Jump to content
  • entries
    77
  • comments
    854
  • views
    39,543

11 Comments


Recommended Comments

  • Moderator
boogielicious

Posted

I wonder if they make more durable yarn. 

jmanbooyaa

Posted

Awful. Hate to see stuff not hold up. 

  • Moderator
nevets88

Posted

It's more me being a bit rough sometimes taking the bag in and out of the trunk. When I commuted to the course by train more often, headcovers held up better because less transfering into and out of a messy trunk that also held an unwieldy push-cart. I guess I could get one of those fold up into a small space push-carts.

I don't think durable yarn will help, it's the nature of knitting where the yarn is basically held together by knots, leaving it susceptible to being pulled apart. This I gathered from the little knitting experience I have.

Double Mocha Man

Posted

Those a pretty snazzy new headcovers.  Do you have the matching herringbone suit?

Gary Taylor

Posted

Better than the ski boot head covers you see nowadays.  Titleist had the best head covers ever.

titleistHeadCover.jpg

Double Mocha Man

Posted (edited)

I don't believe in product headcovers, whether ski boot style or otherwise.  Why do I want to advertise to the passersby outside the proshop what I'm packing?  While I'm in the grill.  So I go with generic headcovers.  Steal that driver and it's a crapshoot.  Your Epic Sub-Zero could be gone in 90 seconds.  Make that 9 seconds.

Has anyone here ever had anything stolen out of his/her bag?

Edited by Double Mocha Man
  • Moderator
nevets88

Posted

  On 11/4/2020 at 10:34 PM, Double Mocha Man said:

Those a pretty snazzy new headcovers.  Do you have the matching herringbone suit?

Expand  

Ha ha. I have a houndstooth suit though. Close enough? 

Was also looking at houndstooth patterns for the headcovers. I got this pattern because it was cheaper. 

Double Mocha Man

Posted

  On 11/4/2020 at 11:51 PM, nevets88 said:

Ha ha. I have a houndstooth suit though. Close enough? 

Was also looking at houndstooth patterns for the headcovers. I got this pattern because it was cheaper. 

Expand  

Close enough. It's a gimme.

  • Moderator
boogielicious

Posted

  On 11/4/2020 at 10:42 PM, Double Mocha Man said:

I don't believe in product headcovers, whether ski boot style or otherwise.  Why do I want to advertise to the passersby outside the proshop what I'm packing?  While I'm in the grill.  So I go with generic headcovers.  Steal that driver and it's a crapshoot.  Your Epic Sub-Zero could be gone in 90 seconds.  Make that 9 seconds.

Has anyone here ever had anything stolen out of his/her bag?

Expand  

I go for function. I’ve got these Boston Red Sox covers, but I got them because they are easy to get on and off. If they were generic, I would be just as happy.

Double Mocha Man

Posted

You're advertising Bill Buckner with those Red Sox covers.  Nobody's going to touch those to steal what's underneath!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Blog Entries

  • Posts

    • Wordle 1,312 4/6* ⬛⬛🟩⬛⬛ ⬛⬛🟩🟩🟩 🟨⬛🟩🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,312 6/6* ⬜⬜🟩🟩⬜ ⬜⬜🟩🟩⬜ 🟨⬜🟩🟩⬜ ⬜⬜🟩🟩🟩 🟨⬜🟩🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 back in Phew land….
    • You are not wrong. The shaft and the head together both contribute to the performance of the club. I'd also suggest that they contribute in different amounts depending upon whether we are comparing a driver, an iron or a wedge. (We could argue all day about how much is the head and how much is the shaft... and I would enjoy the argument.) Having said that, in order for a youtuber or anyone else for that matter to completely optimize the club and then hit it in comparison to another completely optimized club is all but impossible. Just one of the many reasons why all club tests should be taken with a generous pinch of salt.  Not only that but even in robot testing there are variables that are outside the areas of control. I've personally been lucky enough to witness robot testing first had. It's fascinating how non-repeatable the results can be. Let me elaborate. With an 7 or 8 iron the robot can land balls over and over again in an area the size of a kiddie pool. However, when the testers moved away from a 7 or 8 iron, the results got less and less precise. Interestingly it didn't matter if they went up or down the bag. With the robot hitting short pitches and even chips, relatively, more variation than full short iron shots. Similarly, long drives with the robot created more variation as well. This is without the effects of wind, variations in the surface and texture of where the ball lands etc...  In addition, this doesn't take into account possible bias, either consciously or unconsciously of the tester. The testers I got to witness (these happened to by Taylormade guys, but I'm sure it doesn't matter), confessed that they could influence the results if they wanted to. They could take two clubs and make either of them "win" with robot testing if they wanted to. They made to the point to illustrate that in their job they had to constantly make sure they were fighting bias and/or putting in double checks, but never-the-less when I now read about any testing saying X club is 7 yards longer, I think back to their statement.  So, if it's that difficult to get really good results out of a robot imagine how difficult it is to get quantifiable results out of a human swinging a club.  Here's a fun test to try. Hit your driver 10 times on a launch monitor and gather the data (You can do 20 or 30 swings it doesn't matter). Now group the data into 2 sets, the odd numbered swings and the even numbered swings. Look at your two data sets. I guarantee that one data set will look "better" than the other. Even though, it's the same person swinging the same club on the same day. But if you just happened to be testing a driver against your driver on that day, Even if you gather your data by switching back and forth between the two drivers you may get misleading results. I've done this test a few times in my life and it's interesting to see how the "odd numbered me" or the "even numbered me" always produces different results, sometimes one will win by a large margin.  In summary, I too enjoy watching reviews of the new clubs that come out, especially drivers. But it is information not data. 
    • Wordle 1,312 4/6* ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬛⬛🟦🟦🟦 ⬛🟦🟦🟦⬛ 🟧🟧🟧🟧🟧  
    • Something I’ve been thinking about. I watch a lot of club tests, retired and get up way too early, and there’s something I think in my opinion might be being done wrong. They might pick several drivers, could be something different, and use the same shaft so things will be equal. In my mind a shaft might be good in one club and not in another. Learned the hard way, had my best ever driver at the time, G410, and kept hearing about how great the G425 MAX was. Since I sometimes have trouble finding senior shafts we traded heads and the 410 shaft never seemed to work out in the 425 head for me. Wasn’t as straight or as long so I have moved on. Don’t think everyone was wrong about the G425, just think that combination maybe didn’t work for me.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...