Is Titleist still the #1 ball in golf???

[crmelk]

While watching the Mercedes a few weeks ago one of the commentators mentioned that Vijay is no longer with Titleist. This kind of came as a shock to me because I consider Titleist to be the best ball on the market. Then I started to think about it. Phil, Tiger, Ernie, Sergio all have left! Most of the guys that I play with give me the, "they're all the same" line but I would really like to hear what you guys have to say. I have been playing Titleist since I started playing simply because...well every on tour did! Now I'm not so sure if they are the best and if they deserve that $50 price tag per dozen. It would be nice to save some $$$ on balls and get the same or better performance.

[buttuh]

I think it would take a lot to knock them off of the top spot. You never really know why the pro's switch balls there's always money involved. As far as you switching to other balls, you'll never know if there are better balls out there until you try. I personally would never pay $50 for golf balls, but that's not to say it isn't worth the price. I'll stick to balls that are in the $20-25, and even then I don't buy them new.

[Chris28054]

Well 3 PGA events and 3 New ProV1 wins!!!!

[mat562]

By any yardstick, Titleist balls still reign supreme at all levels of top amateur and professional golf.

 

The reason so many big names have gone elsewhere is simply because they've been offered similarly big wads of hard cash to play something else and have found that it equals or exceeds the performance of the prior ball.

 

Personally, I dont think the recent price hike is a good move - and rifling through the pockets of Joe Public to pay off the cost of the recent court case in one fell swoop is a bad move in my opinion, and could alienate some of the buying public.

[ohcanada17]

Overall its where they want to be.... if they (Titleist) want to be the number one ball... they'll pay to have it played... then everyone will believe its the best and buy it.

 

Personally, its tough to compare to the TM TP balls... and Cally is a second close (just does not spin)... and I think the players notice this on tour and would rather play a better ball over $$$...

[Simp]

Up until a couple of years ago I feel that they were definitely the #1 ball in golf. I'm not so sure now though. While I don't think there's any one ball that will beat a Titleist, there are a few out there that will definitely stand toe to toe with them. Personally, I believe that Bridgestone, TaylorMade and Callaway make a ball that is just as good as a Titleist. Obviously I'm comparing the top shelf balls that each company produces.

[tpariff]

Well 3 PGA events and 3 New ProV1 wins!!!!

 

1 "new" win and 2 "revamped" wins. Only Pat Perez has won with the ball to be released in the next few weeks.

 

Keep in mind that Tiger, Phil, Vijay and some of the other big boys have either not played or have only played one event (Vijay). And Vijay won Tiger's tournament with the new Srixon.

 

I'm just sayin....

 

There ARE some good or better alternatives out there. I've personally not played a Titleist ball for about two years. I'm really liking the Bridgestone B330-S and will try the new Srixon balls. It's all about finding what works best for you. If it's a $20 ball, then great.

 

Kevin

[crmelk]

Tpariff, I have heard great things about the B330 and B330-S. I think that I'm going to have to give them a try this season. I will also be trying out that Srixon ball.

[Simp]

I absolutely love the Bridgestone balls! B330 for me. I like the Srixon URC as well, but if I had to pick one today to play for the rest of my golfing days it would be the B330.

[tpariff]

Tpariff, I have heard great things about the B330 and B330-S. I think that I'm going to have to give them a try this season. I will also be trying out that Srixon ball.

 

For some reason I didn't care for the previous version of the B330-S. I was playing the Cally HX Tour and TM TP red for most of last year. When the new B330-S came out I bought a sleeve and gave it a fair shot. First reaction was "wow!" and it's been in the bag ever since.

 

I find it does everything the other good balls do, but it's a bit more durable. The Cally balls seem to shred easier. The Tour iX is a bit more durable than the HX Tour, but not as durable as the B330-S...IMO of course.

 

I'll pick up a sleeve of each new Srixon ball and give them a shot. If one outperforms the B330-S, then I'll bag it.

 

Kevin

[gdu]

By any yardstick, Titleist balls still reign supreme at all levels of top amateur and professional golf.

 

The reason so many big names have gone elsewhere is simply because they've been offered similarly big wads of hard cash to play something else and have found that it equals or exceeds the performance of the prior ball.

 

Personally, I dont think the recent price hike is a good move - and rifling through the pockets of Joe Public to pay off the cost of the recent court case in one fell swoop is a bad move in my opinion, and could alienate some of the buying public.

Yeah, that whole dollar a dozen is really gonna hurt folks. :rolleyes:

[Simp]

By any yardstick, Titleist balls still reign supreme at all levels of top amateur and professional golf.

 

The reason so many big names have gone elsewhere is simply because they've been offered similarly big wads of hard cash to play something else and have found that it equals or exceeds the performance of the prior ball.

 

Personally, I dont think the recent price hike is a good move - and rifling through the pockets of Joe Public to pay off the cost of the recent court case in one fell swoop is a bad move in my opinion, and could alienate some of the buying public.

Yeah, that whole dollar a dozen is really gonna hurt folks. :rolleyes:

 

It's the principle. Titleist saw a good thing, got greedy and got caught. Now they want to bump the price up?!? Bridgestone never looked so good!

[gdu]

By any yardstick, Titleist balls still reign supreme at all levels of top amateur and professional golf.

 

The reason so many big names have gone elsewhere is simply because they've been offered similarly big wads of hard cash to play something else and have found that it equals or exceeds the performance of the prior ball.

 

Personally, I dont think the recent price hike is a good move - and rifling through the pockets of Joe Public to pay off the cost of the recent court case in one fell swoop is a bad move in my opinion, and could alienate some of the buying public.

Yeah, that whole dollar a dozen is really gonna hurt folks. :rolleyes:

 

It's the principle. Titleist saw a good thing, got greedy and got caught. Now they want to bump the price up?!? Bridgestone never looked so good!

 

The price is the same. The MAP is only .99 more. I doubt that has ANYTHING to do with the lawsuit and everything to do with increased cost of production and the fact that it has been 2 years since an update.

[tpariff]

By any yardstick, Titleist balls still reign supreme at all levels of top amateur and professional golf.

 

The reason so many big names have gone elsewhere is simply because they've been offered similarly big wads of hard cash to play something else and have found that it equals or exceeds the performance of the prior ball.

 

Personally, I dont think the recent price hike is a good move - and rifling through the pockets of Joe Public to pay off the cost of the recent court case in one fell swoop is a bad move in my opinion, and could alienate some of the buying public.

Yeah, that whole dollar a dozen is really gonna hurt folks. :rolleyes:

 

It's the principle. Titleist saw a good thing, got greedy and got caught. Now they want to bump the price up?!? Bridgestone never looked so good!

 

The price is the same. The MAP is only .99 more. I doubt that has ANYTHING to do with the lawsuit and everything to do with increased cost of production and the fact that it has been 2 years since an update.

 

You're exactly right! The MAP is only .99 more. That means a retailer CAN NOT charge less than $45.99 per dozen. I won't be surprised if some retailers charge MORE. Add tax and it's right at $50 per dozen. Play them if you want, but I won't.

 

Titleist has even acknowledged that there is no real difference between this ball and the older one. So why should a consumer pay $6 more per dozen? The 2008 model is available everywhere for $39.99 or less.

 

Kevin

[BEND OF THE RIVER GC]

Since they are not allowed to sell the older version any longer, they can release a new ball, claim increased advantages and charge more.

[tpariff]

Since they are not allowed to sell the older version any longer, they can release a new ball, claim increased advantages and charge more.

 

I thought they could still sell the "modified" version of the previous ball, i.e. the one Geof Ogilvy used to win at the Mercedes. I know they're still on the shelves here in Tampa. The boxes have a sticker on them to differentiate from the old patent violating version.

 

And I believe I've read that Titleist has said there's no significant difference between the 2009 ball and the modified version of the 2007/2008 ball.

 

Kevin

[tomjohn10]

The NEW ball is just that...NEW. It is different.

 

The balls Titleist said have no discernible difference are the 07 version produced without the patents and the 07 ball produced with the patents.

 

Everybody is so confused.

 

There are three golf balls: 09, 07 with patents, 07 without patents

 

Titleist can no longer sell the 07 with patents, so they created 07 without patents.

 

09 is the new ball, that is different (just as 05 was different from the original and the 07 was different from the 05)

[fridsdotcom]

 

You're exactly right! The MAP is only .99 more. That means a retailer CAN NOT charge less than $45.99 per dozen. I won't be surprised if some retailers charge MORE. Add tax and it's right at $50 per dozen. Play them if you want, but I won't.

 

Titleist has even acknowledged that there is no real difference between this ball and the older one. So why should a consumer pay $6 more per dozen? The 2008 model is available everywhere for $39.99 or less.

 

Kevin

 

 

Completely incorrect my friend...MAP stands for Minimum Advertised Price. This means that a retailer cannot ADVERTISE them for less then $45.99.

 

Where has Titleist acknowledged that there is no real difference between the two? That doesn't even make sense.

 

According to their press release, it certainly sounds like they feel there is a difference:

http://www.titleist.com/news/newsdetail.as...egory=equipment

[tpariff]

 

You're exactly right! The MAP is only .99 more. That means a retailer CAN NOT charge less than $45.99 per dozen. I won't be surprised if some retailers charge MORE. Add tax and it's right at $50 per dozen. Play them if you want, but I won't.

 

Titleist has even acknowledged that there is no real difference between this ball and the older one. So why should a consumer pay $6 more per dozen? The 2008 model is available everywhere for $39.99 or less.

 

Kevin

 

 

Completely incorrect my friend...MAP stands for Minimum Advertised Price. This means that a retailer cannot ADVERTISE them for less then $45.99.

 

Where has Titleist acknowledged that there is no real difference between the two? That doesn't even make sense.

 

According to their press release, it certainly sounds like they feel there is a difference:

http://www.titleist.com/news/newsdetail.as...egory=equipment

 

I'll believe a "difference" when someone reports one. Apparently this "new" ball isn't so great if many of the Titleist staffers are playing the old ball. 2 of the 3 PGA Tour wins this year have been with the OLD Titleist ball. Hmmm...interesting.

 

And when I see Golfsmith, Watts, TGW or any other big box retailer actually SELL them for less than the MAP of $45.99, then I'll believe you. You might have some connections, but I've rarely ever seen a big box retailer sell a Titleist ball for under the MAP.

 

Have fun with the ball, fellas. I'll stick with something else.

 

Kevin

[mat562]

Certain players sticking with an older model of a ball isn't necessarily an indication that the new ones aren't any good. It may be that there's a particular element of the previous ball that's to a players liking, or which ticks a particular box in the performance or feel section. Tour pros can be a pernickity bunch and very minor differences, imperceptable to the average Joe, may well be a huge thing to them. Often pros are reluctant to switch a particular item with which they're familiar and, with the relative newness of the ball, many have no doubt not yet fully tested and evaluated them - as is a prerequisite for such a fundamentally important bit of kit as the ball.

 

Players sticking with a previous model of Pro V1 is no different to what happened the last time the ball had a mid-life update. And it's effectively the same thing as any of the many pros who play a slightly tweaked version of other ball models to suit their individual requirements and preferences. If you look on the conforming ball list(s) there are many different iterations of many of the more popular balls used on tour for developmental reasons and in order to provide options for their players under the umbrella of one particular brand or model name that will then be marketed to the (largely unknowing) public.

 

I've no idea whether the new Titleists are any good - I haven't hit one yet - but to assume that it's a lemon simply because a few players haven't immediately switched to it over the old model isn't necessarily going to be an accurate assessment of the product.

 

I'll be interested to try them, but unless they're better than the ball I'm currently playing I'll also be sticking with something else.

[tpariff]

Certain players sticking with an older model of a ball isn't necessarily an indication that the new ones aren't any good. It may be that there's a particular element of the previous ball that's to a players liking, or which ticks a particular box in the performance or feel section. Tour pros can be a pernickity bunch and very minor differences, imperceptable to the average Joe, may well be a huge thing to them. Often pros are reluctant to switch a particular item with which they're familiar and, with the relative newness of the ball, many have no doubt not yet fully tested and evaluated them - as is a prerequisite for such a fundamentally important bit of kit as the ball.

 

Players sticking with a previous model of Pro V1 is no different to what happened the last time the ball had a mid-life update. And it's effectively the same thing as any of the many pros who play a slightly tweaked version of other ball models to suit their individual requirements and preferences. If you look on the conforming ball list(s) there are many different iterations of many of the more popular balls used on tour for developmental reasons and in order to provide options for their players under the umbrella of one particular brand or model name that will then be marketed to the public.

 

I've no idea whether the new Titleists are any good - I haven't hit one yet - but to assume that it's a lemon simply because a few players haven't immediately switched to it over the old model isn't necessarily going to be an accurate assessment of the product.

 

I'll be interested to try them, but unless they're better than the ball I'm currently playing I'll also be sticking with something else.

 

I found it interesting hearing stats at the Mercedes regarding the new vs. old Pro v1. According to worldgolf.com, only 10 of the 20 players using Titleist golf balls played the new ball. It may just be me, but I think that's a red flag when half the players choose an older model over a new one. If it were one or two guys, I'd understand that. But half of them? I'm guessing Titleist can't be happy with that considering they are launching a new ball in the next few weeks.

 

It may not be a lemon, but I certainly don't think it's going to blow away anything that's currently available like the original Pro v1 did. Consumers must decide if they're willing to pay the premium for the Titleist name if there's no significant benefit over the current Pro v1 model or any other tour level ball from other manufacturers.

 

Kevin

[mat562]

Kevin

 

I agree with you to a point - there does seem to be a certain recalcitrance amongst the players to make the switch, over and above what I remember the last time the ball was changed (not counting the changes made last year to stop Callaway from chucking the toys around the Carlsbad nursery) when a majority quickly made the switch.

 

That said, there has always been a bit of a schizm amongst the Titleist ball players with regard to Pro V1 models. At any one time, it's been possible to find two or three models of Pro v1 (and a couple of V1X) models in play on the tour - so it's nothing too remarkable, even if there do appear to be somewhat more 'hold outs' amongst the users this time around.

 

I agree that we're unlikely to see a real quantum leap in performance as we did with the original Pro V1, but even that model had some foibles that needed to be ironed out (remember 'seaming' them on the tee?) and the second generation model, whilst not as revoloutionary, was certainly an improvement in every regard.

 

In all truth, I think we'll see yet more blurring of the Pro V1 line on tour in the future - and most other models for that matter too. When the new groove rule comes into effect, I suspect many touring pros will be looking for a higher-spinning model in order to offset, probably in conjunction with weak-lofted irons, the effects of having to play with those V grooves. I imagine that there'll be even more tweaking and yet more Pro V1s with a star, dot, squiggle; whatever after the name to cater for the needs and wants of the big boys whilst making sure that Joe Public just sees 'Pro V1' and buys them regardless. Whilst the rest of the golfing population are still using their square grooved irons, it's perhaps inevitable that there'll be a bifurcation in golf ball design to cater for what will, for a decade or so, be two very different groups of golfers who both want to play a Pro V1 that's optimised for their particular field of play and the clubs they're hitting it with.

 

It'll be interesting to see what Titleist have (and perhaps will) come up with. According to their marketing blurb the new/old Pro V1 (the one that was modified so as not to infringe those patents that aren't valid) was almost exactly the same as the previous one that posessed that all-important technology - despite not posessing that all-important technology. That, in itself, is interesting enough...

[fridsdotcom]

Kevin - google "Minimum Advertised Price Policy"...maybe then you'll "believe me"...I promise, I didn't make this term up. Here's a good article that will bring you up to speed:

 

http://hffo.cuna.org/12433/article/1059/html

 

If you've ever seen / heard / purchased ProV's for less then $45, then you've seen them sell for less then MAP.

 

Please help me understand why you think a retailer would sell a new product for less then the MAP?!

 

So where exactly did Titleist acknowledge that there is no difference between the balls? Oh, right...they didn't. You just made that up in an attempt to add some "facts" to your post. So by your reasoning, the new Taylor Made R9 driver must not be that good because not every TM staffer didn't put it in the bag the first week? And Callaway's Tour ix ball must not be as good as their Tour i ball because some players still use the older version? See how ridiculous this sounds?

 

mat562 - I couldn't agree with you more. I don't think Kevin realizes that professional golfers PLAY GOLF FOR A LIVING. Expecting them to change to a new ball the first week it is available is a lot to ask. If I was Titleist, I would be encouraged that 10 of 20 put the new ball in play the first week.

[tpariff]

Kevin - google "Minimum Advertised Price Policy"...maybe then you'll "believe me"...I promise, I didn't make this term up. Here's a good article that will bring you up to speed:

 

http://hffo.cuna.org/12433/article/1059/html

 

If you've ever seen / heard / purchased ProV's for less then $45, then you've seen them sell for less then MAP.

 

Please help me understand why you think a retailer would sell a new product for less then the MAP?!

 

So where exactly did Titleist acknowledge that there is no difference between the balls? Oh, right...they didn't. You just made that up in an attempt to add some "facts" to your post. So by your reasoning, the new Taylor Made R9 driver must not be that good because not every TM staffer didn't put it in the bag the first week? And Callaway's Tour ix ball must not be as good as their Tour i ball because some players still use the older version? See how ridiculous this sounds?

 

mat562 - I couldn't agree with you more. I don't think Kevin realizes that professional golfers PLAY GOLF FOR A LIVING. Expecting them to change to a new ball the first week it is available is a lot to ask. If I was Titleist, I would be encouraged that 10 of 20 put the new ball in play the first week.

 

I'm fully aware of what the term MAP means, but the reality is that I've never seen a big box retailer sell Pro v1 balls for less than the MAP. The prices we see now for the "old" ball are an effort to clear out that inventory. I live in Tampa and frequent Watts and Golfsmith, and I shop on TGW and some other online retailers. There's another local shop in Tampa with two locations and they sell Pro v1 balls for the MAP. Maybe YOU get them cheaper, but I'm guessing the majority of consumers pay MAP.

 

And I do understand that professional golfers play for a living. I also understand the money sponsors pay these guys to play the latest and greatest equipment. How many r9 drivers have we seen? How many driver models have the TM guys cycled through in the last 2 years? Maybe YOU should check out the latest Paul Azinger thread here and see what he has to say about finally being able to play the equipment HE wants to play because he doesn't have an equipment deal. I have a friend who caddies for a PGA Tour player, so trust me, I'm FULLY aware of how it works.

 

This "new" ball didn't just hit these players' bags in late December. I'm sure they've been testing them for some time now, yet half of the field at the Mercedes chose to play the old ball. And 2 of the 3 wins this year have been with the old ball.

 

The bottom line is that I won't pay $46 per dozen for this ball or ANY ball. If you want to pay it, then go right ahead. Or maybe you have connections where you don't pay $46 per dozen. If so, then good for you.

 

Kevin

[flyhighandlong]

Dont base your decision on what the tour players are using(they are getting paid to play it), get out there and try a bunch for yourself, see what works best for you and then go with that. For me the TM TP Black is easily the best ball for me...

[jaskanski]

Titleist is still the number 1 ball in golf.

If it wasn't, you can bet the other brands would be making a pretty big deal about it -"we're the new number 1!", "the king is dead", you can see the headlines now.

The pro tour usage is irrelevant IMO, it's the buying public that pay the pros wages. The golf industry loves the stats on the coverage of their product. I think it also applies to balls sold to average joe - otherwise someone would be shouting their stats very loud.

[fridsdotcom]

Kevin - google "Minimum Advertised Price Policy"...maybe then you'll "believe me"...I promise, I didn't make this term up. Here's a good article that will bring you up to speed:

 

http://hffo.cuna.org/12433/article/1059/html

 

If you've ever seen / heard / purchased ProV's for less then $45, then you've seen them sell for less then MAP.

 

Please help me understand why you think a retailer would sell a new product for less then the MAP?!

 

So where exactly did Titleist acknowledge that there is no difference between the balls? Oh, right...they didn't. You just made that up in an attempt to add some "facts" to your post. So by your reasoning, the new Taylor Made R9 driver must not be that good because not every TM staffer didn't put it in the bag the first week? And Callaway's Tour ix ball must not be as good as their Tour i ball because some players still use the older version? See how ridiculous this sounds?

 

mat562 - I couldn't agree with you more. I don't think Kevin realizes that professional golfers PLAY GOLF FOR A LIVING. Expecting them to change to a new ball the first week it is available is a lot to ask. If I was Titleist, I would be encouraged that 10 of 20 put the new ball in play the first week.

 

I'm fully aware of what the term MAP means, but the reality is that I've never seen a big box retailer sell Pro v1 balls for less than the MAP. The prices we see now for the "old" ball are an effort to clear out that inventory. I live in Tampa and frequent Watts and Golfsmith, and I shop on TGW and some other online retailers. There's another local shop in Tampa with two locations and they sell Pro v1 balls for the MAP. Maybe YOU get them cheaper, but I'm guessing the majority of consumers pay MAP.

 

And I do understand that professional golfers play for a living. I also understand the money sponsors pay these guys to play the latest and greatest equipment. How many r9 drivers have we seen? How many driver models have the TM guys cycled through in the last 2 years? Maybe YOU should check out the latest Paul Azinger thread here and see what he has to say about finally being able to play the equipment HE wants to play because he doesn't have an equipment deal. I have a friend who caddies for a PGA Tour player, so trust me, I'm FULLY aware of how it works.

 

This "new" ball didn't just hit these players' bags in late December. I'm sure they've been testing them for some time now, yet half of the field at the Mercedes chose to play the old ball. And 2 of the 3 wins this year have been with the old ball.

 

The bottom line is that I won't pay $46 per dozen for this ball or ANY ball. If you want to pay it, then go right ahead. Or maybe you have connections where you don't pay $46 per dozen. If so, then good for you.

 

Kevin

 

So in your first post, you blast Titleist because they only had 50% of their players switch to the new ball for the first event the ball was available for. Then in your next post, you comment about Paul Azinger being able to play the clubs he wants because he doesn't have an equipment deal. Thank you for proving my point...maybe Titleist encourages their players to use whatever Titleist ball is best for their game?

 

If you won't pay $46 a dozen for balls, I completely understand...I commend you...I agree with you! But just say that! Don't make stuff up like "Titleist acknowledged that there is no difference between versions" and "the ball must not be that good because only 50% of their players put it in play in week one". Those statements are just ridiculous.

[tpariff]

Kevin - google "Minimum Advertised Price Policy"...maybe then you'll "believe me"...I promise, I didn't make this term up. Here's a good article that will bring you up to speed:

 

http://hffo.cuna.org/12433/article/1059/html

 

If you've ever seen / heard / purchased ProV's for less then $45, then you've seen them sell for less then MAP.

 

Please help me understand why you think a retailer would sell a new product for less then the MAP?!

 

So where exactly did Titleist acknowledge that there is no difference between the balls? Oh, right...they didn't. You just made that up in an attempt to add some "facts" to your post. So by your reasoning, the new Taylor Made R9 driver must not be that good because not every TM staffer didn't put it in the bag the first week? And Callaway's Tour ix ball must not be as good as their Tour i ball because some players still use the older version? See how ridiculous this sounds?

 

mat562 - I couldn't agree with you more. I don't think Kevin realizes that professional golfers PLAY GOLF FOR A LIVING. Expecting them to change to a new ball the first week it is available is a lot to ask. If I was Titleist, I would be encouraged that 10 of 20 put the new ball in play the first week.

 

I'm fully aware of what the term MAP means, but the reality is that I've never seen a big box retailer sell Pro v1 balls for less than the MAP. The prices we see now for the "old" ball are an effort to clear out that inventory. I live in Tampa and frequent Watts and Golfsmith, and I shop on TGW and some other online retailers. There's another local shop in Tampa with two locations and they sell Pro v1 balls for the MAP. Maybe YOU get them cheaper, but I'm guessing the majority of consumers pay MAP.

 

And I do understand that professional golfers play for a living. I also understand the money sponsors pay these guys to play the latest and greatest equipment. How many r9 drivers have we seen? How many driver models have the TM guys cycled through in the last 2 years? Maybe YOU should check out the latest Paul Azinger thread here and see what he has to say about finally being able to play the equipment HE wants to play because he doesn't have an equipment deal. I have a friend who caddies for a PGA Tour player, so trust me, I'm FULLY aware of how it works.

 

This "new" ball didn't just hit these players' bags in late December. I'm sure they've been testing them for some time now, yet half of the field at the Mercedes chose to play the old ball. And 2 of the 3 wins this year have been with the old ball.

 

The bottom line is that I won't pay $46 per dozen for this ball or ANY ball. If you want to pay it, then go right ahead. Or maybe you have connections where you don't pay $46 per dozen. If so, then good for you.

 

Kevin

 

So in your first post, you blast Titleist because they only had 50% of their players switch to the new ball for the first event the ball was available for. Then in your next post, you comment about Paul Azinger being able to play the clubs he wants because he doesn't have an equipment deal. Thank you for proving my point...maybe Titleist encourages their players to use whatever Titleist ball is best for their game?

 

If you won't pay $46 a dozen for balls, I completely understand...I commend you...I agree with you! But just say that! Don't make stuff up like "Titleist acknowledged that there is no difference between versions" and "the ball must not be that good because only 50% of their players put it in play in week one". Those statements are just ridiculous.

 

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH

 

Someone please change this broken record.

[gdu]

Kevin - google "Minimum Advertised Price Policy"...maybe then you'll "believe me"...I promise, I didn't make this term up. Here's a good article that will bring you up to speed:

 

http://hffo.cuna.org/12433/article/1059/html

 

If you've ever seen / heard / purchased ProV's for less then $45, then you've seen them sell for less then MAP.

 

Please help me understand why you think a retailer would sell a new product for less then the MAP?!

 

So where exactly did Titleist acknowledge that there is no difference between the balls? Oh, right...they didn't. You just made that up in an attempt to add some "facts" to your post. So by your reasoning, the new Taylor Made R9 driver must not be that good because not every TM staffer didn't put it in the bag the first week? And Callaway's Tour ix ball must not be as good as their Tour i ball because some players still use the older version? See how ridiculous this sounds?

 

mat562 - I couldn't agree with you more. I don't think Kevin realizes that professional golfers PLAY GOLF FOR A LIVING. Expecting them to change to a new ball the first week it is available is a lot to ask. If I was Titleist, I would be encouraged that 10 of 20 put the new ball in play the first week.

 

I'm fully aware of what the term MAP means, but the reality is that I've never seen a big box retailer sell Pro v1 balls for less than the MAP. The prices we see now for the "old" ball are an effort to clear out that inventory. I live in Tampa and frequent Watts and Golfsmith, and I shop on TGW and some other online retailers. There's another local shop in Tampa with two locations and they sell Pro v1 balls for the MAP. Maybe YOU get them cheaper, but I'm guessing the majority of consumers pay MAP.

 

And I do understand that professional golfers play for a living. I also understand the money sponsors pay these guys to play the latest and greatest equipment. How many r9 drivers have we seen? How many driver models have the TM guys cycled through in the last 2 years? Maybe YOU should check out the latest Paul Azinger thread here and see what he has to say about finally being able to play the equipment HE wants to play because he doesn't have an equipment deal. I have a friend who caddies for a PGA Tour player, so trust me, I'm FULLY aware of how it works.

 

This "new" ball didn't just hit these players' bags in late December. I'm sure they've been testing them for some time now, yet half of the field at the Mercedes chose to play the old ball. And 2 of the 3 wins this year have been with the old ball.

 

The bottom line is that I won't pay $46 per dozen for this ball or ANY ball. If you want to pay it, then go right ahead. Or maybe you have connections where you don't pay $46 per dozen. If so, then good for you.

 

Kevin

 

So in your first post, you blast Titleist because they only had 50% of their players switch to the new ball for the first event the ball was available for. Then in your next post, you comment about Paul Azinger being able to play the clubs he wants because he doesn't have an equipment deal. Thank you for proving my point...maybe Titleist encourages their players to use whatever Titleist ball is best for their game?

 

If you won't pay $46 a dozen for balls, I completely understand...I commend you...I agree with you! But just say that! Don't make stuff up like "Titleist acknowledged that there is no difference between versions" and "the ball must not be that good because only 50% of their players put it in play in week one". Those statements are just ridiculous.

 

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH

 

Someone please change this broken record.

That's what the rest of us are thinking about you.

[tpariff]

Kevin - google "Minimum Advertised Price Policy"...maybe then you'll "believe me"...I promise, I didn't make this term up. Here's a good article that will bring you up to speed:

 

http://hffo.cuna.org/12433/article/1059/html

 

If you've ever seen / heard / purchased ProV's for less then $45, then you've seen them sell for less then MAP.

 

Please help me understand why you think a retailer would sell a new product for less then the MAP?!

 

So where exactly did Titleist acknowledge that there is no difference between the balls? Oh, right...they didn't. You just made that up in an attempt to add some "facts" to your post. So by your reasoning, the new Taylor Made R9 driver must not be that good because not every TM staffer didn't put it in the bag the first week? And Callaway's Tour ix ball must not be as good as their Tour i ball because some players still use the older version? See how ridiculous this sounds?

 

mat562 - I couldn't agree with you more. I don't think Kevin realizes that professional golfers PLAY GOLF FOR A LIVING. Expecting them to change to a new ball the first week it is available is a lot to ask. If I was Titleist, I would be encouraged that 10 of 20 put the new ball in play the first week.

 

I'm fully aware of what the term MAP means, but the reality is that I've never seen a big box retailer sell Pro v1 balls for less than the MAP. The prices we see now for the "old" ball are an effort to clear out that inventory. I live in Tampa and frequent Watts and Golfsmith, and I shop on TGW and some other online retailers. There's another local shop in Tampa with two locations and they sell Pro v1 balls for the MAP. Maybe YOU get them cheaper, but I'm guessing the majority of consumers pay MAP.

 

And I do understand that professional golfers play for a living. I also understand the money sponsors pay these guys to play the latest and greatest equipment. How many r9 drivers have we seen? How many driver models have the TM guys cycled through in the last 2 years? Maybe YOU should check out the latest Paul Azinger thread here and see what he has to say about finally being able to play the equipment HE wants to play because he doesn't have an equipment deal. I have a friend who caddies for a PGA Tour player, so trust me, I'm FULLY aware of how it works.

 

This "new" ball didn't just hit these players' bags in late December. I'm sure they've been testing them for some time now, yet half of the field at the Mercedes chose to play the old ball. And 2 of the 3 wins this year have been with the old ball.

 

The bottom line is that I won't pay $46 per dozen for this ball or ANY ball. If you want to pay it, then go right ahead. Or maybe you have connections where you don't pay $46 per dozen. If so, then good for you.

 

Kevin

 

So in your first post, you blast Titleist because they only had 50% of their players switch to the new ball for the first event the ball was available for. Then in your next post, you comment about Paul Azinger being able to play the clubs he wants because he doesn't have an equipment deal. Thank you for proving my point...maybe Titleist encourages their players to use whatever Titleist ball is best for their game?

 

If you won't pay $46 a dozen for balls, I completely understand...I commend you...I agree with you! But just say that! Don't make stuff up like "Titleist acknowledged that there is no difference between versions" and "the ball must not be that good because only 50% of their players put it in play in week one". Those statements are just ridiculous.

 

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH

 

Someone please change this broken record.

That's what the rest of us are thinking about you.

 

OOOOOOHHHHH.

 

How long did it take you to come up with that? Very 3rd grade of you.