Red_on_the_head

Does anyone know if there is anything else out there besides 1iron, Pinhawks, Tommy Armour EQL, or iMatch SL's?

First of all, the Pinhawks are out for a little bit. They were popular and sold out quickly. He is getting another run in a little bit though I think(May 10th). I would also wait and get his Pinhawk SL Hybrid at 20*, 265 grams, 62.5 lie. You may not need a 3 hybrid if you go with this set up. Good luck

Wow. I have nothing to recommend for your set up but I am super super jealous!

Does anyone know what's up? I have a fairly fast computer and internet connection. This is the slowest site I've ever been on for a forum. I'm just wondering if anyone else has the same problems?! Thanks, Red

Does anyone have any comments on the Dynacraft Avatar series hybrid irons? Full set 3-PW, AW, SW I just bought the components and am hoping to put the set together sometime in the next week or two.

I think Wilsons are stock 1/4" longer than other major brands. Sounds like you are really diggin the Wilson's. Go with your gut!

Show off!

. . .

I've been playing the FG17's, Circa 1980, and love em. I hit them better than the shovels I've been told are "easier" to hit.

I lose most of my strokes off the tee and on the green. I am not confident in those departments. I don't know how much SL irons have actually lowered my HC(I've never kept one). All I know is that with SL irons there is a feeling of confidence when I step up to the ball with the 4 iron through 9 iron. Confidence is king. If I can post a link on here to another golf forum, you would find nearly every review possible for SL irons-- good and bad.

Quote: Originally Posted by Deryck Griffith Personally, I think the single length irons is band aid solution. I have traditional 3-PW irons and my swing is not by any means "drastically different" throughout the entire set. Sure, my 3i may flatten out on the backswing more than a PW due to the length but my "swing" per se isn't different. I still have to hit all the proper positions with my body, shoulderes, arms; hinge correctly and transfer my weight correct (ie. to the left foot at impact). If I don't execute those positions correctly, a single length iron set won't magically help my ballstriking. How much has your game improved (handicap wise_ since you purchased the irons? Quote: Originally Posted by Red_on_the_head It is not a band aid solution. It is simply different than you grew up with. The simple fact of the matter is that they are more consistent. Every OEM has it wrong in my opinion when it comes to length and lie angles of their clubs.... Single length irons are just an alternative to the OEM's established "standards".

PM sent mdaddy!

I built them with my limited club building knowledge. They are solid. Nice sole design. They have a thick topline which most people like but I do not... That is really their only downfall and it is just a personal preference. The 5* loft increments are a great idea. The offset is perfect. Give them a shot-- they are worth it.

Like I said in an earlier post, I do not consider these 5 baseball players to be the top five ever. I simply wanted to get people's views on how they would rank each baseball player. Each player is unique in his own way. It would be nearly impossible to rank the top 5 ball players of all time. There are simply too many factors. I didn't want steroids to be considered but clearly that is an unattainable request.

Well, certainly people can't look past the roids. Who was to say that Williams or Ruth or Aaron didn't use roids. I say it is very much possible that they did. Or at least something like them. I was asking for rankings based on offensive and defensive production alone. I understand that steroids tainted the era. But pretend like they never existed. Do your rankings change? One thing that impresses me big time is the record that Bonds holds for intentional walks in a season. It is 120. That is unreal. I don't care who you are and whether you've used steroids or not. That is f'n ridiculous.

I did not realize that the States control the judging... There is no doubt that there is more emphasis on aggressive fighting... how does one fix that? Training? This sport has the potential to become one of the biggest ever. I don't want to see it ruined by judging decisions.

I consider Mays to be the best well rounded player ever... He can't compete in some of the offensive categories but as far as having one guy on the list over the rest... It's Mays.

What do you think about changing the point system then? I find that this guy's comments(from mmajunkie.com) to be very interesting. It would push a fighter to actually fight 3 rounds instead of winning the first two and playing 100% defense. It probably doesn't solve the problem of awarding points based on aggressiveness as was the case in the Jackson Machida fight. I find his comments interesting none the less: UFC 123 MAIN EVENT PROVES IT'S TIME FOR A SCORING CHANGE The 10-point-must scoring system doesn’t cut it for MMA. Saturday night, it once again failed to give the win to the person who deserved it. Winning two rounds marginally should not guarantee you a decision, especially if you lose the third round decisively. A scoring system needs to be found that allows a fight to be looked at as a whole and not as three or five separate parts – a 100-point-must system. Judges would divide up a hundred points between the two fighters; close rounds would be scored 55 to 45, all the way down to (the unheard of) 95 to 5. In Saturday night’s fight between "Rampage" Jackson and Lytoto Machida, the first two round were close, but in Rampage's favor, so 55-45 by all three judges leaves Rampage winning 330-270. Third round was all Machida, so a 75-25 round would have stolen the fight 495-405 for Machida. George "hugefightfan" Wells Ajax, Ontario, Canada

Oh btw, I rank them 1)Mays 2)Pujols 3)Bonds 4)Williams (would probably be #1 if he hadn't missed 5 years do to military service) 5)A-Rod Remember that these aren't the best to have ever lived but I have my reasons for picking these 5.

I want to see non-biased rankings based off of offensive and defensive production only. Please do not take steroids into consideration. Mays Bonds Pujols Williams A-Rod

BJ Penn's win. Luck? Skill? Going to end his career in Welterweight with a run at the top? How does George Sotiropoulus keep winning? How did you score the Jackson vs Machida fight?

Wow. I forgot I started this thread. The reason I started it was to see what others people's opinions were about this debate. I am stuck in Minnesota and deal with idiots who have a bias towards Joe Mauer. The debate started at a party and I was the only one of 10 guys who regularly watch baseball take Albert Pujols. Don't get me wrong, I think Joe Mauer is probably one of the most pure hitters to play the game. Albert is better though. Albert's numbers show that he is one of the most well-rounded hitters ever. In any big situation, I would want Albert on my side over Joe. Love them both, but that's all there is to it. Joe does have the catching thing going against him as far as hindering his offensive production. That is not of concern though for sake of this discussion. Thanks everyone for the responses. I needed to know that I wasn't going insane.

Place Joe Mauer and each of his 8 clones in each spot, 1-9, in your lineup. Do the same with Albert Pujols... bat him 1-9. Who scores more runs in 1,000 innings of baseball?

I've actually never regripped with solvent and grip tape. I started building some of my own clubs this year and I have probably installed 50 grips with air and never ONCE had a problem. It is slicker than ... yeah you get it.

I would have loved to see "Bones" slap the shit out of Toney vs Couture choking him out. From what I heard was that Penn could never be on the offensive because Edgar was just too fast for him.