or how they were kept. If price is a consideration play Kirkland or similar as they are about $1 per ball and we’re not poor performers

Played 36 on Sunday...had a handful of "found" PV1 and some new Kirkland's.... long story short, I still have the Kirkland's....

a new ball is better than a found one 99 times out of 100 for me. There may be that 1 time where I find a ball that was hit once and left for dead, but how would I know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Played 36 on Sunday...had a handful of "found" PV1 and some new Kirkland's.... long story short, I still have the Kirkland's....
a new ball is better than a found one 99 times out of 100 for me. There may be that 1 time where I find a ball that was hit once and left for dead, but how would I know?

I may have to play some rounds with a new ball to see if I see any performance improvements. I generally play found balls and don’t see much variation in my game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to clear some things up from my point, I think some have taken it that I am disappointed with the results and that I am defending Callaway because I don’t like the results of the test. I am not defending Callaway for their statement. What I am trying to point it is that it doesn’t and shouldn’t matter what they said, they are going to try to defend their ball, just as any large ball OEM would do if they were perceived as a poor performing ball. 

I have said this a few times, because this is the important part to take away. We have been saying for years, that everyone should try different golf balls to find something that works for their game. This ball test did not change that. What it did was point us in a direction so we have data to look at when determining what to try. 

TXgolfjunkie made a spreadsheet that has broken down the data and you can input the information according to what you want in a ball, and it will give you some options to try. That’s a great tool to use. 

The ball that I have been pretty comfortable playing is the Chrome soft, and Chrome soft x, that ball does what I need it to do. Due to the cost I have changed and I am giving The MTBx a good look. 

What I don’t like is when guys say something like “I just purchased 2 dozen of x ball, and now that the test shows it didn’t perform perfectly, I am getting rid of them”. That ridiculous. Why?

the data that is given should help point is to a ball that will work for what we need in a ball, I for one am not going to discredit a ball based on a comment by the manufacturer of the ball. 

I don’t care who says what about what ball, I am going to check into any ball that fits my categories. There exceptions, I do not like Titleist, I never have, so I don’t buy Titleist anything. Their equipment just doesn’t work me. Outside of that, I will try anything that I feel will work. 

Find a ball that works for you, it shouldn’t matter who makes it. We all have companies we don’t like, but their are many other companies that we can try. We should use the Data provided and make a decision based on our own needs. 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I literally cleaned out my entire bag of duo - u's and chromesofts.....ordered some bridgestones and already had pro v 1's.......ive been brainwashed!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JonMUSC08 said:

I love the people that over-analyze someone else's analysis and how they prefer to utilize data... 🤔. All of a sudden everyone becomes an expert in data analysis and what golf ball is perfect. hahaha

I'm going to guess you play a TP5(but the old ones), only because most of your clubs are (old)TM, haha. As for people analysing the data, everyone has their own interpretations of data regardless of the field from which the data came from. And not everyone has the same ideas of what performance parameters are important to them. I find it interesting to listen to others and what they find important in the data.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stevens24 said:

I have never delved into the ball data quite this deep, and it does make you wonder if something is holding you back in the slightest. I remember noticing When Kevin Na switched to Callaway from Titleist the entire bag changed. But the ball stayed a Pro V1X. Keving isn't the longest hitter and is a good short game player. 

The ball is the hardest thing for the pros to change and is one of the reasons guys stay with a ball/ball company that works ie Rose with TM. Sometimes they switch because it’s part of the new deal or a better fit by being all one bag ie Rory who went TM over Callaway because the pairing of TM gear with their bell outperformed Callaway plus prov or their ball.

anotber is money. Titleist pays a nice chunk of change for players and why not keep what works and the money. Callaway doesn’t have many pga tour pros on staff playing their ball 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kor.A.Door - I agree 100% that if someone is playing a ball that didn't perform well in the test, but they're comfortable with it, then they shouldn't switch it up just because of the MGS Ball Test. And I also agree that had any of the other major manufacturers been in Callaway's spot, they would've responded similarly. And to be honest, I'm guilty of not giving golf balls enough time before moving on, but no more! The Pro V1x are my ride or die from here on out!

Having more time to digest the results of the test and see some of the reactions around the interwebz, I have a greater appreciation for what MGS achieved here. MGS should be proud of the test as it covered a lot of ground, and despite some of the criticism, I haven't read a thing suggesting they're saying the test is the 'end all, be all' or anything of the sort. Ultimately, I think what the test represents is an EXCELLENT starting point for anyone looking for a reason to try a different ball. Is it an advertisement for Snell? Nope. Any company would've gotten an influx in traffic and possibly orders if they occupied the top spot. Alternatively, it's also not indictment on golf balls that didn't perform that well. I believe this because a lot of amateurs are going to play what they're comfortable with anyway especially if they believe a certain ball 'does everything they need it to'. 

I think the most important thing achieved by this test is it encourages you to take a deeper look when selecting a golf ball. Because as most of you know, we're blitzed by advertising suggesting something that may not be true (soft is FAST! 😜). For those of us who want to perform our best on the course, being able to dig a little deeper and perhaps try a ball you normally wouldn't can make a difference! 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what Happy Gilmore would have to say?

It’s amazing how many people are missing the point of this “buyers guide” it’s a benchmark. A starting point. Some days I wonder...

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I literally cleaned out my entire bag of duo - u's and chromesofts.....ordered some bridgestones and already had pro v 1's.......ive been brainwashed!!!


Yeah the test got in my head too. I played the duo pro 4 straight days in Florida. Never lost a ball but changed them out after each round. 2 days I averaged a little over 240 off the tee and the other 2 days averaged 222 off the tee. Same conditions same lame ass swing. Was it me? The ball? Probably me but I’m blaming the ball. Thing is the 240 days were days 1 and 3.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's truly a litmus test to how well you are doing as a Forum, group or some type of platform that when you launch a test such as this and you send a shockwave across the industry and social media platforms.
MGS has seemingly dropped a Nuke. Bravo guys on being the unbiased and the unbought forum.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Our balls don’t perform well with Robots”...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shankster said:

“Our balls don’t perform well with Robots”... emoji57.png

"Golfers aren't robots, they're real players hitting real balls and....."  well, that's about where the argument falls apart.  😂

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

“Our balls don’t perform well with Robots”... emoji57.png

It's because robots can't process hype 

  • Like 4
  • Love 1

Share this post


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

“Our balls don’t perform well with Robots”... emoji57.png

 

1 minute ago, jlukes said:

It's because robots can't process hype 

If only robots had feelings...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's because robots can't process hype 


But it looks like a soccer ball. Surely the robot can process that?
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...