B-Con

I just came across this article: http://www.technologyreview.com/view/424278/mathematics-reveals-new-approach-to-the-perfect-putt/ On a flat, gradient surface (ie, no saddlepoints, etc), all equidistant putts have ideal targets that are about the same spot. So you can read your own putt by reading several different putts of the same distance, as they should share a common target point. The paper is from 2 years ago, but it was neat to see analysis behind this approach. I forget where I first read about this approach, I think it was on this forum. Regardless, I've been using it for a while. I've found it particularly useful on mid-short putts where I'm having trouble deciding how much break there is. Mainly just throwing this out there, in case anyone else finds it interesting. :-)

Was hoping to find half-naked photos of TST staff... Left disappointed. ;-)

This is an effective shot? Maybe from a tight lie, but I would think any presence of grass would make dragging the clubhead at least as risky as not.

Just leave it at home for the first couple casual rounds. Or do you literally have to get rid of it (ie, sell it to afford the gap wedge)?

My gear is pretty spread out over several major brands, so I probably have everything covered anyway. Adams, Titleist, Callaway, Ping, and Odyssey are currently in my bag in one way or another. My current visor is Titleist. It was the right colors, so I got it. No need to match anything.

My local course is shorter and has two sets of tees, white and blue. The par-3s are reasonable, two in the 180s, a 130s, and a 150s (from the blues). [url=http://plantationgolf.net/ready-to-play/scorecard]Scorecard link[/url]. Three, play into the wind though and two have very deep greens, so effective yardage on those is 20 more 1/4 of the time.

How do you play the clubs? Which one is least comfortable for you to hit? Least consistent? Least versatile? Least likely to actually be used? Least replaceable during a round if you actually needed it? The simplest advice is to just pull the club that is [i]required[/i] the least often per round. For me, my 3-hybrid is my go-to club on a lot of holes because it's the longest club I'll use off the fairway. My 58* wedge is nice to have, but I only pull it a couple times per round and I can make do with my 52* laid open 80% of the time anyway. I might only have 1 shot per round that I actually [i]needed[/i] it for. I really like having it, but it's probably the club that would go if I needed one to.

I'd give Woods a slight edge. He plays in a few more PGA Tour events per year. (Right now it's 17 events for Woods vs 14 for McIlroy, I believe.)

I have noted that different balls sound different and feel different. [list] [*] Sound tends to range from soft "thuds" in more expensive short-game oriented balls, to sharp "tings" in cheaper/harder distance-oriented balls. [*] Feel tends to range from softer more seemless impact in the more expensive short-game oriented balls to harder more punched impact in the distance-oriented balls. [/list] But I have not noticed any actual difference in performance. I have taken several balls of various types out with me onto putting greens and practiced putting, and I have yet to be able to determine a difference in actual performance. If there is one, I'm not good enough to, side-by-side, tell a difference. If someone were a terrific putter and could control their putts down to the inch consistently, I wouldn't be surprised if one ball traveled an inch farther than another or had 5% less skidding, but I would expect that to only be a very minor deviation in performance, only relevant for a really good player, and probably only noticeable between the extremes of ball types. Part of the problem is that, psychologically, we get primed by our senses to expect some things. When we see and feel a certain kind of impact, we're mentally prepared and probably biased toward observing it. I've heard people say that certain balls seem to go farther/shorter, or roll differently. But people also mess up their assessment of every other type of shot in golf, so I consider such hearsay untrustworthy. :-) I would be open to hearing from a good putter who has conducted extensive side-by-side tests between several ball types and performed some sort of measurements (even if they're just relative to each other). It may not be perfect, but it'd be interesting to hear, and certainly worth more than people comparing balls across different rounds on different days.

When choosing club specs, the goal is to optimize a set of measurements. Your flex, kickpoint, loft, swing-weight, etc, should all work together to produce an optimal combination of launch angle, speed, and spin for the ball. Get on a launch monitor. See what your numbers are. Fitting it can be a bit of an art and I'm certainly no expert, but if you can get some reasonably good measurements you can find some resources (consult a fitter or the Internet) and see how your numbers match up against an optimal set. Generally swing speed is the base constant that others are compared to, so given your swing speed determine if your other measurements are anywhere near where they should be. Less loft on the club is primarily going to lower the launch angle and possibly reduce driver spin. Do your numbers suggest that you get a high enough launch angle? Are you launching it too low? For the record, I think that common wisdom is that players tend to need more loft, and a 9* face is not optimal for most lower swing speeds. I think that the stereotypical golfer who needs a 9* driver is swinging at least 97 MPH with a stiff shaft, but YMMV.

89. I haven't played or practiced much lately, so I was kind of surprised to do decently. Unfortunately, I missed a lot of good GIR opportunities. I think I had three chances to hit the green with a wedge that I just chunked. Driving was decent, though.

You must be new here. Ah, yep. Welcome. We totally think these things are worth 35 pages of meandering conversation. :-)

I thought you could only win the same award once every six months. Did that change?

Whenever different people study the same thing, if they're worth their salt, their results will look similar. One of them has to come first, though, and thus comparisons are inevitable. -- Random thought.