Might be going back to a Cheaper, Non-Tour Ball...

Call me crazy but I just played a couple rounds yesterday and found something interesting. I was very inconsistent on my first round and had several blow-up holes resulting in a final score of 89. The last time I played that course I shot 76 so I was quite disappointed. It was a real off day. There was some very good golf and some very bad golf. The entire round I was playing my normal ball (ProV1x).

Without anything to do, I decided to hang around and play another 18. I have to pat myself on the back for walking all 36, too! :)

Throughout the second round I played with two balls: a Burner Soft and a Noodle. I shot 79 closing out with 2 birdies...one off an 80-yd LW and one off a bombed drive that got me on the putting surface of the Par-5 18th with only a 5-iron in.

Did I see some differences in performance? Yes! Did the ball come to an immediate stop off my wedges? No, not really. Some shots released a few feet more than expected. But the cheaper balls flew higher and straighter and felt softer with every other club in the bag. And those improvements helped me with my tempo. I knew the ball was going to jump off the face and go an extra few yards so I swung within myself as much as I could. Not to mention I was getting a little tired on those final 9-holes!

I'm not so much concerned with score as with performance. I've shot lots of good scores before so I know more will come. But the fact that the ball doesn't seem to matter much is what I'm looking at here. Maybe the ball does matter and I'm just assuming the expensive Tour balls are better when they're really not?!

I think a ball that feels soft while launching high and going straight is actually a net gain for me as compared with these more expensive Tour balls that maximize spin off my wedges but universally feel much firmer and don't fly as high thus putting more of an emphasis on my swing being perfect. It's a bit like the blades debate. It's good when it's good, but on average, what's the best choice?

And don't get me wrong, I'm a wizard with my 60*. My wedges are generally my biggest strength and my most consistent weapon. Maybe that's why hitting these cheaper balls higher and straight with my irons is such a valuable thing. It could be that no matter what ball I use, my wedge game will be alright? Meanwhile, I probably need to reduce the amount of chipping of pitching I do by simply hitting more GIRs.

Nonetheless, this experience (and a few other past experiences) really has me wondering, am I holding myself back not going with a ball I know will feel softer while improving the look of my irons?

What thoughts do you guys have?

My driver SS is about 105. I typically hit my 7-iron about 155-160. However, I'd say I was picking up at least 5-yards with my irons when using the cheaper balls. I can't say my driver/3w distances were that affected.

Anyone else come to a similar conclusion?

It's easy to say that extra spin is a good thing, but is that really true? How do we really know that?

And it's easy to say that Tour balls are great, but the guys who win with them are often swinging 120-mph. I'm sure for them, they do feel soft!

I have not. I want as much spin as possible from my balls because it's much much easier to remove spin and lower flight than it is to add spin and increase height. What you're experiencing is more mental; You believer the softer ball is better, so you play better while gaming it. It's not to say if it categorically is or is not, but generally speaking, most better players want tour level caliber balls while they play (even better players who swing 105, which is much higher than the 'average' male).

But does adding spin make you a better player? For me, I'm not sure that philosophy is beyond reproach. I'm not sure it's safe to assume that adding spin is always a good thing. If adding spin comes at the cost of a lower ball-flight then it might not be advisable, right? It'll be especially bad with your irons where you'd probably prefer easy/high launch and adequate spin.

I don't really see much of a need to worry about spin until you're inside 100-yds at which point optimizing for that area of the game seems rather extreme--particularly if it's all based on an assumption. I didn't really have a problem getting those cheaper balls to stop yesterday on distance wedges. So do I really want to increase spin for the sake of some chipping and pitching when I'm already good at that stuff anyway?

Again, I'm not a tour player. I don't know how much I should look at those guys. They eat, sleep and breathe golf 24/7 and hit the ball a lot harder than I do.

And at the same time, the feel of many of these other balls is so ridiculously soft, it makes most every shot feel delightful as it it were struck perfectly flush. This further pays off in how the tendency to over-swing is reduced quite significantly, not to mention the round seems like maybe it might be more enjoyable as well. It's as dramatic a shift as going from a 2-iron to a say, a hybrid, which will generally feel awesome on most every shot. I would describe Tour balls as feeling comparatively "heavy" while the cheaper balls just seem to jump off the face.

It seems to me that selecting a Tour ball to increase spin is really only something that makes sense if you have to do it for some reason. But I sure didn't feel like I was giving away any strokes yesterday. If anything, the 2nd round felt like I had a ball that was working for me in a way the Tour balls weren't. Here in the south, you really don't need a ton of spin to hold the greens (which are soft). You need height. Generally a high shot comes down and stops dead. That's the more important variable.

Like I said... You're telling yourself you enjoy hitting a nice feeling soft ball better, so you play better with it. Almost all the data I see shows soft balls are generally not better for better player's game. If you enjoy it more and that somehow causes you to play better because you're relaxed & happy, etc then by all means, that is the route you should take. I don't want my balls to "jump"... I want the ball to be predictable. I don't really need a ton of help distance wise for the tees I'm playing. Maybe if I suddenly had to go play 7400 yards then yes I would want some more distance, but spin is what stabilizes the ball. Remove spin, remove stability... especially for a guy like me who usually plays a draw.

If I want to hit a nippy 40 yard wedge to a tucked front pin that spins 7 or 8k, I'm not doing it with a Callaway supersoft, that's for sure.

Yeah, but be real. How often are you hitting that 40-yd shot to a tucked pin? That's an extreme example. Tour balls are definitely better-equipped for that, but that's 1 in a million really. Besides, if you're taking on shots like that on the regular, you know as well as I do, you're fighting an uphill battle.

Just seems to me that whatever I can do to stabilize my game and hit more greens is the best bet. If I sacrifice short-game spin, what's the actual penalty to be paid in my handicap? My handicap is not based on my ability to hit 40-yd wedges shots. And don't get me wrong, I'd take my 40-yd wedge shot over anyone's any day all day, lol. It's the strength of my game. But I think that's part of why I'm plateauing at a 7-handicap. I need to hit more quality shots with my mid- and short-irons. And that's precisely what I did yesterday in that second round. I think the ball had something to do with it.

Hey, whatever you gotta tell yourself to feel justified in your decision is fine by me. If you play better for your game, that's all that matters.

Well, clearly I'm not lying if I'm describing what happened and what I observed.

We have become so conditioned to responding to simple statistics, spin in this case, that the overall playability of the product is overlooked. There are also a few issues with quoting spin as a primary statistic; one of which you’ve already run into.

Lower spinning balls usually launch higher. Higher launch gives a higher peak, and a higher descent angle. For those who don’t hit their short irons and wedges hard enough to fully energize the ball’s cover, descent angle becomes the dominant factor.

The spin number we usually see quoted is the ball’s initial spin, since our tools can ‘see’ the ball in its initial flight. There is no model for the efficiency of its dimple pattern and how spin degrades with distance, which for full shots, is the critical factor (we really care about retained spin from a green-holding point of view).

Firmer compression balls become increasingly more appropriate at higher swing speeds, where trajectories can de come excessive.

Higher spin balls biggest advantage is on partial wedge/chip/pitch/lob shots, where increased spin is pretty much a universal asset. However, most partial spin is a function of the cover, not the core, which isn’t energized to any extent. See my Q-Star review for such a ball.

Ball selection if over-hyped, IMO. I shot my best round ever with a Get Sum. I have preferences that I like throughout a round that keeps me gaming the MTB-X. But, there are a lot of balls out there that are cheap and work just fine. Especially for the masses who aren't single-digit.

Nobody is claiming that you are lying. Play whatever balls you want and we will play ours. No need to justify your decision.

I actually just came off a dozen MTB-X balls. I was excited to try them and was definitely hoping they would be the perfect, affordable Tour-style ball. I found that they launched a little higher, which I liked, but there was also a small but undeniable loss of distance, particularly off the tee. I always felt I was giving up 5- or 10-yards. Have you found the same?

Good point. I may go back to trying something like the Bridgestone RXS? I feel like high-compression Tour balls really put an emphasis on SS in the irons. I just can't hit the sort of 7i - 3i hard enough to justify them. I end up hitting shots that are too low and which curve too much. Meanwhile the cheap balls go higher and straighter which is great. My 3i is going maybe 200-yds so I'm not short, but I'm by no means a Tour-level player with distance. At present I'm gaming at least 1 (sometimes 2) hybrids.

But at the same time, I'm good enough with my wedges to appreciate the advantages of some spin around the greens. There are some chip shots that just aren't going to stop with a super cheap ball. But those short chips are really the only place that experience has told me to give much of a crap about spin (at my level of golf).

I'm also thinking about what makes someone a single-digit though and it comes down to hitting greens. All the spin in the world around the green isn't going to affect one's handicap by more than +/- maybe 1-stroke.

We've long known that the determining factor in one's handicap is GIR. If there's one stat that basically sums you up as a player, that's it. There's no getting around it. And the best short game in the world isn't good enough to change that.

Short game is a secondary factor because of course saving pars around the green is not something anyone does on a continuous basis. At best, one might achieve a 50% conversion rate.

But if anything, one gets better at missing in the right spots. And that can be done with any type of ball. As a 7-handicap who's strength is being a good short game player, I'm always more concerned with where I'm going to miss--which is a function of the approach shot. Even then, I'd much rather avoid missing altogether and get better just hitting more greens.

At the end of the day the amateur just needs to hit more greens or at least put themselves close enough to putt and at worse miss in a spot where the chip/pitch is friendly. Saving pars with delicate, spinny, perfectly-nipped wedges is not something that'll happen very often.

I'm just thinking I might be better served this year if I choose a ball that's more geared towards improving my my irons than my wedges.

For me the MTB-X is longest off the tee. It does go high, too. I think it's the firmness of the ball that contributes. My swing speed is around 105-110 with driver, I think. Need to get it measured.

I second that. While Snell MTB-X provides an insane amount of spin with short irons and wedges, its also super high spin all through the bag. I lost 10-12 yards on EVERY club with the MTB-X. Until they fix this huge issue on their next version, a large % of the target market for this ball, cant even use this ball.

I believe you have to be honest with yourself and your limitations when it comes to golf- especially the equipment. That is why as I have lost swing speed over the years I progressively stopped hitting long irons and went to hybrids- my first iron is a 6 iron now. I stopped hitting lower lofted fairway woods and now my first fairway wood is a 5 wood. My driver is 12 deg. And since i have struggled getting pro version balls in the air I switched to surlyn full time over 5 years ago. The results? A course record 62 from the 6500 yard tees in 2015, a senior city tourney win, my lowest scoring averages vs par ever, my lowest bogey rate for 18 holes ever. All with the gamer soft. I am now playing the tru feel from Titleist and beat my scratch pro v1 buddies today in our over 50 mens club by 6 shots each- with the lowest compression and inexpensive for a titleist 2 piece ball.

How is this possible? Because the scorecard doesn't see urethane only numbers. I am a plus 3 in the over 50 league and shot 68 on a par 72 with this ball. So while your friends and urethane snobs may try to guilt you into having spin- play what works for you. Few thing give me more satisfaction than beating pro v players who think I am a bum because I use surlyn.

I have played the Soft Feel and I do gain extra distance with my slower swing speed. With that said, when the weather gets warmer, I like the QST. I can handle a slightly firmer ball and enjoy a little more spin in the summer when the greens are more firm. Good score or not, it's fun to see the green side spin.

To me adding spin does not "make" you a better player, but it allows you more shot options. Personally I have found when I play an X style tour ball I tend to overswing a bit as the ball is firmer and mentally I'm thinking I have a longer ball so go at it. Thus I've gone back to mostly the ProV1 or occasionally the Z-Star. For my game the two ball types (X and non-X) have virtually the same distance and spin so I opt for the better feeling ball. As to the score variance, playing this time of year is often a crap shoot as it can be windy, drizzly, and soft plus the greens still have (in Maryland at least) multiple grass types growing making putting tough.

Wow, that's really incredible!

Do you have any insight(s) to share regarding the performance characteristics of the various surlyn balls?

One drawback of going away from Tour Balls is that I really don't have the foggiest idea what's what. I imagine there might be some performance rankings?

I’ve seen the same thing as OP. When I was learning the game and when I’ve struggled there are aspects of softer non tour balls that can make the game easier. More effortless launch, straighter flight. And most of the greens we play here in the upper Midwest are very receptive and/or allow for being able to account for some rollout in the short game.

Probably the majority of players could use a non urethane ball with no detriment to their scoring as not many that I see have any idea how to control or use spin anyways.

I recently switched clubs and control into and around the greens is critical, and I do use spin to improve my ability to get nearer the pin, but at my old club I could practically use anything and not matter. I used to save every ball I shot par or better during our Monday night 9 hole league and there’s several non urethane balls in the collection.

At melloyello

i have tried 15 different models to replace the gamer soft. None have the same magic I found with that ball.

A lot of the information on surlyn balls I found here. NJ Patbee was the one who recommended the GS ball. The reality is the ball makers don’t put as much marketing into surlyn balls so you end up going thru some trial and error. In general though I have found the fewer the dimples the higher the flight. The two piece balls tend to be more point and shoot, the 3 piece ones have a little more workability.

One thing I like about surlyn balls is they don’t over check on bump and runs. They have simplified my short game and made it more consistent. If you want relative spin numbers you can check the spin charts from past years that the golf mags put out. The surlyn balls tend to spin 500 to 1000 rpms less than urethane on 50 yard shots but the launch higher.

After your research you have to get some balls and audition them. I played the GS for over 4 years because different balls were not as good on my scorecard. Then It went out of production.

Good luck

I am a mid handi, and I can see both sides. the only point i want to make here is , as far as where I can justify a better ball , is when I am hitting wedge, and I blade a shot hitting onto the green, a better spin ball will help me by stopping on green...

I could have written this post (with the exception of the 62!). I accidentally stared playing the Titleist Velocity over the winter and was surprisingly pleased with the results. It changes how I conduct my short game, but with adjustment it doesn't aversely affect the outcome.

Ive honestly never noticed a whole lot of difference in my scores from cheap balls to expensive balls. The only real difference for me is that the expensive ones tend to stop a bit quicker on pitch/chip shots. On full shots I noticed little difference though.

This winter I bought a dozen on the Maxfli Straightfli and Maxfli Softfli when they were only sale and Ive been playing them early this year and honestly, they work just fine, they spin just fine and although I had been playing to move to the Maxfli Tour X, Im now questioning whether I need to spend the money.

Just for balance, I'll say that my experience with the MTB-X has been exactly the opposite. I decided to try it because the independent testing data that I had read indicated that the best golf balls on the market in terms of a combination of distance, dispersion, and spin off a wedge, were the two ProV's, the two TP5's, and the Snell MTB-X. At the same time, I was moving on from the Chrome Soft after YEARS because the same testing had shown that it shorter, crookeder, and had LESS spin that other premium ball.

Given the price difference, I decided to try the MTB-X and see, and MY results have been exactly what the testing indicated they would be. Until the weather get warm and the courses dry out and I'm wearing one layer of clothes, I'm not completely willing to commit myself to an absolute number for yardage off the tee, but the MTB-X is for sure longer off irons, and spins great off a wedge. The only thing I was worried about, which was durability of the finish, hasn't been a problem at all. It's a great ball at any price, and especially at the bulk price.

It doesn't surprise me! It will be a dead perfect ball for anyone needed more spin with their shots (sometimes spin will actually increase distance, if your normal spin is too low).

Whatever you do , find a ball you like and stick with it ... You are overthinking the ball thing . I use two balls only , the TP5 for fast conditions and fast greens when I need extra spin and TP5x when the greens are more receptive and I dont want the ball backspinning off the green . I am a high spin player so I use the TP5x most of the time to reduce the backspin a little .

I think it comes down to what kind of courses you play and whether your surlyn cover shots will hold or not. Play Royal Melbourne? Use urethane. Play muni golf in soft conditions? Surlyn is probably fine. I don't play really high end courses and find that surlyn balls were ok for full shots. I have play for more run out with partial shots though.

Dave

Yeah, my experience with the MTB-X has certainly not included a loss in distance. It does go high. That's been the odd thing. I'll hit a drive that looks like I sky'd it. Then, I walk, and walk, and walk some more to get to my ball - only to find it further down the fairway than I've ever been. My tpi trainer recently noted I'm starting to really flex the shaft, getting more early kick (and loft). That's part of it. But, the X has been both higher and longer.

feel and compression are bigger factors than greenside spin, I prefer a softer ball in the winter