Blades4me

No, I am not ball loyal and wil change during my round. I play everthing from tour level balls to Laddie Extrems, however I will not play Top Flight or Callaway Warbirds, just too hard IMO. I haven't found that the ball makes that big, if any difference in my scoring. Since most of my chipping is dead handed there is little difference between the balls on the green for me.

B-stone does make good irons and I would agree every bit as good as Mizuno or Titleist. They, as you mentioned are huge in Asia & Hawaii and slowly gaining popularity over here. However they are "clicky" compared to Titleist and even more so compared to Mizuno. Does this affect the playability, in no way does it interfer. Its just a matter of what type of "feel" you like. You can "soften" them up a little with different shafts, but they will never be as "buttery" as Mizuno, and "yes" I am a Mizuno fan. The above is just my opinion and not written in stone.

After listening to some pro's and IMO I don't think you will get as much "distance" out of being able to spin the ball back as you think. Everything I've read and heard about this sez that you have more control with roll out than spinning the ball back. A lot of pro's have said that they don't like the spin back b/c its too hard to control and the only reason it happens is cuz of their higher club head speeds, and as you know, they have some serious club head speed. I have enough club head speed that I can get the ball to take 2-3 hops and then sit down. Not my favorite shot cuz if I blow it the ball is over the green and its not as accurate for me as using roll out. I'm sure there are situations where this shot would be good, but those are usually few and far between.

Both Mizuno and Titleist are excellent irons, it just depends on what kind of feel you like or are looking for. IMO, you can't go wrong with either. Having said that, I prefer Mizuno's.

My suggestion would be to get the most inexpensive balls right now cuz you will be loosing lots of balls. Percept Laddie Extrems are good and they were 20 bux for 1.5 doz. Or, as you play look for balls and just play the balls you find. I'd put more emphasis on getting the basics down before worrying about what ball to play.

fourputt I've done PFT's (pulmonary function test) on ppl who smoked cigarettes, (which as you pointed out there are a lot of) and ppl who just smoked pot, or at least the ones who would admit it. The PFT's of the smokers were noticablly worse than the other group; IMO b/c ppl who smoke cigarettes smoke way more than ppl who smoke marijuana. They both have there malidies, but from what I've seen so far the ciagette malidies far out weigh the malidies of marijuana. One thing all of the "experts" do agree on is that there needs to be more studies done and I would add to that OBJECTIVE studies.

I don't know if they still do, but the cigarette companies did indeed add nicotine to their cigarettes. What we have found out about nicotine is that it is more addictive than heroin. That is why the cigarette companies added nicotine, to get more smokers. That worked very effectively. In my mind the cigarette companies have committed worse crimes than many drug pushers b/c they knew cigarette smoking was addictive, knowingly added more nicotine to pump up the bottom line and generally added to a unhealthy life style, but kept saying that there weren't any health problems associated with smoking. Now if one wasn't around before the 80's I can see how this paragraph would be questionable. Having been a respiratory therapist for the last 34 years I can say without a doubt that I've seen a lot more damage from cigaettes than marijuana, that isn't to say that there isn't any damage done from marijuana. This is the 3rd demension and a demension of attrition; everything and I mean everything comes with a price/consequences. So it seems to me that its more of a question of, "are you willing to deal with the consequences"?

How very refreshing to read this. That is what it used to be like back in the day when people actually knew what the word integrity meant. Good on ya mate!

I buy whatever tour quality ball I can get for the least amount of money. Right now that would be Niki Tours.

I'll take shorts.

I've play with guys who's drives aren't more than 220 yds, but the closer to the green they get, the more dangerous they become. Distance is way overrated and accuracy just doesn't seem to get much respect. I do agree that keeping the ball in play is critical to good scoring.

For me, here in the northwest its usually 1 club difference, sometimes 2.

If I can hit my long irons and 3 metal good the driver usually isn't a problem. When it is, I grip down a little, flatten out the swing, slow down my take away and just concentrate on a full swing. When that doesn't work I do what you do and go to my 3 metal. Since it is a 12.5* 3 metal it goes almost as far as my driver when hit well. Personally I don't think I'd let the driver inconsistency bother you. You still seem to score well and I'd bet that the driver thing is just a blip. When it starts to affect the scoring, then its serious. Until then just a inconvience. Call me crazy, but I don't see where driving has that big of an effect on putting.

What makes a club forgiving is 1) loft, the more loft the more forgiving, 2) more off set, to make up for a poor swing--this is a band aid not a swing fix, 3) perimeter weighting and 4) more weight down low on the sole of the club. There may be more, those are the ones I'm aware of. It is always a good idea to get fitter for your clubs regardless of your skill level. Of course there are those who would say, "if you want forgivness, go to church"--a little humor.

Swing speed is a function of rhythm & tempo. So rhythm & tempo are FAR more important that swing speed.

I'll take Johnny, the rest are PC pukes. Yeah Johnny is such a poor golf commentator. Thats why NBC has had him do the golf for some many years.

WOW, those are some nice legs. I've never thought that Paula Cramer had great legs, but I like the total package.

I too, seem to be helplessly addicted to my Mizuno irons. I was like a lot of ppl who had heard of the "budda" feeling of Mizuno irons, but had no idea what that felt like. I thought that the ppl who posted how buttery soft they felt where high on something. Then I made up a combo set of 60's & 32's and found out what they all meant by the buttery soft feel of mizuno when pured. I have different sets of irons and will play them, but when it comes right down to it, I'll take my Mizzy's.

Who's paranoid? I always hang out in the darkest cornor of my closet, put tin foil in all of my windows and watch out for the little grays. And I just got a message from the "celestrials" that the mother ship will arrive in Roswell NM on 12/21/2012. I wonder if they have golf?

LOL, from what I remember the 70's were a lot of fun. The sad thing was that in the 70's we JOKINGLY said, "party til you puke" and in the 80's it seemed they took it serious.

They were athletes back then also. Sam Snead wanted to be a pro football player and was very good, but got injured. He switched to golf. Hale Irwin went U of C on a football scholarship. Most of the players of old had a athletic back ground and either got injured or washed out and went to golf. It was also considered a old mans game back then. And lets not forget about Gary Player, who was the original one to work out for golf b/c, as he said, "I had to keep up with Arnie & Jack". IMO, the biggest difference from then and now is that the players of today are more complete. It used to be they were either "boomers" or "putters". Jack was probably the most complete, but his short game was his weak point, however when you are that accurate with long, mid irons and putting I can see why he wasn't a really good short game guy. About 6 or 7 years ago Tiger said, "can you imagine what golf would be like with the talent of ppl like Bo Jackson or Deon Sanders?" Now it is happening. I was watching Gary Woodland this last weekend; I can't remember what hole, but he tee'd off with a 2i and hit it 284 yds! Holy Sh*t, thats a really good drive for me. In the end though, I do agree that the competition is starting to get pretty feirce on tour. I like to see it.

I've found the NV green stiff to be a good, stable standard shaft. IMO their stiff isn't as stiff as other graphite stiff shafts and I get a nice high ball flight with the ones I've used. I'm think'n that if you have a quick transition and or tempo that this shaft mite not be able to keep up. So, I'd suggest play'n it for awhile and see what you think.

I'm from the school that sez, "if you are hitting it good and can control the ball, who the hell cares what shaft it is!". With that said, I too have been told by ppl in the business that "co engineered" shafts aren't the same as the same after market shaft, but if tipped ~1" they will play very close to the same after market shaft. I was told that the reason for this was that the OEM's felt that when they did that they were able to fit a broader group of ppl. Makes sense to me.

Bridgestone from J33 irons on have been excellent. IMO they are too "clicky" for me, but that has nothing to do with playability and everything to do with my idosyncrascies.

I agree with that and would say until one is at least a fairly consistent ball striker spinning or PURing won't matter. I'd put that at around a 12 hc; so IMO from 12 hc down it will help at little. Where it helps is in the dispersion of the ball. Generally, after spining or PUREing the ball dispersion will be tighter. I've found DG and PX spines to be all over the place, very noticable to subtle. KBS spines are very subtle. Spining will get you in the "ball park", PUREing/SST will get you box seats. Personally I spine b/c it is very inexpensive and easy to build a spinning unit; (go on the internet and type in "shaft spining"). If I buy a graphite shaft from Golfsmith, I'll have it sst/PUREd. The same applies to the launch monitor, which is, until one has a fairly consistent swing neither of these 2 things will do anything.