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!







Of course with my new clubs it picks the most expensive ball ever.
[ATTACH type=”full”]9264855[/ATTACH]
does anyone know if you toggle over and try the “cost is a factor option” if that takes up 1 of the 5 fittings?
I swear last time I did the ballnamic I put it that ball cost was not a factor then did it saying it was a factor. when I did it today it said I only had 2 sessions left.
so now 1 after my results above
$15 off code DAD15 to use by 6/16
Did it, thanks for the code @PiratePenguin Thanks for that! But the results. Oof.
Not the Rx that Bridgestone recommended, rather the bx, chrome tour or LA golf ( all in reverse order). Wilson staff also on the list.
Iโll do it again in few weeks. But wow, 180 off from expectations.
[QUOTE=”JW Smoove, post: 12406107, member: 63219″]
Did it, thanks for the code [USER=2635]@PiratePenguin[/USER] Thanks for that! But the results. Oof.
Not the Rx that Bridgestone recommended, rather the bx, chrome tour or LA golf ( all in reverse order). Wilson staff also on the list.
Iโll do it again in few weeks. But wow, 180 off from expectations.
[/QUOTE]
How did Bridgestone recommend your ball? Their online tool? Because that’s kind of all or nothing and puts me in the wrong ball.
[QUOTE=”OldandStiff, post: 12406129, member: 53737″]
How did Bridgestone recommend your ball? Their online tool? Because that’s kind of all or nothing and puts me in the wrong ball.
[/QUOTE]
Yes. The online tool
[QUOTE=”JW Smoove, post: 12406133, member: 63219″]
Yes. The online tool
[/QUOTE]
That spin or distance question with theirs is pretty brutal. This has more input and more options.
[QUOTE=”OldandStiff, post: 12406138, member: 53737″]
That spin or distance question with theirs is pretty brutal. This has more input and more options.
[/QUOTE]
Thanks. That helps.
Yeah the Bridgestone tool puts me in the RX because my driver SS is only low 90s. Ballnamic puts BX and BXS higher on my list and I prefer them both. Don’t like the RX for my game at all. XS is my favorite of the four.
6 BX mind set on the way.
I’m looking forward to getting some numbers with the new clubs to do another Ballnamic. I feel the suggestions have always been quite spot on to find the right ball testing the 5 best ones.
Howโs everyoneโs results been that have tried their top 1 or 2 choices?
[QUOTE=”Golfers Anonymous, post: 12410289, member: 59233″]
Howโs everyoneโs results been that have tried their top 1 or 2 choices?
[/QUOTE]
Mine have been pretty solid. Got me thinking about some things like stopping power vs. workability
[QUOTE=”Golfers Anonymous, post: 12410289, member: 59233″]
Howโs everyoneโs results been that have tried their top 1 or 2 choices?
[/QUOTE]
Good. Tried one I probably wouldn’t have and love it and now consider it my gamer. I had four finish within 1% of each other so I tried them all. Each may be “better” at one specific thing, but how do I prefer to use them on course? That’s where playing comes in. But great tool for narrowing down.
New email code today, two days only, FLASH25 for $25 off makes it $14. ? Expires 6/14
Was curious if Ballnamic is missing any of the current balls out there now? Do they publish a list of the balls in the database?
I know the V1/V1x is due for a refresh this year but not really concerned there.
[QUOTE=”erock9174, post: 12699551, member: 7797″]
Was curious if Ballnamic is missing any of the current balls out there now? Do they publish a list of the balls in the database?
I know the V1/V1x is due for a refresh this year but not really concerned there.
[/QUOTE]
They don’t publish a list but typically do post on social when new balls have been added
What all data does it ask for on the numbers side of things?
[QUOTE=”Scooby45, post: 12835534, member: 62865″]
What all data does it ask for on the numbers side of things?
[/QUOTE]
[LIST]
[/LIST]
Yeah, I like that Itโs all easily accessible numbers. Iโm pretty sure any launch monitor has this data.
Iโve gotta re-up my subscription, but Iโm gonna wait to do so until spring and hopefully more the new balls are added.
[QUOTE=”That post, post: 12835551, member: 65950″]
Yeah, I like that Itโs all easily accessible numbers. Iโm pretty sure any launch monitor has this data.
Iโve gotta re-up my subscription, but Iโm gonna wait to do so until spring and hopefully more the new balls are added.
[/QUOTE]
And you don’t even HAVE to have those actual numbers. It can use high-med-low inputs if you don’t have actual monitor data and still be good.
[QUOTE=”PiratePenguin, post: 12835564, member: 2635″]
And you don’t even HAVE to have those actual numbers. It can use high-med-low inputs if you don’t have actual monitor data and still be good.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah but they are so easy to get at pretty much any store with a launch monitor no reason not to dial in as much as possible
Timely bump with some ball threads, but it’ll be a few months before the ’25 balls are added to it.
[QUOTE=”That post, post: 12835571, member: 65950″]
Yeah but they are so easy to get at pretty much any store with a launch monitor no reason not to dial in as much as possible
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely, just pointing out for anyone curious who doesn’t that they can still get great recommendations from it. (y)
[QUOTE=”OldandStiff, post: 12835573, member: 53737″]
Timely bump with some ball threads, but it’ll be a few months before the ’25 balls are added to it.
[/QUOTE]
Last year they were a little late to the party on some. I want to say around June. Hopefully itโll be a little quicker this year.
[QUOTE=”Golfers Anonymous, post: 12410289, member: 59233″]
Howโs everyoneโs results been that have tried their top 1 or 2 choices?
[/QUOTE]
Good. The recommend accuracy always surprises a litte me but shouldn’t.
[QUOTE=”PiratePenguin, post: 12835536, member: 2635″]
[LIST]
[/LIST]
[/QUOTE]
Any concerns with the italicized spin numbers from trackman?
[QUOTE=”Scooby45, post: 12835680, member: 62865″]
Any concerns with the italicized spin numbers from trackman?
[/QUOTE]
Probably not ideal but workable?
[QUOTE=”Scooby45, post: 12835680, member: 62865″]
Any concerns with the italicized spin numbers from trackman?
[/QUOTE]
How much do you think those numbers might be off?
[QUOTE=”Parrot, post: 12835771, member: 48815″]
How much do you think those numbers might be off?
[/QUOTE]
Iโm guessing they are fine for the variance I bring to the table swing to swing. I just know some folks can get worked up over it so I was simply curious.
[QUOTE=”Scooby45, post: 12835680, member: 62865″]
Any concerns with the italicized spin numbers from trackman?
[/QUOTE]
Not if you link up with me and get a RCT ball
[QUOTE=”That post, post: 12835811, member: 65950″]
Not if you link up with me and get a RCT ball
[/QUOTE]
Fair point, we might just have to link up later next year if I am going to dive in.
Just a note for those who do subscribe. I believe you get 1 year to do all 5 fittings. I didnโt realize this and was keeping one back. I got new irons in Oct 2024 and didnโt realize my subscription ended in June 2024. Wished they would send an email with one month to go to remind you.
Use code WELCOME10 for $10 off if anybody is interested. Not sure how long it’s good for but it’s working today.
Yoooooo
[ATTACH type=”full”]9358944[/ATTACH]
got this response from them today about a couple of those balls. Let’s go!!
I shall do this shortly.
Would love to see instead of a recommendation on a ball, the raw data of each ball in a spreadsheet. Showing spin rates, peak height, ball speed, initial launch etc
Reviving an old thread here. Has anyone used Ballnamic lately? I know it hasnโt been updated for 2026 models yet but decided to do it on a whim anyway. My top recommendation was the PXG Xtreme Tour X, which wasnโt a huge surprise as I typically X model balls. My complaint is that I only see the results for their top 5 recommendations. I really wish I could see their data for all the balls in their system and make my own determination. The shocker for me was that the Callaway Chrome Tour X didnโt crack their top 5 for me as it has been my trusted gamer since last summer. Even being the prior gen I would have expected it to show up.
For reference here are my results:
1. PXG Xtreme Tour X (96.4%)
2. Srixon Z Star Diamond (94.3%)
3. Srixon Z Star XV (93.5%)
4. Maxfli Tour X (92.7%)
5. PXG Xtreme Tour (92.3%)
So whatโs everyoneโs thoughts? How reliable is Ballnamic? Should I run out and buy a box of the PXG balls?
[QUOTE=”The Scott, post: 13892206, member: 83243″]
Reviving an old thread here. Has anyone used Ballnamic lately? I know it hasnโt been updated for 2026 models yet but decided to do it on a whim anyway. My top recommendation was the PXG Xtreme Tour X, which wasnโt a huge surprise as I typically X model balls. My complaint is that I only see the results for their top 5 recommendations. I really wish I could see their data for all the balls in their system and make my own determination. The shocker for me was that the Callaway Chrome Tour X didnโt crack their top 5 for me as it has been my trusted gamer since last summer. Even being the prior gen I would have expected it to show up.
For reference here are my results:
1. PXG Xtreme Tour X (96.4%)
2. Srixon Z Star Diamond (94.3%)
3. Srixon Z Star XV (93.5%)
4. Maxfli Tour X (92.7%)
5. PXG Xtreme Tour (92.3%)
So whatโs everyoneโs thoughts? How reliable is Ballnamic? Should I run out and buy a box of the PXG balls?
[/QUOTE]
How much do you trust the numbers you put into it? Thatโs been the thing for me is when I did it a couple years ago I was feeding it numbers I had from an R10. Which Iโve since learned were not exactly very trustworthy based on seeing numbers on much more accurate machines.
[QUOTE=”The Scott, post: 13892206, member: 83243″]
Reviving an old thread here. Has anyone used Ballnamic lately? I know it hasnโt been updated for 2026 models yet but decided to do it on a whim anyway. My top recommendation was the PXG Xtreme Tour X, which wasnโt a huge surprise as I typically X model balls. My complaint is that I only see the results for their top 5 recommendations. I really wish I could see their data for all the balls in their system and make my own determination. The shocker for me was that the Callaway Chrome Tour X didnโt crack their top 5 for me as it has been my trusted gamer since last summer. Even being the prior gen I would have expected it to show up.
For reference here are my results:
1. PXG Xtreme Tour X (96.4%)
2. Srixon Z Star Diamond (94.3%)
3. Srixon Z Star XV (93.5%)
4. Maxfli Tour X (92.7%)
5. PXG Xtreme Tour (92.3%)
So whatโs everyoneโs thoughts? How reliable is Ballnamic? Should I run out and buy a box of the PXG balls?
[/QUOTE]
I find itโs a good way to learn about balls that may fit you. But until itโs updated I wouldnโt go running to do anything.
I honestly forgot all about this.
Was it the LA ball it spit out for a bunch of people a couple of years ago?
I actually always found it to be pretty balanced. I always got Recโs of balls that I already played, or that I knew did indeed fit my needs.
It just never made any sense at all for Ping, imo.
[QUOTE=”The Scott, post: 13892206, member: 83243″]
Reviving an old thread here. Has anyone used Ballnamic lately? I know it hasnโt been updated for 2026 models yet but decided to do it on a whim anyway. My top recommendation was the PXG Xtreme Tour X, which wasnโt a huge surprise as I typically X model balls. My complaint is that I only see the results for their top 5 recommendations. I really wish I could see their data for all the balls in their system and make my own determination. The shocker for me was that the Callaway Chrome Tour X didnโt crack their top 5 for me as it has been my trusted gamer since last summer. Even being the prior gen I would have expected it to show up.
For reference here are my results:
1. PXG Xtreme Tour X (96.4%)
2. Srixon Z Star Diamond (94.3%)
3. Srixon Z Star XV (93.5%)
4. Maxfli Tour X (92.7%)
5. PXG Xtreme Tour (92.3%)
So whatโs everyoneโs thoughts? How reliable is Ballnamic? Should I run out and buy a box of the PXG balls?
[/QUOTE]
I just used it as part of the 2ndSwing Virtual Fitting call. We plugged in averages from recent sim sessions, so should be pretty accurate data and results. It can heavily sway results based on how important certain things are. For example we put high importance on eliminating high flyers. Because of that ProV1X was my top followed closely by ProV1 and Chrome Tour
[QUOTE=”Jman, post: 13892241, member: 1579″]
I actually always found it to be pretty balanced. I always got Recโs of balls that I already played, or that I knew did indeed fit my needs.
It just never made any sense at all for Ping, imo.
[/QUOTE]
At least they could be unbiased since they didn’t have one to push themselves
[QUOTE=”Dan.The.King, post: 13892244, member: 85152″]
At least they could be unbiased since they didn’t have one to push themselves
[/QUOTE]
Eh. Kinda? Hahaha
Still, made no sense for them
Was fun to mess with though!!!
I think Ballnamic is one of the best resources available for golfers to get fitted to the most appropriate golf ball for their game. The fact that PING does not manufacture their own golf balls makes them a genuinely reliable source. Independent research is always vastly superior to all others. Any golf ball company-based ball fitting is suspect. (This is true in any industry when a company with a product in the field is sponsoring the testing. Data can be and is easily is manipulated to show any results you want or to change the focus of the findings. You see this constantly in everything from specious political explanations and messaging to advertising claims and endorsements. Yes. Outrageous claims and untruths can always be manipulated and spun to be seen in a more favorable light).
The fact that a golfer can input his own data and numbers, ball flight information, and desired performance outcomes is priceless. Of course, like anything else, proper interpretation of the results is pivotal. I believe that Ballnamic provides a great starting point from which to begin your own on-course testing. Launch monitor results are helpful. However, I believe that on-course testing is essential if you want to truly know how a ball will perform… (I,e., hitting it off the turf; watching the actual ball flight and trajectory; seeing how it performs in the wind; how the ball feels off the club face; how it rolls on putts; how it spins; etc).
FWIW: I heard in an interview with PING, that they developed Ballnamic to help them with golf club development.
I’ve never trusted it because of the name. The namic bit just sounds too phoney.
[QUOTE=”The Scott, post: 13892206, member: 83243″]
Reviving an old thread here. Has anyone used Ballnamic lately? I know it hasnโt been updated for 2026 models yet but decided to do it on a whim anyway. My top recommendation was the PXG Xtreme Tour X, which wasnโt a huge surprise as I typically X model balls. My complaint is that I only see the results for their top 5 recommendations. I really wish I could see their data for all the balls in their system and make my own determination. The shocker for me was that the Callaway Chrome Tour X didnโt crack their top 5 for me as it has been my trusted gamer since last summer. Even being the prior gen I would have expected it to show up.
For reference here are my results:
1. PXG Xtreme Tour X (96.4%)
2. Srixon Z Star Diamond (94.3%)
3. Srixon Z Star XV (93.5%)
4. Maxfli Tour X (92.7%)
5. PXG Xtreme Tour (92.3%)
So whatโs everyoneโs thoughts? How reliable is Ballnamic? Should I run out and buy a box of the PXG balls?
[/QUOTE]
Do you like a high trajectory X ball? If so, thatโs why it wonโt recommend the CTX – it is a low trajectory X ball like the TP5x. I believe all those other X balls you listed in the results are high trajectory Xs (which is what I like/need).
[QUOTE=”PiratePenguin, post: 13949292, member: 2635″]
New release balls updated:
[MEDIA=twitter]2036934989334675613[/MEDIA]
[/QUOTE]
Good to know! Sounds like itโs time for me to run a new fitting!
[QUOTE=”The Scott, post: 13949803, member: 83243″]
Good to know! Sounds like itโs time for me to run a new fitting!
[/QUOTE]
I won a free fitting in an X contest in December and have been waiting for this before running it. ๐๐ป