Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ryohazuki222

New Golf Clubs or New TV?

Note: This thread is 4138 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

0  

  1. 1. Which one?!

    • Big Awesome Beautiful TV
      18
    • Shiny New Golf Clubs
      10


32 posts / 12533 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

As for the tv,

Same here, but if it is 0% everyone's a winner.

When I got my irons they were last years model and 50% off, this was a few years back though but in early January. I seriously doubt it hurt my game versus the current years ones!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be a jerk and ruin your hypothetical, but can't you get a good set of used Mizunos on eBay for like $500, and a fairly large (26-30" LCD) for another $500? I know you said one or the other, and I understand if you don't want to compromise, but you can do pretty well these days in the TV and club markets while still being frugal.

That said, if I had my druthers, I'd get a big f&(*ing flat screen -- like 60" -- and hang it on the wall which currently holds a rather ugly watercolor.

But that's only because I have a new set of X-forged irons in the closet, so I guess I cheated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We put the 26" in the bedroom. Its the biggest we could get to fit inside the armoire. We are getting a 42" for the living room. As soon as I get taxes. Already picked it out.

OK... I was just hoping you weren't using a 26" in the family or living room, that would be a shame, especially during hockey season. Of course I guess there's not to much hockey to follow in Indiana...

I just wish I could get my wife sold on getting rid of this damned tube TV so we could go get an HD TV... she thinks size is all that matters, and the one I have is supposedly big enough ... but I keep trying to tell here size is only part of the picture... quality is the other half

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be a jerk and ruin your hypothetical, but can't you get a good set of used Mizunos on eBay for like $500, and a fairly large (26-30" LCD) for another $500? I know you said one or the other, and I understand if you don't want to compromise, but you can do pretty well these days in the TV and club markets while still being frugal.

Haha. I'm glad to hear all opinions.

The situation is basically with these stipulations: -- I have about $1200 in store credit from Golfsmith (long story.) -- I want clubs custom fitted to me... that's reason #1 in getting new clubs. -- Anything below a 37" is a DOWNGRADE to my 27" box when viewing in fullscreen. Not worth my money. -- Using as a computer monitor/display a lot. Anything below 1080p isn't worth my money. -- Will buy tv of a reputable brand.' The way I figure is that I can easily sell my store credit to someone for 70%-80% of it's value and buy the tv I want which I've been watching and cost about $750-$1000. Personally, I'm waiting for it to drop to $700 until I buy. Or I can buy my custom clubs with my Golfsmith credit. I'll still have about $200 left over which I'll likely sell and put towards my tv. Currently I'm holding out on selling the golfsmith credit at a 10% loss on value if anyone is interested. The longer I can wait, the better I'll be off. TV prices are getting cheaper because of newer technology. My Golfsmith credit will sell much easier when golf season actually starts. It's just that some days I'm fine, and other days I get really impatient. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh... and I'm in Texas and we've been having AMAZING (but windy weather) with 60s (sometimes 70s) in the afternoons on most days with some cold days in between.

So the sooner I get my clubs, the sooner I get to play with them. I'm lucky enough not to have to wait months for the snow to melt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you DONT get new clubs, everytime you come home from a mediocre round with your old clubs you'll have that shiny TV laughing at you.

Get the clubs. Clubs. Clubs. Clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking to buy some Taylormade tour preferreds. Tried em out and really liked em.... but having trouble picking out a shaft.

I think I decided on the golf clubs for now. Then hope my new job pans out and get the tv in a couple months maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you DONT get new clubs, everytime you come home from a mediocre round with your old clubs you'll have that shiny TV laughing at you.

Yeah... I actually already chose golf over tv once this year. My city has a few nice muni's and offers a membership for a year or half a year plus a small charge per round. Already plunked down $515 for six months... and it costs me $2.50 to go walk a round now so I started going a few times a week.

Decided to place my bet that tv prices will drop further on the older models around march april when the new stuff comes out. I should have enough by then to get the tv too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prime golf weather is just around the corner, so you might consider clubs. However, I do love my TV - 56" Samsung DLP. Over the air HD is phenomenal! Don't have cable or satellite but my blu-ray player streams netflix. (Something else you might want to look into)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've had a 50" and a 42" plasma for about 4 years. Sure they're great but you get used to it after a while and if you got clubs you would love em and probably like them better and use them more. Plus its a good incentive to play golf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I upgraded this past xmas from a 32" CRT to a 50" Samsung plasma HDTV (720P). I also upgraded my cable service to digital with the HD/DVR set top box. I have to say going from a traditional CRT to my new setup is better than crack! Walmart has some great prices on Samsungs. I got my 50" 720P for $900 and the 1080P version is $1400. I went with the 720P because of the price difference and I'm not disappointed. Naturally LCD's cost more for the same screen size compared to plasma, and if I wanted to use this as a second computer monitor I'd definitely go with the LCD due to screen burn-in. The higher resolution would be good for a computer monitor too, but when watching TV the difference isn't easily noticable. I don't watch much TV as a general rule but the HD programing and the DVR coupled with digital service is a pretty potent combination. I routinely record shows I want to watch and when I do have some time there is always something available I like. Fast forwarding through the commercials (or watching stuff through the free on demand serivce, and yes they do have the Golf Channel on demand) is something that will quickly spoil you to the point of where you don't want to watch shows live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha... looks like the poll results took off... almost 2:1 in favor of the tv.

I decided to wait out my decision until the super bowl. If I find a great deal on a tv in the next couple days that I can have home for the super bowl I may just go with the tv in the end.

But if that doesn't happen... I'll order some clubs and hope an amazing deal doesnt pop up to rub the fact that I can no take advantage of the deal in my face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: This thread is 4138 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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.

Sign in to follow this  



  • 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

    • I strongly support Mario Lemieux as the GOAT in hockey. Others will just point to career totals, but those don't tell the story. Others have even said to “compare Wayne’s first 915 games” (which is how many Mario played in his career), because they think that's a "fair" way to compare the careers. But, Wayne started five seasons before Mario and Mario was still playing in the league nine seasons after Wayne had retired. If instead you look at seasons where Lemieux and Gretzky overlapped (1984-1994 and 1995-1997, a total of 12 seasons), you get a different story. This doesn’t eliminate differences in teammates, but at least eliminates the change in the style of play and/or the change in goalie style, equipment, etc. It also doesn’t account for the fact that Gretzky had played in the league for five years, which is an advantage earlier in the career and a bit of a disadvantage later in his career). Over those 12 overlapping seasons, Lemieux: 745 games (highs of 79 and 76, lows of 22 and 59) 613 goals 881 assists 0.82 GPG 2.01 PPG Gretzky, over the same years: 894 games (+149) (highs of 82 and 81, lows of 45 and 64) 495 goals (-118) 1248 assists (+367) 0.55 GPG 1.95 PPG So, in the years they played in the league together, Lemieux scored 0.27 goals per game more than Gretzky and 0.06 points per game more than Gretzky. Gretzky played nearly two full seasons more than Lemieux in their overlapping years, yet came up 118 goals shy of Lemieux and couldn’t even make up the gap in points per game. Of course Gretzky’s career-long totals are higher than Lemieux’s. The years their careers didn’t overlap were played under quite different rules and equipment and such, and so Gretzky “wins” on longevity. Now, if you rank longevity as a thing, then the post above is irrelevant to you. But if you consider Mario’s career “long enough” to count as a career, and you ask yourself which hockey player was capable of playing the best hockey for their career, you can build a very strong case for Lemieux. The parallels between Tiger and Jack are kinda crazy. Jack/Wayne had longer careers with fewer injuries against weaker opposition. Tiger/Mario had shorter careers (injuries/illnesses) against stiffer competition. Woods is the GOAT to me, even before he got his 15th major. Considering the strength and depth of field, 14 > 18 and 81 (at the time before The 2019 Masters) > 72. P.S. Wayne’s 1994-95 season, in which Mario didn’t play: 48 games, 11 goals, 37 assists for 48 points. If you want to count that season, Wayne’s per-game stats drop to 0.54 GPG and 1.90 PPG. P.P.S. Someone suggested that Wayne's last five years when he was in decline, if Mario made up those 150 games, he'd see a similar drop to his numbers. This isn't true: In the 2000-2004 season Mario played 144 games. He scored 70 goals (0.49 GPG) (almost Wayne's 12-season-overlap production level) and 207 points (1.44 PPG), which brings his average(s) to 0.77 GPG (over 1/5 of a goal more per game than Wayne during the 12-season span) and 1.91 PPG (0.04 less). It turns out that the differences in goaltender style, etc. had a big effect and substantially boosted Wayne's career totals: in the five years before they had years in common, Wayne played 393 games, scored 356 goals and racked up 914 points.
    • @David in FL We can put in a request a week out and the lottery will be done 3 days before play day. Once the tee sheet opens, we can take whatever is available.  No shows are very common at my club, so is people hogging times to play alone. The proshop sent out a letter asking people not to hog tee times but people are still doing it and nothing is being done about it. Since it is a membership club, no payment is involved... As for the 15-min tee times, no idea how that helps with social distancing. Rumor was that when we first opened up and had 10-min tee times, a few groups of players congregated at the tee boxes. A member saw it and took photos and videos of these guys not social distancing/wearing masks and sent them to the governor. A few days later, the governor called the GM and we have the 15-min rule. But this still did not promote social distancing. The same guys are still congregating at tee boxes. And the head pro response to that was “this is a private club so they can do whatever they want”. And it created another issue that the course seems empty so we got people sneaking on to play, fish, swim, jog, etc. My course has always been busy on weekends but I never had trouble walking on whenever I wanted during the week. But I cannot even get a tee time now because the tee sheet is completely packed! Even if I wanted to join a threesome I couldn’t because people block off the extra spot so no strangers could join... @NM Golf are you still around? How is it at Arroyo?
    • I said more than 3.   But, thats just because of one hole at my home course.    It's a short par 4, 299 yards.   But, there is a large fescue mound and sand for about 50 yds in front of the green.    So every single person all day long hits to the exact same spot.  end of the fairway about 200-215 out.   leaving an 85-100 wedge in.   and, most amateur golfers take pretty big divots with wedges.   my ball ends up in i divot on that hole a few times per year.    sometimes I move it, sometimes I don't.   depends on the game I'm playing in. 
    • I thought about this, although I wonder how many are full swings. I know that it will be more than short game, as the full swing is much tougher to master and getting good, usable distance is tough at this handicap. But how many is it really? Just doing simple math, a scratch golfer is probably hitting between 32 to 36 full swings per round, that is if they don't have any penalties and depending on the length of par 5s. This may be less if it is a particularly short course where they are left with under 100 yards on many par 4s, but just as a baseline. A 32 handicap is probably shooting around 105-110 total score. At least 36 of these are most likely putts (probably more like 40-45), and if they are anything like I was at this level, duffed chips come by the barrel (I may have had 25-30 chips per round at my worst). I'd guess that a 32 handicap golfer probably takes 45-55 full swings per round. This is less than a medium bucket of balls around these parts, and should be achievable with full swing range reps. I'm no pro, and definitely out of shape, but I get 54 hole weekends in when I can. Sure, Monday is rough (usually my feet from walking), but by Tuesday I am ready to play again.
    • That is a lot of wedges. I think that you really need to know how YOU hit those clubs.  I for one, do not carry a lob wedge.  I am not good enough to strike it consistently and the misses can be catastrophic.  I hit partial swings for anything inside 100 whenever possible, and it is abundantly better.  It also gives me great gapping.  I recommend you figure this out for yourself.  An overly simplified plan for this might be: 52 degree GW hits 100-105 Partial 8-iron for 90 yards Partial 9-iron for 80 yards Partial PW for 70 yards Partial 49 degree GW for 60 yards Partial 52 degree GW for 50 yards Partial SW for 40 yards See here for more info:  
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Adunifon
      Adunifon
      (39 years old)
    2. Caveman59
      Caveman59
      (61 years old)
    3. Mech12
      Mech12
      (45 years old)
    4. metbid
      metbid
      (71 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...