Jump to content

The Pearl

Advanced Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The Pearl

  1. My apologies also. I read through the thread too quickly and jumped to conclusions resulting in too harsh a tone that I really did not intend it to be.
  2. Do not sacrifice a course to save money. Bag the caddies to save money. Bag the Preserve. I would never play the Preserve over any of the regular courses. YOU HAVE to schedule 36 a day. Do Not only schedule 18. That is a rookie mistake. You are not required to play or pay for the second round of the day, you can cancel that if you are fried. YOU DO NOT WANT to sit around while it is nice out because you got rained out or did not schedule an afternoon round. The reason you schedule 36 is for ultimate flexibility due to weather and rest. Since he has a whole year to prep, have your Dad get in shape. You are likely to get a rainout along the way. Pretty rare in shoulder season to get in 3 or 4 straight days of 36 holes in good weather. Schedule all the courses. With a twosome, you probably will have some flexibility to adjust the schedule. Stay downtown a night or two to save money at the beginning or end of the trip. Don't stay on the property when you don't have to, only for the days required to secure tee times. Fly in Day, stay downtown. You can still use the facilities. Last day of golf, check out, play your rounds, stay down town or wherever. Fly out the next day. It is a bit of a logistical pain, but it saves two nights of lodging. IN GENERAL, Old Mac is the least popular course. It is the biggest "hit or miss" on the property. Some love it, some are not impressed. It is the course that you are most likely to be able to hop on with a schedule change. My group has dropped it from the rotation. Pacific and Bandon are of course must plays. Many think Trails is the best course on the property. I would never skip it, ever. If you are staying 4 golf days, you simply schedule each course and go from there. Also, YOU DON'T have to play all 18 on your second round of the day. There are loops on Pacific Dunes, Old Mac, and Bandon comes back to the clubhouse at the 9th. You can play the 1st 11 or 13 holes at the SR and it comes right back to the clubhouse.
  3. Follow Up: Manny reviewed my grip briefly when I took my lesson years and years ago. My top hand was fine. My bottom hand was really strong so when he did the grip check as he did in the video, my club head would close considerably. He had me make the right hand more neutral with the V pointing to the center of the chest. With my proper grip as approved by Manny in person, I can easily replicate what Hogan suggest as a check.
  4. This thread is off track because the OP has misread Manuel's description of the grip of the top hand form his book. Point 1: For those of you new to MDLT or unfamiliar with Manuel, one of the most important features of his teaching is he is VERY SPECIFIC with words. Every single word in his book and every single word on his lesson tee has an exact meaning. Point 2: Manny does not "teaches the club in the palm of the top hand" as the OP has suggested. The book reads (Chap. 1, pg 14, 1st Ed) "The club rests DIAGONALLY ACROSS the palm of the high hand. If the club is placed too far forward the fingertips, when the holding pressure is applied, the club will be rotated by the fingers and the clubhead will end up closed." Point 3: Manny clearly demonstrates the proper top hand grip in the video posted upthread. Start about the 4:55 mark. In fact he states: "The pad of the left hand (top hand) is usually towards the top of the shaft." In fact if you freeze the video you can clearly see how to grip the club with the top hand at about the 5:33 mark. Point 4: thomasgolfer605 is refuting a concept that Manny never makes. Perhaps somebody more sophisticated could post screen shots.
  5. If you are posting in an MDLT thread, nobody gives a crap about Ben Hogan's grip. Manny's grip is neutral. Both V's point to the center of the chest. When you grip the club, set the club down at address and open the hands, both palms should face each other. Pretty simple. With this grip, if swing the club as Manny teaches it will fly straight and long. By the way, if you were to take a lesson with Manny and you were a competent and experienced golfer and your grip was "not perfect" he usually would not mess with it if he felt it did not interfere with executing his concepts.
  6. Probably too much to ask if will be available in yellow.
  7. Giving up by playing which ball? I am assuming by your 3rd sentence you mean by playing the Hammer Distance?
  8. The best bunker shot is the one you don't have to hit. Don't hit it in the bunkers. Most are avoidable unless you play a course littered with them. Pick one club and use only it unless you are short-sided or in deeper grass where perhaps a sand wedge will help get through the grass and than use that one. No more than two short-game clubs. Never use a lob wedge. Getting the ball on the green as quickly as possible and letting it run to the hole is terrible advice. If you want to learn how to chip and pitch, don't use a target. Go to a secluded spot and learn how to let the club swing from various backswing lengths by using the bounce and tempo.
  9. According to the MGS ball test, depending on your swing speed, the AVX, it can be argued is the softer version of the LD. If that doesn't work, the standard ProV1 should work. It just depends on your "soft" requirement. All of the Titleist balls perform pretty much as advertised, but in reality, if your swing speed is slow to mid, you won't see a ton of difference on well-struck shots. The biggie diff is the amount of greenside spin. You may also see too much spin in the ProV1x in the wind.
  10. I don't see this out in the wild. The modern driver is the easiest club to hit in the bag. In fact, I can't think of anybody I have gotten paired with over the last several year that used their 3-wood. Again, if you hit your 3-wood off the tee better than your driver, you have a poorly fitted driver, probably not enough loft and/or the club is too long. Tom Wishon has wrote about these two issues over and over again.
  11. The 3-wood is no different than any other club in the bag. It either serves a purpose or it does not. To make sweeping generalizations is lazy. 1. If your 3-Wood is redundant with your driver, you most likely have a driver fitting problem. If you do not have proper gaps in all of your clubs, you have a fitting problem. 2. You don't need "speed" to hit a 3-wood. You need a properly fit 3 wood. With that said, yes, the 3-wood off the deck is probably the hardest "shot" to execute for your average amateur. Even with a properly fit 3-wood, problems hitting the 3-wood are often present. In this case, experimenting with a 4/5 wood in lieu is your only option. Again this dependent on how often you are required to hit a 3-wood in your normal round. In this case the argument against a 3-wood is that a golfer is simply not presented with an opportunity to hit a 3-wood, therefore, they would be better served with "another club" that they use to help them score. This probably applies to "longer" hitters. For shorter hitters, a proper fit 3-wood is a huge weapon. If you are using a 3-wood for "tight tee" shots, you might want to try choking down on your driver and hitting bunt driver out there. Heck with a weapon. I would argue, the most dangerous club9s) in the bag for the average amateur in terms of "losing strokes" are the lob wedge and to a lesser extent, the sand wedge.
  12. Any feedback on how the left dash played or was everybody just happily in oblivion?
  13. Great discussion and everybody has made some really excellent points from their own pespective. I have played pretty much all of the brands over the years. I look at the QC issues from a performance perspective in that Titleist balls ALWAYS do what they are suppose to do, time after time after time. I can hit, pitch, or chip a Titleist tour ball and know, based on my strike, exactly what the ball is going to do or what the result will be, good or bad. With every other brand, I have noticed small discrepancies. You hit a drive on the sweet spot and the bal might be 10 yds shorter than you would guess. You hit a full wedge and the bal flies 5 yds short. You hit a chip and the ball does not check quite as much or too much. Titleist balls NEVER surprise you. You crush a drive, it is going to be right where you anticipate it should be. You nip a little pitch and the ball react EXACTLY like you think it should. If you are good player and you are consistent, the ball will do the same thing every time.
  14. Economics and the law of supply and demand are concepts that escape most people.
  15. The new 2021 version is even better. Many will disagree, but the ProV1X is a far superior ball to the regular ProV1. I am in the high 80s, low 90s clubhead speed and the ProV1 (2021) is shorter across the bag. If the strength of your game is the short-game, there is no ball better. You can get ProV1X to do anything you want.
  16. You might want to try the new ProV1. According to the MGS test, you are getting a much less spinning ball with lower flight than the TP5 with essentially the same compression AND you won't potentially sacrifice any driver distance using the softer AVX.
  17. I am wondering if they would simply soften the Left Dot up a bit without any sacrifice in performance? At least to me, the 2021 V1 and V1X were "softened" up relative to previous models. The Left Dot feels a bit hard. If they could trim it back a bit, than the AVX could maybe evaporate away? Thoughts?
  18. As a result of COVID, all of our courses have gone to 10 minute tee time intervals. It seems to have made a pretty big impact on speed of play. Perhaps an example of "low-impact" solutions. A second COVID "change" is that two courses that historically have been on the slower side now require "pre-payment" of rounds. In conjunction with the 10 minute tee times seems to have had an impact.
  19. Great idea, in theory. Probably need to tweek a few things. 1. As Ty said, you are gonna have people try to game the system to get a free round. 2. Not sure how you are going to "enforce" non-compliers. Initially, I think a better approach is to market, encourage, and do the best you can to ensure fast play so that your course gets the reputation without locking yourselves into refunds, etc. Everybody knows what causes slow play, it is just that 95% of the courses simply do nothing. You are on the right track about trying to set the expectation long before tee off.
  20. I am warming up to the left dot. And for those that mention how firm it is, you are spot on. I have only used the ball in spot duty, but on more than a few shots I have been really surprised at some of the outcomes. For me, I would describe it as sneaky long. It is my own fault for not doing a full evaluation so that is my goal on Sunday...to play my normal course with the Left Dot all the way for the 18 holes. Wish it came in yellow, but probably a real long shot and way down the road. But not a deal breaker. I would really like to settle on only one of the Titleist balls, but each line seems to have one little quirk for me. The Left Dot might be the one I get married to...
  21. Will the "more flexibility" = "more distance" myth ever die?
  22. It maybe 60% of the format but it is irrelevant and would be irrelevant if it was 100% of the format. Each individual player's contribution can range from 0% to 100% This should not be a hard concept to grasp. You could play perfect golf in either format and still lose the match. You could play crappy golf in either format and still win the match. This is even more pronounced in alternate shot where your partner could literally win or lose the match with one or two shots. You play crappy golf in singles and the probability of getting beat is extremely high. You play great golf in singles and the probability of winning is extremely high, You bring somebody else into the matches and the number of "expected" potential outcomes increase as two more golfers are added to the statistical equation. Nobody on this forum would ever want their job performance, pay, or reputation reliant on a partner. In fact, 100% of this board would demand a new partner or raise holy hell if their record and subsequent pay was continually mediocre as a result of a "teammate". Now Sergio may indeed have the magic potion in terms of team play, but in order to make that claim you would need to statistically evaluate his % of contribution in each match throughout his entire career in order to make any claim above and beyond pure randomness. Likewise with every single player to ever play in the Ryder Cup. You would also have to adjust for a whole host of other factors to find any statistical significance. I suspect if anybody ever embarked on this undertaking that you would see a few outlier players. For example, Sergio won 3 points this week, all with Rahm, the number player in the world. And he got handled easily by BDC. BDC won 1 1/2 points in team competition with....Scott Scheffler....#21 in the world. In terms of Sergio being an exception to the rule, this is never unusual in any statistical series. There is always an outlier in any data set. If you run a simulation forecasting Ryder Cup points with faceless golfers you are probably 100% guaranteed to get a player having the same results of Garcia, as well as Seve/Jose for that matter. You can't have it both ways with Sergio given his singles record. He can't be the overwhelming contributor in a team format, but play mediocre in singles. In fact, his poor singles record could easily lead to the conclusions that he has contributed far less to the team format, not the other way around. Does he not care anymore when he plays singles? Has his single parings been against stronger players? Etc. Etc. Etc.
  • Create New...