My experience gaming clubs that were designed for my handicap range

1111214161719

Comments

  • Exactice808Exactice808 Just want to hit ball far and go find it... Members Posts: 4,439 ✭✭
    edited May 15, 2019 4:59am #392

    @IamMarkMac said:

    @Nard_S said:

    @MelloYello said:

    I hear you. I'm a big fan of video too. I have a problem with overswing and saw it instantly once I recorded myself. Maybe a dozen or so swings later, I had it limited to parallel.
    Went out on the course and promptly started overswinging again. In game, I couldn't shorten my backswing at all. The body just wouldn't listen.

    Plenty videos, you tube uploaded couple here.... fix certain things still got other issue..... sometimes easy to spot issue but takes A LONG time to break old bad habits... while exception to the rule most though required what was 1:3 ration 1x old habit 3x to fix the old habit..

    Post edited by Exactice808 on
    Titleist 915D3 
    TM M2v1 - 
    TM 18* M2 
    TM TP MC 4 & 5 PX 6.0 Rifles
    Cobra AMP Cell Pro 6-PW PX 6.0 Rifles
    Titleist SM5 Vokey50*/8*, 54*/10* & 58*/8* X100's
    Scotty Newport 2 33"
  • dpb5031dpb5031 Members Posts: 5,129 ✭✭

    @Nard_S said:

    @MelloYello said:

    Last year was the first time I really began looking at my swing. It was eye-opening. But the results are obvious. Not only do I look better cosmetically but I'm statistically better. I’m more consistent. I’m shocked at how often I don’t feel “in the zone” now but still produce essentially the same quality of shots. And it barely took any work! It doesn't take 1,000 swings to make an adjustment. It takes 10 if you are looking at videos of each one.

    Then you can go hit the range and have fun beating 100 balls on the range as you ingrain that feel.

    Yeah that does not happen. If it did, handicaps would be half as to what they are, Tiger would not take 2 years to cement a change and Faldo would not have taken three.
    I'm pro"Pro" and video and learning true proper mechanics, mirror work etc but the human body is stupid, no speak English stupid or more precisely body does not do cognitive thought. Rare one adjustment aligns the stars, often there's 3 more to adjust that compensated. 4 wrongs make a half right, that sort of thing. Changes take 1000'sof reps to overwrite neurological maps and ingrain new ones , that's biological fact. It's why golfers who started in youth have way more potential to reach high level play or why if you did not take up an instrument by 12 at the latest you'll never be much of anything musically.

    Thank you...well stated.

    Yes, there will be exceptions, but they're rare. Most players will eventually hit a wall on their own, video or no video. Depends on innate talent, time, luck, and knowledge.

    Another point relative to this is that it's not very difficult for a beginner, or someone who really stinks to make substantive improvements with or without instruction, but it becomes exponentially more difficult the better the player.

    USGA Index: ~2

    WITB:
    2018 Taylormade M3 8.5 Graphite Design Tour AD IZ 6x
    Taylormade M2 Tour 15 Fujikura Pro TourSpec 73 S
    Kasco K2K 33 - UST Axivcore 65 Tour Green S
    Callaway RazrX Tour 4h - stock shaft in S
    Ping i200 5-UW (2 flat) - Nippon Modus 105X
    Ping Glide 2.0 - SS 54 (bent to 55 & 2 flat)
    Taylormade Ho Toe 64 (Bent to 62 & 2 flat)
    Palmer AP30R putter (circa 1960s)
    Taylormade TP5X Ball
  • bladehunterbladehunter Today was a good day.... Members Posts: 25,784 ✭✭

    @MelloYello said:

    @mahonie said:

    @MelloYello said:

    @mahonie said:

    Mello, taking all the points you’ve said about your game (and everyone else’s for that matter) I cannot for the life of me understand why you haven’t got at least a set of AP1s in your bag! You’ve just admitted that you can’t really hit 3 and 4 irons, which is no surprise as your CBs have a relatively high CG. Now that you seem to be enjoying the high launch and forgiveness of hybrids, the next natural step seems to be the AP1, particularly if score is so important to you. However, a little anecdote that might influence your decision:

    Read the thread. No reason we can't be serious. I don't mind discussing equipment with folks but you gotta be serious. If you're talking to me about AP1's and saying I "can't hit long irons" it's obvious that you're being sarcastic and snarky.

    My question is why? Why do that? Why can't we be serious while still being friendly? Why do you choose to be sarcastic about it?

    Just seem inappropriate. Bad for the forum.

    You posted that blade users weren’t open to hearing suggestions. Just wanted to see what you’re reaction was when I made a suggestion to you. Pot...kettle...black are a few words that spring to mind.

    Point made...we can go back to being friendly now ;-)

    So now I'm expected to entertain your nonsense ****-posting?

    Good to know. That's what the ignore list is for.

    See you around...or I guess I won't. Nice knowing ya. Thanks for wasting all of our time.

    I don’t think we have an ignore feature anymore.

    TM Tour M6 11.2 * KK Tini XTS 70X
    TM Tour 17 M1 14.5* Graphite Design ADDI 8x
    TM Tour M5 19.8 * Aldila Synergy Blue 70TX  
    Titleist Tour Proto MB 3-pw Modus 130X
    Ping Glide Forged   54 60 S400
    Cameron GSS 009 1.5 tungsten sole weights, sound slot
  • Bad9Bad9 Members Posts: 4,215 ✭✭

    @Nard_S said:

    @MelloYello said:

    Last year was the first time I really began looking at my swing. It was eye-opening. But the results are obvious. Not only do I look better cosmetically but I'm statistically better. I’m more consistent. I’m shocked at how often I don’t feel “in the zone” now but still produce essentially the same quality of shots. And it barely took any work! It doesn't take 1,000 swings to make an adjustment. It takes 10 if you are looking at videos of each one.

    Then you can go hit the range and have fun beating 100 balls on the range as you ingrain that feel.

    Yeah that does not happen. If it did, handicaps would be half as to what they are, Tiger would not take 2 years to cement a change and Faldo would not have taken three.
    I'm pro"Pro" and video and learning true proper mechanics, mirror work etc but the human body is stupid, no speak English stupid or more precisely body does not do cognitive thought. Rare one adjustment aligns the stars, often there's 3 more to adjust that compensated. 4 wrongs make a half right, that sort of thing. Changes take 1000'sof reps to overwrite neurological maps and ingrain new ones , that's biological fact. It's why golfers who started in youth have way more potential to reach high level play or why if you did not take up an instrument by 12 at the latest you'll never be much of anything musically.

    I know 3-4 guys who have a "new swing" a couple of times a year. They will have a bad day, read a tip, remember something, etc and hit a bucket of balls at the range. Bammo swing changed/fixed. They have been doing this every year for at least a decade. Their swing(and the results) are never any different. Two of them are legitimate 5hc too.

    Ping G400 10.5°/Xcaliber SL r flex
    Callaway Heavenwood Xcaliber SL r flex
    Maltby KE4 Tour 25°/Xcaliber HY r flex

    Maltby KE4 Tour 28°/Xcaliber HY r flex
    Ping I200 5-G/CFS70 r flex
    Maltby Tricept 54°/Xcaliber r flex
    Maltby Tricept 58°/Xcaliber r flex
    Mizuno Bettinardi C06
  • MelloYelloMelloYello Upstate, SCMembers Posts: 3,229 ✭✭
    edited May 15, 2019 12:29pm #396

    @Nard_S said:
    Changes take 1000's of reps to overwrite neurological maps and ingrain new ones , that's biological fact.

    Be careful with the assumptions you're making as you talk about this topic. You almost make golf instruction sound pointless by insinuating that everything we do is deep-rooted in our neurology. To be frank, that just isn't the case.

    Many swing adjustments have absolutely nothing to do with the kind of stuff you're talking about. Many swing fixes are easily adopted because they afford the player the chance to keep all the deep-rooted stuff that goes on "under the hood."

    Three rather obvious examples would be grip, setup and alignment. Those certainly aren't deep-rooted and yet virtually all beginners get them wrong to some degree.

    When I transitioned from interlocking to Vardon it took me all of a few shots to make the change. Did it feel a bit strange on the first couple of swings? Sure, but by the end of the session I was a convert. It took all of about 2-3 swings to see how my hands were in a better position to properly release the club. In fact, Hank Haney described making a similar tweak to Tiger's grip in The Big Miss. At first, Tiger objected but seeing the result of the first couple shots he instantly accepted it, moved on and never looked back. I would say it was the same thing for me. I instantly improved and was able to immediately adopt the change.

    If getting better always had to do with putting in "1000's of reps" then we'd very rarely fix anything.

    I mean, don't get me wrong. There ARE things that are difficult because they do involve deep-rooted stuff. I've always had to work on hip turn indirectly for example because it involves balance. When I say indirectly, I just mean that if I want my hips to be more "open" as I get through the ball I have to resist getting turning them too much during the back-swing. I've never been able to just "fire my hips faster." IMHO, that's just not a thing a human being can do on command. It's like running faster.

    Another example of something easy was when I developed that weird Annika/Inbee-type thing of looking down the target line at impact. I guess because I was making a lot of indoor swings with no ball I developed the habit of letting my head come up without realizing it.

    I started to occasionally shank a few shots and I had no idea what was happening. I didn't realize I was doing the head thing until I saw some video but then I corrected it immediately. The flaw developed because I was lazy. As soon as I made even the slightest attempt to avoid it, it was gone.

    A lot of changes are easy. Some of hard. Some are in between. Why would we expect different?

    And besides, even if something is going to take time to master, why does that even matter? Video is still the tool that first makes us aware of the ugly things we've ingrained.

    There are a multitude of "hard" things that I've worked on as well that sometimes took a couple days, or a week or a month to get down to an appreciable degree. In general though, if you can't immediately see something in a new move that indicates why it's going to be better, then a move isn't worth doing.

    I would never advocate for a swing change based merely on aesthetics nor would I push a guy to do something that didn't feel like it added something positive: balance, feel, control, power, etc.

    Driver: TaylorMade M3 (10.5)
    Fairway: TaylorMade RBZ Black (16.5)
    Hybrid: Tour Edge Exotics E8 (19)
    Irons: Titleist 716 CB (4-Pw)
    Wedges: Vokey SM6 52-F / 56-F / 60-S
    Putter: Nike Method Milled 003
  • MelloYelloMelloYello Upstate, SCMembers Posts: 3,229 ✭✭
    edited May 15, 2019 12:35pm #397

    @IamMarkMac said:

    I hear you. I'm a big fan of video too. I have a problem with overswing and saw it instantly once I recorded myself. Maybe a dozen or so swings later, I had it limited to parallel.
    Went out on the course and promptly started overswinging again. In game, I couldn't shorten my backswing at all. The body just wouldn't listen.

    FWIW, I think you basically just validated what I said:

    @MelloYello
    It doesn't take 1,000 swings to make an adjustment. It takes 10 if you are looking at videos of each one. Then you can go hit the range and have fun beating 100 balls on the range as you ingrain that feel.

    Video can often make your faults abundantly clear. It's often quite easy to remedy them (cosmetically).

    The trick is finding a repeatable feel to associate with the new move.

    In any case, it's at that point that it's on the golfer to go and make that change permanent with whatever amount of work is required.

    Driver: TaylorMade M3 (10.5)
    Fairway: TaylorMade RBZ Black (16.5)
    Hybrid: Tour Edge Exotics E8 (19)
    Irons: Titleist 716 CB (4-Pw)
    Wedges: Vokey SM6 52-F / 56-F / 60-S
    Putter: Nike Method Milled 003
  • Nard_SNard_S Members Posts: 3,198 ✭✭

    @dpb5031 said:

    @Nard_S said:

    @MelloYello said:

    Last year was the first time I really began looking at my swing. It was eye-opening. But the results are obvious. Not only do I look better cosmetically but I'm statistically better. I’m more consistent. I’m shocked at how often I don’t feel “in the zone” now but still produce essentially the same quality of shots. And it barely took any work! It doesn't take 1,000 swings to make an adjustment. It takes 10 if you are looking at videos of each one.

    Then you can go hit the range and have fun beating 100 balls on the range as you ingrain that feel.

    Yeah that does not happen. If it did, handicaps would be half as to what they are, Tiger would not take 2 years to cement a change and Faldo would not have taken three.
    I'm pro"Pro" and video and learning true proper mechanics, mirror work etc but the human body is stupid, no speak English stupid or more precisely body does not do cognitive thought. Rare one adjustment aligns the stars, often there's 3 more to adjust that compensated. 4 wrongs make a half right, that sort of thing. Changes take 1000'sof reps to overwrite neurological maps and ingrain new ones , that's biological fact. It's why golfers who started in youth have way more potential to reach high level play or why if you did not take up an instrument by 12 at the latest you'll never be much of anything musically.

    Thank you...well stated.

    Yes, there will be exceptions, but they're rare. Most players will eventually hit a wall on their own, video or no video. Depends on innate talent, time, luck, and knowledge.

    Another point relative to this is that it's not very difficult for a beginner, or someone who really stinks to make substantive improvements with or without instruction, but it becomes exponentially more difficult the better the player.

    Beating thousands of balls is pointless too, focused & disciplined practice, slowing it down, "eating the elephant one bite at a time" will get more done. Gear does not matter here.
    For weeks, been working on aspect of swing that yields lots of benefit and is "correct" and does match tendencies, but last night, I could not do it to save my life. Body stupid. So now I have to back down, slow it down, build it up again. Step forward, step back. So it goes.

  • Nard_SNard_S Members Posts: 3,198 ✭✭
    edited May 15, 2019 1:59pm #399

    @MelloYello said:

    @Nard_S said:
    Changes take 1000's of reps to overwrite neurological maps and ingrain new ones , that's biological fact.

    Be careful with the assumptions you're making as you talk about this topic. You almost make golf instruction sound pointless by insinuating that everything we do is deep-rooted in our neurology. To be frank, that just isn't the case.

    Many swing adjustments have absolutely nothing to do with the kind of stuff you're talking about. Many swing fixes are easily adopted because they afford the player the chance to keep all the deep-rooted stuff that goes on "under the hood."

    Three rather obvious examples would be grip, setup and alignment. Those certainly aren't deep-rooted and yet virtually all beginners get them wrong to some degree.

    When I transitioned from interlocking to Vardon it took me all of a few shots to make the change. Did it feel a bit strange on the first couple of swings? Sure, but by the end of the session I was a convert. It took all of about 2-3 swings to see how my hands were in a better position to properly release the club. In fact, Hank Haney described making a similar tweak to Tiger's grip in The Big Miss. At first, Tiger objected but seeing the result of the first couple shots he instantly accepted it, moved on and never looked back. I would say it was the same thing for me. I instantly improved and was able to immediately adopt the change.

    If getting better always had to do with putting in "1000's of reps" then we'd very rarely fix anything.

    I mean, don't get me wrong. There ARE things that are difficult because they do involve deep-rooted stuff. I've always had to work on hip turn indirectly for example because it involves balance. When I say indirectly, I just mean that if I want my hips to be more "open" as I get through the ball I have to resist getting turning them too much during the back-swing. I've never been able to just "fire my hips faster." IMHO, that's just not a thing a human being can do on command. It's like running faster.

    Another example of something easy was when I developed that weird Annika/Inbee-type thing of looking down the target line at impact. I guess because I was making a lot of indoor swings with no ball I developed the habit of letting my head come up without realizing it.

    I started to occasionally shank a few shots and I had no idea what was happening. I didn't realize I was doing the head thing until I saw some video but then I corrected it immediately. The flaw developed because I was lazy. As soon as I made even the slightest attempt to avoid it, it was gone.

    A lot of changes are easy. Some of hard. Some are in between. Why would we expect different?

    And besides, even if something is going to take time to master, why does that even matter? Video is still the tool that first makes us aware of the ugly things we've ingrained.

    There are a multitude of "hard" things that I've worked on as well that sometimes took a couple days, or a week or a month to get down to an appreciable degree. In general though, if you can't immediately see something in a new move that indicates why it's going to be better, then a move isn't worth doing.

    I would never advocate for a swing change based merely on aesthetics nor would I push a guy to do something that didn't feel like it added something positive: balance, feel, control, power, etc.

    100% agree on your scope of things. Disagree that "hard things" should show benefit immediately, not uncommon to see regression for quite some time and sporadic frustrating results for even longer and yes they do take 1000's of reps. Grip, alignment & setup is habitually violated by lesser golfers but fixing those will not put them in Annika's or Tiger's or even Joe Scratch's orbit. Not even close. Can a 90 mph duffer spend some time and in a few short months be 100mph with right guidance? Sure. Can he then start splitting fairways and hitting greens in double digit fashion with elevated power, or go to 110 mph all with same effort? Nada.

  • nsxguynsxguy Just anudder user FloridaMembers Posts: 5,582 ✭✭
    edited May 15, 2019 3:38pm #400

    @Exactice808 said:

    @nsxguy said:

    Whatever amount of coffee you have during the day I suggest you cut it by 75%.

    I specifically mentioned blade putters, as in the Bullseye and 8802. Google their pics. Virtually ALL putters I see on Tour and in play when I play have some sort of heel-to weighting/forgiveness.

    I didn't say I would kill for his results. I said a "9" would. And his results, disregarding his lack of length, seem pretty darn good to me. Certainly doesn't look like any 25 I've ever seen.

    And OK, I get you don't believe the CB is more forgiving and will get your misses closer to the hole. Yes, that IS what this thread is mostly about.

    "even per his test HE FINDS no difference between the MB and CB" ??? Really ? LOL HE finds no difference ? _A 25 ? Riiiiight !!! Now I'm convinced _so no need for you and I to discuss this subject further.

    You used that line already...the coffee one....... yeah... not really funny sorry "brother"

    A "9" would like those numbers... really?? they are pretty darn good?? Really and then the NEXT sentence "right a 25" So wait you like his numbers you think a 9 would like those numbers then the next sentence you say "Right a 25" sarcastically now, not taking his comments that he see no difference in his numbers so the CB & MB are similar... WHAT???
    Um, make up your mind... is he a quality 25hdcp with data and flight info thats worthy of a 9hdcp yet he does NOT have credibility to say that he sees no difference between an CB and MB....

    Lastly... probably the most import.... WHAT? You are telling me because ALL putters now have heel-toe weighting/forgiveness. PLEASE tell me you are not implying that the weights have anything to do with INCREASING forgiveness in a putter?

    You do realize that the Weights on a putter are for swing weight, putter total weight, face balance and for toe closure manipulation right? Has nothing to do with Increasing forgiveness.
    https://www.scottycameron.com/store/product.aspx?zpid=725
    Scotty cameron one of the leaders has NOTHING about the weights in relation to face forgiveness.....

    Now I see why you (and your "combatants") got so frustrated with your political discussions/board. You can't be bothered to pay attention to what people write. You just fly off the handle.

    I didn't say ANYTHING about the weight in the BOTTOM of a putter, as in the Scotty.

    If you don't understand that an Anser/Newport type putter has more weight to the toe and the heel and that expands the sweet spot and forgives less than perfect strikes and a mallet type putter (although less obvious) does the same thing (TM Spider/X) typically with a metal frame and a lightweight insert PLUS weight back and to the outside there's just no point in discussing anything with you.

    Nice talking to you. You take care now.

    Post edited by nsxguy on

    Callaway Epic 10.5 Project X Hzrdus Yellow 63 gr, 6.0
    Adams A12 Pro hybrids, 16*, 20*, Aldila VS Proto Stiff
    Ping G20, 5-PW, DGS300
    Cleveland RTX-4 48, 52, DGS300
    Ping Glide Forged 56* DGS300
    Cleveland RTX-3, 64 DGS300

    Evnroll 1.2 (Today - always subject to change LOL)
    Titleist AVX
  • revanantrevanant Members Posts: 166 ✭✭

    @Nard_S said:

    @MelloYello said:

    @Nard_S said:
    Changes take 1000's of reps to overwrite neurological maps and ingrain new ones , that's biological fact.

    Be careful with the assumptions you're making as you talk about this topic. You almost make golf instruction sound pointless by insinuating that everything we do is deep-rooted in our neurology. To be frank, that just isn't the case.

    Many swing adjustments have absolutely nothing to do with the kind of stuff you're talking about. Many swing fixes are easily adopted because they afford the player the chance to keep all the deep-rooted stuff that goes on "under the hood."

    Three rather obvious examples would be grip, setup and alignment. Those certainly aren't deep-rooted and yet virtually all beginners get them wrong to some degree.

    When I transitioned from interlocking to Vardon it took me all of a few shots to make the change. Did it feel a bit strange on the first couple of swings? Sure, but by the end of the session I was a convert. It took all of about 2-3 swings to see how my hands were in a better position to properly release the club. In fact, Hank Haney described making a similar tweak to Tiger's grip in The Big Miss. At first, Tiger objected but seeing the result of the first couple shots he instantly accepted it, moved on and never looked back. I would say it was the same thing for me. I instantly improved and was able to immediately adopt the change.

    If getting better always had to do with putting in "1000's of reps" then we'd very rarely fix anything.

    I mean, don't get me wrong. There ARE things that are difficult because they do involve deep-rooted stuff. I've always had to work on hip turn indirectly for example because it involves balance. When I say indirectly, I just mean that if I want my hips to be more "open" as I get through the ball I have to resist getting turning them too much during the back-swing. I've never been able to just "fire my hips faster." IMHO, that's just not a thing a human being can do on command. It's like running faster.

    Another example of something easy was when I developed that weird Annika/Inbee-type thing of looking down the target line at impact. I guess because I was making a lot of indoor swings with no ball I developed the habit of letting my head come up without realizing it.

    I started to occasionally shank a few shots and I had no idea what was happening. I didn't realize I was doing the head thing until I saw some video but then I corrected it immediately. The flaw developed because I was lazy. As soon as I made even the slightest attempt to avoid it, it was gone.

    A lot of changes are easy. Some of hard. Some are in between. Why would we expect different?

    And besides, even if something is going to take time to master, why does that even matter? Video is still the tool that first makes us aware of the ugly things we've ingrained.

    There are a multitude of "hard" things that I've worked on as well that sometimes took a couple days, or a week or a month to get down to an appreciable degree. In general though, if you can't immediately see something in a new move that indicates why it's going to be better, then a move isn't worth doing.

    I would never advocate for a swing change based merely on aesthetics nor would I push a guy to do something that didn't feel like it added something positive: balance, feel, control, power, etc.

    100% agree on your scope of things. Disagree that "hard things" should show benefit immediately, not uncommon to see regression for quite some time and sporadic frustrating results for even longer and yes they do take 1000's of reps. Grip, alignment & setup is habitually violated by lesser golfers but fixing those will not put them in Annika's or Tiger's or even Joe Scratch's orbit. Not even close. Can a 90 mph duffer spend some time and in a few short months be 100mph with right guidance? Sure. Can he then start splitting fairways and hitting greens in double digit fashion with elevated power, or go to 110 mph all with same effort? Nada.

    I’d love to improve my swing speed. I have the time. Anything you’d specifically recommend (exercises, training aids, etc.)?

    Cobra King LTD
    Cobra Amp Cell 3W
    Cobra F6 Baffler 5W
    Mizuno MP-4 w/ Project X 6.0
    Titleist Vokey SM5 54-10 M
    Mizuno JPX 58-14
    Ping Redwood D66

  • nsxguynsxguy Just anudder user FloridaMembers Posts: 5,582 ✭✭

    @revanant said:
    I’d love to improve my swing speed. I have the time. Anything you’d specifically recommend (exercises, training aids, etc.)?

    Here ya go rev. There's a whole Forum for such stuff - https://forums.golfwrx.com/categories/instruction-%26-academy

    Ask away or just do a search.


    Callaway Epic 10.5 Project X Hzrdus Yellow 63 gr, 6.0
    Adams A12 Pro hybrids, 16*, 20*, Aldila VS Proto Stiff
    Ping G20, 5-PW, DGS300
    Cleveland RTX-4 48, 52, DGS300
    Ping Glide Forged 56* DGS300
    Cleveland RTX-3, 64 DGS300

    Evnroll 1.2 (Today - always subject to change LOL)
    Titleist AVX
  • Nard_SNard_S Members Posts: 3,198 ✭✭

    I> @revanant said:

    @Nard_S said:

    @MelloYello said:

    @Nard_S said:
    Changes take 1000's of reps to overwrite neurological maps and ingrain new ones , that's biological fact.

    Be careful with the assumptions you're making as you talk about this topic. You almost make golf instruction sound pointless by insinuating that everything we do is deep-rooted in our neurology. To be frank, that just isn't the case.

    Many swing adjustments have absolutely nothing to do with the kind of stuff you're talking about. Many swing fixes are easily adopted because they afford the player the chance to keep all the deep-rooted stuff that goes on "under the hood."

    Three rather obvious examples would be grip, setup and alignment. Those certainly aren't deep-rooted and yet virtually all beginners get them wrong to some degree.

    When I transitioned from interlocking to Vardon it took me all of a few shots to make the change. Did it feel a bit strange on the first couple of swings? Sure, but by the end of the session I was a convert. It took all of about 2-3 swings to see how my hands were in a better position to properly release the club. In fact, Hank Haney described making a similar tweak to Tiger's grip in The Big Miss. At first, Tiger objected but seeing the result of the first couple shots he instantly accepted it, moved on and never looked back. I would say it was the same thing for me. I instantly improved and was able to immediately adopt the change.

    If getting better always had to do with putting in "1000's of reps" then we'd very rarely fix anything.

    I mean, don't get me wrong. There ARE things that are difficult because they do involve deep-rooted stuff. I've always had to work on hip turn indirectly for example because it involves balance. When I say indirectly, I just mean that if I want my hips to be more "open" as I get through the ball I have to resist getting turning them too much during the back-swing. I've never been able to just "fire my hips faster." IMHO, that's just not a thing a human being can do on command. It's like running faster.

    Another example of something easy was when I developed that weird Annika/Inbee-type thing of looking down the target line at impact. I guess because I was making a lot of indoor swings with no ball I developed the habit of letting my head come up without realizing it.

    I started to occasionally shank a few shots and I had no idea what was happening. I didn't realize I was doing the head thing until I saw some video but then I corrected it immediately. The flaw developed because I was lazy. As soon as I made even the slightest attempt to avoid it, it was gone.

    A lot of changes are easy. Some of hard. Some are in between. Why would we expect different?

    And besides, even if something is going to take time to master, why does that even matter? Video is still the tool that first makes us aware of the ugly things we've ingrained.

    There are a multitude of "hard" things that I've worked on as well that sometimes took a couple days, or a week or a month to get down to an appreciable degree. In general though, if you can't immediately see something in a new move that indicates why it's going to be better, then a move isn't worth doing.

    I would never advocate for a swing change based merely on aesthetics nor would I push a guy to do something that didn't feel like it added something positive: balance, feel, control, power, etc.

    100% agree on your scope of things. Disagree that "hard things" should show benefit immediately, not uncommon to see regression for quite some time and sporadic frustrating results for even longer and yes they do take 1000's of reps. Grip, alignment & setup is habitually violated by lesser golfers but fixing those will not put them in Annika's or Tiger's or even Joe Scratch's orbit. Not even close. Can a 90 mph duffer spend some time and in a few short months be 100mph with right guidance? Sure. Can he then start splitting fairways and hitting greens in double digit fashion with elevated power, or go to 110 mph all with same effort? Nada.

    I’d love to improve my swing speed. I have the time. Anything you’d specifically recommend (exercises, training aids, etc.)?

    I can say the easiest 1/2 iron and 15 yards on driver was done by working abs and core and legs in the gym 3x a week for several months. Easy because there's zero swing adjustment. Beyond that, you have to figure where loss of potential power is and work at that. I'm continually a guy who loses connection with torso to arm triangle, so the "hard thing" is swinging always with that because urge to wallop and unload too early is too prevalent. So I do it correctly and for quite a time I'm hitting at what feels like 80% even though general impact is better. What I alluded to earlier in an "aspect, I'm working on" was that a key problem with my connection is right shoulder does not get true depth of turn and at proper angle (too flat), but when I do that well, connection, power and better striking abound. So you may want to explore that, video is a great way to diagnose it too.

  • BigmeanBigmean Everything is Relative Members Posts: 4,920 ✭✭

    Since this got into putters....

    As a bit of a putter collector and putting being the strength of my game, I must say that even blade putters with a back heel (think studio 1, mills style blades, tad etc) have a more generous hitting zone to them
    Than my heel shafted 8802 style putters. I feel like the “swing path through gate” is mostly altered from weight around shaft, but nsx Guy is 100% correct in his comments.

    It is beyond answer style vs blade, and putters are really finicky and sometimes you just get along with something you don’t expect etc. On that note, I also feel that modern blades are more like heel weighted high toe blade putters vs answer style in terms of the real differences and not a 8802 vs answer analogy, but this got far past those kind of comments.

    Anyway, back to whatever happened here....

    Ryoma Maxima 9.5*/Quadra Fire Express
    913F 15*/Tour AD MT7
    Roddio 21* hybrid/Tour AD DI75
    Miura 1957 small blades/Nippon 1150 tours
    Wilson Staff V4 tour modus 130
    Mizuno MP-14/DG300-raw finish
    Buchi 50/56. RomaRo 59
    Gold's Factory custom original flat-stick amongst a couple dozen others.
  • Exactice808Exactice808 Just want to hit ball far and go find it... Members Posts: 4,439 ✭✭
    edited May 15, 2019 5:35pm #405

    @nsxguy said:

    Now I see why you (and your "combatants") got so frustrated with your political discussions/board. You can't be bothered to pay attention to what people write. You just fly off the handle.

    I didn't say ANYTHING about the weight in the BOTTOM of a putter, as in the Scotty.

    If you don't understand that an Anser/Newport type putter has more weight to the toe and the heel and that expands the sweet spot and forgives less than perfect strikes and a mallet type putter (although less obvious) does the same thing (TM Spider/X) typically with a metal frame and a lightweight insert PLUS weight back and to the outside there's just no point in discussing anything with you.

    Nice talking to you. You take care now.

    This is the third time you have said something personal unrelevant to a golf forum.... funny you cried about getting emotional in the other thread I apologized yet you keep making asinine smart remarks.... and small little personal attacks..... what a hypocrite.....

    "I didnt say anything about weigh in the bottom of the putter" Oh ok lets move the goal post... lets play semantics now.

    So first off what happens when a person removes the weights PERIOD so now the putter has LESS mass on the heal and toe does it make it LESS forgiving. How about if we add more weight?
    Next moving discretionary weight similar to a Cavity back... expands the sweet spot..... I did not realize that a putter face flexes and expands the same way an iron does, requiring the need of retained ball speed in a putting motion. (generally speaking for the mainstream putters)

    Finally... you made another dumb comment about me being a 7 and NOT knowing about putter forgiveness. Well heck! Please educate me as this THREAD Is 100% relevant to it.

    I would like to be explained a putter based on my handicap. As you seem to imply that putters have a range of forgiveness at it should be tailored to the player. Please show me something from a manufacture and specs that imply a putter that will reduce putts based on forgiveness...

    I admit the putter is the least of my knowledge to in truth I would appreciate to be provide information if it could help my putting. Thanks! I would truly appreciate it!

    Titleist 915D3 
    TM M2v1 - 
    TM 18* M2 
    TM TP MC 4 & 5 PX 6.0 Rifles
    Cobra AMP Cell Pro 6-PW PX 6.0 Rifles
    Titleist SM5 Vokey50*/8*, 54*/10* & 58*/8* X100's
    Scotty Newport 2 33"
  • Exactice808Exactice808 Just want to hit ball far and go find it... Members Posts: 4,439 ✭✭

    @Bigmean said:
    Since this got into putters....

    As a bit of a putter collector and putting being the strength of my game, I must say that even blade putters with a back heel (think studio 1, mills style blades, tad etc) have a more generous hitting zone to them
    Than my heel shafted 8802 style putters. I feel like the “swing path through gate” is mostly altered from weight around shaft, but nsx Guy is 100% correct in his comments.

    It is beyond answer style vs blade, and putters are really finicky and sometimes you just get along with something you don’t expect etc. On that note, I also feel that modern blades are more like heel weighted high toe blade putters vs answer style in terms of the real differences and not a 8802 vs answer analogy, but this got far past those kind of comments.

    Anyway, back to whatever happened here....

    Hey Bigmean, to get educated as it seems I missed the boat. As ultimately that is what I am really here for anyways.

    So is there a Forgiveness rating inherent in putters?
    1)SGI, GI, Players GI, Players CB and Blades?

    MOI for putters is rated different from the Pure MOI in irons. So to BE relevant to the topic is there putters based on handicap to be played.
    I understood putting to be very personal and directly related to the individuals feel.

    Second. in relation to CB (cavity back) was intended to retain ball speeds on less then optimal strikes, I would consider swing/club speed to be a factor. The putter I assumed does not move with enough velocity to be affected by face flex like an iron. Secondly.... if you miss hit a putter on the toe or heal from my understanding that is what partial what the weights are their for? or discretionary weight to help face twist either way, helping the player closer the face or if the player misses the discretionary weight "holds the line per say"

    This is a different term of forgiveness in relation to how MOI is rated on a putter. If that was what NSX means THEN he is 100% correct, I accept and conceded his point. But he stated that the weights or discretionary weight was moved to increase the sweet spot on a putter. While generically true any weight moved could help but again does a putter have the velocity and face flex to be quantifiable or is the weights more used for putter balance.

    Titleist 915D3 
    TM M2v1 - 
    TM 18* M2 
    TM TP MC 4 & 5 PX 6.0 Rifles
    Cobra AMP Cell Pro 6-PW PX 6.0 Rifles
    Titleist SM5 Vokey50*/8*, 54*/10* & 58*/8* X100's
    Scotty Newport 2 33"
  • revanantrevanant Members Posts: 166 ✭✭

    @nsxguy @Nard_S
    Thanks!

    Cobra King LTD
    Cobra Amp Cell 3W
    Cobra F6 Baffler 5W
    Mizuno MP-4 w/ Project X 6.0
    Titleist Vokey SM5 54-10 M
    Mizuno JPX 58-14
    Ping Redwood D66

  • IamMarkMacIamMarkMac SF Bay AreaMembers Posts: 664 ✭✭

    @MelloYello said:

    @IamMarkMac said:

    I hear you. I'm a big fan of video too. I have a problem with overswing and saw it instantly once I recorded myself. Maybe a dozen or so swings later, I had it limited to parallel.
    Went out on the course and promptly started overswinging again. In game, I couldn't shorten my backswing at all. The body just wouldn't listen.

    FWIW, I think you basically just validated what I said:

    @MelloYello
    It doesn't take 1,000 swings to make an adjustment. It takes 10 if you are looking at videos of each one. Then you can go hit the range and have fun beating 100 balls on the range as you ingrain that feel.

    Video can often make your faults abundantly clear. It's often quite easy to remedy them (cosmetically).

    The trick is finding a repeatable feel to associate with the new move.

    In any case, it's at that point that it's on the golfer to go and make that change permanent with whatever amount of work is required.

    Yes, I was validating what you said. I was just sharing the rather funny experience I had when I first used it.

    Bag 1                                                                 Bag 2
    Ping G400 LST 10                                             Epon Technicity 9
    Ping G400 3W 14.5                                          TM R9 3W 14
    Ping G400 3H 19                                              Miura 3H 19
    Mizuno JPX 919 Hot Metal Pro 5-P               Epon 503 4-P Nippon Super Peening Orange
    Mizuno s18 50, 54, 58                                     Miura 51, 56 k-grind
    Bettinardi BB1                                                  Scotty Cameron Newport 2
  • nostaticnostatic "i drank what?!?" Socrates lost angelesClubWRX Posts: 172 ClubWRX

    @Exactice808 said:

    @Bigmean said:
    Since this got into putters....

    As a bit of a putter collector and putting being the strength of my game, I must say that even blade putters with a back heel (think studio 1, mills style blades, tad etc) have a more generous hitting zone to them
    Than my heel shafted 8802 style putters. I feel like the “swing path through gate” is mostly altered from weight around shaft, but nsx Guy is 100% correct in his comments.

    It is beyond answer style vs blade, and putters are really finicky and sometimes you just get along with something you don’t expect etc. On that note, I also feel that modern blades are more like heel weighted high toe blade putters vs answer style in terms of the real differences and not a 8802 vs answer analogy, but this got far past those kind of comments.

    Anyway, back to whatever happened here....

    Hey Bigmean, to get educated as it seems I missed the boat. As ultimately that is what I am really here for anyways.

    So is there a Forgiveness rating inherent in putters?
    1)SGI, GI, Players GI, Players CB and Blades?

    One could argue that face technologies like White Hot/Microhinge (Odyssey) and SweetFace (Evnroll) are somewhat putter equivalents to GI/SGI features in irons. Basically trying to take an off-center hit and make it go straight with similar distance.

    I don't think there is a Maltby equivalent metric for putters, but the Maltby number is arguably not perfect anyway. It is a quantifiable data point though.

    Ping G400Max 10.5 XTorsion S - Cobra F9 3W 16 Devo7 S - F9 3H Devo8 S 
    Mizuno 919 Hot Metal Pro 4-PW - 919F GW - S18 55/09 PX LZ Tour 6.0 - Ping Glide2.0 Stealth 58TS
    Odyssey StrokeLab Double Wide Flow
  • Exactice808Exactice808 Just want to hit ball far and go find it... Members Posts: 4,439 ✭✭
    edited May 15, 2019 9:35pm #410

    @nostatic said:
    One could argue that face technologies like White Hot/Microhinge (Odyssey) and SweetFace (Evnroll) are somewhat putter equivalents to GI/SGI features in irons. Basically trying to take an off-center hit and make it go straight with similar distance.

    I don't think there is a Maltby equivalent metric for putters, but the Maltby number is arguably not perfect anyway. It is a quantifiable data point though.

    I got the face tech, But I want to know if there is credence to Heel and toe weight design as it aids in forgiveness. To imply that its similar to a CB design. The aid to retain ball speed on less than optimal strikes. Secondary to increase the sweet spot on the putter.

    I was under a completely different impressions.
    toe balanced, heel balanced and face balance was the weight design, to affect the center of gravity of the putter dependent on the "type" of "putter" whos stroke differs. those that require a square faced stroke or those that manipulate the face at impact.

    I did not realize that weight on the heel and toe was for forgiveness or was the primary, Im sure there is SOME truth to it, but I dont think that was the primary intent.

    Titleist 915D3 
    TM M2v1 - 
    TM 18* M2 
    TM TP MC 4 & 5 PX 6.0 Rifles
    Cobra AMP Cell Pro 6-PW PX 6.0 Rifles
    Titleist SM5 Vokey50*/8*, 54*/10* & 58*/8* X100's
    Scotty Newport 2 33"
  • MelloYelloMelloYello Upstate, SCMembers Posts: 3,229 ✭✭
    edited May 15, 2019 9:48pm #411

    @Exactice808 said:
    I got the face tech, But I want to know if there is credence to Heel and toe weight design as it aids in forgiveness. To imply that its similar to a CB design. The aid to retain ball speed on less than optimal strikes. Secondary to increase the sweet spot on the putter.

    I was under a completely different impressions.
    toe balanced, heel balanced and face balance was the weight design, to affect the center of gravity of the putter dependent on the "type" of "putter" whos stroke differs. those that require a square faced stroke or those that manipulate the face at impact.

    I did not realize that weight on the heel and toe was for forgiveness or was the primary, Im sure there is SOME truth to it, but I dont think that was the primary intent.

    Karsten Solheim was formally trained in engineering and worked in aeronautics. He understood mechanics quite well and designed the Anser putter looking to increase stability (aka forgiveness).

    TBH, I'm not convinced that you quite understand the notion of increased-MOI clubs (CBs) when you continually talk about retaining ball-speed as opposed to say, minimizing unwanted deflection.

    One ought to be able to simply look at an Anser putter and come away knowing it's a forgiving, cavity-back alternative to a traditional blade.

    Driver: TaylorMade M3 (10.5)
    Fairway: TaylorMade RBZ Black (16.5)
    Hybrid: Tour Edge Exotics E8 (19)
    Irons: Titleist 716 CB (4-Pw)
    Wedges: Vokey SM6 52-F / 56-F / 60-S
    Putter: Nike Method Milled 003
  • Exactice808Exactice808 Just want to hit ball far and go find it... Members Posts: 4,439 ✭✭

    @MelloYello said:
    Karsten Solheim was formally trained in engineering and worked in aeronautics. He understood mechanics quite well and designed the Anser putter looking to increase stability (aka forgiveness).

    TBH, I'm not convinced that you quite understand the notion of increased-MOI clubs (CBs) when you continually talk about retaining ball-speed as opposed to say, minimizing unwanted deflection.

    One ought to be able to simply look at an Anser putter and come away knowing it's a forgiving, cavity-back alternative to a traditional blade.

    Ive been reading like crazy in between emails and phone calls LOL! (Sorry again this is my OCD/ADD/joy)

    So couple items here... as I read more. I again ADMIT my limited knowledge on putter designs. So as I speak bear with me as I am actually learning at the same time!
    With that the more I read, I need to agree and clarify @nsxguy what his statement meant. With that let me clarify what he stated.... With the evolution of the putter in general he is CORRECT 100% that the redesign is "revolutionary" and aided in forgiveness. I WILL NOT deny that now. I surely was confused or "Skeptical" but fact remains. As you stated and my reading about the "Anser" putter. The movement of weight outwards created "forgiveness".
    Ok so let me display more ignorance.
    1) I have never played or seen a traditional bullseye putter in general to put this in any context. SO I can honestly say that a Anser Putter is my base point. Meaning to me I have never experienced a Traditional putter to that extent. So yes had to google what a 8802 was I knew what bulleye putter, but I chalked that up as a "hickory club" something not relevant to the discussion as even more so I think would anyone go to a "mini putt putt" golf and use their putters..( I know someone did recently but that seemed extreme and well beyond and norm)

    2) My apologies as my lack of knowing what a "traditional blade" is, I made the mistake to take that a "traditional blade" as, Anser putter as a traditional blade. PURELY by design as that is what I was familiar with. Scotty newport etc. etc. When I hear blade I just think straight putter. In comparison to all the other WILD designs of putters out there.

    Anyways..... to put this to bed as I stand corrected to @nsxguy point. gotcha the actual redesign of a "Traditional blade" putter was intended to increase forgiveness. OK I get it.... OK I concede and I apologize for my confusion and my misunderstanding.

    Titleist 915D3 
    TM M2v1 - 
    TM 18* M2 
    TM TP MC 4 & 5 PX 6.0 Rifles
    Cobra AMP Cell Pro 6-PW PX 6.0 Rifles
    Titleist SM5 Vokey50*/8*, 54*/10* & 58*/8* X100's
    Scotty Newport 2 33"
  • mahoniemahonie Members Posts: 2,422 ✭✭

    @Exactice808 said:

    @nostatic said:
    One could argue that face technologies like White Hot/Microhinge (Odyssey) and SweetFace (Evnroll) are somewhat putter equivalents to GI/SGI features in irons. Basically trying to take an off-center hit and make it go straight with similar distance.

    I don't think there is a Maltby equivalent metric for putters, but the Maltby number is arguably not perfect anyway. It is a quantifiable data point though.

    I got the face tech, But I want to know if there is credence to Heel and toe weight design as it aids in forgiveness. To imply that its similar to a CB design. The aid to retain ball speed on less than optimal strikes. Secondary to increase the sweet spot on the putter.

    I was under a completely different impressions.
    toe balanced, heel balanced and face balance was the weight design, to affect the center of gravity of the putter dependent on the "type" of "putter" whos stroke differs. those that require a square faced stroke or those that manipulate the face at impact.

    I did not realize that weight on the heel and toe was for forgiveness or was the primary, Im sure there is SOME truth to it, but I dont think that was the primary intent.

    This video might help:

    Callaway Big Bertha Alpha Fubuki ZT Stiff
    MD Golf Superstrong 3-wood UST Proforce 65 Stiff
    Wilson Staff FG Tour M3 21* Hybrid Aldila RIP Stiff
    Mizuno MP4 4-PW DG S300
    Wilson Staff PMP wedges 50/54/58 KBS Hi-Rev 2.0
    Radius Classic 8
  • nostaticnostatic "i drank what?!?" Socrates lost angelesClubWRX Posts: 172 ClubWRX
    edited May 15, 2019 10:16pm #414

    @Exactice808 said:

    @nostatic said:
    One could argue that face technologies like White Hot/Microhinge (Odyssey) and SweetFace (Evnroll) are somewhat putter equivalents to GI/SGI features in irons. Basically trying to take an off-center hit and make it go straight with similar distance.

    I don't think there is a Maltby equivalent metric for putters, but the Maltby number is arguably not perfect anyway. It is a quantifiable data point though.

    I got the face tech, But I want to know if there is credence to Heel and toe weight design as it aids in forgiveness. To imply that its similar to a CB design. The aid to retain ball speed on less than optimal strikes. Secondary to increase the sweet spot on the putter.

    I was under a completely different impressions.
    toe balanced, heel balanced and face balance was the weight design, to affect the center of gravity of the putter dependent on the "type" of "putter" whos stroke differs. those that require a square faced stroke or those that manipulate the face at impact.

    I did not realize that weight on the heel and toe was for forgiveness or was the primary, Im sure there is SOME truth to it, but I dont think that was the primary intent.

    Face vs toe balancing is somewhat independent of heel/toe weighting - it depends on the shaft angle and hosel design. There are putters with essentially the same head that can be either face balanced or toe hang

    https://blog.odysseygolf.com/hoselguide/

    Ping G400Max 10.5 XTorsion S - Cobra F9 3W 16 Devo7 S - F9 3H Devo8 S 
    Mizuno 919 Hot Metal Pro 4-PW - 919F GW - S18 55/09 PX LZ Tour 6.0 - Ping Glide2.0 Stealth 58TS
    Odyssey StrokeLab Double Wide Flow
  • jpdxjpdx Members Posts: 1,599 ✭✭
    edited May 16, 2019 12:59am #415

    @nostatic said:

    @Exactice808 said:

    @Bigmean said:
    Since this got into putters....

    As a bit of a putter collector and putting being the strength of my game, I must say that even blade putters with a back heel (think studio 1, mills style blades, tad etc) have a more generous hitting zone to them
    Than my heel shafted 8802 style putters. I feel like the “swing path through gate” is mostly altered from weight around shaft, but nsx Guy is 100% correct in his comments.

    It is beyond answer style vs blade, and putters are really finicky and sometimes you just get along with something you don’t expect etc. On that note, I also feel that modern blades are more like heel weighted high toe blade putters vs answer style in terms of the real differences and not a 8802 vs answer analogy, but this got far past those kind of comments.

    Anyway, back to whatever happened here....

    Hey Bigmean, to get educated as it seems I missed the boat. As ultimately that is what I am really here for anyways.

    So is there a Forgiveness rating inherent in putters?
    1)SGI, GI, Players GI, Players CB and Blades?

    One could argue that face technologies like White Hot/Microhinge (Odyssey) and SweetFace (Evnroll) are somewhat putter equivalents to GI/SGI features in irons. Basically trying to take an off-center hit and make it go straight with similar distance.

    I don't think there is a Maltby equivalent metric for putters, but the Maltby number is arguably not perfect anyway. It is a quantifiable data point though.

    so now were to cb putters and blade putters. haha! I have a question....

    what influences direction on an off center putt more? face tech or face angle at impact?

    I agree that these face techs could help with keeping similar distance on off-center hits, but make them directionally straighter? I disagree - I just can't figure out how it would make the putt straighter. please enlighten me.

    Srixon z785 hzrdus black 6.5
    Nike
    Vapor Fly 3 wood 15* Diamana Blueboard
    Nike
    Vapor Fly 3 hybrid 20* Diamana Blueboard
    Nike Vapor Fly Pro 4 DG Pro s300 -2*
    Nike
    Vapor Pro 4-PW DG s300 -2*
    Nike
    Engage 54* SS and 58* DS
    Nike Method Matter m4-12
    Nike Air Hybrid II Bag

    b-team/travel bag
    Nike Vapor Flex 440 driver 9.5* Diamana Blueboard
    Nike Vapor Pro driver 11.5* Diamana Blueboard
    Taylormade Burner 2.0 3 wood stock r flex shaft
    Taylormade Burner 2.0 3 hybrid stock r flex haft

    Nike Vapor Fly Pro 4-AW DG Pro S300 -2*
    Nike Engage 50* SS 54* SS 60* DS
    Nike Method Origin b2-01
    Cure CX-2
    Nike Air Sport II and Hyperadapt
  • nostaticnostatic "i drank what?!?" Socrates lost angelesClubWRX Posts: 172 ClubWRX

    @jpdx said:

    @nostatic said:

    @Exactice808 said:

    @Bigmean said:
    Since this got into putters....

    As a bit of a putter collector and putting being the strength of my game, I must say that even blade putters with a back heel (think studio 1, mills style blades, tad etc) have a more generous hitting zone to them
    Than my heel shafted 8802 style putters. I feel like the “swing path through gate” is mostly altered from weight around shaft, but nsx Guy is 100% correct in his comments.

    It is beyond answer style vs blade, and putters are really finicky and sometimes you just get along with something you don’t expect etc. On that note, I also feel that modern blades are more like heel weighted high toe blade putters vs answer style in terms of the real differences and not a 8802 vs answer analogy, but this got far past those kind of comments.

    Anyway, back to whatever happened here....

    Hey Bigmean, to get educated as it seems I missed the boat. As ultimately that is what I am really here for anyways.

    So is there a Forgiveness rating inherent in putters?
    1)SGI, GI, Players GI, Players CB and Blades?

    One could argue that face technologies like White Hot/Microhinge (Odyssey) and SweetFace (Evnroll) are somewhat putter equivalents to GI/SGI features in irons. Basically trying to take an off-center hit and make it go straight with similar distance.

    I don't think there is a Maltby equivalent metric for putters, but the Maltby number is arguably not perfect anyway. It is a quantifiable data point though.

    so now were to cb putters and blade putters. haha! I have a question....

    what influences direction on an off center putt more? face tech or face angle at impact?

    I agree that these face techs could help with keeping similar distance on off-center hits, but make them directionally straighter? I disagree - I just can't figure out how it would make the putt straighter. please enlighten me.

    To quote my attorney ex-wife, "it depends." There are a lot of variables in stroke path, roll, etc. This is what Evnroll claims:

    https://evnroll.com/technology.html

    Feel free to discuss with them ;-)

    Ping G400Max 10.5 XTorsion S - Cobra F9 3W 16 Devo7 S - F9 3H Devo8 S 
    Mizuno 919 Hot Metal Pro 4-PW - 919F GW - S18 55/09 PX LZ Tour 6.0 - Ping Glide2.0 Stealth 58TS
    Odyssey StrokeLab Double Wide Flow
  • dciccorittidciccoritti An inch an hour, 2 feet a day Toronto, CanadaMembers Posts: 1,554 ✭✭

    @nostatic said:

    @jpdx said:

    @nostatic said:

    @Exactice808 said:

    @Bigmean said:
    Since this got into putters....

    As a bit of a putter collector and putting being the strength of my game, I must say that even blade putters with a back heel (think studio 1, mills style blades, tad etc) have a more generous hitting zone to them
    Than my heel shafted 8802 style putters. I feel like the “swing path through gate” is mostly altered from weight around shaft, but nsx Guy is 100% correct in his comments.

    It is beyond answer style vs blade, and putters are really finicky and sometimes you just get along with something you don’t expect etc. On that note, I also feel that modern blades are more like heel weighted high toe blade putters vs answer style in terms of the real differences and not a 8802 vs answer analogy, but this got far past those kind of comments.

    Anyway, back to whatever happened here....

    Hey Bigmean, to get educated as it seems I missed the boat. As ultimately that is what I am really here for anyways.

    So is there a Forgiveness rating inherent in putters?
    1)SGI, GI, Players GI, Players CB and Blades?

    One could argue that face technologies like White Hot/Microhinge (Odyssey) and SweetFace (Evnroll) are somewhat putter equivalents to GI/SGI features in irons. Basically trying to take an off-center hit and make it go straight with similar distance.

    I don't think there is a Maltby equivalent metric for putters, but the Maltby number is arguably not perfect anyway. It is a quantifiable data point though.

    so now were to cb putters and blade putters. haha! I have a question....

    what influences direction on an off center putt more? face tech or face angle at impact?

    I agree that these face techs could help with keeping similar distance on off-center hits, but make them directionally straighter? I disagree - I just can't figure out how it would make the putt straighter. please enlighten me.

    To quote my attorney ex-wife, "it depends." There are a lot of variables in stroke path, roll, etc. This is what Evnroll claims:

    https://evnroll.com/technology.html

    Feel free to discuss with them ;-)

    Twist Face?? :-)

    Titleist TS2
    Titleist 718 MB 5-PW
    Taylormade MG 52 SB-09 | 56 SB-12 | 60 SB-10
    Callaway PM Grind 19 64.10
    Scotty Cameron Select Newport 2
    Bridgestone Tour BXS

  • nostaticnostatic "i drank what?!?" Socrates lost angelesClubWRX Posts: 172 ClubWRX

    @dciccoritti said:

    @nostatic said:

    @jpdx said:

    @nostatic said:

    @Exactice808 said:

    @Bigmean said:
    Since this got into putters....

    As a bit of a putter collector and putting being the strength of my game, I must say that even blade putters with a back heel (think studio 1, mills style blades, tad etc) have a more generous hitting zone to them
    Than my heel shafted 8802 style putters. I feel like the “swing path through gate” is mostly altered from weight around shaft, but nsx Guy is 100% correct in his comments.

    It is beyond answer style vs blade, and putters are really finicky and sometimes you just get along with something you don’t expect etc. On that note, I also feel that modern blades are more like heel weighted high toe blade putters vs answer style in terms of the real differences and not a 8802 vs answer analogy, but this got far past those kind of comments.

    Anyway, back to whatever happened here....

    Hey Bigmean, to get educated as it seems I missed the boat. As ultimately that is what I am really here for anyways.

    So is there a Forgiveness rating inherent in putters?
    1)SGI, GI, Players GI, Players CB and Blades?

    One could argue that face technologies like White Hot/Microhinge (Odyssey) and SweetFace (Evnroll) are somewhat putter equivalents to GI/SGI features in irons. Basically trying to take an off-center hit and make it go straight with similar distance.

    I don't think there is a Maltby equivalent metric for putters, but the Maltby number is arguably not perfect anyway. It is a quantifiable data point though.

    so now were to cb putters and blade putters. haha! I have a question....

    what influences direction on an off center putt more? face tech or face angle at impact?

    I agree that these face techs could help with keeping similar distance on off-center hits, but make them directionally straighter? I disagree - I just can't figure out how it would make the putt straighter. please enlighten me.

    To quote my attorney ex-wife, "it depends." There are a lot of variables in stroke path, roll, etc. This is what Evnroll claims:

    https://evnroll.com/technology.html

    Feel free to discuss with them ;-)

    Twist Face?? :-)

    Nano Orthogonal Native Stability Equivalence Neutral System Enhancement ™

    Ping G400Max 10.5 XTorsion S - Cobra F9 3W 16 Devo7 S - F9 3H Devo8 S 
    Mizuno 919 Hot Metal Pro 4-PW - 919F GW - S18 55/09 PX LZ Tour 6.0 - Ping Glide2.0 Stealth 58TS
    Odyssey StrokeLab Double Wide Flow
  • A.PrinceyA.Princey Major Hacker Members Posts: 2,150 ✭✭
    edited May 16, 2019 7:55am #419

    I'm a 3-5hcp and G25 irons work for this cat, played blades a few times but the effort and ease of GI is too appealing. I really like being able to take tons of spin off GI clubs with 2/3 and 3/4 shots into the wind, and clubbing up(and still get decent traj).

    '16 M2 10.5*, Diamana Ltd. 70 S+ 43.5"
    Ping G SFT 16*, DIamana Ltd. 70 S+ 41.5"
    Ping Rapture 3i, AWT-R
    Ping G25 4-G, DG-R400
    Vokey 56(57*), 60(63*) DG-R400
    Byron DH89 Longneck 33" (or any of 10 4 other putters...)
  • kiwihackerkiwihacker Members Posts: 707 ✭✭

    @A.Princey said:
    I'm a 3-5hcp and G25 irons work for this cat, played blades a few times but the effort and ease of GI is too appealing. I really like being able to take tons of spin off GI clubs with 2/3 and 3/4 shots into the wind, and clubbing up(and still get decent traj).

    I think your post just sums up that clubs shouldn't be targeted at a certain handicap range. Use whatever suits you. Your handicap is determined by the skill of the player holding the club, not the club itself. 👍

    Cobra King F6 Driver 10.5°
    17° Callaway X Hot 4 wood
    20.5°& 23° Cleveland DST Launcher hybrids
    Taylormade R7 TP 5-PW irons
    Cleveland RTX 2 5O°, 54°, Callaway MD Forged 58°
    Ping Anser Sigma 2 putter
  • MelloYelloMelloYello Upstate, SCMembers Posts: 3,229 ✭✭

    @nostatic said:

    @jpdx said:

    @nostatic said:

    @Exactice808 said:

    @Bigmean said:
    Since this got into putters....

    As a bit of a putter collector and putting being the strength of my game, I must say that even blade putters with a back heel (think studio 1, mills style blades, tad etc) have a more generous hitting zone to them
    Than my heel shafted 8802 style putters. I feel like the “swing path through gate” is mostly altered from weight around shaft, but nsx Guy is 100% correct in his comments.

    It is beyond answer style vs blade, and putters are really finicky and sometimes you just get along with something you don’t expect etc. On that note, I also feel that modern blades are more like heel weighted high toe blade putters vs answer style in terms of the real differences and not a 8802 vs answer analogy, but this got far past those kind of comments.

    Anyway, back to whatever happened here....

    Hey Bigmean, to get educated as it seems I missed the boat. As ultimately that is what I am really here for anyways.

    So is there a Forgiveness rating inherent in putters?
    1)SGI, GI, Players GI, Players CB and Blades?

    One could argue that face technologies like White Hot/Microhinge (Odyssey) and SweetFace (Evnroll) are somewhat putter equivalents to GI/SGI features in irons. Basically trying to take an off-center hit and make it go straight with similar distance.

    I don't think there is a Maltby equivalent metric for putters, but the Maltby number is arguably not perfect anyway. It is a quantifiable data point though.

    so now were to cb putters and blade putters. haha! I have a question....

    what influences direction on an off center putt more? face tech or face angle at impact?

    I agree that these face techs could help with keeping similar distance on off-center hits, but make them directionally straighter? I disagree - I just can't figure out how it would make the putt straighter. please enlighten me.

    To quote my attorney ex-wife, "it depends." There are a lot of variables in stroke path, roll, etc. This is what Evnroll claims:

    https://evnroll.com/technology.html

    Feel free to discuss with them ;-)

    Dang bro....his demonstration video is pretty impressive!

    Driver: TaylorMade M3 (10.5)
    Fairway: TaylorMade RBZ Black (16.5)
    Hybrid: Tour Edge Exotics E8 (19)
    Irons: Titleist 716 CB (4-Pw)
    Wedges: Vokey SM6 52-F / 56-F / 60-S
    Putter: Nike Method Milled 003
Sign In or Register to comment.