Should a Beginner Use a High-Quality Ball Like a Pro V1?

[motteler621]

yea I saw that golf digest findings article. They pretty much made it look like you should be playing premium balls, same distance off driver and irons as other balls but you get the spin and low trajectory around the greens that are needed. The beginner shouldnt be wasting his money on them until he is able to make solid contact though.

[Zeph]

Golf Digest gets paid for advertising balls, it is in their interest that people buy more expensive balls and lose them. The logic behind that article is stupid.

[max power]

Nailed it.  There will come a time when a better ball will help your game, but it's not when you're a beginner.

Originally Posted by Zeph

Golf Digest gets paid for advertising balls, it is in their interest that people buy more expensive balls and lose them. The logic behind that article is stupid.

[motteler621]

Originally Posted by Zeph

Golf Digest gets paid for advertising balls, it is in their interest that people buy more expensive balls and lose them. The logic behind that article is stupid.

ehh, One of the main judges and editors behind the Hot list clubs and Hot list balls, signed up on Golfwrx (Golfdigest and them have a partnership) to get golfers complaints etc to improve the hot list. He answered all kinds of questions, including the "Golf Digest gets paid to promote certain brands or clubs". You can look it up if you want but here is one of the questions he answered

tbowles411, on 02 March 2011 - 11:08 AM, said:

Mike,

I don't think people are questioning your integrity per se. What people are more frustrated about is the appearance of the corporate mentality that GD is a business, which I don't really have a problem with. One that provides a service of course to their readers, but a platform to the OEMs. When, for example, Callaway garners 11 "golds" for their stuff, but then you see the very first page of the magazine with a 3 page layout of how great Callaway is, it just lends to the argument that advertising dollars speak louder than your opinion of you and the testers. There are a just a few smaller OEMs out there that may get "chosen" each year to make an appearance and they are given a little attention, but if you spend millions of dollars in pictures for the magazine, you get more attention.

"Fair points. Perception can be 9/10 of the law sometimes. But advertising isn't part of our process of evaluation. There is a business side to our company and an editorial side. The business side does not sit in on our Hot List voting sessions. Do big companies get more of our attention? Probably, or at least relatively more of our attention. But it's not exclusive. We listen to every manufacturer that wants to tell its technology story. We spent a day in an unheated warehouse in a Chattanooga snow storm with the team at Scratch, learning about their plans and theories. We spent a day with Callaway, too. Short answer: Every product has earned its way onto the Hot List."

another question on the subject:

TWshoot67, on 02 March 2011 - 12:12 PM, said:

Mike,
I believe many people have brought it up already. I think what may be the main complaint/concern about the" HOT LIST " is the objectivity of the list itself. Many people believe that everything is controlled by advertising dollars which is probably more true then many would want to hear. Also it would seem very hard to give an honest review when you seem to have the same OEM's contributing the most adds happen to always have the best results on the Hot List. It will be interesting to hear what you have to say about the different questions that are brought up in this forum. I think this could really turn into an eye opening experience for many who really don't know what goes on behind the scenes of a Golf publication, like me. I for one would like to see more products that are focused on the single digit handicap player! I can't wait to see where this all goes.......

"Please see earlier response on advertising influence. Please read the detailed response here . It would be a monumentally easier and less expensive project if it were "controlled by advertising dollars." But it isn't that way. Hard to respond to this criticism. But ask any manufacturer if they think they control the Hot List voting. I don't believe you will get a yes. "

and here is a link if you want to read that thread on Hot list clubs

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/450283-golf-digest-hot-list-your-questions-for-mike-stachura/page__st__30

And here is the thread were he actually discusses the Hot List Balls we are talking about

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/466843-mike-stachura-talks-2011-digest-hot-list-balls-wed-1200-noon-here/page__hl__golf+digest+hot+list

So in other words, it is a lie that goes around about Hot Lists that is easy to believe (which is why you got rep points, lol)

[max power]

You're right.  If he says it's not true, it must not be...

I'm not saying Golf Digest is other there trying to scam everybody, but they live and die off advertising.

"Do big companies get more of our attention?  Probably."

Or, in another, more accurate sense, yes.

[motteler621]

you can believe what you want to believe. The balls were tested with machines and the results were compared. If you believe that titleist payed them to give false numbers or nike payed them to give false numbers on their premium line over the non urethane balls then I dont know what to tell you. It was all based on data from their testings, spin, launch angle etc with different clubs

PS. I believe what he says

Originally Posted by max power

You're right.  If he says it's not true, it must not be...

I'm not saying Golf Digest is other there trying to scam everybody, but they live and die off advertising.

"Do big companies get more of our attention?  Probably."

Or, in another, more accurate sense, yes.

[newtogolf]

It seems too many assumptions are made on all sides.  My understanding is that each individual should be fitted for clubs and balls.  Some beginners might have natural athleticism and a high enough swing speed to justify using a tour ball while others would benefit from the attributes and price of a less expensive one.  We don't know who Golf Digest is targeting when it refers to beginners, so I don't think it's fair to just consider the review as a sellout to their advertisers.

[Zeph]

Originally Posted by motteler621

you can believe what you want to believe. The balls were tested with machines and the results were compared. If you believe that titleist payed them to give false numbers or nike payed them to give false numbers on their premium line over the non urethane balls then I dont know what to tell you. It was all based on data from their testings, spin, launch angle etc with different clubs

What has a machine got to do with beginners? We know balls have different characteristics, the point is that beginners rarely hit the ball well enough to take advantage of spin from a wedge. Most of the time they are probably not even hitting a wedge into a green, more like duffing a 7 iron or something like that.

[Chris G]

waste of money mate, wait till you are more confident and have been playing a while, use a mid range ball and something that doesnt burn a hole in your pocket.

[motteler621]

Originally Posted by Zeph

What has a machine got to do with beginners? We know balls have different characteristics, the point is that beginners rarely hit the ball well enough to take advantage of spin from a wedge. Most of the time they are probably not even hitting a wedge into a green, more like duffing a 7 iron or something like that.

yea I never said a beginner should be using a premium ball. Golf Digest never said that either. Look at my first post,

[max power]

Did I dispute the robot numbers?  Did I say that anyone was PAID off?  You're doing a terrible job of arguing with me.  I suggest that you're the one believing what he wants to believe, and you're certainly free to do so.  Just as you're free to buy and tout the "workability" or "butteriness" of new woods, irons, putters, etc....

Originally Posted by motteler621

you can believe what you want to believe. The balls were tested with machines and the results were compared. If you believe that titleist payed them to give false numbers or nike payed them to give false numbers on their premium line over the non urethane balls then I dont know what to tell you. It was all based on data from their testings, spin, launch angle etc with different clubs

PS. I believe what he says

[motteler621]

Originally Posted by max power

Did I dispute the robot numbers?  Did I say that anyone was PAID off?  You're doing a terrible job of arguing with me.  I suggest that you're the one believing what he wants to believe, and you're certainly free to do so.  Just as you're free to buy and tout the "workability" or "butteriness" of new woods, irons, putters, etc....

well Im pretty lost in this conversation now. Golf Digest never said beginners should be using a premium ball, the article only stated the data of premium balls and non premium (non urethane). So what exactly am I doing a terrible job arguing with you about, lol

[motteler621]

Originally Posted by motteler621

yea I saw that golf digest findings article. They pretty much made it look like you should be playing premium balls, same distance off driver and irons as other balls but you get the spin and low trajectory around the greens that are needed. The beginner shouldnt be wasting his money on them until he is able to make solid contact though.

Originally Posted by Zeph

Golf Digest gets paid for advertising balls, it is in their interest that people buy more expensive balls and lose them. The logic behind that article is stupid.

Originally Posted by max power

Nailed it.  There will come a time when a better ball will help your game, but it's not when you're a beginner.

Seriously,lol what are you guys even talking about then. Golf Digest never said beginners should be using premium balls, Only thing Im arguing is that advertising dollars controls the data results they show for their hot list balls article and which clubs get gold ratings on the regular hot list.

[grim golfer]

Dont bash me, lol, im just saying.

Even when I first took up the game I was playing Titleist Professionals and Tour Balatas.

Sure I was shanking everything and not making good contact for quite sometime but hitting a Top Flight or Pinnacle and so on felt like hitting a rock.

Couldnt stand how the cheap crappy balls felt.

Yes there are better cheaper balls now that dont hurt the wallet but if you ar elike me even as a crappy player I can tell the difference in overall feel and playing a crappy ball just doesnt feel right to me.

I could care less as to what golf digest says, but I agree with the way in which the results were presented and discussed. If oyu can play the better balls by all means do it

[meenman]

On the flip side, if a beginner can hit a ProV1 straight, he/she/it should be able to hit any ball straight. So, play whatever you want.

[sean_miller]

Beginners need consistent spin, which is more likely with a mid-priced ball. Ironically, once you can hit the sweet spot consistently, a mid priced ball spins just fine and feels pretty good too. I like Pro V1s. They're a darned good ball. I just think it's not necessary to use one to learn the game. It certainly isn't necessary to use one in order to maintain a single digit index.

[Chrepper]

Sometimes I need a beach ball on the tee, haha.

I agree with most of the golfers here when they mention "feel."  I hate when I hit a golf ball and it feels like I just hit a rock.  In contrast, I hate when I putt a ball and it feels like Jello.

With that said, golf is expensive, as are the balls.  I'll have fun and score pretty decent with any ball that feels good to me (within reason).

I'll say this much:  I've shanked Prov1s, and I've shanked range balls.

[ckolson]

Does more spin on the green also equate to more spin off of the tee and in turn less accuracy for new golfers? Will this lead to more balls either slicing or hooking for beginners?