Custom Ball Fitting

First topic message reminder :

Just wondered if anyone has had one of these done.

I've got one tomorrow at a course near me, costing £10 to have it done but if you buy 2 dozen of whatever your resulting ball is you get that taken off the total price.

Never really thought to much about ball I use kind of buy whatever the best deal is at time.

Thanks for the numbers Fader. Interesting to see differences. Not a great difference in 6-iron and PW numbers and the xFixx looks pretty decent. Did you get to hit any half-PWs? Be interested to see how the xFixx does with those sort of half-club pitches and chips from around the green - will you be able to make it hold when needed or will it always role out quite a bit.

Did the Bridgestone fitting today. Got fitted for the B330-S which was a little surprising. Thought I would probably fit into the B330 RXS but the 330-S apparently was the best for me. Got a free sleeve of the 330-S to take away.

However, not sure how true the fitting was. I passed a range while out shopping with the missus and persuaded her to let me stop in on the way back. No clubs or shoes; I ended up borrowing a driver from the range to take this test. Had a go with an R11 first but was hitting power fades until I realised the toe weight was missing got another one and this time it was the RBZ. Both of them were like breeze blocks on the end of a stick, probably a longer shaft than my driver too.

Picked up a sleeve of the 330-RXS to try out tomorrow along with the 330-S

navyblueshorts wrote:Thanks for the numbers Fader. Interesting to see differences. Not a great difference in 6-iron and PW numbers and the xFixx looks pretty decent. Did you get to hit any half-PWs? Be interested to see how the xFixx does with those sort of half-club pitches and chips from around the green - will you be able to make it hold when needed or will it always role out quite a bit.

Nbs: we hit quite a few 50-75yard pitches on the tests and felt good.

Used them yesterday for first time in an eclectic round and again today in club stableford comp. Felt really nice off the driver, got some really good flights on the irons and short irons/wedge shots really did hold up. One bounce and checked up, actually found better stopping distance than that of the mid range balls I've used.

Chipping was actually really good again got a good amount of control on all around and ral good one bounce and stop from bunkers. Felt nice off the putter. Overall really impressed especially as our greens have firmed up but the new ball was stopping

1GrumpyGolfer wrote:...Had a go with an R11 first but was hitting power fades until I realised the toe weight was missing ...

That's interesting. Would have thought that would favour a hook rather than a fade...

They were all consistent strikes and flight, Navy, so I wondered was the club set up for a fade? Looked at the bottom, noticed the 10g weight in the heel, and then saw the empty spot in the toe. I guess the heel weight pulls that area through first leaving the club face open?

navyblueshorts wrote:Not a great difference in 6-iron and PW numbers

Did you read the same post I did? 20 yards on the 6 and 16 on the wedge? If anything, it wasn't as great a difference on the driver.

I really want to do this sort of thing now, thanks for all the info Fader.

Really interesting stuff.

Fader - which balls did you hit first ? The pro v1's?

Can understand difference with driver but was surprised by 20 yard spread with 6 iron. That's massive !

Yep fascinating read Fader, the early scepticism by some on the thread was also amusing.

Scoring low at golf requires a lot of things to come together and to me anything that can be done to give an advantage, no matter how slight, is worth a go.


I must take a look take a look myself. I've used a Pro V1x for about 3 years, it flies well and I get good control around the greens with it. I don't think I need to change it but that is a pure guess. I wouldn't be looking for extra distance as I'm happy how far I hit the ball but if I'm using a ball that spins too easily toward OOB then yeah I'd like to know if there's a safer alternative.

SmithersJones wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:Not a great difference in 6-iron and PW numbers

Did you read the same post I did? 20 yards on the 6 and 16 on the wedge? If anything, it wasn't as great a difference on the driver.

I really want to do this sort of thing now, thanks for all the info Fader.

I was meaning the spin numbers....

Still think its a pile of crap, as the trackman does not take into account the type of weather we are playing in, and can vary on how it is set up.

I know in hot/warm weather, I can hit my 8 iron 150 yards but in normal weather it's between 135/140 no matter what make of ball I choose, the thing that makes me choose a make of golf ball is how well it feels coming of the putter face.

All golf balls are made by basically the same process, and the same components, I know that the pro v1s had an advantage several years back, but they are now all much the same, the only difference being the makers mark.

OP, the trackman/doplar I've been on is outside so the ball flight is affected by the weather. Not sure how you could have a problem with that.

As for balls being much of a muchness, well, I can see why it's easy to say that but it isn't really true, I used to get way too much spin off a pro-v, sometimes coming right off certain greens, however other premium balls have less spin.

Horses for courses, but they are not all the same.

Very interesting fader but I'm still a bit sceptical. Sometimes during a practice round I'll hit about 5 balls of the tee and there's no noticeable difference in distance or trajectory between a top flite and an old pro v1. The only difference for me is how they react on the green.

OP: Balls are all the same.. Well they are all round. Other than that they most certainly are different in the composite materials many are made of. Also theres no way you can say a 2 piece is the same as a 5 piece ball.

The test was done outdoors so factored in air pressure as well.

Ray: THe Pro V1 was the 12th ball I tried out we actually started out with Callways, onto Bridgestione then Titleist and TM's.

Jas: I wasn;t looking for the additional yardage either, but it's a happy bonus, the control I've got over the weekend is no different to what I was getting with the Mid Range balls I usually buy if anything it was a lot better.

Guess I was right about it being a good sales technique then Fader.

One thing that interests me about the Trackman results are that I'd always thought that the higher the spin rates the higher the ball would go hence you hit it more gently into the wind to reduce spin and therefore height. These results are the exact opposite.

I've no idea about techniques and the science of the game I just see the ball and hit it so are there any golf science bods with an explanation?

i cant believe theres such a big difference between balls with ur irons.
i have a dolly mixture in my practise bag. when i go to the range i dont notice any huge difference in terms of carry length

Not sure why everyone is questioning Faders claims.

None of you lot have done it, and don't have the benefit of a doplar radar in your eyeball so cant say whether there is a difference between your practice shots.

sorry just to be clear.. im not questioning fader.. im merely saying that when im on the range my dispersion with various different balls is nowhere near as much as his reading from trackman.
and i dont need a doplar radar..... when i go to pick up the balls

At the same time hendo, doesn't sound like you've tried it using the same kind of ball.

yeah i dont think ive many bridgestones in there granted but ive everything from yellow range balls to hard pinnacles and srixons to old pro Vs.

Hibbz: That was what surprised me to, I always though higher spin rate meant higher launch and ball flight. However it was explained to me that swing speed has an impact on how it compressed the ball + spin and launch angle to give overall result.. My swing speed combined with the other factors didn't give me optimal angles for use of Premium balls. Now If that’s wrong someone please correct me as I was getting a bit baffled by the science after a while.

But your right a good sales technique but one I’m happy to have taken part in.

Hend: Agreed it was the irons that were the biggest shock to me, I thought I'd be a bit longer with the driver and maybe a yard or 2 with the irons not a club & half. But thems the figures on the Trackman and was a tenner well spent and I’m liking the Bridgestone’s so far.

The biggest thing I think about this is the fact it shows one ball doesn't suit all.

hend085 wrote:yeah i dont think ive many bridgestones in there granted but ive everything from yellow range balls to hard pinnacles and srixons to old pro Vs.

Point being that if you only had a bag full of one type and one type only, you might get an even tighter distribution.

We had this discussion a couple of years ago on the old BBC site. I went and had a ball fitting as it was a freebie. At the time I was using Calloway balls and after hitting 5 balls by Calloway, Titiest, Srixon, Bridgstone, TM and a couple more. We looked at the results and for me on that particular day Bridgstone Tour B330RX were best. Few yards longer as I was getting less spin with the driver, and dispersion was much better than anything else, meaning more balls in the fairway.

Most places who do the ball fitting these days are sponsored by a leading brand, so it needs doing with someone who's not affiliated to any. Srixon now use plenty of data on the back of their ball cartons, which inform people about swing speed for that particular ball. MaxFli makes you laugh at the same time, because their 'Lady Tour' balls are marketed in pink or with pink font on the ball, but these balls need to be hit with a swing speed of 100+mph. My Mrs think they look great, but only swinging at 80mph she can't hit them and they feel crap because she's not compressing the ball enough on contact, so it feels like rock.

Anyway it's fairly easy to find out if ball fitting works, just use google and read reviews

Hibbz wrote:...One thing that interests me about the Trackman results are that I'd always thought that the higher the spin rates the higher the ball would go hence you hit it more gently into the wind to reduce spin and therefore height. These results are the exact opposite...

Not science really but the urethane-covered balls grip the clubface better and although they spin at higher rates, they're kind of being driven downwards a touch at impact with an iron as they grip the clubface so well hence a lower launch angle. A lower spin ball (surlyn) will tend to ride/slip up the face just a touch adding to the launch angle but you get lower spin as a corollary of that lower grip. I don't think high spin rates will compensate for lower launch angles but if you launched two balls at the same angle with differing spins, the higher spinning ball will hit a higher apex I would think.
Did that make any sense what-so-ever? I can visualise what I'm on about but I'm not sure I can explain it very well!

Yeah that makes sense thank you Navy but it means I now have another question, sorry.

How is the launch angle measured? I just assumed it was an angle gained from drawing a line from the start point to the highest point and measuring the angle to the ground in which case it's more a function of how high the ball goes as opposed to how quickly it gets that height which is what I think of as the launch.

I have to confess I figured it was just another piece of silly jargon if I'm honest.

Is it maybe measured over the first 10m of the flight/arc or something?

Hibbz wrote:Yeah that makes sense thank you Navy but it means I now have another question, sorry.

How is the launch angle measured? I just assumed it was an angle gained from drawing a line from the start point to the highest point and measuring the angle to the ground in which case it's more a function of how high the ball goes as opposed to how quickly it gets that height which is what I think of as the launch.

I have to confess I figured it was just another piece of silly jargon if I'm honest.

Is it maybe measured over the first 10m of the flight/arc or something?

Now thats a good question.. i'm off to google

Hibbz wrote:...How is the launch angle measured?...

Dunno TBH but I assume it's over a short initial distance/time rather than the complete flight to the apex.

TrackMan uses 'doppler' technology which emerged from military use.

It looks at:
Attack angle, launch angle, carry, club path, launch direction, side swing plane, spin axis, swing direction, spin rate,, dynamic loft, smash factor, hang time, spin loft, landing angle, face angle and face to path .... calculates and spits out data for all attributes.

Ok, so I googled the question and got blinded by science so in short I gave up..

I believe these devices derive all their information from the very early flight of the ball, ie the first few millimetres. They are essentially high speed cameras, albeit not using visible light, which monitor that very early flight and are able to then calculate the trajectory of a shot. Essentially, they take thousands of readings as the ball passes through the reader's range, and then calculate the resulting flight by combining the information on spin, launch angle, deviation etc. As such, even if you're outside when hitting on one of these devices, the stats won't take wind etc into consideration unless the machine has a wind sensor built in too. Even then, it won't be reliable because we all know the wind is stronger the higher you go and the launch monitor is very low to the ground.

google "magnus effect" to find out about how a golf ball "flies".

Thanks people, definitely more to it than meets the eye!

It's fascinating stuff for reading at home but I think when I'm stood over the ball with OOB to the right and water all up the left I might be better off with my method of see ball, hit ball rather than worrying about what "Trackman" may or may not be thinking!

Smithers, trackman technology was developed from missile software from the danish military. It's a lot more than the tinpot technology you make it out to be. Simply because none of us are ballistic scientists doesnt mean we can dismiss it as worthless and something that isnt scientific. It goes on a lot more than the first few inches, hence why you have to stay out of the way of the sensor through the ball flight.

Fact is we play golf in all sorts of weather, it would be impossible to account for it all in a single fitting session.

Fitting works, certainly more than guesswork or off the shelf purchases. You wouldn't buy a car which didn't have enough leg room to drive. Why have a club or a ball that isn't suited to you.

super_realist wrote:Smithers, trackman technology was developed from missile software from the danish military. It's a lot more than the tinpot technology you make it out to be. Simply because none of us are ballistic scientists doesnt mean we can dismiss it as worthless and something that isnt scientific. It goes on a lot more than the first few inches, hence why you have to stay out of the way of the sensor through the ball flight.

Fact is we play golf in all sorts of weather, it would be impossible to account for it all in a single fitting session.

Fitting works, certainly more than guesswork or off the shelf purchases. You wouldn't buy a car which didn't have enough leg room to drive. Why have a club or a ball that isn't suited to you.

I certainly don't think it's tinpot in any way shape or form. Apologies if my description made it seem so. I was describing the monitors I've been on, which face the golfer, rather than pointing down the line of the shot. Clearly these things have moved on, but the fact they are more often used indoors than out means there's still a lot of calculation rather than measurement involved.

From the Trackman website;

Using the same hardware as our outdoor TrackMan Pro, the indoor-only model measures ball launch as well as all clubface and swing data. Then instantly, using our proprietary world-class ball flight model, it calculates the length, dispersion and trajectory of the shot. Importantly, because TrackMan measures ball spin in just 10 feet of ball flight, golf facilities with limited indoor space can also take advantage of our industry leading accuracy and reliability

That's not to dismiss this process in any way, shape or form. It clearly is scientific, and accurate, where exactly did I suggest otherwise?

An interesting post Fader. Thanks for the info.

It's got me thinking about a ball fitting. There's an English pro fairly local to me in Khon Kaen who has a TrackMan but doesn't sell balls. I'd have to provide the different make of balls myself.
I'd be a bit knackered though if the results came back that a ProV1 was best for me because I can't afford them.

I would be suprised if any ball (out of the top ones) could give a player anymore in regards to length, consitancy and ball flight over feel. I dont like hitting hard balls, I dont like putting or chipping with hard balls.Its more about the short game for me. We are past the days of the balata( a ball which went considerably shorter for the benefit of spin and feel)

Mysti
I am with you on this, don't care if a ball gives me 20 more yards of my driver, if it does not feel good of my putter face, I won't use it, so I don't use Prov1s for that reason.