Jump to content

2000 Prov1 vs 2020 Prov1


Tsecor

Recommended Posts

Pretty interesting. I found six 2009 Pro V1 in a box in my garage and played them about a month ago. I love them! Performance was great, distance, everything about them I liked! If I found a few dozen new I’d keep playing them. Most of the recent iterations focus on spin characteristics, or durability as was mentioned in the video, or slight modifications, so it’s not surprising Shiels didn’t see big differences.

Driver: Ping G430 Max 9*, Ping Tour 70X

Fairway: Ping G425 15*, Ping Tour 70X

Hybrid: Ping G425 22*, Ping Tour 80X

Irons:  Ping i230 4-GW, TT DG X100

Wedges: :edel-golf-1: SMS 50D/54V/58D:Nippon:Modus 130 stiff, +1”

Putter:  :edel-golf-1: EAS 1.0

Ball: Titleist 2023 AVX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that surprising, bu I wish he would have tested the seam alignment as that was a big deal with the original.  Horizontal seam for spin and vertical for distance.  

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15*  w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 915H 21* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype        
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :titleist-small: 54/12D, 60/8M w/:Accra iWedge 90 Graphite
Putter:   :taylormade-small:TM-180

Testing:   SPGC_logo.jpg

Backups:  :odyssey-small: Milled Collection RSX 2, :seemore-small: mFGP2, :cameron-small: Futura 5W

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The seam position off the tee made a big difference in ball flight when they came out.  I remember Nicklaus saying he was shocked they were legal because of that characteristic.

Modern Bag:  :ping-small: G410 LST 10.5*, Hzrdus Smoke RDX 6.5 Flex;   :titelist-small:  915F 3w, Diamana S+ 70 S flex;  Snake Eyes 18* 2h, 23* 4h & 27* 5h; :mizuno-small: JPX 900 Forged 6 - PW, PX LZ 6.0;  Edison 2.0 49*, KBS Tour 120 S; Edison 2.0 53*, KBS Tour 120 S ;  Edison 2.0 57* KBS Tour 120 S;   :ping-small:  Heppler Fetch;  Ball - :Snell: MTB-X; Bag - Jones MyGolfSpy Edition! 

Shot Scope H4, MG600 Rangefinder

Classic Bag:  Driver - :wilson_staff_small: Persimmon; 3w - :Hogan: Speed Slot; 5w - :wilson_staff_small: Tour Block; 3 - pw - :wilson_staff_small: Dynapower; sw - Ram Tom Watson;  putter - bullseye standard or flange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good old rick Shiels. The 2020 prov1 is actually 2019 version due to 2 year release cycles and they come in the odd years.

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/25/2021 at 9:43 AM, RickyBobby_PR said:

Good old rick Shiels. The 2020 prov1 is actually 2019 version due to 2 year release cycles and they come in the odd years.

Bit of a nit pick.  He was testing the model current for the year 2020.

14 of the following:

Ping G430 Max 10.5 degree

Callaway 2023 Big Bertha 3 wood set to 17 degrees

Cobra F9 Speedback 7/8 wood set at 23.5 degrees

Callaway Epic Max 11 wood

Ping Eye 2 BeCu 2-SW

Mizuno 923 JPX HM HL 6-GW

Hogan sand wedge 56 degree bent to 53

Maltby M Series+ 54 degree

Ping Glide 3.0 Eye2 58 degree

Ping Glide 3.0 60 degree

Evnroll ER2

Ping Sigma 2 Anser

Cheap Top Flite mallet putter from Dick's, currently holding down first place in the bag

TaylorMade Mini Spider

Bridgestone XS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No real surprises, the specs the USGA uses haven't really changed. Some of the testing methods have, but not that would alter the performance. Even the cover durability was advertised for years by Titleist as improved. 

All Titleist all the time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hook DeLoft said:

Bit of a nit pick.  He was testing the model current for the year 2020.

Yes but it helps that accurate information is given so those that may be searching looking know what’s what.

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tony Covey MGS said:

Test it with a robot, outdoors, and man...the deficiencies of the dimple pattern are glaring. A hint of wind destroys hit. I use this example because it brings the point of this conversation home. Lift (initial launch performance) is similar. Drag (what happens once the ball is in the air) is worlds apart. This is what gets obscured when the wrong tool is chosen for a ball test.

 

Thank you for the very enlightening insight!

To your knowledge do most/all company's actually do the outdoor robot testing you describe as a matter of standard practice to evaluate and perfect the dimple pattern?  I can't imagine Titleist's 2021 change to the dimple pattern wasn't born of some sort of data that validated it as an improvement, but as was mentioned earlier in this thread the same basic dimple pattern seems to be remarkably prevalent throughout the industry.  Another level of separation between Titleist and others...?

Driver: :titleist-small: TSR2, :Fuji:Ventus Blue 6 S, 65g Stiff

FW: :titleist-small: TSR2 3w, 15,  :Fuji:Ventus Blue 7 S, 70g Stiff

Hybrids:  :callaway-small: Apex Pro 3H, :Fuji:Ventus Blue 8 S, 80g Stiff

            :taylormade-small: Stealth DHY 4H, :Fuji:Ventus Blue 8 S, 80g Stiff

Irons: :edel-golf-1: SMS 5-6, SMS Pro 7-PW, Aerotech Steelfiber i95 Stiff

Wedges: :vokey-small:SM9 48 F Grind, 52 F Grind, 56 M Grind, Aerotech Steelfiber i95 Stiff

Putter: :odyssey-small: Sri-Hot 5K Triple Wide, Stroke Lab shaft

Ball: :titelist-small: Pro V1

Click here for my HONMA TR20 Official Review!  :honma:

Click here for my Arccos Caddie Bundle Official Review!   :Arccos:

Click here for my Edel SMS & SMS Pro Irons Official Review:edel-golf-1:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Tony Covey MGS said:

Exactly this. This stuff drives me bonkers, so let me lay it out for everyone.

Anyone who is testing golf balls on a camera based launch monitor and doesn't provide any sort of disclaimer about the fact that downrange numbers are, at best, estimates, either doesn't understand the capabilities of their tools, or isn't vested in providing an accurate picture to their audience.

The more significant the difference in the dimple pattern, the less reliable the info is. 

For my money, the GC Quad is the best launch monitor on the planet. In our indoor test environment, nothing comes close (we can talk about radar's inability to accurately and repeatedly capture spin axis tilt in limited flight environments some other time), but it doesn't mean it's perfect. 

Like anything project around the house, it's important you understand your objective, and choose the right tools accordingly.

When it comes to testing golf balls, Quad remains outstanding for capturing the data that's generated within the first milliseconds of flight. Ball speed, launch angle, azimuth (starting direction/horizontal launch angle), spin rate, and axis tilt are the ones I would be looking at for a ball test. When the ball is the key variable, you need to be really aggressive in how you define outliers, and of course, being really aggressive in what you remove  means that with human testers, you need to hit a significant number of shots to give you enough data to work with.

Peak Height, Carry, Descent Angle, Roll, total distance, and yup...Offline too, WHEN THE BALL IS THE VARIABLE and you're only capturing the initial launch, extrapolating carry, descent, total, roll, etc. differences of two different models with two entirely different dimple patterns, is no more than a semi educated guess (and the less alike the dimple, the less educated it becomes. 

Ball Speed, Launch Angle(s), Spin, and Axis Tilt that's what you get when the balls are different. That's perfect for Most Wanted and our lab testing because the ball isn't the variable. It's fine...even preferable to normalize downrange performance. One of our objectives is to eliminate every variable that we can.

Anyway...

Back to the point at hand...the Quad captures what I suppose is like an initial flight plan. It tells you what the ball happened at launch and provides a normalized view of what *should* happen the rest of the way. What it doesn't do is tweak its algorithms based on specific dimple characteristics, and it sure is hell can't detect when there's a critical defect in that pattern.

There are two primary things to consider at this point, and both are related to the dimple pattern.

First, let's consider the worst case scenario.  Call it uneven dimpling. Whether that's from sloppy paint or where the factory inexplicably pieced together two different cover designs (it happens). In the real world, these problems would likely manifest in the offline number and would be visible over the full flight, but, and this is the important piece of it, there's be nothing in the launch data to provide any evidence of an issue. Since aero issues don't typically manifest at impact, the flight would look normal on a camera-based system.

Now let's simply consider general differences or ENHANCEMENTS in aero performance over a generation or two of balls. There are fundamentally good dimple designs, fundamentally bad ones, and others that are optimized for one ball design but get used on a tons of different designs (the popular foremost dimple is a good example here - works better on 3-piece balls than 4-piece).

Another great example was the original Kirkland 3-piece. In indoor tests its almost indistinguishable from a Pro V1. It spins a bit more, but otherwise...

Test it with a robot, outdoors, and man...the deficiencies of the dimple pattern are glaring. A hint of wind destroys hit. I use this example because it brings the point of this conversation home. Lift (initial launch performance) is similar. Drag (what happens once the ball is in the air) is worlds apart. This is what gets obscured when the wrong tool is chosen for a ball test.

Since the advent of the solid core ball, compression rules haven't much changed. A firmer ball is a faster ball. Any kid who hit both a baseball and a tennis ball with a bat fundamentally understands this...even if he hasn't thought about it in terms of golf ball performance. 

Likewise, the rules of spin haven't changed either. You want more spin, put a soft layer over a hard one. Want less spin, put a harder layer over a soft one. That's your simple explanation of why soft core balls (particularly 2-piece models) don't spin around the green.

That leaves the cover and more specifically the aerodynamics. It's the least understood aspect of ball design, but it's likely where there's been the greatest evolution over the last decade or two, drag coefficients, the Magnus (and reverse Magnus effect), that sort of stuff are likely where the greatest opportunities remain.

Ultimately, what we're talking about is stability of flight

So yeah...comparing a decades old ball against a new ball, I suppose, makes for a fun read, but when you're methodology is fundamentally incapable of capturing the most significant changes over those decades, you're basically just blowing smoke to get clicks.

I'd also add that golf balls have a shelf life and testing anything more than a few years is also dicey.

Might make this my signature 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Getoffmylawn said:

Thank you for the very enlightening insight!

To your knowledge do most/all company's actually do the outdoor robot testing you describe as a matter of standard practice to evaluate and perfect the dimple pattern?  I can't imagine Titleist's 2021 change to the dimple pattern wasn't born of some sort of data that validated it as an improvement, but as was mentioned earlier in this thread the same basic dimple pattern seems to be remarkably prevalent throughout the industry.  Another level of separation between Titleist and others...?

I can't speak to robot testing specifically, but a group of tour players on a driving range is pretty close to a ball striking robot. They are consistent enough to make observations about whether one ball flys higher or lower than another. Verifying the carry and roll distance is easy enough as well to judge whether there is noticeable effect on a prototype ball. 

:ping-small: G425 MAX 9* Driver

:cobra-small: Baffler Rail-H 3H-4H

:touredgeexotics: CBX 119 16* 2 hyb

:callaway-small: APEX CF19 6-AW

INDI Wedges 52, 56, 60 

:odyssey-small: Stroke Lab Tuttle / :edel-golf-1: EAS 2.0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jlukes said:

Might make this my signature 

And I thought linking to the Callaway test made my signature a bit large.

:callaway-small: Epic Max LS 9° :Fuji: Ventus Blue 6X  (2021 Official Review) | :callaway-small:Epic Speed 18° Evenflow Riptide 70g 6.0
:titelist-small: 816 H1 21° Mitsubishi Motors Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings Chemical industry Mitsubishi  Rayon Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation, mitsubishi, blue, company png |  PNGEgg Diamana S+ Blue 70 S | 
image.png.08bbf5bb553da418019f0db13c6f4f9a.png SMS 4-5/SMS Pro 6-PW  image.png.267751aa721ee9cf3944fa2ff070b98c.png  Steelfiber i95 S (2023 Official Review)
:ping-small: Glide 4.0 50°.12°S/54°.14°W/58°.6°T PING Z-Z115 Wedge Flex | :cleveland-small:  SOFT 11S Super Stroke Mid-Slim 2.0
:ping-small: Hoofer Bag | :titelist-small: Pro V1 | Right Handed | Tracked by :ShotScope: V3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a lot of words about a golf ball.

there's got to be a point where the ball - for the most part - is the least important part of a golfers bag.
with the average handicap a 14 and a wide majority of golfers 14 or higher it all seems a bit of overkill.
Of course that's not to say there's not also a point where it becomes important to pay attention to the little things, with the ball being on of them. But there IS a tipping point.

I mean - play what you want to play - but if you lose balls on a consistent basis and are spending 47.00 on pro V1's because some outlet says they are "the best" you might as well put your money in a pile and set it on fire or open your window as you drive down the road and throw it out.

usga-handicaps.jpg.f584e59f3df2632ee5a26ed2ed60bc4c.jpg

DriverPING G425 Max
Woods- PING G 3w, Sub70 pro 4w, 
Callaway UW 19*, TourEdge C721 22* 
Irons- XXIO X

Wedges- Callaway Jaws Raw 

Putter- Cleveland HB Soft #1 w/UST
Ball- Maxfli Tour X

Interested in an in-depth review of  the Callaway Paradym driver? Click ➡️ here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, StrokerAce said:

a lot of words about a golf ball.

there's got to be a point where the ball - for the most part - is the least important part of a golfers bag.
with the average handicap a 14 and a wide majority of golfers 14 or higher it all seems a bit of overkill.
Of course that's not to say there's not also a point where it becomes important to pay attention to the little things, with the ball being on of them. But there IS a tipping point.

I mean - play what you want to play - but if you lose balls on a consistent basis and are spending 47.00 on pro V1's because some outlet says they are "the best" you might as well put your money in a pile and set it on fire or open your window as you drive down the road and throw it out.

usga-handicaps.jpg.f584e59f3df2632ee5a26ed2ed60bc4c.jpg

I tend to agree a little bit, but I would also say the quality control aspect of this conversation should still be a factor for that 14 or above handicapper...if a golfer's going to lose a ball it should be because he/she put a bad swing on it, not because the core was off-centered or the ball so poorly made it had a snowball's chance in hell of flying straight to begin with.

Driver: :titleist-small: TSR2, :Fuji:Ventus Blue 6 S, 65g Stiff

FW: :titleist-small: TSR2 3w, 15,  :Fuji:Ventus Blue 7 S, 70g Stiff

Hybrids:  :callaway-small: Apex Pro 3H, :Fuji:Ventus Blue 8 S, 80g Stiff

            :taylormade-small: Stealth DHY 4H, :Fuji:Ventus Blue 8 S, 80g Stiff

Irons: :edel-golf-1: SMS 5-6, SMS Pro 7-PW, Aerotech Steelfiber i95 Stiff

Wedges: :vokey-small:SM9 48 F Grind, 52 F Grind, 56 M Grind, Aerotech Steelfiber i95 Stiff

Putter: :odyssey-small: Sri-Hot 5K Triple Wide, Stroke Lab shaft

Ball: :titelist-small: Pro V1

Click here for my HONMA TR20 Official Review!  :honma:

Click here for my Arccos Caddie Bundle Official Review!   :Arccos:

Click here for my Edel SMS & SMS Pro Irons Official Review:edel-golf-1:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody know how to get Tony fired up on a Monday morning...🤣

:taylormade-small:     Stealth 2+ 9 (Diamana PD 60 S 45") 

image.png.dee92ef6cebb2ac4a3883744fc248f12.png     Stealth 2+ 15 (Diamana PD 70 S 43")

:ping-small:          G425 19 (Raijin 2.0 85x)

:ping-small:          G425 22 (Raijin 2.0 85x)

:srixon-small:            ZX7 5-9 (KBS C Taper S)

:titleist-small:            Vokey SM9 45 10 F (KBS 610)

 :titleist-small:           Vokey SM9 49 08 F (KBS 610)

 :titleist-small:           Vokey SM9 55 08 M (KBS 610)

 :titleist-small:           Vokey SM9 59 04 T (KBS 610)

:taylormade-small:     Spider GT Splitback 34"

 :titleist-small:           ProV1 #23

Twitter             @THEZIPR23

 

"One thing Golf has taught me, is that my muscles have no memory."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Getoffmylawn said:

I tend to agree a little bit, but I would also say the quality control aspect of this conversation should still be a factor for that 14 or above handicapper...if a golfer's going to lose a ball it should be because he/she put a bad swing on it, not because the core was off-centered or the ball so poorly made it had a snowball's chance in hell of flying straight to begin with.

I have a friend who has dogs and they let him walk a private course. He's given more probably 15-20 dozen nearly new Pro V1 and Pro V1x balls.
I really hope high handicappers keep buying them and losing them because that is a lot fewer balls that I need to buy. 🤣

That's not to say a lower hc player doesn't lose balls but the quantity that he finds and the condition they are in tend to lean in the direction of a higher hc player.

DriverPING G425 Max
Woods- PING G 3w, Sub70 pro 4w, 
Callaway UW 19*, TourEdge C721 22* 
Irons- XXIO X

Wedges- Callaway Jaws Raw 

Putter- Cleveland HB Soft #1 w/UST
Ball- Maxfli Tour X

Interested in an in-depth review of  the Callaway Paradym driver? Click ➡️ here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, StrokerAce said:

a lot of words about a golf ball.

 

I get what you are saying,  but regardless of how good or bad a golfer is,  some people like to learn and understand the details of clubs, balls, and other equipment.  Others are happy just hitting whatever.  MGS is basically about trying to dig into those details and identifying differences and people agree and disagree with the findings.  I personally enjoyed the educational aspect of what Tony posted; will it sway me in any direction or improve my handicap? Simple answer is no.  

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15*  w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 915H 21* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype        
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :titleist-small: 54/12D, 60/8M w/:Accra iWedge 90 Graphite
Putter:   :taylormade-small:TM-180

Testing:   SPGC_logo.jpg

Backups:  :odyssey-small: Milled Collection RSX 2, :seemore-small: mFGP2, :cameron-small: Futura 5W

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, cnosil said:

I get what you are saying,  but regardless of how good or bad a golfer is,  some people like to learn and understand the details of clubs, balls, and other equipment.  Others are happy just hitting whatever.  MGS is basically about trying to dig into those details and identifying differences and people agree and disagree with the findings.  I personally enjoyed the educational aspect of what Tony posted; will it sway me in any direction or improve my handicap? Simple answer is no.  

clearly you stopped at the first sentence.

I work in higher ed and have for 20+ years; I have nothing against educating yourself or learning about things. 

Furthermore I could care less if a 30 handicapper plays 90 dollar golf balls. Their game, their choice. 
My entire point was there is a level of skill where the ball matters and where the ball doesn't; maybe I missed that in Tony's soliloquy.... 

DriverPING G425 Max
Woods- PING G 3w, Sub70 pro 4w, 
Callaway UW 19*, TourEdge C721 22* 
Irons- XXIO X

Wedges- Callaway Jaws Raw 

Putter- Cleveland HB Soft #1 w/UST
Ball- Maxfli Tour X

Interested in an in-depth review of  the Callaway Paradym driver? Click ➡️ here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StrokerAce said:

a lot of words about a golf ball.

there's got to be a point where the ball - for the most part - is the least important part of a golfers bag.
 

 

On the other hand, the golf ball is the only piece of equipment you use for every shot - making it a pretty important factor. If you are looking at variables however, then nothing is more variable than human input - even really good ball strikers will likely never repeat a shot with the same level of accuracy as another.

If you're looking at noticeable performance differences, you'd better be certain that the weakest link in the chain isn't the person swinging the club. And no ball in the world is going to help with a lack of ability - but it can make the differene in the way you perceive how it feels - even with a simple 3ft putt. But alas, 3ft putts are not a big selling point of most golf balls.

Edited by jaskanski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, jaskanski said:

On the other hand, the golf ball is the only piece of equipment you use for every shot - making it a pretty important factor. If you are looking at variables however, then nothing is more variable than human input - even really good ball strikers will likely never repeat a shot with the same level of accuracy as another.

If you're looking at noticeable performance differences, you'd better be certain that the weakest link in the chain isn't the person swinging the club. And no ball in the world is going to help with a lack of ability - but it can make the differene in the way you perceive how it feels - even with a simple 3ft putt. But alas, 3ft putts are not a big selling point of most golf balls.

not sure what your point is... that because you paid a lot of money for a golf ball then it gives you a psychological advantage? because you paid a lot for it then it 'feels' better? 

in some cases the opposite is true - when you lose a few 4 dollar golf balls that can really piss you off and mess with your head.

wish someone would do a blind test and give a 14+ handicap player 5 different balls ranging in price and quality and ask them to pick the "best" one.... without knowing anything about them. 

DriverPING G425 Max
Woods- PING G 3w, Sub70 pro 4w, 
Callaway UW 19*, TourEdge C721 22* 
Irons- XXIO X

Wedges- Callaway Jaws Raw 

Putter- Cleveland HB Soft #1 w/UST
Ball- Maxfli Tour X

Interested in an in-depth review of  the Callaway Paradym driver? Click ➡️ here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StrokerAce said:

clearly you stopped at the first sentence.

I work in higher ed and have for 20+ years; I have nothing against educating yourself or learning about things. 

Furthermore I could care less if a 30 handicapper plays 90 dollar golf balls. Their game, their choice. 
My entire point was there is a level of skill where the ball matters and where the ball doesn't; maybe I missed that in Tony's soliloquy.... 

didn’t stop at the first sentence.   You disagree with the fact that the ball matters; which is fine and in not so many words said information was a waste,   Essentially the point of Tony’s comments were related to the original post that said the 2000 and 2019 balls were basically the same based on a launch monitor test; which doesn’t measure the correct things to make that statement.  Neither of the posts were about who should care; which is what your posts are discussing. 

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15*  w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 915H 21* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype        
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :titleist-small: 54/12D, 60/8M w/:Accra iWedge 90 Graphite
Putter:   :taylormade-small:TM-180

Testing:   SPGC_logo.jpg

Backups:  :odyssey-small: Milled Collection RSX 2, :seemore-small: mFGP2, :cameron-small: Futura 5W

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, jaskanski said:

On the other hand, the golf ball is the only piece of equipment you use for every shot - making it a pretty important factor. If you are looking at variables however, then nothing is more variable than human input - even really good ball strikers will likely never repeat a shot with the same level of accuracy as another.

If you're looking at noticeable performance differences, you'd better be certain that the weakest link in the chain isn't the person swinging the club. And no ball in the world is going to help with a lack of ability - but it can make the differene in the way you perceive how it feels - even with a simple 3ft putt. But alas, 3ft putts are not a big selling point of most golf balls.

Exactly. Anyone looking to get better there needs to be consistency and the ball is the on Eli eve of equipment that’s is used on every shot. 
 

#finditcutit and the mgs ball lab shows that not all balls are equal. The ball study showed how bad a shot result can be with balls that have inconsistency. 
 

those that know know  

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I'm saying is that there are plenty of 'premium' golf balls out there that don't get a second look from me because they don't feel right off the putter. Once it fails this basic go/no go test - why bother evaluating it any further? Most touring pros will tell you the same thing - if it feels OK then it's a good start.

Most high index players could certainly benefit from a better feeling ball around the greens that are far from premium priced but feel just as good. If you like to putt with a rock just because you think it can eek out a few extra yards from your duffed tee shot, then knock yourself out. For the majority of players (who as we've established are around the the index as per your graphic) too much emphasis is placed on distance which is only achieveable (compared to another ball regardless of dimples or construction) if it is struck precisely enough to be worth counting as 'significant'. That would be less than justifiable to be worth considering as a factor in selecting a golf ball.

But a simple 'putt' test? Worth every penny of whatever price point you choose. Sound resonable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, cnosil said:

didn’t stop at the first sentence.   You disagree with the fact that the ball matters; which is fine and in not so many words said information was a waste,   Essentially the point of Tony’s comments were related to the original post that said the 2000 and 2019 balls were basically the same based on a launch monitor test; which doesn’t measure the correct things to make that statement.  Neither of the posts were about who should care; which is what your posts are discussing. 

wrong again. *read*what*I*wrote*

at no point did I disagree with the fact that the ball matters - I said that there is a point where it shouldn't matter as much as everything else. the entire reason I included the handicap charts. I even said that it DOES matter for lower handicaps.

don't put words in my mouth - I never said information was a waste.

DriverPING G425 Max
Woods- PING G 3w, Sub70 pro 4w, 
Callaway UW 19*, TourEdge C721 22* 
Irons- XXIO X

Wedges- Callaway Jaws Raw 

Putter- Cleveland HB Soft #1 w/UST
Ball- Maxfli Tour X

Interested in an in-depth review of  the Callaway Paradym driver? Click ➡️ here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, jaskanski said:

What I'm saying is that there are plenty of 'premium' golf balls out there that don't get a second look from me because they don't feel right off the putter. Once it fails this basic go/no go test - why bother evaluating it any further? Most touring pros will tell you the same thing - if it feels OK then it's a good start.

Most high index players could certainly benefit from a better feeling ball around the greens that are far from premium priced but feel just as good. If you like to putt with a rock just because you think it can eek out a few extra yards from your duffed tee shot, then knock yourself out. For the majority of players (who as we've established are around the the index as per your graphic) too much emphasis is placed on distance which is only achieveable (compared to another ball regardless of dimples or construction) if it is struck precisely enough to be worth counting as 'significant'. That would be less than justifiable to be worth considering as a factor in selecting a golf ball.

But a simple 'putt' test? Worth every penny of whatever price point you choose. Sound resonable?

sure. 

just like people who like to run like to wear Asics vs Nike vs Brooks, etc...

use what feels good to you.... even if "find it cut it" (gasp!) says it's not a "good" ball.

DriverPING G425 Max
Woods- PING G 3w, Sub70 pro 4w, 
Callaway UW 19*, TourEdge C721 22* 
Irons- XXIO X

Wedges- Callaway Jaws Raw 

Putter- Cleveland HB Soft #1 w/UST
Ball- Maxfli Tour X

Interested in an in-depth review of  the Callaway Paradym driver? Click ➡️ here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, StrokerAce said:

wrong again. *read*what*I*wrote*

at no point did I disagree with the fact that the ball matters - I said that there is a point where it shouldn't matter as much as everything else. the entire reason I included the handicap charts. I even said that it DOES matter for lower handicaps.

don't put words in my mouth - I never said information was a waste.

I read what you wrote; Perhaps it is what appears to be sarcasm that is creating my confusion.  Not trying to put words in you mouth, just expressing my understanding/misunderstanding of what you are saying.  That is how discussions work and perhaps you past criticisms of MGS approaches have caused me to read more into your statements than you intended 

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15*  w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 915H 21* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype        
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :titleist-small: 54/12D, 60/8M w/:Accra iWedge 90 Graphite
Putter:   :taylormade-small:TM-180

Testing:   SPGC_logo.jpg

Backups:  :odyssey-small: Milled Collection RSX 2, :seemore-small: mFGP2, :cameron-small: Futura 5W

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, StrokerAce said:

not sure what your point is... that because you paid a lot of money for a golf ball then it gives you a psychological advantage? because you paid a lot for it then it 'feels' better? 

in some cases the opposite is true - when you lose a few 4 dollar golf balls that can really piss you off and mess with your head.

wish someone would do a blind test and give a 14+ handicap player 5 different balls ranging in price and quality and ask them to pick the "best" one.... without knowing anything about them. 

 

1 hour ago, StrokerAce said:

clearly you stopped at the first sentence.

I work in higher ed and have for 20+ years; I have nothing against educating yourself or learning about things. 

Furthermore I could care less if a 30 handicapper plays 90 dollar golf balls. Their game, their choice. 
My entire point was there is a level of skill where the ball matters and where the ball doesn't; maybe I missed that in Tony's soliloquy.... 

what’s been your issue lately? Seems like you hate everything MGS and the people associated with it?

 

Link to comment
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.   Restore formatting

  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...