My Golf Spy Ball Test - General Discussion

[Joker91]

> @Sixcat said:

> > @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.

 

I just want to see the raw data. These guys are putting their own spin on this by only providing the extremes of the swing speed spectrum. It's all for views and clicks hidden behind an "impartial/unbiased" badge

[TheCityGame]

> @Joker91 said:

> > @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 ****.

 

NO, actually I don't.

 

Pointing out your trolling of this discussion is not an indication that I have taken the opposite point of view no matter what you want to tell yourself.

[Joker91]

> @TheCityGame said:

> > @Joker91 said:

> > > @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 ****.

>

> NO, actually I don't.

>

> Pointing out your trolling of this discussion is not an indication that I have taken the opposite point of view no matter what you want to tell yourself.

 

Whatever gets you though the day

[Mahamilto]

Joker. You want the raw data...

 

Then read just look at the charts and ignore all of the text. They have nothing but raw data in the charts.

 

I mean really. In a internet full of completely biased testing and fanboy sites you are going to attack literally the one site that publishes data based upon a large group of golfers of variable skill and ability?

 

Of course everything will be individual. But there are some really interesting data points from the test.

 

Just from reading your posts, you seem irrationally angry about a test not having relevance. If you think it’s garbage, ignore it.

[Joker91]

> @Mahamilto said:

> Joker. You want the raw data...

>

> Then read just look at the charts and ignore all of the text. They have nothing but raw data in the charts.

>

> I mean really. In a internet full of completely biased testing and fanboy sites you are going to attack literally the one site that publishes data based upon a large group of golfers of variable skill and ability?

>

> Of course everything will be individual. But there are some really interesting data points from the test.

>

> Just from reading your posts, you seem irrationally angry about a test not having relevance. If you think it’s garbage, ignore it.

 

They are just as biased as anyone else.

[Josh L.]

> @Joker91 said:

> They are just as biased as anyone else.

 

Then don't use their testing in you decision making.

[Myherobobhope]

I wasn’t aware sites could still be hugged to death

[Mahamilto]

The raw data isn’t biased as long as they aren’t falsifying their data.

 

It makes zero sense why you would choose this hill to troll on...

[Joker91]

The top 2 distance balls are the only balls other than Max-Flis that they link in the article to be bought. Completely unbiased

[pappaf2]

Article is working again but the tables are missing. Reading the article it looks like the K3 (ksig 3 piece) is a low launch high spin ball with all clubs.

[MPSgolfs]

> @pappaf2 said:

> Article is working again but the tables are missing. Reading the article it looks like the K3 (ksig 3 piece) is a low launch high spin ball with all clubs.

 

The K Sig 3 piece has always been a spinny mess for me. Nothing like the K Sig 4 piece, sadly.

[Downtown_Brown_41]

Deleted

[Tblythe]

Joker plays ChromeSoft X and just found out it’s a s*** ball. Big mad online. Lol

[EastTNGolfer]

I may have to snag some MaxFli Tours after seeing those test results.

[GoGoErky]

> @Tblythe said:

> Joker plays ChromeSoft X and just found out it’s a **** ball. Big mad online. Lol

 

That’s seems to be happening to a lot of cs x users today

[pappaf2]

> @TnJohn said:

> I may have to snag some MaxFli Tours after seeing those test results.

 

That and the Tour X seem legit

[EastTNGolfer]

> @GoGoErky said:

> > @Tblythe said:

> > Joker plays ChromeSoft X and just found out it’s a **** ball. Big mad online. Lol

>

> That’s seems to be happening to a lot of cs x users today

 

It does confirm my suspicions that the Chromesoft is similar to the K3 in distance, only less spinny.

 

Edit to add: Which kinda sucks because I still have around 60 chromesofts lying around. I guess they are going to the shag bag.

[Joker91]

> @Tblythe said:

> Joker plays ChromeSoft X and just found out it’s a **** ball. Big mad online. Lol

 

I switch back and forth from Q Star Tour and TP5x. I don't notice a difference in distance on good strikes. I do see the TP5x drop out of the sky with no spin on strikes higher on the face.

[Lodestone]

how did the Snells compare to the ProV1s?

[GDTBATH]

> @Lodestone said:

> how did the Snells compare to the ProV1s?

 

Very, very similarly. The Snells and ProV’s were numerically, some of the best tested, with MTB Black comparing comparably to ProV and MTB-X comparing to ProVx.

 

I was surprised that at least numerically, Chrome Softs didn’t compare as well. I’ve liked the feel of Chrome Softs but the article basically says to ignore feel completely (lists the reasoning). I’ve played MTB Black for some time, now. Ordered one dozen MTB-X’s To compare with the Black.

 

ETA - manipulating the charts is handy. You can compare whatever you want and eliminate the brands you have no interest in.

[Lodestone]

> @GDTBATH said:

> > @Lodestone said:

> > how did the Snells compare to the ProV1s?

>

> Very, very similarly. The Snells and ProV’s were numerically, some of the best tested, with MTB Black comparing comparably to ProV and MTB-X comparing to ProVx.

>

> I was surprised that at least numerically, Chrome Softs didn’t compare as well. I’ve liked the feel of Chrome Softs but the article basically says to ignore feel completely (lists the reasoning). I’ve played MTB Black for some time, now. Ordered one dozen MTB-X’s To compare with the Black.

>

> ETA - manipulating the charts is handy. You can compare whatever you want and eliminate the brands you have no interest in.

I was going to try the Snells, but with the buy 3 get 4 deal with the ProV1 the price wasn't _THAT_ much different. Plus I just joined a new club and wanted to buy something from the pro shop. I'll probably give them a try at some point, though.

[MPSgolfs]

I found it interesting that both Mizuno balls were really spinny. I've played a couple times recently with someone testing both Mizuno balls, and he repeatedly complained about their high spin compared to his normal TP5x. Spot on!

[Myherobobhope]

This just confirms that the ball I thought I nutted and did not carry the trap with was Costco s fault! I’m going to give the mtb x another run

[Stanks]

Dean mother-f***ing SNELL coming in hot with the HOTTEST ball that is also one of the cheapest Urethane offerings on the MARKET. That's just hot s***. That's awesome. These mass-holes (not a curse word, just slang, I'll still probably get reported) coming in and holding it down for the Boston strong. That's just great. I'm beyond stoked for that result.

That being said, I have a few words about the review / intel.

1. There is NO SUCH THING AS UNBIASED. I don't care who you are. There is always some sort of lean somewhere but, the graphs / charts speak for themselves. I won't read MyGolfspys interpretation of the charts because, anyone with a brain can rip them apart and chase their validity. (I.E. same setup used for all shots, were all shots taking at the same time of day, was the temperature different during different shots, how many shots equated an "average", accounting for groove wear, accounting for ball manufacturing errors, etc. etc.).

2. Telling me I need to get past "feel". This game is all about feel. You have high handicappers able to notice and comprehend if they don't like the shape or look of a club face on one of their irons. You have old dudes that like to hit balls that feel like marbles where as my dad uses Chromesofts / MTBs which feel like your golfing with a marshmallow.

3. This buying guide could have easily and I mean very easily cut down considerably with Dean Snells recommendation to buying a ball. Whichever is cheapest and you notice less change out of from 150 - 100 yards in. That

[thegrayman]

In what world is the Vice Pro higher compression than the Pro Plus?

[dlygrisse]

So if I were to generalize.

ProVX is the best ball for slower swings and one of the best for fast swingers.

Snell has the best ball for fast swingers but if you swing slow you should look elsewhere.

 

High compression usually gives more ball speed.

 

Low compression feels nice but gives up yards with the driver, launches short irons long and high with low spin..

 

The AVX launches high but with less spin.

 

 

[trackcoach13]

> @Joker91 said:

> The top 2 distance balls are the only balls other than Max-Flis that they link in the article to be bought. Completely unbiased

 

Wrong as usual...

[dsc123]

I don't understand the shot area. Take Snell MTB X, for example. Off the driver, with a high swing speed, the shot area is about 1400--which is something like 38×38 yds. 28th out of the 34 tested. With a slow swing speed, its 157, about 12×13, and 32nd out of the 34 tested. But then if I show all swing speeds, it's about 9000, or about 95x94, by far the worst of the lot.

 

I would have expected this to act like an average, but I guess that instead, it sees a ball go 290 @ 115mph, and 201 @ 85mph, and sees a dispersion of 89 yards in distance? If I understand this correctly, that's not really a meaningful number, since no player is going to vary his swing speed like that.

 

Either way, the mtb x doesnt fare well in the shot area measurements, but it's less glaring bad.

 

 

[groach]

My goodness there is a lot of hate for the golf spy guys. Why can't you just take their data as a starting point and call it what it is - a very good test with very good data. It was hit with a robot. I mean, c'mon guys. Get off yourselves and how they are so biased and you are so much smarter, etc. Here's a perfect example - I did my own ball testing two years ago. Bought sleeves of every ball I could think of. I had always played Pro V1x. Turns out, Chromesoft went the furthest for me felt the best. Their data tells me the opposite, that in general, I should be playing a harder ball (my SS is about 105). But guess what - it's just a starting point. Everyone interacts with the ball differently between angle of attack, smash factor, etc. It's impossible to get a perfect data point test because no two swings are the same - except with a robot. If you're not sure what to do - use their data as a starting point. Grab a Pro V1x, a Chromesoft, and Bridgestone BXS and see which one you like the most. Then test it some more against similar types of balls. Eventually you'll have the perfect ball for yourself. These guys are giving so much data and yet people just refuse to be thankful about it and instead rip it and find ways to disprove it and how biased it is. I'm really shocked at all the negative responses.

[Stanks]

> @groach said:

> My goodness there is a lot of hate for the golf spy guys. Why can't you just take their data as a starting point and call it what it is - a very good test with very good data. It was hit with a robot. I mean, c'mon guys. Get off yourselves and how they are so biased and you are so much smarter, etc. Here's a perfect example - I did my own ball testing two years ago. Bought sleeves of every ball I could think of. I had always played Pro V1x. Turns out, Chromesoft went the furthest for me felt the best. Their data tells me the opposite, that in general, I should be playing a harder ball (my SS is about 105). But guess what - it's just a starting point. Everyone interacts with the ball differently between angle of attack, smash factor, etc. It's impossible to get a perfect data point test because no two swings are the same - except with a robot. If you're not sure what to do - use their data as a starting point. Grab a Pro V1x, a Chromesoft, and Bridgestone BXS and see which one you like the most. Then test it some more against similar types of balls. Eventually you'll have the perfect ball for yourself. These guys are giving so much data and yet people just refuse to be thankful about it and instead rip it and find ways to disprove it and how biased it is. I'm really shocked at all the negative responses.

 

Hate? Nah. None. But, a study is subjective. Everything is open to interpretation. I will, however, say that it is extremely informative and very flattering to the ball production market. Now, when there are multiple statements recommending me to play a higher compression ball versus a lower (basically, screw the feel), telling me a bad shot might not be might fault (the arrow, not the indian argument?), etc. etc.

My Golf Spy knew this was coming. They understand that, with every data point posted, there will be someone picking it apart but, at the same time, there is a huge Thank You that should be stated even with the constructive criticism spoken. They did a great job but, they should stick to the hard facts and take away the interpretation / recommendations.