Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Please help!!......Titleist 712 AP2 vs. Nike VR Pro Combo

5 posts in this topic

I am the newest rookie of the Sand Trap and would REALLY appreciate some expert opinions before I make a decision on my next set of golf clubs! Here's my situation....

Just started golfing this past summer and caught on very quickly, much to the disbelief of some of my more seasoned golf partners. I have been using a cheap set of Nicklaus clubs and want to upgrade before next season and really get serious about my golf game. I am currently stuck between a used set of Titleist 712 AP2s and Nike VR Pro Combos.....Both appear to be in similar used condition, probably rated about 8-8.5 out of 10. The AP2s will cost me about 600$ while the Victory Reds will cost me about 550$.

First of all, what are your honest opinions when it comes to buying used clubs? Secondly, which of these iron sets would you lean toward if you were me?

Thanks in advance...Anything you reply with will be greatly appreciated!!


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

Hi there, welcome to the Sandtrap ! Personally I would go to your local golf shop and hit both to see what feels better before making any purchases...but if not possible then I would go with the AP1s, great irons and will hold their value longer.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • There are two ways he could reasonably respond to this… A) How would he know?
      B) The current rule does just that. I think you're misreading what he wrote. And you have no idea what the "primary cause" is, particularly since you're not even discussing a specific situation right now. I can see how soling your putter near the ball could be more likely to cause a ball to move than walking in and stopping a foot+ away from the ball. A ball overhanging the hole is not deemed at rest until the time has elapsed (or the player taps in). The situations are not alike. You, too, seem to be reading this incorrectly. Re-read 18-2/0.5. There's no presumption of guilt or innocence. The facts are simply weighed, and the most likely cause determined. The player is not guilty until proven innocent. Kindly stop just making stuff up. On that we agree.
    • I have a daughter playing D1 golf.  While the competition isn't as severe, D1 and high D2 coaches do have stereotypes for their golfers.  They want them a certain size and a certain build.  They will take a kid that is 5'9" that averages a 78 over a girl that is 5'5" and averages 75 .  They know that the 5'9" hasn't maxed out their potential and can grow in the distance department just on size alone.  They want girls going into greens with irons and spinning the ball, not a bumped hybrid that rolls onto the green.  Heard this from several coaches in the process.
    • I'm curious if Phil had found a setup edge with putting if he'd share it so openly with his fellow pros? He's rather competitive, but has been open about some of his strategies in the past. It probably depends on the individual stroke tendencies.
    • Did they ever look at just an exception to this rule for obvious external causes like wind and gravity? To a large extent though the hovering of the club was only relevant to actually causing the ball to move off the greens. Just stepping in to the ball and standing there (esp. on fast greens) is likely the primary cause - absent wind. Why is a putt that comes to rest on the edge of the cup and then goes in when a player walks toward it to mark it not treated the same under this rule. It's at rest and then it moves. Treat like situations alike, right? Why make an exception because it's on the green or near the hole? The player walking in is the likely cause and aren't extra heavy footsteps not allowed, because they are likely to tip the balance? Might not be 'opposite', but I do think your idea is a bit like shifting of the burden of proof from the defendant to the plaintiff. If done this way you could stick with the existing 51% threshold to be tighter on latitude. It just seems that way with a few of the rulings as applied. To a large extent though the hovering of the club to avoid a penalty was only relevant to actually causing the ball to move off the greens. Just stepping in to the ball and standing there (esp. on fast greens) is likely the primary cause of movement - absent wind. I personally like that the wind moving the ball regardless of whether or not the club was grounded does not result in a penalty now.
    • Off topic stuff is in the spoiler tag… I'm fortunate to have a daughter who is close to a bogey golfer as an (undersized, she still has a few years of growth left) 8th grader. The competition for women's D1/D2 golf is nowhere near as severe.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. billymo2
      (24 years old)
    2. bostonboy9416
      (16 years old)
    3. kpaulhus
      (29 years old)
  • Blog Entries