Closest to AVX

[nsxguy]

On 11/30/2022 at 9:23 PM, OnTheBag said:

The AVX is a fantastic ball that works well for me and my swing speeds are comparable to yours @Longdriver295  Being retired, I can't afford $50 a dozen so I use Q Star Tour yellow.  The AVX is a little better in the wind and longer, but at $35 a dozen the QST wins out.  Plus I don't notice that much difference (if any) in the course of play.  

 

I rarely lose a ball, but when my health cooperates, I play A LOT.  About 2-3 rounds is all I ask of a ball.  3 dozen plus premium course pickups and scramble giveaways will cover me for the whole year.  

 

The golf ball is, or can be (arguably), the most important piece of equipment for your game.

 

You do realize you're talking about 40-60 CENTS per round, right ?

 

$1.25 per ball difference and a ball lasts you 2-3 rounds on average.

 

There almost HAS to be ways of cutting costs by far more than 40 cents, no ? Heck, instead of 3 rounds per week, play 1 less round every 3 months and that'd more than make up the extra cost of AVX over Q-Star. Not so ?

[nsxguy]

On 12/1/2022 at 7:20 AM, Longdriver295 said:

So are saying the AVX soin around the greens and off short irons are not that good? I mean I hit the ball pretty high so not sure I'd have trouble stopping a 7 or 8i on the greens. I'm holding greens well now with those clubs using just about any ball that's urethane cover

 

You're not going to hit your driver 100 feet in the air with the ProV1x and 70 feet with the AVX. Nor are you going to spin a 60* wedge at 11K and an AVX at 7K.

 

And I believe angle of descent with the irons is more important than a few less revolutions of spin, so being a high ball hitter, the AVX should work just fine.

 

The simple answer is to buy a sleeve of AVX and practice (first) chipping and putting with both a sleeve of AVX and a sleeve of whatever ball you play now.

 

Then play a few rounds with the AVX.

 

That should give you a pretty fair comparison.. 👍

[OnTheBag]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

The golf ball is, or can be (arguably), the most important piece of equipment for your game.

 

You do realize you're talking about 40-60 CENTS per round, right ?

 

$1.25 per ball difference and a ball lasts you 2-3 rounds on average.

 

There almost HAS to be ways of cutting costs by far more than 40 cents, no ? Heck, instead of 3 rounds per week, play 1 less round every 3 months and that'd more than make up the extra cost of AVX over Q-Star. Not so ?

I don't disagree with you, but being retired (and not lucratively) I have to manage my pennies.  There isn't enough difference in the balls at my swing speed to justify the added cost.

[bogeyman71]

On 12/3/2022 at 5:54 PM, Simp said:

I find that the Tour Response is as close to the AVX as I've played. 

^^^^This^^^^^

[The Pearl]

3 hours ago, OnTheBag said:

I don't disagree with you, but being retired (and not lucratively) I have to manage my pennies.  There isn't enough difference in the balls at my swing speed to justify the added cost.

Why do golfers continually refer to swing speed as a reason not to play tour balls when it has been proven time and time again to be completely false?  

 

If your budget is that restrictive to saving literally pennies on a golf ball than you wouldn't be playing golf at all.  There really is a category of golfers who sacrifice any and all results on the golf course to save one dollar. Incredible. 

[OnTheBag]

15 minutes ago, The Pearl said:

There really is a category of golfers who sacrifice any and all results on the golf course to save one dollar. Incredible. 

At my age, I play for enjoyment and social interaction.  I'm not going pro and as long as I can still hit the shots I want then so be it.  My expectations and my opinion of a good round are likely different than yours.

 

Awfully egotistical of you to presume to understand everyone's position on this forum.  Those of us in the 70 year old plus crowd view life differently than others.  

[North Butte]

9 minutes ago, The Pearl said:

Why do golfers continually refer to swing speed as a reason not to play tour balls when it has been proven time and time again to be completely false?  

 

If your budget is that restrictive to saving literally pennies on a golf ball than you wouldn't be playing golf at all.  There really is a category of golfers who sacrifice any and all results on the golf course to save one dollar. Incredible. 

The "not enough speed to compress the ball" nostrum was one of those magic marketing gimmicks that somehow struck millions of people as so obvious it had to be true. Even though it was purely an invention of some company's "throw stuff up against the wall and see what sticks" advertising.

 

That said...

 

You can call it pennies per ball or whatever. When you scuff an 8-iron and see your $4.16 AVX splash down in a pond that is $4.16 you'll never see again. If it had been a $1.04 cheapie or a $2.08 mid-priced ball instead that's less money gone. I personally don't sweat that kind of thing because it happens maybe once a round on average. 

 

But if I played a ball-eating course with hazards and deep rough and OB everywhere and lost three or four balls a round, darned right I'd quickly find myself a less than $4 option. Likewise if I were playing golf on a budget that barely covers green fees, I wouldn't play a few less rounds a year just so I could treat myself to $4 Titleists.

 

What's the worst that going to happen if I play a sub-optimal ball instead of the one that works best for me? My handicap index might go up from 12.6 to 13.3? That's utterly meaningless, handicap golfers aren't playing in situations where every single stroke costs them a trophy or prize money. If you can't score quite as well with a cheap DTC ball as an expensive Titleist, your handicap simply floats up a little and you're right back where you would have been anyway. 

 

There's a municipal course across town from me where residents can get a yearly pass for a few hundred dollars. All the golf they want to play. I've gotten paired up with people there who absolutely did not have a golf budget allowing them to break out a fresh box of AVX every four or five rounds. Their entirely yearly expenditure on golf is less than some people's monthly country club bill. The fact they can't afford to spend "pennies per ball" more to have the illusion of playing better with a "Tour" ball doesn't bother most of them in the slightest. They just want to tee up a nice, clean ball on every hole and hit the damn thing. They can do that for one dollar, not four. 

[The Pearl]

11 minutes ago, OnTheBag said:

At my age, I play for enjoyment and social interaction.  I'm not going pro and as long as I can still hit the shots I want then so be it.  My expectations and my opinion of a good round are likely different than yours.

 

Awfully egotistical of you to presume to understand everyone's position on this forum.  Those of us in the 70 year old plus crowd view life differently than others.  

You literally said up thread that you play the QST at $35 bucks a dozen so you are far from pinching pennies.   And none of us are going pro so quit with the silly "oh shucks" routine.  Nobody says you have to buy a $50 bucks a dozen. There are tons of cheaper "tour ball" alternatives that get you in the $35 range. You don't have to do it but people on the ball forum  continually come on here and claim so kind of moral high ground because they don't spend $50 bucks on a dozen balls.  It is such an odd flex, " I just play for fun and I don't care what I shoot or what ball I play, but by golly I am going to spend time on a golf ball forum and let everybody know how awesomely thrifty I am."  

 

If you really wanted to save a buck you would be playing the Kirkland ball, so no, I don't buy the poverty angle about "saving pennies." 

 

 

[The Pearl]

21 minutes ago, North Butte said:

The "not enough speed to compress the ball" nostrum was one of those magic marketing gimmicks that somehow struck millions of people as so obvious it had to be true. Even though it was purely an invention of some company's "throw stuff up against the wall and see what sticks" advertising.

 

That said...

 

You can call it pennies per ball or whatever. When you scuff an 8-iron and see your $4.16 AVX splash down in a pond that is $4.16 you'll never see again. If it had been a $1.04 cheapie or a $2.08 mid-priced ball instead that's less money gone. I personally don't sweat that kind of thing because it happens maybe once a round on average. 

 

But if I played a ball-eating course with hazards and deep rough and OB everywhere and lost three or four balls a round, darned right I'd quickly find myself a less than $4 option. Likewise if I were playing golf on a budget that barely covers green fees, I wouldn't play a few less rounds a year just so I could treat myself to $4 Titleists.

 

What's the worst that going to happen if I play a sub-optimal ball instead of the one that works best for me? My handicap index might go up from 12.6 to 13.3? That's utterly meaningless, handicap golfers aren't playing in situations where every single stroke costs them a trophy or prize money. If you can't score quite as well with a cheap DTC ball as an expensive Titleist, your handicap simply floats up a little and you're right back where you would have been anyway. 

 

There's a municipal course across town from me where residents can get a yearly pass for a few hundred dollars. All the golf they want to play. I've gotten paired up with people there who absolutely did not have a golf budget allowing them to break out a fresh box of AVX every four or five rounds. Their entirely yearly expenditure on golf is less than some people's monthly country club bill. The fact they can't afford to spend "pennies per ball" more to have the illusion of playing better with a "Tour" ball doesn't bother most of them in the slightest. They just want to tee up a nice, clean ball on every hole and hit the damn thing. They can do that for one dollar, not four. 

I don't disagree NB, but you are mostly describing outliers in the ball world.

 

 

[The Pearl]

For the record, you can get 2018 ProV1 5A mint condition at Lostgolfballs.com for 19.99/dozen .  No shipping costs on 4 dozen or more.

 

There has never been a better time in history for golfer's to buy cheap tour balls. 

[nsxguy]

6 hours ago, OnTheBag said:

I don't disagree with you, but being retired (and not lucratively) I have to manage my pennies.  There isn't enough difference in the balls at my swing speed to justify the added cost.

 

 

2 hours ago, OnTheBag said:

At my age, I play for enjoyment and social interaction.  I'm not going pro and as long as I can still hit the shots I want then so be it.  My expectations and my opinion of a good round are likely different than yours.

 

Awfully egotistical of you to presume to understand everyone's position on this forum.  Those of us in the 70 year old plus crowd view life differently than others.  

 

Sorry my friend but you're just making excuses.

 

You made it quite clear that the AVX suits your game better,,,,,,,,, and now you're saying you don't care that much about your game.

 

I gave you a solution; simply skip 1 round every THREE months and that would likely more than pay for the 40 cents difference per round. You didn't bother to address that.

 

But honestly, I'm sorry you have to pinch pennies, but if $1.20 per WEEK causes you financial problems, you might want to consider a  different hobby. I know I would.

 

Good luck. 👍

Edited December 6, 2022 by nsxguy

[Longdriver295]

19 minutes ago, The Pearl said:

You literally said up thread that you play the QST at $35 bucks a dozen so you are far from pinching pennies.   And none of us are going pro so quit with the silly "oh shucks" routine.  Nobody says you have to buy a $50 bucks a dozen. There are tons of cheaper "tour ball" alternatives that get you in the $35 range. You don't have to do it but people on the ball forum  continually come on here and claim so kind of moral high ground because they don't spend $50 bucks on a dozen balls.  It is such an odd flex, " I just play for fun and I don't care what I shoot or what ball I play, but by golly I am going to spend time on a golf ball forum and let everybody know how awesomely thrifty I am."  

 

If you really wanted to save a buck you would be playing the Kirkland ball, so no, I don't buy the poverty angle about "saving pennies." 

 

 

If truth be known and I'm guilty, but 90% of the folks on here that "think" they are in the Pro category playing 50 buck balls should be playing the Kirklands. Yes I would play the AVX and pay 50 if I knew for a fact it was worth the price, but I don't.  That's why I ask the question what was closest. Right now I play the QST which I think is as good as any, I even think the Vice Pro may even be better than QST. 

Edited December 6, 2022 by Longdriver295

[The Pearl]

36 minutes ago, Longdriver295 said:

If truth be known and I'm guilty, but 90% of the folks on here that "think" they are in the Pro category playing 50 buck balls should be playing the Kirklands. Yes I would play the AVX and pay 50 if I knew for a fact it was worth the price, but I don't.  That's why I ask the question what was closest. Right now I play the QST which I think is as good as any, I even think the Vice Pro may even be better than QST. 

 

You are not going to ever know if a ball $50 bucks or otherwise IN FACT was worth the price UNLESS you play it for an extended period of time.  No test of any kind by a web site or opinions of forum members is going to give that type of factual information. 

 

Buy a dozen and play through it, than you will know. 

[JAM01]

If the AVX fits you spend the money, unless your golf is really just for fun and a 120 is as good as an 80, then there are cheaper balls that are decent and not rocks.

[Longdriver295]

3 hours ago, JAM01 said:

If the AVX fits you spend the money, unless your golf is really just for fun and a 120 is as good as an 80, then there are cheaper balls that are decent and not rocks.

Well I do play golf for fun but I do play to a 4hcp, so I'm a pretty good golfer. But that doesn't mean I should pay 50 bucks for a dozen balls. I'm playing to that handicap with the Q Star Tour. 

[BYK]

13 minutes ago, Longdriver295 said:

Well I do play golf for fun but I do play to a 4hcp, so I'm a pretty good golfer. But that doesn't mean I should pay 50 bucks for a dozen balls. I'm playing to that handicap with the Q Star Tour. 

lol shhhhhhhh

expensive is always better

that's what I do, and look how much it's done for my game🤣

damn am I dumb

[Tinkerer]

Ive avoided Titleist in the past, never really seeing the benefit over the hype. Ive been playing the last year with Chrome Soft and the Srixon Z Star. I had tried AVX previously but never liked it around the green. Two months ago I grabbed the new AVX. Handicap had stretched out to 17, it’s now 11. There are other factors but compared to the other balls it’s longer, straighter and noticeably better around the green than earlier versions. My only real goal was breaking 80. Did that twice with an AVX over the last month. Other things contributed but our pro during a lesson said “try these”. He was right. 

Edited December 8, 2022 by Tinkerer

[nsxguy]

On 12/7/2022 at 7:19 PM, Longdriver295 said:

Well I do play golf for fun but I do play to a 4hcp, so I'm a pretty good golfer. But that doesn't mean I should pay 50 bucks for a dozen balls. I'm playing to that handicap with the Q Star Tour. 

 

Nobody's said you should pay $50 for a dozen golf balls.

 

If you're happy with what you've got, who cares ?

 

But I guess the question I'd ask is, have you tried the $50 balls ? And, if so, have you given them enough time to decide based on performance ?

 

Frankly, the major difference in ball price seems to be spin. Generally speaking the premium balls spin more; and that's about it.

 

And speaking about spin, the shots where the balls that spin more really shine, is when the shot needs to stop quickly. Most common one is with a front pin tucked right behind a bunker. Drop and stop, or even go past the flag and back it up.

 

Can't make that shot, and/or some others, with a ball you can't spin (enough).

 

Me personally ? I have an early release with my irons and that hurts me trying to generate spin, so I need the ball to help with the spin. Spin = control. If you can't spin it the way you'd like to, you generally can't control it as well.

[The Pearl]

On 12/7/2022 at 5:19 PM, Longdriver295 said:

Well I do play golf for fun but I do play to a 4hcp, so I'm a pretty good golfer. But that doesn't mean I should pay 50 bucks for a dozen balls. I'm playing to that handicap with the Q Star Tour. 

 

You seem to have ran around in a big circle. YOU started the thread so you must be curious that the AVX (a retail $50 ball) might help your game, otherwise why ask? 

 

Your statement is pretzel logic. You can't draw definitive conclusions by eliminating lower level options. As a 4 hdcp you can could probably shoot your cap by grabbing any ball out of a garbage pail of random golf balls. 

 

As suggested, the logic next step is to get a sleeve or a dozen and play them until you get your answer.  The real issue you have and that others always seem to get hooked on is the price. THE REAL QUESTION you are unconsciously asking yourself is "how much am I willing to pay to improve my game in buying a golf ball"? 

 

Would you spend 50 bucks a dozen to become a 3 hdcp? A 2 hdcp?

 

The fascinating thing about the ball thread is that folks will play tons of golf, spend tons of money on equipment, and on lessons, yet give zero thought to the golf ball or balk at spending a bit extra for the next level up whether that be a QST or a ProV1. 

 

If I were your coach I would simply ask you why as a 4 hdcp are you playing a ball that is clearly inferior to other options at the same price point that is most likely costing you greenside spin and distance? 

 

 

 

[Tinkerer]

On 12/1/2022 at 11:15 PM, North Butte said:

I do struggle with (lack of) height and spin and I still like AVX a lot. If my home course's greens didn't get extremely firm and hard to hold with approach shots at times during the Summer and early Fall I'd probably be playing AVX instead of Pro V1x. But somehow that extra height and spin of the Pro V1x helps me feel like I'm doing everything possible to keep my 7-iron shots from bouncing over the green when the course gets super firm and fast.

 

In reality, I know deep down that the few extra yards AVX brings my game is more valuable than that little bit of extra stopping power. But I've been using Pro V1x for nearly a decade now and when I play a few rounds with AVX everything's great until the first time I fail to hold a green. Funny how mind games work, for all I know those shots would have ended up in the rough over the green with Pro V1x!

 

But I can't help but think, "Stupid AVX, no stopping power" and so I'll root around in the bottom pocket of my golf bag and dig out a Pro V1x for the rest of the round. 

I do exactly the same, hit my lowest scores with the AVX, play in windy conditions and switch to a Z Star every time I also say "stupid AVX, no stopping power"

 

Yet, the extra distance and lower flight helps me much more and the closest alternate I have found, Chrome Soft, is just not the same. AVX is an outlier, for me at least but I struggle to buy in!