30 Mar 2007 21:38:42
Scott Joyce
ball question

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C77313.C99B75D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Possibly a stupid question, but oh well. Would the group on average say
that a 2-piece ball would generally be the best for high handicappers, while
3-4 piece ball would fit a low handicappers or pro's game better, If this
is true, why. Any obvious specific benefits of a 2 piece over a 3-4 piece
and/or vice versa?

Many thanks
Scott

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C77313.C99B75D0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" >
<HTML ><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1" >
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR >
<STYLE ></STYLE>
</HEAD >
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff >
<DIV >Possibly a stupid question, but oh well.  Would the group on =
average=20
say that a 2-piece ball would generally be the best for high =
handicappers, while=20
3-4 piece ball would fit a low handicappers or pro's game better,  =
If this=20
is true, why. Any obvious specific benefits of a 2 piece over a 3-4 =
piece and/or=20
vice versa?</DIV >
<DIV > </DIV>
<DIV >Many thanks</DIV>
<DIV >Scott</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C77313.C99B75D0--



30 Mar 2007 20:57:30
Mike Dalecki
Re: ball question

Scott Joyce wrote:
> Possibly a stupid question, but oh well. Would the group on average say
> that a 2-piece ball would generally be the best for high handicappers,
> while 3-4 piece ball would fit a low handicappers or pro's game better,
> If this is true, why. Any obvious specific benefits of a 2 piece over a
> 3-4 piece and/or vice versa?
>
> Many thanks
> Scott

I wouldn't be focused on whether it's a 2- or 3- or 4-piece ball; I'd be
focused on its playing characteristics.

IMO, a high handicapper should probably use a cheaper ball because
they're likely losing them.

Higher handicappers often suffer from slices; a "distance ball" will
tend to have a harder cover, which means it doesn't accept spin as well.
Thus, slices will be less severe.

The downside of distance balls is that they don't hold greens well
because they don't accept backspin as well as a spin or soft-cover ball.

So ask yourself what you're trying to get in a golf ball (don't worry
about construction). More distance and less sidespin, a distance ball.

For more control around the green, a spin ball.

I play the ProV1 because it's a nice combination of distance (it's
pretty good, but not the greatest) and spin and feel around the green.
I'd rather give up a little distance in favor of control around the
green. The downside is the balls cost circa $4 each, which if you have
a tendency to lose balls is a little steep.

A nice compromise between softness and distance is the Noodle; it's a
quite reasonably-priced ball, will accept spin better than a distance
ball, but will produce decent distance for most people.

Mike




--
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdoctor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2007: June 22-24----Lawsonia!
Website: http://clubdoctor.com/rsgwis2007


31 Mar 2007 07:29:39
David Geesaman
Re: ball question

Scott Joyce wrote:
> Possibly a stupid question, but oh well. Would the group on average say
> that a 2-piece ball would generally be the best for high handicappers, while
> 3-4 piece ball would fit a low handicappers or pro's game better, If this
> is true, why. Any obvious specific benefits of a 2 piece over a 3-4 piece
> and/or vice versa?
>
> Many thanks
> Scott
>

I wholly believe that a low spin (2 piece) ball is better for any golfer
who struggles to hit more than 10 fairways per round.

The newer 3 piece balls like the V1 are really great in that they don't
spin as much off driver and long irons as the traditional spin balls.
They don't spin quite as much overall, but they are a really good
compromise.

Dave


31 Mar 2007 09:18:50
Ben.
Re: ball question

On Mar 31, 6:29 am, David Geesaman <dgeesamanIHateS...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
> Scott Joyce wrote:
> > Possibly a stupid question, but oh well. Would the group on average say
> > that a 2-piece ball would generally be the best for high handicappers, while
> > 3-4 piece ball would fit a low handicappers or pro's game better, If this
> > is true, why. Any obvious specific benefits of a 2 piece over a 3-4 piece
> > and/or vice versa?
>
> > Many thanks
> > Scott
>
> I wholly believe that a low spin (2 piece) ball is better for any golfer
> who struggles to hit more than 10 fairways per round.

On your average par 72 course w/ 14 par fours, ten fairways hit is ~
71%. On the PGA TOUR, 71% fairways hit puts you in the top 12 in
driving accuracy. IOW, that is a completely and patently unrealistic
basis for choosing a ball. Play the ball that you are most
comfortable with; the ball that fits your swing characteristics:
speed, path, and, not unimportantly, the course where you play most of
your golf.

If you impart a lot of sidespin on your driver and find yourself in
the woods looking for your ball, play a hard distance ball that takes
les spin. If you are a reasonable striker of the ball, missing the
fairway by only a few yards, and need distance and spin off the short
irons, play a Pro V1. Don't be silly and buy a ball based on how many
fairways you may or may not hit. On a good round, I probably hit six
to eight fairways, but I score in the low 80's to high 70's. This is
because my fairway misses are not that bad. Yeah, the occasional duck
hook or <cough cough > controlled "fade", but by and large I need the
characteristics offered by a three piece ball - good distance plus
excellent feel around the green

As an aside, I recently tried the 2007 Pro V1X to see if it was any
better around the greens than the old X ball. While I think I gained
a little more distance off the driver (5-7 yards max over the regular
Pro V1) than the old one, it is still no better in my mind than a Top
Flite around the greens. Short irons, 8-SW, imparted a reasonable and
definitely acceptable amount of spin into the green, but chipping and
pitching was a far more calculated effort than w/ the Pro V1. What I
mean is that I had to pick a spot to land the X ball so that it would
roll out to the pin rather than aggressively chipping and relying on
the check of the Pro V1 to stop the ball in the vicinity of the pin.



01 Apr 2007 00:29:47
Howard Brazee
Re: ball question

On 31 Mar 2007 09:18:50 -0700, "Ben." <kombi45@yahoo.com > wrote:

>Don't be silly and buy a ball based on how many
>fairways you may or may not hit. On a good round, I probably hit six
>to eight fairways, but I score in the low 80's to high 70's. This is
>because my fairway misses are not that bad.

And this advice doesn't apply to your course because of penal rough -
consider changing courses to one suitable to your skills.