Bridgestone Challenge Golf Ball Fitting Promotional Video

[1badbadger]

Take 2

I tried to post this video several months ago but had some trouble, so hopefully y'all can see it this time.  I believe it was made somewhere around 2010 or 2011, but to my knowledge was never released.  It has some very good information, so anyone interested in golf ball fittings, or those who have questions about the process, will find it interesting. 

One of the main points in this video is the opinion that golf balls should not be tested from the green back to the tee...that when finding the ball best for your game you should fit it the way you play it...from the tee to the green.  The "green-to-tee" method has been widely believed as the best way to do it for a long time, but this video explains the merits of tee-to-green. Keep in mind that because it's 8 or 9 years old some of the data is outdated, like the number of fittings Bridgestone has conducted for example.  But otherwise it's a really well done piece.  

After watching it, I'd be interested to hear which way you think it's better to test balls...tee-to-green or green-to-tee, and if this video changed your mind or not.  Enjoy!

 

[dennyjones]

Interesting...

[Club Rat]

Bridgestone used to be at our course every year on Demo Day.

Then they eliminated the program, so I was told.
I knew the guys who presented the fitting and would talk with them every year.
I also liked that I could check my stats to compare as I was growing older and losing a few yards.

Their  marketing strategy was good, a website which was informative and face to face with the consumers.
For years our rep would throw a sleeve of Bridgestone balls at me when we golfed together.
I told him, I would play the ball IF it had a softer cover.
Finally after years of web surveys, they finally produced a soft feel product.

I frequently test multiple brands on course.
I test them on various holes under different wind directions and wind speeds.  
IMO, they all are comparable in distance and most produced decent spin.
They held the course in strong head and side winds.
My only complaint was the RX did not hold greens very well on down wind conditions.
I occasionally had shots down wind carry way too far, like 20 yards over the back of a green.

Other than a few mishaps, Bridgestone has very good products.
I really like the New E-12 ball.
 

[Missouri Swede]

3 hours ago, Club Rat said:

I really like the New E-12 ball.

How is it different from the E6? I looked at their website, but it’s not urethane (iirc), so I wasn’t sure how different it would be/react.

[1badbadger]

6 hours ago, Club Rat said:

Bridgestone used to be at our course every year on Demo Day.

Then they eliminated the program, so I was told.
I knew the guys who presented the fitting and would talk with them every year.
I also liked that I could check my stats to compare as I was growing older and losing a few yards.

Their  marketing strategy was good, a website which was informative and face to face with the consumers.
For years our rep would throw a sleeve of Bridgestone balls at me when we golfed together.
I told him, I would play the ball IF it had a softer cover.
Finally after years of web surveys, they finally produced a soft feel product.

I frequently test multiple brands on course.
I test them on various holes under different wind directions and wind speeds.  
IMO, they all are comparable in distance and most produced decent spin.
They held the course in strong head and side winds.
My only complaint was the RX did not hold greens very well on down wind conditions.
I occasionally had shots down wind carry way too far, like 20 yards over the back of a green.

Other than a few mishaps, Bridgestone has very good products.
I really like the New E-12 ball.
 

Yes, it's true that they discontinued the golf ball fitting program in 2016, which was a decision made by the President/CEO who had just joined the company at that time.  He has since been replaced by the former Executive VP who started the Bridgestone Challenge originally.  At the beginning of this year they announced a new version of the ball fitting program would be launched in spring in select Sunbelt markets, and expand to nationwide this summer.  They will be adding approach shots data to the fittings, which is something that was talked about as far back as 2007.

A lot of guys used to like to run through  fitting every year to check progress, or confirm they were still playing the correct ball.  We used to enjoy seeing familiar faces when we arrived at courses we went to on a regular basis!

Your assessment from your testing is pretty spot-on.  The B-330 Series was outstanding in windy conditions, and for some players the RX was tougher to control downwind because it didn't  spin as much as the other models, which is also why you would get those shots that went long. Your comments about the RX is something I used to hear quite a bit.  Players would "complain" about the lower spin rates of the RX, and some actually looked at this as an indication of a lower quality ball (not suggesting this is what you are saying Rat).  The original version of the RX which was released in 2008 was a noticeably higher spinning ball than subsequent versions.  This is because initially it was the only high performance model for players who had a swing speed under 105 mph.  In 2010 when the RXS was introduced, the spin on the RX was reduced to create more separation between the two models.  Otherwise there wouldn't be enough of a difference between the RX and RXS.  So even though the RX was likely the lowest spinning urethane ball on the market at the time, it performed exactly the way it was designed to.  For players who wanted/needed more spin than the RX provided, they could choose the RXS.  Just a little insight.  

[David in FL]

The ProV1 is a great ball, and I played one for many years, but I switched to an RXS several years ago for the exact reason.  I finally decided that my measurable performance off the tee, and subsequently into the green was more important than some perception of “feel” around the green.  I’m a relatively short hitter (225 driver carry) and found an extra 10+ yards off the tee with the RXS.  That equates to a full club difference into the green.  I can also still hit spinny little chips when I want to.  They don’t feel quite as soft off the club face, or the putter, but honestly, that’s pretty subjective, and hasn’t bothered me at all.  

 

[saevel25]

For my game, Snell MTB is the best price for performance.

My top 3 over the past 10 years has been Snell, Bridgestone, and Titleist for golf balls. They make a really good golf ball. They just need to sell it for $10 less ;)

 

[Club Rat]

10 hours ago, Missouri Swede said:

How is it different from the E6? I looked at their website, but it’s not urethane (iirc), so I wasn’t sure how different it would be/react.

I played with our Bridgestone rep late January when we had a somewhat of a decent weather day for January.
He gave me a few of the new E-12's that day and told me the ball had been tested in Japan last year and
Bridgestone was overwhelmed with response for the popularity and sales.

The E-12 Sotf and E-12 Distant will replace the E-6 ball this year and should be available in the US market in March.

The website indicates - 

Quote

Distance Performance class, 3-piece surlyn golf ball that delivers sidespin reducing performance, with added distance off the tee with a softer feel. Bridgestone’s proprietary new Active Acceleration Mantle layer is a key component of the 3-piece construction. The Active Acceleration Mantle is comprised of a new High Performance Polymer material that provides increased thrust and higher initial velocity at impact, while allowing Bridgestone to soften the core for greater forgiveness and enhanced feel. Designed specifically for players with less than 105 MPH driver swing speeds. The e12 SOFT utilizes Bridgestone’s Delta Wing Dimple pattern for less drag and optimized aerodynamics in the cover. Available in White, Matte Green, Matte Red and Matte Yellow. 

I only played a couple of holes and was immediately impressed.
I have not had a chance to play them since then, just waiting until conditions become better.
I wrote a review on the E-6 a few years back when they were introduce.
Bridgestone has made small significant changes/improvements each year and I played them more on a regular basis.

Anyone who tries the New E-12 Soft will notice immediately the soft feel.
While only hitting a few shots that day, I felt it preformed better than the E-6, IMO.

 

[Club Rat]

23 hours ago, 1badbadger said:

After watching it, I'd be interested to hear which way you think it's better to test balls...tee-to-green or green-to-tee, and if this video changed your mind or not.

I didn't have time to touch base on your question earlier, but wanted to add my two cents worth.

In the video, Bridgestone acknowledges six years ago that feel was important to players.
But, IMO they waited to develop the outer core until the demand cried for it.
The B330  was the first soft feel product and then the E-6 models over the past couple of years.

In regards to testing tee-to-green or green-to-tee, I've always choose a ball which gave me optimal feel with putting and pitch/chip shots.
Distance was never considered off the tee as mine was better than average,
Approach was also better than average and most shots held the bent greens which are common in my area.

Where I excelled, was play on and around the greens, mainly due to extensive practice and natural abilities.

So, the video does not change my perspective. My expectations was and always has been,
a ball which gave me a good feel off the face of the putter and wedges. 

Back in my day, Balata's were preferred by most players I golfed with. Then came along the Professional model.

Nowadays, many major and less known manufactures are selling softer feel products.

I'd even venture to say, most professionals have always leaned towards a feel type golf ball. Just guessing.