What's the point in playing a Pro V?

[Cornbread]

We all get way too caught-up in this Ball Spin stuff. In todays world of Golf, things have leveled / evened-out to where there is really not that big of a difference in Ball A vs Ball B. Sure in the olden days of the wound Titleist vs say standard Top-Flights their were huge differences. Today thru technology manufactures have created non-urethane covered balls that act almost like urethane. Upgrades in core materials and layers have also closed the old gap to where most balls have practically the same characteristics.
The specifications for Legal Golf Balls are narrowly defined, therefore all the various manufacturers produce products that act all but the same. Ball Weight, size, ball speed, design, performance, ect... must fall within these very narrowly defined specifications.
It's the Marketing and Advertising schemes / angles that make us think there are major differences. There are not.
Give Mickelson, Couples or Mahan, a TF Gamer, Maxfli VT4, a Wilson Staff Zip, or any decent ball and they will learn its slight nuances and eventually shoot the same scores they do with their current Highly Marketed Balls. Just like the groove change which affected spin, a Ball change will not increase Tour average scores, at least not enought to be noticable.

[bigoak]

played with a older but a good player today/ He loves the pinnacle ball. It would not be my choice. He hit the middle of every fairway. His ball hit the green on every par 3. The greens were crusty and the pinnacle just rolled out. I played a Pro V and shot 81. He couldn't make a decent chip and had a short - long putting day and shot 90. I swear if he was using a Pro V, he would have beaten me soundly,

[shades9323]

played with a older but a good player today/ He loves the pinnacle ball. It would not be my choice. He hit the middle of every fairway. His ball hit the green on every par 3. The greens were crusty and the pinnacle just rolled out. I played a Pro V and shot 81. He couldn't make a decent chip and had a short - long putting day and shot 90. I swear if he was using a Pro V, he would have beaten me soundly,

If he hasn't figured out his short game yet, a pro v aint gonna help. The pinnacle would actually be more predictible than the pro v.

[TopWalker]

I'd turn the discussion more towards urethane vs. non-urethane. A lot of the so-called experts say that mid and high handicappers should play urethane balls and I agree with them.

The reasoning is pretty simple. Most players (mid and high hc) will miss most greens. If you're chipping on 12 holes and needing 30 putts that's 42 shots around the green alone.

And often times the player has short-sided themselves. They chip their rockflight across the green and then three putt for a double bogey. A urethane covered ball is going to get more check in those situations, giving you a better chance to make a putt for par.

It is a challenge moving to a urethane covered ball, but boy is it nice to actually attack a pin knowing the ball will check.

TW

[JWL1957]

If he hasn't figured out his short game yet, a pro v aint gonna help. The pinnacle would actually be more predictible than the pro v.

Theres some of truth to that. I chip better with a harder ball knowing how much it will usually roll out.

[cody west]

Theres some of truth to that. I chip better with a harder ball knowing how much it will usually roll out.

who is to say the pro v's dont roll out the same like if you think about it its not that hard to regulate spin... come down on the ball while accelerating and move your hips. the ball will check as long as its not a rock. if golfers use common sense and take their time on the shot they should know the maximum stopping power they have, just look at your lie and use the same swing. more grass behind the ball means less stop. your always better off using a ball the can stop because what if you have a short chip into a downslope. how do you expect to make a non-urethane ball stop?

its isnt about knowing how far it will roll because all balls will roll the same relative to the others of the same model (all top-flight xl's will roll the same and all pro v1's will roll the same) its more about having the time to get used to the way one ball rolls because it is easier to just use all low end balls and expect them not the check but in all seriousness it would benefit most people to use one thing and stick with it. its like using a different driver every round.

[Woters]

why use a PRO V1???

Because make superb golf balls, if not THE best golf balls on the planet.

I would much rather change a ball every round for the benefits of feel/spin than play any other brand (& I have tried most of them)

They aint the #1 ball in golf for nothing, if the better players thought a Srixon/Callaway/Nike whatever was better they would change...& they dont!

[sean_miller]

why use a PRO V1???

That one made me spew coffee. BPOTD!!

[wolverine_man]

Sounds like the latest Titleist commercial. I love the one where it shows the amateur player opening a pack of PRO V1s and holding the ball up to his nose as if he is smelling it. LOL

why use a PRO V1???

[cody west]

why use a PRO V1???

what other kinds of balls have you tried because i seriously don't believe anyone with a hcp over 5 can tell the difference between the top callaway and the top titliest like i would like to hear your opinions and reasonings based on your own experience not what tour players say because unless you have the swing consistency of a scratch golfer you most likely can't tell the difference between a tour i and a pro v1 or a tour ix and a pro v1x because i know myself i have trouble telling up to the putting green because you can clearly tell a difference on the putting green.

[wolverine_man]

Shot 78 today on a longer tougher course than usual. Had my PRO V1xs with me and I have no complaints. Used one ball for all 18. I did notice on the putting green that for some reason the TP Black seems a little too soft off the putter face.

[bigoak]

If he hasn't figured out his short game yet, a pro v aint gonna help. The pinnacle would actually be more predictible than the pro v.

Yes it was very predictable. The pinnacle went past the hole every time. Did I mention that the greens were crusty? The pro V1 works fine and when the course is wet, the pro V1x works fine. He is a 7 and has a pretty good game but with small greens and pins tucked in front, the Pinnacle isn;t going to carry the traps and get close. Not every course has runways leading up to the green on all holes.

[Cornbread]

Titleist & the ProV1 are the number one ball in Pro Golf for a reason. The Pro's have swing speeds of 105 plus. Many around 115+ .
Too many amature hackers use the Pro V1 because they think its the ball for them as well. It is NOT! (unless you swing as fast or faster than the Pros)
Amatures think it somehow gives then then some great advantage, when in many cases it actully hurts their game ( vs the proper ball for their speed )

[Paz]

Titleist & the ProV1 are the number one ball in Pro Golf for a reason. The Pro's have swing speeds of 105 plus. Many around 115+ .

I disagree with this amateurs should still play a soft high spin ball. The advantages around the green are much more advantageous to the players score than distance loss off the tee from not having a fast enough swing speed to get its proper distance.

[Zeph]

Titleist & the ProV1 are the number one ball in Pro Golf for a reason. The Pro's have swing speeds of 105 plus. Many around 115+ .

Where did you come up with this information? Please don't say "off the top of my head".

[Shorty]

Titleist & the ProV1 are the number one ball in Pro Golf for a reason. The Pro's have swing speeds of 105 plus. Many around 115+ .

This is complete and utter nonsense. This inference of high swing speeds being needed to "activate" a ball is total BS.

A player who has a decent short game but misses a lot of greens, like millions of amateurs will benefit from a ball that can be controlled from close to the green. In fact, you could say that an "amateur", (a pejorative term at best) needs (or can benefit from) this ball more than a pro does.

[James_Black]

This is complete and utter nonsense. This inference of high swing speeds being needed to "activate" a ball is total BS.

OR

The reason why they missed the green in the first place was because a high-spin ball is so hard to control.....

[Zeph]

Has there been tests to see the difference in amount of sidespin on different balls and how it affects ball flight? Like Iron Byron, set up with an open clubface, then looking at how far the ball spun sideways.