Lots of misinformation out there in regards to golf balls and compression. We wanted to share the testing and the data and show what happens with a high compression golf ball and low compression golf ball when they are both used by the same golfer.
Dan talks about why this test and comparison is happening and then takes some swings and breaks down the data to explain what is happening and how it relates to his game. From there we discuss why both of these balls are very good, but could be right or wrong for your game.
Soft vs Firm! Fast vs Slow! Spin Increase vs Spin Decrease! So much info and you see all of the swings and all of the data.
This is one you do not want to miss.
Now I need a simulator…
Second, I really enjoyed this, a great rundown of what works for a swing like @Canadan. It also explains everything he and I have been talking about in his iron distances the past year, that move to the RX changed things in a big way, and now we can see why.
Great video. Excellent length. More importantly something that should spur on conversation in the importance of the golf ball to help eliminate some of that one size fits all mentality.
should be lots of great info here
This is also relevant with things like reviews and hitting reports on clubs. As initial reports come in I think some want absolutes on spin and distance narratives with new release irons (for exsmple), but it really depends on the player AND ball. Sound changes too … ? I was hitting p770 the other day and the shop owner/fitter throws out a ball — try this one. Lower compression and spin drops significantly. I felt (sound) like I was hitting a different club.
And I also see differences depending on what type of shot I am hitting.
Good stuff.
Never done a ball fitting, as I have always gone off feel, so I do wonder if there is another ball out there that can improve my numbers and help me play better
We actually put some thought into it, but with the limited time I had at the Tech Studio, we felt a comparison like this would be most eye opening.
I actually hit AVX as well (briefly) but didn’t feel like the differences vs ProV1x were dramatic enough to have the same kind of impact. This was about a combination of showcasing benefits, and representing a personal experience where I feel like my shots are genuinely a club longer this year – and the most significant change is the ball.
The most important part to me in that video was highlighting that spin PLUS descent angle and matching/fitting the two together is essential to maximizing stopping power and distance. Essentially if I summarize, the difference is about ~1400 rpm and about 10 yards of distance between the two balls. Even though we didn’t see what the land angle was on each shot, its critical to know as that will dictate what happens once it lands on the green. And ultimately for approach iron shots, that’s what matters.
Its something that crossed my mind when gaming Tour BX which matches my swing profile perfectly as I can get 4i to one stop hold on greens and on a good strike will spin back balls on anything under a 7i on most receptive greens vs gaming the Tour BXS which in the middle of the summer I actually found to spin to much for me as I pulled balls off greens. Knowing that and really highlighting what your video talks about, I know I can play the BXS early spring golf where greens are still a little stiff or late fall where they are a bit less receptive and play BX the rest of the year to get a consistent result.
1 – absolutely this is one club in the bag. We did the same test in our exploratory session with wedges that showed a greater number of difference, but I felt like adding clubs would not benefit from a time perspective. Obviously those who do seek a ball fitting should make sure it works from wedge to driver. Because of my speed, I have zero fear in the driver slot because any ball speed loss potential is instantly negated by reduced spin (which I want). Could be very different for others
2 – someone already mentioned putter preference which I can absolutely relate to. Making the transition from Tour B X to Tour B RX definitely promotes a subtle yet present audible change. As we golfers are lunatics by design, that absolutely could play a role in preference.
WHere did the Tour B X fit on the scale? Between the prov and B RX? Did the B X give you to much spin?
There was some eye popping information in this video. I am not sure how many, but I am willing to bet a lot of golfers are like myself, and just buy golf balls off the rack because we like certain brands, feel, unique characteristics, etc about a golf ball. We don’t truly fit our game to a particular golf ball. Honestly, I kinda thought many balls that are similar in price point would react the same way with the same swing speed. I know it’s been talked about here and companies like Bridgestone are doing the fit for ball apps and such. If I asked 10 regular every weekend to the casual golfer they would argue there is no reason to get fit for the ball itself.
Watching this video is eye opening to me on how I have looked at clubs and shafts so much and not at the ball enough.
If you all get a chance later, it would be interesting to see something similar with those with slower swing speeds. How compression of a low compression ball works with the slower and higher swing speeds.
Glad you didn’t have that swing versus Jdax
I actually did not hit them in the tech studio, but I had a chance to go to Bridgestone HQ last year where I got fit into RX. If you haven’t had a chance to watch that discussion with @rehbirdie, check it out;
haha, my second swing against @JDax was more in my realm. First one was a bit of a whoopsie for sure
To use an example, there are not many shafts on the market outside of extremes that would change 1200 rpms of spin.
Heck, there are not many club heads that would, again outside of extremes.
So for all of the conversation and attention to detail that we as THPers put into finding the best combination, it makes sense to put that same thought into the ball.
Would have been good to throw in driver and wedge data too, but I get that the video needs to be of reasonable length perhaps. Curious how the lower spin of the RX impacts you on shorter wedge shots and around the greens.
I don’t think this video makes any statement about the soft vs. hard golf ball debate. The only way to do that in my opinion is to have two balls with everything identical other than compression. Not sure that is possible without the manufacturer making samples.
As you saw at the Tech Studio, the options are endless.
We just need THPers to ask for it, and given enough time, I am sure we can accommodate. Be as specific as you want.
https://www.thehackersparadise.com/forum/index.php?threads/introducing-the-thp-tech-studio.8921986/
Can you explain this one further?
Two balls, both multilayer, both urethane covered. I would assume that the biggest difference between them would be compression, right?
With that said, I think there will always be a level of differences, between all balls, that is what makes choices good.
There is just so much misinformation out there in regards to golf ball compression, it was important to show facts and readers know how important golf ball choice is.
I think that depends on the player, how the ball reacts around the green. Not to mention playing an RX in Florida on dry bermuda is different from playing in Ohio on soft bent grass etc etc.
I’m not a guy who lives and dies by greenside spin. I can flop to land soft or pitch to bounce and roll without fear around here, so that isn’t the most critical component of a ball fitting. Do others feel differently about what matters most to them? I’m betting so – but that’s why the primary component of this exploratory video was to say "take a deeper look at the balls you’re trying" than "this is the ball you should play"
This is the first year I have FULLY committed to a single ball – and that includes giving away balls I have found, and not bouncing around between manufacturers. In the past I’ve played MOSTLY one ball but have hit others.
My opinion? Find something that works great and commit to it. When new products of similar compression/logic come into the market, test them against what you believe to be your best ball and make determinations on play moving forward.
…now obviously this is extreme and many guys are happy to play whatever is available, I’m just talking about looking for the product that absolutely maximizes your swing potential.
I don’t debate the concept of getting fit and its importance to everyone. That is quite clear in this video.
But this test IMO doesn’t conclude any debate about soft vs. hard golf balls. There are other variables not being controlled here to make that conclusion. And I also don’t necessarily agree with other sites that state otherwise. I agree 100000% that we all need to be sure the MOST important part of our equipment suites our needs.
Oh definitely, this is not a debate of soft vs hard. One is not better than the other, that would be up to the golfer and their game.
I want to quote this one as well to say that I don’t think a monitor is required to find the right ball, if you’re willing to buy a few sleeves to try.
Most of us have a putting green available, so learning about each ball there is always a positive. Then taking it to the course and giving them a try against each other, whether that means full rounds with each type of ball until you find one that produces the best overall numbers, or launches in the shape you’re looking for, etc.
I’ve been incredibly fortunate to have access to some incredible facilities to better understand what’s best for my game, and having the Tech Studio at my disposal last week, I got to really sink my teeth into why Tour B RX has been miles ahead of others on iron performance.
…I just figured it had something to do with carrying around my 4.5 year old on my shoulders all year long haha #DadBod
So although you appear to have concluded this ball is great for you, and I’m not debating what you feel is best for your game, I’m just curious what BStone would say about it.
I quoted in the thread already, but at Bridgestone HQ last year, they fit me into RX. Here is our discussion after the fitting;
That’s the main failing in online fittings or general ‘this ball is for this SS’ recommendations. It’s more complicated and individual than that, and Bridgestone went against their general advice with @Canadan because that blanket rule didn’t put him in what is actually the best fit for him.
One thing for me that needs to be better controlled for ball fitting is mats vs. grass. They provide very different interactions and, I suspect, influence things like spin.
It’s a reasonable baseline for optimization on a standard golf swing – Which we all know is rare haha
It’s also why Bridgestone has ALWAYS encouraged fitting and has used numerous methods to support the folks who want to play their ball.
Of course. Every lie on the course is different. Those are variables that are uncontrollable.
The baseline wouldn’t change however.
My question is about bettering the testing, what variables are not controlled that should be?
I’m not a ball expert that is for sure, but here are some that come to mind:
Keeping all the above the same, but testing two nearly identical balls on a machine, only changing the compression. That is how I would run a test if I were trying to prove my point on soft vs. hard. Scientific approach, controlling as many variables as possible. Only the manufacturers have the ability to run such a test I believe, so personally, I think of it all as just noise and marketing. This video does an incredible job of showing how trying a ball oneself, getting a fitting with data and testing on course, is the absolute answer.
Ok…..no doubt. So I guess the manufacturer themselves are a bit guilty of pushing a poor approach.
Although, I’m sure they do this in part because MOST golfers are NOT getting fit. Us maniacs on this site are the exceptions, not the rule out there.
I don’t disagree with those things playing a role.
The issue is the golfer cannot buy that, so testing it would not help them as much in my opinion.
Unless the goal is to say emphatically one is better than the other, which anybody that does would be incorrect and certainly will never be a goal of our content. But rather education on what compression does to a golf ball and how much it can impact the golfer at their personal level.
Oh absolutely. Blindly, and without more data, it’s all based in reasonable likelihoods. And they seem to have historically been good about encouraging people to confirm things beyond those general likelihoods.
I think the point of that is more about guys standing in a Golf Galaxy or whatever store debating on a Bridgestone.
You can’t say things like "this ball is softer" or "this ball is firmer" to appeal to people… and you can’t really go full Titleist who sells balls because they are Titleist. Makes sense that in the most basic sense, they would make those distinctions.
Good chance I need to change my lie angle, but I feel like with mats I get some club grab that can change face angle and dynamic loft. I also start coming into the ball more shallow on mats to minimize impact on my left wrist, where pain is always first to manifest with golf. When I hit on grass I don’t notice anything like that. Unfortunately I can’t hit outdoors with real balls and a monitor. That’s just not an option. All that said, I agree with the baseline. The things I see with different balls from indoor GCQuad sessions do seem to hold as I play. I lose a little driver distance (trivial) but overall I have better iron control with B RX over B X mostly because of spin and wind (mountain upslope and downslope winds are a daily thing).