Scotty Cameron Classic Mini

[RobotDoctor]

[quote name='texas-ex' post='1868390' date='Aug 6 2009, 08:41 AM'][quote name='RobotDoctor' post='1868129' date='Aug 6 2009, 07:43 AM'][quote name='biscuity' post='1867906' date='Aug 6 2009, 12:08 AM'][quote name='RobotDoctor' post='1867854' date='Aug 5 2009, 10:05 PM']1) I am not moving goal posts. I am rebutting your response to cast putters. You stated that all the cast putters Cameron made has a rough finish. Well, yes, the Anser reproductions he made for Elkington, Love, Duval, and others, had this rough, sand cast appearance. That said, I just mentioned that there are casting processes that will leave no rough finish. I will even go on to say that if there are visible mill marks on a wax mold, the ceramic casted molds will even pick that up in the process and produce the milling (somewhat) in the casting.

By the way, I have witness the casting process at Dolphin Manufacturing first hand and seen the before and after products. Have you been to a golf club casting facility and seen this for yourself? Believe me, casting is a very exact science and you would be amazed in what can be done with a "rough" casting. Believe me, it is not so rough.[/quote]

My point was that the examples of cast Titleist putters from the same era that Tiger's would have been made (around 1998) are all very low quality castings. It's not logical to assume that he would make a junky looking putter for Davis Love and a great one for Tiger. If anything DL3 is more in Scotty's camp than Tiger.

[/quote]

Biscuity, you really do not understand the science of casting, do you? The castings that Cameron made that emulated the Ping Scottsdale were done so to replicate the conditions that the Scottsdales were originally made, including metal composition and the sand cast impressions in the cavity. Sand casting is a method still employed today and is an excellent means of casting. The sand is an oil based sand which lends itself to forming around a mold and is a perfectly fine method. Besides, some people prefer the rough cavity look as these replicate the original Scottsdale Anser. These were made in the mid 90s just after Cameron signed with Titleist, not late 90s of Tiger's era. Tiger wanted an very close copy of the Ping Anser 2 he was using and, last I saw, the Ping Anser 2 is not a rough cast putter, it is a smooth cast putter, made by the casting technology I mentioned earlier at the very same plant I was at. That is what Tiger wanted and that is what Cameron produced. That is, of course, if Cameron actually made Tiger's gamer by casting it. Who knows how the putter was actually made. But to use your logic, since Cameron cannot produce a suitable replacement for Tiger's putter with the CNC technology of today and that, [i]"modern technology would allow him to easily do a 3D scan and replicate the exact shape"[/i], then why does Tiger say that his backup is a Nike? Are we to ignore what Tiger says and believe he is not telling the truth?

Then comes my other question. If Tiger's putter was actually cast, who did it? Last I saw from pictures from Cameron's studio, he is not set up to cast using ceramic slurry as Dolphin Manufacturing is. Could it be assumed that if Tiger's putter was actually cast by some contracted vendor, possibly Dolphin? If Tiger's putter is actually cast then it appears that this is another case of propaganda from the Cameron camp to make other's believe the putter was made in the Studio. Just a thought.
[/quote]

There is a facility WITHIN 2 MILES of my shop that does precision casting of stainless steel (303, 304, 316, 17-4 etc). I "skim" mill and "skim" turn their parts to within tolerance all the time. We have not yet ran into any differences between billet and cast materials. Suppliers choose to cast parts because in the long run it's cheaper to create a shape closer to the finished product. Now if you think about it, billet flat bar is "cast" too. I know, crazy. The steel is melted and poured into a form which is then cooled and pushed through an extrusion die to get to the bar shape that you want. Whoa.

Once again, this may or may not have anything to do with putters.
[/quote]

Um, sorry, but this has a lot to do with putters.

If the feel of a piece of steel is needed to be changed, wouldn't an annealing process be the proper course of action?

[biscuity]

[quote name='foregasim' post='1868356' date='Aug 6 2009, 07:26 AM'][quote name='biscuity' post='1868239' date='Aug 6 2009, 09:39 AM'][quote name='foregasim' post='1868130' date='Aug 6 2009, 05:43 AM'][quote name='biscuity' post='1867813' date='Aug 6 2009, 12:34 AM']Foregasim challenged me to show a putter that was milled like Tiger's gamer, ...[/quote]

Would you care to share with the class the post where this "challenge" was made?
[/quote]

In post #474 from this thread you wrote:

[i]"Since you seem to be so[color="#000000"] adept at[/color] digging up pictures of old photos and claiming that Cameron CNC milled Tigers putter, how about some photos of some of the other heads that were CNC milled in 1999 that are the IDENTICAL shape as Tigers gamer or is it your position that he created a computer program just for this particular program and never used that program again? It would be the first and only computer program that he ever wrote and it would be the first and only time there was a one of a kind CNC milled Anser 2 Cameron."[/i]
[/quote]

So let me get this right. I asked for "some photos of some of the other heads that were CNC milled in 1999 that are the [b]IDENTICAL[/b] shape as Tigers gamer" and you post some photos that were similar but not the same. Then you post that I challenged you "to show a putter that was milled [b]like[/b] Tiger's gamer".

You did not post photos of an identical putter head as I originally requested. The point was that if the putter was milled on a CNC mill that there would be a computer program that could reproduce the exact "identical" head shape, not a similar but different head shape. You post similar head shapes and then change what I said so that it justifies what you posted. I DID NOT challenge you "to show a putter that was milled [b]like[/b] Tiger's gamer". That was misleading at best and an outright false statement. It is something I have become accustom to when reading Cameron's web site and the posts made by Cameron fanatics.

Next time try and be honest in what you post, especially when you are claiming it is in reference to something I posted.
[/quote]

You're wrong there. I posted photos of putters that are [b]identical[/b] to the way Tigers putter came off the CNC machine. It is common for the pros to have putters ground to fit their tastes. That grinding process is not part of the CNC file. Same with the stampings, they are done by hand and there will always be slight variances.

[HeadonaStick]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1869031' date='Aug 6 2009, 03:29 PM'][quote name='foregasim' post='1868356' date='Aug 6 2009, 07:26 AM'][quote name='biscuity' post='1868239' date='Aug 6 2009, 09:39 AM'][quote name='foregasim' post='1868130' date='Aug 6 2009, 05:43 AM'][quote name='biscuity' post='1867813' date='Aug 6 2009, 12:34 AM']Foregasim challenged me to show a putter that was milled like Tiger's gamer, ...[/quote]

Would you care to share with the class the post where this "challenge" was made?
[/quote]

In post #474 from this thread you wrote:

[i]"Since you seem to be so[color="#000000"] adept at[/color] digging up pictures of old photos and claiming that Cameron CNC milled Tigers putter, how about some photos of some of the other heads that were CNC milled in 1999 that are the IDENTICAL shape as Tigers gamer or is it your position that he created a computer program just for this particular program and never used that program again? It would be the first and only computer program that he ever wrote and it would be the first and only time there was a one of a kind CNC milled Anser 2 Cameron."[/i]
[/quote]

So let me get this right. I asked for "some photos of some of the other heads that were CNC milled in 1999 that are the [b]IDENTICAL[/b] shape as Tigers gamer" and you post some photos that were similar but not the same. Then you post that I challenged you "to show a putter that was milled [b]like[/b] Tiger's gamer".

You did not post photos of an identical putter head as I originally requested. The point was that if the putter was milled on a CNC mill that there would be a computer program that could reproduce the exact "identical" head shape, not a similar but different head shape. You post similar head shapes and then change what I said so that it justifies what you posted. I DID NOT challenge you "to show a putter that was milled [b]like[/b] Tiger's gamer". That was misleading at best and an outright false statement. It is something I have become accustom to when reading Cameron's web site and the posts made by Cameron fanatics.

Next time try and be honest in what you post, especially when you are claiming it is in reference to something I posted.
[/quote]

You're wrong there. I posted photos of putters that are [b]identical[/b] to the way Tigers putter came off the CNC machine. It is common for the pros to have putters ground to fit their tastes. That grinding process is not part of the CNC file. Same with the stampings, they are done by hand and there will always be slight variances.
[/quote]
You're making at least two assumptions there.

[RobotDoctor]

Cast putters that have been skim-milled also can be ground/sanded to the players preference as well.

[RobotDoctor]

Just for the record, a milled casting is not necessarily a bad thing. The milling process brings accuracies that are desired. The problem with castings is that discontinuities can occur as a result of the entrapment of Hydrogen (gaseous voids) that create dead spots as opposed to hot spots. Can I discern a putter cast versus a putter that was milled from a billet of steel? Probably not but I do not have a sense of feel that Tiger and others have. Does it really matter to me? No.

It would be nice to know if Tiger's putter was indeed cast so that we could get to the bottom of the $7,000 worth of GSS that Tiger has in his putter.

[texas-ex]

[quote name='wentorf11' post='1868497' date='Aug 6 2009, 10:34 AM'][quote name='texas-ex' post='1868474' date='Aug 6 2009, 10:24 AM']Once you have the CNC program to cut a putter from a block then the rest is easy. You just adjust your offsets for the semi-finished forged or cast raw shape. There was another shop here in Houston that was doing the millwork for the old Dogleg Right putters a few years back. I know those were either cast or forged rough -- believe it was cast somewhere in Asia. You couldn't tell they weren't cut from a flat bar.

In my opinion, whether the rest of the Studio Stainless line was cast or Tiger's putter was a one-off doesn't matter. If they all were cast, then the quality was very good, so much so that we are still talking about it. The stainless castings I machine for Schlumberger have gone through more rigorous testing than any putter ever will. If the preeminant oilfield services company OK's cast parts to go downhole and hold $100,000 worth of electronics safely, who am I to b**** about a putter?

If Tiger's putter is a true single cast putter then I can see how Scotty would say that the putter cost $7000 to make. Hell, I couldn't do it for that in my shop. Regardless, Tiger likes it. End of story.

I [size=7][color="#ff0000"]owned[/color][/size] the sand cast Newport made for Elkington. He gave it to me after a charity tournament in which we played together. It is a ROUGH piece. Obviously it was done by some shop then Scotty milled the face flat and added sight lines and stampings.[/quote]

That's kind of what I thought, does matter what the raw material is you just need to do the milling...

You say owned...so you don't have Elk's putter anymore! How did that one get away?
[/quote]

I couldn't play with it because the neck was bent a little bit. I asked the Studio to try to bend it to my specs but they wouldn't touch it for fear of breaking it. Sooooo, I sold it and bought a Cami&Co GSS Newport II with the super thin top line (Pat Pend Anser 2 copy, btw) that I could game.

First rule of my putter collection is that if I can't make a putt with it, it don't stay around.

[biscuity]

[quote name='foregasim' post='1869455' date='Aug 6 2009, 03:18 PM']Heck, [b]it is pretty well accepted[/b] that in the early 2000's many of the Cameron OTR putters were cast in Asia and then shipped to the USA for CNC milling. Few people could tell from looking at these putters that they started life as a casting.[/quote]

LOL

[tpariff]

Biscuity,

Are you going to address the discrepancy on the number of 2004 My Girl putters listed on the SC website? After all, you DO seem to believe everything they print.

Thanks.
Kevin

[xxio]

[quote name='tpariff' post='1869765' date='Aug 7 2009, 09:02 AM']Biscuity,

Are you going to address the discrepancy on the number of 2004 My Girl putters listed on the SC website? After all, you DO seem to believe everything they print.

Thanks.
Kevin[/quote]

I think he will still decide.

There are several of my posts that he only chooses to answer half of the questions and ignore the rest even though they are related. It is kind of hard to debate issues when a poster does that.

[RobotDoctor]

As Judge Smails said, "[i]Welllllllllll, were're waiting.[/i]"

[tpariff]

[quote name='xxio' post='1869796' date='Aug 6 2009, 09:11 PM'][quote name='tpariff' post='1869765' date='Aug 7 2009, 09:02 AM']Biscuity,

Are you going to address the discrepancy on the number of 2004 My Girl putters listed on the SC website? After all, you DO seem to believe everything they print.

Thanks.
Kevin[/quote]

I think he will still decide.

There are several of my posts that he only chooses to answer half of the questions and ignore the rest even though they are related. It is kind of hard to debate issues when a poster does that.
[/quote]

True. But my question is pretty damn simple. I provided 2 different pieces of info on the same putter. I just want to hear how he explains that one.

Kevin

[texas-ex]

[quote name='RobotDoctor' post='1868607' date='Aug 6 2009, 11:31 AM'][quote name='texas-ex' post='1868390' date='Aug 6 2009, 08:41 AM'][quote name='RobotDoctor' post='1868129' date='Aug 6 2009, 07:43 AM'][quote name='biscuity' post='1867906' date='Aug 6 2009, 12:08 AM'][quote name='RobotDoctor' post='1867854' date='Aug 5 2009, 10:05 PM']1) I am not moving goal posts. I am rebutting your response to cast putters. You stated that all the cast putters Cameron made has a rough finish. Well, yes, the Anser reproductions he made for Elkington, Love, Duval, and others, had this rough, sand cast appearance. That said, I just mentioned that there are casting processes that will leave no rough finish. I will even go on to say that if there are visible mill marks on a wax mold, the ceramic casted molds will even pick that up in the process and produce the milling (somewhat) in the casting.

By the way, I have witness the casting process at Dolphin Manufacturing first hand and seen the before and after products. Have you been to a golf club casting facility and seen this for yourself? Believe me, casting is a very exact science and you would be amazed in what can be done with a "rough" casting. Believe me, it is not so rough.[/quote]

My point was that the examples of cast Titleist putters from the same era that Tiger's would have been made (around 1998) are all very low quality castings. It's not logical to assume that he would make a junky looking putter for Davis Love and a great one for Tiger. If anything DL3 is more in Scotty's camp than Tiger.

[/quote]

Biscuity, you really do not understand the science of casting, do you? The castings that Cameron made that emulated the Ping Scottsdale were done so to replicate the conditions that the Scottsdales were originally made, including metal composition and the sand cast impressions in the cavity. Sand casting is a method still employed today and is an excellent means of casting. The sand is an oil based sand which lends itself to forming around a mold and is a perfectly fine method. Besides, some people prefer the rough cavity look as these replicate the original Scottsdale Anser. These were made in the mid 90s just after Cameron signed with Titleist, not late 90s of Tiger's era. Tiger wanted an very close copy of the Ping Anser 2 he was using and, last I saw, the Ping Anser 2 is not a rough cast putter, it is a smooth cast putter, made by the casting technology I mentioned earlier at the very same plant I was at. That is what Tiger wanted and that is what Cameron produced. That is, of course, if Cameron actually made Tiger's gamer by casting it. Who knows how the putter was actually made. But to use your logic, since Cameron cannot produce a suitable replacement for Tiger's putter with the CNC technology of today and that, [i]"modern technology would allow him to easily do a 3D scan and replicate the exact shape"[/i], then why does Tiger say that his backup is a Nike? Are we to ignore what Tiger says and believe he is not telling the truth?

Then comes my other question. If Tiger's putter was actually cast, who did it? Last I saw from pictures from Cameron's studio, he is not set up to cast using ceramic slurry as Dolphin Manufacturing is. Could it be assumed that if Tiger's putter was actually cast by some contracted vendor, possibly Dolphin? If Tiger's putter is actually cast then it appears that this is another case of propaganda from the Cameron camp to make other's believe the putter was made in the Studio. Just a thought.
[/quote]

There is a facility WITHIN 2 MILES of my shop that does precision casting of stainless steel (303, 304, 316, 17-4 etc). I "skim" mill and "skim" turn their parts to within tolerance all the time. We have not yet ran into any differences between billet and cast materials. Suppliers choose to cast parts because in the long run it's cheaper to create a shape closer to the finished product. Now if you think about it, billet flat bar is "cast" too. I know, crazy. The steel is melted and poured into a form which is then cooled and pushed through an extrusion die to get to the bar shape that you want. Whoa.

Once again, this may or may not have anything to do with putters.
[/quote]

Um, sorry, but this has a lot to do with putters.

If the feel of a piece of steel is needed to be changed, wouldn't an annealing process be the proper course of action?
[/quote]

Feel (sound) is subjective and can change based on head shape, shaft, face milling, head weight, grip, etc. Annealing does change the hardness and physical properties of a metal. Essentially it's the opposite of heat treating -- in simple terms. But we're talking about METAL. Soft metal is still damn hard -- kind of like jumbo shrimp I guess. If you want a soft feel, go get yourself a Nubbins or glue some rubber bands to your putter face. Otherwise it's all mental. GSS, DASS, BSS (bullxxxx stanless steel), Soft Carbon, blah blah blah is all marketing mumbo jumbo. I still want to see a heat treated tool steel putter (D2 or maybe S7) that would be virtually indestructable. For reference, this would essentially be the same as a hammer's head.

Consider me the first one to jump on the super hard heat treated quenched and tempered putter head bandwagon. I'm leading the revolution.

[tpariff]

[quote name='foregasim' post='1869961' date='Aug 6 2009, 10:15 PM']In my best impersonation posting voice:

Well they are both right. At first 500 were made. That was when the web master posted the information that 500 were made. Then, just in case there needed to be some extras because of damage or because they were lost in shipping, another 250 were made. The the new web master put up the other page not realizing that he needed to modify the first page.

or

Originally there were 750 made but then 250 were destroyed. So both pages are correct.[/quote]



Wouldn't it just be easier to write "fewer than 1,000 were produced"?

Kevin

[biscuity]

[quote name='tpariff' post='1868151' date='Aug 6 2009, 05:56 AM']Biscuity,

Since you believe everything on Scotty's site, which of these statements on Scotty's site do you believe?

Exhibit A - COA for a 2004 My Girl stating "1 of only 750"

[url="http://www.scottycameron.com/authentication/registrysearch.asp?registry=A006927"]http://www.scottycameron.com/authenticatio...egistry=A006927[/url]

"Third in the My Girl series in a black pearl finish at 350g. Newport Beach style head with triple flangelines. [size=4][b]1 of only 750 pieces made in 2004.[/b][/size]"


Exhibit B - 2004 My Girl description from the Putter Archive showing "Only 500 pieces were made"

[url="http://www.scottycameron.com/putters/archivedetail.aspx?id=116&modelID=259&seasonID=5"]http://www.scottycameron.com/putters/archi...&seasonID=5[/url]

"The 2004 Limited Release My Girl putter is a modified version of the popular Newport Beach, which has a rich history on Tour with a winning reputation. Scotty refined this soft carbon steel Newport Beach, with its slit ''floating face'' and distinctive sound and feel, by finishing it in brilliant Black Pearl for unmatched beauty. He completed the ensemble by giving its shaft the same iridescent Black Pearl finish - a truly unique accompaniment. The head was specifically selected for this Limited Release project and was weighted heavier at 350g to properly balance the shorter, 33'' overall length. Going along with the girlish pink pistol grip and My Girl shaft band is a black carbon fiber look My Girl headcover embroidered with dancing stars, the ''My Girl'' signature logo (with ''American Made'' below), the words ''Designed by Scotty Cameron'', as well as a 3 Point Cameron logo with stars, and the Titleist script logo. [b][size=4]Only 500 pieces were made.[/size]"[/b]


That's only one example of the inaccuracies of the COA system, the website, etc.

Kevin[/quote]

Yep, that sure looks like an error on the web site to me. If I owned a My Girl 3 I would write the webmaster to see if they would look into it and correct the problem.

My Girl Quantities:

2002 500
2003 1000
2004 500 (750?)
2005 750
2006 750
2007 750
2008 1000

I can't believe they actually made more than 5,000 of those things. Not my cup of tea. But I guess somebody likes them.

[reflog74]

Look, we know some of those numbers are just wrong. Take, for example, the 2003 NP 1.5 Prototype (black pearl). Only 2003 were made and they sold out really fast. Then, in 2006, a club pro in TN ordered 50 special event headcovers and guess what putters showed up in the boxes? Yep. 50 NP 1.5 Protos. I saw the pics he took of them all laid out -- before he got a call telling him to send those putters back to CA.

John

PS: That's not a typo you can lay on the webmaster.

[tpariff]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1869998' date='Aug 6 2009, 10:27 PM'][quote name='tpariff' post='1868151' date='Aug 6 2009, 05:56 AM']Biscuity,

Since you believe everything on Scotty's site, which of these statements on Scotty's site do you believe?

Exhibit A - COA for a 2004 My Girl stating "1 of only 750"

[url="http://www.scottycameron.com/authentication/registrysearch.asp?registry=A006927"]http://www.scottycameron.com/authenticatio...egistry=A006927[/url]

"Third in the My Girl series in a black pearl finish at 350g. Newport Beach style head with triple flangelines. [size=4][b]1 of only 750 pieces made in 2004.[/b][/size]"


Exhibit B - 2004 My Girl description from the Putter Archive showing "Only 500 pieces were made"

[url="http://www.scottycameron.com/putters/archivedetail.aspx?id=116&modelID=259&seasonID=5"]http://www.scottycameron.com/putters/archi...&seasonID=5[/url]

"The 2004 Limited Release My Girl putter is a modified version of the popular Newport Beach, which has a rich history on Tour with a winning reputation. Scotty refined this soft carbon steel Newport Beach, with its slit ''floating face'' and distinctive sound and feel, by finishing it in brilliant Black Pearl for unmatched beauty. He completed the ensemble by giving its shaft the same iridescent Black Pearl finish - a truly unique accompaniment. The head was specifically selected for this Limited Release project and was weighted heavier at 350g to properly balance the shorter, 33'' overall length. Going along with the girlish pink pistol grip and My Girl shaft band is a black carbon fiber look My Girl headcover embroidered with dancing stars, the ''My Girl'' signature logo (with ''American Made'' below), the words ''Designed by Scotty Cameron'', as well as a 3 Point Cameron logo with stars, and the Titleist script logo. [b][size=4]Only 500 pieces were made.[/size]"[/b]


That's only one example of the inaccuracies of the COA system, the website, etc.

Kevin[/quote]

Yep, that sure looks like an error on the web site to me. If I owned a My Girl 3 I would write the webmaster to see if they would look into it and correct the problem.
[/quote]

But which number is correct? Is the COA correct, or is it the putter description?

Before you answer, ponder this information:

The number of My Girl putters from year to year is NOT consistent. If you go by the putter descriptions on SC.com only, you will see that they were produced in the following quantities:

2002 = 500
2003 = 1,000
2004 = 500
2005 = 750
2006 = 750
2007 = 750
2008 = 1,000

Kevin

[biscuity]

Yeah, I don't know. And I don't really care. But if it's really bothering you I suggest you email the webmaster. Or should I do it for you?

[xxio]

All of the blame goes to the webmaster?

Maybe all of the accolades should to?

I vote all the profits as well.

"The putter used by TW to win a few majors has been brought to us in part by the webmaster of the ScottyCameron.com website".

"All PGA Tour wins by Cameron putters should be partly credited to the person who spent several hours designing the program for the ScottyCameron.Com webpage".

All COAs will now be issued by the webmaster of the ScottyCameron.com website just so that if there are any inaccuracies we can blame him as well.

I hope Scotty fires his webmaster real soon. It is a bad reflection on his company. Does SC even bothering reading his own site to check for errors?

[HeadonaStick]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1870025' date='Aug 6 2009, 10:38 PM']Yeah, I don't know. And I don't really care. But if it's really bothering you I suggest you email the webmaster. Or should I do it for you?[/quote]
Nice deflection!

But don't ignore the fact that this, again, demonstrates that you cannot rely on what is on Scotty's website or in the COA's. Unless you're a collector.

By the way, a webmaster only posts the material he or she is given. Blaming the webmaster is a giant cop out.

[biscuity]

[quote name='reflog74' post='1870003' date='Aug 6 2009, 07:29 PM']Look, we know some of those numbers are just wrong. Take, for example, the 2003 NP 1.5 Prototype (black pearl). Only 2003 were made and they sold out really fast. Then, in 2006, a club pro in TN ordered 50 special event headcovers and guess what putters showed up in the boxes? Yep. 50 NP 1.5 Protos. I saw the pics he took of them all laid out -- before he got a call telling him to send those putters back to CA.

John

PS: That's not a typo you can lay on the webmaster.[/quote]


I guess the message there is when you're making 200,000 putters a year it's possible for mistakes to happen. It appears that most people don't care about that, because it sure looks like Cameron is doing great in the marketplace despite the bad economy.

For some people a few mistakes would cause them to sell their Scotty collection and buy another brand. That's OK. But what happens if their new favorite brand has inconsistencies in their quantities as well? Or are you saying that nobody else makes mistakes?

[tpariff]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1870025' date='Aug 6 2009, 10:38 PM']Yeah, I don't know. And I don't really care. But if it's really bothering you I suggest you email the webmaster. Or should I do it for you?[/quote]

WOW! You don't care? For someone who doesn't care you sure have spent a lot of time trying to explain things to us. I just thought you could wow us again with another explanation since you seem to have all the answers.

Kevin

[FightingScot93]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1870025' date='Aug 6 2009, 10:38 PM']Yeah, I don't know. And I don't really care. But if it's really bothering you I suggest you email the webmaster. Or should I do it for you?[/quote]


You use the Cameron site as gospel of all things Scotty yet when a large error is pointed out you say you don't care. You do realize this makes you look a bit shoddy. I am not saying you are but which is it? Can we trust every piece of information on the Cameron site or not? Perhaps the webmaster made other mistakes, mistakes which you used to bolster your argument. If I was arguing a certain POV for so long I would want to be 100% sure that the evidence I have been using is 100% reliable. To say "I don't care" when an error is pointed out is a cop out.

[tpariff]

[quote name='xxio' post='1870029' date='Aug 6 2009, 10:40 PM']All of the blame goes to the webmaster?

Maybe all of the accolades should to?

I vote all the profits as well.

"The putter used by TW to win a few majors has been brought to us in part by the webmaster of the ScottyCameron.com website".

"All PGA Tour wins by Cameron putters should be partly credited to the person who spent several hours designing the program for the ScottyCameron.Com webpage".

All COAs will now be issued by the webmaster of the ScottyCameron.com website just so that if there are any inaccuracies we can blame him as well.

I hope Scotty fires his webmaster real soon. It is a bad reflection on his company. Does SC even bothering reading his own site to check for errors?[/quote]

Maybe the new putter series should be called the "Webmaster" series.

[biscuity]

[quote name='xxio' post='1870029' date='Aug 6 2009, 07:40 PM']All of the blame goes to the webmaster?

Maybe all of the accolades should to?

I vote all the profits as well.

"The putter used by TW to win a few majors has been brought to us in part by the webmaster of the ScottyCameron.com website".

"All PGA Tour wins by Cameron putters should be partly credited to the person who spent several hours designing the program for the ScottyCameron.Com webpage".

All COAs will now be issued by the webmaster of the ScottyCameron.com website just so that if there are any inaccuracies we can blame him as well.

I hope Scotty fires his webmaster real soon. It is a bad reflection on his company. Does SC even bothering reading his own site to check for errors?[/quote]


[quote name='tpariff' post='1870038' date='Aug 6 2009, 07:43 PM'][quote name='biscuity' post='1870025' date='Aug 6 2009, 10:38 PM']Yeah, I don't know. And I don't really care. But if it's really bothering you I suggest you email the webmaster. Or should I do it for you?[/quote]

WOW! You don't care? For someone who doesn't care you sure have spent a lot of time trying to explain things to us. I just thought you could wow us again with another explanation since you seem to have all the answers.

Kevin

[/quote]

My explanation is that it looks more like a mistake than a purposefully deceptive tactic. If they were trying to lie about quantities it would be pretty stupid for them to list it as "1 of 750" several times in the registry and "1 of 500" in the putter description section. Mistakes happen.

[reflog74]

I'm saying people who bought a NP 1.5 Proto, thinking it was worth $x because there were only 2003 in the world, were and should have been dismayed to find out that there were at least another 50 laying around.

I'm saying that if you issue a "limited edition" putter representing that there were only 2003 made, a "mistake" of 50 more is unacceptable. We're not talking about 200,000 OTR putters here.

John

[xxio]

Then that mistake is on Cameron not his webmaster.

He markets them as limited releases it is [b]his[/b] (not his webmaster's) responsibility to check everything connected to the release is in order. Otherwise people will naturally think there is something fishy going on.

Again your explanation is possible, but only a possibility. Unless there is proof we have to go the same facts (similar to the Mini) presented to us by the maker himself. There is an "inaccuracy", "inconsistency", or what some may consider "a lie".

[biscuity]

Don't get all worked up xxio, we're just talking about some girly little putters.

I'll test the system and email their webmaster.

[RobotDoctor]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1870025' date='Aug 6 2009, 08:38 PM']Yeah, I don't know. And I don't really care. But if it's really bothering you I suggest you email the webmaster. Or should I do it for you?[/quote]

Come on biscuity, you should care. Your "Web-sters Dictionary of Cameron Putters," sc.com, has a definite error and you don't care? I am confused because for several days you have thrown the site and the registry in our faces as absolute gospel and you don't care? This is precisely the point with Cameron.


[quote name='biscuity' post='1870042' date='Aug 6 2009, 08:43 PM'][quote name='reflog74' post='1870003' date='Aug 6 2009, 07:29 PM']Look, we know some of those numbers are just wrong. Take, for example, the 2003 NP 1.5 Prototype (black pearl). Only 2003 were made and they sold out really fast. Then, in 2006, a club pro in TN ordered 50 special event headcovers and guess what putters showed up in the boxes? Yep. 50 NP 1.5 Protos. I saw the pics he took of them all laid out -- before he got a call telling him to send those putters back to CA.

John

PS: That's not a typo you can lay on the webmaster.[/quote]


I guess the message there is when you're making 200,000 putters a year it's possible for mistakes to happen. It appears that most people don't care about that, because it sure looks like Cameron is doing great in the marketplace despite the bad economy.

For some people a few mistakes would cause them to sell their Scotty collection and buy another brand. That's OK. But what happens if their new favorite brand has inconsistencies in their quantities as well? Or are you saying that nobody else makes mistakes?
[/quote]

Then you come back with this comment? Are you kidding me? Don't you care about ethics and integrity in the business place? Well, I do and so do many others which is why this issue is the hot topic it is. There is no defending dishonesty and one day this whole charade will catch up with Cameron. Speaking about an out of production, fully distributed item suddenly showing up in moderate numbers (50), how about the case of NASA head covers suddenly showing up after they were out of production and fully distributed in the first place. Hmmmmmmm, pattern here?

If you don't condemn this practice, at least this instance, then you will certainly lose objective and lose credibility here. Just a thought.

[xxio]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1870092' date='Aug 7 2009, 11:02 AM']Don't get all worked up xxio, we're just talking about some girly little putters.

I'll test the system and email their webmaster.[/quote]


Not worked up at all. I'm just concerned about you. You think this is a "lame thread" yet do so much research. I wonder how much passion you put into things that you care about. Be careful you may burn out soon.

I like putters.

You think they are "girly" yet check the Cameron site for proof (same site with mistakes btw) to debunk some of the arguments against these putters.

Have you ever heard of the theory of the "poisoned well". You may want to check into it if you want to keep referring to the Cameron site for proof

How do you plan to "test the system"?

[biscuity]

[quote name='xxio' post='1870101' date='Aug 6 2009, 08:09 PM']I'm just concerned about you.[/quote]



[quote]You think this is a "lame thread" yet do so much research. I wonder how much passion you put into things that you care about. Be careful you may burn out soon.[/quote]

Correction, I said wasting your time bashing on fan-based forums is a lame waste of time.

[quote]How do you plan to "test the system"?[/quote]

I'll write their webmaster, present the inconsistencies, and request a clarification/correction. Then I'll wait for a reply and post it here on the forum.