Titleist golf ball study; Finally, some facts added to the debate

11314151618
19

Comments

  • ShilgyShilgy Phoenix 12226WRX Points: 1,360Handicap: 3.2Members Posts: 12,226 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #512
    tnord wrote:


    gvogel wrote:


    What's the big deal? So the game becomes a little bit harder - although for you it will probably be a 5 yard difference. It's golf. If you want an easier game, try lawn darts.



    The unarguable point is that since that course that you play was laid out, equipment has changed quite a bit for the game. In fact, in no other time period of the game, not even with the advent of the steel shaft or the wound ball, has the game changed as much in a 20 year period as it has from 1993 to 2013. Unarguable.




    I agree with the bolded part. So what? What is the problem you and Jack are trying to solve?




    that a lot of the skill scores have not appreciably changed on tour or for amateurs at home, and strategy of the game has been removed via technology strategy-like in other games-have changed but not been removed. that time to play, and cost to maintain golf courses are directly impacted by the required length of the modern game our home courses certainly do not require lengthening. Some feel tour courses do others do not feel that way. that agronomy practices demanded by the public could be dialed back, and consequently make the game easier and more welcoming to beginners go for it-has nothing to do with changing the ball.



    i have yet to hear any architect say that distance is not a problem.
    Posted:
    WITB
    Tools for the job!

    To paraphrase Dr Seuss: Don't cry because the round of golf is over-smile because it happened . :)

    Game is recovering from total ankle replacement. Getting there and glad to be pain free!
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • UhitUhit  861WRX Points: 0Members Posts: 861
    Joined:  #513
    cxx wrote:

    Uhit wrote:

    gvogel wrote:


    gvogel wrote:


    What's the big deal? So the game becomes a little bit harder - although for you it will probably be a 5 yard difference. It's golf. If you want an easier game, try lawn darts.



    The unarguable point is that since that course that you play was laid out, equipment has changed quite a bit for the game. In fact, in no other time period of the game, not even with the advent of the steel shaft or the wound ball, has the game changed as much in a 20 year period as it has from 1993 to 2013. Unarguable.




    I agree with the bolded part. So what? What is the problem you and Jack are trying to solve?




    You can read his interview. I think that the point is making short golf courses relevant in order to decrease the time it takes to play 18 to 3-1/2 hours from 5 hours. He said that no other game takes as long as golf.




    If this is true, then he is completely out of touch... image/swoon.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':swoon:' />



    ...the most time on the course is lost by waiting, and not by walking.



    And waiting correlates to slow play, which makes the difference whether you can play a 7000 yards course, in 3-1/2 hours, or 5 hours...

    ...you can verify this, every time you play.



    It is impossible to reduce the time to play 18 holes from 5 hours to 3-1/2 hours solely by shortening a 7000 yards course,

    because you can walk 7000 yards in ONE hour! image/read.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':read:' />



    Sorry, but I don't want to be fooled by Nicklaus - especially not with such an obvious nonsense!




    Walk time is probably closer to 2 hours if you include green to tee distance. It's pretty well established that tee time spacing is pretty effective in reducing playing time. Stretching out tee times is not a problem given that the number of players has been reduced. I play primarily at two clubs, one with 8 minutes between times and one with 10 minutes. The course with 10 minute times is much less congested. Short delays work themselves out rather than forming a traffic jam.




    Our 7000 yards course has a total length (including the distances to the club house, and green to tee distances) of roughly 10500 yards.



    So, that it doesn't matter whether you play the course from the 6000 yards tee boxes, or the 7000 yards tee boxes, because you have to walk 10500 yards anyway...

    ...which is done in 1 1/2 hours btw...



    ...thus, shortening the course would save neither time, nor money!
    Posted:
  • tnordtnord  2320WRX Points: 54Handicap: +0.2Members Posts: 2,320 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #514
    i know this is a very vocal "don't take my guns.....i mean yards away!!!!" crowd, but i don't care.



    the mid to long iron game has basically been lost for better than average players. shot shaping and control is diminished year after year. even in the short time i've been playing this game, the ball is very noticeable harder to curve.



    the "strategy" now is to hit it over all the hazards and wedge it onto the green.



    i get really sick of this idea that there's basically only duffers that can't hit it 200yds, and tour players. there ARE plenty of people out there that hit it 250-300yds, and the game of golf is for them too, not just the lowest common denominator. a good golf course incorporates strategy, thought, and options for players of all skill levels. one idea frequently kicked around that really irks me is narrowing fairways and adding bunkers/hazards at distances people better than them hit it. i believe that's misguided because that increases difficulty for everybody, making it even less likely they'll reach the green in two, or be able to hold it if they do.



    the more multi dimensional the game is, the more rewarding and enjoyable it is to play. that's being lost at a rapid rate.
    Posted:
    TaylorMade 2017 M1 440 Speeder Evolution 757x
    Titleist 917F3 13.5 Fuji Speeder Pro TS 84X
    Mizuno MP4 3-P X100
    SM7 50F 54M 58M S400
    Bettinardi BB1
    On -, @protrajT
  • Roadking2003Roadking2003 Austin 6635WRX Points: 1,115Handicap: 8.7Members Posts: 6,635 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #515
    tnord wrote:


    the mid to long iron game has basically been lost for better than average players. shot shaping and control is diminished year after year. even in the short time i've been playing this game, the ball is very noticeable harder to curve.



    the "strategy" now is to hit it over all the hazards and wedge it onto the green.




    Any stats to back up that opinion?


    i get really sick of this idea that there's basically only duffers that can't hit it 200yds, and tour players. there ARE plenty of people out there that hit it 250-300yds, and the game of golf is for them too, not just the lowest common denominator. a good golf course incorporates strategy, thought, and options for players of all skill levels. one idea frequently kicked around that really irks me is narrowing fairways and adding bunkers/hazards at distances people better than them hit it. i believe that's misguided because that increases difficulty for everybody, making it even less likely they'll reach the green in two, or be able to hold it if they do.




    I can assure you that narrowing the fairway at 320 - 350 yards will not make the course more difficult for me.
    Posted:
  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #516

    tnord wrote:


    the mid to long iron game has basically been lost for better than average players. shot shaping and control is diminished year after year. even in the short time i've been playing this game, the ball is very noticeable harder to curve.



    the "strategy" now is to hit it over all the hazards and wedge it onto the green.




    Any stats to back up that opinion?


    i get really sick of this idea that there's basically only duffers that can't hit it 200yds, and tour players. there ARE plenty of people out there that hit it 250-300yds, and the game of golf is for them too, not just the lowest common denominator. a good golf course incorporates strategy, thought, and options for players of all skill levels. one idea frequently kicked around that really irks me is narrowing fairways and adding bunkers/hazards at distances people better than them hit it. i believe that's misguided because that increases difficulty for everybody, making it even less likely they'll reach the green in two, or be able to hold it if they do.




    I can assure you that narrowing the fairway at 320 - 350 yards will not make the course more difficult for me.




    Hey don’t go pinching in my layup area!!!!
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • cxxcxx  3240WRX Points: 225Members Posts: 3,240 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #517
    Uhit wrote:






    Our 7000 yards course has a total length (including the distances to the club house, and green to tee distances) of roughly 10500 yards.



    So, that it doesn't matter whether you play the course from the 6000 yards tee boxes, or the 7000 yards tee boxes, because you have to walk 10500 yards anyway...

    ...which is done in 1 1/2 hours btw...



    ...thus, shortening the course would save neither time, nor money!




    Average brisk walking pace is 3.0-3.1 mph rather than the 4 mph you imply. That's my speed and I'm off the rack average.
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • UhitUhit  861WRX Points: 0Members Posts: 861
    Joined:  edited Feb 28, 2018 #518
    cxx wrote:

    Uhit wrote:


    Our 7000 yards course has a total length (including the distances to the club house, and green to tee distances) of roughly 10500 yards.



    So, that it doesn't matter whether you play the course from the 6000 yards tee boxes, or the 7000 yards tee boxes, because you have to walk 10500 yards anyway...

    ...which is done in 1 1/2 hours btw...



    ...thus, shortening the course would save neither time, nor money!




    Average brisk walking pace is 3.0-3.1 mph rather than the 4 mph you imply. That's my speed and I'm off the rack average.




    Well, in Europe, we assume 6 km/h, which equates 1000 meter in 10 minutes, which equates 1094 yards in 10 minutes...



    ...at least this is what I learned around 30 years ago.



    btw I have a average walking speed of more than 7 km/h...



    ...thus I already tried to make a understatement.
    Posted:
  • tnordtnord  2320WRX Points: 54Handicap: +0.2Members Posts: 2,320 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #519

    tnord wrote:


    the mid to long iron game has basically been lost for better than average players. shot shaping and control is diminished year after year. even in the short time i've been playing this game, the ball is very noticeable harder to curve.



    the "strategy" now is to hit it over all the hazards and wedge it onto the green.




    Any stats to back up that opinion?




    do you want me to walk you through a yardage book? you can start by doing math on a given hole to see what kind of club a better than average player will be hitting into the green. figure an average 300yd drive and 195yd 6i. that basically means you've got to have a 500yd par 4 to even get into the mid irons of a better players bag. then evaluate your yardage book and any hazard that's less than a 275 carry is going to get s*** on by the ball as it flies overhead. what SEEMS like a long par 4 at 450 yards is really just a driver and a PW.



    i get really sick of this idea that there's basically only duffers that can't hit it 200yds, and tour players. there ARE plenty of people out there that hit it 250-300yds, and the game of golf is for them too, not just the lowest common denominator. a good golf course incorporates strategy, thought, and options for players of all skill levels. one idea frequently kicked around that really irks me is narrowing fairways and adding bunkers/hazards at distances people better than them hit it. i believe that's misguided because that increases difficulty for everybody, making it even less likely they'll reach the green in two, or be able to hold it if they do.




    I can assure you that narrowing the fairway at 320 - 350 yards will not make the course more difficult for me.




    well it does, because as noted above, that's where the 2nd shot for many end up. be it punch out from the trees, 2nd from a fairway bunker, or a 200yd drive and 150yd hybrid. narrow the fairways, grow the rough, firm up the greens, tuck pins, and add bunkers are challenges for everyone, not just better players.
    Posted:
    TaylorMade 2017 M1 440 Speeder Evolution 757x
    Titleist 917F3 13.5 Fuji Speeder Pro TS 84X
    Mizuno MP4 3-P X100
    SM7 50F 54M 58M S400
    Bettinardi BB1
    On -, @protrajT
  • Conrad1953Conrad1953  15408WRX Points: 3,308Members Posts: 15,408 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #520
    Roll back the ball = shrink the game. OK, so all those "grow the game" types should not be in favor

    of rolling back the ball.
    Posted:
  • TsarBombaTsarBomba  698WRX Points: 0Handicap: 9Members Posts: 698
    Joined:  #521
    tnord wrote:


    tnord wrote:


    the mid to long iron game has basically been lost for better than average players. shot shaping and control is diminished year after year. even in the short time i've been playing this game, the ball is very noticeable harder to curve.



    the "strategy" now is to hit it over all the hazards and wedge it onto the green.




    Any stats to back up that opinion?




    do you want me to walk you through a yardage book? you can start by doing math on a given hole to see what kind of club a better than average player will be hitting into the green. figure an average 300yd drive and 195yd 6i. that basically means you've got to have a 500yd par 4 to even get into the mid irons of a better players bag. then evaluate your yardage book and any hazard that's less than a 275 carry is going to get s*** on by the ball as it flies overhead. what SEEMS like a long par 4 at 450 yards is really just a driver and a PW.



    i get really sick of this idea that there's basically only duffers that can't hit it 200yds, and tour players. there ARE plenty of people out there that hit it 250-300yds, and the game of golf is for them too, not just the lowest common denominator. a good golf course incorporates strategy, thought, and options for players of all skill levels. one idea frequently kicked around that really irks me is narrowing fairways and adding bunkers/hazards at distances people better than them hit it. i believe that's misguided because that increases difficulty for everybody, making it even less likely they'll reach the green in two, or be able to hold it if they do.




    I can assure you that narrowing the fairway at 320 - 350 yards will not make the course more difficult for me.




    well it does, because as noted above, that's where the 2nd shot for many end up. be it punch out from the trees, 2nd from a fairway bunker, or a 200yd drive and 150yd hybrid. narrow the fairways, grow the rough, firm up the greens, tuck pins, and add bunkers are challenges for everyone, not just better players.




    Well it would still be easier for the shorter accurate players then, don't you think?



    Especially since we are talking about a magical ball that only goes shorter for long guys. That thing will be left and right like a wiffle ball for big hitters. Perfect handicap device for the lengthonal challenged.
    Posted:
  • tgsevers81tgsevers81  316WRX Points: 90Handicap: 12.3Members Posts: 316 Greens
    Joined:  #522
    This is a PGA Tour issue (where it actually is not an issue) versus a USGA issue. The USGA is supposed to support the game and concerns for golf as a whole, not the PGA Tour specifically. Driving distance increases is not an issue for the vast majority of amateur golfers. How does golf, as a whole, benefit from dialing back distances a golf ball can achieve? Along that same line, how does the PGA Tour benefit? Do we want to watch DJ, Rory, or JT smash drives of 250 or 350? I understand the beauty is in the eye of the beholder on this matter. Some may want to see a more strategic approach on the PGA Tour based on limited distance. Others want to see DJ blasting 375 yard bombs on some holes. But, I personally don't think the USGA has any business telling me, as a recreational golfer, that a conforming ball can only have X scientifically engineered capability of obtaining a maximum distance.
    Posted:
    I use golf clubs, 14 to be exact!  Mostly my putter though!
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • BY#99BY#99  348WRX Points: 38Handicap: 10Members Posts: 348 Greens
    Joined:  #523
    Do you realize that Titleist being the top dog has the most to lose if they do anything to the golf ball? Not surprising they would come out with something saying rolling back the ball is not a good idea or needed.
    Posted:
  • J13J13 Dad golf Maryland 16103WRX Points: 1,115Handicap: +1.6Members Posts: 16,103 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #524
    BY#99 wrote:


    Do you realize that Titleist being the top dog has the most to lose if they do anything to the golf ball? Not surprising they would come out with something saying rolling back the ball is not a good idea or needed.




    How so? They aren't the longest premium ball right now so how would this impact them more so then any other company like Callaway or TM?
    Posted:
    Driver - Under construction
    Fairway wood - Under construction
    Irons - Under Construction
    Wedges - Under Construction
    Odyssey Versa 6
    Srixon Zstar XV

    WITB- http://www.golfwrx.c.../page__st__1590


    Instagram-
    On -, @Jminis13





  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  edited Mar 7, 2018 #525
    Titleist are by far the most popular multipiece urethane ball on all the professional Tours and the most popular in retail sales. Those two facts are not unconnected.



    As the market stands right now (and has for decades) Bridgestone has no chance of significant market share growth relative to Titleist in that profitable segment. The public does buy golf balls based on what is used on Tour. That is demonstrably an effective marketing strategy as it has been for a long, long time.



    So Bridgestone would love for the Big, Bad USGA (or their Big, Bad PGA Tour) to step in and force a disconnect between the balls played on Tour and the balls played by retail golfers. If you competitor has you beat cold using one strategy, of course you'd like somebody to stamp out that strategy by the stroke of a pen.



    It has NOTHING to do with ball performance. All the major brands of multipiece urethane balls perform to within a tiny fraction of the maximum allowed under the Rules.



    Bridgestone is the equivalent of a child losing at a game who wants Mommy to step in and change the rules for him in mid-game.



    Bridgestone's idea is to get their mouthpieces like Tiger to cause a groundswell of public pressure, forcing USGA to say basically, "Attention everyone! Starting next year there will be a ridiculously poor performing ball used by all professionals. Unless you want to give up 20% of your distance you'll have to buy the special ball for non-professional play". Then Bridgestone can fight it out in a brand new market that's never existed before at least have a vain hope of catching up with Titleist. Probably by continuing their idiotic "ball fitting" type thing.
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • BY#99BY#99  348WRX Points: 38Handicap: 10Members Posts: 348 Greens
    Joined:  #526
    J13 wrote:

    BY#99 wrote:


    Do you realize that Titleist being the top dog has the most to lose if they do anything to the golf ball? Not surprising they would come out with something saying rolling back the ball is not a good idea or needed.




    How so? They aren't the longest premium ball right now so how would this impact them more so then any other company like Callaway or TM?




    Never said they were the longest but consumers may “feel” that Titleist is not “above” or better than the other brands if they perceive the balls to be more regulated and less differentiation. I do not think it is a coincidence, in my opinion, that from what I have seen/read, Titleist is the most vocal on this topic.
    Posted:
  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #527
    Titleist is the most vocal because they have the most to lose. There has been a principle of "same equipment and ball rules for everyone" for as long as there have been ball and implement Rules. During that century or so, Titleist has built up the most bullet proof and successful golf ball brand and continues to rake in profits from that first-place position.



    So yeah, when people start pitching the idea that for the first time ever there should be special Rules that say good players and hackers are going to be segmented into separate markets it is going to be Titleist advocating for sticking to the traditional way of writing the Rules.



    It's in their best interest but also in the best interest of golfers who don't want to see a bunch of loudmouth idiots ruin the way the game has always been governed.
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • J13J13 Dad golf Maryland 16103WRX Points: 1,115Handicap: +1.6Members Posts: 16,103 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  edited Mar 7, 2018 #528


    Titleist are by far the most popular multipiece urethane ball on all the professional Tours and the most popular in retail sales. Those two facts are not unconnected.



    As the market stands right now (and has for decades) Bridgestone has no chance of significant market share growth relative to Titleist in that profitable segment. The public does buy golf balls based on what is used on Tour. That is demonstrably an effective marketing strategy as it has been for a long, long time.



    So Bridgestone would love for the Big, Bad USGA (or their Big, Bad PGA Tour) to step in and force a disconnect between the balls played on Tour and the balls played by retail golfers. If you competitor has you beat cold using one strategy, of course you'd like somebody to stamp out that strategy by the stroke of a pen.



    It has NOTHING to do with ball performance. All the major brands of multipiece urethane balls perform to within a tiny fraction of the maximum allowed under the Rules.



    Bridgestone is the equivalent of a child losing at a game who wants Mommy to step in and change the rules for him in mid-game.



    Bridgestone's idea is to get their mouthpieces like Tiger to cause a groundswell of public pressure, forcing USGA to say basically, "Attention everyone! Starting next year there will be a ridiculously poor performing ball used by all professionals. Unless you want to give up 20% of your distance you'll have to buy the special ball for non-professional play". Then Bridgestone can fight it out in a brand new market that's never existed before at least have a vain hope of catching up with Titleist. Probably by continuing their idiotic "ball fitting" type thing.




    Titleist's market share in the ball category drops each year, club sales are terrible so we won't go there. This could speed up their decline in losing the ball market but either way it's on the decline. Too many good balls out there and the public is figuring that out which is why another companies ball (Callaway Chrome Soft) leads in big box store sales like Dicks. Titleist had a stranglehold on the ball market because they did a fantastic job at marketing and capturing green grass accounts especially at private clubs where they cut the pro's a deal to be exclusive with Titleist. Well times are changing and those deals are disappearing faster then the white rhino in Africa. They already lost big box, next is the continuing decline in pro shops. Titleist makes a great ball but so do others and with golf ball companies popping up left and right it's like a million tiny asteroids hitting planet Titleist. Eventually the constant nibbling by these small fish adds up not too mention someone like Callaway who's taking shark sized bites of flesh and has already proven they are capable of taking down massive companies (Taylormade)
    Posted:
    Driver - Under construction
    Fairway wood - Under construction
    Irons - Under Construction
    Wedges - Under Construction
    Odyssey Versa 6
    Srixon Zstar XV

    WITB- http://www.golfwrx.c.../page__st__1590


    Instagram-
    On -, @Jminis13





  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #529
    Yes and we all know that Callaway and Taylormade (or the sainted Costco) are morally superior enterprises to the evil Titleist empire. So anything that is bad for Titleist is good for golf, right?
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • J13J13 Dad golf Maryland 16103WRX Points: 1,115Handicap: +1.6Members Posts: 16,103 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  edited Mar 7, 2018 #530


    Yes and we all know that Callaway and Taylormade (or the sainted Costco) are morally superior enterprises to the evil Titleist empire. So anything that is bad for Titleist is good for golf, right?




    Never said Titleist was an evil empire i'm just discussing the business side of whats going on already in the marketplace. If i was Titleist i would be extremely concerned and start focusing on increasing my club market share to offset some of the ball loss. I mean Footjoy has taken a massive hit as well. Nike, Adidas, Sketchers, ect has come in and taken large chunks of market share. Clothing the same. My point is there are so many good brands now that no 1 company will dominate that way again. Titleist isn't going away they just aren't going to be so far ahead anymore. Ultimately that benefits consumers.
    Posted:
    Driver - Under construction
    Fairway wood - Under construction
    Irons - Under Construction
    Wedges - Under Construction
    Odyssey Versa 6
    Srixon Zstar XV

    WITB- http://www.golfwrx.c.../page__st__1590


    Instagram-
    On -, @Jminis13





  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #531
    J13 wrote:



    Yes and we all know that Callaway and Taylormade (or the sainted Costco) are morally superior enterprises to the evil Titleist empire. So anything that is bad for Titleist is good for golf, right?




    Never said Titleist was an evil empire i'm just discussing the business side of whats going on already in the marketplace. If i was Titleist i would be extremely concerned and start focusing on increasing my club market share to offset some of the ball loss. I mean Footjoy has taken a massive hit as well. Nike, Adidas, Sketchers, ect has come in and taken large chunks of market share. Clothing the same. My point is there are so many good brands now that no 1 company will dominate that way again. Titleist isn't going away they just aren't going to be so far ahead anymore. Ultimately that benefits consumers.




    How does it benefit consumers if they buy a $4 golf ball from Callaway or Bridgestone instead of a functionally equivalent $4 golf ball from Titleist?
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • J13J13 Dad golf Maryland 16103WRX Points: 1,115Handicap: +1.6Members Posts: 16,103 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #532

    J13 wrote:



    Yes and we all know that Callaway and Taylormade (or the sainted Costco) are morally superior enterprises to the evil Titleist empire. So anything that is bad for Titleist is good for golf, right?




    Never said Titleist was an evil empire i'm just discussing the business side of whats going on already in the marketplace. If i was Titleist i would be extremely concerned and start focusing on increasing my club market share to offset some of the ball loss. I mean Footjoy has taken a massive hit as well. Nike, Adidas, Sketchers, ect has come in and taken large chunks of market share. Clothing the same. My point is there are so many good brands now that no 1 company will dominate that way again. Titleist isn't going away they just aren't going to be so far ahead anymore. Ultimately that benefits consumers.




    How does it benefit consumers if they buy a $4 golf ball from Callaway or Bridgestone instead of a functionally equivalent $4 golf ball from Titleist?




    I don't think it benefits anyone to pay $4 for a golf ball. As for Titleist they are the most expensive premium ball and have worked really hard to make sure people know that. It worked for them for a long time. Perceived value is a strong marketing tactic. Nowadays people are seeking value hence why so many companies are hitting the $30-35 price point for a premium urethane ball.
    Posted:
    Driver - Under construction
    Fairway wood - Under construction
    Irons - Under Construction
    Wedges - Under Construction
    Odyssey Versa 6
    Srixon Zstar XV

    WITB- http://www.golfwrx.c.../page__st__1590


    Instagram-
    On -, @Jminis13





  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #533
    At some point, with perfectly acceptable multilayer urethane balls at every price point from a buck-fifty on up, you gotta think maybe someone paying $50 for a dozen ProV1x actually just wants to buy some $50 golf balls.



    As long as PXG can thrive, I don't worry too much about the continuing supply for $4/ball golf ball customers!
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • J13J13 Dad golf Maryland 16103WRX Points: 1,115Handicap: +1.6Members Posts: 16,103 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #534


    At some point, with perfectly acceptable multilayer urethane balls at every price point from a buck-fifty on up, you gotta think maybe someone paying $50 for a dozen ProV1x actually just wants to buy some $50 golf balls.



    As long as PXG can thrive, I don't worry too much about the continuing supply for $4/ball golf ball customers!




    I agree. I'm interested to see how the Callaway Chrome Soft X sells at it's new higher price point.
    Posted:
    Driver - Under construction
    Fairway wood - Under construction
    Irons - Under Construction
    Wedges - Under Construction
    Odyssey Versa 6
    Srixon Zstar XV

    WITB- http://www.golfwrx.c.../page__st__1590


    Instagram-
    On -, @Jminis13





  • mahoniemahonie England 2776WRX Points: 438Handicap: 11Members Posts: 2,776 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #535


    Titleist are by far the most popular multipiece urethane ball on all the professional Tours and the most popular in retail sales. Those two facts are not unconnected.



    As the market stands right now (and has for decades) Bridgestone has no chance of significant market share growth relative to Titleist in that profitable segment. The public does buy golf balls based on what is used on Tour. That is demonstrably an effective marketing strategy as it has been for a long, long time.



    So Bridgestone would love for the Big, Bad USGA (or their Big, Bad PGA Tour) to step in and force a disconnect between the balls played on Tour and the balls played by retail golfers. If you competitor has you beat cold using one strategy, of course you'd like somebody to stamp out that strategy by the stroke of a pen.



    It has NOTHING to do with ball performance. All the major brands of multipiece urethane balls perform to within a tiny fraction of the maximum allowed under the Rules.



    Bridgestone is the equivalent of a child losing at a game who wants Mommy to step in and change the rules for him in mid-game.



    Bridgestone's idea is to get their mouthpieces like Tiger to cause a groundswell of public pressure, forcing USGA to say basically, "Attention everyone! Starting next year there will be a ridiculously poor performing ball used by all professionals. Unless you want to give up 20% of your distance you'll have to buy the special ball for non-professional play". Then Bridgestone can fight it out in a brand new market that's never existed before at least have a vain hope of catching up with Titleist. Probably by continuing their idiotic "ball fitting" type thing.




    You do realise that the only reason that Titleist is in the position they are in with the ball is because they were on the brink of losing the whole of the ball market and resorted to stealing patents from Spalding (Callaway) and Bridgestone to develop the Pro V1? The settlements were made out of court so it is unlikely that we will ever know what the terms were. There was talk of sharing technologies and patents but it is my guess that Titleist have got all of their eggs in the Pro V basket and do not have anything else. If the Pro V is compromised, Titleist will be fatally wounded and that is why they vigorously fight any challenge. I would go so far to say that I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some link, buried down very deep, between someone in power at the PGA Tour and Titleist and they work together to protect their mutual interests (i.e. cash in the pocket).
    Posted:
    Callaway Big Bertha Alpha Fubuki ZT Stiff
    Callaway XR Speed 3W Project X HZRDUS T800 65 Stiff
    Wilson Staff FG Tour M3 21* Hybrid Aldila RIP Stiff
    Cobra King CB/MB Flow 4-6, 7-PW
    Wilson Staff PMP wedges 50/54/58 KBS Hi-Rev 2.0
    Radius Classic 8
  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #536
    mahonie wrote:



    Titleist are by far the most popular multipiece urethane ball on all the professional Tours and the most popular in retail sales. Those two facts are not unconnected.



    As the market stands right now (and has for decades) Bridgestone has no chance of significant market share growth relative to Titleist in that profitable segment. The public does buy golf balls based on what is used on Tour. That is demonstrably an effective marketing strategy as it has been for a long, long time.



    So Bridgestone would love for the Big, Bad USGA (or their Big, Bad PGA Tour) to step in and force a disconnect between the balls played on Tour and the balls played by retail golfers. If you competitor has you beat cold using one strategy, of course you'd like somebody to stamp out that strategy by the stroke of a pen.



    It has NOTHING to do with ball performance. All the major brands of multipiece urethane balls perform to within a tiny fraction of the maximum allowed under the Rules.



    Bridgestone is the equivalent of a child losing at a game who wants Mommy to step in and change the rules for him in mid-game.



    Bridgestone's idea is to get their mouthpieces like Tiger to cause a groundswell of public pressure, forcing USGA to say basically, "Attention everyone! Starting next year there will be a ridiculously poor performing ball used by all professionals. Unless you want to give up 20% of your distance you'll have to buy the special ball for non-professional play". Then Bridgestone can fight it out in a brand new market that's never existed before at least have a vain hope of catching up with Titleist. Probably by continuing their idiotic "ball fitting" type thing.




    You do realise that the only reason that Titleist is in the position they are in with the ball is because they were on the brink of losing the whole of the ball market and resorted to stealing patents from Spalding (Callaway) and Bridgestone to develop the Pro V1? The settlements were made out of court so it is unlikely that we will ever know what the terms were. There was talk of sharing technologies and patents but it is my guess that Titleist have got all of their eggs in the Pro V basket and do not have anything else. If the Pro V is compromised, Titleist will be fatally wounded and that is why they vigorously fight any challenge. I would go so far to say that I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some link, buried down very deep, between someone in power at the PGA Tour and Titleist and they work together to protect their mutual interests (i.e. cash in the pocket).




    Give it a rest. Every company in that business has sued and been sued repeatedly.



    That's a decades old corporate legal proceeding that was settled. It has nothing to do with anything in 2018.



    It is truly amazing the fervor of anti-Titleist zealotry on this forum.
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • mahoniemahonie England 2776WRX Points: 438Handicap: 11Members Posts: 2,776 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #537

    mahonie wrote:



    Titleist are by far the most popular multipiece urethane ball on all the professional Tours and the most popular in retail sales. Those two facts are not unconnected.



    As the market stands right now (and has for decades) Bridgestone has no chance of significant market share growth relative to Titleist in that profitable segment. The public does buy golf balls based on what is used on Tour. That is demonstrably an effective marketing strategy as it has been for a long, long time.



    So Bridgestone would love for the Big, Bad USGA (or their Big, Bad PGA Tour) to step in and force a disconnect between the balls played on Tour and the balls played by retail golfers. If you competitor has you beat cold using one strategy, of course you'd like somebody to stamp out that strategy by the stroke of a pen.



    It has NOTHING to do with ball performance. All the major brands of multipiece urethane balls perform to within a tiny fraction of the maximum allowed under the Rules.



    Bridgestone is the equivalent of a child losing at a game who wants Mommy to step in and change the rules for him in mid-game.



    Bridgestone's idea is to get their mouthpieces like Tiger to cause a groundswell of public pressure, forcing USGA to say basically, "Attention everyone! Starting next year there will be a ridiculously poor performing ball used by all professionals. Unless you want to give up 20% of your distance you'll have to buy the special ball for non-professional play". Then Bridgestone can fight it out in a brand new market that's never existed before at least have a vain hope of catching up with Titleist. Probably by continuing their idiotic "ball fitting" type thing.




    You do realise that the only reason that Titleist is in the position they are in with the ball is because they were on the brink of losing the whole of the ball market and resorted to stealing patents from Spalding (Callaway) and Bridgestone to develop the Pro V1? The settlements were made out of court so it is unlikely that we will ever know what the terms were. There was talk of sharing technologies and patents but it is my guess that Titleist have got all of their eggs in the Pro V basket and do not have anything else. If the Pro V is compromised, Titleist will be fatally wounded and that is why they vigorously fight any challenge. I would go so far to say that I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some link, buried down very deep, between someone in power at the PGA Tour and Titleist and they work together to protect their mutual interests (i.e. cash in the pocket).




    Give it a rest. Every company in that business has sued and been sued repeatedly.



    That's a decades old corporate legal proceeding that was settled. It has nothing to do with anything in 2018.



    It is truly amazing the fervor of anti-Titleist zealotry on this forum.




    It has everything to do 2018 if you realise where Titleist have come from and what they are trying to protect. Wally Uihlein has said that the Pro V1 saved Titleist. Without it they’re gone. When you read the judgement notes and recognise the underhanded tactics and lies Titleist told in court to try and get off the hook you begin to realise how dirty they really are...my eyes were truly opened. This coming from someone who was a fan of the two year product cycles and perceived quality of the brand.
    Posted:
    Callaway Big Bertha Alpha Fubuki ZT Stiff
    Callaway XR Speed 3W Project X HZRDUS T800 65 Stiff
    Wilson Staff FG Tour M3 21* Hybrid Aldila RIP Stiff
    Cobra King CB/MB Flow 4-6, 7-PW
    Wilson Staff PMP wedges 50/54/58 KBS Hi-Rev 2.0
    Radius Classic 8
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #538
    200.gif
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • Roadking2003Roadking2003 Austin 6635WRX Points: 1,115Handicap: 8.7Members Posts: 6,635 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #539
    BY#99 wrote:


    Do you realize that Titleist being the top dog has the most to lose if they do anything to the golf ball? Not surprising they would come out with something saying rolling back the ball is not a good idea or needed.




    Why do you say that? They dominate the market and will dominate if the ball is changed. In fact, if the ball is changed everyone will have to buy new balls.



    There is no reason to think Titleist would not dominate the market regardless of what changes.
    Posted:
  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #540


    There is no reason to think Titleist would not dominate the market regardless of what changes.




    If the Tour or USGA were to somehow ensure that no amateurs played the type of ball being used by Tour players, that would be one of the main underpinnings of Titleist's entire marketing strategy eliminated at the stroke of a pen.



    Who knows, three-quarters of a century ago they figured out a way to rise to the top of the industry. Kick 'em to the curb and make 'em start over and maybe they'd come out on top again.



    But it's kind of like taking the team that's up 28-10 at the start of the fourth quarter and saying, "If you were good enough to win the first three quarters you're good enough to win the fourth quarter. The score is now 0-0, play hard!".
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • Roadking2003Roadking2003 Austin 6635WRX Points: 1,115Handicap: 8.7Members Posts: 6,635 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #541
    mahonie wrote:



    Titleist are by far the most popular multipiece urethane ball on all the professional Tours and the most popular in retail sales. Those two facts are not unconnected.



    As the market stands right now (and has for decades) Bridgestone has no chance of significant market share growth relative to Titleist in that profitable segment. The public does buy golf balls based on what is used on Tour. That is demonstrably an effective marketing strategy as it has been for a long, long time.



    So Bridgestone would love for the Big, Bad USGA (or their Big, Bad PGA Tour) to step in and force a disconnect between the balls played on Tour and the balls played by retail golfers. If you competitor has you beat cold using one strategy, of course you'd like somebody to stamp out that strategy by the stroke of a pen.



    It has NOTHING to do with ball performance. All the major brands of multipiece urethane balls perform to within a tiny fraction of the maximum allowed under the Rules.



    Bridgestone is the equivalent of a child losing at a game who wants Mommy to step in and change the rules for him in mid-game.



    Bridgestone's idea is to get their mouthpieces like Tiger to cause a groundswell of public pressure, forcing USGA to say basically, "Attention everyone! Starting next year there will be a ridiculously poor performing ball used by all professionals. Unless you want to give up 20% of your distance you'll have to buy the special ball for non-professional play". Then Bridgestone can fight it out in a brand new market that's never existed before at least have a vain hope of catching up with Titleist. Probably by continuing their idiotic "ball fitting" type thing.




    You do realise that the only reason that Titleist is in the position they are in with the ball is because they were on the brink of losing the whole of the ball market and resorted to stealing patents from Spalding (Callaway) and Bridgestone to develop the Pro V1? The settlements were made out of court so it is unlikely that we will ever know what the terms were. There was talk of sharing technologies and patents but it is my guess that Titleist have got all of their eggs in the Pro V basket and do not have anything else. If the Pro V is compromised, Titleist will be fatally wounded and that is why they vigorously fight any challenge. I would go so far to say that I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some link, buried down very deep, between someone in power at the PGA Tour and Titleist and they work together to protect their mutual interests (i.e. cash in the pocket).




    The title for your story should be something like "How I dreamed up history and paired it with my wildest imagination for what might happen".



    Titleist dominates due to their brand. 99% of all golfers can't tell the difference between a PROv1 and other premium balls, but PROV1 has 50% of the sales. That's due to brand.
    Posted:
19

Leave a Comment

Rich Text Editor. To edit a paragraph's style, hit tab to get to the paragraph menu. From there you will be able to pick one style. Nothing defaults to paragraph. An inline formatting menu will show up when you select text. Hit tab to get into that menu. Some elements, such as rich link embeds, images, loading indicators, and error messages may get inserted into the editor. You may navigate to these using the arrow keys inside of the editor and delete them with the delete or backspace key.