Nemicu

You had me at "store". Let's be realistic - how many rounds of golf do you play inside a store? Likewise, how many shots are with an unknown ball on a mat with a no other "real world" factors taken into account. It's close, or pretty near to - zero. So why put any faith into a simulator system designed to massage your ego which is not related in anyway to how you play golf? If you want an accurate assessment of how a club works for a certain shot at a certain distance, then here are my 3 top tips: 1. Go outside to a golf course. 2. Hit your normal golf ball 3. Look at the ball flight and pace out how far it goes. That is how you play golf - therefore that is how you gauge equipment. And before anybody says: "I can't find a demo club anywhere near me, blah, blah, blah.." - I'm afraid you'll have to endure the element of doubt and confusion that augmented reality provides. Don't make me come round there.

Having served my own country, albeit some time ago, I still have the utmost respect for anyone in the forces worldwide. However, i do find it somewhat strange that the first post to come out of anyone's mouth is a rather gushing review of a chain store. Call me old fashioned, but why not introduce yourself first with a post? And then maybe put your opinion into some sort of context? Like how and why you think their service is excellent and how it compares to others. Just a thought. Call me cynical, but I've seen enough golf forums to know that 3rd party involvement is out there. No offence to you or the OP.

It's going to be a long day

You waited two years for this to be your first post? How many other sleeper accounts does Golfsmith have on here?

The main differences are the Squareback 1 is face balanced and the Squareback 2 has toe hang, or "toe flow". Obviously, the Squareback 2 has a plumbing neck hosel rather than a half bend shaft like the Squareback 1, which in turn gives a full shaft of offset rather than a half shaft of offset with the Squareback 1. The Squareback 2 features a slightly thinner top line, but a slightly thicker cavity than the Squareback 1, but the weights are essentially the same. For a better understanding of how each specific characteristic works or suits your style, refer to the SC putter selection guide here: http://www.scottycameron.com/studio/articles/putter-selection-guide.aspx

You don't say. Apparently, according to Google, "Golf" is also a brand of VW cars. No kidding. And they have the temerity to discuss them online.

I think perhaps the problem is with staff pay. Stores are not really going to hire qualified pros for minimum wage and commission. If you really want to be educated and enlightened in your purchase, then expect that to be reflected in the price you pay. Is it worth paying the extra $10 and getting assessed by a pro? Most people think not - and hence we have to endure sales people like those described in big box stores. We reap what we sow...

Titleist 980F? Phil Mickelson put one back into play briefly last year. Copy cat - I've been using one for years lol. Other Titleists to consider could be the 906F4 and the 909F2 - both excellent fairways and still plenty relevant (and cheap). For easier to use and launch, you can't really go wrong with the Ping G series. G20 would be my pick and plenty around fairly cheap.

Golf Gamebook could be the answer: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/gamebook-live-golf-scorecard/id409307935?mt=8

I would have to respectfully disagree. What about length? What about loft? I've seen enough Trackman readings to know this to be the case - most handicap golfers could get better results simply by switching to a shorter than standard shaft and changing to more loft. The numbers go up simply because they are easier to control. Sure, you might get the odd solid hit from a 45"+ driver which seems to be the norm these days, but overall control suffers as a result. The problem is, the customer (and the OEM) only sees the one good shot that goes further. You're right that higher handicappers are consistently bad, but a lot of that is probably down to their own ignorance rather than poor technique, mainly because nobody really takes into account getting fitted for length FIRST for a driver, then weight, then bend profile, then flex. Only when you are consistently above 1.45 average smash factor (whatever your handicap) can you be considered to be correctly fit for a driver. To the OP - I noticed that you were using a 9* Ping i15 - not really the easiest driver in the world to use IMO and even some better players struggle with it. I would really advise a proper fitting session with a certified pro who could help to connect you with a driver more suited to your ability, swing and needs. FWIW, this is probably not going to be inside a golf superstore or on a golf forum full of anecdotal evidence, conjecture and guesswork either. Just my opinion.

So you smash factor, or more accurately, how efficiently you are hitting the ball - doesn't matter? From my experience, smash factor on drivers is the #1 indicator on whether or not the driver/shaft is a good "fit". Without it, the rest of the numbers are meaningless or at best not a true depiction of what is going on. Personally, I'd put spin at the bottom of the list. Oh - and if it's not a doppler tracking device, I wouldn't have any faith in the data anyway. Don't get me started on LM's in stores.....

As I recall, Pinhawk heads are .370" hosel - this is because parallel tip iron shafts can be tip trimmed to get the desired flex regardless of your desired playing length. Shaft suggestion would be relative to what you like in terms of weight and ball flight - bend point depending on how you load and release the shaft. Without any info about your preference or swing style, it's a complete guess. Anyone can guess, as I'm sure you're aware.

A quick tip for consistency - be more consistent with your set-up. That means getting your grip, stance, ball position and alignment dead on every time. If you can't get a consistent set-up, then it's near impossible to have a consistent swing (or putting stroke). Get your fundamentals down cold and I guarantee your game will improve. I know it sounds boring, but that's the best tip I've ever received and it's kept me in single figures for nearly 30 years. On links course where there are so many other variables, YOU must be the least variable of all the possibilities.

A lot would depend on what shafts you intend using in them. Constant weight? Ascending or descending in weight?. Either way, I would think Pinhawk heads are identical in weight through the set, otherwise you would end up with variable flex. Therefore, just use tip weights to get your desired swing weight if using a set of constant weight shafts. If you have a variable weight shaft through the set, you have bigger problems to achieve a constant swing weight and flex. You can't have it both ways I guess, but then again I don't really hold any water with the constant length set theory. If there really were any credence to it, then a lot more people (maybe pros included) would be using them. Gimmick perhaps? If they work for you though, then thats all that matters.

Here's an interesting thought however - if you look at the ubiquitous Trackman optimal numbers, then not one of them has an optimal smash factor of 1.50. Which begs the question, are they really as optimal as they could be? Anyone who knows anything about fitting knows that hitting the middle of the club face yields the best ball speed. And ball speed is everything.

Well - best of luck. The Nike system looks like a better option for someone to use to store tools in a garage or something like that. The Ping could be converted into a soap box cart with an extra set of wheels lol.

I hate to say it, but other than a casual interest to someone who likes or collects Nike/Ping memorabilia, both items (including the shafts) are pretty much worthless. Anyone who needs a fitting cart probably has an account with Nike or Ping - in which case they get one for free. If you're not an authorised Nike or Ping dealer - why would you need a fitting cart for irons you can't get? The same applies to the shafts - they only work with Nike fitting carts heads. If you don't have the Nike fitting cart heads, then you're screwed. If you DO have fitting cart heads, you're probably an authorised dealer who has a fitting cart and the shafts that go with them already.... ....in which case, you have a two carts that are pretty difficult to sell. No offence, but if you really do buy and sell for a living, then it's best to stick with what you know. Did it not occur to you that any of the residual stock left in a golf store (i.e. left behind because it's not worth anything?) was largely worthless?

Fit your ball around feel first IMO. If you've grown accustomed to how softer balls feel, it can be very difficult to use a firmer ball for putting, chipping and pitching, which are arguably more important than any other aspect of your game. FWIW, 100mph isn't really fast enough to have any compression issues on most golf balls anyway.

Is there any reason why amateurs would not be eligible for the team? Olympic sport always used to be this way. On the other hand, could any pros fit the Olympics around their tour schedule anyway? The Open is close to that date - I would think most top pros would want to play in that rather than an Olympic format.

They were indeed made in 50 degree loft: http://golf.mizunoeurope.com/wedges/mp_t-10/ You may need to keep searching. As with any wedge, it all depends on what you like and how it performs. There are no hard and fast rules to what loft and spacings you have - YOU are the one who has to make it work around your game - pro or not.

I don't really see anything innovative (at least compared to what has been tried before) and I would reiterate my query about "the most innovative putter since 1750" part. Are you serious? Be that as it may, if you or your "friend" believe strongly enough in this product, I wish you the best of luck.

You may recall Mizuno did this comparison some time ago. http://golf.mizunoeurope.com/irons/jpx825/#prettyPhoto

I think you missed my point. If you ignore the number on the bottom of a club, then you essentially have an iron of a specific loft. It will go a specific distance. You're right that most people don't know that there is a difference between irons, but most people don't know that just because it has 6 on the bottom of the club, it doesn't apply or compare to every other 6-iron you've ever hit in your life either. I would reiterate my point - the number written on the club is not a sense of entitlement, therefore if you say it goes longer (or shorter) than you own personal 6-iron, then unless the length, loft, weight, mass distribution, MOI, swing speed and angle of attack are the same, then you have no basis for comparison.

The "most innovative putter since 1750"? Please tell me thats the time and not the date.

Like any club, they either fit the end user or they don't. If they don't match your physique and swing, then you are not making the most out of your equipment. And also like any other club too, the truth is in the results. If you find your shots going one way more often than another, then your lie is wrong. If you are right handed and the toe is up at address, then the chances are the lie is too upright and shots will have a tendency to go left. The shorter irons is where it gets more noticeable. The chances of buying a set of irons and getting them to fit perfectly to your swing and physique are minimal - contrary to whatever you may believe or what any OEM would have you think. Thankfully, forged irons like Scratch are a doodle to alter for loft and lie. If the shafts are too long, short, too heavy, too stiff, too flexible - then you have bigger problems. If you get fit, then you have one less thing to worry about.