Can amateur golfers really tell the difference?

[GaryF]

17 minutes ago, funkyjudge said:

I know from personal experience that you can add as much as 35-40% to shot distances by playing around with simulators and launch monitors like the ones that they use in indoor fitting centers and big box golf stores. I do clubfitting work at an indoor facility owned by a PGA Pro, and I have played with the altitude adjustment settings and managed to get as much as 368 yards with my driver (I never hit more than 245-250 yards of carry and 270-275 total yards on those machines when they are properly set at sea level or close to it, and 235/250 is more common for me on them).

That’s an incredible boost, I had no idea it would be that much.  I’ve been shopping for irons and hitting at a couple different pgatss and I always check and they were at SL.  Probably doesn’t take much adjustment to add 7-10 yards on a 7i.

[funkyjudge]

1 minute ago, GaryF said:

That’s an incredible boost, I had no idea it would be that much.  I’ve been shopping for irons and hitting at a couple different pgatss and I always check and they were at SL.  Probably doesn’t take much adjustment to add 7-10 yards on a 7i.

I don’t know which machines PGA Superstore  uses, but we have four of the Canadian-made HD Golf simulators at the place where I do fittings.

Iron distance will not be anything near the 90 extra yards that I get at high altitude on the HD Golf simulator, but you can expect to see an extra 30 yards with a 7-iron on perfect strikes when you have the machine set at high altitude.

[GaryF]

2 minutes ago, funkyjudge said:

I don’t know which machines PGA Superstore  uses, but we have four of the Canadian-made HD Golf simulators at the place where I do fittings.

Iron distance will not be anything near the 90 extra yards that I get at high altitude on the HD Golf simulator, but you can expect to see an extra 30 yards with a 7-iron on perfect strikes when you have the machine set at high altitude.

Recently hit at pgass in Roswell, GA and Altamonte Springs, FL.  Had my data emailed and both came from Foresight Sports which I assume corresponds to the brand being used. 

[funkyjudge]

Just now, GaryF said:

Recently hit at pgass in Roswell, GA and Altamonte Springs, FL.  Had my data emailed and both came from Foresight Sports which I assume corresponds to the brand being used. 

Yes, Foresight Sports is the maker of the GC2, GC3 and GC Quad launch monitors…the best in the business, in my opinion.

[GaryF]

19 minutes ago, funkyjudge said:

Yes, Foresight Sports is the maker of the GC2, GC3 and GC Quad launch monitors…the best in the business, in my opinion.

So back on the topic of this thread...,sort of, I was hitting the jpx921 7i at Roswell, and was getting spin rpm of 4850, love the club but not the spin. The sales guy told me I might get better results using the ball I play (lower compression Srixon Q Star Tour) as opposed to the Callaway LS they had me hit and suggested I bring my ball to hit.  But then in FL last week hit the new jpx923 (same shaft), same LS ball, but avg spin around 5150.  100% can feel the difference in balls.  

[hohjoe]

21 hours ago, chisag said:

... The golf ball as an important piece of your equipment just like any other in your bag. Would anyone switch putters of different styles and lengths during a round? Like the ball, the putter does the same thing with similar loft but different materials and/or face inserts. Would you play the rest of your round with a x-flex TSR4 driver you "found in the woods" on the 11th hole when you normally play a Ping G425 with a r-flex? 

... I think part of the criteria for some is they are so inconsistent so the ball really doesn't matter. I would make the argument some of their inconsistency comes from playing different balls. We all understand that a fat shot isn't gonna be any different with a Velocity or a ProV1. But what you are trying to do with your golf ball is have consistency with your well struck shots even if that is only a handful per 18 holes and you simply can't do that playing different golf balls. Now an 18 index probably can't tell any difference between a TP5, TP5x or even a Tour Response but they can tell a difference between those balls and a TM Distance + or a Callaway Supersoft. The goal for every player is to hit good shots and even if you hit 4 a round, you know what they look like and can try and repeat them if you use the same ball for every round. 

 

So for a high handicapper it really doesn't matter much which ball is used as long as it's the same ball?

[chisag]

2 hours ago, hohjoe said:

So for a high handicapper it really doesn't matter much which ball is used as long as it's the same ball?

 

... I do think every golfer benefits from using a premium ball with a urethane cover. Kirklands are $18 a dozen and Maxfli Tours $26. Even an Ionomer cover provides enough spin to begin to learn how to control your short game. I also don't like lumping all players by handicaps because an 18 might have the beginnings of a decent short game but struggle with the full swing. That said, If a player has little control over their swing and hit it high/low, left/right, fat and thin with a bump and run short game, they could use any ball but would still benefit from using the same ball. If they hit a good pitch with a Titleist Velocity or Srixon Soft Feel that just lands on the green and rolls 30 feet, they can depend on that as a standard. If it rolls off the green the next time they know they hit it thin. 

... There is a lot that goes into how a golf ball reacts so taking as many variables out of the equation as possible is always a good idea.  

[Middler]

I'm not sure what the OP actually meant. I would agree that most amateurs couldn't tell the difference just playing any 3+ pc urethane tour ball. That does not mean there aren't performance or quality differences (see Ball Lab), just that a player wouldn't be able to tell the differences without playing many times with each ball - if then.

But some/many amateurs could tell the difference between a urethane tour ball and a really soft and/or 2 pc ionomer ball. Even if you don't notice the difference in spin, a 2 pc ionomer ball definitely has a different feel off the club - though I almost never hit them these days, maybe they've improved considerably?

[GregGarner]

Seems reasonable to me that indiscriminately switching between different types of balls and claiming that it doesn't make a difference is akin to arguing that you shouldn't care about Strokes Gained Analytics because fractions of a shot aren't whole shots. 

Player variability is a feature, not a bug. The goal should be to reduce variability, not throw your hands up and declare that nothing can be done... If you give me a ball that, on my best strikes, performs in a way that benefits me and on mis-hits is not particularly different than others, it would seem to be only upside in that equation. Why wouldn't I play a ball that is net-neutral on my bad shots and net-positive on my good ones?