Muscle Back Blades Are Swing-Improvement Irons

Almost a decade ago I wrote this post about how I changed my irons from so-called "game-improvement" cavity back irons to muscle back blade irons. Basically, my golf swing had worsened while playing cavity back irons and became better with muscle back blades. I've concluded that "game-improvement" is clearly a marketing coined term designed to sell clubs to golfers. It's not a stretch for the consumer to assume that such clubs will improve their golf swing. Heck, that's what I thought at first. But in reality, "game-improvement" clubs are designed to simply improve the results of a bad golf swing. That's a big difference.

Now that I've played with blades for virtually the last decade, I believe that they are the best type of irons to improve your golf swing. I recently came across this promo video for the new Mizuno MP-4 forged muscle back irons where PGA Tour Pro Charles Howell III expresses a similar sentiment at the 4:47 mark:



Howell explains:

If my son decides he wants to play golf...I would start him off in a set like this [muscle back blade irons]. You can tell right away when you hit is solid. You can tell right away how to draw the ball [and] fade the ball. This iron right here, if you play golf with this every day, you'll actually get better. It will make you a better player.

So, if cavity back irons are the "game-improvement" irons, then muscle back blades are the "swing-improvement" irons!

Re-Grip Golf Clubs With Air!

Playing golf with grips in good condition is important for your golf swing. Worn grips become slick and require greater than normal grip pressure to hold adequately. In turn, this can add tension throughout your golf swing causing all sorts of problems.

The average golfer should regrip their golf clubs at least once per year. Aside from the cost of the grips, most golf shops will charge around $3 per club in labor cost. With 14 clubs in the bag, that cost can quickly add up over time. However, regripping is something that can be done quite easily at home with the right tools and equipment. The traditional method utilized nasty solvents that can be quite messy and cause pangs of guilt to the average tree hugger. An alternative method uses compressed air. Check out this video for the gripping details:

Golf GPS on Your Phone?

My first experience with GPS technology for golf occurred a little more than a decade ago. I was playing a nice but long-forgotten golf course with some friends. We had opted to splurge on a motorized golf cart and I was pleasantly surprised to find that it contained a magical video screen that displayed your current location on the golf course and yardages to important landmarks. I was amazed at the amount of accurate and useful information provided by this technology.

The only problem with golf GPS technology was access to it. At first it was only found in golf carts. Eventually, it made its way into handheld units. However, I found these units too costly to be worthwhile. While technological advancements and market forces over time have greatly improved the value proposition of these devices, I still never felt comfortable dropping several Benjamins on one.

But having recently joined the modern age by buying my first smartphone, I discovered that its embedded GPS receivers can transform it into a golf GPS device. With several golf GPS iPhone apps available, I hit the Internet to find the best one. I read through many relevant threads on the main golf message forums and one name kept cropping up: the $19.99 Golfshot: Golf GPS. I installed it on my iPhone 5 and hit the course!

Golfshot is a full-featured golf GPS app that replicates the primary features of a dedicated unit. The company has over 40,000 worldwide course maps available for download without a subscription fee. There are two main screens that are easily toggled while playing. One is the aerial screen that displays your location on an overhead map of the hole with basic yardage information. There's a target reticle that you can drag with your finger to pinpoint a location on the map to discover the distance to that point and the distance from that point to the middle of the green. The second screen is the GPS list view and displays detailed yardages from your current location such as distances to hole landmarks and the front, middle and back green locations. Both screens have access to a sub-menu where you can take notes, snap photos, and, most importantly, track club distances. Once you finish playing a hole, you can enter your score on the electronic scorecard.

After playing several rounds with Golfshot, I'm thoroughly impressed. Initially, my main concern was accuracy. However, I compared the Golfshot yardages alongside those from golfers in my foursome who used dedicated laser and GPS handheld devices and found that they were always within a few yards of each other. While the aerial screen is nice visually, the GPS list view is the most useful. In fact, if you're already familiar with a course, you probably won't ever need to access the aerial screen. The swing tracking function is an easy way to track your true club distances and accuracy. Golfshot will store this data and give you valuable statistics on your clubs. Be sure to only track full swings, otherwise you'll skew the data lower. In any case, don't be surprised if your true club distances aren't as far as you think. Try as I might, those 300 yard bombs in my mind never quite registered much more than 250!

I didn't expect much from Golfshot's electronic scorecard, but I ended up pleasantly surprised. It asks for your score, putts, the club used on the tee, location of the tee shot, sand shots, and penalty strokes for each hole. Once I became familiar with the input screen, I found it faster and more convenient to use than the old-school paper version. Once the scorecard is completed, Golfshot emails the scorecard and a link to the Golfshot website where you can view more detailed stats that are presented in useful charts and graphs. Very cool stuff.

So the question remains, can a smartphone golf GPS app take the place of a dedicated golf GPS device? For the vast majority of golfers, I say "yes" for the following reasons:

• Accuracy: While some dedicated golf GPS devices boast "sub-meter precision", that level of accuracy is just not needed for 99% of golfers. Golfshot was more than accurate enough for me.
• Inexpensive: If you already own a smartphone, the cost difference between a smartphone golf GPS app and a dedicated golf GPS device can be several hundred dollars.
• No added weight or bulk: Software is massless. When you're lugging around over 20 lbs. on your back, every gram counts.

However, if you're a very serious golfer, you'll still want a dedicated golf rangefinder because of the military grade accuracy and the fact that most smartphones are not legal for tournament play.

P.S. If you're too cheap to drop $20 on a golf GPS app, try Swing by Swing.  Among the free apps, it's the best because there are no annoying ads.  But like all of the free apps, it doesn't offer much beyond distance to the middle of the green.

Sanding Your Grips to Improve Your Game

The golf grip is one of the most important parts of your golf club. It is the only direct contact that you have with your golf club. I completely agree with Golf Pride's explanation: "The traction that a fresh grip provides lets you hold the club lightly without the subconscious fear of losing the club during your swing. This relaxed state promotes proper swing mechanics and wrist action. While a worn grip causes you to grasp the club tighter, causing arm and wrist tension that inhibits proper swing mechanics."

In addition, Golf Pride recommends: "As a rule of thumb, you should regrip once every year. Regardless of whether you play golf every day or twice a year, ozone, heat, dirt, and oils are constantly at work breaking down the materials that make up your grips."

However, I've been able to extend the life of my golf grips by simply sanding them down when they start to get slick with medium grit sandpaper to reveal a fresh layer of rubber. As a reference, Fred Couples uses 220-grit sandpaper. To get them extra clean, follow the sanding with a wash using dish soap and rinse with water. Try it and discover how a little sandpaper can prolong the usefulness of your grips and save you some major coin!

VideoCaddy: The Worst Golf Gadget Ever?

I love to play golf. I love to ride motorized golf carts. I love to record video with my video camera. Now there's a device called the VideoCaddy that let's me combine my 3 loves together. But why on Earth would I want to do that?

Well, someone thought that it would be a great idea. Unfortunately, it appears that the entrepreneurs behind the VideoCaddy didn't quite understand the concept of addressable market (the total potential market for a product). Did these guys do any market research whatsoever? Do they even know what that means?

Think for a moment about who would need such a device. Anyone who wants to videotape their swing would want to do it in a controlled environment such as the driving range. In that case, you'd want a dedicated tripod to ensure stability and flexibility. At a cost of $70 vs. a decent $10 tripod, the VideoCaddy is clearly a poor solution. But the makers of the VideoCaddy tout it's ability to record your swing on the course. But I ask, "Why?!" The pace of play is slow enough on the average golf course. Can you imagine playing behind some clown who's trying to record their swing? It takes extra time to position the cart, aim the camera, and work the camera. These kinds of ridiculous delays is a capital offense at my home course.

The only thing I see the VideoCaddy being useful is to tee up my video camera for all the golfers behind me that want to tee off on it for holding up play! If someone sent this to me for free, I'd toss it right into the garbage in knee-jerk reaction. However, the VideoCaddy might be interesting for collectors of rarities because I doubt they'll ever sell more than a handful.

Golf Bag Eating Squirrels!

Today is Squirrel Appreciation Day. In dishonor of this ridiculous day, I have a story to tell:

Imagine, for a moment, that you are a sweet, innocent, harmless, bushy-tailed little squirrel. You're prancing along, you get hungry, you spot some food. You put your little squirrel lips around a big, juicy chestnut...and BAM! A frickin' 460cc Titanium driver head cold clocks you silly.

Well that's almost exactly what I witnessed by the tee box of the 2nd hole at my home track, Rancho Park Golf Course, several years ago. As usual, there was a two group backup at the 2nd hole. A squirrel came begging for food to a guy in my foursome who I had met for the 1st time a hole earlier. Without hesitation, he swung his driver at the squirrel like it was a teed up Titleist Pro V1x. The driver hit the squirrel squarely on it's side and it went down like a sack of potatoes. It was convulsing uncontrollably and I was certain that it was a goner. I glanced at the assailant in shocked disbelief. He just smiled and exclaimed, "Ha, gotcha ya stupid squirrel!" After about a minute the squirrel miraculously got back on it's feet and limped away.

What kind of person would commit such a callous and senseless act on one of nature's cutest creatures? I say a smart and rational person! This wasn't my opinion at the time, but over the years I've come to understand why such violence is perfectly acceptable. You see, the squirrels at this particular course are not the typical and harmless variety. They have devolved into ravenous golf bag destroying monsters! They have learned that golf bags often contain tasty snacks and it's now coded into their DNA. Any golf bag left unattended will attract a squirrel looking for food. If it sniffs something yummy, it will do whatever it takes to get to it. These squirrels are adept at opening velcro and unzipping zippers. If it still can't get to the food, it will chew it's way through. Over the several years that I've played on this course, squirrels have destroyed two of my golf bags. Here's a picture of the latest victim:

So if you ever see someone play whack a mole with the squirrels at a golf course, understand that he's just saving your golf bag from destruction!

A 6-Iron Giveaway!

Alert!: Taylor Made is giving away 20,000 new Burner 2.0 6-irons. Sign-up at their website for a chance to win! I couldn't determine an expiration date for this offer so it's best to enter early. Good luck!

Best Investment of 2010: Wedges?

With the economy still in shambles, it's difficult to find a decent investment these days. All the usual suspects such as stocks, bonds, and commodities all look about as promising as Lindsay Lohan staying sober. So what is the savvy investor supposed to do?

I say buy wedges. Yeah, you heard me right. You can thank that meddling USGA. I've concluded that their sole guiding principle is to make golf more difficult and less enjoyable for the "bad" of the game. Their latest impediment to the much-needed growth of the game is a new ruling on club grooves. In effect, the beloved U-grooves/square-grooves that let us back up the ball on the green like a tour pro will soon go the way of the dodo bird. As of January 2011, "Manufacturers can no longer manufacture products with the pre-2010 grooves and can no longer ship products with the pre-2010 grooves. Retailers can continue to sell clubs shipped to them before this date as conforming clubs indefinitely." As the laws of supply and demand dictate, this sudden reduction in supply with a steady demand will result in a rise in price. Cleveland Golf has even launched a dedicated website, Year of the Wedge, to recognize (and capitalize on) this unique situation.

Keep in mind that wedge grooves become ineffective much faster than any other club. I've read recommendations to replace wedges every 15-20 rounds! So even if you don't plan on selling a pre-January 2011 wedge for a future profit, you should stock up on them to last you before they may become outlawed altogether by January 2024.

I've already made my investment. I bought a TaylorMade TP wedge with xFT. The cool feature of this model is the exchangeable faces. Once the grooves wear out you can simply replace the face with a fresh set of grooves. It is both economical and eco-friendly. I bought 3 replacement Z-groove faces for the cost of one wedge. I'm expecting a solid return on this investment in some form!

Rain Pours Through Sun Mountain

I'm a huge fan of Sun Mountain golf products. They have repeatedly won me over as a customer with such novel golf innovations as the stand bag, Dual X-Strap and the Speed Cart. Unfortunately, Mother Nature literally rained on their parade at the 2010 Ryder Cup this past weekend.

If you didn't hear, Sun Mountain provided the rain suits for the U.S. Ryder Cup team. Initially, the gear was panned for their gawd awful looks. Butch Harmon quipped, "They are the ugliest things I have ever seen." But really, hasn't ugly golf attire been somewhat the norm for Ryder Cup teams? Not a surprise to me since it appears that the only qualification for designing and selecting the team's wardrobe is to be married to the captain. But so what about fashion? When it comes to rain gear function over form is paramount. Anyone who has had to play golf in the rain knows the utter misery of playing in wet clothing. Not only is it uncomfortable but it can adversely affect your play.

Unfortunately, the U.S. Ryder Cup team experienced this firsthand since their Sun Mountain rain suits possessed neither form nor function. They were found to be about as waterproof as one of Lady Gaga's fishnet tops. Their leaky gear had to be ditched in favor of generic off-the-rack digs bought from a merchandise tent. What a debacle! It's quite simply an excusable failure by any measure and a huge blow to the manufacturer. This is certainly a low point for the company but it got even lower when, in classic "kick 'em when they're down" fashion, the manufacturer of GORE-TEX issued the following statement:

"It's unfortunate that the U.S. team at the Ryder Cup was not wearing uniforms with the GORE-TEX® brand, especially if the faulty gear ultimately interfered with performance," said Yvonne Erickson, marketing leader at W.L. Gore & Associates. "Gore has rigorous uncompromising standards in place to ensure that our products are of the highest quality, to back up our Guaranteed to Keep you Dry® promise to consumers. Gore and Sun Mountain Sports parted ways in 2006 and, therefore, GORE-TEX® brand technology was not used in the rain jackets and pants worn by the U.S. team this morning. We hope that the U.S. Ryder Cup Team will be wearing uniforms with GORE-TEX® product technology in the future."

Hopefully this epic disaster doesn't dampen Sun Mountain's hard-earned reputation as a producer of quality golf products. I've owned two stand bags and a Speed Cart and I've been 100% satisfied with their quality and performance. I'm still a fan and I'll continue to buy their products as long as I play golf.

Is Phil Mickelson a Cheater?

Phil Mickelson has long been rumored to be one of the least popular players amongst his peers on the PGA Tour. But now his popularity is dipping to new lows over his use of 20-year-old Ping Eye2 square-groove wedges that sidestep the new groove rule. "I don't like it at all, not one bit," Rocco Mediate said. "It's against the spirit of the rule...We have to get rid of those clubs, because they're square grooves - what else can you say?" According to Scott McCarron, "It's cheating, and I'm appalled Phil has put it in play."

Readers of this blog know that I'm no fan of Phil, but in this case I believe that he's getting unfairly crucified. In my opinion, it's perfectly fine to play golf with anything that the USGA deems to be legal. Heck, if the Iron Byron was legal, I'd be the first to use one. Since all square-groove Ping Eye 2 irons manufactured before April 1, 1990 are legal, Phil didn't do anything wrong by putting them in the bag. The USGA agrees. "The clubs are usable where USGA rules apply," said Dick Rugge, the USGA's senior technical director. "The rules speak for themselves and show it's not cheating to use them."

So the critics of Phil need to back down. He's certainly not cheating. If people have any beef, they should redirect their rage at golf's governing bodies. But more interestingly, I think that this controversy sheds light on other issues. For instance, what does all this say about golf club technology? The message I get is that 20-year-old technology is better than that of today. I've long believed that iron performance improvement through technology is limited and this is further validation. My conviction was so strong that I put a set of Mizuno MP-14s in my bag about a year ago. These irons are about 18-years-old and play just as well as my much newer Nike Blades. I'd hate to work in the marketing department at any golf club company when consumers watch that the pros are opting for clubs made two decades ago!

Titleist Pro V1 and V1x Differences?

Introduced in the Fall of 2000, the Titleist Pro V1/V1x was one of the most revolutionary golf balls of all time by incorporating a multi-layer construction with a soft urethane-covering to virtually eliminate the traditional trade-offs between distance, spin, feel, and durability. Since then the Pro V1/V1x has been the dominant ball in golf. Dominant among pros and amateurs alike.

Not wanting to be left behind, I adopted the Pro V1 as my primary ball from the get-go. I'm always open to trying the competitor's new offerings, but I just haven't found anything that's materially better yet. Part of the reason is that Titleist isn't content to rest on its laurels. There has been at least 2 major revisions to the original Pro V1/V1x. The newest adds the A.I.M. (Alignment Integrated Marking) sidestamp so that you don't even have to manually line up your golf ball anymore!

I've always used the Pro V1 rather than its X-rated sibling because I've always thought that the former was softer, spun more and produced a higher ball flight; all qualities that I prefer. According to the Titleist website, here are the differences between the Pro V1 and the Pro V1x:

• Distance: For most players, Pro V1x will be longer off the tee.
• Feel: Pro V1 is softer than the Pro V1x.
• Durability: Pro V1 is the most durable Titleist tour played golf ball.

However, results from the cover story, "The Best Ball For You" of the February 2008 issue of Golf Magazine seem to contradict some of these claims. According to this exhaustive robot golf ball test, the Pro V1x is indeed slightly longer than the Pro V1 by about 1.4 yds in total distance (carry plus roll) off a driver (90 mph swing speed, 137 mph ball speed, 13.75-degree launch angle, 2,900 rpm). However, additional tests indicate that the Pro V1x also spins more (the printed article lists the spin rate of the Pro V1x at 12,299 rpm vs. the Pro V1 at 11,914 rpm with a sand wedge) and is softer! Based on these new test results, here's a revised summary of the differences between the Pro V1 and the Pro V1x:

• Distance: For most players, Pro V1x will be longer off the tee. (According to Titleist and Golf Magazine)
• Feel: Pro V1x is softer than the Pro V1. (According to Golf Magazine)
• Spin: Pro V1x spins more than the Pro V1. (According to Golf Magazine)
• Durability: Pro V1 is the most durable Titleist tour played golf ball. (According to Titleist)
• Ball Flight: Pro V1 has a slightly higher flight. (According to Titleist)

As a longtime Pro V1 user, I found the new evidence that the Pro V1x is actually softer and spinier than the Pro V1 to be downright shocking. Maybe even more shocking is that it took almost 8 years to come to light. Durability and ball flight be damned, any ball that flies farther and spins more is a better ball in my book. I'll be switching to the Pro V1x right after I go through my current stash of 3 dozen Pro V1s! How about you?

A Golden Tee for Distance?

I recently had the opportunity to chat with Jack Mehoffer, VP of marketing at Hanso Golf, regarding their latest product introduction. It's called "Golden Tees", and they represent the latest in golf tee technology.

Golf Grouch: What are they?

Jack Mehoffer: In short, Golden Tees provide the lowest Static Coefficient of Friction between a golf ball and a tee. In layman's terms, these tees are scientifically proven to provide the least resistance between the golf ball and tee. As a result, the ball will travel farther.

What does this mean for golfers?

Research conducted by our Head of R&D, Rod Stiffington, indicates that Golden Tees can increase driving distance 10% or more. So a golfer with an average driving distance of 250 yards can expect a 25 yard increase by simply switching to the Golden Tee.

How do they work?

The wooden golf tee has been used universally since its commercial introduction in the 1920s. Unfortunately, the coefficient of friction from wood is very high, especially against the new urethane-covered golf balls. Metals offer much lower coefficients of friction, but you can't make 100% metal golf tees because they damage clubs and lawn mower blades. Golden Tees offer the benefit of metal contact with the golf ball, but without the drawbacks of 100% metal golf tees. In addition, we are utilizing the metal with the lowest coefficient of friction against urethane, gold."

Are you using real gold?

Yes, we only utilize 24K gold. We try to minimize the cost by only coating the contact areas with gold. In addition, we've developed a patent-pending electroplating technology to apply a layer of gold onto the contact area about 100 microns thick. That's about the thickness of a human hair.

What is the availability and retail price?

Golden Tees can be found soon at specialty golf retailers for $10 a tee or a package of 50 for $450. We think that this is a small price to pay for a 10% increase in driving distance.

Who's using them?

The best players in the world will be teeing up with Golden Tees at this week's Masters. Look for them on TV! Interestingly, Golden Tees are also becoming a favorite among major Hip Hop artists such as Snoop Dogg, Kanye West and P. Diddy. Apparently, they love the "bling".

What's next?

Well, we're constantly looking for ways to minimize the friction between the golf ball and tee. We have already developed prototypes of tees utilizing the material with the lowest coefficient of friction. Care to guess what that might be?

I have no idea.

It's ice. We are tentatively calling the product "Iced Tee". They are currently undergoing hot weather testing in the Mojave desert. Unfortunately, it appears that there are still some snags that we must overcome before we bring it to market.

Correct Shaft Flex: Stiff or Regular? Can You Handle the Truth?

One of the biggest equipment faux pas that golfers make is playing with golf shafts that are too stiff for their swing. Most of this can be directly traced to the golfer's ego. Just like there are no men driving VW Beetles with those dainty flower holders, the macho factor won't allow male golfers to play anything less than a stiff flex.

However, it is important to understand just how shaft flexibility affects performance. After all, the shaft is often known as the "engine" of the golf club.

Theodore P. Jorgensen authored a book called "The Physics of Golf." He conducted several experiments to demonstrate that the shaft of the golf club during the golf swing actually bends forward at impact. Jorgensen provides a graph indicating that the clubhead lags behind the hands at the start of the downswing. However, by the time that the club is about horizontal to the ground, the clubhead catches up to the hands and eventually leads the shaft at impact.

This is counterintuitive to what most people believe. While all golfers acknowledge that the clubhead lags at the start of the downswing, most assume that it continues to lag until well after impact. Furthermore, it is commonly assumed that the more flexible the shaft, the more that the clubhead lags throughout the swing. Golfers assume these things because that's what it feels like during the swing. However, as with many things in golf, what you feel is not always what is real.

In reality, the shaft unloads during the downswing and kicks forward by impact, regardless of swing speed or shaft flex rating. Our hands simply cannot outpace the clubhead as the shaft unloads during the golf swing. In fact, the more flexible the shaft, the more that the clubhead will kick forward, increasing velocity and effective loft. Therefore, all other things being equal, softer shafts provide more distance and a higher trajectory than their stiffer siblings. This applies to all human-generated swing speeds, including that of Tiger Woods. Tiger himself acknowledges this phenomenon writing, "If I had weaker shafts I'd hit the ball farther just because there's more flex in the shaft and more kick in a regular-flex shaft than in the stiff shafts I use."

So why doesn't Tiger switch to "senior" flex shafts? While a more flexible shaft will provide more distance, the tradeoff is less control. It is simply much more difficult to control the clubface at impact with a more flexible shaft. The last thing that Tiger wants to do is to miss more fairways! For the rest of us, distance is probably our primary concern. Regardless, it is very important for us to play with the right flex for our unique swings. If you haven't done so already, I recommend that you visit your local golf retailer and receive a proper fitting. Finding the correct flex is fast, easy, and usually free.

Headcovers Protect the Clubhead and More

I was flipping through the June 2006 issue of Golf Digest recently and came across "The Golf Guru" column. Every month, the Golf Guru answers questions posed by readers of the magazine. It's somewhat entertaining, but the writer tends to write for chucks at the expense of sound advice. Such was the case in response to a reader's question, "Do headcovers do any good?"

In short, the Golf Guru believes that headcovers were a remnant of the persimmon wood era that serves no functional purpose today. He argues that headcovers did indeed protect "soft-as-cheese persimmon clubheads and the 'whipping' that bound the hosel to the shaft" but is unnecessary for the modern metal-wood.

However, I think that his advice is a little half-baked for several reasons. For one, some of us like to keep our clubheads free of dings and paint chips. Not only is maintaining the clubhead's condition aesthetically pleasing, but it helps preserve the club's resale value.

But one of the best reasons to use a headcover is to protect those precious graphite shafts. I knew a guy who never used a headcover, whether it was on or off the course. He would just let his clubs clang around in his bag unprotected on the golf cart and also in the trunk of his SUV. Then one day he was hitting driver on the driving range and the head snapped off. I think the clubhead flew farther than the ball!

You see, not using a headcover leaves the shaft exposed to the leading edges of any neighboring irons. Like eager beavers chipping away at a tree, the countless mini-dings from these irons can weaken the shaft to the point where it may break. At least that's what the pro shop guy says. Whether it's true or not, why take the chance?

Lastly, a headcover can protect your club from the prying eyes of thieves. With clubs such as the TaylorMade R7 TP worth as much as some people's cars, a generic headcover is the best deterrent for the growing golf club theft problem.

As you can see, there are some good reasons to continue using headcovers. But please, for the love of mankind, don't use a tiger headcover unless your name happens to be "Tiger." Otherwise, it's rather poseur-ish.

Avoid Golf on a Driving Range Mat!

When I first started playing golf, there were no grass driving ranges in my area. By default, I was forced to practice on artificial grass range mats. Not knowing any better, I believed that they were just as good as the real thing. Boy was I wrong. Indeed, I became pretty proficient hitting golf balls off padded Astro Turf. But that's a lot like saying you can fly a plane well after only piloting a video flight simulator.

While hitting a teed ball off range mats doesn't pose a problem, hitting unteed balls off range mats can adversely affect your swing. The main problem with range mats is that they don't allow you to take divots. When an iron impacts real grass, it digs in and scoops out a chunk of turf leaving the so-called divot. When this happens in relation to contact with the golf ball is all the difference with iron ball-striking. When hit properly, the iron contacts the ball before it impacts with the turf. If the iron hits the turf before the ball, the turf will interfere with the iron on ball contact resulting in the so-called "fat" shot (see picture). Besides the dreaded shank, the fat shot is the ugliest shot in golf. Laying sod is for landscaping your yard, not for hitting a golf ball.

Practicing on real turf gives you the necessary feedback to learn proper iron ball-striking. Hit a fat shot on real turf, and the ball behaves just like it does on the golf course - it goes nowhere. The beauty is knowing that you must have done something incorrectly to produce such a poor result. However, a fat shot on a range mat will likely produce a somewhat acceptable result. How do you improve if you don't know when you are doing something wrong?

Another problem with range mats is that they are unyielding to the impact from a properly struck iron. As a result, golfers may try to minimize contact with the mat, adversely affecting their swing. I certainly felt that extensive practice on range mats caused me to develop an overly shallow swing and become a "picker" of the golf ball. In other words, I was hitting the golf ball without taking a divot whatsoever.

While I don't think that there's anything significantly wrong with being a "picker", the margin for error is much less for a picker. Strike the ball one or two grooves lower than normal on the clubface, and a picker will hit it thin. A steeper swing will forgive such faults.

Lastly, the firmness of mats may actually start to alter your clubs! If you have soft, forged irons, the constant pounding against a range mat could bend the club's lie angle. Be sure to have the lie angles of your forged irons checked if you've been hitting off a mat.

Thankfully my local course now has a full-time 100% real grass driving range. I realize that my extensive practice on range mats was not only largely fruitless, but also detrimental. I now refuse to practice on range mats, using them only to warm-up before a round in the absence of a grass range. As Cheech and Chong might say, "there's just no substitute for real grass."

Alpha C830.2: 460cc Never Looked So Small

The UPS delivery guy is the Santa Claus for adults. I always get that sudden rush of excitement when I see that plain brown cardboard box sitting on my doorstep. Such was the feeling when I recently found a long, skinny box perched against my front door. Inside was an Alpha C830.2 driver with an Aldila NVS shaft!

You may be wondering, what the heck is an Alpha C830.2? We are all familiar with the big golf club companies such as Titleist, Ping, TaylorMade, etc. These guys have huge marketing budgets to ensure that they remain top of mind with the consumer. As a result, it's very difficult for the new and smaller golf companies to get noticed.

Alpha Golf is one such golf company. Started in 2000, Alpha was able to attract some attention relatively quickly by making a name for themselves in the sport of professional long drive. Long drive is golf's loud, rebellious and juiced-up younger brother. It is a sport that takes one element of golf to the max and then kicks it up a notch. To be successful, competitors need equipment that can withstand extreme conditions.

Alpha Golf recognized this need and developed drivers that could take the punishment while still offering top performance. Alpha's success on the Long Drivers of America (LDA) circuit speaks for itself. But how would such a specialized driver work for the average golfer?

That's what I wanted to find out with Alpha's C830.2. I had read that the driver head was a full 460cc, so when I opened the package I fully expected to see a Yugo on a stick. However, I was surprised to find a rather conventional looking driver in terms of size. In fact, it looks even smaller than my 400cc TaylorMade 540XD when viewed from the top! At first I thought that I had received the wrong driver, but "460cc" was clearly stamped into the sole. Like Anna Nicole Smith, the Alpha C830.2 hides its mass well.

I was anxious to get to the course to see how the Alpha C830.2 would stack up. To be honest, I haven't hit many 460cc drivers. They always appeared a little too big for my liking. In this respect, the C830.2 was easy on my eyes.

I have been playing with the C830.2 exclusively over the last month and I can honestly say that I'm pleasantly surprised. With my trusty ol' TaylorMade 540XD, I probably drive the ball an average of 260-270 yards when I nut it. It's hard to say for sure, but it seems that I'm a little longer with the C830.2. I just don't know if it's the sword or the swordsman. I could be subconsciously swinging harder than normal because I know that the C830.2 is a "long drive" driver. Regardless, I've hit some of my longest drives ever on my home course with the C830.2.

In terms of accuracy, the C830.2 fares well. With 460cc, it better! With all that surface area from its deep face, I seem to hit the screws on the C830.2 more frequently than my 540XD. As a result, my drives are a little bit more accurate.

As far as feel goes, I would characterize the C830.2 as having a solid metallic feel and sound, reminiscent of a Titleist driver. It doesn't have that hollow aluminum baseball bat sound found on some of the other 460cc drivers.

Having put the C830.2 through its paces, I believe that it compares very favorably against the "Big Name" offerings. Whether it is the right driver for you is another question. I feel that golfers need to demo many different drivers to find one that best fits their individual game. That being said, the C830.2 is definitely worth a swing. It may be especially attractive to those traditionalists who are uncomfortable looking down at some of the gigantic looking 460cc drivers out there. Just don't fall into the trap of assuming that the C830.2 is a "long drivers only" club. It works great for the "average" player as well.

BallFinder Scout: Titleist Pro V1 Finder

Now that the RadarGolf system has made it to retail, I wonder just how successful it will become. The company has certainly been successful garnering media attention and forging alliances with major retail partners such as Golfsmith and The Sharper Image. However, the product itself still seems a bit too gimmicky because it only finds its own proprietary golf balls. Once the novelty wears, will it have a viable market? I remain dubious. Golfers just won't give up their Titleist Pro V1s!

Well, there is another golf ball finding system called the BallFinder Scout that finds all (white-colored) golf balls, not just special ones. Remember those cool fictional robots from the movies, The Terminator and Robocop? They possessed advanced optical recognition technology to scan an area and highlight objects of interest. This is kinda how the BallFinder Scout works. The system utilizes digital video camera and color recognition technology to identify white golf balls.

According to the website, the device:

• is similar in size and weight to a mobile phone
• utilizes a 3.2 mega-pixel imager to locate balls within a range of up to 35-feet
• searches up to 600 square feet in one second
• can locate balls with just 3 dimples on the ball visible

But how do you use it? According to the website:

Just point the SCOUT™ in the direction where you think the golf ball may be hidden press the button and slowly move the SCOUT™ in a side to side scanning motion, once the SCOUT™ "locks" onto a ball you will see small red brackets appear on the LCD screen highlighting the area where a golf ball is located, the golfer then walks towards the area shown on the LCD screen to pick up the ball - its that simple!

Aside from the grammatical landmines, it sounds great. But like most things, I'm a bit skeptical. While it is endorsed by the great Han Faldo, I'm curious about the real world effectiveness of this device in practice. Even if it works as advertised, is it a solution to a problem that needs solving? Sure, it'd be nice to have a device that finds lost golf balls, but at what price? According to the website, you can order a BallFinder Scout for £148.00. At the current exchange rate of $1.8259 per £, that amounts to a tad over $270. Assuming that a slightly used Pro V1 is worth about $2, it would take about 135 found Pro V1s to recover your investment! I don't know about you, but I can't imagine that I'll lose that many balls in my lifetime. Regardless, I'm a gadget freak, so I may just have to procure one of these babies! Maybe I can hack it to find other stuff like lost money...

Fix That Ball Mark Properly!

The more greens that you can hit, the better. However, balls landing on the green often leave marks that damage the green's root system. If these ball marks are not fixed, the affected turf turns brown and dies, takes weeks to regenerate, and infuriates your greenskeeper.

I make it a habit to fix as many ball marks that I find when I'm on the green. I really appreciate it when others do the same. However, I can't tell you how many times I see golfers fix ball marks incorrectly. More times than not, I'll see a well-intentioned golfer plunge his ballmark repair tool behind the ball mark and then pry it upward like he's trying to uproot a weed. I cringe because I know that such action only worsens the damage done to the green, prolonging the healing process. If done correctly, fixing a ball mark will start the healing process immediately, rather than weeks later.

Here's the correct way to fix a ball mark:

1. Use a ballmark repair tool to do the job most efficiently.
2. Insert the repair tool at the edge of the high side of the ball mark.
3. Push the tool forward from the edge of the ball mark toward the center. Do this around the edges of the indentation.
4. Do NOT insert the tool under the indented area and push up - a common mistake. Think of it as pushing turf in from the edges toward the center.
5. Tap down the repaired area.

Here is a good vidoe demonstrating proper ball mark repair technique:



GCSAA

Together, we can make golf a little less grouchy.

Just Groovy, Baby!

Last summer, I played a round at Angeles National with Rich from Eatgolf.com. We were paired with an older man and his son. Mid-way through the round, the son started to offer Rich some equipment advice. He believed that Rich's drives were too low and he recommended that Rich play with a driver with more grooves to impart more backspin. Upon hearing this, I just grimaced. I had recently read about the topic of grooves on the Internet and I knew that his advice was flawed. As a person who hates to hear bad advice, I felt the need to interrupt. I remarked, "Actually, I've read that grooves on a driver clubface don't add a lick of spin. Just look at the new TaylorMade drivers. They don't even have grooves in the contact area." Everyone just looked at me dumbfounded.

According to equipment guru Frank Thomas, "...the grooves on a driver do nothing with regard to ball spin." In fact, some studies have shown that grooves on a driver can actually decrease spin. Pat Ryan Golf wrote about the findings of Art Chou of Chou Golf Design Labs and Deshou Liang of Drexel University. They discovered that a smooth faced club at low loft angles (less than 20 degrees) produces more backspin than a rough surface.

So grooves on drivers don't add spin. But how about other clubs? Surely, grooves make a difference, right? Yes, just not in the way that most people think.

According to Paul Smith:

The backspin is created by the balls compression on the clubface. This occurs between the time of impact and the moment of separation from the clubface. The clubs swing path and type of head rotation sees the ball mashed into the clubface. The loft presented to the ball distorts it in shape and gives us the launch angle and all of its backspin. The ball does not actually ever ride up the clubface, instead it gets imbedded in the face where the groove lines reside. High-speed photography has proved this. The more loft the greater the backspin.

Therefore, the grooves have zero influence on the launch angle or backspin on the ball. Well known club designer Ralph Maltby built a set of irons with no face groves at all and played with them extensively to prove this point to disbelievers.

Also, in the mid 1980's the USGA undertook extensive groove type testing and concluded that in dry conditions it was loft, not grooves that put backspin on the ball.

So what good are grooves then? Rather like car tyres which work perfectly in the dry, we need them to work in the wet as well. Clubfaces without grooves work fine in dry conditions but with water and grass in the way, the grooves allow some of the trapped materials to be moved from the collision zone. Without groves you may get a high flyer with less spin and in this instance the ball does in fact run up the face - it actually skids up the face on the lubricating water and/or grass.

The Sand Trap offers a similar explanation saying, "The main purpose of grooves is to collect dirt, grass, and water, thus increasing ball/steel contact." So if grooves aren't the primary producers of spin, then how do those pros on TV hit those high-spinning shots? Frank Thomas explains, "pros produce high spinning shots by striking the ball cleanly with a descending blow on an oblique angle..." In other words, perfect ball-striking.

Golf Review: Technasonic Check-Go

Snake-oil salesmen have long found golf to be fertile ground to hawk their wares. I can't think of another sport that has as many gadgets and gizmos that don't do squat. Thankfully, most are obviously junk upon first glance. However, there are some things that make you wonder if it's legit.

One such gadget that has always piqued my interest is the Technasonic Check-Go. It has been around since the late 80s and it is still a hot seller. In a nutshell, it's a device that's supposed to find the optimal balance point (equator) of a golf ball by spinning the ball at high speeds. Why is this important? Well, if you putt the ball along its balanced equator, it should roll truer on the green. Dave Pelz, the mad scientist of golf, has done research in this area and wrote, "Physics is physics. If balls are not balanced and they are not lined up on their balance point, they’re not going to roll straight."

It sounded good enough for me. I plunked down around 30 hard-earned greenbacks to satisfy my curiosity. Once I opened the package, I inserted my AA Duracells and got "Check-Go-ing" on a new box of Pro V1s. It seemed easy enough; just place the golf ball on the holder, attach the cage, hold down the button to spin the ball, and then mark the ball with a pen. Well, it actually takes some practice.

On my first attempt, the Pro V1 spun wildly out of control when I tried to mark it with the pen. Instead of a straight line along the ball's balanced equator, I ended up with a ball half-covered in ink! But after a couple more attempts, I started to get the hang of it. The key is to let the ball spin up to the maximum speed and then apply the pen to the ball lightly with increasing pressure. To get a heavier line, go back over the Check-Go line with a Sharpie and the Gatorade Line-M-Up method.

For the most part, the Check-Go works as advertised. I have put dozens of balls through this thing and it has always found the ball's balance point. Whenever I re-spun a marked ball, it would return to the same balance point indicated by the original line.

The only gripe that I have with the Check-Go is that the line that is manually drawn is frequently "off" a bit. The cause of this problem is the way that the pen is aligned and applied to the ball. To draw the line on the ball, the pen is simply inserted into a hole of the cage. Unfortunately, this hole allows some "play" with the pen allowing the pen approach the ball at varying angles. As a result, the line can be off from the true center of the ball. I have a couple of Pro V1s with off-center lines and I find it very distracting when I putt. Technasonic could improve the Check-Go immensely and probably sell a lot more of them if they just devised a way to apply the pen to the ball more accurately.

While I'm confident that the Check-Go does find the balance point of a golf ball, I'm not sure that it really matters in practice. I haven't noticed any difference to my putting results. I'm probably just not good enough to know. But if you believe that balanced golf balls will make a difference to your game, then the Check-Go is a great product for you.