Expedition Exchange Bulletin Boards  

Go Back   Expedition Exchange Bulletin Boards > General
User Name
Password
FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old July 28th, 2009, 11:58 AM
matttaylor matttaylor is offline
Matt Taylor
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muskyman
I have had a bent grass putting green in the back yard for 10 years

That's awesome. Is it a lot of maintenance? Would you share some pics? A guy I know bought a synthetic green installation company, but it never took off. He had a sweet demo unit at his old house though. I was so skeptical, but the thing actually putted pretty close to a real green and held shots from 30-40 yards.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Muskyman
Bobby Locke used to have glass inserts he would drop into the hole to allow him to putt over the hole. He also had hand carved rings that he would drop into the hole to make it njust big enough to fit a ball and would putt to the smaller hole to hone his stroke. His last drill he used often was one to perfect dying the ball into the hole, he would putt to a south african coin that was just bigger then a 50 cent piece that he would step into the green and try and stop the ball on top of the coin! As I recall his lifetime putting average was like 1.41 PPG and his best season was like 1.33 as i recall. I would have to say Dave Pelz couldent do that with his true roller Bobby believed that different puts needed to be hit different ways and he used cut strokes to keep a ball up on a slope and create the arc he wanted. those ideas fly in the face of the Pelz data.

Putting was so different back then. Even up to the late 1960s, greens were pretty hairy and slow. Putting strokes had a little pop with the right hand in them.

On TV a couple of weeks ago, they aired some old Shell match between Nicklaus and Sam Snead that they rendered in High Definition. It was awesome. Snead was at the end of his career, and Nicklaus was just starting out. They played at Pebble and went down to the final hole before Nicklaus clipped him by one shot.

The short games were awesome to watch, specifically Snead's. The greens were hairy and slow by today's standards, and this make for all sorts of interesting, low shots around the greens. Snead was an old man by this time, and he had one of those sick old man short games.

Truth be told, I hate putting on slow greens. But watching that show made me wistful for all the things that don't exist in modern golf much anymore: the bump and run shots, purposely hitting putts off the toe or the heel, chipping with a 7-iron from the fringe, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old July 28th, 2009, 01:10 PM
Muskyman
 
Posts: n/a
taking care of the green is like 20 min a day and works as a great aerobic workout. I let it slide last year so this year has been a bit of a hassle getting it back on track.

Not all the greens were slow back in the 50's and 60's in fact places like medina, congressional, Marion and Augusta have always been known for lightning fast greens. When the early german bent grass started making thier way to america greens started picking up .

As far as hitting shots off the toe of a putter and using a 7 iron...I didnt know those things ever left the game?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg GREEN.JPG (36.2 KB, 20 views)
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old July 28th, 2009, 03:03 PM
matttaylor matttaylor is offline
Matt Taylor
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 370
Man, that green looks nice.

The way courses in America are set up for tour play, there is rarely ever a reason to chip with a seven iron or play a bump and run shot.

Greens are up high and protected by bunkers. Even when they're not, they're so fast that even shots on the froghair around the green are played with a 56* wedge.

Square grooves are partly responsible as well. It's so easy to hit a low shot that takes two bounces and checks with a squared grooved wedge that there is no reason to hit a chip with a 7 iron.

You see it European golf a lot still, because those courses still allow for it. For better or worse, American golf is about high shots that spin. I think I remember Annika saying something about this after her experience playing with the men -- she just couldn't generate enough club head speed to spin the ball as it was required by the courses set up for the PGA tour. As accurate as she was, she couldn't access the PGA's tucked away pin placements. She was talking about full shots, but missing greens with tucked pins and fast greens require short, high shots.

As for hitting the ball off the toe and heel, that went away when sweet spots on putters started getting bigger. You can still do it, obviously, but it doesn't have the same effect with a perimeter weighted putter as it did with, say, a Wilson 8802.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old July 28th, 2009, 08:08 PM
tonydesanto tonydesanto is offline
Tony DeSanto
Gen
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Greater Denver Area
Posts: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlee
I just can't get into the Sun Mountain bags. They look like hacker bags. I'm sure they work just fine, but they don't have the player look.

Well, if you mean the crazy color combinations and patterns, I'm with you on that one. As for the shape and features of the bags, I think they're still innovative and quite light...very much a carry bag.

If you choose one of the simpler patterns, I don't mind it.

903747.jpg

Now, as for the PING bags: they look quite nice if you can ignore that huge PING logo.

Here's mine, it's probably one or two generations older than what you find today...simple, clean, very lightweight, and functional.

DeSanto_-1.jpg DeSanto_-3.jpg

Here are a few shots of my clubs. I've had these irons since I played in HS. A club pro I worked for let me purchase these at cost. Prior to these, I was playing Ping Eye 2 clubs. My game improved quite a bit, once I got used to them. I think playing with clubs that offered no feedback were a crutch. These offer so much feedback, you can actually feel where you hit it on the club face.

The 8-iron:

DeSanto_-5.jpg DeSanto_-6.jpg

DeSanto_-8.jpg DeSanto_-9.jpg

DeSanto_-10.jpg DeSanto_-12.jpg

Driver (for now):

DeSanto_-13.jpg DeSanto_-14.jpg DeSanto_-15.jpg

One of the early metal utility clubs (TaylorMade). I really like how small and heavy this club is. It makes it easier to get out of rough or fairway bunkers. The only thing I've never liked about it is the closed face. If they had made this club with a square setup, I'd have chosen it.

DeSanto_-16.jpg DeSanto_-17.jpg DeSanto_-19.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old July 28th, 2009, 10:43 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,054
Oh sweet, that's a cool set.

Innovative? A golf bag? It's a tube of nylon with some straps on it. How innovative can a golf bag be? I think most of these purported innovations are gimmicks more than anything else. The only two innovations I've noticed on the golf bags are the double shoulder straps and the deploying legs.

What about the bags with the loops for the tees? That's gimmicky. I don't need to have my tees fastened to the outside of the bag like ammunition. I have a few tees in my pocket. And the rest of the tees go in a pocket on the bag. That's more than sufficient.

The same goes for those bags with the external ball holders. How quickly does one need to access additional balls? I suppose if Mr. Mulligan Man were using a carry bag, he would need quick access to additional balls. But I've always found a pocket in the bag to be perfectly sufficient.

There are also those bags with the Camelbak reservoirs. I almost fell over when I saw these. I couldn't believe it. Like golf is some high speed low drag activity and reaching for a battle of water inside a pocket is too burdensome.

And what of those bags with the scorecard holders? Those things are hilarious. A scorecard doesn't belong on the bag. It belongs in your butt pocket, folded nicely with the baby pencil inside the card. That's the only way to do it. No clipboards are necessary or desirable.

I'm still waiting for the golf bags to come out with MOLLE loops all over the outside. This way, the bag can be configured to suit "the mission".

I think I've seen your bag before:


No offense, but this is a hacker bag. I usually see these bags with the thirty gloves velcroed to the outside, and all kinds of little charms hanging from the loops like that squeeze bottle with the bristles for cleaning irons and a spike wrench danging as well. And the golf towels are usually the ones with the pear-shaped paper clip (more on this below).

If my memory serves, the partitions in your bag are set up all wrong. There are too many of them. I prefer a bag with four partitions like so:


Top compartment for the woods. 9 o'clock compartment for the long irons. 3 o'clock compartment for the medium irons. And 6 o'clock compartment for the scoring clubs. When you reach into that 6 o'clock compartment, your brain should be aware that you're in scoring range and you can save a stroke if you do your part.

At least that's how I like the partitions to be. If you want to put your putter together with your woods to prevent the putter from getting hammered and then move the 9 down with your wedges, that's fine too. There's no one way to do it. But I opine that four partitions is plenty.

Another thing I don't like about this generation of the Sun Mountain bags is that the two shoulder straps bissect the spine of the bag. That is, the two straps don't cross. This design was copied from the Izzo straps, which were the first double straps on the scene if I recall.

I prefer the two shoulder straps to cross. If you're all strapped up with both straps, then it won't matter. But if you use only one strap, there's a big difference. With the straps that cross, you can carry the bag with a single strap only over one shoulder and the bag will not tilt severely. If you are in the for long haul and walking to your drive, then it won't matter because you'll be employing both straps. But many walks in golf are short. If you're walking from the bunker to behind the green, or from green to tee, I think the preferable method is to use only one strap and not "strap up" completely with both straps. For these applications, the crossed shoulder straps work better because the bag tilts less.

You can see that a bag like the Ping Hoofer doesn't claim to be innovative and lacks the gimmicky features, but it's actually better thought out than this Sun Mountain bag.

Sorry, but these towels have to go:


I crack up every time I see those "golf towels" at Roger Dunn's or Nevada Bob's or Golfsmith. Those towels are completely unsuited for golf. They're too small and they're secured with that ridiculous pile of shit pear-shaped clip. Your towel isn't embroidered with the lame Pebble Beach or Trump National logo like on the true moron bags with these towels, but that towel still sucks.

I much prefer a regular towel:


These towels are a buck apiece at Costco or IKEA or wherever. They work great. They're large enough that they don't even have to be secured to the bag. Just lay them over a shaft or your umbrella. The umbrella thing looks cooler, but it doesn't work well with the stand bags because the towel gets caught up in the legs.

I like to wet about 2/3 of the towel. This way, the dirty side of the towel is completely wet for cleaning shoes and clubs and balls and I have both wet and dry portions of the clean side of the towel for my hands and face. The towel is large enough that I don't have trouble accessing different portions of the towel (clean, dirty, wet, dry).

For the umbrella, I prefer the dedicated golf umbrellas with their greater length:


I think I've been rained on only a few times in my golf life. But I still carry the umbrella because I think it looks cool. And when it does rain, I feel like a stud because I have my umbrella with me.

And I use my umbrella numerous times every round. Every time I hit one of my woods, which is probably about 15 times a round, I put the headcover over the umbrella's handle. For this reason, I like my umbrella to be long and the handle to be straight. It makes the perfect headcover holder.

Is the umbrella dead weight on my bag? Probably. But I certainly use it more than I do my spoon or 6-iron.

I know you love this club, but I got some issues with it:


What happened to the crown on this thing? This club looks as though it's been through a few years of use without a headcover. You can almost see how this club was spinning around inside the bag and rubbing against other clubs. EEEEEEEEEK!

I realize today's "woods" don't require headcovers. I get it. But yet I cringe whenever I see wood heads clanging around. It drives me nuts.

Now, after having talked shit about your gear, I will end on a positive note. Your driver is solid. I love the 983 sole markings:


I think Titleist nailed it on the 983 sole. The 975D sole looks so dated now. And my 905R sole doesn't look as good as the 983 sole. And forget the 907 and 909. They don't have the wonderful bore-through shaft. Gotta be bore-through.

No sky marks:


That 983 is looking very deadly there. It reminds me of a deadly shark for some reason. Just beautiful.

These irons are nice:


They look sort of like MP-33s, but they have a box toe. I wish my MP-33s had a box toe.

Love the pinned shaft:


When I was a kid, the pinned shafts were starting to disappear and only Hogan still did the pin jobs. The pinned shaft is sort of like the pinned barrels on the Smith & Wessons. The pin is no longer necessary, but it's something I love to see and I wish my clubs and Smiths had the pin. My favorite pinned shaft is when the pin is left unchromed and it starts to darken with age. This patinaed pin makes for a nice contrast with the chromed hosel.

Man, just look at this beaut:


Is that your 8-iron? Or is this set old enough that your 7-iron looks like today's 8? In either case, this is a nice club. Mizuno toplines aren't that thin, and the box toes aren't on the Mizuno irons either. This iron is looking sweet. The last set of irons I had that looked this good were my Titleist Tour Models. Those irons were the most beautiful irons I've ever seen. But they were rocks.

Look at that bitchin toe:


The sandblasting edge is off. I think Stevie Wonder did the masking for that sandblasting job.

Sweet clubs. Thanks for sharing.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old July 29th, 2009, 08:39 AM
tonydesanto tonydesanto is offline
Tony DeSanto
Gen
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Greater Denver Area
Posts: 252
Regarding innovation: I guess I am being a bit nostalgic about the fact that this company was the first to come out with a true lightweight carry bag. Before them, all we had were those heavy, clumsy, vinyl bags. I think they were the first company to make a rigid carry bag too. I hated the team bags that we had to carry that collapsed all the time, got muddy in the rain (we played in the spring; spring meant rain in East TX). They were the first to integrate a lightweight stand.

To innovate now is probably tough to do. Youíre right, as you say, at the end of the day itís a tube with nylon (I believe Sun was the first to use nylon by the way) and some straps on it. I do like that bags are oval instead of round anymore. I also like the fleece lining to protect the graphite shafts. So, innovations anymore are little by little.

I completely agree with you on these points: 1) camelbaks have no place on a bag; 2) tees donít need a holder like a bandoleer; 3) external ball holders are plain sillyóall you need is one in your pocket and one on the ground; 4) scorecard holders or clipboards make no sense either; 5) MOLLE loops would be the final nail in the coffin, but Iím surprised we havenít seen these yet with urban-warfare cammo. Cammo is a fashion statement anymore, donít you know?

Ultimately, one is either a decent player or one is a hacker. I lump all this crazy stuff you listed in with golf sandals, those bottle-brushes, fake golf club flasks, hanging ball-mark repair Swiss Army knife wannabe tools. I agree thereís a lot of crap and snake oil out there promising to shave strokes off your game and make life easier. It always reminds me of an old saying I used to hear about gimmicky fishing lures: ďthose are designed to catch fisherman, not fish.Ē Iím not exactly sure how to adapt such a poignant saying to golf and hackers, but Iím sure you get the meaning all the same.

As for the partitions: this one has only four dividers, practically identical to yours. I keep the putter with the woods to help prevent damage. Irons are arranged 3-5 (if Iím carrying 3 wedges), 6-8, 9-LW.

Umbrella: not sure what the point is here. Mine is a dedicated golf umbrella too; I just donít like those that are so long that they interfere with getting to the clubs. In fact, the one I have is still a bit too long for my taste, but itís a compromise as too short and it wonít offer decent protection to keep the clubs dry. For playing in the rain, keeping the grips and my glove dry are the priority. I can see your point on the straight handle for using it as a head cover holder, but I just drape it over my other clubs, as you do your towel.

Shoulder straps: you may be right. Iíll have to go back and look to see if each strap is full length or if they bisect the spine as you mentioned. This was the first generation of double-straps. If you remember, Izzo first came out with an add-on shoulder strap that you could add to any single-strap bag. I think Sun took this and ran with it. I think the newer style would be easier to carry with a single strap, but itís never bothered me that much to switch yet. A point Iíll make about bags: a lot of current bags appear to be a bit large, even the Sun bags. This isnít good for the person who truly carries all the time. Youíll fill it with too much stuff and it will be too heavy.

Towels: I used to carry the bath towel as you show, and I too used to use one side for clubs and the other for my hands and face. But, I hated how it was always in the way. I always seemed to move it from one club to the other. I kept it around the woods to keep it up higher and out of the way of the stand. Since you hate the dedicated golf towels so much, youíre gonna love this. I finally decided on two: one for the clubs and one for the hands and face. Theyíre smaller, out of the way, and donít interfere with my carrying the bag or the stand. I think youíve seen enough hackers out there hanging a bunch of shit on their bags and have made a Pavlovian association. I do hate the pear-shaped clip though. They do suck. Theyíre cheap; they bend, and sometimes come loose.

Utility club: youíre right. Itís a bit scuffed. Iím not sure what happened as Iíve had this thing for so long. I do always keep my woods, uh metals, covered. I think I got this used as a kid and never changed to anything else. Now when you look around, all the woods are huge and they donít offer small utility clubs like that anymore. I should probably look to polish that one up a bit, but Iíd really like to find something similar with a square, rather than 2* closed, face. I prefer the smaller heads. It just seems like you can pick the ball more cleanly with smaller clubs than the large ones of today. This is especially true when in rough or in a fairway bunker. Even my driver is too big for my taste, and itís smaller than whatís offered today. I prefer smaller, heavier clubs rather than the larger, lighter ones of today.

Thanks for the compliments on the irons. Theyíve always been my favorite part of the game and they inspire confidence each time I pick them up. I do like how they turn more pear shaped starting with the 8-iron and moving to the SW. I guess thatís why my 8 and my sand wedge have always been my favorites. I too dig the pinned hosels. I donít think they do that anymore, as the epoxy used today is so strong itís not required. In fact, it wasnít really necessary back when these were made, but it was tradition. Now days, if you get one of these re-shafted, they simply cut the shaft near the hosel and drill out the pin. The new shaft gets glued in and you canít even tell from the outside as the external part of the pin is still in there. But it would still bug me. Iíve thought about having these re-grooved with boxed grooves, but that would require re-chroming, which requires removing the shafts. So, Iíve just lived with them.

I think itís funny how much we like the same things when it comes to irons. Simple, clean, thin toplines, and rounded edges.

Good luck on the round today.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old July 29th, 2009, 10:11 AM
Muskyman
 
Posts: n/a
OMG

I can only imagine the beat down I would get over my beat up old 3 metal

the problem is I can hit it so well that no matter what I try it just plain still performs.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old July 29th, 2009, 10:29 AM
hanchung hanchung is offline
wsixhan
W6HAN
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Pasadena, CA
Posts: 1,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlee
Let's try Eldorado. I haven't played there since college I think.

I can't promise I'll be there by 6:00 p.m., as I'll leave the shop at 5:00 and I don't know what the afternoon traffic will be like. But I'll try to be on time. See you Wednesday.

Bring your A game.

Wish I could join you guys tonight also I haven't seen Al in ages, would have been nice if I could.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old July 29th, 2009, 12:11 PM
tonydesanto tonydesanto is offline
Tony DeSanto
Gen
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Greater Denver Area
Posts: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlee
...but they have a box toe. I wish my MP-33s had a box toe.

...Mizuno toplines aren't that thin, and the box toes aren't on the Mizuno irons either.


This iron is looking sweet. The last set of irons I had that looked this good were my Titleist Tour Models. Those irons were the most beautiful irons I've ever seen. But they were rocks.

John, I had a few questions:

1) Could you explain the box toe? I never learned that term and I'm curious to learn what it means. Are there certain benefits to it? Any compromises too, or is it purely aesthetic?

2) Which Titleist Tour Models did you have? I'm hoping the 680s; those really looked sweet.
680_2.jpg

These 1987 Box Blades look very similar to mine:

Titleist 1987_box_blade.jpg

3) Why did you get rid of the Titleist irons? What did you mean by, "But they were rocks"?

I was just looking on their website, and their current offerings are scary.

Their forged blades look like Zorro left his mark.

2009_US_501_8.jpg 2009_US_502_8.jpg

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlee
The sandblasting edge is off. I think Stevie Wonder did the masking for that sandblasting job.

Classic John Lee right there. This made me laugh so much.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old July 29th, 2009, 01:07 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonydesanto
1) Could you explain the box toe? I never learned that term and I'm curious to learn what it means. Are there certain benefits to it? Any compromises too, or is it purely aesthetic?

The box toe is just a term for a boxy-shaped toe area of a lot of blades. Your Palmers have the box toe. Here's a pic again:


The toes there are looking very boxy. Note how the front edge of the irons is almost perpendicular to the soles. A lot of people don't like this look and prefer the rounded toe of the Mizunos:


Note how much rounder the MP-33 toe is compared to yours. Here's an MP-37:


Again, you can see that very rounded toe area. Box toe or round toe, it's really just personal preference. One reason I like the box toe is that when I look down at the club, I get more of a squared effect that is easier for me to align.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonydesanto
2) Which Titleist Tour Models did you have?


I had these Tour Models:

http://www.titleist.com/historical_c...ails.asp?id=43

These things were beautiful clubs. Even from that awkward angle, you can see how straight the toeline is compared to a current Mizuno. These Tour Models had the box toe.

The topline on these Tour Models was thin to win. A current Mizuno iron's topline is way fatter than the topline on these Titleist Tour Models.

Another thing about these Tour Models was that they had very little offset. One thing I don't like about Mizunos is that I think they have too much offset. I like to look down the hosel and see the leading edge of the iron about even with the left edge of the hosel. That's just what I like. It's not "better" than slight offset.

These Tour Models were almost pure blades too. They had a muscleback, but the muscleback was hardly there at all. They were beautiful.

I never liked the look of these 680s:


The 680 is one of those clubs that photographs well, but when you see it in person it doesn't look quite right. There's something wrong with it. The head is very thin top to bottom and the head looks really long. It's sort of Titleist's copycat of the MP-29, but the MP-29 looks bitchin in person while the 680 looks like a hockey stick. And the muscleback stuck out a lot. I mean A LOT. These sticks just didn't look right in person.

These 680s were rocks too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonydesanto
3) Why did you get rid of the Titleist irons? What did you mean by, "But they were rocks"?

These Tour Models were rocks. All of the Titleist irons are rocks. Sure, they say "FORGED" on them, and they probably are forged. But forged from what? The steel used on these things is rock hard. They felt like shit. I loved my Tour Models because of the way they looked, but I was always jealous whenever I hit my brother's MP-14s. The MP-14s felt way softer than my Tour Models did. It wasn't even close. That's why I eventually switched to MP-14s.

I was perfectly happy with the MP-14s, but I went to the MP-33s when they came out because I love the way the MP-33s look. I still have the MP-33s. I was tempted by the MP-37s for a while and actually bought a set on eBay:


But after I sobered up, I went back to the MP-33s and Ho is sporting the MP-37s now.

The next time you run into a set of Titleist "forged" blades, scope them out. You'll see that they are hardly dented at all because the material is so rock hard. And try tapping two of the irons together. You'll get a clack type of sound, the same hack sound you'd hear if you tapped two cast clubs together. If you rub two Titleist forged iron heads together, you can almost feel how hard the material is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonydesanto
Their forged blades look like Zorro left his mark.

Indeed. That Z muscle stuff is so gimmicky. I just took a quick tour through Titleist's current offerings and there isn't a single club there that I would buy. Look at this crap:


and:


First of all, they look like fake Taylor Mades. Why Titleist would want to copy Taylor Made is beyond me.

Second, the bore-through shaft is gone. Poof. Gone.

Third, Titleist put the injection hole where the bore-through shaft would be. Did Titleist think people were so stupid they couldn't tell the difference between a real bore-through shaft and an injection hole? Totally lame.

I'm sure these clubs hit just fine, but they're a total rip-off.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old July 29th, 2009, 01:56 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonydesanto
Regarding innovation: I guess I am being a bit nostalgic about the fact that this company was the first to come out with a true lightweight carry bag. Before them, all we had were those heavy, clumsy, vinyl bags.

I think your memory is off. I started playing golf when I was 12, so that was like 1980 or 1981. And we had nylon carry bags back then. And I doubt these bags hit the scene right when I started playing golf.

These nylon carry bags were from companies like Ollo and Vagabond. Ollo was big when I was just starting out, and Vagabond started to take over when I was in high school. These were "standard" bags too when I was playing junior golf. Everyone had either an Ollo or Vagabond golf bag, sort of the way everyone has a Ping Hoofer bag today.

I'm not sure how old Sun Mountain is, but I get the feeling Sun Mountain wasn't even around back in 1980 or 1981.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonydesanto
I think they were the first company to make a rigid carry bag too.

Sun Mountain may have been. I'm not sure. The Ollo and Vagabond carry bags were spineless/soft bags. I remember when Ping came out with a carry bag that had a large maple dowel inserted into the bag to make it rigid. When I got one of these bags in college, I removed the dowel because I was accustomed to the softie golf bags.

I also fought the first carry bags with the pop-out legs. I hated these when they first came out. They felt so gimmicky.

What's weird is that I embraced the double-strap bag as soon as it came out. I remember the add-on Izzo straps. I bought one for my carry bag as soon as I saw the Izzo straps. At a glance, I could tell it was a better system. The first round that I played with the Izzo, the bag felt feather light. 14 clubs was no problem at all, even in the hottest weather. This is when I was young. I can barely haul around 14 clubs and an umbrella today. By the end of the round, I'm pooped out.

Then, when Ping came out with the original Hoofer, I was sold. Here was a bag that had the legs and the double straps that crossed. And I thought the bag looked bitchin. I still have that original green Hoofer and also a brand-new spare green Hoofer in my stash. I like these original Hoofers better than the current Hoofers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonydesanto
As for the partitions: this one has only four dividers, practically identical to yours. I keep the putter with the woods to help prevent damage. Irons are arranged 3-5 (if Iím carrying 3 wedges), 6-8, 9-LW.

Ooops, my had. I must have been thinking of some other bag, either a late-model Sun bag or a bag from another manufacturer. These bags crack me up. You can play tic-tac-toe in the partitions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonydesanto
Mine is a dedicated golf umbrella too; I just donít like those that are so long that they interfere with getting to the clubs. In fact, the one I have is still a bit too long for my taste, but itís a compromise as too short and it wonít offer decent protection to keep the clubs dry.

I like the long golf umbrellas. They make the umbrella easier to use as a heacover holder and they provide a good deal more protection against the rain than a smaller umbrella would. Even for rainy weather in town I use a golf umbrella.

I don't wear a glove, but if I did, I would put the spare gloves under the umbrella whenever it rained. I love that shit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonydesanto
I should probably look to polish that one up a bit, but Iíd really like to find something similar with a square, rather than 2* closed, face.

If you're inclined, Golfsmith and other places offer a refinish of the Pittsburgh Persimmon woods. I think they just polish the sole and hosel and sandblast the rest. I think it's cheap too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonydesanto
Even my driver is too big for my taste, and itís smaller than whatís offered today.

Like you, I generally prefer the small-headed clubs. But for some reason I love the huge-headed drivers. You're hitting off a tee, so the size of the head isn't a disadvantage the way it would be if you hit off the ground. And the sound from some of these 460 titanium drivers is nice. So long as the head has an elegant shape and the sound is nice, I love the biggie drivers.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old July 29th, 2009, 02:22 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,054
I just found this old pic:


That's an MP-33 3-iron. This is not a box toe.

The edge of the sandblasting there is a good indicator of how much roundness there is on the toe compared to your Palmers.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old July 29th, 2009, 03:06 PM
tonydesanto tonydesanto is offline
Tony DeSanto
Gen
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Greater Denver Area
Posts: 252
Got it. Thanks for the clarification and teaching me a new term.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old July 29th, 2009, 03:16 PM
tonydesanto tonydesanto is offline
Tony DeSanto
Gen
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Greater Denver Area
Posts: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlee
I don't wear a glove, but if I did, I would put the spare gloves under the umbrella whenever it rained. I love that shit.

The summer before college I remember playing a state golf tournament at the TPC Course at the Woodlands, north of Houston. It was a three-day event. The last two days it rained almost constantly. Talk about hot and humid...it sucked.

I had several gloves up there under that umbrella. It doesn't do much good though, as they just can't dry out in such a humid environment. All it does is keep them from getting any wetter than they already are.

One day I hope to convert over to playing without a glove. I hate that it's a crutch. I just can't seem to develop enough confidence with a full swing without trying to control it more with my right hand. I've even experimented with other grips to see if that helped, and I just never felt right about it. The glove just provides me with 100% confidence that I can control the club with the left hand while maintaining the relaxed flexibility you need to allow your hands to naturally roll over during and after impact.


Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlee
Like you, I generally prefer the small-headed clubs. But for some reason I love the huge-headed drivers. You're hitting off a tee, so the size of the head isn't a disadvantage the way it would be if you hit off the ground. And the sound from some of these 460 titanium drivers is nice. So long as the head has an elegant shape and the sound is nice, I love the biggie drivers.

You're right that sweeping the ball off the tee does help, but I just haven't gotten used to these larger clubs. They still seem to have more wind resistance than the smaller drivers. They're lighter too, and I guess I just prefer a heavier club.

Thanks for the tip on refinishing the 5-wood. That does sound like a good plan.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old July 29th, 2009, 09:06 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,054
Just got back from golf.

Eldorado Park was closed for the day. I think Eldorado was hosting some tournament because the course was closed and there were a lot of good players there. A bunch of these guys were hitting balls on the range when I got there and my reaction was, "boy, there sure are a lot of good players here today". Then I found out the course was closed. It may have been some Golden State Tour type of tournament. These guys looked like entry-level professionals.

So Al and I hit Recreation Park in Long Beach. It was a hackfest. My score was as follows:

1 - Bogey
2 - Double
3 - Snowman
4 - Bogey
5 - Par
6 - Par
7 - Triple
8 - Par
9 - Par

11 over for nine holes, and Recreation Park is not a difficult course. Lots of chunked pitches and chips and lots of three-jacks.

I'm pooped. I think I'll sleep like a rock tonight. But it was fun to get out again.

Thanks to Al for the very fun round.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old July 29th, 2009, 10:16 PM
hanchung hanchung is offline
wsixhan
W6HAN
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Pasadena, CA
Posts: 1,182
John, that's not hacking... that's just having fun. snowman, triple, double... shit happens all the time. what i wanna know is how did al do... LOL.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old July 29th, 2009, 10:35 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,054
Al's progressing nicely. His swing looks a lot more flowing and powerful than it did before. Actually, there's quite a difference from before.

I was a little disappointed by Al's short game though. There was a time when Al's short game was starting to get seriously deadly. This was when we used to hit Dominguez every week. Al's short game today was about as bad as mine. I don't think he plays as much nowadays.

One reason today was so fun was that it was the first time Al and I played a legit course together. Before today, it was only Dominguez (a par-three course).
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old July 30th, 2009, 09:34 AM
hanchung hanchung is offline
wsixhan
W6HAN
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Pasadena, CA
Posts: 1,182
that's very sweet. i think everyone needs more short game practice time. when your short game is solid, everything else is a no brainer. people give up stokes in short game way more than off the tee and/or fairway. solid putting and anything inside 100 yds is a huge confidence builder because I would know I can get up and down for a bogey is better than double or double is better than triple... i need to work on the short game.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old July 30th, 2009, 10:16 AM
matttaylor matttaylor is offline
Matt Taylor
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 370
You guys are overdue for another brother vs brother Ryder Cup match.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old July 30th, 2009, 10:28 AM
hanchung hanchung is offline
wsixhan
W6HAN
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Pasadena, CA
Posts: 1,182
indeed.

SEOULHeim Cup 2009
Reply With Quote
  #121  
Old July 30th, 2009, 10:57 AM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,054
Those Seoulheim Cups were getting boring.

Han and I (younger brothers) won the last three matches.

The older brothers weren't even putting up a fight.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old July 30th, 2009, 11:02 AM
hanchung hanchung is offline
wsixhan
W6HAN
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Pasadena, CA
Posts: 1,182
maybe we need to find a new format? EE Invitational?
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old July 30th, 2009, 11:52 AM
alcruz
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlee
I was a little disappointed by Al's short game though.

Defenitely not one of my better days, my "A" was non-existent. It was a still great afternoon and I had a good time just being out. John started slow but I could see that as we played along he was getting his groove back. I'd like to redeem myself, I'll be at Big Rec tonight and hit some balls at the range. Work on my chipping with John's new tip.

Han I'd like to get a chance and play a round with you as well. John hopefully we could play at El Dorado another day, maybe Matt can join us as well?

Oh and I'm up for an EE Invitational
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old July 30th, 2009, 01:31 PM
johnlee johnlee is offline
John Lee
K6YJ
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,054
Let's coordinate a day next week for some afternoon G.

I'm free every afternoon next week. Which day is good for you guys?

And if you have the time, let's hit dinner after golf.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old July 30th, 2009, 01:43 PM
alcruz
 
Posts: n/a
As in weekday afternoons (after 5?) or weekend? Dinner afterwards sounds like an excellent idea!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Good Korean Movie - Tae Guk Gi Nadir_E General 8 February 19th, 2006 02:38 AM
Good TV This Weekend johnlee General 34 February 7th, 2005 10:01 AM
talk about good eats... david General 1 December 22nd, 2004 07:10 PM
PCQ-Now the good stuff-LOT's of pics traveltoad General 11 July 28th, 2004 09:00 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:52 AM.




Copyright © 2001-2012 Expedition Exchange Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.