Jump to content
2024 Houston Open WITB Photos ×

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


Roadking2003

Recommended Posts

you are absolutely correct that some could gain distance by reducing spin, but i do not believe that to be the case for the majority. i could be wrong.

 

sidespin != backspin

 

backspin actually makes the ball go straighter.

 

do people with under a 10hdcp not get to enjoy the game of golf too? or is it only for people that can't break 90?

 

A lot of amateurs don't de-loft the club at impact, or they even scoop through impact - both is adding spin.

 

A spinny ball, doesn't know if the player wanted pure backspin with a perfect vertical spin axis, or also side spin, because of a tilted spin axis.

 

Guess what, a amateur has bigger problems to control the spin axis, than a pro...

...thus the amateur will get more punished by a more spinning ball, than the pro.

 

btw

 

there are low handicappers, who hit it short, and high handicappers who hit it a long way...

 

...because the short game is also important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 550
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i concede your point regarding spin axis, but not that "scooping" adds spin.

 

can we all think about shots beyond just the driver?

 

Maybe it is not the appropriate word for that strike technique...

 

...but if you let the club head overtake your hands through impact, and let the club head slide through the ball position, you are adding a lot of loft, which is adding spin.

 

If you have ever played with a 64 degree wedge, you know, that you can literally slide through and under the ball, with next to no forward moving of the ball - similar to a flop shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something struck me as odd the other day that reminded me of this thread. There has been so much posted about how courses “have to” lengthen holes because the modern players hit it too far. And yet baseball celebrates with awe how far guys like Judge and Stanton hit the ball and how many home runs they hit.

 

I have not seen any reports of stadiums thinking they “must” move back the fences to stop this onslaught. Now that they are on the same team maybe some team will just move back the fences when the Yankees are in town?

Titleist TSR4 9° Tensei AV White 65

Titleist TSi3 strong 3w 13.5° Tensei AV White 70

Titleist TS3 19°  hybrid Tensei Blue/Titleist TSR3 24° Diamana Ahina

Titleist T150 5-pw Nippon Pro Modus 125

Vokey SM8 50° F & 56° M SM9 60°M

Cameron Newport w/ flow neck by Lamont/ Cameron Del Mar

 



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something struck me as odd the other day that reminded me of this thread. There has been so much posted about how courses “have to” lengthen holes because the modern players hit it too far. And yet baseball celebrates with awe how far guys like Judge and Stanton hit the ball and how many home runs they hit.

 

I have not seen any reports of stadiums thinking they “must” move back the fences to stop this onslaught. Now that they are on the same team maybe some team will just move back the fences when the Yankees are in town?

 

You're right, they dont move fences, they just make sure they cant use metal bats at professional level. Same thing as limiting golf equipment...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something struck me as odd the other day that reminded me of this thread. There has been so much posted about how courses “have to” lengthen holes because the modern players hit it too far. And yet baseball celebrates with awe how far guys like Judge and Stanton hit the ball and how many home runs they hit.

 

I have not seen any reports of stadiums thinking they “must” move back the fences to stop this onslaught. Now that they are on the same team maybe some team will just move back the fences when the Yankees are in town?

 

A number of fields have actually moved their fences in to increase HR's for the home team. Baseball field dimensions are based on the type of baseball the home team hopes to play. Citi Field was built as a pitchers field initially, but the lack of HR's made winning and attracting power hitters difficult so they moved in the fences. Back in the day, the Yankees built their stadium with a short right field fence for Babe Ruth.

 

The Sentry course was set up for long hitters. DJ hit a drive 430 yards but at least 80 yards was rollout down the hill.

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

Something struck me as odd the other day that reminded me of this thread. There has been so much posted about how courses "have to" lengthen holes because the modern players hit it too far. And yet baseball celebrates with awe how far guys like Judge and Stanton hit the ball and how many home runs they hit.

 

I have not seen any reports of stadiums thinking they "must" move back the fences to stop this onslaught. Now that they are on the same team maybe some team will just move back the fences when the Yankees are in town?

 

You're right, they dont move fences, they just make sure they cant use metal bats at professional level. Same thing as limiting golf equipment...

They are hitting the ball 450+ feet with wood. Longer than ever before on a consistent basis. So the metal bat example is invalid. The metal bat ban is more of a safety issue for pitchers and infielders.

Titleist TSR4 9° Tensei AV White 65

Titleist TSi3 strong 3w 13.5° Tensei AV White 70

Titleist TS3 19°  hybrid Tensei Blue/Titleist TSR3 24° Diamana Ahina

Titleist T150 5-pw Nippon Pro Modus 125

Vokey SM8 50° F & 56° M SM9 60°M

Cameron Newport w/ flow neck by Lamont/ Cameron Del Mar

 



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kudos to Titleist on making a biased powerpoint. So basically, all thats changed is the golfer's fitness level and therefore we should not allow people to workout anymore and ban protein from professional player diets.

 

Strange post. Did you read the report? They showed how several other factors have changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kudos to Titleist on making a biased powerpoint. So basically, all thats changed is the golfer's fitness level and therefore we should not allow people to workout anymore and ban protein from professional player diets.

 

Strange post. Did you read the report? They showed how several other factors have changed.

 

Yep. Made sure to read it before posting anything. There arent very many factors. Golfer, club, ball, course. Course lengthening meant a race for more distance and that has been acheived and now everyone complains that the "driver" and "ball" are too long which is hogwash to limit the argument to just the driver when those same long drivers can use a 2 iron to hit 250yd+ shots. Jamie sadlowski may be an exception but he drives a 2 iron further than most tour player's can drive. So scaling back tour woods really isnt an option. Elite fitness is only going to get better. Making courses longer isn't an option, although they could redesign course hazards differently to make it more difficult to do the bomb it and recover strategy as well as they could tighten the out of bounds borders as a deterent from bombing it. Then theres the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing missing from this Titleist rant is for it to be presented by Michael Breed!

Driver - Cobra Speedzone

Hybrids

      Cobra 17
      Wishon 775 21

      Wishon 775 24 
Irons - Callaway Apex MB 6-A
Wedges - Maltby 54 60 TSW DRM
Putters - L.A.B Blad.1 and L.A.B. DF 2.1 Long
Titleist Yellow ProV1x / AVX 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone should read "How to Lie with Statistics" at least once in their lives.

 

Honestly, if he wanted to say the ball isn't the problem, he could do an Iron Byron test between old and new. I'm sure there is a reason he didn't.

Titleist Tsi3 9/Tensei White 65x

Titleist Tsi2 16.5/Tensei White 75x

Titleist 818 h2 21/Tensei White 95x

Mizuno Mp-20 mb 4-Pw/Dynamic Gold 120x

Mizuno T22 50, 54, 58/Dynamic Gold s400

Bettinardi Studio Stock #8

Titleist ProV1x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone point me to the video where Mark Crossfield pulls apart this data? I need him to tell me to be critical of some of these ambit claims, otherwise I just might believe everything I’m being told by Titleist.

TaylorMade Qi10 10.5* 
Callaway BB Alpha 816 16*
Srixon Z H45 Hybrid 19* 
Srixon ZX Utility 23*
Srixon ZX5 Mk II 5-AW

Callaway Jaws Raw Black 54 & 58
TaylorMade Spider Tour Black
Bridgestone Tour RX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone should read "How to Lie with Statistics" at least once in their lives.

 

Honestly, if he wanted to say the ball isn't the problem, he could do an Iron Byron test between old and new. I'm sure there is a reason he didn't.

 

You mean the correlation between the declining amount of public phone cells, and the increase of the average live expectancy within the last 20 years?

 

Yes, (meanwhile) I guess, that Davis may address this issue...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Jack's comments at PGA National were more of the same. "It's the ball's fault and I've been saying that since the 1970s..." Jack has made golf balls and courses for decades. He notes that people complain at how long it takes to play a round of golf. Yet he makes some of the longest and most difficult courses around and tried to make a ball just as long as anything else out there. Why didn't Jack take the lead and take some of his own medicine? Why is he waiting for the USGA and the R&A to force him to make the changes he thinks are necessary? Jack hasn't even made one course where he could even try these kinds of ideas.

 

On the other hand, this study misses some of the reasons why distance might not be good for the game of golf. What about the time it takes to play a round these days? The Titleist study never mentioned that. What about the increased maintenance costs that longer courses generate? Titleist never mentioned that. Today Jack said that only Titleist is against rolling the ball back (Bridgestone has said they are for it, but we have yet to hear from Callaway, Srixon, and TaylorMade). And I can understand why. If you roll the ball back, then all of the OEMs have to make and market a ball that the masses will have to play and test. And Titleist's (already decreasing) stranglehold could be broken.

Ping G410 LST 10* (DI-6X)
Ping G410 3W 15.5* (DI-7X)
Ping i20 3-PW (DI-95X, PX 6.0)
Ping Glide 2.0 50*SS, 56*SS, 60*ES (PX 6.0)
Ping Vault Arna

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack's comments at PGA National were more of the same. "It's the ball's fault and I've been saying that since the 1970s..." Jack has made golf balls and courses for decades. He notes that people complain at how long it takes to play a round of golf. Yet he makes some of the longest and most difficult courses around and tried to make a ball just as long as anything else out there. Why didn't Jack take the lead and take some of his own medicine? Why is he waiting for the USGA and the R&A to force him to make the changes he thinks are necessary? Jack hasn't even made one course where he could even try these kinds of ideas.

 

On the other hand, this study misses some of the reasons why distance might not be good for the game of golf. What about the time it takes to play a round these days? The Titleist study never mentioned that. What about the increased maintenance costs that longer courses generate? Titleist never mentioned that. Today Jack said that only Titleist is against rolling the ball back (Bridgestone has said they are for it, but we have yet to hear from Callaway, Srixon, and TaylorMade). And I can understand why. If you roll the ball back, then all of the OEMs have to make and market a ball that the masses will have to play and test. And Titleist's (already decreasing) stranglehold could be broken.

 

J.B. Holmes, J. Day, J. Nicklaus, etc., and every other slow player imitating them, are responsible for longer rounds of golf,

 

because you can play the very same course, with the very same length, in 4 hours, or 6 hours - solely depending on the people you play with, or the people in front of you. :read:

 

 

This is completely independent from the balls they use.

 

-

 

Someone already pointed to the (fun-) fact, that one can run a mile within the time Holmes took for one shot!

 

...I can play a whole par 3 in that time.

 

 

How long do you need, to walk (additional) 500 yards?

 

...probably not longer than you are currently allowed to search for one ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack says the modern ball goes too far. Tiger says the modern ball goes too far. Louis Oosthuizen says the modern ball goes too far. MIke Davis has come to that conclusion, and now Martin Slumbers is on the same side of that fence.

 

These are guys at the highest levels of the game, and they have a lot more say than a bunch of us rambling folks on the internet. I happen to think that we have reached a point where there might be a change to the ball - and maybe to the COR of the drivers and fairway woods.

Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove.  P.G. Wodehouse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grumpy old guy #1 complains about the modern ball.

 

Grumpy old guy #2 complains about the modern ball.

 

Grumpy young guy complains about the modern ball.

 

And Mike Davis WHO WORKS FOR THE ORGANIZATION WITH 100% CONTROL OVER THE DISTANCE OF THE BALL complains about the modern golf ball making it tough for him to play Mr. Wizard doing course setups for his employer's events.

 

Yep, that convinces me I need a shorter ball. Those guys are really speaking for mainstream golfer, right there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack says the modern ball goes too far. Tiger says the modern ball goes too far. Louis Oosthuizen says the modern ball goes too far. MIke Davis has come to that conclusion, and now Martin Slumbers is on the same side of that fence.

 

These are guys at the highest levels of the game, and they have a lot more say than a bunch of us rambling folks on the internet. I happen to think that we have reached a point where there might be a change to the ball - and maybe to the COR of the drivers and fairway woods.

 

Great idea, lets forget the facts, common sense, and our brain for a minute,

and believe everything the leader(s) say(s)...

 

...even Abraham Lincoln was aware, that:

 

"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the thing. When I go play golf tomorrow, it will not be on a Mike Davis 8,000 yard setup. It will be on my outdated small town country club that was built the same year I was born and has not been changed one iota since the ProV1 was invented.

 

In all these "ball goes too far [sic]" threads, I still have not seen one single advantage it would offer me and the guys I play with if tomorrow we had to use a ball that flies 20-30% shorter than today's ball. We're going to be playing the same course, under the same conditions, with the same (poor) golf swings. The ball would literally just fall out of the air sooner than it does now. Where is the benefit?

 

So I figure the Nicklaus/Davis perspective must offer *some* benefit to players in the top echelon (1%? 5%?) of players. But they are going to have a real tough time expecting the 95 or 99 percent of us who aren't at that level to simply accept a crappy performing ball so that the elites can somehow enjoy their rounds more. But it's much of a muchness with our current cultural moment so I can't say I'm surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very disappointed in Jack and what he is suggesting. A few of my golf buddies are in their 70's and still enjoy the game like they did 20 years ago. One of them texted me and said the ball/equipment allows him to still play 6000-6200 yards even at 76 years old. Changing that would make it more difficult on our seniors. To me Jack sounds like this guy:

 

9rYVxqH.jpg

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

Here's the thing. When I go play golf tomorrow, it will not be on a Mike Davis 8,000 yard setup. It will be on my outdated small town country club that was built the same year I was born and has not been changed one iota since the ProV1 was invented.

 

In all these "ball goes too far [sic]" threads, I still have not seen one single advantage it would offer me and the guys I play with if tomorrow we had to use a ball that flies 20-30% shorter than today's ball. We're going to be playing the same course, under the same conditions, with the same (poor) golf swings. The ball would literally just fall out of the air sooner than it does now. Where is the benefit?

 

So I figure the Nicklaus/Davis perspective must offer *some* benefit to players in the top echelon (1%? 5%?) of players. But they are going to have a real tough time expecting the 95 or 99 percent of us who aren't at that level to simply accept a crappy performing ball so that the elites can somehow enjoy their rounds more. But it's much of a muchness with our current cultural moment so I can't say I'm surprised.

 

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

 

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

Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove.  P.G. Wodehouse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grumpy old guy #1 complains about the modern ball.

 

Grumpy old guy #2 complains about the modern ball.

 

Grumpy young guy complains about the modern ball.

 

And Mike Davis WHO WORKS FOR THE ORGANIZATION WITH 100% CONTROL OVER THE DISTANCE OF THE BALL complains about the modern golf ball making it tough for him to play Mr. Wizard doing course setups for his employer's events.

 

Yep, that convinces me I need a shorter ball. Those guys are really speaking for mainstream golfer, right there.

 

By the way, grumpy old guy #2 is currently at the top of the leader board at the Honda. Where he should be.

Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove.  P.G. Wodehouse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the thing. When I go play golf tomorrow, it will not be on a Mike Davis 8,000 yard setup. It will be on my outdated small town country club that was built the same year I was born and has not been changed one iota since the ProV1 was invented.

 

In all these "ball goes too far [sic]" threads, I still have not seen one single advantage it would offer me and the guys I play with if tomorrow we had to use a ball that flies 20-30% shorter than today's ball. We're going to be playing the same course, under the same conditions, with the same (poor) golf swings. The ball would literally just fall out of the air sooner than it does now. Where is the benefit?

 

So I figure the Nicklaus/Davis perspective must offer *some* benefit to players in the top echelon (1%? 5%?) of players. But they are going to have a real tough time expecting the 95 or 99 percent of us who aren't at that level to simply accept a crappy performing ball so that the elites can somehow enjoy their rounds more. But it's much of a muchness with our current cultural moment so I can't say I'm surprised.

 

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

 

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

 

If they want to make any material difference in how the game is played by Dustin Johnson, they are not talking about a 2-3% rolback. It would have to be 20-30% to make DJ hit the same clubs into the same holes at the same length as Jack did in his prime. And I'm not sure a 30% rollback would actually do that.

 

So don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining, please. They are not talking about a tweak to the ball that makes my 210-yard drives go 205.

 

And yes, the game has changed since the early 90's. The equipment and balls got better in every way. I like better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the thing. When I go play golf tomorrow, it will not be on a Mike Davis 8,000 yard setup. It will be on my outdated small town country club that was built the same year I was born and has not been changed one iota since the ProV1 was invented.

 

In all these "ball goes too far [sic]" threads, I still have not seen one single advantage it would offer me and the guys I play with if tomorrow we had to use a ball that flies 20-30% shorter than today's ball. We're going to be playing the same course, under the same conditions, with the same (poor) golf swings. The ball would literally just fall out of the air sooner than it does now. Where is the benefit?

 

So I figure the Nicklaus/Davis perspective must offer *some* benefit to players in the top echelon (1%? 5%?) of players. But they are going to have a real tough time expecting the 95 or 99 percent of us who aren't at that level to simply accept a crappy performing ball so that the elites can somehow enjoy their rounds more. But it's much of a muchness with our current cultural moment so I can't say I'm surprised.

 

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

 

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

 

...well, if you unarguable deny the distance report of the USGA itself, and the fact, that distances haven't changed since more than a decade, because of the ball, and the equipment regulation...

 

...and you ignore, that the fairways became faster, and that the athletes have more sophisticated training programs etc...

 

...then yes...

 

...a truly unarguable point.

 

-

 

Maybe you should consider, that the agronomy with the advent of the lown-mowers has changed the game more, within a 20 year time span, than everything else... :derisive:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the thing. When I go play golf tomorrow, it will not be on a Mike Davis 8,000 yard setup. It will be on my outdated small town country club that was built the same year I was born and has not been changed one iota since the ProV1 was invented.

 

In all these "ball goes too far [sic]" threads, I still have not seen one single advantage it would offer me and the guys I play with if tomorrow we had to use a ball that flies 20-30% shorter than today's ball. We're going to be playing the same course, under the same conditions, with the same (poor) golf swings. The ball would literally just fall out of the air sooner than it does now. Where is the benefit?

 

So I figure the Nicklaus/Davis perspective must offer *some* benefit to players in the top echelon (1%? 5%?) of players. But they are going to have a real tough time expecting the 95 or 99 percent of us who aren't at that level to simply accept a crappy performing ball so that the elites can somehow enjoy their rounds more. But it's much of a muchness with our current cultural moment so I can't say I'm surprised.

 

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

 

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

 

...well, if you unarguable deny the distance report of the USGA itself, and the fact, that distances haven't changed since more than a decade, because of the ball, and the equipment regulation...

 

...and you ignore, that the fairways became faster, and that the athletes have more sophisticated training programs etc...

 

...then yes...

 

...a truly unarguable point.

 

He doesn't care about the past 15 years. He hated the ProV1 and Titanium driver when they first appeared, he thinks they should never been allowed in the first place, he wants to go back in time to the late 1990's and correct this historic injustice that has demonstrably ruined the game.

 

This isn't about what's happening now or going forward. This is about re-litigating a decision that was made nearly 20 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the thing. When I go play golf tomorrow, it will not be on a Mike Davis 8,000 yard setup. It will be on my outdated small town country club that was built the same year I was born and has not been changed one iota since the ProV1 was invented.

 

In all these "ball goes too far [sic]" threads, I still have not seen one single advantage it would offer me and the guys I play with if tomorrow we had to use a ball that flies 20-30% shorter than today's ball. We're going to be playing the same course, under the same conditions, with the same (poor) golf swings. The ball would literally just fall out of the air sooner than it does now. Where is the benefit?

 

So I figure the Nicklaus/Davis perspective must offer *some* benefit to players in the top echelon (1%? 5%?) of players. But they are going to have a real tough time expecting the 95 or 99 percent of us who aren't at that level to simply accept a crappy performing ball so that the elites can somehow enjoy their rounds more. But it's much of a muchness with our current cultural moment so I can't say I'm surprised.

 

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

 

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

 

If they want to make any material difference in how the game is played by Dustin Johnson, they are not talking about a 2-3% rolback. It would have to be 20-30% to make DJ hit the same clubs into the same holes at the same length as Jack did in his prime. And I'm not sure a 30% rollback would actually do that.

 

So don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining, please. They are not talking about a tweak to the ball that makes my 210-yard drives go 205.

 

And yes, the game has changed since the early 90's. The equipment and balls got better in every way. I like better.

 

I would never pee on your leg.

 

I am guessing that the USGA/R&A will come out with two, or possibly 3 ball specifications. The different specifications would apply to different course lengths for elite players. As Mike Davis mentioned last summer, an elite player could play Myopia Hunt Club with ball spec #2 or #3, and make that shorter course a challenge again. That happens to be Jack's approach as well.

 

That approach would be for elite players, and would not change the game for you or me. There is an old course that I play from time to time with hickories; I would have the option of using ball spec #2 or #3 on that course. But not on the course that measures 6400 where I play in the Thursday league.

Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove.  P.G. Wodehouse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the damage has already been done. The ball goes further, courses built from the 90's on are much bigger and more difficult than their predecessors. All the courses wanted bragging rights over the longest and hardest test of golf. During this same period, maintenance got more expensive and green fee's went up. The popping of the real estate bubble took all the air out of the balloon.

 

I don't think changing the ball will fix anything at this point.

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 Texas Children's Houston Open - Discussion and links to Photos
      Please put any questions or Comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Monday #1
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Monday #2
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #1
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #2
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Thorbjorn Olesen - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Ben Silverman - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jesse Droemer - SoTX PGA Section POY - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      David Lipsky - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Martin Trainer - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Zac Blair - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jacob Bridgeman - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Trace Crowe - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jimmy Walker - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Daniel Berger - WITB(very mini) - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Chesson Hadley - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Callum McNeill - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Rhein Gibson - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Patrick Fishburn - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Peter Malnati - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Raul Pereda - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Gary Woodland WITB (New driver, iron shafts) – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Padraig Harrington WITB – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      Tom Hoge's custom Cameron - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Piretti putters - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Ping putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Kevin Dougherty's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Bettinardi putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Erik Barnes testing an all-black Axis1 putter – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Tony Finau's new driver shaft – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
       
       
       
       
       
      • 7 replies
    • 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

×
×
  • Create New...