My Golf Spy Ball Test - General Discussion

[MattM97]

> @"North Texas" said:

> > @MattM97 said:

> > I'll probably look at the results as always but take them with a bag very big pinch maybe bag of salt.

> >

> > Will their test change anything for me? No cause I have a metric ton of golf balls already that I enjoy using. Would I try what they rank as best? Maybe if it's way out of left field unexpected but if it doesn't fit what I like I won't play it.

>

> Everyone needs to read Matts first sentence over and over. There is absolutely nothing about this company's ball test that makes it the end all be all. It's just another ball test and that's pretty much it. It may help you or it may not.

 

They'll probably say otherwise lol.

 

But I do that with every test or review. Like with a lot of ball testing a lot of guys don't like the 'click' most X balls give when hit and kinda rank it lower or how they dislike that. I just get all the info and specs I want/need from those tests and do my own or make my own guesses. With balls it's easy I buy a dozen or a sleeve to test out.

[Sixcat]

> People are grumbling about Mygolfespionage tests, but if you have looked at their results from the last several years of “most wanted” they haven’t shown any brands favoritism.

>

> They also include all the data, even broken down into data by swing speed. The tests appear to be conducted with very little bias; a good number of golfers, with a variety of swing speeds, a large sample size of shots per offering, and they use a legitimate launch monitor for data collection.

>

> As far as testing products goes, it’s actually pretty fair. I’m for sure interested in their results, and I have seen significant differences in the various tour ball offerings, so I’m looking forward to hard data.

>

> Is it perfect? Of course not. Will I change balls? Maybe, maybe not. But if anything stands out it will for sure make me consider trying a sleeve of something for the first time, or giving another ball a harder look if I dismissed it after limited testing!

 

Couldn't agree more. I haven't seen anything to indicate bias toward any manufacturer or brand. What I have found over the past few years, their results don't lead me to rush out and buy the "Most Wanted" whatever but I often consider brands as a result of their testing that I may not have considered in the past. Evnroll being a prime example.

[cpeck]

the site is gonna crash!

 

 

edit- it crashed lol

[Mahamilto]

Some people care... site crashed lol

[cpeck]

......and that’s why we upgraded over here, bravo to @easyyy and @Gxgolfer for being ahead of the rest.

[Willian70]

I got to see it before the site crashed. Snell is the longest. Pro v1/v1x are at the top. Cut golf balls are junk, Srixon Z star and XV top performers however Srixon XV had irregularities causing them to go offline in testing. It was informative but I am going to play the XV because I bought so many of them. One major take away is they claim SOFT balls are hurting your game unless you have very high SS and Spin.

[c50sooner]

Predicting Cut Blue as the long DTC. Also is it possible that the website “going down” is part of this whole weeks long tease process. The timing seems a little suspicious.

[jjfcpa]

> @Willian70 said:

> I got to see it before the site crashed. Snell is the longest. Pro v1/v1x are at the top. Cut golf balls are junk, Srixon Z star and XV top performers however Srixon XV had irregularities causing them to go offline in testing. It was informative but I am going to play the XV because I bought so many of them. One major take away is they claim SOFT balls are hurting your game unless you have very high SS and Spin.

 

I predicted Snell would be the longest, but you didn't say which Snell ball... Black or X?

[Willian70]

> @jjfcpa said:

> > @Willian70 said:

> > I got to see it before the site crashed. Snell is the longest. Pro v1/v1x are at the top. Cut golf balls are junk, Srixon Z star and XV top performers however Srixon XV had irregularities causing them to go offline in testing. It was informative but I am going to play the XV because I bought so many of them. One major take away is they claim SOFT balls are hurting your game unless you have very high SS and Spin.

>

> I predicted Snell would be the longest, but you didn't say which Snell ball... Black or X?

 

MTB can't remember. I loaded the page right at 9:45 am started going through the data for the balls I play just saw Snell MTB whatever. I hit refresh to look at comments being posted and servers crashed. Sorry.

[Joker91]

> @Willian70 said:

> I got to see it before the site crashed. Snell is the longest. Pro v1/v1x are at the top. Cut golf balls are junk, Srixon Z star and XV top performers however Srixon XV had irregularities causing them to go offline in testing. It was informative but I am going to play the XV because I bought so many of them. One major take away is they claim SOFT balls are hurting your game unless you have very high SS and Spin.

 

Sounds like thier typical bullxxxx test

[jjfcpa]

> @Joker91 said:

> > @Willian70 said:

> > I got to see it before the site crashed. Snell is the longest. Pro v1/v1x are at the top. Cut golf balls are junk, Srixon Z star and XV top performers however Srixon XV had irregularities causing them to go offline in testing. It was informative but I am going to play the XV because I bought so many of them. One major take away is they claim SOFT balls are hurting your game unless you have very high SS and Spin.

>

> Sounds like thier typical bullxxxx test

 

That sounds kind of harsh. While you probably have to use your own interpretation of the data presented, it's better than having nothing at all. Almost purchased some of the new Cut golf balls over the weekend... now, I'll probably hold off.

 

 

 

[Joker91]

> @jjfcpa said:

> > @Joker91 said:

> > > @Willian70 said:

> > > I got to see it before the site crashed. Snell is the longest. Pro v1/v1x are at the top. Cut golf balls are junk, Srixon Z star and XV top performers however Srixon XV had irregularities causing them to go offline in testing. It was informative but I am going to play the XV because I bought so many of them. One major take away is they claim SOFT balls are hurting your game unless you have very high SS and Spin.

> >

> > Sounds like thier typical bullxxxx test

>

> That sounds kind of harsh. While you probably have to use your own interpretation of the data presented, it's better than having nothing at all. Almost purchased some of the new Cut golf balls over the weekend... now, I'll probably hold off.

>

>

>

 

Because of what 1 company says? Go watch the last TXG video about Cut balls. You gotta look at more than 1 place that claims to be unbiased.

[Joker91]

Delete

[GDTBATH]

I'm looking forward to it (once they finally get the site up haha). I think people should be careful about accepting anything from that (or any) site as either the gospel truth, or as something to be repudiated out of hand. Read through the study, consider the methodology and take it into consideration. Recognize that sometimes, there is something to the claim that X ball is best or isn't best, but use the info as part of your own, independent, decision-making process.

[jjfcpa]

> @Joker91 said:

> > @jjfcpa said:

> > > @Joker91 said:

> > > > @Willian70 said:

> > > > I got to see it before the site crashed. Snell is the longest. Pro v1/v1x are at the top. Cut golf balls are junk, Srixon Z star and XV top performers however Srixon XV had irregularities causing them to go offline in testing. It was informative but I am going to play the XV because I bought so many of them. One major take away is they claim SOFT balls are hurting your game unless you have very high SS and Spin.

> > >

> > > Sounds like thier typical bullxxxx test

> >

> > That sounds kind of harsh. While you probably have to use your own interpretation of the data presented, it's better than having nothing at all. Almost purchased some of the new Cut golf balls over the weekend... now, I'll probably hold off.

> >

> >

> >

>

> Because of what 1 company says? Go watch the last TXG video about Cut balls. You gotta look at more than 1 place that claims to be unbiased.

 

I did watch the video about the Cut balls recently posted by TXG. They were definitely working for them and that's why you'd have to interpret the results from MGS and determine just how valid they are. However, I have read some reports that the Cut balls don't have very good durability - these were postings that I read in this forum and elsewhere. That also played into my decision to hold off on purchasing the Cut golf balls.

[3114]

This is not just a website crash. They promoted this test for weeks through their social media accounts. Site goes down at the exact time the data is supposed to be released and there is nothing but crickets from Not allowed because of spam? No tweet, no instagram post, nothing. I don't buy it.

[3114]

Also, why is mine golf spy blurred out like an expletive?

[marlowe70]

Site is up again.

[nsxguy]

> @3114 said:

> Also, why is mine golf spy blurred out like an expletive?

 

The Rules/Terms & Conditions are a bit ambiguous but it looks like WRX has simply ********** out any references to competing websites - so I guess that makes the Rule less ambiguous ? LOL

[Joker91]

Data for only 115mph or 85mph. bullxxxx test

[CodyJSparks]

And site is down again...

 

[mmack067]

If you check both the 85mph box and 115mph box it'll give you the averages for 100mph. Looking at the data the Bridgestone Tour BX is something I'm going to try. I've been playing the TP5X but want to bring my wedge flight down a bit and driver launch up.

[Joker91]

> @mmack067 said:

> If you check both the 85mph box and 115mph box it'll give you the averages for 100mph. Looking at the data the Bridgestone Tour BX is something I'm going to try. I've been playing the TP5X but want to bring my wedge flight down a bit and driver launch up.

 

Is that just an average of 85mph and 115mph or is it actual 100mph data?

[Sixcat]

> @Joker91 said:

> > @mmack067 said:

> > If you check both the 85mph box and 115mph box it'll give you the averages for 100mph. Looking at the data the Bridgestone Tour BX is something I'm going to try. I've been playing the TP5X but want to bring my wedge flight down a bit and driver launch up.

>

> Is that just an average of 85mph and 115mph or is it actual 100mph data?

 

If you read the report, the major ball manufacturers confirm "swing speed to result" process is linear. If everyone agrees the results are linear regardless of swing speed, what's the need to study additional swing speeds? High end and low end result in the same result everywhere between!

[mmack067]

> @Joker91 said:

> > @mmack067 said:

> > If you check both the 85mph box and 115mph box it'll give you the averages for 100mph. Looking at the data the Bridgestone Tour BX is something I'm going to try. I've been playing the TP5X but want to bring my wedge flight down a bit and driver launch up.

>

> Is that just an average of 85mph and 115mph or is it actual 100mph data?

 

I think it was mentioned in the article that it's an average, but the site is down again so I can't confirm. That said, the results were pretty linear so I would think it would be pretty close. I understand the frustration if you're in the 100MPH range, but for someone in the 110-112 range having data at 115 is really nice.

[Joker91]

> @Sixcat said:

> > @Joker91 said:

> > > @mmack067 said:

> > > If you check both the 85mph box and 115mph box it'll give you the averages for 100mph. Looking at the data the Bridgestone Tour BX is something I'm going to try. I've been playing the TP5X but want to bring my wedge flight down a bit and driver launch up.

> >

> > Is that just an average of 85mph and 115mph or is it actual 100mph data?

>

> If you read the report, the major ball manufacturers confirm "swing speed to result" process is linear. If everyone agrees the results are linear regardless of swing speed, what's the need to study additional swing speeds? High end and low end result in the same result everywhere between!

 

Because there are more variables than just swing speed

[TheCityGame]

> @Sixcat said:

> > @Joker91 said:

> > > @mmack067 said:

> > > If you check both the 85mph box and 115mph box it'll give you the averages for 100mph. Looking at the data the Bridgestone Tour BX is something I'm going to try. I've been playing the TP5X but want to bring my wedge flight down a bit and driver launch up.

> >

> > Is that just an average of 85mph and 115mph or is it actual 100mph data?

>

> If you read the report, the major ball manufacturers confirm "swing speed to result" process is linear. If everyone agrees the results are linear regardless of swing speed, what's the need to study additional swing speeds? High end and low end result in the same result everywhere between!

 

Why even?

 

Obviously, Joker has a bug up his butt about the guys.

 

He could maybe just go back to the impartial :trollface: Golf Digest Hot List or wherever he gets his information and let people who care about the MGS test discuss this without it being called bullxxxx in every other post.

[Joker91]

> @TheCityGame said:

> > @Sixcat said:

> > > @Joker91 said:

> > > > @mmack067 said:

> > > > If you check both the 85mph box and 115mph box it'll give you the averages for 100mph. Looking at the data the Bridgestone Tour BX is something I'm going to try. I've been playing the TP5X but want to bring my wedge flight down a bit and driver launch up.

> > >

> > > Is that just an average of 85mph and 115mph or is it actual 100mph data?

> >

> > If you read the report, the major ball manufacturers confirm "swing speed to result" process is linear. If everyone agrees the results are linear regardless of swing speed, what's the need to study additional swing speeds? High end and low end result in the same result everywhere between!

>

> Why even?

>

> Obviously, Joker has a bug up his butt about the guys.

>

> He could maybe just go back to the impartial :trollface: Golf Digest Hot List or wherever he gets his information and let people who care about the **** test discuss this without it being called bullxxxx in every other post.

 

Sounds like you got your nose up their a**. Maybe you can keep limiting yourself to a site that claims to be the best at testing when all these tests are crap. All that matters is how the equipment works for you individually.

[Joker91]

wow "c r a p" is filtered?

[Sixcat]

> @Joker91 said:

> > @Sixcat said:

> > > @Joker91 said:

> > > > @mmack067 said:

> > > > If you check both the 85mph box and 115mph box it'll give you the averages for 100mph. Looking at the data the Bridgestone Tour BX is something I'm going to try. I've been playing the TP5X but want to bring my wedge flight down a bit and driver launch up.

> > >

> > > Is that just an average of 85mph and 115mph or is it actual 100mph data?

> >

> > If you read the report, the major ball manufacturers confirm "swing speed to result" process is linear. If everyone agrees the results are linear regardless of swing speed, what's the need to study additional swing speeds? High end and low end result in the same result everywhere between!

>

> Because there are more variables than just swing speed

 

In any experiment, the independent variable is manipulated, generating a usable data set for the dependent variable. The raw data from the results should be gathered and analyzed by statistical means. This allows the researcher to establish if there is any relationship between the variables and accept or reject the null hypothesis. Which produces deductive reasoning along a linear platform to achieve valid results.

 

I couldn't care less what the results of this experiment are. I will play the ball I chose, not what any message board tells me I should play. But linear results at 85 and 115 are proportional to everything in-between.