Jump to content
IGNORED

Pitch mark maintainance


iWALK18
Note: This thread is 3224 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!

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Administrator
I just use this ... works great

No it doesn't. Cameron's repair tool is one of the worst out there. Not only is it really thick, it encourages popping up the ball marks. I'd bet $1000 you don't repair ball marks properly.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

No it doesn't. Cameron's repair tool is one of the worst out there. Not only is it really thick, it encourages popping up the ball marks. I'd bet $1000 you don't repair ball marks properly.

Looks like you beat me to the punch, iacas! It's that rocker on the bottom that's the dead giveaway.

"If you are going to throw a club, it is important to throw it ahead of you, down the fairway, so you don't have to waste energy going back to pick it up." Tommy Bolt
Insight XTD 9.5°, Insight 14.5°, X16 P-4iron, Edge 3H

Powerbuilt 2iron and SW, Cleveland 54°, Odyssey Rossi II

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I haven't found a single tool with slender enough prongs. Because of this, I've grinded off some on the prongs of a Taylormade tool. The metal is pretty solid, so it doesn't break, but the prongs are really thin compared to most tools and tees.

I've got the Scotty tool too, too thick prongs, not a good one.

Ogio Grom | Callaway X Hot Pro | Callaway X-Utility 3i | Mizuno MX-700 23º | Titleist Vokey SM 52.08, 58.12 | Mizuno MX-700 15º | Titleist 910 D2 9,5º | Scotty Cameron Newport 2 | Titleist Pro V1x and Taylormade Penta | Leupold GX-1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

No it doesn't. Cameron's repair tool is one of the worst out there. Not only is it really thick, it encourages popping up the ball marks. I'd bet $1000 you don't repair ball marks properly.

It looks like it could work, other than the thickness of the prongs, but it's a bit hard to tell the scale of it. The little bend looks to me lke it could help push rather than pry, but only if you insert it in the ground upside down relative to that photo (i.e., so the bend points down when the handle is level). But it looks like a pair of shovels rather than a narrow sharp blade to me.

In the bag:
FT-iQ 10° driver, FT 21° neutral 3H
T-Zoid Forged 15° 3W, MX-23 4-PW
Harmonized 52° GW, Tom Watson 56° SW, X-Forged Vintage 60° LW
White Hot XG #1 Putter, 33"

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The little bend looks to me lke it could help push rather than pry, but only if you insert it in the ground upside down relative to that photo

Hmmm...now that's a thought. Maybe it was designed that way and people just use it wrong! Hmmm...nah...the prongs will be pulling AWAY from the crater at the bottom. Not good.

I'd also like to comment on the "depth limiting" designs. These are entirely useless around here when it's wet. The ball marks are really deep. You could do better with a long tee, pretty sure. No doubt a great idea for Arizona, but not so great in Central NY in the spring.

"If you are going to throw a club, it is important to throw it ahead of you, down the fairway, so you don't have to waste energy going back to pick it up." Tommy Bolt
Insight XTD 9.5°, Insight 14.5°, X16 P-4iron, Edge 3H

Powerbuilt 2iron and SW, Cleveland 54°, Odyssey Rossi II

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I'm not sure what you mean by "pulling away". This is what I'm picturing.

The depth might be an issue, but I don't usually find terribly deep pitch marks.

In the bag:
FT-iQ 10° driver, FT 21° neutral 3H
T-Zoid Forged 15° 3W, MX-23 4-PW
Harmonized 52° GW, Tom Watson 56° SW, X-Forged Vintage 60° LW
White Hot XG #1 Putter, 33"

Link to comment
Share on other sites


What are your thoughts about these:
http://www.sportcover.com/catalog200..._DT_page56.pdf

If they are as good as they claim, does anyone know where to get them?

In my KZG Stand Bag:
919THI 11* w/ OBAN Revenge 6 (S)
919THI 16.5* w/ OBAN Revenge 7 (S)
KZG 18* & 22* U Iron w/ Matrix Studio 84 (S)
KZG 5-PW Cavity Back Forged III w/ N.S. Pro 1050 GH (S)KZG Forged TRS 50*, 54*, 58* w/ N.S. Pro 1050 GH (S)Kirk Currie/Wright San Saba 33" e7 or TriSpeed uProMy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
What are your thoughts about these:

I tried searching for "greenfix ball mark repair tool" because that's what they were called, and some former PGA guy was selling them I think, but they seem to have gone away or something... or he doesn't have a site of his own anymore or something. Good luck and let us know if you can find them.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I tried searching for "greenfix ball mark repair tool" because that's what they were called, and some former PGA guy was selling them I think, but they seem to have gone away or something... or he doesn't have a site of his own anymore or something.

So they are a good and proper tool then?

In my KZG Stand Bag:
919THI 11* w/ OBAN Revenge 6 (S)
919THI 16.5* w/ OBAN Revenge 7 (S)
KZG 18* & 22* U Iron w/ Matrix Studio 84 (S)
KZG 5-PW Cavity Back Forged III w/ N.S. Pro 1050 GH (S)KZG Forged TRS 50*, 54*, 58* w/ N.S. Pro 1050 GH (S)Kirk Currie/Wright San Saba 33" e7 or TriSpeed uProMy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


No it doesn't. Cameron's repair tool is one of the worst out there. Not only is it really thick, it encourages popping up the ball marks. I'd bet $1000 you don't repair ball marks properly.

I'll take that bet and raise you another $1000, it's all in how you use it and most people don't know how

Insert the tool at the edge of the pitch mark, not within the depression itself, push the tool forward from the edge of the pitch mark toward the center, do this around the edges of the indentation, tamp down the repaired area with your putter so that the surface is flat and even, and you are done wrong way and most common mistake, inserting the tool under the indented area and push up, that's a no, no and you'll get a from the grounds keepers PM me to transfer the $$$ into my account, thanks hehe
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I just so happened to run across this last night in Wal-Mart of all places. This tool should work perfect I would think.



In the bag:
Driver: `09 Launcher (10.5º) w/ Fujikura Fit-On Red Stiff
3 Wood: `09 Launcher w/ Fujikura Fit-On Red Stiff shaft
3 Hybrid (20.5º): `09 Launcher w/ Fujikura Fit-On Red Stiff Shaft
4-PW: CG7 Tour w/ TT Dynamic Gold Stiff Shafts50º (8º Bnce), 56º (14º Bnce), 60º (8º Bnce):
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Poor picture quality, but it looks like the prongs are too thick.

Ogio Grom | Callaway X Hot Pro | Callaway X-Utility 3i | Mizuno MX-700 23º | Titleist Vokey SM 52.08, 58.12 | Mizuno MX-700 15º | Titleist 910 D2 9,5º | Scotty Cameron Newport 2 | Titleist Pro V1x and Taylormade Penta | Leupold GX-1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Yeah, it's hard to tell. Can you measure the thickness of the prongs or post a picture with, say, a quarter edge-on for reference? I definitely like the look of it, though it wouldn't fit in a pocket as well as the typical flat one.

In the bag:
FT-iQ 10° driver, FT 21° neutral 3H
T-Zoid Forged 15° 3W, MX-23 4-PW
Harmonized 52° GW, Tom Watson 56° SW, X-Forged Vintage 60° LW
White Hot XG #1 Putter, 33"

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I went to a golf expo/super sale this past weekend. It was mostly a bunch of junk, but I picked up two of these for 60 cents. Does a great job and you cannot even tell the area used to be a pitch mark after it works its magic. I'm not proud to say I was using a tee, but this is much better. Thanks to the starter of this thread. The golfers behind me thank you as well. :)



Link to comment
Share on other sites


It looks like it could work, other than the thickness of the prongs, but it's a bit hard to tell the scale of it. The little bend looks to me lke it could help push rather than pry, but only if you insert it in the ground upside down relative to that photo (i.e., so the bend points down when the handle is level). But it looks like a pair of shovels rather than a narrow sharp blade to me.

Yeah, those Scotty ones look like the prongs should point down - like the nub with the red jewel on it is for pressing your thumb against.

Mizuno MP600 driver, Cleveland '09 Launcher 3-wood, Callaway FTiz 18 degree hybrid, Cleveland TA1 3-9, Scratch SS8620 47, 53, 58, Cleveland Classic 2 mid-mallet, Bridgestone B330S, Sun Mountain four5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I went to a golf expo/super sale this past weekend. It was mostly a bunch of junk, but I picked up two of these for 60 cents.

Can't quite read the writing. What is it? I could see ordering a few hundred for the course I play at! (They need all the help they can get!)

"If you are going to throw a club, it is important to throw it ahead of you, down the fairway, so you don't have to waste energy going back to pick it up." Tommy Bolt
Insight XTD 9.5°, Insight 14.5°, X16 P-4iron, Edge 3H

Powerbuilt 2iron and SW, Cleveland 54°, Odyssey Rossi II

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Can't quite read the writing. What is it? I could see ordering a few hundred for the course I play at! (They need all the help they can get!)

It's a cast, metal el cheapo. It says "Nevada Bob's" with a cowboy looking dude holding a golf bag and a tennis racket. I suspect it was a free give away, or promotional item at Nevada Bob's. In hindsight I should've bought them all and donated them to my club!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: This thread is 3224 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!

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
  • TST Partners

    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • Was that a low spinner from Viktor on 4 at Valhalla? From the first cut, I worries it would fly past the flag, then it stops dead.
    • Day 37: Played 18. Didn’t execute my piece every swing, but when I did the results were solid (8 GIR + 5 nGIR, 79). 
    • Iacas- Can you please post all the data behind field strengths? Thank you very much!
    • New 3W is pretty good  I hit a good drive actually but straight into a headwind so it left me far enough back from the trees to attempt something stupid. So naturally, with a new 3W in the bag, I wanted to see what it could do. Hit a high draw directly over the trees and couldn't see where it ended up from the fairway, but I knew I hit it well. I doubt that's the optimal play for scoring well in the long run but it felt good to do.
    • I'm sure you've read this, but I just have to post it, here, again, for everyone who hasn't. It changed my thinking forever and irrevocably on this exact topic:  "We don't say "the golfers are more talented" today. We say "there are more talented golfers today." "More" meaning they are far more numerous, not more talented. Talent is random. Only a small percentage of people win the talent lottery --- for world class golf, way less than 1%. And there's no telling whether the most talented player of any period, including this one, was more talented than Jack, or Jones, or Vardon. It's absolutely unknowable. What IS knowable, though, is that the base population is larger, so whatever percentage of people are born with golf talent, there are a lot more of them today than there were 50 years ago. What is knowable is that training and coaching is vastly improved. Hogan had to, in his words, "dig his swing out of the dirt" by hitting millions of golf balls. Today, they have radar and laser and the Minolta super duper high speed swing cam, and they know exactly how every little swing tweak affects their spin rate and launch angle and apex height -- stuff nobody had any clue about in Jack's day. So 50 years ago, if you had 100 guys born with golf talent take up golf, maybe 30 of them would find their optimal swing. Today, it's probably over 90. What is knowable is that the huge purses, and the fact that Tiger was the world's richest and most famous athlete, and not just the world #1 golfer, is making golf the first choice of more young athletes, rather than just the guys who couldn't make the "real" sports teams in school. So if you had 100 guys born with multi-sport talent 50 years ago, most of them played golf for fun, if at all. Today, a lot more of them concentrate on golf as their main sport. And what is knowable is that travel is much faster and cheaper now, so almost every world class player shows up for almost every major and WGC, and for many of the regular PGA events. 50 years ago, the second or third best player in, say, Australia, often didn't even play in the British Open, let alone a PGA event. So all the PGA events, and three of the four majors, had only a handful of international players, and the fourth major had only a handful of Americans. None of that is speculation. It is a verifiable fact that there are over twice as many people in the world today than there were 50 years ago. It's a verifiable fact that the purses today are hundreds of times as high as they were 50 years ago --- Tony Lema got about $4200 for winning the 1964 Open; today, it's about $3.5 million. It's a verifiable fact that virtually all the world top 100 play every major they are eligible for, instead of only a handful playing any events that require overseas travel. It's not knowable exactly how all of that combines, but a good indication is the number of entries in the US Open. To enter the US Open requires both top 1% talent for the game, and a serious commitment to it. There were about 2400 entrants per year 50 years ago. This century, it's consistently over 9000, well over three times as many. It's true that, mostly because of the time and expense, the number of duffers recreational players has declined, but they never had any influence on field strength, anyway. High school kids on the golf team still play all they want, for free. What do you have to counter that? Nothing but your belief that there were half a dozen golf phenoms all at the same time in the 60's, and none today, now that Tiger's past his prime. You're entitled to that opinion, but what facts do you have to back it up? Only the number of majors they won. But how many majors would Phil have won if the fields were like they were 50 years ago? Mickelson finished second in the US Open to Goosen in 2004, to Ogilvy in 2006, and to Rose last year. 50 years ago, odds are that none of those guys would have even tried to qualify for the US Open, since it required shutting down their schedule for a minimum of three weeks to travel to the US for sectional qualifying, with no guarantee that they would make it into the actual tournament. Michael Campbell, who beat Tiger with some amazing putting down the stretch in 2005, said that he would not have entered that year if the USGA hadn't established overseas qualifying sites, so he didn't have to travel to enter. How would Phil look next to Arnie with those three US Opens? Eight majors, and a career Grand Slam. And how would Tiger look if Michael Campbell, Trevor Immelman, Angel Cabrera, and YE Yang had stayed home, like most international players did in the Jack era? I'll make it even simpler for you, since you follow women's golf. How much better would the US women look today, if there were no Asians on tour? Or even just no Koreans? Well, it looks like you're going to crow about the lack of current talent every time a guy backs into a win for the foreseeable future, but come on. The Valero was a 40-point tournament, which makes it one of the weakest regular PGA events, barely above the John Deere Classic. And the tournament committee knows that most top players don't like to play right before a major, so they try to attract the few who do by making it as close to major conditions as possible, to help them fine tune their games. A weak field facing a tough setup is not a recipe for low scores, but you still insist on taking one bad week and comparing it to the majors of your hazy memory, even though you seem to have forgotten epic collapses by the likes of Arnie, who managed to lose a seven shot lead over the last 9 holes of the 1966 US Open. And who knows how often something like that happened in a low-rent event? I don't know if Tiger was more talented than Jack, or even Trevino. All I know is that there are many solid reasons to believe that in order to win a tournament, he had to beat around three times as many talented golfers, even in most of the regular tour events he's won, as Jack did in a major --- especially the Open, where Jack only had to beat as few as 8 other Americans, at a time when probably 60-70 of the world top 100 were Americans.  I don't say it's true by definition, as you claimed, but I say it's the way to bet, based on facts and logic."  
×
×
  • 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...