mchepp

Fundamentally I agree with your comment, however,the difference is not only time, but money. Paying for a golf membership at a club is a monthly subscription that is a decent amount of a families income. The more kids you have, then it becomes a larger percentage of your families budget is going to golf. Also with a club, even if you don't play you pay. During busy family periods my friend might only play once a month, that means he was basically paying to play Pebble Beach at his home club. He has quit and plays public clubs or he gets invites to many clubs through friends. He doesn't have the weight of the monthly payment for golf and when has time he enjoys his hobbies. This topic was started about a private club. I think that was the thought behind many of the comments of kids vs. golf.

Someone needed some zen gardening time.

I know for me the amenities make a difference when discussing this kind of decision with my wife. My current club is a 15-20 minutes (one way) longer drive now, but it has a par 3 course I can take the kid and wife out to play, and it also has a pool which my kid really likes. So after a round I meet them at the pool and we get some relaxing summer weekend afternoons with a happy family. I have my eye on the closer club, but unless my kid gets really serious about golf I am going to stay put. Let me add, that just about every dad I know when adding the 2nd kiddo, has typically relinquished their membership. I think the 2nd makes things tougher. I am certain there are families that manage but most of my friends haven't been able to. I am saying this not to depress you, but recommend you give it a year before making any kind of decision.

This is just my opinion, ultimately @iacas is right, you need to get yourself an instructor, but in addition to that, I think you need to treat your improvement like a struggling business. If you had a struggling business you would decide on a path you wanted to take to make it better. So not only set a goal, but then measure yourself on how your practice is improving it. If you felt iron play was where you are struggling, then measure your average distance from the hole and along with your instructor see if you are improving to decide if you are working on the right things. I find when I start doing this, some of the other pieces of my game start to get better.

Thank you @Shorty and @Vinsk for the replies. I have nothing to do with the company and I have never spoken to them. I just have an interest in different or potentially disruptive business models. For starters I think a company like this could save money simply because of the direct to consumer model versus buying in a pro shop. Most shops add anywhere from 30-50% of margin (that's my estimate). That can be eliminated. Snell for example shows that a high performance ball can be made affordable when 3 conditions are met: The consumer buys in bulk No money for marketing Selling direct to consumers For example I have purchased gloves from this company Cartur and found them to be as good as any high performance golf glove I have found on the market. $15 for what would easily cost me $25 in a shop. So I agree that there are other great gloves on the market at affordable prices. My thought was that a subscription might be a way around the buying in bulk part of the equation. Potentially by having a "guaranteed" income stream of the subscription they can avoid making me buy 4-5 at a time. I might misplace the 5 or as said leave it out in the sun, whatever. I could save money and have a regular cadence of gloves in the same way that I am controlling now by buying 5 at a time. I am sure they will have a non-subscription model, but I doubt they survive fighting that battle.

Can you share why you feel this way?

Initially I was opposed to the idea of a subscription. However, I respect that without that model they really have no way of standing out. They are pushing a fashion model, which is fine, but lets be real, it's a glove. The majority of golfers (men) aren't really fashion accessory gurus. They also have discussed a buy one, give one to youth, which is very admirable, but hasn't proven to be a model that causes people of buy more...anything. So the main difference, is to make it easy for the consumer. Remove the need to drive to the golf store or buying a glove when you get to the golf shop. There needs to be some uniqueness added to the subscription. For a big part of the US the season is 6-9 months long and they won't need gloves in January. So they will need to be creative. I think there is a possibility it could work. Subscriptions for consumables can work, but it will need to be creative.

In my opinion you should reshaft the whole set. I think that some of the newer shafts on the market do a better job helping us (to put it nicely) less skilled golfers out more. Shafts like True Temper Elevate or Nippon Modus, do a nice job blending the benefits of weight and ball flight like graphite and the consistency that steel provides.

My home club has a decent scorecard. I like the simplicity of the cover, although our logo is a whole different conversation. It has always been awful. They now have another one since this one and it is even worse. A bad cartoon version of a tree. The inside has plenty of room for the 4-some and ability for tracking different games. Maybe even a few too many. I give it a 6.

@DaveP043 How about sizing? Like you typically wear a Medium and this was a medium and fit the same?

I'll admit being intrigued to see how a subscription glove service works. My current strategy is to utilize many gloves and rotate them. This could be a solution where I just get a new one every few months. I am also interested to see the pictures you share. I will say though, I am not impressed with the marketing campaign so far. It seems a little disjointed. Maybe the owners have regular jobs also. That would probably explain it.

Great recommendation here. Hunter Ranch is a great choice.

Hi there, we just did that drive a few months ago over the Christmas holiday. We stayed in Redding both ways. I would recommend staying in Sacramento on the way down and Redding on the way back. Sacramento gets you closer for the second leg. Redding to Palm Springs is a trek on the way there, just felt like we were driving forever. Also Sacramento has a number of golf courses. My recommendation would be Haggin Oaks, and if your willing to get a little off the beaten track I've heard Granite Bay is nice (not played it). On the way back Fresno might have some golf offerings. Maybe @Golfingdad could recommend one there. A better golfing choice would be the 101, of course that would be a MUCH longer drive.

This is what it is all about right here!

I think S&T was the first to say a few things that most instruction did not. They were the first (that I saw anyways) to change what we think of as fundamentals. Forever before everyone considered fundamentals to be grip, stance, grip pressure, etc and they were the first to say no, there isn't a strong commonality among good players. They were the first to refer to extension and flexion so that we were discussing human movement properly. Another was, popular instruction for my childhood was keeping the flex in your trail knee. They showed that was nonsense and I think that has been adopted almost universally now. You could argue that most of this was Mac's material, but they were the first to be discussing it openly. Sure you could argue that all of this was already known, but they did question things that popular instruction of the time considered fact. And there were a number of things they were right about. Did you work on things specifically recommended by a S&T instructor ideally in person? Hard to know why it didn't work for you, but I saw many students at S&T camps hit very long towering golf shots.

I do remember for a period of time, this forum, and many others were discussing S&T. I believe that @iacas like most smart instructors studied it, found the good pieces and continued to evolve what he teaches. Most smart people do this. I also feel that S&T was so popular on the forums because the hype at the time was very strong, but there was really only the Golf Digest article telling people about the "new" swing on the PGA Tour. With so little information we all went to forums to find out more. Then the schools started, then the book, and it has more or less reached a steady state now. I still see a few good instructors taking the good pieces and improving students. And to be fair it wasn't only Wi, Baddeley was another talked about. Personally, I think Erik's ability to absorb information like this, take the good pieces and then help the rest of us is what makes this place so great. He can sniff out a waste of time incredibly fast.

I voted to ban it, although I don't think it is essential to do so right away. I did not understand the original ban of anchoring to the body versus anchoring to your arm. Yes I know the argument that it is not fixed, but why not have just done away with any type of anchoring. I feel this would have been a cleaner break rather than let this unique case run on only to get banned later.

What about: 18. You have strange desire to find a bathtub in nature.

Love this. This now becomes #11. 11. Prefers to just prattle on, without actual discourse

Without a face on, we are guessing, but counter to your point is both JT and Rose have very different right elbow positions than @IU426. Both are much more inside their shirt seem. To be fair @IU426 is also wearing a black shirt in a darkish room so I can't be sure. But JT's right elbow is in a much better position.

Some additional point gathering metrics are: (in no particular order) 1. Creation of new accounts to say you are a student of said crazy theory as a "testimonial" 2. After being banned returning as a new account only slip back into your old ways and get outed. 3. (Recently added) Blur portions of your swing pictures to hide the fact that you have already posted them in the past 4. Be a poor speller (why are they so often poor spellers?) 5. Garage videos 6. Complain that aren't being treated by the forum fairly 7. Move around forums thinking the other one will be more accepting of theory (to be fair this used to be easier when so many forums were popping up) 8. Using bad camera angles to further your theory 9. Say specialists (neuroscientists, biochemists, etc) agree with you. 10. Start out extremely friendly, then transition to frustrated/angry, then irate, then downright nasty.

Leave it to @GolfLug to have the most fancy fan I have ever seen. But what I really wanted to ask is how is the piano going?

I have nothing to add about your swing, but what is going on with that fan?

Hmm, this is an interesting scale, the GSGC. I am now so interested in your rating of such gems as Jeff Mann or the closed shoulder swing guy. If anyone can be a 10 on such a scale it must be Jeff Mann.

Typically I would ask you for a face on video also. Just allows people to confirm things they see down the line. For starters I agree with @Yossarian that you need to read @mvmac's thread on posture. The other big thing I see is you get to about here in your backswing. And from here on you have stopped turning and you begin letting your arms raise and go farther than you should. This causes you sequencing issues down the road. For example here we are a few frames later and you haven't turned your body much more, but your lead arm is higher. And here we are at the top, but it has been all arms since the first pic I showed you. I suspect that your right elbow has gone on a bit far and your early extension is a reaction to the arms being out of sequence. Your swing is pretty good. Do you have a local pro that you see?