Jump to content
ChetlovesMer

New Study on Spikes vs Spikeless Shoes

10 posts / 1746 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

spikedstudy.jpg

A recent study conducted at Pinehurst Resort has found that amateur golfers — both low and high handicaps — are leaving a significant amount of...

Okay, I read this and I immediately call foul.

The study was conducted by PrideSports Company. … They make replacement golf spikes... Methinks they have a vested interest in the results. 

This is my opinion, but there's no way this test was unbiased! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

40 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:
spikedstudy.jpg

A recent study conducted at Pinehurst Resort has found that amateur golfers — both low and high handicaps — are leaving a significant amount of...

Okay, I read this and I immediately call foul.

The study was conducted by PrideSports Company. … They make replacement golf spikes... Methinks they have a vested interest in the results. 

This is my opinion, but there's no way this test was unbiased! 

No, it's true.  You gain an extra 3/4 inch on your drives.  1/2 inch on your 7 iron distance.  And they do have cute bottoms.

Edited by Double Mocha Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

No, it's true.  You gain an extra 3/4 inch on your drives.  1/2 inch on your 7 iron distance.  And they do have cute bottoms.

By the way, this is also the same company that makes brush tees. According to their "fair and unbiased" testing you gain 4-1/2 yards per drive by using brush tees. So, if I use their replacement spikes and their brush tees I should be able to see at least a full club length distance gain. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

10 minutes ago, dennyjones said:

what are we talking about?

Shoe bottoms, the one in the pic.  Get your mind outta the unraked bunker.  😊

Edited by Double Mocha Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2019 at 4:44 PM, ChetlovesMer said:
spikedstudy.jpg

A recent study conducted at Pinehurst Resort has found that amateur golfers — both low and high handicaps — are leaving a significant amount of...

Okay, I read this and I immediately call foul.

The study was conducted by PrideSports Company. … They make replacement golf spikes... Methinks they have a vested interest in the results. 

This is my opinion, but there's no way this test was unbiased! 

I have no idea about the accuracy or validity of this particular study, but companies conduct tests and studies all the time, exactly because they want to be able to demonstrate that their product is superior.

Nothing at all wrong with that, and just because they have a bias, doesn’t necessarily mean that we can infer that the study was flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, David in FL said:

I have no idea about the accuracy or validity of this particular study, but companies conduct tests and studies all the time, exactly because they want to be able to demonstrate that their product is superior.

Nothing at all wrong with that, and just because they have a bias, doesn’t necessarily mean that we can infer that the study was flawed.

True. But any valid study will list the potential biases and how they were avoided. Tests are bogus until proven otherwise. Not the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, Vinsk said:

True. But any valid study will list the potential biases and how they were avoided. Tests are bogus until proven otherwise. Not the other way around.

We’re not talking about experimental bias here, but rather an assumption (probably true) that the company sponsoring the study was hoping for a particular result.  Regardless though, this isn’t the study.  It’s simply an article outlining the results for public consumption.

Again, I don’t know a damn thing about the validity of this.  But neither does anyone else here.  I just don’t think we can infer whether the conclusions are valid or not solely based upon who may have commissioned it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, Vinsk said:

True. But any valid study will list the potential biases and how they were avoided. Tests are bogus until proven otherwise. Not the other way around.

I completely agree. I in the sciences and we conduct experiments all the time (I know Duhhh). I insist that the hypothesis is that the system is flawed until proven otherwise. The study above could be perfectly valid under the conditions and processes in the study. What it doesn't tell you is if they did initial studies that focused on which conditions spikes fair best and spikeless performed worst. Possibly they showed that under dry freshly cut fairways with no clippings, with shot grass (say tour length), and hard ground spikeless was better than hard plastic cyclone spiked but if the grass was longer with fresh clippings and and soft ground spikes were much better. WIthout knowing what data was not included and how many conditions they chose all that can be said is that in that group there was a trend. I also don't know if the difference is statistically significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

49 minutes ago, criley4way said:

I completely agree. I in the sciences and we conduct experiments all the time (I know Duhhh). I insist that the hypothesis is that the system is flawed until proven otherwise. The study above could be perfectly valid under the conditions and processes in the study. What it doesn't tell you is if they did initial studies that focused on which conditions spikes fair best and spikeless performed worst. Possibly they showed that under dry freshly cut fairways with no clippings, with shot grass (say tour length), and hard ground spikeless was better than hard plastic cyclone spiked but if the grass was longer with fresh clippings and and soft ground spikes were much better. WIthout knowing what data was not included and how many conditions they chose all that can be said is that in that group there was a trend. I also don't know if the difference is statistically significant.

My head is spinning...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Affiliates

    SuperSpeed
    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo
  • Posts

    • Day 51 - Worked on some hip turn in the mirror. Need to film for Evolvr tomorrow, see how my setup looks. 
    • Made it through 16 holes today at +11 (73). Had 14 GIR/nGIR. I was about 30 yards from the green on a par-5 when I had to quit due to darkness. Just extrapolating my scoring, if I par #17 (considering I was close to GIR already), and bogey #18, that would be an 83, which is an excellent score for me on this course, from the tees I was playing. My ball striking was good all round, and I only had one horrendous mishit (topped a 3W off the tee on #2, ended up making a 6). The wind was strong and gusty so the ball was doing some weird stuff. On the first hole I flushed my drive, and it only got out 228 yards, then proceeded to hit my hybrid 260 yards just short of the green.  
    • Day 317 Played 16 holes today. Started pretty late in the afternoon, and was almost home on the par-5 17th hole when it was finally too dark to continue so I picked up and headed home. One of the best rounds in recent memory, and there was some pretty wild wind to contend with. Too tired for a superspeed workout so that will wait until tomorrow.
    • The only people that are allowed to whine about 3 putt pars are tour pros😉. Just kidding. Glad you got out for a round, and keep that driver in play and going LONG!!!
    • Day 126.  Speed sticks, protocol one at halftime of SNF.  It has been eleven days since I did this last;  that's way too long. 
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Double_AA
      Double_AA
      (27 years old)
    2. FCAPT
      FCAPT
      (66 years old)
    3. ScrilltheDeal
      ScrilltheDeal
      (32 years old)

×
×
  • 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...