RRP of balls. Is it getting beyond ridiculous?

[Backsticks]

Rubbish!!!

Really ? Golf ball compression is insignificant when hit with putter force. It is designed for compression at clubhead speed of 100mph region. A putt cant be more than a couple of mph. I would say distance is a simple function of clubhead speed and mass of the ball, and all ball roll an identical distance with the same putter stroke.

 

[Backsticks]

What you say would have more effect if you played off 2, instead of being a duffer

Your cause is rather stilted by the fact you spout this anti-technology guff, and then play like an absolute rabbit

Am not anti technology at all. In fact technology is my profession, and also an interest in a variety of other fields. Technology has influenced golf greatly in the last few decades.
GPS is a great help, especially if you regularly play courses you dont know. Hybrid clubs are great, and have written the death warrant of the longer irons for most golfers - the game is easier with them. Launch monitors provide interesting data, and have eliminated some of the nonsense and unscientific guessing about what influences ball flight. Modern waterproof fabrics are terrific, wet play can be comfortable rather than the old choice of leaky or sweating inside. Highspeed cameras, force measurement, and scientific analysis may actually be starting to make some progress in truly describing the biomechanics of the golf swing, rather than the coachings of pros who had no more understanding of the golf swing than the average hacker, but just happened to be good at the game themselves - and really had no explanation or understanding why they themselves were good. 460cc titanium drivers are easier to hit than timber woods.

So technology is influencing the play of golf. And mainly for the better.

The golf ball is longer - due to technology - but that can be a good or bad thing depending on your point of view. A bad development in my opinion, but undeniably a step change in how far we can all hit it. And golf balls themselves ARE different - but the mistake is to link ball differences, to performance differences. As they say, the card just tells how many, not how. And the card will be the same with all balls today, for almost everyone, for almost every round. A 20 hc wondering what ball he should play, may as usefully wonder what shirt colour will be best for his putting stroke. Its the lack of technological knowledge that leads many into the trap of thinking the ball, and many other 'technology' factors will actually influence the card they will sign for.

 

[IanMcC]

Am not anti technology at all. In fact technology is my profession, and also an interest in a variety of other fields. Technology has influenced golf greatly in the last few decades.
GPS is a great help, especially if you regularly play courses you dont know. Hybrid clubs are great, and have written the death warrant of the longer irons for most golfers - the game is easier with them. Launch monitors provide interesting data, and have eliminated some of the nonsense and unscientific guessing about what influences ball flight. Modern waterproof fabrics are terrific, wet play can be comfortable rather than the old choice of leaky or sweating inside. Highspeed cameras, force measurement, and scientific analysis may actually be starting to make some progress in truly describing the biomechanics of the golf swing, rather than the coachings of pros who had no more understanding of the golf swing than the average hacker, but just happened to be good at the game themselves - and really had no explanation or understanding why they themselves were good. 460cc titanium drivers are easier to hit than timber woods.

So technology is influencing the play of golf. And mainly for the better.

The golf ball is longer - due to technology - but that can be a good or bad thing depending on your point of view. A bad development in my opinion, but undeniably a step change in how far we can all hit it. And golf balls themselves ARE different - but the mistake is to link ball differences, to performance differences. As they say, the card just tells how many, not how. And the card will be the same with all balls today, for almost everyone, for almost every round. A 20 hc wondering what ball he should play, may as usefully wonder what shirt colour will be best for his putting stroke. Its the lack of technological knowledge that leads many into the trap of thinking the ball, and many other 'technology' factors will actually influence the card they will sign for.

With respect, this is all very noble and haughty, but, for me at least, is just not true. I have not altered my swing, attitude or stance, but changing to a premium 3 piece ball (ProV1) from a 2 piece with a much lower compression (Srixon Softfeel) has radically altered my driving stats. I am not a good enough player (currently 9.1 Index) to notice any difference around the greens, but I am so poor in that realm that, as you say, it would make no difference anyway. For me, I am hitting many more fairways with the ProV1, as it spins less with the driver. The Softfeel is a great ball, and I love putting with it, but the ProV1 saves me many more shots off the tee than the softfeel does on the green.

 

[Orikoru]

With respect, this is all very noble and haughty, but, for me at least, is just not true. I have not altered my swing, attitude or stance, but changing to a premium 3 piece ball (ProV1) from a 2 piece with a much lower compression (Srixon Softfeel) has radically altered my driving stats. I am not a good enough player (currently 9.1 Index) to notice any difference around the greens, but I am so poor in that realm that, as you say, it would make no difference anyway. For me, I am hitting many more fairways with the ProV1, as it spins less with the driver. The Softfeel is a great ball, and I love putting with it, but the ProV1 saves me many more shots off the tee than the softfeel does on the green.

No it doesn't!??

 

[Voyager EMH]

No it doesn't!??

Has me a bit puzzled too.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Really ? Golf compression is insignificant when hit with putter force. It is designed for compression at clubhead speed of 100mph region. A putt cant be more than a couple of mph. I would say distance is a simple function of clubhead speed and mass of the ball, and all ball roll an identical distance with the same putter stroke.

It's not the compression, it's the cover. Again you completely miss the point, and seem to have no feel in your game at all. A hard skinned brick will jump off a putter much more than a soft skinned ball.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

The golf ball is longer - due to technology - but that can be a good or bad thing depending on your point of view. A bad development in my opinion, but undeniably a step change in how far we can all hit it. And golf balls themselves ARE different - but the mistake is to link ball differences, to performance differences. As they say, the card just tells how many, not how. And the card will be the same with all balls today, for almost everyone, for almost every round. A 20 hc wondering what ball he should play, may as usefully wonder what shirt colour will be best for his putting stroke. Its the lack of technological knowledge that leads many into the trap of thinking the ball, and many other 'technology' factors will actually influence the card they will sign for.

Excatly, buying expensive balls is just a waste of money, FOR YOU. But for decent players we do see the difference, especially, in fact almost wholly in approach shots and round the greens.

 

[Voyager EMH]

It's not the compression, it's the cover. Again you completely miss the point, and seem to have no feel in your game at all. A hard skinned brick will jump off a putter much more than a soft skinned ball.

Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

 

[hovis]

With respect, this is all very noble and haughty, but, for me at least, is just not true. I have not altered my swing, attitude or stance, but changing to a premium 3 piece ball (ProV1) from a 2 piece with a much lower compression (Srixon Softfeel) has radically altered my driving stats. I am not a good enough player (currently 9.1 Index) to notice any difference around the greens, but I am so poor in that realm that, as you say, it would make no difference anyway. For me, I am hitting many more fairways with the ProV1, as it spins less with the driver. The Softfeel is a great ball, and I love putting with it, but the ProV1 saves me many more shots off the tee than the softfeel does on the green.

Hitting "many more" fairways with a prov 1 over a srixon doesn't make sense. It ent the ball doing that mate.

 

[hovis]

It's not the compression, it's the cover. Again you completely miss the point, and seem to have no feel in your game at all. A hard skinned brick will jump off a putter much more than a soft skinned ball.

I've Just asked the pro I have dedicated putting off this question. He said about 4 years ago he tested the difference from one end of the spectrum to the other (using a putter on a swing arm). He said inside 20 feet the difference was negligible. Over that the longer the putt the bigger the difference. 40 feet was about 1 to 2 ft past with the harder ball. He also sent me this from snell golf::

thanks for the great question. So this can be a very complicated and in depth topic. I will try to keep it brief and cover a few basics…. Putting can have variations based off putter/ball combos. So for example a metal face putter and surlyn ball (both harder) would roll out further than a urethane ball or a putter with a softer face insert. This difference could be as much as a couple feet on 30+ ft putt. Now when it comes to urethane ball vs another brand urethane ball with the same putter, differences would be small (likely only a couple inches at most). Different models would have slightly different urethane thickness, durometer (hardness), and something called “flex modulus” (getting above my pay grade here, lol). In our case the MTB Black vs MTB-X would have nearly zero differences as they have the same exact cover. The X is a firmer overall model so on a perfect surface with robot putter, ball could roll out fractions more but no way noticeable with a human. Thicker, softer cover models like say the Chrome Soft by Callaway may roll out fractions less on the same 30 ft putt. To be clear we are now talking a couple inches or less on 30+. Hope that helps!" Thanks to Snell for helping out.

 

[jim8flog]

I would say distance is a simple function of clubhead speed and mass of the ball, and all ball roll an identical distance with the same putter stroke.

Have you actually done any tests yourself to prove this point? I do not mean comparing like for like balls but say a Prov1 (or softer|) against a Toplflite XL

Real world golf is not quite the same a theoretical physics

Dimple pattern and depth, how much the surface is in contact the ball what type of cover (does it cause stiction), is the friction the same? What type of putter you are and what putter you use e.g do you cause the ball to jump, do you get near instant roll, etc.

 

[Backsticks]

Have you actually done any tests yourself to prove this point? I do not mean comparing like for like balls but say a Prov1 (or softer|) against a Toplflite XL

Real world golf is not quite the same a theoretical physics

Dimple pattern and depth, how much the surface is in contact the ball what type of cover (does it cause stiction), is the friction the same? What type of putter you are and what putter you use e.g do you cause the ball to jump, do you get near instant roll, etc.

No, but Hovis pro contact had, as described above, so practical testing seems to confirm what one would expect. If its down to a couple if inches, or differences imperceptible to a human, then its of zero influence on ones card. Green pace, borrow, judgement, luck are the real influences on whether the putt will drop for you. They DO influence the score you will sign for. Even if there were/are measurable differences, that doesnt mean they will influence a putt dropping or not - and this is THE measure of whether the ball makes a difference. A ball that influences your score by 0.02 shots, effectively doesnt influence it.
The dame mistake/deception is made in much golf equipment testing or claims - they dont make the link to real world scores. Which is ultimately what matters to the golfer. They dont, because it would show that the bottom line influence on your score, is nil. Undermining the misunderstanding they prefer to let you conclude erroneously - that one ball is 'better' than another.

 

[hovis]

No, but Hovis pro contact had, as described above, so practical testing seems to confirm what one would expect. If its down to a couple if inches, or differences imperceptible to a human, then its of zero influence on ones card. Green pace, borrow, judgement, luck are the real influences on whether the putt will drop for you. They DO influence the score you will sign for. Even if there were/are measurable differences, that doesnt mean they will influence a putt dropping or not - and this is THE measure of whether the ball makes a difference. A ball that influences your score by 0.02 shots, effectively doesnt influence it.
The dame mistake/deception is made in much golf equipment testing or claims - they dont make the link to real world scores. Which is ultimately what matters to the golfer. They dont, because it would show that the bottom line influence on your score, is nil. Undermining the misunderstanding they prefer to let you conclude erroneously - that one ball is 'better' than another.

A bit of a disclaimer to the tests he's done. The experiments weren't designed to see the distance variation between balls (that's was just a bonus finding). He's aim was to see what effects the new putter faces have on ball roll. Putter faces such as stroke lab and evnroll. If anyone is interested they found "using quintech technology". That no matter what the ball construction was putter face was by far the biggest factor that determined ball launch, roll and spin with a putter.

 

[Backache]

The answer from Snell is that it could make a difference of 2ft over 30 ft which is certainly significant.
Doesn't say which is better but it kind of suggests if you want to be consistent it might be better to stick with one type.

 

[hovis]

The answer from Snell is that it could make a difference of 2ft over 30 ft which is certainly significant.
Doesn't say which is better but it kind of suggests if you want to be consistent it might be better to stick with one type.

I'd say that's significant too. But I read that to be from a soft ball to a brick. I bet if you put a pro v against a srixon soft feel it wouldn't be much.

 

[Backache]

I'd say that's significant too. But I read that to be from a soft ball to a brick. I bet if you put a pro v against a srixon soft feel it wouldn't be much.

I read it as surlyn v urethane cover.

 

[hovis]

I read it as surlyn v urethane cover.

What would a srixon soft feel be and what would a Dunlop DDH be? Genuine question, I don't know. But they definitely ent the same hardness/softness

 

[jim8flog]

No, but Hovis pro contact had, as described above, so practical testing seems to confirm what one would expect. If its down to a couple if inches, or differences imperceptible to a human, then its of zero influence on ones card. Green pace, borrow, judgement, luck are the real influences on whether the putt will drop for you. They DO influence the score you will sign for. Even if there were/are measurable differences, that doesnt mean they will influence a putt dropping or not - and this is THE measure of whether the ball makes a difference. A ball that influences your score by 0.02 shots, effectively doesnt influence it.
The dame mistake/deception is made in much golf equipment testing or claims - they dont make the link to real world scores. Which is ultimately what matters to the golfer. They dont, because it would show that the bottom line influence on your score, is nil. Undermining the misunderstanding they prefer to let you conclude erroneously - that one ball is 'better' than another.

As already said on this thread. I have done personal testing.

The differences I found to be very obvious - a lot more than a couple of inches on a 10ft putt between a very soft covered ball and a brick.

 

[Backache]

What would a srixon soft feel be and what would a Dunlop DDH be? Genuine question, I don't know. But they definitely ent the same hardness/softness

No idea what they are covered with but urethane is generally reserved for premium balls as it's more expensive.

 

[hovis]

No idea what they are covered with but urethane is generally reserved for premium balls as it's more expensive.

Sorry, yeh I get that part. I was wondering if a brick like a DDH was the same cover as a ball that's no so brick like. Such as a soft feel, ad333?. But Mr snell says its all in the cover not the harness off the ball. ?‍. Either way the extra 2 ft on a 30ft putt doesn't suggest its jumping off the face as a poster suggests