• Announcements

    • iacas

      Visit FlagstickRule.com   03/13/2017

      Visit the site flagstickrule.com to read about and sign a petition for the USGA/R&A regarding the one terrible rule in the proposed "modernized" rules for 2019.


Established Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


1badbadger last won the day on April 7

1badbadger had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

216 First-Ballot Hall of Famer

1 Follower

About 1badbadger

  • Rank
    Dedicated Member
  • Birthday 01/03/1967

Personal Information

  • Your Location
    Dallas/Ft. Worth

Your Golf Game

  • Handicap Index
  • Handedness

Recent Profile Visitors

2,254 profile views
  1. That's no joke. Between Blackwolf Run, Whistling Straights, Erin Hills and other strong public courses like University Ridge, Trappers Turn, SentryWorld and others, it's pretty good. I read the whole story on how Erin Hills came to be...holy crap, it's like a Greek tragedy. There is heartbreak, intrigue, high stakes business deals, murder, triumph, defeat...it was one of the most interesting things about the development of a golf course I have ever read: http://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/golf/2017-us-open/2017/05/05/making-erin-hills-part-1-most-perfect-site/100024980/
  2. The site of the 2017 U.S. Open is near my old stomping grounds...I was born about 30 min. away from where Erin Hills was eventually built. I moved from that area long before the course was even planned, so I've never been there or played it or anything, but I learned some interesting things this evening. I have a good friend up there who works for a limo/shuttle company, and he has been driving people from Madison, Milwaukee and O'Hare to Erin Hills for several days, and he made several comments on how remote the golf course is. It might not be exactly in the middle of nowhere, but apparently a short drive would get you there. There is only one way in, and one way out. And these are country roads, not four-lane highways. They announced this site would host the U.S. Open in 2010...seven years ago, and they couldn't get a better road system in place? I thought that was one of the things that they took into consideration when they scout potential sites? It sounds like this course was earmarked to host USGA events before it was even built, so if they set out to design a course that would one day host a major, why wouldn't the road infrastructure be included? Anyway, the course itself is a monster...or at least can be, when the stretch it out. From the blacks it plays 7,800 yds, but it looks like it will play about 7,700 during the tournament. All four par 5s are over 600 yds, two par 4s are over 500 yds, and two others are over 480. This is the first time in many years the course will play to a par of 72, which actually gives the guys a chance to make up some ground.
  3. I think the biggest issue is when you used the term "hodge podge"...I don't know if I've ever heard anyone outside of my family say that, so you're either from the Midwest or we're somehow related! As far as your question on single length irons, I think it's one of those things that looks great on paper, but in real life there are some issues. I don't think it's totally without merit, and I think it will work for some players, but I don't expect it to become a mainstream concept that will challenge conventional methods (Natural Golf comes to mind) If you're interested in experimenting, by all means do so. Just don't sell your current set of irons yet!
  4. There are several statements that I disagree with which I feel are important to discuss: All golf balls do not go about the same distance. A low compression, 2-piece Surlyn covered model will launch higher and with less spin than a 5-piece, high compression urethane covered model which will result in a noticeable difference in distance off the tee. Dean even stated in another answer "The soft golf ball market has taken off due to the lower spinning balls means players can be longer in distance." Regarding balls for different swing speeds and compression: 3) Bridgestone (and I think Callaway) has come out with tour caliber balls for players who swing under 105mph. Is it possible to design a tour caliber ball for a specific segment of swing speed or is this just mostly a marketing thing? DEAN: The whole swing speed story to me is one of the most over-rated stories in golf. Companies force or teach golfers to play low compression balls so their low swing speed can compress the ball. The problem with this is that low compression balls have the lowest spin in all shots, so they are pushing players to play a ball with no performance at all… and when you need that spin around the green, it's not there… I almost don't know where to start on this one. The concept of designing golf balls based on swing speeds doesn't teach or force players to use a low compression ball...it's about using a ball that has the appropriate compression for your swing speed. Some players will have better results with a higher compression ball, others will have better results with a lower compression. Keep in mind, there is a difference between "lower compression" and "low compression". Most of the urethane tour balls have a compression rating somewhere between the mid 70s to mid 90s. Tour models like the Chrome Soft, B330-RX and B330-RXS are in the mid 60s, which is lower. Balls like the Supersoft and e6 are in the upper 30s and 40s, which is considered low. Dean's statement that "low compression balls have the lowest spin on all shots" is somewhere between a little misleading and flat-out wrong. It's true that a lower compression ball will spin less (and launch higher) than a firmer ball on full shots. But on short game shots around the green, the ball is not compressed. On pitch shots, chip shots, and greenside bunker shots for example, the only part of the ball that is being activated is the cover. Notice on this chart that the lowest compression ball is very close to the highest spinning, and the lowest spinning ball has almost the same compression rating! The point is, compression has little to no affect on short game shots...the cover is the main factor. All 4 of these models have a urethane cover, but the two that provide the most spin have softer covers. To put this in context, the chart below was a test Golf Digest did in 2015 which shows the performance on a partial wedge shot (I think it was 40 yds) with most of the balls on the market at the time The different colors represented the price point. These results don't match the first chart I posted exactly which can happen when player testing (this one shows the B330 has higher spin than the RXS). Is there a difference between the lower spinning "red dots" and the highest spinning? Sure. There should be though. Golf balls are designed to have different types of performance for different types of players. The B330-RX has the lowest spin among the red dot models, but that doesn't mean it's lacking in performance...it spins exactly how the ball designers intended it to, because not everyone wants/needs maximum spin. Notice the e7...this is a high compression ball very comparable to the B330, but has very different spin characteristics. So again, higher compression doesn't mean higher spin around the green and lower compression doesn't necessarily mean low spin. About the only thing that I could agree with Dean's comment on would be that all the ultra-low compression balls are Surlyn covered models designed for distance, so it's true that these balls have low spin on all shots and will not offer the same level of performance around the greens, but again, that has more to do with the cover than the compression. The fact is, there are lower compression balls that perform at the highest level. The B330-RXS is the same type of ball as the Pro V1 in many respects, and performs just as well as, or even better for many players, so I'm surprised by his comments that fitting for swing speed is over-rated and lower compression balls have no performance. That's like saying getting fit for the correct shaft flex is over-rated, and softer flex shafts don't perform as well as stiffer shafts! Does anyone consider the Dynamic Gold S-300 to be a lower performing shaft than the Dynamic Gold X-100? No, of course not. They are designed to do the same thing, but because some players don't swing as fast as others the softer flex will give them better results, just like the B330-RXS is the equal to the B330-S, but will fit players who don't swing as hard better. I'm also not on-board with the opinion that fitting with a driver is a "mistake" and when testing to choose a ball based on 100 yds and in. I'm not saying that short game performance isn't important, but wow...to claim that testing with a driver is a mistake is ridiculous. I'll make a simple point on this...anyone can hit good wedge shots with a Pro V1 or B330 or Z-Star. Fast swingers, slower swingers, high handicappers, low handicappers...it doesn't matter, they can all get good results on wedge shots. Does that mean that's the ball they should play, and it will work equally as well for the other aspects too? No. A wedge can mask any issues in performance because of the loft and backspin, but the driver exaggerates issues. The same players who hit respectable wedge shots with various tour balls might struggle to keep shots in play or lose potential distance. And before anyone tries to use the old "the driver is used 14 times a round, but half of the shots are inside of 100 yds" argument...save it. If you play a high spin ball and you're struggling to hit the fairway with your tee shots, that ball will not help you save shots around the green. Too much spin for players who can't control it is worse than a lower spinning model. Sorry Dean...not trying to blast you or anything, just putting in my two cents. Ok, maybe more like four cents!
  5. What gets under my skin, which is loosely related to losing a ball in the fairway is piping a drive down the middle and having the ball kick into the rough because the fairways are crowned. There is a course in Austin which was notorious for this. It was a nice track otherwise. It's one thing to not be rewarded for hitting a good shot, but it's another to be penalized for hitting a good one.
  6. This happens all the time...the little one wanted to play through, and the big one wouldn't let him, so the little one gets mad and hits into him, and it turns into a fight. Either that or they were playing a $20 Nassau and the little one was down and kept pressing but lost and couldn't pay up. Quote of the day: "The little one ain't that smart!"
  7. Good point. I would bet that most folks don't know that though, so it's good that you mentioned it. The trajectory can be adjusted on most new drivers, but the loft really cannot be changed. I'll tell you what...if these type of adapters become common on iron sets and other clubs, I'm going to have to find another line of work! No one will need an equipment tech or club builder anymore!
  8. I think a big reason for the distance creep in shaft length is because they have continued to make them lighter and lighter, so the extra length is needed to keep the swingweight up. I agree that a shorter length driver is better, but when you go from a 130g shaft like the Dynamic Gold to a 50g graphite, that's an 80g difference which is about 8-9 swingweight points. So from a manufacturer's perspective, how do you get the swingweight back up without making the head heavier? Make the shaft longer. And before you know it, drivers are 46-46.5" long! Is this the best for most players? I don't think so, but in terms of how it happened, this would be why.
  9. When working with a new adjustable driver, I always recommend starting with it in the stock neural position. Before you start ripping drives onto the range, warm up with shorter clubs first, and work your way up to the driver, otherwise your initial shots won't provide the best feedback. If you still have your previous driver and hit it fairly well, take it along too. If for some reason you just can't seem to hit the new one, you can hit a few shots with your old driver to determine if you're not swinging well or if it's the club. If the neutral setting isn't producing the ball flight you are looking for, then make the smallest adjustment in the appropriate direction and hit some more shots. You should be able to get a pretty good idea in about 3-5 shots (not including any obvious mishits). The "U" setting probably stands for "upright", which will have a draw bias. Never make more than 1 adjustment at a time to a golf club when dialing it in, otherwise you won't know which adjustment influenced the change in ball flight, whether it's good or bad. The cool thing about the new drivers is you can't screw up too bad...worst case scenario is you set it to neutral and start over!
  10. Range balls are designed to be durable first and foremost, whereas pro-line balls are designed to perform a certain way. Some range balls are "limited flight" for situations where the range isn't very deep. It allows players to warm up even if their shots are not the normal distance. Range balls tend to be lower spinning off of all clubs, especially compared to urethane covered "tour" type balls. They usually have a pretty high compression rating, because lower compression balls won't stand up to the type of action that range balls are subjected to.
  11. I would suggest going with a new, prior generation model rather than the pre-owned/refurbished option. Golf balls recovered from water hazards will not perform as well as a new ball. The loss in performance will vary from one ball to the next also, even if they look like they are in almost new condition.
  12. Yeah, the Sasquatch was not only loud, but it was a horrible sound. Silly me for thinking the big reason no one would play it was because it's square. Although personally I'm not concerned with a driver causing damage to my hearing, I do think some models are too loud and/or don't sound good. There is no question that sound affects feel, so an unpleasant sounding driver probably will not feel very good either. Drivers that sound like an aluminum softball bat drive me nuts.
  13. If you still have your previous set, you can compare them to the new set to see what the differences are. Check the basic specs: length, lie angle, swingweight, shaft flex and shaft weight. I'll bet at least one of these is noticeable different, or maybe more. Shafts do not lose their stiffness over time. If anything, steel shafts actually get stiffer, but we're talking about over 30-40 years. Based on your comments, the shaft flex or swingweight are what I would look at first.
  14. Yes, this is actually a real thing. Cotton balls will dampen the sound, and don't weigh enough to change the dynamics of the club. The driver has to have a removable weight screw to access the inside of the head though.
  15. I will echo what @MrDC mentioned about bounce...there are many 54* wedges out there, and the amount of bounce will vary. Talk to your pro about the main job this wedge will be used for, and ask him for a recommendation for bounce. For example, if you happen to get a low bounce wedge and it's to be used for bunker shots in fluffy sand, you'll struggle. The bounce/sole grind will make a big difference in how your wedge performs in its role in your bag.