Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 3371 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

Product Name: Tee Claw
Product Type: Practice Equipment
Product Website/URL: teeclaw.com
Cost: $9.99 - $14.95 (various retailers)

Ratings (out of 5):
Quality: 5
Value: 5
Effectiveness: 4
Durability: 5
Esthetic Appeal: 5

 

My Member Review

I spend a lot of time hitting off of mats at local golf ranges.  The ranges aren't very well maintained, rubber tees often are stolen, destroyed or hit out onto the range so finding a mat with a decent rubber tee is often a challenge.  I always carried my own but it would sometimes get awkward as people would think I was stealing them when I was done practicing.  I liked the idea behind the Tee Claw and was looking forward to testing it because if it worked well it would solve my problem of finding mats with rubber tees.  

I first tested the Tee Claw at my instructors store, he uses a GC2 Smart Camera System with standard indoor mats.   The Tee Claw secured nicely to the mat but because the mat he uses is quite large, there was not a easy place to secure the anchor cord.  We ended up connecting two anchor cords together and attaching them to my shoe which worked well.  

The Tee Claw design prevents the tee from going into the carpet which means you will likely need to use tees that are shorter than the ones you would on a course.  I basically used the tee I'd use with my fairway woods with my driver and the ones I use with my hybrids with my woods.  I was unable to find a tee length that was short enough to work with my hybrids but I probably tee the ball lower than most people.  We eventually cut a tee that had just enough stem to fit into the tee claw and that worked okay.  

Once we had the right tee heights set, using the Tee Claw with my different clubs worked very well.  I like the idea of using the same tees I do on the course when I practice.  The Tee Claw held into my instructors carpet very well.  On the few times it came loose (mostly due to hitting the ball fat), the anchor cord attached to my shoe kept if from getting too far away.  It worked as you would expect with tees, sometimes you would pick the ball off clean and the tee and Tee Claw remained intact, other times the tee would fly out  or break but the Tee Claw remained attached to the carpet.  I left one with my instructor who liked it a lot and will probably start to use it in place of rubber tees.  His feedback is that most of his clients preferred it to rubber tees once they figured out the right tee length to use with it.  

I then took the Tee Claw to a local indoor simulator facility.  The simulators are used for multiple sports (hockey, football, soccer, baseball, dodge ball) which all require the person to stand in the middle of the floor.  Keeping a rubber tee in the middle of the floor is not possible so they have been experimenting with different tee options to solve the problem.  The issue they had with some of the solutions they tested is that the device would shoot backwards or around the room.  There was a risk someone outside the simulator could get hit with it and they kept losing the devices.  They liked the idea that the Tee Claw could be anchored to a shoe, as that would not only prevent loss but also reduce risk of someone outside the simulator getting hit in the eye.  The Tee Claw worked just like it did at my instructors store and going forward I think the Sim Company will become a good customer of Tee Claw. I left them one of the three that was included in the box so they could continue testing it.  

My last test yesterday at my local outdoor range.  The mats my local outdoor range uses are different than the mats at the indoor locations.  What I found was that it was more difficult to screw the Tee Claw all the way down into the mat like I could with the indoor mats.  This created two problems, 1) The tee height was a little higher than it was on the indoor mats and what I prefer.  2) The Tee Claw always detached from the mat from a strike.  I was able to anchor the Tee Claw to the underside of the mat so it never left the mat but it was a bit cumbersome to constantly re-secure the Tee Claw into the mat then insert the tee.  The problem is the thickness of the mats which prevents the Tee Claw from screwing all the way down into it.  I used the Tee Claw for about 40 shots and was impressed that despite being detached from the carpet  every time, the plastic tabs did not break.  

Overall, I think the Tee Claw is a great product that will always be in my practice bag.  I gave it 5's for everything except "Effectiveness" only because I had some issues with the outdoor mats and people will have to customize their tees so they are the same height with the Tee Claw and what they expect on the course.  I appreciate Tee Claw and TST for providing me with the opportunity to test it.  

  • Upvote 1

Joe Paradiso

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Posted

Did you use the lanyards and Tee Claws to create any alignment lines, clubhead path lines, etc.?

It does a lot more than hold a tee on a mat.

  • Upvote 1

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 7 months later...
Note: This thread is 3371 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

    • Day 470 - 2026-01-13 Got some work in while some players were using the sim, so I had to stick around. 🙂 Good thing too, since… I hadn't yet practiced today until about 6:45 tonight. 😛 
    • That's not quite the same thing as what some people messaged me today.
    • Day 152 1-12 More reps bowing wrists in downswing. Still pausing at the top. Making sure to get to lead side and getting the ball to go left. Slow progress is better than no progress.  
    • Yea, if I were to make a post arguing against the heat map concept, citing some recent robot testing would be my first point. The heat map concept is what I find interesting, more on that below. The robot testing I have looked at, including the one you linked, do discreet point testing then provide that discrete data in various forms. Which as you said is old as the hills, if you know of any other heat map concept type testing, I would be interested in links to that though! No, and I did say in my first post "if this heat map data is valid and reliable" meaning I have my reservations as well. Heck beyond reservations. I have some fairly strong suspicions there are flaws. But all I have are hunches and guesses, if anyone has data to share, I would be interested to see it.  My background is I quit golfing about 9 years ago and have been toying with the idea of returning. So far that has been limited to a dozen range sessions in late Summer through Fall when the range closed. Then primarily hitting foam balls indoors using a swing speed monitor as feedback. Between the range closing and the snow flying I did buy an R10 and hit a few balls into a backyard net. The heat map concept is a graphical representation of efficiency (smash factor) loss mapped onto the face of the club. As I understand it to make the representation agnostic to swing speed or other golfer specific swing characteristics. It is more a graphical tool not a data tool. The areas are labeled numerically in discrete 1% increments while the raw data is changing at ~0.0017%/mm and these changes are represented as subtle changes in color across those discrete areas. The only data we care about in terms of the heat map is the 1.3 to 1.24 SF loss and where was the strike location on the face - 16mm heal and 5mm low. From the video the SF loss is 4.6% looking up 16mm heal and 5mm low on the heat map it is on the edge of where the map changes from 3% loss to 4%. For that data point in the video, 16mm heal, 5mm low, 71.3 mph swing speed (reference was 71.4 mph), the distance loss was 7.2% or 9 yards, 125 reference distance down to 116. However, distance loss is not part of a heat map discussion. Distance loss will be specific to the golfers swing characteristics not the club. What I was trying to convey was that I do not have enough information to determine good or bad. Are the two systems referencing strike location the same? How accurate are the two systems in measuring even if they are referencing from the same location? What variation might have been introduced by the club delivery on the shot I picked vs the reference set of shots? However, based on the data I do have and making some assumptions and guesses the results seem ok, within reason, a good place to start from and possibly refine. I do not see what is wrong with 70mph 7 iron, although that is one of my other areas of questioning. The title of the video has slow swing speed in all caps, and it seems like the videos I watch define 7i slow, medium, and fast as 70, 80, and 90. The whole question of mid iron swing speed and the implications for a players game and equipment choices is of interest to me as (according to my swing speed meter) over my ~decade break I lost 30mph swing speed on mine.
    • Maxfli, Maltby, Golfworks, all under the Dicks/Golf Galaxy umbrella... it's all a bit confounding. Looking at the pictures, they all look very, very similar in their design. I suspect they're the same club, manufactured in the same factory in China, just with different badging.  The whacky pricing structure has soured me, so I'll just cool my heels a bit. The new Mizuno's will be available to test very soon. I'm in no rush.  
×
×
  • 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.