Ballnamic

[KhiloD]

13 minutes ago, namcneilly said:

I hope your season gets started soon.  It'll probably be busy once golf gets started but if you happen to also do the comparison outdoors, it would be good if you could post whether or not you observed anything outside that differed from the indoor evaluation.  

 

It seems the key selling point of Ballnamic is differentiating between full flight results and what is computed from initial launch conditions.  I'm curious how this translates in reality.

I will definitely post and see on full flight vs. indoor. End of April most likely here.

[Doctor Slice]

I had been playing ZStar Diamonds since last summer after playing TourB RX for the last couple of years.   I wanted a change and decided to cough up the cash for the Ballnamic fitting a few weeks ago.  My results were:

 

1. Tour BX

2. ChromeSoft X

3. Vice Pro Plus

4. ZStar XV

5. Tour BXS

 

Based on the Bridgestone fitting tool, I never though the Tour BX was for me and went RX.  I picked up some BX and have been really happy with them the last few weeks.   I might try the Chromesoft X, but the Tour BX is giving me everything I want right now.

[hammergolf]

Really like on Balnamic how you can change your preferences and seeing the results change. Most of the balls recommended I have tried at some point. It seems like the biggest preference that changes the results are “workability” and “feel”. 

[mantan]

I got a Ballnamic fitting last fall. Over the last few months, I've played sleeves of all the recommended balls as well as a few close relatives.

 

My best matches were the Bridgestone X, Bridgestone XS, Wilson Triad and Chrome Soft X.

 

For whatever reason, I just didn't jive with the B X at all.  Which made me hesitant to play the BXS.  The Wilson Triad was solid all around. It didn't seem to shine in any one area, but was good at everything.  The Chrome Soft X was great in the wind.  I also tried the Chrome Soft LS, which wasn't a good fit.

 

The standard Chrome Soft blew them all away.  It was great at every aspect. The CSX was slightly better in the wind, but the CS was fine.

 

The only caveat is I did it based on my own memory of my launch monitor data. My driver fitting was supposed to include a Ballnamic fitting, but we forgot to do it.

[KhiloD]

On 3/15/2023 at 8:19 AM, Trippels said:

The whole point of ballnamic is to recommend balls based on testing outdoors, so Aerodynamic Performance is accounted for. As well as avoiding bias in the calculation algorithms used by launch monitors indoors. 

Not claiming ballnamic is 100% correct on your recommendations, or the TP5 isn't the best for you, but the indoor testing you've done isn't a good argument against the value of the ballnamic recommendations. 

Said I would update based on Real performance:

 

Have played my first couple rounds with the TP5 and what I saw indoor on the sims is what I am seeing in real flight and play.

 

It had a much flatter trajectory but was able to stop where I needed it to. Was excellent in to the wind as well.

 

Extremely happy that this is now a piece of equipment I don't have to worry about for the season.

[buckI]

Did the Ballnamic at a Ping fitting day at our club.   Currently play the 21 Pro V1x and moving to the 23.   I need the spin and our club has smaller undulated greens and you need height on approaches.

 

The fitter put in the driver data and we filled out the other input and here was my results:

 

1. 23 pro V1x
2. Srixon Z Star Diamond
3. Chrome Soft X
4. Oncore
5. 21 Pro V1x

Flyer prevention is not high importance to me so that may have knocked out the Bridgestone.   I was happy to see that the ball I have been playing and moving to were top choices.

 

 

[MiloMalt]

For those that have switched to the ball Ballnamic recommended, do you still play that ball and do you feel it worked for you?

[Minarets]

35 minutes ago, MiloMalt said:

For those that have switched to the ball Ballnamic recommended, do you still play that ball and do you feel it worked for you?

Yes. Playing the Bridgestone Tour B X (in yellow) and I would have never tried BStone if it wasn’t for ballnamic.  Thought I was a Pro v1 and TP5 Pix guy for life.  Now loving the BStone X in yelllow 

[GolfTurkey]

8 hours ago, MiloMalt said:

For those that have switched to the ball Ballnamic recommended, do you still play that ball and do you feel it worked for you?

 

Also playing the Bridgestone BX thanks to Ballnamic and I'm very happy.

 

The flyer prevention appears to be real and it spins like crazy around the greens without spinning very high off irons and has good wind performance as advertised, 

Edited May 8, 2023 by GolfTurkey

[Wardonation]

I entered five different specs answering the questions. IT always came up BX, CSX and Prov1 just in a different order. Not sold...

[Jeff58]

Quote

Another form of fortune telling, sometimes called "reading" or "spiritual consultation", does not rely on specific devices or methods, but rather the practitioner gives the client advice and predictions which are said to have come from spirits or in visions.

 

Other forms of prediction that can have a high degree of accuracy relative to golf performance -

 

Augury: by the flight of birds. A large bird flying level along a fairway will very often result in difficulty obtaining optimal contact with your long iron, or having the ball stop reliably on the green if you do.

 

Scrying: by looking at or into reflective objects. If you look directly into a lake, stream, or other body of water and see your ball there, your score for that particular hole will very often exceed par.

 

The basic issue with Ballnamic is that it is interpreting your desires, not your impact mechanics. While obtaining useful data from a launch monitor isn’t trivial, it can be done in an indoor environment by comparing the test ball vs. a V1, which the LM is using to create the full flight model.

[Airjenks]

On 5/7/2023 at 6:06 PM, MiloMalt said:

For those that have switched to the ball Ballnamic recommended, do you still play that ball and do you feel it worked for you?

I switched to the chrome soft x LS and haven’t looked back. I would have never tried it otherwise. Worked very well and I definitely recommend it. The only rabbit hole I might go down if I get bored is stiffer shafts in my clubs to get my spin numbers lower and go with a spinier ball for the wedges. Don’t really need that until late summer and not a big though… 

[DJ07]

On 5/7/2023 at 6:06 PM, MiloMalt said:

For those that have switched to the ball Ballnamic recommended, do you still play that ball and do you feel it worked for you?

Yep! Switched to Chrome Soft X, and it was the right choice! I was a Pro V1 loyalist forever, but I wanted better stopping power with my irons and a ball that was better around the greens. I had tried ProV1x but found it just spun a lot and got caught in the air too much. The TP5 plays great in my irons and wedges, but I found way short off the driver. The Bridgestone B XS was also a decent option, but I saw inconsistent performance with it across the bag. I always tended to go back to the ProV1 then experiment a couple rounds later. Ballnamic recommended Chrome Soft X, and it took a couple of rounds to get used to the firmer ball, but it checks all my performance needs: long off the tee, good stopping power with the irons, spinny around the green, and the triple track lines work well for me putting.

[pmoore311]

Did the ballnamic fitting online inputting my launch data...surprised by the number 1 recommendation but was happy to see my gamer in the top listed balls (Pro V1). Gave some piece of mind that I am using the right ball. I'm right in the 170 bs range off the tee, and was very surprised to see this ball on the list. Anyone else recommended the AVX and have used it in the higher bs range? Could be a fun ball for fall soft and cold conditions here in Michigan.

 

1. AVX 96.8%

2. Z Star XV 96.8

3. Pro V1 95.9%

4. Pro V1X Left Dash 95.8%

5. Tour B X 94.6%