redi630

Wow, is that a bad attitude or just plain stupid? The White Sox could use a first baseman and they love paying nothing for players, even if that player will give them nothing in return.

Well, I have played with these wedges for a couple of weeks now and, to my surprise, it has been a big adjustment. There are many reasons for this but in regards to the shafts, I believe that the ball flight with these clubs is actually lower than with my old wedges. This is very surprising to me as my sand wedge is now a 58* as opposed to my old SW witch was a 56*. I notice the lower ball flight more on the shorter distances than the longer ones. I think this is especially strange since I have to swing harder do to the fact that the ball spins so much more with the MD grooves. The ball now either checks much quicker than with my old wedges, or it will even spin back a little.

I have been expirementing with this as well. A local pro told me to have my left eye directly over the ball. Stan Utley actually teaches to have your left eye slightly inside the ball. If you were to take your stance over the ball, and hold another ball at your left eye and than let that ball fall to the ground, it should drop just inside of the 1st ball. It has been working for me. As far as feeling "cramped", have you been fitted for your putter. I wonder if it is to long.

Money can't buy happiness, but at least you can choose your own misery.

At least 3 days a week to work on technique. My course doesn't have a range yet so I do not hit balls before my round.

All players except for the player that made the footprint and all other players who played before the footprint was made. That is why I don't see this as equal. It only effects the players that follow the person who makes the footprint...IMO

Fourputt, you need to read better before you post. Yes, which I explained in my post. These are NOT hazards. I didn't say every bunker without a rake is not a hazard. I said at this particuler course, a bunker with out a rake is not a hazard, and I believe that Pine Valley is the same way.

I have never played Pine Valley, but I don't believe the bunkers with out rakes are the same as the bunkers most of you are talking about. I played a course, The Dunes Club, where some sand had rakes and some did not. If the sand did not have a rake, than it was NOT considered a hazard and you were allowed to ground your club. If the trap had a rake, than it was considered a hazard and you could not ground your club. (Most greenside bunkers had rakes and thus were considered hazards) These traps, though, that were not considered hazards, were not your typically fairway bunkers that you see on most courses. They are very large and were really part of the fairway. On a par three, there really wasn't any grass between you and the green. Only sand and some overgrown fescue that you would walk through to get to the green. On par 4's and 5's, these traps would cover the entire width of the hole, from one side to the other, and would be as long as 70 yards. (You never had to play out of these bunkers if you played the hole correctly, but they were there to try and make you play the hole a certain way) Here is a picture I found of a par three at the Dunes club. This picture is taken from the back of the green, facing the tee box's. (The Dunes Club only has 9 greens but has two sets of tee boxes to hit from, one for the front 9 and one for the back. So this picture shows one tee box on the left and one on the right) As you can see, there is sand, and there would not be a rake in this sand, but would you really call it a sand trap? I wouldn't. It's really the fairway between the tee and the green. While I haven't played Pine Valley, I have seen pictures of it and I believe it is the same set up as The Dunes Club. For your typically fairway bunker, there will always be a rake, as it should be.

I really liked this book. It helped my mental part of the game. I haven't read other golf books that tackle the "mental" part of golf so I can't compare it to the Bob Rotella books (which seem to be more popular) but this one really helped my game.

To funny!

Great video! Golf is my only money pit right now. I was getting into white tale deer hunting in the winter but I have lost interest (don't have enough money with a son and another on the way) for now.

I switched to a car from an SUV. My wife still has an SUV though, Trailblazer. It's an extra $160 a month to keep it gased up, and she doesn't drive as much as I do, but we need at least one big car in my family with a kid, another on the way and a dog.

This book was to confusing for me. To many swing thoughts were placed in my head and it actually made me a worse golfer than when I started. I would not recommend this book to a beginner golfer, probably not even an experienced one.

My wedges from 30-115 yards have improved dramatically this year since I read "The Art of the Short Game". I have just started to work on his "chipping" techniques and I am becoming a believer in the teachings in this area as well. It will take me a while to get use to not opening my stance though. I have yet to practice his sand technique yet. I don't know how I will be able adjust to getting out of the sand without opening my stance. Over all, this is a great book with proven techniques that can help everyone's game, whether it be a beginner or experienced player.

I just got the 58* forged with C-Grind. The C-grind refers to the grind on the sole of the club. It allows you to open the club face without adding bounce. This helps you to get under the ball on chip shots. I just received the club last week. My only issue is that the MD grooves tear up my golf ball. It cuts the ball like a knife. Great spin but I am going to go through a lot of golf balls now. I don't really understand the PM (Phill Mickelson) grind. It seams like this sole actually increases the bounce on the club when the club face is opened. I can't think of a situation where I would want more bounce.

For some reason, they do not offer this option on the Callaway website.

What ever works!

I hadn't even heard of the spinner shaft before you mentioned it. I wish I had because I would have liked to try them.

Considering what I have been told about the trajectory, I wounder if you noticed that the lost distance was in the roll of the ball. I mean, if you lost distance with the Rifle shaft, maybe it was because you were hitting the ball higher and were not getting as much roll. I guess I am just trying to verify what I have been told by my rep but it all seems to make sense.

I talked to the rep that sold me the club and he called his Callaway rep. The only difference between the two shafts is that the Project X has a higher kick point which results in a lower trajectory. (I guess that is why Royal Precision came out with a new Project X high launch irons option) That means that with the Rifle Flighted shaft my wedges currently have, the ball will have a higher trajectory. I figure that having a slightly higher trajectory with wedges is a good thing so I am not going to return the club.

I ordered new wedges and they came in today. I ordered the Project X Flighted shaft but there was a screw up somewhere and I received the Rifle Flighted shaft. (I was only charged for the Rifle Flighted) My question, is the Project X shaft worth the up charge? I am not sure if I should just keep these clubs and save the money or if I should go with the upgrade. My Irons are all Project X. Any input would be welcomed!

My regular tee time is 6:45 but I have tee'd off as early as 5 AM.

I officially hate John Daly. I can't believe he shot 2 over for this tournament. His antics (which made him a lovable loser) no longer out weigh his pitiful golf game. I hope he moves to Europe so I don't have to see or hear about his bull***t. I am tired of this buffoon. John Daly...YOU SUCK!

Powerbands are not "sneaker" golf shoes. This is what I would consider a "sneaker" golf shoe.

I like the look of the new Addidas sneaker golf shoe but I play in the morning and my feet would get soaked if I played in those.