Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 3023 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

Posted
7 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

I know people who wen to MIT for real, got engineering degrees and have trouble making Kraft Macaroni and Cheese. So regardless of whether his posts are the truth, he seems to not understand basic physics.

Please identify where the lack of physics knowledge is evident in my posts.  I would love to read your insight. 


Posted
Just now, JPitts said:

Please identify where the lack of physics knowledge is evident in my posts.  I would love to read your insight. 

There isn't any "lack of knowledge in physics" in your posts. I think most people were turned off by your overall tone, but I liked your review post. It's just that at 35 putts average which is closer to 38 right now, I'm not going to improve my putting no matter what I use.

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
3 minutes ago, JPitts said:

Please identify where the lack of physics knowledge is evident in my posts.  I would love to read your insight. 

You are not telling us the truth about who you are or where you are from. No need to continue this conversation.

Scott

Titleist, Edel, Scotty Cameron Putter, Snell - AimPoint - Evolvr - MirrorVision

My Swing Thread

boogielicious - Adjective describing the perfect surf wave

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
3 minutes ago, JPitts said:

Please identify where the lack of physics knowledge is evident in my posts.  I would love to read your insight. 

I do not have a degree in anything related but it seems to me you have almost avoided talking about physics because you are probably afraid of being caught in a lie.-This is in spite of being invited to talk about them.

Seriously-You looked at Wikipedia and copied the information there?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque

I feel I can spot a bullshitter when I see one and I feel I have spotted one in you-Citing a formula from WIkipedia on torque?-Really?

3 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

You are not telling us the truth about who you are or where you are from. No need to continue this conversation.

Bullshitter.

"The expert golfer has maximum time to make minimal compensations. The poorer player has minimal time to make maximum compensations." - And no, I'm not Mac. Please do not PM me about it. I just think he is a crazy MFer and we could all use a little more crazy sometimes.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
3 minutes ago, Lihu said:

There isn't any "lack of knowledge in physics" in your posts. I think most people were turned off by your overall tone, but I liked your review post. It's just that at 35 putts average which is closer to 38 right now, I'm not going to improve my putting no matter what I use.

I'm Jason from Ft. Worth, Texas. I've stated at least 3  times now in this thread where I am from. Now you have a first name.  


Posted
15 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

I know people who wen to MIT for real, got engineering degrees and have trouble making Kraft Macaroni and Cheese. So regardless of whether his posts are the truth, he seems to not understand basic physics.

How much physics does it take to make Maccaroni 'n Cheese?

Anyway, no one wins here. It's an interesting putter. And JPitts is correct about the glowing reviews - they do exist. But I've also read a few negatives, mostly about its looks! lol. If it works to get the ball in the hole in less putts, it's fine. No putter is manna from Heaven. With mine, I had them reduce that T line so I could aim it straight. We'll see how it goes.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Ping G400 Max 9/TPT Shaft, TEE EX10 Beta 4, 5 wd, PXG 22 HY, Mizuno JPX919F 5-GW, TItleist SM7 Raw 55-09, 59-11, Bettinardi BB39

 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Phil McGleno said:

I do not have a degree in anything related but it seems to me you have almost avoided talking about physics because you are probably afraid of being caught in a lie.-This is in spite of being invited to talk about them.

Seriously-You looked at Wikipedia and copied the information there?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque

I feel I can spot a bullshitter when I see one and I feel I have spotted one in you-Citing a formula from WIkipedia on torque?-Really?

Bullshitter.

Actually the formula I posted is for angular velocity.  The image was posted from Google images though. A lot easier than trying to type it in this editor.  The fact you don't know the difference is ok,  most people don't. 

Edited by JPitts

Posted
Just now, JPitts said:

I'm Jason from Ft. Worth, Texas. I've stated at least 3  times now in this thread where I am from. Now you have a first name.  

Ah, yes, I see.

Anyway, I think this got off on a bad start.

Your original post was fine, then you dug into the site owner which was way overkill for what he noted in his posts to you. No doubt you are smart, and you don't have to prove it on this site. Just take everything at table value and go with it. No one is trying to put down the things you noted.

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
1 minute ago, Lihu said:

Ah, yes, I see.

Anyway, I think this got off on a bad start.

Your original post was fine, then you dug into the site owner which was way overkill for what he noted in his posts to you. No doubt you are smart, and you don't have to prove it on this site. Just take everything at table value and go with it. No one is trying to put down the things you noted.

I wasn't trying to lay into anyone.  I know that tone doesn't always reflect properly through typed text. 

I do get a bit defensive about physics though as it is my passion. I've spent a lot of money and time studying it and applying it in my professional life.  There is a ton of mis information out there that is being presented and I am simply trying to correct some of the more common mistakes.  

 


Posted
12 minutes ago, JPitts said:

Actually the formula I posted is for angular velocity.  The image was posted from Google images though. A lot easier than trying to type it in this editor.  The fact you don't know the difference is ok,  most people don't. 

That is odd-On the Wikipedia page it says "power =" and then does some substitution to get power = torque x angular speed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque

But hey, you are a bullshitter-This is what you do.

3 minutes ago, JPitts said:

I wasn't trying to lay into anyone.

Bullshit.

"The expert golfer has maximum time to make minimal compensations. The poorer player has minimal time to make maximum compensations." - And no, I'm not Mac. Please do not PM me about it. I just think he is a crazy MFer and we could all use a little more crazy sometimes.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I really don't care about the science, I just care if it works. Are these putters available at any retail golf stores? I'd love to see one in person.


Posted
3 minutes ago, JPitts said:

trying to correct some of the more common mistakes.

Well then do so. Just saying, "I'm from MIT and I'm passionate about physics" doesn't fly. Explain your reasoning with facts, diagrams, tests, whatever. If you've spent any time here you'd know that's exactly what @iacas does and his expecting no less is completely reasonable.

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
6 minutes ago, caniac6 said:

I really don't care about the science, I just care if it works. Are these putters available at any retail golf stores? I'd love to see one in person.

Like @iacas said -It is a flat piece of metal on the end of a stick. Find one you can aim, find one with a good balance, and then learn to make a good stroke.

It is not like a putter actually twists in your hands.-There is a reason they have to go so low friction in the Revealer or like Edel has to in their no torque putters.

Good putters can putt with anything.-Look at how you putt almost as well with a wedge as your putter.-Your wedge is not using a formula for power or angular velocity to stay balanced and resist twisting.

"The expert golfer has maximum time to make minimal compensations. The poorer player has minimal time to make maximum compensations." - And no, I'm not Mac. Please do not PM me about it. I just think he is a crazy MFer and we could all use a little more crazy sometimes.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
1 minute ago, Phil McGleno said:

Good putters can putt with anything.-Look at how you putt almost as well with a wedge as your putter.-Your wedge is not using a formula for power or angular velocity to stay balanced and resist twisting.

Likewise, bad putters can't putt with everything. :-D

 

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
10 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Well then do so. Just saying, "I'm from MIT and I'm passionate about physics" doesn't fly. Explain your reasoning with facts, diagrams, tests, whatever. If you've spent any time here you'd know that's exactly what @iacas does and his expecting no less is completely reasonable.

I'll post some info later today.


Posted
15 minutes ago, caniac6 said:

I really don't care about the science, I just care if it works. Are these putters available at any retail golf stores? I'd love to see one in person.

North Carolina? They have 2 fitters - locations. Call to see if they have demos on the floor. All of them are custom fitted, so picking one up at a store and taking it home is not a go. I was in CA on vacation and visited a fitter. They had about 3 demos and the infamous Revealer on the floor.

http://www.directedforce.com/Articles.asp?ID=255

Ping G400 Max 9/TPT Shaft, TEE EX10 Beta 4, 5 wd, PXG 22 HY, Mizuno JPX919F 5-GW, TItleist SM7 Raw 55-09, 59-11, Bettinardi BB39

 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
23 minutes ago, caniac6 said:

I really don't care about the science, I just care if it works. Are these putters available at any retail golf stores? I'd love to see one in person.

It works,  at least for me and from what I've read,  several others.  The company website had a list of fitters and retailers. Im not going to post a link, so just Google the company name, Directed Force putters.


Posted
5 minutes ago, JPitts said:

It works,  at least for me and from what I've read,  several others.  The company website had a list of fitters and retailers. Im not going to post a link, so just Google the company name, Directed Force putters.

Yes-The company is good about sending out shills to vouch for how awesome these flat pieces of metal on the ends of sticks are. The guy who started the company even pretended to be someone else-Right here on this site-for a time.

  • Like 1

"The expert golfer has maximum time to make minimal compensations. The poorer player has minimal time to make maximum compensations." - And no, I'm not Mac. Please do not PM me about it. I just think he is a crazy MFer and we could all use a little more crazy sometimes.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3023 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!
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

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

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • 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.