Could a company that doesn’t produce golf balls enter the ball fitting world? The answer is yes and it will begin shortly. PING is set to launch something they are calling Ballnamic and golfers will have the ability to be fit at their fittings (as well as online) and for a fee get information.
The website is setup and you can find it at www.ballfitting.com and while not a ton exists on their parameters, it appears on the surface to be quite in depth. We are told from someone that has gone through Ballnamic already, that it is well done.
Do you trust a company to offer “better” information if they do not have skin in the game with their own product? With recommending other companies will some loyalists decide to possibly try that other brand’s equipment as well, perhaps finding more technology or a better fit in a driver for instance? Only time will tell on the latter of course, but it is an interesting idea and at THP we are all for more information to the golfer.
We expect the roll out of this service to be coming very soon and we will be following up here as golfers get a chance to go through it!
The service is not out officially yet, but when it rolls out, there will definitely be all of the information on costs listed.
Fee is $39. I will probably pay it. Less than the cost of a dozen high end golf balls it doesn’t seem that excessive. I have certainly spent more than $40 on sillier things.
I just went through it and it looks like it might be $39 for one set of results. For that it seems a bit steep. If it is $39 for full access to run some different scenarios for a year then I might go for it.
I have a feeling that is where this is banking on. That while a person is at an in person PING fitting, they will get an "add on" to take that data and input it into the system since the accuracy will be there.
In my opinion that is what they are banking on for the time being. That there is a level of trust in the data because they have no vested interest. It does beg the question if let’s say a person gets fit to a Mizuno ball, one that maybe they never considered, would that also make them ask themselves, "well maybe I should try their equipment too".
Only time will tell.
I got to the point of paying and decided not to. This comment makes me feel better.
2) I was put in TP5 or Chrome Soft X TT.
3) Cannot believe I paid for that.
Very good point. You should be able to trust the data if they’re not pushing a certain company.
This is where I’m at.
I don’t understand what is in it for ping despite a money grab. ????
Data, maybe? I went through the steps all the way to the payment screen, so I’m assuming they’ve collected my information for whatever it is they’re doing.
So, not sure what I’d gain by spending another $39.
Certainly the financials are important, but I would say if I was on the other side the argument or gist of it would be, here we have Ping buyers. If we put them in a ball that works, and they play better golf than ever because of it, those buyers are loyal. Now the flip side is you are inserting other brands now, but time will tell on that.
I for one will not pay for someone to tell me what ball is best for me.
I get TaylorMade and Callaway out of it, who are competitors, and the first thing I wonder is how their equipment would fit me as well.
"flier prevention score" ??????
Bingo.
I believe (at least my brain tells me this) the above is the general idea.
Now if everybody was getting fit to Volvik for some reason, you might question whether or not they are skewing against competitors, but I genuinely do not believe that will be the case.
I’d run through it to see what sort of crazy configuration they gave me, but there is no chance in hell I am paying 40 dollars for an online fitting. Happy that @Jman did it for us.. you know, for science.
I genuinely believe the dynamic will change once it rolls out as it will be online, but more about an "add on" to an in person fitting where the input data is done by the fitter themselves straight from the launch monitor results.
"PickYoBallaForADolla" was already taken.
So, some kind of Ping based fitting, for a fee or free?
There seems to be an awful lot of free fitting experiences out there. Obviously brand specific, but still worthy of dialing in numbers and understanding the swing. I’m sort of curious what kind of behind the scenes discussions are going on at some of the higher end fitting studios about ballopoly here.
My assumption is that like many demo/fittings they will be free of charge and this will be an offer at the end to the golfer that for a small fee, they will get to be fit for a golf ball.
Now it definitely makes more sense if you are doing an actual in person fitting. I’m always a little skeptical of online fittings but at least it’s a guide for buyers.
On the flip side there’s zero chance I pay $39 for an online fitting. Maybe if I was doing a fitting at Ping but not a chance online.
If it were like.. 5-10 dollars and comprehensive (which it appears to be), I’d probably take a chance on it.
Nope, I’m right there with ya!
When I was stationed in Korea, they’d give us penicillin for this :confused2:
View attachment 9024578
They would lose their ass entering the ball market, so, being the choices they’ve made the past year and a half, maybe.
It was interesting to say the least since I entered all my launch monitor data rather than just using the broad choice selector.
I will say, it told me what I already knew as my top 4 were TP5, CSX, BXS, MTB…then there was a Maxfli…..
According to what I saw going through it, it’s based on how the ball reacts when wet.
My assumption is pretty deep, but to keep it simple, how it reacts when outside elements will appear, meaning water, rough, etc. This could be something that would change spin and drag dynamics.