Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 4234 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

Why not do an internet search?

"Advantages of ProV1"

"Why Pro V1 golf ball"  etc etc.

http://www.pgatour.com/news/2013/09/06/the-evolution-of-the-pro-v1.html

In the race of life, always back self-interest. At least you know it's trying.

 

 


Posted
Personally I don't see all the hype behind them. Especially for the price. To me lethals or chrome + react the same for cheaper. But that being said I gave dad a new pro v1x that I had to use last round and hit played the best he has in the past 3 or 4 years.

Posted
Why not do an internet search? "Advantages of ProV1" "Why Pro V1 golf ball"  etc etc. [URL=http://www.pgatour.com/news/2013/09/06/the-evolution-of-the-pro-v1.html]http://www.pgatour.com/news/2013/09/06/the-evolution-of-the-pro-v1.html[/URL]

Why search Google when I can hear the opinions of golfers here?

  • Upvote 1

  • Moderator
Posted

I find they are the best ball around the green.  There are many threads in this section about them, which is why @Shorty was recommending a search.  They have been discussed many times.

  • Upvote 1

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
Thanks guys...I live next to two golf courses so I find and play a lot of stray balls. Turns out I have a couple of these Pro V1s in my bag! I do notice the Titlelist and Callaway balls I play usually result in better shots.

Posted

I refuse to pay $47 for a dozen balls. I have always played with cheaper balls. I have never been able to stop a ball on the green. Recently found a few ProV1's and played them, have been able to drop and stop shots into the green, short chips check up nicely. I was never able to do this with any other ball. So now I find deals on ProV's, I play "practice" balls, can tell no difference. Also play he "Black spot" balls if anyone has heard of these, and they are great. Also now I hit cheaper balls off the tee and play the ProV into the green, yes I know this is not officially legal. But I don't play in tournaments and I don't lose very many ProV's this way.

  • Upvote 1

Derrek

Righty in the left trap


Posted
Love pro v1s, can't afford them. If you can find older 3 piece tour balls at the store they can be great deals. I 'm playing Taylormade TP Black LDPs right now. $20/dozen and i get a good penetrating ball flight and good greenside control with them. Would rather play the slightly softer pro v1x but for now the TP blacks are working for my game.

Posted

The Prov1x for my swing has the most stopping power on the green compared to any other ball I have ever played - too much for my 18 HCP and the fact that I am usually short.  I have also driven it very long with a good swing.  It is no doubt an excellent ball for better players, and for some it may be worth the $4/ball.  I find the 2nd tier urethene cover (U/3, Gamer Tour, e5) balls more suited to my game, but if I had a pro's swing I would probably being playing the Prov1 or Prov1x.

I don't buy Titleist's Prov1 marketing campaign, but there is no better (some may be as good) ball for skilled players.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I made a conscious decision to not ever play ProV1s  for fear of loving them, then being stuck playing $4 balls. However, I played in a charity tournament yesterday and hit my ball into a tree. It apparently never came down but I did find a ProV1x while looking. I grabbed the ProV1x and dropped to replay my shot from the original spot (since my first ball was lost) and played it throughout the rest of that hole. When I got to the green ,I had a chip of about 5 yards to the green, with the pin being another 10 yards from the edge of the green. Generally I will land the ball somewhere midway between the edge of the green and the hole and it'll run out a bit and end up pretty close. Not with the Prov1x. That thing landed and stopped, not moving an inch. Holy crap, never stopped a chip like that before. I put it in my bag and did not use it again for the rest of the round. I can't be falling in love with $4 balls. ;-)

  • Upvote 1
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 4234 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

    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).
  • 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.