BOMB: OK, I know I’m sounding a little like Ronald Reagan, but here we go again. Can people who know nothing about golf equipment please stop writing about it? This time the source of my consternation is not some small, local newspaper but the Old Gray Lady herself, The New York Times—the supposed paper of record, for goodness sakes! In the March 22 edition in the Physical Culture section, a piece appeared on the new drivers. Fine. But author Sarah Bowen Shea fell hook, line and sinker for the marketing hype, writing that “the clubs here flirt with [the MOI] limit,” and that some clubs “embed inserts in the club face.” Excuse me? None of the drivers shown (Callway FT-I, Cobra Speed Pro S, Nike Sumo2, TaylorMade Burner and Titleist 907 D1) come within 10 percent of the MOI limit, and a couple are about 20 percent off the USGA’s 5,900 limit (6,000 if you add the 100-point tolerance). Saying that’s flirting is like saying you’re flirting with a girl by saying “hello.” And as for those clubs that "embed inserts in the face," well, I’m still looking for them. At least they had the good sense to mention for the Sumo2 that you should be sure to buy the “most recent U.S.G.A. approved club.”
GOUGE: I'm sure manufacturers are jumping for joy that the New York Times is providing free advertising these days. But let's not pile on Ms. Shea. She clearly will believe anything, witness her willingness to rely on the expertise of Ben Weir who talks about how much "less topspin" the Callaway FT-i had or the "optimal topspin" on the Cobra Speed Pro. I'm guessing Ben Weir knows nothing about angle of descent and didn't have a TrackMan or EDH Flightscope launch monitor device on hand to compare spin rates and launch angles and ballspeeds of each driver. And don't give me that we shouldn't expect rigor in the Style section. Why do we rage against these journalistic bungles? Because each amazingly weak attempt to educate diminishes us all, but more importantly, it leaves the golf consumer further confused. Having the input of one golfer, who clearly was not custom fit for each of the drivers he was using, stand as the definitive description of how a club might perform is empty, meaningless and misguided. And yet here the average golfer stands, looking for guidance and walking away more confused than he or she was before. I'm not saying there's an easy answer to any analysis of new drivers, but what might be more helpful is explaining each driver's technology by talking to the designers and independent experts. If you can't do that thoroughly, leave the subject alone. Don't give us this dreck.
For more visit
www.espn.go.com/golf
Rating
Comments
Archived Comments (2) Click to expand
Post A Comment