RRP of balls. Is it getting beyond ridiculous?

[Backsticks]

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.

Thats interesting. Could you describe the test rig and over what range of putter head speeds ? Is putter speed typically in the range of a couple of mph ?

 

[Backache]

Thats interesting. Could you describe the test rig and over what range of putter head speeds ? Is putter speed typically in the range of a couple of mph ?

Personally I'd have thought the initial speeds of all but the shortest actual putts is far greater than a couple of miles an hour , most start far faster than I would run and I should think the smash factor is lower than 1.5 so putter head speed I would guess must be around 10 mph or higher for longer putts but may be wrong

Edit I am wrong I can't do links on my phone but have just googled an interesting article by Paul Hurrion on putting speeds and impact location on the putter.
Interestingly the smash factor is higher for putters than for drivers and it obviously depends on the stimp of the green but for a flat green stimping at 9 a putt hit at 4mph will travel 9 ft.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

Bad

 

[Banchory Buddha]

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.

Yup, interesting backsticks has liked this post, yet contradicts everything he is trying to say

 

[Banchory Buddha]

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.

Yeah I thought you hadn't read it and just saw the bit that would back you up, that two similar balls would have neglible difference.

However pit a brick against a soft covered ball and the differnece is marked over a pretty short putt.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Bad

Oh, I was hoping for a bit of an explanation.
Can it ever be beneficial to have the ball jump off the face of the putter very slightly more with one ball than another?

 

[Banchory Buddha]

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

Yeah it's cover, because as Backsticks correctly but incorrectly said, the speed of a putter stroke is not going to be affected by compression, but it will by the cover if it's very hard, or much softer

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Oh, I was hoping for a bit of an explanation.
Can it ever be beneficial to have the ball jump off the face of the putter very slightly more with one ball than another?

Why would it be? You don't want putts springing off the face, you want it to be very much controlled

 

[Voyager EMH]

Yup, interesting backsticks has liked this post, yet contradicts everything he is trying to say

Quite easy, I find, to "like" a post that disagrees with my point of view, if it has been well expressed.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Why would it be? You don't want putts springing off the face, you want it to be very much controlled

But what if you like the way a ball jumps off your putter and you have adapted well to it and that a softer ball makes you feel as if you are hitting a lump of putty and you tend to leave all your putts short of the hole with that type of ball?

 

[Backsticks]

But what if you like the way a ball jumps off your putter and you have adapted well to it and that a softer ball makes you feel as if you are hitting a lump of putty and you tend to leave all your putts short of the hole with that type of ball?

1) Are you not making a stroke of a given force on the ball without knowing how it feels like ?
2) Is green speed not going to dominate even if any variation due the ball. A 7 stimp to a 9 stimp is 2 feet ? Normal green speed variation. Again, ball variation is the least of a putters problems.

 

[hovis]

1) Are you not making a stroke of a given force on the ball without knowing how it feels like ?
2) Is green speed not going to dominate even if any variation due the ball. A 7 stimp to a 9 stimp is 2 feet ? Normal green speed variation. Again, ball variation is the least of a putters problems.

Especially when the expert Mr snell said maximum 2ft on a 30ft putt

 

[Backsticks]

But what if you like the way a ball jumps off your putter and you have adapted well to it and that a softer ball makes you feel as if you are hitting a lump of putty and you tend to leave all your putts short of the hole with that type of ball?

The ball isnt 'jumping off' your putting in any way that you can notice from its motion. Most prominent, will be a sound difference. I think most golfers who dont just pickup the nearest clean ball, have been brainwashed to a brick/performance ball dilemma, reinforced by price differenciation and what the best 0.00001% of world golf play (are payed to play...). How does the production cost of bricks compare to 'premium' (for want of a better word) compare ?

 

[Backsticks]

Especially when the expert Mr snell said maximum 2ft on a 30ft putt

Thats my point to. Stimp itself has an influence of 6 ft (if scalable linearly) on that 30ft putt. On a perfectly flat put without break, slope, or grass nap variation to boot.

 

[IanMcC]

Either 3 three knobs on here are calling me a liar, or at best calling me grossly mistaken. Wonderful that these wretches can come to these conclusions without knowing me, or having ever seen me hit a golf ball. Half of me thinks it's amusing, the other half of me is mad as hell. Oh, and hovis, I am very much not your 'mate'.

 

[Voyager EMH]

I find it all, so amusing.

 

[backwoodsman]

For some reason, I keep coming back read this thread. And have to say, I no longer know who is arguing what. (And no, please, no-one try to explain. Else we'll be going through it all again ... )
But, based on my own game (14.8 HI) I do notice a difference between balls. I've only got observational data (ie no impirical data) but 'ball X' seems to exaggerate a slice far worse than does 'ball Y'. I don't impart enough backspin to notice a difference in 'stopping power' on greens. But I seem to consistently score better with with 'ball Y' . So I've settled on sticking to 'ball Y' and not bother with 'ball X' or indeed anything else. Trial & error has led me to play with Callaway Supersofts (or Titleist Tour Soft as alternative). Any Pro Vs I find I give away to mates if they want them. Other balls I either leave on the course or chuck in the nets. A 'consistent ball' policy seems to work for me. (If that supports anyone's argument, then feel free ... ).

As to whether balls are too expensive - don't know. Haven't bought any in ages. I find enough good condition balls to keep me in my ball of choice. But please do keep buying them, at whatever price, and continue to leave them out there for me.

 

[Slab]

I do buy into the view that there’s a playing difference between bricks and TOTR balls (& I hope that translates to a scoring difference too) and (as said) I choose to play mainly with a mid range softer ball type…





… why is it then that time and again I can stop a range brick onto a penny from 50yards with a deft lop with GW at the short game practice area but on the course I’ll duff my ball of choice 25yrds and then reach for the putter from off the green

 

[theoneandonly]

I've read through the thread and am unsure if balls are expensive or not ?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Bought a sleeve of ProV1s on Saturday…boy they were expensive…then again they would as I don‘t usually have to bother buying balls. However I thought that as I am playing with the Mike tomorrow, I can at least be playing a nice clean ball even if my shoes might be a bit grubby - the ball I’m using at the moment is a bit of a mess as it’s lasted me a good few rounds and i want to create the best impression ?

Given the debate on this thread I don’t think I take the ball I play seriously enough ?