Your most unpopular Golf opinions?

[Gdane]

My unpopular opinion is that I'm ok with value-rate muni's and budget-friendly privately owned golf courses charging extra for range balls.

 

What is really starting to grind my gears is higher-end publics that have increased their rates 50%+ over the last couple of years and still charging extra for a small bucket.  This is a totally arbitrary number and capitalism is capitalism, but once I'm paying $100+ hand me a token at the shop, or have the pyramids out at the range.

 

/rant

[jda]

The amount of "it works for me, so it should work for you" with golfers is even higher than just normal privileged older men in general population.

[GoldenAges]

When graphite shafts took over I found that 44.5" was the perfect 'fit' for my swing. I'm 6 feet tall.

 

Drivers are now designed for lightweight shafts with a STANDARD length of 45.75".

 

The biggest scam in golf is driver and fairway wood fittings. They will 'fit' a 5'6" man into a 50 gram shafted 45.75" driver that is actually not a fit at all and player has no chance at hitting good consistently. No chance.

 

They couldn't fit this player correctly if they wanted because his driver shaft would be 43 inches and he needs a 75g driver shaft to maintain proper swingweight. 3w needs to be probably 42.25" an 85g shaft and 5w needs probably around 41.5" and a 95 gram shaft to 'fit' the golfer. They dont make that weight shaft in the flex he needs in order to be 'fit'.

 

I can't get fit for any of my woods because nobody carries the few shafts I need to try to be properly 'fit'. I have a 70g driver shaft and would need an 80 and 90g shaft for my fairways which no local fitters carry.

 

 

 

[david.c.w]

1 hour ago, GoldenAges said:

When graphite shafts took over I found that 44.5" was the perfect 'fit' for my swing. I'm 6 feet tall.

 

Drivers are now designed for lightweight shafts with a STANDARD length of 45.75".

 

The biggest scam in golf is driver and fairway wood fittings. They will 'fit' a 5'6" man into a 50 gram shafted 45.75" driver that is actually not a fit at all and player has no chance at hitting good consistently. No chance.

 

They couldn't fit this player correctly if they wanted because his driver shaft would be 43 inches and he needs a 75g driver shaft to maintain proper swingweight. 3w needs to be probably 42.25" an 85g shaft and 5w needs probably around 41.5" and a 95 gram shaft to 'fit' the golfer. They dont make that weight shaft in the flex he needs in order to be 'fit'.

 

I can't get fit for any of my woods because nobody carries the few shafts I need to try to be properly 'fit'. I have a 70g driver shaft and would need an 80 and 90g shaft for my fairways which no local fitters carry.

 

 

 

 

Disagree, assuming the fitting is done on a Trackman.  I did a shaft fitting for my driver and the data was concrete.  

 

If the player gets fit and they have consistent output, does not matter what they are fit with.  Swings our there are wild.  Perhaps it would "never" work on a tour player swing, but might work perfectly on a 10 index.

 

If it looks stupid but works, it is not stupid.

 

 

[Ereim]

Unpopular opinion: 

 

You should play the upmost tees until you break 100, then move back one until you break 90, back again when you break 80. The game is hard enough, don’t let vanity get in the way of having a good time.

[mshills]

People who go off about fittings being a waste of time have never been properly fit.

 

Aimpoint, correctly used, speeds up pace of play. 

 

”Shallow the club” will be seen in a couple years as just as useful as stack-and-tilt or strong left hand grip or reverse C are today. 

[klebs01]

2 hours ago, GoldenAges said:

When graphite shafts took over I found that 44.5" was the perfect 'fit' for my swing. I'm 6 feet tall.

 

Drivers are now designed for lightweight shafts with a STANDARD length of 45.75".

 

The biggest scam in golf is driver and fairway wood fittings. They will 'fit' a 5'6" man into a 50 gram shafted 45.75" driver that is actually not a fit at all and player has no chance at hitting good consistently. No chance.

 

They couldn't fit this player correctly if they wanted because his driver shaft would be 43 inches and he needs a 75g driver shaft to maintain proper swingweight. 3w needs to be probably 42.25" an 85g shaft and 5w needs probably around 41.5" and a 95 gram shaft to 'fit' the golfer. They dont make that weight shaft in the flex he needs in order to be 'fit'.

 

I can't get fit for any of my woods because nobody carries the few shafts I need to try to be properly 'fit'. I have a 70g driver shaft and would need an 80 and 90g shaft for my fairways which no local fitters carry.

 

 

 

don’t need heavy shafts to get the swing eight correct. I play all my woods short with 60g shafts and still have them at d4. Companies will build them for you if ordered with those specs. It is frustrating that I have to buy them to try them though. Wish companies would carry short x flex shafts in the kit as well as extra weights. 

[klebs01]

7 minutes ago, mshills said:

People who go off about fittings being a waste of time have never been properly fit.

 

Aimpoint, correctly used, speeds up pace of play. 

 

”Shallow the club” will be seen in a couple years as just as useful as stack-and-tilt or strong left hand grip or reverse C are today. 

eh. Not sure I’ve ever seen items that would fit me on a fitting cart. Would be nice to have a full tour experience though. 

[DavePelz4]

Enjoy watching Akshay Bhatia play but we need to start a GoFundMe and get him a couple of cheeseburgers.  He's 6'1" and weighs 130 pounds.  That's wrong.

[GoldenAges]

5 hours ago, david.c.w said:

 

Disagree, assuming the fitting is done on a Trackman.  I did a shaft fitting for my driver and the data was concrete.  

 

If the player gets fit and they have consistent output, does not matter what they are fit with.  Swings our there are wild.  Perhaps it would "never" work on a tour player swing, but might work perfectly on a 10 index.

 

If it looks stupid but works, it is not stupid.

 

 

What they're doing with the lengths of metal woods is not fitting the club to the person. The person ends up picking the best option out of several bad options. That doesn't mean the fitting was successful. 

My 9i is 36 inches long with a 125g shaft. You could fit me into a 39 inch 9i with a 35g shaft and if I hit a few good ones on a trackman it would be a success?

 

If it looks stupid but works once trackman but is not sustainable, it is stupid.

 

A proper fitting would put the emphasis on fitting the club length to the person. A player will benefit many times over by having shorter, more accurate clubs than long clubs that dont fit the person and spray all over the course.

 

[BIG STU]

On 6/11/2024 at 7:08 AM, mshills said:

Removing bunkers is often a great idea. For many courses, it saves some amount of maintenance $, can help keep the cost of play low, and make the game more accessible.  
 

Bunkers don’t need to be manicured. We should learn something from looking at Royal Melbourne as one example. They don’t need to be perfect, in fact I’d say they shouldn’t be. That local $50 daily fee should not aspire to, or spend like, Muirfield Village or Quail Hollow or Augusta National. If I’m mad about it, don’t hit it there. 

One of the gripes in my Men's League. We are allowed to rake (if one available) and place in the traps. Like you said our course is not Augusta National or Quail Hollow and our traps are not maintained. Of course with our full membership rates or partial rates one should not expect it. I tried to get the league to play it as it lies. OMG the howls of protest. Now at times they will play it down in the rough. I tried on a normal Thursday play day to get them to play it down everywhere. Our VP was running the game that day and I had him talked into it. When he announced it a howl of protest went up and one member pointed it out in the by laws saying we did not play it down in the fairways or the traps at any time. I tried to get it in the by laws at the annual meeting that as part of a regular game day SOMETIMES we could play it down everywhere. That got shot gown as quickly as the Chinese weather balloon off of our beach last year. I told a bunch of them if they played it as it lied that their handicaps would be much higher. One of the guys remarked that not everyone grew up on Goat Tracks in the Carolinas playing down matches. Maybe I am too harsh with a bunch of old retired farts having fun. One thing we do have here as in most courses here is a "root rule" which I agree with. No need for anyone breaking a wrist playing golf having fun. LOL I did have one the other day sitting on top of a big root. I did not move it and clipped it off the top with a 5 iron. In this case I do not expect anyone or everyone to do that. Like I told the guys I have had practice over the years clipping a ball off of concrete and roots. 

[Bad9]

2 hours ago, BIG STU said:

One of the gripes in my Men's League. We are allowed to rake (if one available) and place in the traps. Like you said our course is not Augusta National or Quail Hollow and our traps are not maintained. Of course with our full membership rates or partial rates one should not expect it. I tried to get the league to play it as it lies. OMG the howls of protest. Now at times they will play it down in the rough. I tried on a normal Thursday play day to get them to play it down everywhere. Our VP was running the game that day and I had him talked into it. When he announced it a howl of protest went up and one member pointed it out in the by laws saying we did not play it down in the fairways or the traps at any time. I tried to get it in the by laws at the annual meeting that as part of a regular game day SOMETIMES we could play it down everywhere. That got shot gown as quickly as the Chinese weather balloon off of our beach last year. I told a bunch of them if they played it as it lied that their handicaps would be much higher. One of the guys remarked that not everyone grew up on Goat Tracks in the Carolinas playing down matches. Maybe I am too harsh with a bunch of old retired farts having fun. One thing we do have here as in most courses here is a "root rule" which I agree with. No need for anyone breaking a wrist playing golf having fun. LOL I did have one the other day sitting on top of a big root. I did not move it and clipped it off the top with a 5 iron. In this case I do not expect anyone or everyone to do that. Like I told the guys I have had practice over the years clipping a ball off of concrete and roots. 

The mens league at the club I joined this year plays full on tournament rules for every round.

[Espy42]

20 hours ago, Ereim said:

Unpopular opinion: 

 

You should play the upmost tees until you break 100, then move back one until you break 90, back again when you break 80. The game is hard enough, don’t let vanity get in the way of having a good time.

At a course near us, the starter asks for your index then tells you which tees you play (you can play shorter but not longer). I'm not sure how they enforce it.

 

I know my game and I play from white or, on some courses, senior tees. I get comments because I play from the front tees, but I just shrug and say this is where I play from. 

 

[jda]

Don't roll the ball back.  Limit tour distance by:

 

1).  Tees only 1.25 inches max

2).  One attempt to tee the ball

 

If somebody tries to just stick the tip of the tee in to try and launch the ball on the upswing and it falls over, then they get to play the ball off of the turf.

[knock it close]

1 hour ago, jda said:

Don't roll the ball back.  Limit tour distance by:

 

1).  Tees only 1.25 inches max

2).  One attempt to tee the ball

 

If somebody tries to just stick the tip of the tee in to try and launch the ball on the upswing and it falls over, then they get to play the ball off of the turf.

It will take OEM's one cycle to adjust the the cog to match launch conditions for that. Tour average AoA is pretty neutral and even down still anyway depending on whose data you use, and that hurts the short guys who rely on ideal launch numbers to get distance. 

Edited July 2, 2024 by knock it close

[BIG STU]

8 hours ago, Bad9 said:

The mens league at the club I joined this year plays full on tournament rules for every round.

Man I would love that league

[Maine Golfer]

On 7/1/2024 at 1:03 PM, Ereim said:

Unpopular opinion: 

 

You should play the upmost tees until you break 100, then move back one until you break 90, back again when you break 80. The game is hard enough, don’t let vanity get in the way of having a good time.

yep. I basically agree. I play closer tee's, I'm not hurt by the fact my tee game isn't good. I play tee's that give me a prayer. 

[PedronNiall]

20 hours ago, GoldenAges said:

What they're doing with the lengths of metal woods is not fitting the club to the person. The person ends up picking the best option out of several bad options. That doesn't mean the fitting was successful. 

My 9i is 36 inches long with a 125g shaft. You could fit me into a 39 inch 9i with a 35g shaft and if I hit a few good ones on a trackman it would be a success?

 

If it looks stupid but works once trackman but is not sustainable, it is stupid.

 

A proper fitting would put the emphasis on fitting the club length to the person. A player will benefit many times over by having shorter, more accurate clubs than long clubs that dont fit the person and spray all over the course.

 

 

Still unsure as quoted above how you came up with a shorter driver requiring a heavier shaft to achieve an ideal SW or proper total weight for a shorter golfer. Makes no sense that someone who on average has less strength and less leverage to work with should be swinging a heavier, higher inertia club than a taller, stronger golfer simply based on the length that promotes an ideal setup posture and swing path for them. 

 

A fitting should figure out what actually works.

[GoldenAges]

On 7/2/2024 at 2:40 PM, PedronNiall said:

 

Still unsure as quoted above how you came up with a shorter driver requiring a heavier shaft to achieve an ideal SW or proper total weight for a shorter golfer. Makes no sense that someone who on average has less strength and less leverage to work with should be swinging a heavier, higher inertia club than a taller, stronger golfer simply based on the length that promotes an ideal setup posture and swing path for them. 

 

A fitting should figure out what actually works.

 

I agree, a fitting should figure out what works, and shouldn't be about putting you in a light shafted, longer club than fits you just to boost Trackman numbers, but yet here we are.

 

It makes no sense that a short human being needs a short golf club that actually 'fits' him?

 

Better to get 'fit' instead?

 

Ok.

 

I think people have heard 'get fit' so much that they're brainwashed and common sense doesn't make sense to them anymore. Getting fit is the only way for them.

 

Theres no way a 5'6" human can get a 45.75" golf club on plane and hit good golf shots consistently unless he chokes down a few inches. That's a fact. It's literally impossible.

 

My brother is 6'7" and he had a real fitting. Ping made him clubs 2" longer than average. He was fit to the club. Crazy concept, but it actually works. 

 

The 5'6" 20 handicap golfer needs an extra 5 yards off the tee instead of keeping the ball in play? Hogwash. Fittings are not about improving your game. It's about getting better numbers on the Trackman to get you to buy new clubs.

 

That's what folks are being 'fit' for out there instead of golf clubs that actually 'fit' the human. The reason lighter shafts are pushed is because they produce better trackman numbers. It's really quite black and white for me. There are real fittings, and there are sham fittings. 

 

I'm not saying all fittings are bad. Getting fit for a shaft is probably the best way to improve your game. Gap fittings are more than likely very beneficial the vast majority of the time. A vast majority of golfers could probably use a putter fitting.

 

There's not enough people using critical thinking on this topic. We're talking about a shorter club that is maybe 15-20 grams heavier in total weight and feels the exact same when swinging. I can't get down with the manufacturers logic that everyone needs 50g shafts because 70g is too heavy. 

These are the players whose best clubs are their much heavier and shorter hybrids.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 4, 2024 by GoldenAges

[jda]

True, but maybe unpopular:  most fitters are number readers and shaft swappers.  You are probably better off fitting yourself if you have any kind of knowledge about clubs, shafts and your swing.

 

Had a HS kid a few years back with a 125-129 SS.  Got fit in a R shaft since it had the fastest ball speed on the screen.  Seriously.  I started to tell him and his parents about it and they just did not want to hear it since the fitter was a pro - I just walked away.  He was in a Tour X in about 4 weeks.

[mshills]

@GoldenAges has obviously been “fit” at Golf Galaxy. I’d feel that way too. 

[Nard_S]

5 hours ago, PedronNiall said:

 

Still unsure as quoted above how you came up with a shorter driver requiring a heavier shaft to achieve an ideal SW or proper total weight for a shorter golfer. Makes no sense that someone who on average has less strength and less leverage to work with should be swinging a heavier, higher inertia club than a taller, stronger golfer simply based on the length that promotes an ideal setup posture and swing path for them. 

 

A fitting should figure out what actually works.

If you take an inch off modern driver, you need to add weight, the SW alone is reason.

I have wingspan of average 5' 9'' guy  Best drivers have used are 75g shafts at 44.5''. Why is a PW 14g heavier than #8i? Dunno honest, but shorter lengths need to be heavier, it's the extended lengths that need lighter. Much of it is math/physics and dynamics of swinging club. 

[Maine Golfer]

At the end of the day the player has to make a choice. I hope people have honest fitters and plenty of options but YOU have to pick!

 

 

[Ferguson]

Better players should get preferred tee times.  

[david.c.w]

15 hours ago, GoldenAges said:

 

Theres no way a 5'6" human can get a 45.75" golf club on plane and hit good golf shots consistently unless he chokes down a few inches. That's a fact. It's literally impossible.

 

 

Tell that to the 5'6" golfer with the 45.75" driver who is an absolute stripe show.  Have you seen real golfer's real swings in the wild?  There are some crazy ones out there.  

 

I love when a keyboard warrior sits back and says things are impossible and there is no chance it can work.  Would love to hear your thoughts on single length irons...

[knock it close]

19 hours ago, GoldenAges said:

Theres no way a 5'6" human can get a 45.75" golf club on plane and hit good golf shots consistently 

5'4" Brooke Henderson was using a 48" driver with pretty decent success, she just doesn't have a loft problem

Edited July 3, 2024 by knock it close

[aenemated]

1 hour ago, knock it close said:

5'4" Brooke Henderson was using a 48" driver with pretty decent success, she just doesn't have a loft problem

 

Beat me to it! 

 

Man, I love her swing. 

[klebs01]

2 hours ago, knock it close said:

5'4" Brooke Henderson was using a 48" driver with pretty decent success, she just doesn't have a loft problem

She also chokes way down on it. So it doesn’t really play 48”. 

[Argonne69]

Golf courses that require one to create an online account to simply look at the tee sheet, nevermind book a tee time, should be bulldozed and turned into housing developments or cemeteries. 

 

It's doubley frustrating when you go through the process, which often includes waiting for an email with a confirmation code, and then find that the course doesn't allow singles to book online. Grrrrr. 

 

Seems that whenever I create an account, there's never an option to opt out of spam, and I get a mailbox full of unwanted emails. 

 

Edited July 3, 2024 by Argonne69

[Argonne69]

6 hours ago, Ferguson said:

Better players should get preferred tee times.  

 

Bah. Sadly, better players =/= fast players. I'd rather have several groups of 20 cappers who know how to play ready golf and properly use a golf cart leading us off that a bunch single digit players grinding over 18 inch putts. 

 

Tee times should be based on pace of play. The first foursomes out should be able to play in 3.5 to 3.75 hours. 

 

Had a wonderful round today. Teed off in a foursome at 7:20 am and finished in 3:35.