We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Golf Digest Hot List

I am probably wrong about this but isn't the face flex basically a work around of TM speed pockets which was thought of by Adams then TM bought the patent. This is just my impression as I haven't really considered Wilson equipment before and tend to be a slight TM homer
 
Canadan said:
I don't agree with the inclusion of look/sound/feel or demand in a hot list. At all. I don't write my reviews for THP based on what I prefer and I don't think anyone else should either. That is the kind of arrogance that drives me crazy.

I also can't adequately discount or grade the technology or performance of these irons personally because I have only hit one iron twice. That's why I asked the question "are they wrong?" because I don't pretend to know. I figured even 4/5 and 4.5/5 would at least net a club a gold rating.
Click to expand...

My thoughts were similar.
If you give one company 5 stars for innovation for visual technology that may or may not work.
And you give another company 4 stars for innovation for visual technology that may or may not work.

Where is the line drawn? One company did it first and that was 30+ years ago and that was the one that got 4 stars. Both companies put out a darn good product and I dont think that is debatable. So why is one considered groundbreaking and one considered almost groundbreaking? I should add that the C200 is at least attempting something never done before.

It doesnt stop there though. If you look over the list at innovation from companies that have truly innovated in products, there are short ticks here and there over the last few years that are downright baffling. Then add in the buzz selection and how wrong it has been for a decade plus.

As I said before, its a thankless job and I think advertising has less to do it than people think, or at least I hope it does. But my take is that at least some consistency should be in place.
 
ntanygd760 said:
I am probably wrong about this but isn't the face flex basically a work around of TM speed pockets which was thought of by Adams then TM bought the patent. This is just my impression as I haven't really considered Wilson equipment before and tend to be a slight TM homer
Click to expand...
Its much more complete of a mechanism for ball speed creation and retention than that single slot was/is. It's actually quite ingenious and works crazy well. W/S is bringing it.
 
ntanygd760 said:
I am probably wrong about this but isn't the face flex basically a work around of TM speed pockets which was thought of by Adams then TM bought the patent. This is just my impression as I haven't really considered Wilson equipment before and tend to be a slight TM homer
Click to expand...

it's quite different in reality. However it looks similar to the sole slots on the TM irons, and I think that's a confusing part that makes it appear that this tech has been done before.
 
The video version is more interesting. There is a video review of each piece of equipment.
 
ntanygd760 said:
I am probably wrong about this but isn't the face flex basically a work around of TM speed pockets which was thought of by Adams then TM bought the patent. This is just my impression as I haven't really considered Wilson equipment before and tend to be a slight TM homer
Click to expand...

Definitely not. Wilson had slots in the face of irons over 3 decades ago.
 
Will have to try them out then when I go and buy my next set of irons.
 
deuce said:
They put the F5 and C200 irons on the Silver list.
Click to expand...

But Wilson does not get much love anywhere outside our forum. Not agreeing, just saying.
 
tahoebum said:
I really doubt I'll read a golf magazine at all this year unless I stumble across one on a plane or in a doctor's office. All the reviews I need are here!
Click to expand...

QFT.

It seems like every year when the list comes out, the same conversations take place. If people want to base their purchase decisions on a magazine, it's their money, they can do what they want. I'd rather base my decisions on what golfers who have a game like mine say, along with my impressions and testing of the club (if I can get my hands on them).

re: 2/5 for demand of the C200s - it's almost a self fulfilling prophecy in a way. How many average golfers are going to see that and go "well, the Hot List says demand is only a 2, so they can't be that good. I'll go hit something else instead." I don't know the answer to that
 
Having "Demand" as a category just flat out makes the entire list a disgrace and a waste of both the paper it's written and the ink in the pen.

Let's let preconceived notions of every OEM be the main determining factor and separator of our comparison rankings. Great idea (sarcasm). The whole point of comparing two or ten different products is to let the performance and tech speak for itself. The dinosaurs at GD need a wake up call.
 
I just read the hot list then I brushed my cat. One of those activities was productive.
 
tucsondivots said:
But Wilson does not get much love anywhere outside our forum. Not agreeing, just saying.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but when a magazine - that is read by a lot of people, a lot of whom actually give these lists credence - downgrades these irons ... they stick another knife in the back of W/S ... and based on what? The fact that they don't generate much buzz? GD is creating a self-fulfilling prophecy, and it's crap.
 
I take the hot list for what it is...someone's opinion. Plus rankings are fun. Would I read a THP thread where JB or JMan ranked their top 5 drivers....hell yeah I would. Does it influence some purchases...more than likely.
 
Remember folks, reviews and hot lists are largely based on OPPINIONS. Neither are 100% factual.
 
Borss said:
Remember folks, reviews and hot lists are largely based on OPPINIONS. Neither are 100% factual.
Click to expand...

BUT, this list has the potential to influence sales.
 
I always check out the hot list, but don't treat it as gospel. If I come away with one piece of information that I didn't find elsewhere, I'm happy. I trust THP reviews more than anything else. It's what brought me here in the first place.
 
deuce said:
BUT, this list has the potential to influence sales.
Click to expand...

So do reviews and ads. I'm sure they're trying to be unbiased. There's nothing for them to gain otherwise.
 
I dont even look at this list anymore. Not enough involved to take it seriously plus there is money involved in the rankings.
 
Borss said:
So do reviews and ads. I'm sure they're trying to be unbiased. There's nothing for them to gain otherwise.
Click to expand...

I said nothing about bias. Their rating metrics suck.
 
Borss said:
I agree that the demand rating is dumb.
Click to expand...

I cannot believe I am sticking up for GD...but demand IS part of the equation. What is the buzz, what do you want to try. Most of the time you are not going to try 30 drivers...you come into the shop with 3-4 you would like to try. Demand leads to purchase.
 
Sweethebs said:
I cannot believe I am sticking up for GD...but demand IS part of the equation. What is the buzz, what do you want to try. Most of the time you are not going to try 30 drivers...you come into the shop with 3-4 you would like to try. Demand leads to purchase.
Click to expand...

I agree with you here to an extent.
However they continue to make it confusing, eventually it leads to people just assuming that a company is getting it gifted (which I dont think they are). I mean if buzz is a real thing, it really does come down to the one with the best marketing, because that creates buzz.

I would rather see consistency in other areas. I will use an example. The Titleist 915 driver. The company themselves said they used the Nike technology. Go back and look at the ratings for both and how can both get the same rating for innovation? Shouldnt one get innovation and one get virtually zero for innovation?

The same with the point in slots listed above by a few. How can one company do it first decades ago. ANother company do it and get 5 stars for innovation. Then the original company do it again in a completely new way never done before and not get 5 stars.

So if you want to make it about whats hot, performance shouldnt matter, it should be the subjective side.
If you want to make it a real list, then consistency should be there.
 
I see demand as an exceptionally bias concept.

1 - It's marketing
2 - It's prestige
3 - It's incredibly bias

None of those things reflect the quality of a golf club. Who cares how many yards'ier they got, I want what is going to make a difference this year. I want to know what club is changing the game and improving golfers just by using it. It is why I think the hot list from GD is nonsense.
 
I hate this list: it's a yearly joke that is published for the uninformed consumer base. Things we read here often conflict with what is "hot" and what isn't. On the plus side, we're fortunate to have the access we have to the OEM's and have a staff of writers that bring it unbiased. Written by peers who call them how they seem them. Regardless of what some think.

BTW Club clash will give me all the information I need for driver pondering 2016.
 
I take zero stock in this Hot List whatsoever, but you know what, even if the companies say they don't like it, look at their marketing. Those gold badges are displayed everywhere by virtually every company that got them. Not saying I agree or disagree with the blasphemous abuse of the gold/silver/bronze ratio and/or the ratings they hand out, but some people and the companies use it to their advantage. Ok, I admit, I don't agree with it.

In the end, it's all business and if it gets people excited to try new equipment, so be it. There are uses for just about everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top