SQAIRZ, Fact or Fiction?

[Sandy Divot]

When I received my shoes, the inside, in the heel area, was kind of lumpy. It felt like a blister waiting to happen. The material the shoe was made from seemed like plastic, and had a very strong odor. Considering these are the same price as top of the line leather FootJoys, they seemed rather cheaply made. Also, I don’t believe that these give you any advantage over any quality spiked shoe. In fact, the shoe worn by a lot of guys in long drive competition is spikeless. My spelling might be off, but it’s Athalonz, and I believe Langer switched to it this year.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Sandy Divot

[TexasSR75070]

46 minutes ago, iacas said:

Let me go back to third grade and say “you started it.”

You accused us of not doing our research, of believing whatever Titleist says. You misquoted several of us. You tried to insult us by talking about how active it is here.

All over golf shoes.

We are glad you like them.

I don't think it is exactly true that I "started it". I was basically called a shill for the company after my first post when I then responded that "it upsets me to see people knock a product without doing any research or trying the product themselves before doing so." That's just how I feel and that applies anywhere to any product. I didn't call out anyone in particular and certainly didn't "accuse" all of you. In fact, at least one of you had looked at the study, thought it had holes in it, and that the company should be sued. However, there was another post that seemed to imply that all of Sqairz distance claims are based solely on having a square toe box. That is totally false and would seem to indicate to me that there was no "research" into what besides the toe box may be contributing to performance enhancement besides the obvious. If the shoe fits..........pun intended. 😆

In regard to FJ/Titleist, I didn't communicate that very well, and I think I've already apologized for that. I was trying to understand if, not just the skepticism (which I agree is healthy), but some of the other comments were strictly because it was Sqairz making the claims, being relatively new to the market, and would they be directed at FJ if it were them making the claims. 

My comment about activity here was not intended as an insult. Sorry you took it that way. It was just a statement of fact in direct response to "I find it curious that you claim not to be affiliated with the company in any way yet this is the only topic you’ve posted in depth on since you’ve been a member here." I haven't come here that often and that is why I haven't, yet, run across the other topics that pique my interest (I mentioned what they are) and that I would certainly engage in. Perhaps that is why my perception, perhaps incorrectly, is of less activity. I also mentioned topics that I felt I had no business joining in on the discussion.

I agree with all of you in regard to the guy whose handicap dropped so much. I, too, am skeptical that any drop like that over any period of time could be solely due to the shoes. I'm not sure; did Sqairz claim the handicap improvement was solely due to the shoes or just that this guy's handicap improved by that much since he started wearing them, letting others attach direct correlation which Sqairz never made, or did they? I can't find that particular claim at the moment. I don't know how bad this guy's swing was (though I heard "sway" had something to do with it) or how ill-suited his previous choice of golf shoes was. Maybe the shoes just sparked something, enabled him to make other adjustments he could not have maybe made otherwise and thus the improvement. You are a renowned instructor, highly recognized and with many awards. Is it true or not that sometimes just a relatively minor tweak can spark a major improvement in some people?

Thanks for "putting up with me" and continuing the dialogue.

[iacas]

21 minutes ago, TexasSR75070 said:

Thanks for "putting up with me" and continuing the dialogue.

Please don't quote things nobody has said.

21 minutes ago, TexasSR75070 said:

that the company should be sued.

He did not say that.

21 minutes ago, TexasSR75070 said:

I don't think it is exactly true that I "started it".

Okay.

This is getting into the meta, so we're done. The history is there for all to see, should they want to. Move on.

[Sandy Divot]

20 minutes ago, TexasSR75070 said:

I don't think it is exactly true that I "started it". I was basically called a shill for the company after my first post when I then responded that "it upsets me to see people knock a product without doing any research or trying the product themselves before doing so." That's just how I feel and that applies anywhere to any product. I didn't call out anyone in particular and certainly didn't "accuse" all of you. In fact, at least one of you had looked at the study, thought it had holes in it, and that the company should be sued. However, there was another post that seemed to imply that all of Sqairz distance claims are based solely on having a square toe box. That is totally false and would seem to indicate to me that there was no "research" into what besides the toe box may be contributing to performance enhancement besides the obvious. If the shoe fits..........pun intended. 😆

In regard to FJ/Titleist, I didn't communicate that very well, and I think I've already apologized for that. I was trying to understand if, not just the skepticism (which I agree is healthy), but some of the other comments were strictly because it was Sqairz making the claims, being relatively new to the market, and would they be directed at FJ if it were them making the claims. 

My comment about activity here was not intended as an insult. Sorry you took it that way. It was just a statement of fact in direct response to "I find it curious that you claim not to be affiliated with the company in any way yet this is the only topic you’ve posted in depth on since you’ve been a member here." I haven't come here that often and that is why I haven't, yet, run across the other topics that pique my interest (I mentioned what they are) and that I would certainly engage in. Perhaps that is why my perception, perhaps incorrectly, is of less activity. I also mentioned topics that I felt I had no business joining in on the discussion.

I agree with all of you in regard to the guy whose handicap dropped so much. I, too, am skeptical that any drop like that over any period of time could be solely due to the shoes. I'm not sure; did Sqairz claim the handicap improvement was solely due to the shoes or just that this guy's handicap improved by that much since he started wearing them, letting others attach direct correlation which Sqairz never made, or did they? I can't find that particular claim at the moment. I don't know how bad this guy's swing was (though I heard "sway" had something to do with it) or how ill-suited his previous choice of golf shoes was. Maybe the shoes just sparked something, enabled him to make other adjustments he could not have maybe made otherwise and thus the improvement. You are a renowned instructor, highly recognized and with many awards. Is it true or not that sometimes just a relatively minor tweak can spark a major improvement in some people?

Thanks for "putting up with me" and continuing the dialogue.

I think you are making too big a deal about this.

[birdie seeker]

I bought a pair last season. First time out with them I got a blister on the top of my left foot. Went back to my footjoys.

[TexasSR75070]

On 3/8/2022 at 3:42 PM, iacas said:

I'm curious if you think that most (all) of the benefit is from the pattern of nubs and spikes and such on the sole.

Now that I've had an attitude adjustment (😥), let me see if I can't provide a reasonable and responsible response to your question.

I don't think it is the spikes. They use six on each shoe supposedly placed in "pressure points" created before and during the swing. I can't say yay or nay in that regard, The Pivix spikes they use have prongs that don't seem to reach beyond the level of the nubs. I've worn down the spikes, had prongs break off and noticed no difference in traction. I had never heard of that brand, Pivix, previously.

They say they patented the sole. I don't know what the patent covers but the pattern of the nubs is unlike anything I personally have seen, and they have a wider base than comparably sized shoes. As someone who has fallen wearing another brand of golf spikes while going down a steep slope and breaking my arm trying to catch my fall, I am very sensitive to "traction" in a golf shoe. I can say I have never had my right foot slip out from under me during a swing, and while others gingerly walk down steep slopes, I can confidently walk down them with little to no fear of falling, no matter the course conditions.

The sole and nub pattern, as much as it seems to help with traction for me, is also something I dislike. I am a "dew sweeper" and, in addition, most days the course is being watered as we play. That pattern of nubs seems to collect grass and dirt/mud that can be difficult to dislodge with so many little valleys (for lack of a better description) running between the nubs in all sorts of directions. The thing I have found that is surprising, is that, given that, I have sensed no loss of grip/traction as the round progresses.

As far as overall benefit from the shoe, in my case, I think it has to be a combination of many things, the width of the base, the traction provided by the soles pattern, the heavier more "structured" shoe that perhaps have had an impact on my balance during the swing. With better balance and more confidence that my rear foot won't slip out from under me, I can proceed to swing faster, adding distance to my drives. So, is the distance gain directly tied to the shoes alone? Depends on how one views it, I guess. 

I hope this answers your question. (I know, I'm wordy. I should have been a lawyer.)

23 hours ago, birdie seeker said:

I bought a pair last season. First time out with them I got a blister on the top of my left foot. Went back to my footjoys.

I don't doubt that at all. If I had to guess, it is because of their "gusseted" tongue, sown on each side, higher up than most golf shoes, making the shoes waterproof up to the last eyelet. Some people even have reported having difficulty getting the shoes on and off because of it.

That's too bad. I think otherwise you might have enjoyed them.

[Bucki1968]

I do like mine.  I really like the shoestrings. They never come untied!

[xrayvizhen]

This may be off-topic, unless the topic is snake oil salesmen, but what about Nick Faldo claiming the Sqairz golf shoe adding "8.8 yards" to your drive? Maybe it's just the season but I think this kind of crap goes on every spring.

By the way, I have a bridge over the East River in NY that I'd really like to sell.

Edited April 16, 2022 by xrayvizhen

[iacas]

1 hour ago, xrayvizhen said:

This may be off-topic, unless the topic is snake oil salesmen, but what about Nick Faldo claiming the Sqairz golf shoe adding "8.8 yards" to your drive? Maybe it's just the season but I think this kind of crap goes on every spring.

By the way, I have a bridge over the East River in NY that I'd really like to sell.

I moved it to a topic where it's not off topic.

[jmanbooyaa]

Don’t users say they are heavy? That would not be something I would want in a golf shoe. Maybe strictly cart golfers. I am not. 

[Vinsk]

Due to the enormous inconsistency with average golfers shots, I wouldn’t put much confidence in their ‘results.’ You put a pro in those shoes and do a comparison It may produce a more accurate analysis. I can easily vary 8-10yds on my drives in one range session. Certainly over multiple.

[ChetlovesMer]

47 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I can easily vary 8-10yds on my drives in one range session. Certainly over multiple.

I wish my tolerance was that tight. More like 20-30 yards for me.