Index vs. Golf Ball Cork Sniffery

OK, I went form an 18 to a 12. I am curious the opinions on something. Where about, in terms of index, does ball start to matter? It's an odd question, I know. But, a 25 would not take advantage of a ProV vs a plastic rock ball, I'm thinking. I, at my level of play, like various types of balls because (in my mind) the standard deviation in my swing is more of an influence of outcome than compression or cover material. Does that make sense? I notice that I tend to gravitate toward the firm urethane balls (XV, MTB-X) because I like how they come off the clubface, especially the driver. But, in general, is there an index range where it starts to matter? I recently read of a member of this forum who's a low single-digit and plays very non-tour models - even wins club championships with them. Oh...and "cork sniffer" is an old term I learned back when I was a practicing musician...guys who worry about what part of South America the wood of their Les Paul came from, etc...

BY FAR, the most important thing is to play the same ball all the time, whatever the construction. BY FAR...

That said, and with all due respect, I think you are asking the wrong question. Rather than looking for some sort of a cutoff for a playing level where the ball "matters", turn it around and look at it the other way. It's implied in your question that three or four piece urethane ball is at least somewhat better, or good players wouldn't play 'em, right? So the real question isn't whether the lesser player can fully employ the benefits of a premium ball, but rather, "Is a lesser player capable of overcoming the inconsistencies of a cheaper, two piece golf ball?"

That question is the same one that is asked about other aspects of golf equipment, most notably club fitting, and it always seems that the "I'm not good enough..." argument is exactly backwards; it should be "Because I'm not very good, I need all the help I can get!"

People in the golf ball industry will tell you that a two piece surlyn ball comes off an iron like a flier; inconsistent carry distances and roll out. And now that those balls aren't longer, there is just NO advantage to them other than cost. That is NOT to minimize the importance of cost, and not to decide for everybody how serious they should be about the way they play golf. But multi-layer urethane cover golf balls are just better, more consistent golf balls, with equal or better distance off the tee, and tighter dispersion off irons. They just are.

BD nailed it.

Even cost is basically a non-factor unless you are losing multiple balls in a round. If you like the firm urethane balls than play them and shop for a fair price. Plenty of alternatives from the Snell bulk purchase to the recent Srixon deal. Lostgolfballs.com, etc. Nobody is saying go into your local shop and pluck down 50 bucks for ProV1x's.

Just no reason to play what we now know are inferior golf balls just to save a few bucks.

Titleist has run events with unmarked balls. Half the customers/players were single digit or better while the rest were essentially bogey golfers. They played a distance two piece ball for 9 holes, then a V1 for the other. The difference in scores for the better players was around one stroke in favor of the V1. For the bogey players, the V1 advantage was closer to four. The reason is that the lesser player was constantly playing from difficult situations close to the green (since they consistently missed the green) where the V1’s short game advantage was critical.

The advantages of short game performance vs. straight flight are highly dependent on course layout and conditions. On a flat track with open greens, or links-style with wind predominating, playing an e6 or similar could be an advantage for any level of player. On my home course, the course’s main defense is the combination of small, often raised greens that are close to surrounded by sand, water, and/or OB. Without a ball with strong short game spin, holding these greens with a partial shot, or an iron longer than a 7 or so, is difficult at best.

Cork sniffer is a wine term.

Today, I have a slower swing speed, so I bought soft e12 balls with lower compression.

On my way down to a 13, I used to play Titliest since Top Flite felt like hitting a rock.

The main reasons have been emphasized by others already. I would add that for me, urethane covered multi layer balls can actually stop on downwind mid and short iron shots. Hitting a Callaway SuperHot 190 yards downwind has very little chance of stopping on a putting green.

D2's or Hammer Control are not rocks. You must have went with the all time rock, XL.

Here is my thing

I just shot the best round of my life with a Softfli, a legit 79, two birdies and one lost ball where I carded a triple.

After that I'm not longer thinking about urethane balls.

1. I hit my irons high enough they usually stick the greens regardless of balls. During that round I hit a hybrid into a 200 yard par 3, held the green just fine.

2. The greenside difference is fine but if you know the ball is gonna roll out more, just hit the shot shorter...it's not a difficult concept. What happens when you hit that urethane thinking you're gonna hit it within 2 feet and stop it and you end up hitting it short 20 feet and it stops?

Take the good with the bad on both balls I guess unless ur a scratch and have consistent control which most of us don't.

I'm on the softfli train for good now

O I should add it hadn't rained in STL for about a month prior to that round of 79, the ground couldn't have been drier and I was still holding greens

Time for a premium ball.

Yes, I was referring to the late 1990s. Top Flite XL vs. Titliest DT 90 Solo etc.

There was a very obvious difference, at least in feel.

Feel or not, I’d rather enjoy hitting a ball that doesn’t make a loud and sharp cracking sound like cold range balls.

Congrats on the round. I just tied my personal best at a local course with a 77 using a top flite hammer control. Living in Michigan, same state as this weeks tournament, same conditions, hot and dry as a popcorn fart. As someone who enjoys many hobbies and is a member of more forums than I can remember, I have never seen more snobbery and knowitallism as on a golf forum.

Talking about inferior equipment and such. On 17, I hit a 30 yard pitch with a 2 piece ball and it came up short because of a 1 hop and stop. Made the seven footer for birdie luckily. On 15, 106 yard gap wedge, hit green, bounced forward a little and came back to be 2 feet left of its pitch mark. This thread and the one similar to it remind me so much of ones where people say a high capper can't hit a blade, while sure, some can't, but some can. I think a lot could be gained from these discussions if some people would realize just because they can't do something doesn't mean someone else can't.

And for the record. I never said tour balls are bad. I love the prov1x, just hate paying for it. Shot an 81 friday using that and a 77 using a top flite today. All while using a Moe Norman/Todd Graves swing. Another subject some people know little to nothing about, but experts none the less and still opine their expertise.

Play what ya want. And more importantly, enjoy yourself.

"I just shot the best round of my life I just shot the best round of my life" 

Unfortunately(?) this is how the majority of golfers choose ALL of their equipment (especially drivers).

"I love the prov1x, just hate paying for it"

No need to say anything else. LMAO

Yes, there is a difference between liking something and thinking you need it. Again, I will repeat, I never said tour balls are bad, but they are not the magical elixir that the internet experts claim it to be. I like pick up trucks and corvettes, but I choose not to own either because I don't want to pay for one.

You're right I will pick my ball based on when I shot my best round, liking the feel and just pretty much notice my game is better all around when I have them in play.

I'm notorious for playing a sleeve of balls and switching when those get lost so I know when I'm playing well with one ba vs another and consistently my 'better shots or stretches of holes' have come with the softfli

Whatever works my friend. So long as you have fun. @bluedot said earlier "BY FAR, the most important thing is to play the same ball all the time, whatever the construction. BY FAR". Or, at least give the ball a good long look before you move on.
Pretty good advice IMO.

To summarize -

We should not use balls (or apparently any other equipment) that has been repeatably and objectively tested for distance, dispersion, and spin because they are recommended by “Internet experts”.

instead, we should use what unknown players advise, due to breaking 80, belonging to numerous Internet forums, etc. The Maxfli Softfli (one of the lowest spinning, 35 compression, highest launching balls available) is an excellent example.

The ball is overrated. I can shoot par with a range ball. Work on your putting stroke and watch you scores really come down.

Loving my new custom tp5x

If that's your take away, maybe reading and comprehending isn't your thing.

Do you use range balls or the cheapest balls bought at Wal-Mart?

Love when internet d**** call other internet d**** "internet d****" just for the sake of proving that they are not in fact internet d****.

OP came here for advice on whether balls which are scientifically proven to be more consistent would benefit his game as a 12 HDCP, not your take on why a top rock is the best ball because you shot your personal best (congrats by the way, I do mean that--I actually do like seeing others succeed at this game) at a local muni.

OP FWIW: (1) Science says tour models perform better and more consistently throughout the range of HDCPs. The great thing about science is that it doesn't care about feelings, opinions, or what Joe Schmo shot that one day at that one course under those certain conditions. (2) If you can afford to do so, do some ball testing with a tour model or two and a two-piece model or two and see what you have better results with (pay attention around the green, science says that almost every modern ball--tour or not--is going to perform similarly off the face of a driver). (3) Once you have found a ball that works for you (feel is equally as important as spin rates and other data IF you find a ball with consistent reactions that you can stop on the green--50% of your shots are going to come off the face of a putter where spin rates don't matter) play it consistently.

I'm a firm believer of the "play your game" approach. That being said, IMO, if you game gets better using a tour ball, use it. If your game doesn't, you probably have a swing flaw that could use some attention. If, at that point, your game still doesn't get better using a tour ball, play a two piece.

Golf is an adventure. Part of the fun is researching and experimenting new equipment. If you're a 12 and you're on this site, you probably fall within the class of people who actually do love the science and technology behind today's golf equipment. Put things to the test, have fun doing it, and keep getting better. Good luck.

Build that strawman.

Again. I never said a top flite is the best ball. I never said to not use a tour ball. What I did say is the ball is not some sort of magic fix. As someone with a hc similar to the OP, I can shoot good numbers with what ever I pull out of my bag. I am a good enough wedge player to get the ball to do what I want. And I play the ball I want to. As should anyone. I also, after playing 30 years , believe course conditions play just as much role in choosing a ball as skill itself.

But I would like to see the science behind a 36 hc needing a tour ball. They are sticking so many greens from 190+ out

Walmart has a surprisingly good selection of golf balls. Just had a look. Other than the “Hit me again assorted colors...”, they seem reasonable. There are some used ProV1 being sold for roughly $1/pc

Who said a 36 HDCP needs a tour ball? Why do you keep making extreme arguments?

Straight crooked said this : OP FWIW: (1) Science says tour models perform better and more consistently throughout the range of HDCPs. The great thing about science is that it doesn't care about feelings, opinions, or what Joe Schmo shot that one day at that one course under those certain conditions.

A 36 falls into that does it not ? So as you can see I'm not trying to make extreme examples. Looking for clarity in this science that someone else mentioned.

"Science says tour models perform better and more consistently throughout the range of HDCPs." Lenman, is there something in that statement you actually disagree with? Or are you merely being one of those internet d*** that you spoke so ill of earlier?

Yes, a tour ball is going to perform better (higher spin rate in short irons and wedges) and more consistently (both distance and dispersion) for a 36 cap. Will the 36 cap be able to take full advantage of the ball? Maybe, maybe not. Can a 36 cap hit the green from 150 with a 5 iron and have a ball stop? More likely with a tour ball than with a two piece. Can a 36 cap hit 10 green side chips to the same place? More likely with a tour ball than a two piece. Can a 36 cap hit 10 shots with any club to the same distance? More likely with a tour ball than with a two piece. As I mentioned in my first post, if a tour ball does not help to improve your game, you likely have a swing flaw that should be addressed first. If you choose not to invest your resources into fixing your swing, then that is on you. You're right, a tour ball is not a magical elixir that will fix a swing flaw. But, and again, throughout the range of HDCPs a tour ball will, in fact, perform better and more consistently *when the ball is struck well*. That is the great thing about science. Science doesn't care if you play off scratch or 36.

That being said, I don't recall saying a 36 needs a tour ball. That statement is a creature of your own "reading and comprehending skills."

He never said any specific hdcp "needs" a tour ball. He said science backs up that it performs better through the range of handicaps. This is the fact you are for some reason unwillingly to acknowledge. The golf ball equivalent of a flat-earther. Furthermore, Straight Crooked goes on to provide a pretty nice template on how to make a ball choice. Pretty close to Dean Snell's recommendations.

Straight Crooked in fact wrote exactly opposite of what you claim towards the end of his comments.I'm a firm believer of the "play your game" approach. That being said, IMO, if you game gets better using a tour ball, use it. If your game doesn't, you probably have a swing flaw that could use some attention. If, at that point, your game still doesn't get better using a tour ball, play a two piece.

This is really not that difficult. It is junior-high level logic. Science shows everybody will benefit from a tour ball. Benefiting and Needing are two different things. Nobody in their right mind thinks a 36 hdcap should plunk down 50 bucks for a dozen ProV1s. Nobody thinks somebody should buy a golf ball they can't afford. Nobody really cares if a player has found a ball at his price point that he loves to play no matter what kind of ball it is. Go for it. And nobody believes because somebody can spin a Wilson Duo that it debunks the science.

This a problem simply solved by the concept of inversion. There is nothing a tour ball can't do that a lesser ball will do. There are things a lesser ball can'at do that a tour ball will always do.