JRod
Well-known member
Im in IA and still haven't received mine, gotta love the usps.
IQPLUS Golf Bar Testing
SW
Grinder
Its the post office, thinking stops at the front door. People in California got their putter covers before I got mine and I'm only 4 hours south of THP world headquarters.
Your bar may be paste or protein powder before you get it though.
Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk
Your bar may be paste or protein powder before you get it though.
Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk
Tmex
Paul Casey, WINNER!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2009
- Messages
- 21,982
- Reaction score
- 100
- Location
- Paul Casey's Twitter Page
- Handicap
- RCGA 14.2
Our mailperson didnt get here till sometime after 6pm lol. Not our normal mailperson. Anyway Im gonna eat this one tomorrow am. It looks like a great portion size and I cant wait to try it out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RxGus
Argyle Warrior
Still nothing here in Ohio Land... which is odd because THP mail seems to get here pretty quick.
I am working on a "summary" of the published study that I'll post tomorrow. Come monday I'll through up a review on the bar itself!
I am working on a "summary" of the published study that I'll post tomorrow. Come monday I'll through up a review on the bar itself!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2010
- Messages
- 10,448
- Reaction score
- 135
- Handicap
- 20
Okay, got mine yesterday.
Texture
Firm, but not crunchy. Very smooth mouth-feel. No chalkiness, and was most comparable to nougat. A little firmer, perhaps.
Tatse
Primarily chocolate, but on the back end you get faint traces of coffee. The chocolate coating is decent, but not extra-ordinary. Comparable in quality to a Hershy bar. I wish that the coffee flavor was more robust- it tasted less like coffee and more like toffee, too weak.
Texture
Firm, but not crunchy. Very smooth mouth-feel. No chalkiness, and was most comparable to nougat. A little firmer, perhaps.
Tatse
Primarily chocolate, but on the back end you get faint traces of coffee. The chocolate coating is decent, but not extra-ordinary. Comparable in quality to a Hershy bar. I wish that the coffee flavor was more robust- it tasted less like coffee and more like toffee, too weak.
Spank818
Brian Gaysian
Nice info guys and gals! Love the fact that it has a chocolate outside and that it doesn't turn rock hard when you freeze it.
- Admin
- #32
I love reading all the feedback. I think it's so interesting how one person wishes it has less coffee flavor and another person wishes it had more. Just goes to show you how different everyone's tastes can be.
BlueTitan
New member
I received the IQPLUS bar in last nights mail but waited till this morning to try it. At first I wondered what to compare it to, finally coming back to a supplement bar, which it is. Looks like a normal candy bar when you open it, abet quite smaller than the gargantuan 500 plus calorie bars that are out there today. Smell test, nice chocolaty smell with a slight hint of coffee. I mention this since I personally cannot stand the smell of several supplement bars on the market, thus I do not buy them.
Taste test was quite surprising, chocolate of course but not grainy, a touch of crunch and a hint of coffee. Happily it wasn't overly chewy either nor did it have a strange "chemical" taste either. 140 calories seems to be in a good range for a snack during a full round of golf. It seems to pack a high level of vitamins and minerals which I would assume works to the claim of improved accuracy, that and the Phosphatidylserine too I'm sure. Overall it's a tasty snack that I could easily eat out on the course. The one negative would be having to eat the same flavor for 6 weeks to get the 20% increase in driving accuracy. I surely do need that help with my driving, maybe they'll come out with another flavor in that time.
I'll be looking forward to Hawk's long term review to see if it's helped his driving and any other thoughts he might have.
Thanks IQPLUS and THP for the chance to try these!
Taste test was quite surprising, chocolate of course but not grainy, a touch of crunch and a hint of coffee. Happily it wasn't overly chewy either nor did it have a strange "chemical" taste either. 140 calories seems to be in a good range for a snack during a full round of golf. It seems to pack a high level of vitamins and minerals which I would assume works to the claim of improved accuracy, that and the Phosphatidylserine too I'm sure. Overall it's a tasty snack that I could easily eat out on the course. The one negative would be having to eat the same flavor for 6 weeks to get the 20% increase in driving accuracy. I surely do need that help with my driving, maybe they'll come out with another flavor in that time.
I'll be looking forward to Hawk's long term review to see if it's helped his driving and any other thoughts he might have.
Thanks IQPLUS and THP for the chance to try these!
claycribbs
Fear the Dolphin Swag!
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2009
- Messages
- 2,503
- Reaction score
- 11
- Location
- Statesboro, Georgia, United States
- Handicap
- 5.4
I got mine! Next round this one will be in my tummy.
Ole Gray
Mayor of the Woodshed
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2008
- Messages
- 31,292
- Reaction score
- 100
- Location
- Watkinsville, Georgia
- Handicap
- Average
Still no IQPLUS bar in my mailbox yet but maybe the first of next week :hungry:
thedue
Another Day in Paradise
Same here, but some great reviews so far. I keep wondering about this accuracy claim. Maybe it will help my eye sight, lol.
RxGus
Argyle Warrior
Study Review
Study Review
Jager R, Purpura M, Geiss KR, et al. The effect of phosphatidylserine on golf performance. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition. 2007. 4:23
Before I start I feel the need to admit that I am an absolute dork. That being put aside, I want to explain a little bit about how clinical trials work and the way we can use the "data" to reach conclusions.
Clinical trials use statistics to show that something specific happening (called an 'outcome') is the result of a medication/procedure/food product and not the result of random chance. In order to do this we have selected 5% as the major breakpoint. If there is <5% chance the difference was due to random chance- the results are considered "statistically significant" and if there is >5% chance the results were do to random chance- the results are considered "statistically insignificant". It is important to note that just because something is "statistically significant" doesn't mean that it is actually useful. A good example of this would be a coupon for $0.01 off a product that is normally $100 dollars. Sure, it makes the product less expensive, but it doesn't do much in the grand scheme of things.
The other concept I am going to talk about here is called "validity". When you make a trial you include certain people and exclude others. When you look at the final results you can only apply the results to people who match the people in the study. For example: if a study looking at people 60 years and older showed that drug X improved quality of life, we couldn't make the claim that drug X would help someone aged 25 because no one aged 25 was in the study.
Now to this study!
The study took 20 golfers (15-40 handicap, age 20-55) and divided them into two groups. These golfers were checked for diet (limited alcohol, no caffeine or other stimulants), medical history (physician physical, blood work), and life style (stress and sleep measurements). Before they started each golfer was given a full breakfast and a specific warm-up routine which was identical for all participants.
For each participant the study looked at their heart rate, perceived stress, and # of good ball flight drives on an open range. A good hit was defined as a "Draw, Fade, or Straight" ball flight while any other ball flight was defined as a miss. A panel of two "experts" rated each ball flight as "correct" or "Incorrect". Each subject took 20 drives at 15 second intervals.
One group was given a nutritional bar with phosphatidylserine to eat once a day for 6 weeks, while the other group was given an identical nutritional bar without the phosphatidylserine to eat once a day. Neither the participants or the investigators knew who was receiving which bar (this is called being "double blind" and it is a VERY good thing). After 6 weeks they repeated an identical set of testing conditions and monitored (again) heart rate, perceived stress, and number of good ball flights.
The results:
Ball flight
IQbar group: 8.3 good shots (out of 20) which improved to 10.1 good shots/20 attempts.
Regular group: 7.8 good shots (out of 20) which improved to 7.9 good shots/20 attempts
This was determined to be a "statistically significant" difference meaning that random chance could not account for the difference between the two groups.
Heart Rate
IQbar group: 113.8 bpm after the first test and 111.3 bpm after the second
Regular group: 114.3 after the first test and 111.1 bpm after the second
This was determined to NOT be "statistically significant" meaning that random chance could account for the difference between the two groups
Perceived Stress (on a 10 point scale, 10 being high)
IQbar group: 5.8 after the first test and 4.0 on the second
Regular group: 5.1 after the first test and 5.1 on the second
This was determined to NOT be "statistically significant" meaning that random chance could account for the difference between the two groups
What does it all mean?
The study concludes that a high handicap golfer (average handicap ~27) who takes an IQbar daily for six weeks will hit (on average) 2 more "good" drives per 20 shots when taken in rapid succession when compared to a player who takes a regular nutritional bar. While the data suggests that the bars may also decrease HR and overall stress in this same population, they are not "statistically significant"
What did the study do well?
What did the study not do well?
What does RxGus think?
Overall, I am actually very impressed with this study. Many times I have looked up "studies" for supplements or other things that were done so poorly you couldn't believe anything they said. This is certainly not the case here.
As for the claim that you will hit 20% more fairways... this may be a little bit overstated. What we can conclude from this is that taking an IQbar daily for 6 weeks will increase your total number of good ball flights per every 20 drives. This means that on a normal round of 14 driving holes you will have 1.4 more "good" ball flights. I don't know about you but for me, a good ball flight doesn't always mean a FIR. If I hit a draw when I need to hit a fade I can end up just as bad as if I had hit a massive push.
I mentioned "validity" earlier in this post. While we can speculate that a bar like this would help all golfers, doing so would be just that... speculation. This study is only valid for high handicap golfers, hitting balls on the range, in rapid fire succession. If you change any of those variables you loose the firm scientific conclusion offered in this study. I would be willing to guess that a bar like this might help you improve your total FIR stat but I can't prove it with this study. The problems here are that most of us don't hit a drive every 15 seconds, and most of us are more concerned about hitting the fairway (and not on the total number of "good" ball flights we have). This study makes no claim that you will hit more fairways, only have more good ball flights.
My final point I want to make is this: How much is an extra 1.4 good ball flights a round worth? $2.5 dollars/bar eating one bar a day for 6 weeks comes out to just over $100. While there may be a statistical difference between this bar and a nature valley bar, it is up to each of us to decided if that difference is actually useful to our golf game.
I hope you all enjoyed reading this (if you made it all the way through the post!). Please feel free to ask any questions at all (here or PM) and I would be happy to clarify points or expand on the parts of the study I didn't cover.
Cheers,
Gus
Study Review
Jager R, Purpura M, Geiss KR, et al. The effect of phosphatidylserine on golf performance. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition. 2007. 4:23
Before I start I feel the need to admit that I am an absolute dork. That being put aside, I want to explain a little bit about how clinical trials work and the way we can use the "data" to reach conclusions.
Clinical trials use statistics to show that something specific happening (called an 'outcome') is the result of a medication/procedure/food product and not the result of random chance. In order to do this we have selected 5% as the major breakpoint. If there is <5% chance the difference was due to random chance- the results are considered "statistically significant" and if there is >5% chance the results were do to random chance- the results are considered "statistically insignificant". It is important to note that just because something is "statistically significant" doesn't mean that it is actually useful. A good example of this would be a coupon for $0.01 off a product that is normally $100 dollars. Sure, it makes the product less expensive, but it doesn't do much in the grand scheme of things.
The other concept I am going to talk about here is called "validity". When you make a trial you include certain people and exclude others. When you look at the final results you can only apply the results to people who match the people in the study. For example: if a study looking at people 60 years and older showed that drug X improved quality of life, we couldn't make the claim that drug X would help someone aged 25 because no one aged 25 was in the study.
Now to this study!
The study took 20 golfers (15-40 handicap, age 20-55) and divided them into two groups. These golfers were checked for diet (limited alcohol, no caffeine or other stimulants), medical history (physician physical, blood work), and life style (stress and sleep measurements). Before they started each golfer was given a full breakfast and a specific warm-up routine which was identical for all participants.
For each participant the study looked at their heart rate, perceived stress, and # of good ball flight drives on an open range. A good hit was defined as a "Draw, Fade, or Straight" ball flight while any other ball flight was defined as a miss. A panel of two "experts" rated each ball flight as "correct" or "Incorrect". Each subject took 20 drives at 15 second intervals.
One group was given a nutritional bar with phosphatidylserine to eat once a day for 6 weeks, while the other group was given an identical nutritional bar without the phosphatidylserine to eat once a day. Neither the participants or the investigators knew who was receiving which bar (this is called being "double blind" and it is a VERY good thing). After 6 weeks they repeated an identical set of testing conditions and monitored (again) heart rate, perceived stress, and number of good ball flights.
The results:
Ball flight
IQbar group: 8.3 good shots (out of 20) which improved to 10.1 good shots/20 attempts.
Regular group: 7.8 good shots (out of 20) which improved to 7.9 good shots/20 attempts
This was determined to be a "statistically significant" difference meaning that random chance could not account for the difference between the two groups.
Heart Rate
IQbar group: 113.8 bpm after the first test and 111.3 bpm after the second
Regular group: 114.3 after the first test and 111.1 bpm after the second
This was determined to NOT be "statistically significant" meaning that random chance could account for the difference between the two groups
Perceived Stress (on a 10 point scale, 10 being high)
IQbar group: 5.8 after the first test and 4.0 on the second
Regular group: 5.1 after the first test and 5.1 on the second
This was determined to NOT be "statistically significant" meaning that random chance could account for the difference between the two groups
What does it all mean?
The study concludes that a high handicap golfer (average handicap ~27) who takes an IQbar daily for six weeks will hit (on average) 2 more "good" drives per 20 shots when taken in rapid succession when compared to a player who takes a regular nutritional bar. While the data suggests that the bars may also decrease HR and overall stress in this same population, they are not "statistically significant"
What did the study do well?
- Appropriate clinical design using the standards of ethics, design, and blinding necessary to appropriately evaluate the claims they are making
- Thorough preparations including using validated measurement scales (a whole different set of studies required) to solidify results
- Great use of placebo nutiritonal bars and limiting outside influences (alcohol, stimulants, nutritional differences)
What did the study not do well?
- Limited results to high handicap players
- Small study group (total of 20 people is really small) makes some statistical calculations less reliable. It would carry much more weight with 200 people instead (I recognize the cost issues involved with this).
What does RxGus think?
Overall, I am actually very impressed with this study. Many times I have looked up "studies" for supplements or other things that were done so poorly you couldn't believe anything they said. This is certainly not the case here.
As for the claim that you will hit 20% more fairways... this may be a little bit overstated. What we can conclude from this is that taking an IQbar daily for 6 weeks will increase your total number of good ball flights per every 20 drives. This means that on a normal round of 14 driving holes you will have 1.4 more "good" ball flights. I don't know about you but for me, a good ball flight doesn't always mean a FIR. If I hit a draw when I need to hit a fade I can end up just as bad as if I had hit a massive push.
I mentioned "validity" earlier in this post. While we can speculate that a bar like this would help all golfers, doing so would be just that... speculation. This study is only valid for high handicap golfers, hitting balls on the range, in rapid fire succession. If you change any of those variables you loose the firm scientific conclusion offered in this study. I would be willing to guess that a bar like this might help you improve your total FIR stat but I can't prove it with this study. The problems here are that most of us don't hit a drive every 15 seconds, and most of us are more concerned about hitting the fairway (and not on the total number of "good" ball flights we have). This study makes no claim that you will hit more fairways, only have more good ball flights.
My final point I want to make is this: How much is an extra 1.4 good ball flights a round worth? $2.5 dollars/bar eating one bar a day for 6 weeks comes out to just over $100. While there may be a statistical difference between this bar and a nature valley bar, it is up to each of us to decided if that difference is actually useful to our golf game.
I hope you all enjoyed reading this (if you made it all the way through the post!). Please feel free to ask any questions at all (here or PM) and I would be happy to clarify points or expand on the parts of the study I didn't cover.
Cheers,
Gus
thedue
Another Day in Paradise
Dang Gus, good stuff. You just took something completely over my head and made it understandable, which is no easy task, haha. While I don't look for this item to gain me shots in the same sense they are talking about, I really think this item, if it tastes good and does its job, might just save me shots. At some point during a standard round I'm notorious for running out of juice and then having a second wind at some point. If this helps me to stay balanced it will be well worth it.
I see similar traits in me with my pool game. A tournament like yesterday can last 10 hours or longer counting warm-up and finals if you do well and last. Add a little alcohol and it's lights out on the concentration by 6PM. Something like this could help.
I see similar traits in me with my pool game. A tournament like yesterday can last 10 hours or longer counting warm-up and finals if you do well and last. Add a little alcohol and it's lights out on the concentration by 6PM. Something like this could help.
johnday
Your everyday 4J
I recieved my bar yesterday. Forgot to get mail and didn't get it until this morning. Probably gonna eat it tomorrow morning before school. I was kinda scared to try it until I read some of these reviews honestly. Now I'm kinda looking foward to it...
- Thread starter
- Staff
- #40
Gus - I meant to respond to this earlier, but it slipped my mind. Thanks a bunch for the summary and the explanation. Sounds like the study was pretty solid. Great contribtion!
Tmex
Paul Casey, WINNER!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2009
- Messages
- 21,982
- Reaction score
- 100
- Location
- Paul Casey's Twitter Page
- Handicap
- RCGA 14.2
I received my bar in the mail on Saturday and brought it out for a little halftime snack.
It was the Choccocino (spell check) flavor as well. It was a little smaller than I thought it would be at first glance but it turned out to be a lot more filling than I thought. Which is really nice. Sometimes the protein bars can be too much and the nutrigrain not enough. This seemed to strike a very good balance.
One thing I really don't like is after eating an energy/protein bar, there is a feeling in my throat and stomach I can't describe. It just makes anything I drink after that feel kinda harsh. This had no such effect. Which is a huge plus for me. Especially if this were to replace a snack during the work day. I hate the discomfort I get from other bars.
IMO I get a chalky taste from a lot of bars that I tolerate because frankly, I have too. And the ones that don't have the chalky taste seem to be hard or just don't taste very good. The bar was NOT chalky and was very easy to bite into. Huge plus.
I really enjoyed the taste. At first I wasn't sure what to expect. Was I going to get the generic chocolate/coffee taste you get from so many other bars?? I wasn't disappointed. They really did a great job of blending the chocolate/coffee line without tasting too manufactured. The taste was sweet but not overly sweet and something that really struck a good vibe with me haha.
The texture wasn't what I expected either. With protein bars, they can be overly chewy and sticky. This wasn't the case. It felt more together but still maintained a very soft feel. Another big plus. This made the bar very clean to eat.
Overall, I would definitely replace the cliff/protein bars I currently game. I love the taste, portion size and texture of the bar. Really good product for IQPLUS! Thank you to both IQPLUS and THP!
It was the Choccocino (spell check) flavor as well. It was a little smaller than I thought it would be at first glance but it turned out to be a lot more filling than I thought. Which is really nice. Sometimes the protein bars can be too much and the nutrigrain not enough. This seemed to strike a very good balance.
One thing I really don't like is after eating an energy/protein bar, there is a feeling in my throat and stomach I can't describe. It just makes anything I drink after that feel kinda harsh. This had no such effect. Which is a huge plus for me. Especially if this were to replace a snack during the work day. I hate the discomfort I get from other bars.
IMO I get a chalky taste from a lot of bars that I tolerate because frankly, I have too. And the ones that don't have the chalky taste seem to be hard or just don't taste very good. The bar was NOT chalky and was very easy to bite into. Huge plus.
I really enjoyed the taste. At first I wasn't sure what to expect. Was I going to get the generic chocolate/coffee taste you get from so many other bars?? I wasn't disappointed. They really did a great job of blending the chocolate/coffee line without tasting too manufactured. The taste was sweet but not overly sweet and something that really struck a good vibe with me haha.
The texture wasn't what I expected either. With protein bars, they can be overly chewy and sticky. This wasn't the case. It felt more together but still maintained a very soft feel. Another big plus. This made the bar very clean to eat.
Overall, I would definitely replace the cliff/protein bars I currently game. I love the taste, portion size and texture of the bar. Really good product for IQPLUS! Thank you to both IQPLUS and THP!
MaryC
Lady of Leisure
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2010
- Messages
- 2,655
- Reaction score
- 24
- Location
- Greater Atlanta Area
- Handicap
- Back9 Beer
I received my bar in Saturday's mail and will be putting it to the test during my last playing lesson of the season on Wednesday afternoon (in 35 degree weather thank you very much).
Gus, thanks so much for the info. It was really interesting and I'm hoping some similar results on Wednesday!
Gus, thanks so much for the info. It was really interesting and I'm hoping some similar results on Wednesday!
Tmex
Paul Casey, WINNER!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2009
- Messages
- 21,982
- Reaction score
- 100
- Location
- Paul Casey's Twitter Page
- Handicap
- RCGA 14.2
I appreciate the opportunity to be honest. I was hungry lol. I have been wanting a bar like for a while and it's nice to have one!
Tmex
Paul Casey, WINNER!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2009
- Messages
- 21,982
- Reaction score
- 100
- Location
- Paul Casey's Twitter Page
- Handicap
- RCGA 14.2
I had a tinge for me. But not a lot. It definitely had a protein bar type crunch for me. If that makes sense.
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2010
- Messages
- 19,618
- Reaction score
- 4,086
- Location
- Liberty Lake, Washington
- Handicap
- GHIN 7.1
I got my Chococcino flavor IQPlus bar on Saturday and just ate it 10 minutes ago.
My first impression is...wow...this is tasty!
I'm a big fan of chocolate and coffee so this was right in my wheelhouse.
I could use a bit more coffee flavor, but I tend to like the stronger coffees anyway and I know a lot of folks don't.
The bar had just the right amount of "chew", so it gave it some substance, but not so much like some of them I have had that felt like I was gnawing on an old baseball glove. It had a great little flavor that finished cleanly without the heavy protein aftertaste.
It also didn't have that typically chalky taste that a lot of these type of bars have.
This bar is without a doubt the best tasting "Sports Bar" I have ever tried and as soon as I can find them locally, I will be buying a box.
IQPlus Foods, I say to you......well done !!
My first impression is...wow...this is tasty!
I'm a big fan of chocolate and coffee so this was right in my wheelhouse.
I could use a bit more coffee flavor, but I tend to like the stronger coffees anyway and I know a lot of folks don't.
The bar had just the right amount of "chew", so it gave it some substance, but not so much like some of them I have had that felt like I was gnawing on an old baseball glove. It had a great little flavor that finished cleanly without the heavy protein aftertaste.
It also didn't have that typically chalky taste that a lot of these type of bars have.
This bar is without a doubt the best tasting "Sports Bar" I have ever tried and as soon as I can find them locally, I will be buying a box.
IQPlus Foods, I say to you......well done !!
gbigoose1
New member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2010
- Messages
- 886
- Reaction score
- 1
- Handicap
- 11
I'm going to start off by saying that IMO the bar looked and smelled like a candy bar. If I'm thinking correctly it smelled just like a three musketeer. Personally, I loved the texture. It was really like nothing I felt like I'd had before. It had been in my mailbox all afternoon so I it was perfect temperature. It seemed crunchy and chewy but there were no nuts, so it had to have been something in the main contents of the bar. People have been asking if it has a chalky feel. Not at all, just like a candy bar here. Here is a thing about me though, I love chocolate, but I'm very sensitive to it. When I get to much of the flavor, I really want to puke. Here though, it was like you were just eating a snack. I actually ate it right when I got home from school, and it might have been the placebo affect but soon after it felt as though I was shaking off my normal after school nap urge. So my final thoughts on this bar would be that if the price is right ( I don't know if it's already been mentioned) I will be glad to go pick up more. I actually couldn't get enough of the texture. I loved it. I would love to do more tests on it to find out if it really helps energy and "accuracy" but I know that if it's decently cheap I would just take it to school as a candy bar. Great product IQ plus, you have must likely gained a customer here!
SW
Grinder
I'm just gonna throw it out there, no disrespect meant to IQ but couldn't the special ingredient be put into pill form or even powder based ala propel and used as on course refreshment?
I'm just thinking outside of the box, I know for me playing in the hot months down here even if I froze one by the ninth hole it would be melted mess since I do not typically take a cooler onto the course.
I'm just thinking outside of the box, I know for me playing in the hot months down here even if I froze one by the ninth hole it would be melted mess since I do not typically take a cooler onto the course.
RxGus
Argyle Warrior
Actually, it can't. One of the follow up studies showed that the the nutrition bar did better than just taking the active ingredient in pill form.