Jump to content

Titleist CEO suggests Tiger is shilling for inferior ball company


WAxORxDCxSC

Recommended Posts

The outgoing CEO of Acushnet fired back at the USGA and Tiger Woods, suggesting that Tiger’s comments were motivated by the fact that Bridgestone produces an inferior ball, and they would have a commercial interest in a “reduced distance” golf ball.

 

http:// https://www.golf.com/tour-news/2017/11/20/titleist-ceo-questions-need-reduced-flight-golf-ball

9* Taylormade Sim 2 with Ventus Black 7x

15* Taylormade Sim 2 with Tensei Pro Blue 80tx

Mizuno Fly-Hi 3,4,5 iron Project X 6.5

Mizuno MP-5, 6-PW KBS C-Taper Lite 115x

Titleist Vokey 50*, 54* with Project X 6.5

Taylormade Hi-Toe 60* with Project X 6.5

Scotty Cameron Newport 2 Notchback

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No he's saying Bridgestone will benefit from the USGA stepping in and eliminating the entire marketing pyramid that Titleist and other manufacturers have based their business on for 50+ years. Titleist is clearly the all-time winner in that game so of course Bridgestone would like to see someone step in an change the rules.

 

Among the minority of golf-ball buyers NOT influenced by who plays what on Tour, there's only a small difference in market share between Titleist, Taylormade, Callaway, Bridgestone, Srixon, etc.

 

But among the majority of buyers who ARE influenced by Tour play, the landslide winner is Titleist with Taylormade and Callaway also in much stronger positions than the two Japanese companies.

 

If USGA re-jiggers the Rules to (in their dreams) force rank-and-file golfers to play a totally different type of ball than is played on Tour then that second, majority, market dries up overnight. Bridgestone no doubt feels that they're positioned with the idiotic so-called "ball fitting" to pounce on all those hackers who used to play ProV1 and who will be looking to switch to the "cheater ball" (as the non-Tour conforming balls will be known).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, he is clearly suggesting that Titleist produces a superior product and that other companies would benefit from rules restricting ball flight (thus leveling the playing field). Whatever color you want to add on top with regard to marketing is your business. I just think it’s notable that he’d question Tiger’s credibility so bluntly.

9* Taylormade Sim 2 with Ventus Black 7x

15* Taylormade Sim 2 with Tensei Pro Blue 80tx

Mizuno Fly-Hi 3,4,5 iron Project X 6.5

Mizuno MP-5, 6-PW KBS C-Taper Lite 115x

Titleist Vokey 50*, 54* with Project X 6.5

Taylormade Hi-Toe 60* with Project X 6.5

Scotty Cameron Newport 2 Notchback

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are already rules restricting the flight of the ball and all the major brand balls are within tiny margins of being at that limit. Titleist has no distance advantage because no distance advantage is allowed under the rules.

 

What is being proposed is a lower limit, not the creation of a limit where none previously existed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist is afraid that setting the field back to the start will hurt the brand, and I think they are right. Titleist's success is propped up on a house of cards built on perceived quality as judged by their tour presence. Institute a new tour ball rule or change the ball rules overall and everybody will have to go back to the beginning and that will hurt the top dog and help the smaller competitors.

Ping G400 Max driver w/Aldila Rogue 125 Silver
Ping G425 5 wood & hybrid
Ping G30 irons w/Recoil 95

Ping G425 irons w/Accra ICWT 2.0 95
Ping Glide wedges w/Recoil 110
Ping Redwood Anser - the "real deal!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist is afraid that setting the field back to the start will hurt the brand, and I think they are right. Titleist's success is propped up on a house of cards built on perceived quality as judged by their tour presence. Institute a new tour ball rule or change the ball rules overall and everybody will have to go back to the beginning and that will hurt the top dog and help the smaller competitors.

 

Titleist was not hurt when golf balls were "set back to the beginning" by the advent of multipiece urethane Tour balls. They were the dominant brand in the "Balata or rock" days and they continued their dominance in the modern era.

 

And they would not be hurt by an across-the-board reduction in ball flight distance tomorrow.

 

The only thing that would harm Ttleist's position would be if somehow retail golfers were prevented from playing the same ball they see played on Tour.

 

Mike Davis seems to think there's a change in the works that would restrict Tour (and other elite) player's ball performance to such a major extent that anyone else would have to be an idiot to play the same ball as used on Tour. I personally can not envision even USGA being that stupid but I've underestimated them before.

 

If they actually pull that off it would be a disaster for Titleist no doubt. Maybe, like friend Nessism Mike Davis hates Titleist so passionately that he thinks anything that harms Titleist is therefore good for the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uilhein is a master marketer. According to Wikipedia he became the national sales manager within a year at Titleist. This a a perfect example of how he operates...it’s brilliant. Again, the reason this is notable — in my opinion — is his willingness to impugn Tiger’s motivation while doing so.

9* Taylormade Sim 2 with Ventus Black 7x

15* Taylormade Sim 2 with Tensei Pro Blue 80tx

Mizuno Fly-Hi 3,4,5 iron Project X 6.5

Mizuno MP-5, 6-PW KBS C-Taper Lite 115x

Titleist Vokey 50*, 54* with Project X 6.5

Taylormade Hi-Toe 60* with Project X 6.5

Scotty Cameron Newport 2 Notchback

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist is afraid that setting the field back to the start will hurt the brand, and I think they are right. Titleist's success is propped up on a house of cards built on perceived quality as judged by their tour presence. Institute a new tour ball rule or change the ball rules overall and everybody will have to go back to the beginning and that will hurt the top dog and help the smaller competitors.

 

Titleist was not hurt when golf balls were "set back to the beginning" by the advent of multipiece urethane Tour balls. They were the dominant brand in the "Balata or rock" days and they continued their dominance in the modern era.

 

And they would not be hurt by an across-the-board reduction in ball flight distance tomorrow.

 

The only thing that would harm Ttleist's position would be if somehow retail golfers were prevented from playing the same ball they see played on Tour.

 

Mike Davis seems to think there's a change in the works that would restrict Tour (and other elite) player's ball performance to such a major extent that anyone else would have to be an idiot to play the same ball as used on Tour. I personally can not envision even USGA being that stupid but I've underestimated them before.

 

If they actually pull that off it would be a disaster for Titleist no doubt. Maybe, like friend Nessism Mike Davis hates Titleist so passionately that he thinks anything that harms Titleist is therefore good for the game.

 

A "tour ball" rule would indeed upset the apple cart at Titleist. The success of their entire company is based off tour success and perceived superiority therefor. Humm...

Ping G400 Max driver w/Aldila Rogue 125 Silver
Ping G425 5 wood & hybrid
Ping G30 irons w/Recoil 95

Ping G425 irons w/Accra ICWT 2.0 95
Ping Glide wedges w/Recoil 110
Ping Redwood Anser - the "real deal!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist is afraid that setting the field back to the start will hurt the brand, and I think they are right. Titleist's success is propped up on a house of cards built on perceived quality as judged by their tour presence. Institute a new tour ball rule or change the ball rules overall and everybody will have to go back to the beginning and that will hurt the top dog and help the smaller competitors.

 

Titleist was not hurt when golf balls were "set back to the beginning" by the advent of multipiece urethane Tour balls. They were the dominant brand in the "Balata or rock" days and they continued their dominance in the modern era.

 

And they would not be hurt by an across-the-board reduction in ball flight distance tomorrow.

 

The only thing that would harm Ttleist's position would be if somehow retail golfers were prevented from playing the same ball they see played on Tour.

 

Mike Davis seems to think there's a change in the works that would restrict Tour (and other elite) player's ball performance to such a major extent that anyone else would have to be an idiot to play the same ball as used on Tour. I personally can not envision even USGA being that stupid but I've underestimated them before.

 

If they actually pull that off it would be a disaster for Titleist no doubt. Maybe, like friend Nessism Mike Davis hates Titleist so passionately that he thinks anything that harms Titleist is therefore good for the game.

 

A "tour ball" rule would indeed upset the apple cart at Titleist. The success of their entire company is based off tour success and perceived superiority therefor. Humm...

 

Therefore you're all for it. Because it would hurt Titleist, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No he's saying Bridgestone will benefit from the USGA stepping in and eliminating the entire marketing pyramid that Titleist and other manufacturers have based their business on for 50+ years. Titleist is clearly the all-time winner in that game so of course Bridgestone would like to see someone step in an change the rules.

 

Among the minority of golf-ball buyers NOT influenced by who plays what on Tour, there's only a small difference in market share between Titleist, Taylormade, Callaway, Bridgestone, Srixon, etc.

 

But among the majority of buyers who ARE influenced by Tour play, the landslide winner is Titleist with Taylormade and Callaway also in much stronger positions than the two Japanese companies.

 

If USGA re-jiggers the Rules to (in their dreams) force rank-and-file golfers to play a totally different type of ball than is played on Tour then that second, majority, market dries up overnight. Bridgestone no doubt feels that they're positioned with the idiotic so-called "ball fitting" to pounce on all those hackers who used to play ProV1 and who will be looking to switch to the "cheater ball" (as the non-Tour conforming balls will be known).

 

I'd love to know how you ascertained who is and isn't "influenced" by the tour?

 

Whether they play Titleist?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I deduce the influence of the Tour on buyers because the manufacturers spend untold millions of dollars placing their products on Tour for just that reason. Surely they would not do it if it were ineffective.

 

I deduce that Tour-influenced buyers are the majority because overall golf ball sales are almost directly proportional to Tour pressence.

 

I deduce the existence of a non-Tour-influenced set of buyer by the fact that plenty of balls still get sold by brands with little or no Tour success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I deduce the influence of the Tour on buyers because the manufacturers spend untold millions of dollars placing their products on Tour for just that reason. Surely they would not do it if it were ineffective.

 

I deduce that Tour-influenced buyers are the majority because overall golf ball sales are almost directly proportional to Tour pressence.

 

I deduce the existence of a non-Tour-influenced set of buyer by the fact that plenty of balls still get sold by brands with little or no Tour success.

 

That's ignoring that they are less expensive and that many don't feel they have the club head speed or consistency to utilize the "best" ball.

 

It's an interesting dilemma as the quality of other balls has quickly caught Titleist and Titleist actually pays less than other OEMs to put their ball in play. Hard to say if Rors, JDay, TW, and DJ choose their ball based on performance or money.

 

Spieth and Thomas had a pretty good year sticking with the best ball in golf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If all that mattered was the quality of the golf ball, then the factories in Korea and Taiwan would just crank out generic 4-piece cast urethane balls to be packaged 50 to the plain white box marked "GOLF BALLS". Churning out a ball that comes within spitting distance of the max performance allowed under the current rules has become a widely-disseminated capability. The retail cost would be probably a $79 for a box of 50 or something like that.

 

Everything else is brand preference and marketing.

 

Thinking of it that way, an entire revamping of the golf ball spec would only suit the existing big-name companies if it specified an entirely different method of construction. That way they could figure out a way to implement new design principles and it would be a decade or so before the white-label Asian factories could catch up. Only problem? It would suck for those of us actually buying and using the product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist was not hurt when golf balls were "set back to the beginning" by the advent of multipiece urethane Tour balls.

 

How much did Titleist pay out in lawsuit settlements to Callaway and Bridgestone?

 

Hardly enough to even register on their P&L statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist was not hurt when golf balls were "set back to the beginning" by the advent of multipiece urethane Tour balls.

 

How much did Titleist pay out in lawsuit settlements to Callaway and Bridgestone?

 

Wasn't the ProV1 the original multi-piece urethane tour ball? It would be difficult to be set-back by technology you invented, no?

Ping G 10.5 Tour 65s
Ping G 14.5 Tour 80x
Titleist 716 T-MB 3 Iron AD DI 95x
Ping Anser Forged Project X 6.0
Ping Glide 50*SS, 54*SS, 58*SS Project X 6.0
Odyssey Versa 2-Ball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist was not hurt when golf balls were "set back to the beginning" by the advent of multipiece urethane Tour balls.

 

How much did Titleist pay out in lawsuit settlements to Callaway and Bridgestone?

 

Wasn't the ProV1 the original multi-piece urethane tour ball? It would be difficult to be set-back by technology you invented, no?

 

No it was not. Titleist were slightly late to the party.

 

What happened when Titleist came along (a couple years after other solid-core, multipiece, urethane balls were being used on Tour) was that almost immediately it was adopted by hundreds of Tour players.

 

Titleist was the dominant leader in Tour presence. Once they released a modern ball to their staff players and that ball starting winning tournaments, the whole concept was legitimized overnight.

 

Established market leaders are almost never the first with innovations. Apple never puts any feature in an iPhone that hasn't previously shown up (in some form or another) in a Samsung or whatever. ProV1 is the iPhone of Tour balls, not the first but the most successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Therefore you're all for it. Because it would hurt Titleist, right?

 

I'd love to see Titleist's bubble burst. I'm an engineer and align myself with products that offer quality and value. Titleist may have the quality but their value is dubious at best.

Ping G400 Max driver w/Aldila Rogue 125 Silver
Ping G425 5 wood & hybrid
Ping G30 irons w/Recoil 95

Ping G425 irons w/Accra ICWT 2.0 95
Ping Glide wedges w/Recoil 110
Ping Redwood Anser - the "real deal!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist was not hurt when golf balls were "set back to the beginning" by the advent of multipiece urethane Tour balls.

 

How much did Titleist pay out in lawsuit settlements to Callaway and Bridgestone?

 

Wasn't the ProV1 the original multi-piece urethane tour ball? It would be difficult to be set-back by technology you invented, no?

 

No it was not. Titleist were slightly late to the party.

 

What happened when Titleist came along (a couple years after other solid-core, multipiece, urethane balls were being used on Tour) was that almost immediately it was adopted by hundreds of Tour players.

 

Titleist was the dominant leader in Tour presence. Once they released a modern ball to their staff players and that ball starting winning tournaments, the whole concept was legitimized overnight.

 

Established market leaders are almost never the first with innovations. Apple never puts any feature in an iPhone that hasn't previously shown up (in some form or another) in a Samsung or whatever. ProV1 is the iPhone of Tour balls, not the first but the most successful.

 

Not true. Are these alternative facts?

 

The iPhone had the first touch screen of any handheld device.

 

Wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist is afraid that setting the field back to the start will hurt the brand, and I think they are right. Titleist's success is propped up on a house of cards built on perceived quality as judged by their tour presence. Institute a new tour ball rule or change the ball rules overall and everybody will have to go back to the beginning and that will hurt the top dog and help the smaller competitors.

 

Of course he is, who wants to produce and sell a golf ball that is clearly inferior to previous iterations. If you believe Titleist has an edge in terms of their golf ball technology and performance, the roll back puts them back with the pack.

 

Imagine the ad in 2018, "Titleist Pro V1, shorter and less straight than last years model, guaranteed to increase your scores or your money back."

Driver - Callaway Paradym
Woods - Callaway Paradym 3W
Hybrids - XXIO 10 3H, 4H, 5H
Irons - Callaway Paradym 6-52*
Wedge - PXG Forged 56** 
Putter - Ping TYNE C
Ball - Titleist AVX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist was not hurt when golf balls were "set back to the beginning" by the advent of multipiece urethane Tour balls.

 

How much did Titleist pay out in lawsuit settlements to Callaway and Bridgestone?

 

Wasn't the ProV1 the original multi-piece urethane tour ball? It would be difficult to be set-back by technology you invented, no?

 

No it was not. Titleist were slightly late to the party.

 

What happened when Titleist came along (a couple years after other solid-core, multipiece, urethane balls were being used on Tour) was that almost immediately it was adopted by hundreds of Tour players.

 

Titleist was the dominant leader in Tour presence. Once they released a modern ball to their staff players and that ball starting winning tournaments, the whole concept was legitimized overnight.

 

Established market leaders are almost never the first with innovations. Apple never puts any feature in an iPhone that hasn't previously shown up (in some form or another) in a Samsung or whatever. ProV1 is the iPhone of Tour balls, not the first but the most successful.

 

Not true. Are these alternative facts?

 

The iPhone had the first touch screen of any handheld device.

 

Wow.

 

An excellent easy-to-read history of the iPhone is called, "The One Device". Check it out.

 

https://www.amazon.c...=the one device

 

Here's a link to a description of what is generally considered the first touch-screen phone.

 

http://mashable.com/2012/11/09/touchscreen-history/#PgosFkfzhsqI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist was not hurt when golf balls were "set back to the beginning" by the advent of multipiece urethane Tour balls.

 

How much did Titleist pay out in lawsuit settlements to Callaway and Bridgestone?

 

Wasn't the ProV1 the original multi-piece urethane tour ball? It would be difficult to be set-back by technology you invented, no?

 

No it was not. Titleist were slightly late to the party.

 

What happened when Titleist came along (a couple years after other solid-core, multipiece, urethane balls were being used on Tour) was that almost immediately it was adopted by hundreds of Tour players.

 

Titleist was the dominant leader in Tour presence. Once they released a modern ball to their staff players and that ball starting winning tournaments, the whole concept was legitimized overnight.

 

Established market leaders are almost never the first with innovations. Apple never puts any feature in an iPhone that hasn't previously shown up (in some form or another) in a Samsung or whatever. ProV1 is the iPhone of Tour balls, not the first but the most successful.

 

Not true. Are these alternative facts?

 

The iPhone had the first touch screen of any handheld device.

 

Wow.

 

LOL

Driver: Cobra F9 with HZRDUS SMOKE Stiff
3W: Titleist 917F2 w/Fujikura Speeder Pro Tour Spec 84 Stiff
2I: Srixon Z U65 18 Degree w/Miyazaki Kaula 7s
Irons: Mizuno MP-54 3-PW DG S300 
Wedge: Vokey TVD 56 K-Grind
Wedge: Vokey SM6 60-12 K-Grind 
Putter: Scotty Cameron Newport 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Titleist was not hurt when golf balls were "set back to the beginning" by the advent of multipiece urethane Tour balls.

 

How much did Titleist pay out in lawsuit settlements to Callaway and Bridgestone?

 

Wasn't the ProV1 the original multi-piece urethane tour ball? It would be difficult to be set-back by technology you invented, no?

 

No it was not. Titleist were slightly late to the party.

 

What happened when Titleist came along (a couple years after other solid-core, multipiece, urethane balls were being used on Tour) was that almost immediately it was adopted by hundreds of Tour players.

 

Titleist was the dominant leader in Tour presence. Once they released a modern ball to their staff players and that ball starting winning tournaments, the whole concept was legitimized overnight.

 

Established market leaders are almost never the first with innovations. Apple never puts any feature in an iPhone that hasn't previously shown up (in some form or another) in a Samsung or whatever. ProV1 is the iPhone of Tour balls, not the first but the most successful.

 

Wasn't the Strata the first sold-core, multi layer urethane covered ball back in mid-1990's?

Driver: Cobra F9 with HZRDUS SMOKE Stiff
3W: Titleist 917F2 w/Fujikura Speeder Pro Tour Spec 84 Stiff
2I: Srixon Z U65 18 Degree w/Miyazaki Kaula 7s
Irons: Mizuno MP-54 3-PW DG S300 
Wedge: Vokey TVD 56 K-Grind
Wedge: Vokey SM6 60-12 K-Grind 
Putter: Scotty Cameron Newport 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you believe Titleist has an edge in terms of their golf ball technology and performance, the roll back puts them back with the pack.

 

 

Key reference highlighted.

 

Personally, I don't believe. Which is why I don't buy Titleist balls.

Ping G400 Max driver w/Aldila Rogue 125 Silver
Ping G425 5 wood & hybrid
Ping G30 irons w/Recoil 95

Ping G425 irons w/Accra ICWT 2.0 95
Ping Glide wedges w/Recoil 110
Ping Redwood Anser - the "real deal!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When asked to comment about Uihleins assertion that Tiger woods is just a shill for Bridgestone, Phil Mickelson said, "I'll be happy to respond to that but first, let me tell you about the game changing technology that can only be found in the new Rogue driver by Callaway golf."

Callaway XR Pro Attas Tour SPX X
Taylormade Tour issue 15* V Steel 3 wood
Hybrid undecided
Cobra Amp Cell Pro's (All MB) 4-GW Project X Rifle 6.0
Cleveland CG15 56 and 60
White Hot 6 Long Neck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion Titleist balls are quality, however, no better/worse than other companies premium offerings. To me it is simple, Titleist pays the most in player sponsors to play their ball. Over time people want to play what the pros play then Friends talk and Titlesist is the winner. I would venture to say if you gave players 4 balls all painted white (Titleist, callaway, TaylorMade, Bridgestone) and asked them to pick their favorite it would most likely be divided pretty evenly. If Ttileist starting paying players to play their drivers at a higher rate than Callaway or TaylorMade and did so for a few year, they would end up being the #1 driver

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether it's the Titleist CEO or TM, Callaway or Snell, no one wants to have to develop or market a product that performs worse than its previous model.

Driver - Callaway Paradym
Woods - Callaway Paradym 3W
Hybrids - XXIO 10 3H, 4H, 5H
Irons - Callaway Paradym 6-52*
Wedge - PXG Forged 56** 
Putter - Ping TYNE C
Ball - Titleist AVX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • 2024 Valspar Championship WITB Photos (Thanks to bvmagic)- Discussion & Links to Photos
      This weeks WITB Pics are from member bvmagic (Brian). Brian's first event for WRX was in 2008 at Bayhill while in college. Thanks so much bv.
       
      Please put your comments or question on this thread. Links to all the threads are below...
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 31 replies
    • 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Matt (LFG) Every - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Sahith Theegala - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Cameron putters (and new "LD" grip) - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Bettinardi MB & CB irons - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Bettinardi API putter cover - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Swag API covers - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Golf Pride Reverse Taper grips - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 15 replies
    • 2024 Cognizant Classic - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #1
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #2
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #3
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #4
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Brandt Snedeker - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Max Greyserman - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Eric Cole - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Carl Yuan - WITb - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Russell Henley - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Justin Sun - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alex Noren - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Shane Lowry - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Taylor Montgomery - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jake Knapp (KnappTime_ltd) - WITB - - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Super Stoke Pistol Lock 1.0 & 2.0 grips - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      LA Golf new insert putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Garsen Quad Tour 15 grip - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Swag covers - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jacob Bridgeman's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Bud Cauley's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Ryo Hisatsune's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Chris Kirk - new black Callaway Apex CB irons and a few Odyssey putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alejandro Tosti's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 2 replies
    • 2024 Genesis Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #3
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #4
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Rory McIlroy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Sepp Straka - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Patrick Rodgers - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Brendon Todd - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Denny McCarthy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Corey Conners - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Chase Johnson - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tommy Fleetwood - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Matt Fitzpatrick - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Si Woo Kim - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Viktor Hovland - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Wyndham Clark - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Cam Davis - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Nick Taylor - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Ben Baller WITB update (New putter, driver, hybrid and shafts) – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Vortex Golf rangefinder - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Fujikura Ventus shaft - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods & TaylorMade "Sun Day Red" apparel launch event, product photos – 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods Sun Day Red golf shoes - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Aretera shafts - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Toulon putters - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods' new white "Sun Day Red" golf shoe prototypes – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      • 22 replies
    • 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put and questions or comments here
       
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open - Monday #1
      2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open - Monday #2
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Ben Taylor - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Garrick Higgo - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Billy Horschel - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Justin Lower - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Lanto Griffin - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Bud Cauley - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Corbin Burnes (2021 NL Cy Young) - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Greyson Sigg - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Charley Hoffman - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Nico Echavarria - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Victor Perez - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Sami Valimaki - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Ryo Hisatsune - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
       
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      Jake Knapp's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      New Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Tyler Duncan's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Greyson Sigg's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Sunjae Im's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Ping's Waste Management putter covers - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Vincent Whaley's custom Cameron - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Odyssey Waste Management putter covers - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Super Stroke custom grips - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Zac Blair's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Bettinardi Waste Management putter covers - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
       
       
       
       
       
       

       
      • 12 replies

×
×
  • Create New...