Jump to content
Guest Delete

Would you use a NON-Conforming Golf Equipment if it gave you a competitive advantage?

Would you use NON-Conforming equipment if it gave you a competitive advantage?  

100 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you use a NON-Conforming Golf Ball if it out preformed a tour ball?

    • Yes
      16
    • No
      84
  2. 2. Would you use a NON-Conforming Golf Club if it gave you more distance and better accuracy?

    • Yes
      19
    • No
      81
  3. 3. Would you use a NON-Conforming Golf club that has grooves on it that have you more spin out of the rough?

    • Yes
      20
    • No
      80
  4. 4. Would you use a NON-Conforming putter that helps you make more putts?

    • Yes
      19
    • No
      81


Recommended Posts

Our Sponsors

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

I expected you to mention this. and I have no problem with any of it.  These guys decide not to play by the rules, they're all playing under the same conditions, nobody is doing something that the other's feel constrained not to do.  But that's not the way the title of the thread reads, the OP is looking for a "competitive advantage".

So you think there shouldn't be any regulation on equipment, anything goes?  Go back to the Rules History site and review some of the things that have been regulated under the rules.  (Also note which organizations first made rulings on equipment, it wasn't the USGA).  In your opinion, should all of them be acceptable now?  Concave clubfaces?  Square grips for clubs?  No limit on the number of clubs?  Allow clubs to be adjusted during play of a round?  How about golf balls, should there be a minimum diameter, a maximum weight, any limitation on symmetry?  In my mind, there should be limits on equipment, and the only folks who have even a moderate degree of impartiality are the R&A and USGA.  I believe golf as a whole is better if the same limits apply to all players, just as the rules of play should be the same for all players.   We can certainly disagree on where the limits should be.

Really to answer the question I would not play anything out right illegal like a shaved driver or Nitro or Bandit balls--- But then again if someone does want to get really technical my irons and wedges are illegal and I did not want to sound like a hypocrite. I have some new conforming wedges a couple of Mizuno T series and a Callaway PM series and I can spin the mess out  of them better than any of my Clevelands. I will admit I did take the groove file to my beloved 588 the other night but it is non conforming anyhow and worn down. But like I said earlier I do have a conforming set ready to go with a set of MP-68 blades and a Callaway PM wedge. Had some clown on WRX one night call me out about my old Mac irons and Cleveland wedges. I told him bring the billfold and come on to the beach. I can play the 68s if I want to. I have that set up in one of my old Titleist Staff bags just in case but at this stage of life I like my Macs better. 

  • Like 2

Driver Homna  G1- X Stock Homna Regular shaft

4 wood Adams Tight Lies 

20* Hybrid Adams Boxer Ozik Matrix R shaft

24* Hybrid Adams A 10-OS Pro Launch Red R

Irons 5 thru PW 1980 Macgregor VIP Hogan Apex #2 shafts

SW- Macgregor LRA 56* S-400

Putter 1997 Santa Fe rusty as heck

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Delete
1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

I expected you to mention this. and I have no problem with any of it.  These guys decide not to play by the rules, they're all playing under the same conditions, nobody is doing something that the other's feel constrained not to do.  But that's not the way the title of the thread reads, the OP is looking for a "competitive advantage".

So you think there shouldn't be any regulation on equipment, anything goes?  Go back to the Rules History site and review some of the things that have been regulated under the rules.  (Also note which organizations first made rulings on equipment, it wasn't the USGA).  In your opinion, should all of them be acceptable now?  Concave clubfaces?  Square grips for clubs?  No limit on the number of clubs?  Allow clubs to be adjusted during play of a round?  How about golf balls, should there be a minimum diameter, a maximum weight, any limitation on symmetry?  In my mind, there should be limits on equipment, and the only folks who have even a moderate degree of impartiality are the R&A and USGA.  I believe golf as a whole is better if the same limits apply to all players, just as the rules of play should be the same for all players.   We can certainly disagree on where the limits should be.

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. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Delete
1 hour ago, chisag said:

... Once you start making your own rules about equipment, where does it end? 
 

https://www.ezeegolf.com/story/videos

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, TimoTe said:

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. 

Actually I had that crop up when we ran the golf shop. One of my good customers his Dad was in his early 80s and really distraught about losing distance. He was thinking about quitting all together and my customer played with him quite a bit. I had an illegal as heck Nakashima driver head with a shaved face. In fact the face had been shaved so thin I was scared to hit it myself. A guy from Charlotte that I knew had started doing them and he had sent me that head as a demo. I built that thing with the lightest whippiest senior graphite shaft we had and set him up with some Bandit balls which are hot as a firecracker. The older gentleman knew nothing about them being non conforming. He ended up playing 4 or 5 years more with his son until he passed away.  Yep like you I have absolutely no problem in that case

  • Like 3

Driver Homna  G1- X Stock Homna Regular shaft

4 wood Adams Tight Lies 

20* Hybrid Adams Boxer Ozik Matrix R shaft

24* Hybrid Adams A 10-OS Pro Launch Red R

Irons 5 thru PW 1980 Macgregor VIP Hogan Apex #2 shafts

SW- Macgregor LRA 56* S-400

Putter 1997 Santa Fe rusty as heck

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Too bad this poll wasn’t accurately named - Would you cheat if it gave you a competitive advantage? I’m surprised and disappointed about 15% would these days. YMMV

  • Love 1

  • Callaway Rogue 10.5° 9.5°D & 3W
  • Mizuno MP-20 HMB 3i 19°, JPX900 Forged 4-GW, S18 56.10
  • Evnroll ER5B (replaced ER2)
  • and Mizuno CLK 3H 19° OR Mizuno S18 60.06
  • Snell MTB-X (replacing Black)

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, TimoTe said:

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. 

 

There are a couple of nits to pick, but they're side-shows to the main event.  However, I have never said that the USGA is wrong in this.  The rules have developed largely in response to changing technology, and to a smaller extent in response to changes in opinions about what golf "should be."  That applies to Rules of Golf as much as to Equipment Rules.  The equipment rules weren't "wrong" in 1908, when the USGA and R&A disagreed on the Schenectady putter, and more than they are "wrong" today.  They've merely changed over time.  The meat my disagreement is in your statement:

Quote

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. 

You've said the USGA (while ignoring the role of the R&A , possibly because the USGA is a favorite whipping-boy for so many) should not have the authority to restrict equipment.  You never answered my direct question, do you think that ANY restrictions on equipment should be made?  If so, who should have the responsibility?  

 

  • Like 1

:titelist-small: Irons Titleist AP2 714, KBS Tour S, 3 flat

:callaway-small: Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:vokey-small: 52, 56, and 60 wedges

:ping-small: B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Delete
1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

You never answered my direct question, do you think that ANY restrictions on equipment should be made?  If so, who should have the responsibility?  

 

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.  

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know how anyone could shoot a solid round of golf with non-conforming equipment, it's like cheating, and golf is the ultimate example of a game where you have to police yourself and adhere to the rules to the best of their knowledge. How could you feel good about hitting longer drives with a non-conforming driver, it's a false positive.

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, TimoTe said:

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.  

Fair enough.

I honestly don't have a problem with televised golf, and I'd probably watch something different.  But what manufacturer would make the clubs for your "no limits" league?  Or if there were multiple leagues, each with different rules and limits, who would make all of those different versions of clubs?

I like the original rules too, but its important to understand that those rules were developed by a single club for play on a single course, for match play only.  Do any of us know that the "scholars holes" even are?  Yet the players there got free relief from them.  If you look at all of those sets of rules from the 18th century, you'll see different rules for different courses.  Its only when you tried to expand the rules to suit all courses in all climates, all geologic settings, all types of competition, that the rules needed to become more complex.

As for your rival league, didn't we just hear chatter about a world tour.  The chatter has died down, way too few of the top players are interested.


:titelist-small: Irons Titleist AP2 714, KBS Tour S, 3 flat

:callaway-small: Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:vokey-small: 52, 56, and 60 wedges

:ping-small: B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Share this post


Link to post

If you aren’t keeping a handicap then play whatever makes you happy and helps enjoy the game. Once you start tracking hdcp whether for to tournament play or just to have a hdcp then use conforming clubs.

I have no desire to play non conforming equipment. One of the the things that has kept me in the game is that chase to get better. 

  • Like 3

Driver: Titleist 917D3 9.5 with Graphite Design MAD Pro 65g S

Wood: Titleist 917F2 with UST Mamiya Helium 5F4

Hybrid: Titleist 816H1 21 with Atmos Blue 85 S

Irons: Titleist 718 AP3 4i, 718 CB 5-6, MB 7-9 with KBS $ Taper 125

Wedges: Vokey SM7 46/50/54/60 with DG s200

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Share this post


Link to post

Would I, no. Do I, no. There is nothing in the market that is non-conforming that is going to just shave ten strokes off your handicap or heck even two strokes. Old irons and wedges with non-conforming grooves at this point are a decade old and data shows the newer clubs perform as well if not better. When was the last time anyone got a weird flier out of the rough because of the new grooves? I haven’t had one in the last ten years and I have played a lot of golf in that time.

There is more cheating in this game with inflated handicaps than with equipment and in my 40 years of playing most guys want as many shots as they can get and not necessarily shoot the lowest scores.

My concern with the USGA moving forward is their inconsistency with applying rules. Can’t anchor a putter to your body but up your forearm is fine. To me that is still anchoring and last I checked an arm is part of the body. Oh and it is not anchoring if there was no intent, Billy Mayfair is the poster child for this rule. In full disclosure I use a long putter and did before the ban and now after, guess what it makes zero difference. I putt just as well with the putter in my chest as I do with it away from my chest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

In the Bag for 2020

PXG 0811XF Gen 2 10.5* (set at 9*) AD VR 6x

PXG 0341X Gen 2 15* AD TP 7x

PXG 0317X Gen 2 19* KBS Proto 95x

PXG 0311T Gen 3 4-6 KBS $ Taper 130

PXG 0311 ST 7 - PW KBS $ Taper 130

PXG 0311 Sugar Daddy 50/10 KBS $ Taper 130

PXG 0311 Sugar Daddy 54/10 & 58/07 TTDG TI S400

:rife-putters-1: Two Bar Blade Long 47"

 

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Jmikecpa said:

Would I, no. Do I, no. There is nothing in the market that is non-conforming that is going to just shave ten strokes off your handicap or heck even two strokes. Old irons and wedges with non-conforming grooves at this point are a decade old and data shows the newer clubs perform as well if not better. When was the last time anyone got a weird flier out of the rough because of the new grooves? I haven’t had one in the last ten years and I have played a lot of golf in that time.
.......
My concern with the USGA moving forward is their inconsistency with applying rules. Can’t anchor a putter to your body but up your forearm is fine. To me that is still anchoring and last I checked an arm is part of the body. Oh and it is not anchoring if there was no intent, Billy Mayfair is the poster child for this rule. In full disclosure I use a long putter and did before the ban and now after, guess what it makes zero difference. I putt just as well with the putter in my chest as I do with it away from my chest.

Its appropriate to mention that just about all of those old clubs produced prior to 2010 are still legal now for almost all play, and will remain legal at least until January 1, 2024.

And I'd have to agree in that I don't think that every decision made JOINTLY by the R&A and USGA is the one I would have made.  But I do believe that they are the appropriate entity to make those rules, and I believe that they're trying to do what is best for the game.  "Best" will always be subjective, we'll never all agree on what should happen.

  • Like 1

:titelist-small: Irons Titleist AP2 714, KBS Tour S, 3 flat

:callaway-small: Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:vokey-small: 52, 56, and 60 wedges

:ping-small: B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Share this post


Link to post

I wouldn't knowingly use, or want to use, non conforming equipment, even for normal casual rounds (Other than maybe just trying it for fun).

Apart from any integrity ussues (which would play on my mind and wreck my score anyway), I want to know how good or bad I played, and using non conforming equipment would give me a duff reading, at least in my head.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

Fair enough.

I honestly don't have a problem with televised golf, and I'd probably watch something different.  But what manufacturer would make the clubs for your "no limits" league?  Or if there were multiple leagues, each with different rules and limits, who would make all of those different versions of clubs?

I like the original rules too, but its important to understand that those rules were developed by a single club for play on a single course, for match play only.  Do any of us know that the "scholars holes" even are?  Yet the players there got free relief from them.  If you look at all of those sets of rules from the 18th century, you'll see different rules for different courses.  Its only when you tried to expand the rules to suit all courses in all climates, all geologic settings, all types of competition, that the rules needed to become more complex.

As for your rival league, didn't we just hear chatter about a world tour.  The chatter has died down, way too few of the top players are interested.

You still have different rules for different courses today--- It is called local options---- Some of the courses have some hazards  marked as a lateral and drop areas located over a water hazard. That speeds up tourist play. Most of the courses here for league play decided to waiver the anchoring ban too because many of the older members had back problems and were going to quit the game. In a nutshell the average recreational golfer does not keep a stipulated handicap nor do they care what the PGA Tour does and further more does not care what the USGA or R&A have to say either. They play have fun and do their own thing. Probably when I heal up I will have to putt with a broomstick. I dragged my Ping B-90I out of the shop and built one of my Bobby Grave Mark 5s to a 48" broomstick. When I putted with the Ping years ago I did not anchor and when I tried the Grace the other day I did not anchor.

  • Like 1

Driver Homna  G1- X Stock Homna Regular shaft

4 wood Adams Tight Lies 

20* Hybrid Adams Boxer Ozik Matrix R shaft

24* Hybrid Adams A 10-OS Pro Launch Red R

Irons 5 thru PW 1980 Macgregor VIP Hogan Apex #2 shafts

SW- Macgregor LRA 56* S-400

Putter 1997 Santa Fe rusty as heck

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Speaking of non-conforming drivers I remembered this.

Back when we ran the golf shop we had a golf list to sign up for Sunday morning. Now one usually had to be in by Wednesday. We actually had courses calling us wanting our play. Usually we had between 25 to 40 players. We always had some kind of game going whether it was a $10 a man scramble or best 2 out of 4 for a best ball team. One Friday I walked in the shop and Big John had a smirk going like the cat who ate the canary. We had 32 players that week going to play a scramble and the 7th hole on this course was a pretty long par 5. He had built a So Long Intregra driver one of those 550 cc giants. Was going to have everyone use it along with a illegal Nitro ball. He furnished everyone a ball. I told him no way was I going to hit that thing with a senior shaft that I would lateral rope hook it. He told me well you and Moose are the only 2 hitting a stiff shaft just aim it to #4 fairway.  When we got there I aimed it into 4 fairway and hit the darnest hook over a pine tree and it took off down the fairway. Now he had set up a flag at the tee to shoot back and I had nailed it to 305 yards where my average was around 275 at that time. LOL Moose was in the last group and they called him Moose for a reason. He was about 45 years old at the time and had either laid brick or finished concrete all his life. He was one of those guys that could pound a driver but not do much of else. Yeah he hit it and the face caved in ball only went about 100 yards. I think John's plan backfired because what he hoped everyone would do was make those drivers and balls legal in our games so everyone would buy them in other words keep up with the Jones. No one bit. To give Intregra credit they were distributed by Hireko at the time did give him credit for the head.  And he did tell them the truth too


Driver Homna  G1- X Stock Homna Regular shaft

4 wood Adams Tight Lies 

20* Hybrid Adams Boxer Ozik Matrix R shaft

24* Hybrid Adams A 10-OS Pro Launch Red R

Irons 5 thru PW 1980 Macgregor VIP Hogan Apex #2 shafts

SW- Macgregor LRA 56* S-400

Putter 1997 Santa Fe rusty as heck

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, TimoTe said:

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.  

The longer this thread gets, the more confused I get about why you're fighting for this.  If you are bored watching golf now, watching golf with non conforming equipment will be a novelty for a short while and then that will get boring to watch too.  I relate this to baseball.  A lot of people are bored watching baseball because they only want to see homeruns.  They dont understand how hard fielding a ground ball is, or throwing a pitch where and how you want it, or the art of base running, or the strategy of the game.  I think there is no end to what to do if in creating excitement in sports.

As far as a second league, they dont do it because it wont be profitable at that scale. That's like saying they should televise triple a baseball or the equivalent of minor league nascar or F1.  There is a small population that will enjoy it but for how long?  I think most people will just say "they aren't good enough for the (insert top level major sport) so they are here".  At the end of it, even if OEMs decide to put money into developing non conforming equipment, take the small sample size of this pole, it's not worth trying to invest in 10-15% of the population.  If they are going to get into a 10-15% niche market, it's going to be fore the super limited edition and super expensive stuff IMO.

Lastly, the argument about the three point line I feel is opposite to your intention.  It made the game more exciting because it made it harder.  Harder to make because its further and harder on the defense because it expands the capability of the offense.  The current debate seems lean towards making it easier.

End game, are you hoping to see matches and rounds like it is played in a video game?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Delete
5 hours ago, Chizzle said:

The longer this thread gets, the more confused I get about why you're fighting for this. 

End game, are you hoping to see matches and rounds like it is played in a video game?

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:

  1. Smaller diameter golf balls that outperform today's golf balls in speed, spin, and distance
  2. No limit on grooves
  3. Hotter drivers without COR limits
  4. 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. 

Share this post


Link to post

I see.  Thank you for clearly clarifying.  I dont think you're wrong about tech advancements to subdue a course.  I think it's happening now with the current legal equipment.  I think the playing field is leveled because everyone uses the same parameters for equipment and I think your arguement is why not change those parameters.  I also agree that there are people that accept things without question, but that doesnt make them wrong or any worse or better golfer.

In the competitive aspect, I dont think making things easy is better for the sport.  The players skill creates shape, distance, spin, getting out of bunkers, tightbloes, bad situations, ect.  For leisure, like many people have said, do whatever you like but I dont think it will be as great as you think.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

When I first started I used the polara ball because of my massive slice. It did not help. 

I also use the ram outlaw wedges, did not get any extra control or spin. 

Also used those out of any bunkers wedges and I think I spent more time on the beach than before. 

With time I learned that practice and dedication are better tools than the gimmicks. 

  • Like 1

Currently reviewing 2020 Bag Boy Chiller Cart Bag

Driver :titelist-small:  - TS2 10.5*, Hybrid   :titelist-small:  - T-MB 716 3 Iron, Hybrid   :titelist-small:  - T-MB 718 4 Iron, Irons:   :titelist-small:  - AP1 714 5 to PW, Wedges  

:vokey-small: SM5 48*, 52*, 56* and 58*, Putter   :titelist-small: Deadcenter SP-209, Ball   :titelist-small:  ProV1, :Arccos: Smart Sensors

Shoes:a couple :footjoy-small: A couple of:nike-small: A couple of Adidas ,   Yeah I have a shoe addiction.

Right Handed, Southeast Michigan

 

Share this post


Link to post

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...