LIVE Q&A with Golf Digest on The Hot List 2012 - Friday, Jan 20, 1PM ET

[moegolfer11]

Why no blades? Yes there are some of us out there that still play them. Also I remember in the past you used to do Balls on the Hotlist. Why Not anymore?

[Llortamaisey]

How come the PING i20 and the Cleveland Classic driver have the same exact score yet one received silver and the other received gold?

[Vosh68]

My biggest question is in regards to the Player's Irons. If you look at the results, the MP-59 won on all of the major categories that really matter to the golfer (Technology, Look/Sound/Feel, and most importantly, Performance). The only thing it wasn't the category leader in was Demand (the one that means nothing to how the club hits the ball). My question is how the i20 iron won the Editor's Choice (the biggest award given) for an iron in the same category even though it was beaten in all of the areas that matter.

[Linkkingx]

I'd like to hear a little more in depth feelings about the AMP irons, specifically compared to the r11 irons. Aside from all the orange these look like a good set for mid handicappers, not too bulky and nice lines at address. Thanks.

[#1Ballin]

Why does the hot list seem bought and paid for by the big manufacturers? They do it in other sports, and it is well known that to make the hot list, you pay a price.

[#1Ballin]

[quote name='SPY ZINGER' timestamp='1326913736' post='4107021']
What influence (if any) does OEM advertising in Golf Digest have on the Hot List?
[/quote]

This one. and....

[#1Ballin]

[quote name='babynoob' timestamp='1326937468' post='4112959']
It seems that the Hot List always includes clubs from manufacturers everyone knows Nike, Callaway, Taylor Made, Mizuno, etc... Why doesn't Golf Digest do testing with more club manufacturers? Include clubs from Japan especially, there are clubs manufactured there that I would love to see go head to head with Callaway or Taylor Made. I am mostly talking about the irons like Miura, Akira, and others.
[/quote]

and this one.......

[Skaffa77]

[quote name='moegolfer11' timestamp='1327071073' post='4123783']
Why no blades? Yes there are some of us out there that still play them. Also I remember in the past you used to do Balls on the Hotlist. Why Not anymore?
[/quote]

I provided that answer in Post #6.

[Golf_Slice]

What type of testing or based on what facts is the reason they make it on the hotlist??

[Sean2]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for joining us today.

Mid and high handicappers are encouraged to play GI and SGI clubs, yet when it comes to wedges the only reviews we see are for "players" wedges. At the same time a number of manufacturers include wedges in their GI and SGI irons sets. For example, the Ping G20s and the RBZs.

Why aren't more reviews done of these wedges and why aren't the mid and high handicapped golfers encouraged more to play the wedges in those sets?

Thank you,

Sean

[MikeSGD]

[quote name='The GreekGrind' timestamp='1326865738' post='4103947']
My question is about what didn't make the hot list.

The Callaway RAZR X Forged made the list last year, so I understand (disagreeably) why they wouldn't make it again this year.

But the Callaway RAZR X Musclebacks weren't on last year or this year. That surprises me a lot. Were they tested? What about them in your opinion, particularly in the performance category, kept them from being on the list this year?
[/quote]

OK, ready to get to work on your questions. It's just me, as my partner in crime is on the road doing some work for NBC today. The duties of fame, I guess.

Let's start with an easy one:

Since 2006, we've maintained that if you have a desire to make the game harder, then you obviously don't need the help of Golf Digest in recommending which golf clubs you should play. We do not believe there is significantly meaningful innovation in pure blade irons, certainly not by comparison to what's happening in the other iron categories. So you will not find the Callaway RAZR X Musclebacks, just like you won't find the Mizuno MP-69 or the Titleist MB (712) or any other pure blades on our list. My advice: If you're trying to decide which blade irons you should play this year, ask your agent.

[MikeSGD]

[quote name='gcnwmn' timestamp='1326907573' post='4105709']
There will be many questions on what didn't make the list (i'm sure). So I will continue the trend

As somebody looking to upgrade their set, I'm fascinated with some of the reviews coming out for the Wilson Staff FG Tours V2 (Seriously.). Were these close to making the list? I've had to resort to looking at "Other" golf websites to get any info before demoing.
[/quote]


The FG Tour V2 was considered in our final stage of evaluations. That is as close as any club that doesn't make the list gets to making the list, if that is helpful to you.

[MikeSGD]

[quote name='TAZBOM' timestamp='1326907858' post='4105783']
Ralph Maltby, who produces the Maltby Playability Factor, a forgiveness indicator for irons, states that a club such as the Titleist AP1 is much more forgiving than the similarly sized TaylorMade R11. Do you find this to be so, and if so, how and why? Does that make one a better club than the other?
[/quote]

"Much more forgiving" is probably overstating the case. Here's a quote from Tom Wishon in his intriguing book, Common Sense Clubfitting, p. 199: "The vast majority of well-designed cavity back irons in the golf market do not vary that much in theri ability to reduce ball speed loss from off-center hits." Those two irons are well-designed. AP1 may have a slightly higher MOI, while the thin-faced R11 may have a slightly high COR. Each of those qualities speak to "forgiveness." That's why both were Gold and both were 4 1/2 stars in Performance, which in our process includes evaluations from our player panel in the area of forgiveness. Whether more forgiving means better is more a function of the player's needs than any particular unequivocal paradigm.

[dsparob]

I know this may have been answered in the past, but on average, how many clubs are involved in hot list testing, that don't make the hotlist. The hotlist has always had a few "under the radar" companies every year which is great, but how many of those make it to the range with your testers, but aren't rated high enough to grab a silver or better?

Thanks for joining us!!!

[Bladesmizuno]

I think the question people need to ask is not how much money certain manufacturers pay to advertise but how much money do these same companies put into their R&D to produce the best equipment?!
[quote name='RealTK' timestamp='1327009975' post='4120067']
[quote name='SPY ZINGER' timestamp='1326913736' post='4107021']
What influence (if any) does OEM advertising in Golf Digest have on the Hot List?
[/quote]


I can answer that. A LOT. Open the first page - What do you see? A 4 page spread of the driver that won the performance award. Coincidence? Then what? 2 Page Titleist add. Then what 2 page Rocketballz add. Connect the dots. I'd be lying if I said I didn't look forward to the hotlist every year but of course the have influence. And the response you'll get is the canned corporate response saying absolutely none. Why is that? Because if he said, "Well yea the OEM's do guide us a little" then no one is going to want to read the Hot List because they know it's BS.
[/quote]

[MikeSGD]

[quote name='shortgame8' timestamp='1326911103' post='4106479']
I would like to know hands down, which driver was considered to be the longest by the majority of the testers.
[/quote]

Why? We don't ask our player panel the question, "Which is the longest driver you hit today?" What we ask our players is a series of perfomance-related questions. Their responses are on a 1-5 scale. One of the questions is "How would you rate this club in terms of distance?" Another is "How was its performance on the worst hits?" There are others, but all of those questions are exclusively about Performance and Look/Sound/Feel, not how do you feel about this brand, or is this the most popular brand on tour. For further perspective, the difference in center hit ballspeeds in a robot test of 30 drivers that were finalists for the Hot List this year was less than 1.2 percent, which is close enough to the margin of error to not be, shall we say, dramatic.

[riis11]

How are the people that test the clubs chosen and where do you get their handicaps from I've tried to check several on GHIN and they were not listed?

[MikeSGD]

[quote name='Yepyukon' timestamp='1326912550' post='4106777']
Thanks Golf Digest for doing this and I hope you are prepared to be bombarded with questions, haha. I will not be near my computer Friday so I will ask my question now.

Would it be possible to release a 'special' GD issue that is only about the hot list? The reason I ask is that there were several clubs and balls that were submitted but didn't make the list (due to demand unfortunately which I consider to be very situational and should not be included in the rating...but I digress). I would love to see how EVERY club and ball performed. All too often, there is a club that several people would love to read a review about but there is little to no information on the club. Even negative reviews are good reviews.

I know people believe that it is a popularity contest governed by which vendor "contributes" the most and that Golf Digest has said that is not the case...this could be a great way to prove you are right


Thanks again Golf Digest
[/quote]


It's been discussed. How much would you be willing to pay for such a special issue? $10? $50? I'm sure the business side of our operation here would like to know.

[MikeSGD]

[quote name='Skaffa77' timestamp='1326913552' post='4106971']
Just a comment. I'll give Golf Digest credit for doing a live Q&A with this audience. This could get brutal...

With that said, I rarely see implementable suggestions with all the critism we give. I might recommend that Golf Digest create a thread requesting constructive suggestions....basically how GolfWRX members would improve the selection/review process. They might be able to implement some feedback...

My question...outside of having a panel of judges for the human scores, would Golf Digest conduct and publish independent club testing with static variables on a machine (like an Iron Byron) for club results on the manufacturer's basic retail offering (stock shafts and settings)? Center shots, toe shots, heel shots...show distance, trajectory, dispersion, spin rates, launch angle...etc.

I like the human element in the reviews, but I would also love to see actual testing results that reflect the performance of a driver, iron, putter.
[/quote]

We conduct robot testing on drivers, stock setups, center, toe, heel, high and low. If we thought those raw numbers would help the majority of our readers, we would publish them. But just like I think publishing the stopping distance of five cars in the same category confuses the issue more than defines it, so, too, with a robot test. I like what players say more than what robots do. That's why people are a bigger part of our process than relative spin rates. If you need more than what we provide, go see a qualified fitter and get on a launch monitor with all the drivers you're considering. The differences you see in that scenario are valid and meaningful to you. What we do is help you determine the drivers that should be in your personal test.

[MikeSGD]

[quote name='SPY ZINGER' timestamp='1326913736' post='4107021']
What influence (if any) does OEM advertising in Golf Digest have on the Hot List?
[/quote]

Really? After all I've done for you, you're going to go there? Pathetic. Seriously, though, do I know OEM advertisers will be in the February issue of Golf Digest? Yes. Do I know OEM advertisers will be pleased or displeased about elements or even the entirety of the Hot List? Yes. Does any of that matter in our evaluations? How could it? Under what scenario would it be productive to lose millions of dollars in advertising, as we have done with the Hot List through its history, including recently? Under what scenario would it be wise to court one advertiser more than another? Why give 4 stars instead of 5 if it might irritate an advertiser? But I can assure it's happened. Every year. Has any manufacturer seen the Hot List before it's been published? No. The day I know the extent of the advertising in the Hot List issue is the day the finished book lands on my desk. I know we'll never get past the idea that advertising plays a role in our process because there is so much advertising in the same issue. But I'd like to know why the theory persists. Maybe you guys know why. But don't take my word for it. Ask any manufacturer. Ask retailers who understand our process. Their take is probably more meaningful than mine.

[MikeSGD]

[quote name='psd' timestamp='1326914366' post='4107151']
Might future GD Hot List editions test and report back on the most effective and worthwhile training aids, instructional DVDs, and the like? Thank you for your consideration.
[/quote]


It's probably been seven years since we've done training aids. We're overdue. DVDs I'm less qualified in that area. Seems more a job for Roger Ebert.

[MikeSGD]

[quote name='riis11' timestamp='1327082751' post='4125161']
How are the people that test the clubs chosen and where do you get their handicaps from I've tried to check several on GHIN and they were not listed?
[/quote]


You can apply to be a Hot List panelist by sending an email to [email protected]. Tell us about yourself and send us 50-word reviews of three products. Send us your contact information and a local pro or the like who can vouch for you. That's how most of our panelists are selected.

[Golf Junkie 1]

I am looking a purchasing irons now. You reviewed both the Mizuno MP59s and MP53s. The 59s seem to have wowed everyone but the 53s were put into silver. Was there really that much difference in the performance of these two irons?

[BrexB]

Your answer re. advertisers influencing the Hot List was a good one. It's easy for us to be cynical.

Can you add to that why it is so rare for one of the dozens (or hundreds) of small club manufacturers, putter manuf. in particular, to break into the Hot List. It would be helpful, I think, for your readers to be exposed to new clubs that they wouldn't hear about otherwise.

[stonyman]

What about companies like Hireko that have been on the list before? Or clone manufactures? I know how everyone hates clones but I gotta say the pricing is way better then any OEM will ever offer except maybe Adams. I find it hard to swallow $500+ sets of irons when clones can be had at half the cost.

Something else I noticed when digging up the 2006 hotlist that isn't on the golfdigest.com site that it included a lot more information about the tech going into the clubs and how that tech relates to golfers and their swings. Why isn't this in depth information provided anymore?

[Mizgoodie]

thye did this chat for US last year too.....

we beat this into the ground last year about the paid for spots they give us answers but everyone is right back at it............... lets ask questions that will let us learn something please......





when testing drivers of the adjustable kind do testers hit the drivers for different settings or just one?

[REF3]

Question: Can you type faster? I keep getting through your answers before the next one is ready!

Seriously, though, thank you for putting yourself through this! It's great to see the questions answered. Please ignore the "oem's buy results crowd". No group is perfect.

[Pinhi Midlothian]

With all the distance buzz about the rocketballz and fast 12 fairway woods, I was surprised they did not get 5 stars for performance. Can you give us any insight why the testers gave them just 4 stars?

[MikeSGD]

[quote name='dsparob' timestamp='1327082725' post='4125155']
I know this may have been answered in the past, but on average, how many clubs are involved in hot list testing, that don't make the hotlist. The hotlist has always had a few "under the radar" companies every year which is great, but how many of those make it to the range with your testers, but aren't rated high enough to grab a silver or better?

Thanks for joining us!!!
[/quote]


We considered 286 products this year. We evaluate products in two stages, one near our office in Wilton and one off-site (this year at the Wigwam in Arizona). Those evaluations include range (or practice green or puttling green) time for all of the products, as well as scores in the criteria of Innovation. The number of products that make it to the final varies from year to year. This year it was about 190 that advanced to the final stage.

[stuart.f.cohen]

[quote name='Pinhi Midlothian' timestamp='1327083864' post='4125277']
With all the distance buzz about the rocketballz and fast 12 fairway woods, I was surprised they did not get 5 stars for performance. Can you give us any insight why the testers gave them just 4 stars?
[/quote]

The same can be said for the Nike VR Pro Limited Edition 3 wood. Was that tested as well?