2023 Golf Ball Test
Golf Balls

2023 Golf Ball Test

Support our Mission. We independently test each product we recommend. When you buy through our links, we may earn a commission.

2023 Golf Ball Test

We can’t emphasize this enough: It doesn’t matter if you shoot 68 or 108; the golf ball is the only piece of equipment you use on every shot.

Does that make the golf ball the most important piece of equipment in the bag?

There’s certainly an argument to be made. It’s why we do robot testing every two years and why Ball Lab has become an integral part of what we do at MyGolfSpy.

Our 2023 test is our third foray into the world of ball testing. With each iteration, we’ve learned more about golf ball performance and have uncovered several surprise findings (both good and bad).

We learned “soft” is slow, performance differences are more significant than many golfers believe and a poorly made ball can fly significantly offline, even on a perfect swing.

While 2023’s test was the largest we’ve ever conducted, the goal remains unchanged: We want to help you find the best golf ball for your game.

Table of Contents

Below you’ll find we’ve broken this article down into distinct categories to help you find the best golf ball for your game. Feel free to skip ahead or scroll on to learn more about that test, methodology, and key findings.

About the 2023 Golf Ball Test

MyGolfSpy’s 2023 golf ball test took place at two locations and involved more than 80 hours of testing time.

Forty-six golf ball models were tested at three speeds each with drivers and mid-irons. To better understand what is typically called “greenside performance,” we also included a 35-yard wedge test.

About the Golf Ball Models Tested

all balls tested for the 2023 MyGolfSpy ball test

The balls tested include retail urethane offerings from major manufacturers and a mix of smaller direct-to-consumer (DTC) and house brands. We also tested a small number of popular two-piece ionomer offerings.

When possible, MyGolfSpy purchased the balls tested at retail and sourced from multiple shops. Exceptions include the Not Your Ball and Inesis Tour 900 Prototype.

Test Locations

Testing took place in mid-July in Arizona. Testing was split between the CoolClub test facility in Fountain Hills and Scottsdale National Golf Club in Scottsdale. Golf Labs robots were used in both locations.

Both parties were compensated for the use of the robots and the engineers to operate them.

Environmental Conditions

Temperatures throughout the test averaged about 105 degrees. It should go without saying that distance numbers will increase as a result. That said, yardage values between balls should be largely relative. Key metrics such as ball speed, launch angle and spin rates will be minimally impacted.

Weather stations were used in both testing locations.

Winds were generally calm throughout the week (wind speed +/- 5 mph). On those occasions when wind speed exceeded 10 mph, testing was halted until the wind subsided.

Test Parameters

For each of the three speeds for the driver and iron portions of the test, the robot was calibrated to achieve specific launch and spin targets.

The parameters for each portion were decided on after consulting with multiple ball manufacturers. The specific configuration for each test condition (including the clubs used) is detailed in the relevant sections below.

For each test condition, a calibration ball (Titleist Pro V1) was used to establish the baseline. This allowed us to split balls into smaller groups to help mitigate the impact of changing environmental conditions. Using a control ball also allows us to make meaningful comparisons across ball groups.

How Balls Were Grouped

The test pool was divided into five groups of nine balls, along with the control ball (10 models total per group).

Groups were divided primarily by price. However, adjustments were made to group similarly priced models from the same manufacturer.

The Test Process

For each golf ball model, we hit three to four shots before moving to the next model in the group. The rotation continued several times (maintaining the same order) until all shots were hit. We then moved to the next group.

As capturing the full flight of the golf ball is imperative in ball testing, data was collected using Trackman launch monitors. We also ran Foresight GCQuad in parallel to ensure the consistency of the setup throughout the test.

Outlier Removal

Before the final processing of the data, outliers were removed using the 1.5 IQR rule. For drivers and irons, outliers were filtered based on carry yards and the offline value. For the 35-yard wedge test, outliers were filtered based on launch angle and spin rates.

Results

The calibration ball was used to establish a baseline for the data presented. Values for each metric are derived from the percentage difference for each ball model relative to the control ball in its group.

Key Findings

1. High Compression Golf Balls Can Work for Nearly Everyone

There is a pervasive belief that lower swing speed golfers need lower-compression golf balls. The results of our test again suggest that many lower swing speed golfers would benefit from higher-compression offerings.

Even in cases where the slower swing speeds all but eliminate the speed advantage of high-compression balls off the driver, the higher spin rates provide a greater ability to hold greens.

For higher swing speed golfers, the distance advantage of firmer compression offerings is clear. For all but the highest spin golfers, lower compression leads to reduced distance off the tee.

With all of that said, if soft feel is important to you, low compression is your only option.

2. Some Golf Ball Models Evolve … Some Don’t

MyGolfSpy Testing Facility

The results of this test suggest that many models evolve over time. What was true two years ago may not be true now.

Some examples: The Pro V1x is lower-spinning off the driver than the previous model. The previously low-flying, high-spinning Mizuno RB Tour series is dramatically different (we were particularly impressed by the RB Tour X), and for lack of a more precise description, Bridgestone’s TOUR B series just performs better.

In other cases (the new Kirkland Performance+ V3, for example), the key performance characteristics, most notably its high spin rate, appear largely unchanged.

3. Performance Matters on All Shots

Performance differences can be significant, even on the shorter shots. While there are few standouts for golfers seeking quantifiable higher spin rates on greenside shots, from top to bottom there are significant differences in both launch angle and spin rates.

A good bit of that is attributable to the cover: ionomer balls launch higher and spin significantly less than urethane offerings. Among the urethane options, there were some surprising disappointments.

As you would expect, most of the balls in this test qualify as average when it comes to greenside spin.

4. Don’t Overlook DTC and House Brands

Golfers seeking value don’t necessarily need to sacrifice performance. Throughout the test, several DTC models stood out for one reason or another.

The Maxfli Tour Series continues to improve and we were particularly impressed by the Tour Soft. VICE Pro and Pro Soft stood out under some test conditions and, while spin rates are a bit on the high side, the PXG Xtreme was a surprisingly strong performer.

The LA Golf ball more than held its own, though it’s hard to find any value in the $70 per dozen price.

Also of note, the Seed SD-02 was one of the more unusual performers in the test. Under many test conditions, it flew notably lower.

5. There’s No Such Thing as a Bad Golf Ball

MyGolfSpy Ball Test

Taking manufacturing quality and consistency out of the equation for now, we’d argue there’s no such thing as a bad ball.

While a good bit of what’s on the market is designed to work for a wide portion of the bell curve, our test uncovered some niche offerings that, if nothing else, suggest there’s a ball out there for every golfer.

The challenge comes in finding the one that works for you.

6. The Need for Speed

You don’t need to sacrifice speed to get what you want from a golf ball. Unless what you want from the ball is an excessively soft feel, you don’t need to sacrifice speed to get the trajectory and spin you need.

In looking only at those balls that produced above-average ball speed in most conditions, we found balls that produced nearly every combination of flight and spin characteristics.

7. It’s Not Launch Angle, It’s Trajectory

We touched on this last time but it’s worth mentioning again: As golfers, we’ve been conditioned to think about golf club performance in terms of ball speed, launch angle, spin rate and often distance.

With the golf ball, launch angle on its own doesn’t tell you much.

In many cases, launch angle differences between balls are minimal but when you consider the whole of ball’s trajectory – launch angle, peak height, peak height distance (how far down-range the ball reached its apex) and descent angle – significant differences emerge.

Does it fly low and flat, high and flat or does it just kind go straight up and straight back down?

The bottom line is that the trajectory of the golf ball is complex. Simplification is always risky but we’d suggest relying more heavily on maximum height than launch angle.

Other Things to Know

This section contains a few notes to help you better understand the rest of what you’ll find in this report.

What is a “Soft” Golf Ball?

The performance section below references “soft” and “soft-ish” golf balls. As with many things in the golf equipment world, there is no universally accepted standard that defines what it means for a golf ball to be soft. You’ll find the phrase “soft feel” applied to balls that range from 35 compression all the way to 100.

For the purposes of our discussion, we’re classifying anything with mid-70s compression or lower as soft. Balls with compression values in the low 80s may be described as soft-ish.

The softest balls on the market (below 60 compression) tend to be two-piece ionomer offerings where really soft cores are used to offset feel lost to firmer ionomer covers.

The Robot Configuration Matters

Our test parameters were intended to align with the launch and spin numbers produced by the average golfer in each group. As distance is the product of speed, trajectory and spin, carry and total distance values will inevitably vary by some degree depending on the trajectory and spin produced by the individual golfer.

While the relationship between speed, launch and spin shouldn’t change much (balls that spin the most for me will likely spin the most for you), the results reflect what happened under the conditions tested.

About Our Top Picks

For each swing speed group, we’ve provided our top picks from the test. The balls are divided into high-spin, mid-spin and low-spin offerings. While not explicitly stated elsewhere, in most cases, each list contains a high-, mid- and low-trajectory ball (in that order).

As some balls that are high-spinning and high-flying off the driver can be mid-flying and mid-spinning off irons (or nearly any other permutation), balls may not fit neatly into one bucket.

The larger point is that we’ve done our best to provide a selection of performance options in each category.

We’ve also provided a “Great Buy” value option for each category.

For what it’s worth, we’ve limited our lists to our top three picks but, in many cases, we could comfortably add a few more.

Golf Ball Performance is Relative

Finally, remember that most manufacturers describe the performance of their products relative to their other products. Simply put, a ball a manufacturer describes as offering high ball flight and low spin may actually be mid-trajectory and mid-spin relative to the market as a whole.

Our descriptions of trajectory and spin are relative to the other balls in this test.

HIGH SWING SPEED RESULTS

Top Picks for High Swing Speed

To arrive at our picks, we considered key performance metrics like ball speed, trajectory, spin rate, and distance. The high speed recommendations below are based on a combination of driver and iron performance.

Low SpinMaxlfi Tour S, Titleist Pro V1x Left Dash, Titleist AVX
Mid SpinMizuno RB Tour X, Titleist Pro V1x, Titleist Pro V1
High SpinSrixon Z-Star Diamond, Wilson Triad, Callaway Chrome Soft X
Great BuyVice Pro Plus

High Swing Speed Driver

Test ParametersTest Averages (All Balls)
Driver Used: PXG 0311 GEN6 7.5°Total Distance: 339.4*
Swing Speed: 115 mphBall Speed: 168.8
Calibration Launch Angle Target: 10.5Launch Angle: 10.4
Calibration Spin Target: 2,500 rpmSpin: 2,597
*For high speed driver, Total Distance = Measured Carry Yards + USGA Bounce and Roll formula

Total Distance

Observations:

Ball Speed

Observations:

  • As expected, the list of top-10 fastest balls at 115 mph comprises mostly high-compression offerings, including the Titleist Pro V1x Left Dash, Maxfli Tour X, Srixon Z-Star Diamond, and the Titleist Pro V1x.
    • Surprises include the Titleist Pro V1 and Pro V1 Yellow, which, while not soft, are sub-90 compression on our gauge.
  • The list of fastest balls includes a mix of higher- and lower-spinning balls, which suggests high-speed players aren’t locked into a single spin profile.
    • You should be able to find what you need with respect to spin and trajectory and still find a fast ball.
  • Under the conditions tested, low-compression balls can’t match the speed of firmer balls.

Spin

When it comes to the driver, low spin can be your friend, as it will often result in straighter shots. It’s a good bit of the reason why low-compression balls are sometimes described as more forgiving.

Observations:

High Swing Speed Irons

Test ParametersTest Averages (All Balls)
Club Used: PXG 0317 CB (8-iron)Total Distance: 181.7
Swing Speed: 87 mphBall Speed: 117.6
Calibration Launch Angle Target: 18Launch Angle: 18.3
Calibration Spin Target: 7,500 rpmSpin: 7,332
*For high speed irons, Total Distance = Measured Carry Yards + USGA Bounce and Roll formula

Total Distance

Observations:

  • Under the conditions tested, the list of longest balls off high-speed irons includes a mix of high- and, at least, mid-compression offerings.
  • Firmer options that produced outstanding iron distance include the Bridgestone TOUR BX, Srixon Z-Star Diamond and the Titleist Pro V1x Left Dash.
  • Softer options among the top 10 include the Bridgestone TOUR B RX, Callaway Chrome Soft and Titleist AVX.
  • The high-flying options on the list include the Callaway Chrome Soft, Titleist AVX, Left Dash and Pro V1 Yellow.
    • All of the above produced similar descent angles.
  • Without regard for distance, other high-trajectory options include Not Your Ball, LA Golf Ball and the VICE Pro and Pro Plus.
    • Of that group, the LA Golf ball produced the shallowest descent angles.
  • Low-flying options with strong distance showings include the Srixon Z-Star (the lowest of the bunch), the Bridgestone TOUR B X and the TaylorMade TP5, which offered the steepest descent angle.
    • While their distance numbers fall outside the top 10, the Kirkland Performance+ V3, Srixon S-Star, Bridgestone TOUR B RX, Volvik Tour VS4 and Taylormade TP5x also offer what could be described as a penetrating trajectory.

Ball Speed

Observations:

Spin

Observations:

  • The highest spinning balls under the conditions tested include the PXG Xtreme, Inesis Tour 900, Kirkland Performanc+ v3, and the Volvik Tour VS4.
  • We’ve talked about the spin challenges inherent to low-compression golf balls. That bears out, as all of the balls in the top 10 are above 80 compression.
  • The lowest spin group comprises “non-Tour” urethane offerings like the Bridgestone TOUR B RX, TOUR B RXS, and Srixon Q-Star.
  • The Seed SD-02 is notable for being a firmer ball that produces low spin rates.

MID SWING SPEED RESULTS

Top Picks for Mid Swing Speed

To arrive at our picks, we considered key performance metrics like ball speed, trajectory, spin rate, and distance. The mid speed recommendations below are based on a combination of driver and iron performance.

MyGolfSpy Ball Test

Low SpinVICE Pro Soft, Titleist Pro V1, Bridgestone TOUR B RX
Mid SpinTitleist Pro V1x, LA Golf Ball, Callaway Chrome Soft X LS
High SpinSrixon Z-Star Diamond, Callaway Chrome Soft X, Bridgestone Tour B XS
Great BuyWilson Triad

Mid Swing Speed Driver

Test ParametersTest Averages (All Balls)
Club Used: Callaway Paradym 10.5°Total Distance: 266.9
Swing Speed: 100 mphBall Speed: 145.5
Calibration Launch Angle Target: 13Launch Angle: 12.67
Calibration Spin Target: 2,600 rpmSpin: 2,783
*For mid speed driver, Total Distance = Measured Carry Yards + USGA Bounce and Roll formula

Total Distance

MyGolfSpy Ball Test - Longest

Observations:

Ball Speed

MyGolfSpy Golf Ball Test - Ball Speed

Observations:

Spin

Observations:

Mid Swing Speed Irons

Test ParametersTest Averages (All Balls)
Club Used: PXG 0317 CB (8-iron)Total Distance: 166.5
Swing Speed: 77 mphBall Speed: 106.6
Calibration Launch Angle Target: 21Launch Angle: 21.0
Calibration Spin Target: 7,000 rpmSpin: 6,657
*For mid speed irons, Total Distance = Measured Carry Yards + USGA Bounce and Roll formula

Total Distance

Observations:

Ball Speed

Observations:

  • The top 10 provides a broad range of offerings, including three Bridgestone balls (TOUR B XS, TOUR B X, and TOUR B RXS). The TaylorMade TP5 and Titleist Pro V1 round out the top five.
  • The fastest “soft” balls under the conditions tested were the Bridgestone TOUR B XS (kinda soft) and the TOUR B RXS, which is legitimately soft.

Spin

Observations:

LOW SWING SPEED RESULTS

Top Picks for Low Swing Speed

To arrive at our picks, we considered key performance metrics like ball speed, trajectory, spin rate, and distance. The slow speed recommendations below are based on a combination of driver and iron performance.

Low SpinVICE Pro Soft, Maxfli Tour S, Bridgestone TOUR B RXS
Mid SpinLA Golf Ball, Maxlfi Tour X, Callaway Chrome Soft
High SpinSrixon Z-Star Diamond, Titleist Pro V1x, PXG Xtreme
Great BuyMaxfli Tour S

Low Swing Speed Driver

Test ParametersTest Averages (All Balls)
Club Used: PING G430 MAX 12°Total Distance: 219.8
Swing Speed: 85 mphBall Speed: 123.4
Calibration Launch Angle Target: 15Launch Angle: 14.3
Calibration Spin Target: 2,800 rpmSpin: 2,943
*For low speed driver, Total Distance = Measured Carry Yards + USGA Bounce and Roll formula

Total Distance

Observations:

Ball Speed

Observations:

Spin

Observations:

Low Swing Speed Irons

Test ParametersTest Averages (All Balls)
Club Used: PXG 0317 CBTotal Distance: 134.9
Swing Speed: 67Ball Speed: 90.0
Calibration Launch Angle Target: 24Launch Angle: 23.6
Calibration Spin Target: 6,500 rpmSpin: 6,029
*For low speed irons, Total Distance = Measured Carry Yards + USGA Bounce and Roll formula

Total Distance

Observations:

  • With the reduced speed friction of the low-speed iron test (66 mph average), low-compression balls shine for distance.
  • The top are all low-compression balls.
  • Ionomer offerings (Callaway Supersoft, Wilson DUO Soft and Not Your Ball) top the chart while most of the rest are non-Tour urethane offerings including TaylorMade Tour Response, Bridgestone TOUR B RX, Callaway Chrome Soft, etc.).
  • The notable exception is the VICE Pro which ranked eighth.
  • All of the balls in the top 10 produced below-average spin rates.
    • VICE Pro was the highest spinning but still fell just outside the top-10 lowest-spinning.
  • The longest ball with average-plus spin rates is the LA Golf ball. The longest with high spin is the Wilson Staff.
  • While there’s not a ton of separation under the conditions tested, the VICE Pro Soft, VICE Pro and Bridgestone TOUR B RXS flew the highest among the top 10.
    • The highest-flying without regard for distance rank were the Seed SD-02 and SD-01 along with the VICE Pro Plus and LA Golf ball.
  • The lowest-trajectory balls within the top 10 are the TaylorMade Tour Response and Not Your Ball.
    • Without regard for distance, the lowest-flying balls include the Kirkland Performance+ V3, Inesis Tour 900 and Tour 900 Proto, the Snell MTB Prime and Volvik Tour VS4.

Ball Speed

Observations:

Spin

Observations:

35-Yard Wedge

The wedge portion of the test was designed to replicate a greenside shot of 35 yards. Rather than calibrate to specific launch and spin targets, we configured the robot to hit the calibration ball approximately 35 yards (total).

Test ParametersTest Averages (All Balls)
Club Used: PXG Sugar Daddy II 56°Total Distance: 37.3
Swing Speed: 37 mphBall Speed: 39.6
Calibration Launch Angle Target: n/aLaunch Angle: 37.3
Calibration Spin Target: n/aSpin: 5,489

Spin

Observations:

  • The Inesis Tour 900, TaylorMade TP5 and Kirkland Performance+ V3 were the highest-spinning in our greenside test.
  • While subtle differences matter to some degree, there’s not much separation at the top of the table beyond those few balls.
  • We find more separation at the bottom where the ionomer offerings spin significantly less. Lower-spinning urethane offerings include the Volvik Tour VS4, Titleist Tour Speed and Snell MTB Prime X.

Launch Angle

Launch angle may not be something you’ve considered on shorter greenside shots but we do see subtle differences.

Observations:

  • Painting with broad strokes, many of the lower-spinning balls on greenside shots produce higher launch angles.
    • That can provide a means to offset lower spin but does limit options to manipulate trajectory around the green.
  • Likewise, higher-spinning balls tend to produce lower launch angles.
    • An exception is the TaylorMade TP5, which produced middle-of-the-pack launch with high spin. That may suggest enhanced stopping power.

2023 Golf Ball Test Data

In our previous Ball Tests, we’ve provided a scatter plot showing the relationship between Ball Speed and Compression. This time, we’ve enhanced the chart to allow you to plot any two of our provided metrics. What you do with it is entirely up to you.

We’ve also included the ability to filter balls by manufacturer or model.

If you experience issues with any of the charts loading, here are the direct links:

Dynamic Bar Charts

Our next two charts provide a more straightforward look at the data. The functionality is similar to the scatter plot. You choose the Metric you want to see, along with the club and speed conditions. You can also filter by OEM and all Model.

By default, the bar chart below will display the Top 10 for the given metric. You can increase or decrease the number of balls shown in the chart (it defaults to 10). You also have the ability to show the Top x, Bottom x or Middle x values.

The way the filters operate is somewhat counterintuitive. We recommend leaving the “Choose What?” set to Include Top x. If you want to see the bottom x, the sort function of the bottom of the chart will re-sort from the bottom up.

As a specific example, by default, the chart will show you the top 10 highest spinning balls. Sorting the chart without adjusting the Top x filter will repopulate the chart with the 10 lowest spinning balls.

Table Data

Finally, we’ve added a crosstab for those who like to see everything in one place. Although we’ve done what we can, this one will be a struggle to view on your mobile device.

More to Come

This is the first of several posts to come from the MyGolfSpy 2023 Ball Test. In the near future, you can expect reports on Wet vs. Dry performance off wedges (yes, moisture makes a huge difference), as well as breakdowns of some of the more interesting models we tested.

Stay tuned.

MyGolfSpy 2023 Golf Ball Test FAQ

To see even more, check out our article on the Best Golf Balls of 2023.

For You

For You

Golf Wedges
May 16, 2024
Wedge Fitting and the Web: PING’s Stake in the Ground
Golf Shoes
May 16, 2024
Pour One Out for NIKE’s Air Zoom Infinity Tour NRG
Golf Technology
May 16, 2024
18 Luxury Golf Gifts We’re Drooling Over
Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony is the Editor of MyGolfSpy where his job is to bring fresh and innovative content to the site. In addition to his editorial responsibilities, he was instrumental in developing MyGolfSpy's data-driven testing methodologies and continues to sift through our data to find the insights that can help improve your game. Tony believes that golfers deserve to know what's real and what's not, and that means MyGolfSpy's equipment coverage must extend beyond the so-called facts as dictated by the same companies that created them. Most of all Tony believes in performance over hype and #PowerToThePlayer.

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey





    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

      Jayson

      4 weeks ago

      Why total distance for irons? Were the range conditions as firm as the data suggests (10+ yd roll for irons and 7yds for 35 wedge)?

      IMO, carry distance is what should be reported for irons (at least in the US, maybe AZ is an exception). Personally, I’m in the high speed category and seldom find a mid iron more than a pace from my pitch mark, except when playing exceptionally firm and fast greens, which amateurs rarely play.

      It be interesting to see an iron test with the balls “worked” for trajectory and spin into a real green to assess for “stopping power”.

      Reply

      John

      3 months ago

      I just watched a pro giving a player a choice of shafts for his driver. The player was a ten handicap and hit his drive about 230 yards. The pro gave the player a choice of shafts from extra stiff down to senior flex. The player hit ten shots with each shaft and when all was done the distance and dispersion was almost the same which told me that at that speed and distance the shaft really didn’t make that must difference. Now if he hit the ball about 300 plus yards the shaft would make a difference but a player that only hits his drive about 230 yards the shaft did not make a difference.

      Reply

      Tim

      3 months ago

      I have to ask why the YELLOWprov1 was included and why does it perform differently? are we now saying we should consider COLOR a performance option when selecting a ball? Also do you feel the left dash and V1x have enough difference between them that the avg golfer would notice on the course?

      Reply

      Kent

      1 month ago

      It’s just a slighty different mix of material since it’s has yellow dye. Any slight difference is a ball while flying in the air 200+ yards is going to result in slightly different results.

      Reply

      benvaughan

      3 months ago

      any tips for someone to dumb to read this data and make sense of it, i use a ball currently not on the list as its cheap and good enough for an 18 handicap, the rzn golf balls. I use the ping g425 sft driver to fight a slice, but the ball flight from the driver is just so high. When i play with people they say great shot and that will be long, but then i get to the fairway its the same distance as them and they are 20 years older than me. Whats the best ball for longer distance, lower flight? do i need a lower spinning ball or not. thanks guys

      Reply

      Trevor

      4 months ago

      Will we be seeing dispersion data from the balls on this test? I would like to see the consistency of the groupings of shots for each ball, which it looks like you said you recorded. Thanks!

      Reply

      James

      4 months ago

      Based on the data results, and including quality, I’m very surprised the Maxfli Tour isn’t recommended for Mid speed swingers. The Maxfli tour data for mid swing results parallels the Pro V1 as closely as any ball according to your data. Closer than the other balls you did recommend.

      Reply

      Lizz

      5 months ago

      Hi Tony, following up on the low swing speed question others have posed. As a typical bogey female golfer, I hit my driver 150 – 170 yards, well below the “slow” swing speed tested. Any intention to test at my swing speed? Frankly I would love if the answer turns out to be “at slower speeds any differences are trivial; buy according to preference!” but actual testing would be great. I’d love to hear your expert opinion, as opposed to those trolls telling us to quit golf if we can’t bomb it 300+ yards (we all know who you are).

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      5 months ago

      I don’t think we’d ever go much lower than we do now.

      You are correct that, as speed drops, the real-world differences in ball speed become trivial.

      I don’t mean to suggest that for lower speed golfers everything performs the same. Instead, I’d say that slower speed golfers need to be more aware of the flight and spin differences between balls -especially as you get closer to the green.

      My reasoning here is that while few of us will ever hit a driver as far as Rory, as we get closer to the green, we all have the potential to be more like the tour pros.

      You don’t need Rory’s clubhead speed to be successful on a 30-yard shot. That’s where urethane balls shine…they spin a lot more and that’s going to give you greater control around the greens.

      If slower speed golfers are able to generate sufficient height with a ‘soft’ golf ball, then low compression can work, but, if you’re struggling to hit the ball in the air, and struggling to generate spin, low compression is likely working against you.

      In those cases (and its many cases), higher flying, higher spinning urethane ball might be a better performing option.

      Reply

      Dan Cohen

      5 months ago

      So, the TaylorMade Tour Response. In the 2021 test, at 100mph with driver, it was second in total distance. In 2023 it’s second from last? How does that happen? I mean, I could see it shifting a few spots, but nearly dead last seems extremely odd, considering there have been no changes to the design or construction.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      5 months ago

      First – the previous test was of the ’20 ball. This test of was of the ’22 ball.

      It is inaccurate to say there were no changes to the design. The ’22 Tour Response has a different dimple pattern, specifically, the “Tour Flight” design found on the TP5 series.

      Dimples are responsible for the initial launch angle, how high the ball flies, where in the flight (how far down range) the ball reaches that height, how it descends, and how it moves through the air everywhere in-between.

      To not understand that a dimple change can have a significant impact on distance seems extremely odd.

      Reply

      Dan Cohen

      5 months ago

      Ok, fair enough. Yes, now I remember you mentioning the dimple change to the TP5 pattern in your lab review. I still think it’s at least notable that a standout ball in your labs and performance testing goes from top of the list to bottom of the list. Also, I was really just asking a question and there wasn’t any need for that particular level of condescending snark.

      Dalton W

      7 months ago

      I saw the Maxfli Tour S was amongst the recommended balls for high swing speed, but the Tour X was not on the list. In the past it ranked really high for the 21 version, and I was just wondering your thoughts. If you are compressing the firmer Tour X ball, would the Tour S still be recommended as a soft ball, or does the new Tour X still seem to be more benifical with higher compression. Wasn’t sure if it would just be more of a feel thing, or if one would show higher performance in the high swing speed category. Saw the Tour S ranked a lot higher this year than the Tour X so I also wasn’t sure if that correlated to a better ball in general. Appreciate all the work on these test!

      Reply

      BeTheBall

      7 months ago

      Great review, NOW is when you need to be here in AZ!! A dry 90* is awesome! OK… so I started playing B.BXS based of 2021 test BUT 2023 tests shows it gained 500 spin and lost 20 yards total distance for my 100 mph swing, surely that cant be right? It appears all my 5 fav balls all gained 200-500 spin and lost distance vs 2021, that seems odd? Was the robot set up differently? Higher spin driver? Help find a ball for my 100mph, which year do I trust?

      Reply

      BeTheBall

      7 months ago

      No reply for 20 yards diff? Also, may I ask what shafts (flex) u used for mid 100mph driver & iron? Thx

      Reply

      Rich

      7 months ago

      Something is off with these numbers. 77 MPH 8 irons do not go 170 yards.

      Reply

      Chris H

      6 months ago

      They do when they’re hit perfectly in the sweet spot of the club every time.

      Reply

      Trevor Ferguson

      3 months ago

      Ah, yes. People forget that quality contact is probably the most important flight and distance consideration…ball striking is the most important variable in golf! IMO…

      Mary McKenna

      8 months ago

      I see something odd in the charts. Callaway Chrome Soft ball mph at 67 mph iron is 123.7 mph while Callaway Chrome Soft ball mph at 77 mph iron is much lower, 106.9 mph. Am I looking at an old page?

      Reply

      Matt

      8 months ago

      It would also be nice to be able to graph driver spin vs. iron spin, driver ball speed vs. iron ball speed, etc. There doesn’t seem to be a way to do that right now.

      Thanks for all of this, BTW!

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      8 months ago

      I agree with you. It would be interesting to show the spin slope as you move from driver, to iron, to wedge. It’s something I’m looking into.

      Reply

      Cody

      3 months ago

      Love the massive effort in this test, and it provides the clearest insight into to the reality of golf ball performance.
      Can we please get the standard deviation and 95% confidence interval for th test?

      Reply

      WYBob

      8 months ago

      I just left my local Pro Shop- it appears the Mizuno RB Tour and RB Tour X can be had for $30/Dz right now. One of the two models is being replaced in 2024 (I can’t remember which one) with a new ball but both models are being discounted currently. Based on these test results, it appears to be a pretty solid deal if you want to try them or are looking for a deal. Just FYI…

      Reply

      Dave

      8 months ago

      Tony and crew thanks again for this great testing data. While nothing is perfect, it does seem to give a more objective analysis on a particular ball’s performance than relying on manufacturer’s marketing claims. Amazing every ball manufacturer claims theirs outperforms all others—

      Reply

      Les

      8 months ago

      My son who is 9 years old swings around 65mph with his driver. He currently uses the tp5 pix (likes the patterns) however from your data it appears the tp5x may be the better ball for him of the two. Is that right as the tp5 is lower compression and every one talks about low compression for juniors

      Reply

      Dave

      8 months ago

      65mpg @9. Holy cow, he’ll need an extra stiff driver before his 18th birthday. I’m sure you’ll love watching him grow into the game.

      Reply

      HikingMike

      8 months ago

      I have some questions about the data. I probably mostly need clarification a bunch of places.

      What exactly is “Max Height Distance”? Why is “distance” even in there. Height is already a length/distance measurement. Adding “distance” in there is just confusing.

      Why are Max Height and Max Height Distance included, with different results? It’s not just units of yards vs feet. Those dots are moving around a lot between the two.

      Why isn’t “Distance” one of the options for x-axis or y-axis? I see distance in your graphics, but not in the data charts. Is “Total” supposed to be total distance?

      Kudos for the test and the data! And I was glad to see some balls included that were not last time. And I (probably everybody) appreciate the diligent replies, Tony.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      8 months ago

      Max Height is distance from the ground plane at the ball’s Apex. Basically, the maximum height of the shot.

      Max Height Distance is how far downrange the ball was when it reached the Apex. Lateral vs. vertical.

      Both values are in feet.

      Total is Total Distance.

      Reply

      Brian

      8 months ago

      I have spent a couple hours messing with the data for the last week or so and I came to the conclusion that the Callaway Supersoft might be the best ball for me and my 95 mph (max) swing speed. I value distance and the Supersoft spins faster off the irons and less off the driver than my favored Tour B RX. But man, those RXs putt like butter…

      Reply

      Jon

      8 months ago

      I had the same thought as a senior with an 82 MPH driver swing speed. Looking for more distance without too much greenside penalty. I’ve been playing Q Star Tour and Bridgestone Treosoft with OK results. TreSoft is similar to E6 and my go to ball. Q Star Tour not much distance but excellent around the greens. I have a number of friends who use the super soft with good results.

      Reply

      Jesús Arasti

      9 months ago

      Good morning.
      Congratulations for an excellent analysis.As a senior player HCP.5 (63 years old) I do not fit the results with the reality of senior players. I have been able to test almost every ball on the market, and with the driver (<80 mph) the difference between all of them is no more than 5-8 yards.
      Now then. When we talk about irons with swing speeds of between 60-75 mph there is no ability to compress the ball and in my specific case for example with a Titleist Prov1 I lose between 5-8 yards. regarding the ball that I usually play (Taylor Made Soft Response) and that difference that with the driver is not relevant, with the irons it may be not being on the green in regulation. With PW (95 yards) the soft response stops at 11 inch. and with iron 7 (130 yards.) in 40 inch. More than enough
      When do you test for low swing speeds? Would we see that there are no significant differences between premium balls and other softer?
      Greetings from Spain
      Jesús

      Reply

      CryptoDog

      9 months ago

      I was just watching this other analysis on Youtube by @todaysgolfer called “ROBOT GOLF BALLS TEST | Find the best 2023 model for your game!”
      May be that is also a good one to get more data

      Reply

      Jon

      8 months ago

      I have a similar experience as I have an 82 swing speed as a senior and have tested numerous balls. I also found I lose distance with balls like the ProV1. The ProV1x is better but I lose it right with any sidespin. It seems as swing speed gets slower the more distance and dispersion benefit from balls like the Supersoft which did well for slow swing speeds on the test. Since I’m slower than the 85 used in the test I’m thinking more of those types of ball might work. I want distance but not too much greenside penalty so that’s an issue. In looking at the test the Wilson Triad is intriguing and worth testing. I’ve been using the Q Star Tour and love it around the greens but as reported in the test driver distance is lacking. I mostly use a two piece Bridgestone ball. I’m glad Tony said for most a high compression ball could be a benefit and didn’t say everyone. Would love to see a test of some of the other balls like the SuperSoft but think this is by far the best test MyGolfSpy has done. Kudos!!

      Reply

      Kevin

      9 months ago

      It seems like the Yellow ProV1 is just a firmer AVX?

      Reply

      John O

      9 months ago

      I would say that for the fast and mid speed mid-iron and 35 yd wedge, you have a pretty good argument. There’s noticable separation for the slow speed iron and across the driver spectrum – spin, flight and distance.

      Reply

      CryptoDog

      9 months ago

      Very interesting results.
      Question: would you be re-doing the test at a lower temperature? Say, just doing the same test with just the top 10 balls to see what happens? May be doing it around 50 degrees F, as a comparison???

      Reply

      SHOCK

      9 months ago

      im just wondering if compression or hard/soft ball affect putting distance or how the ball rolls off ? or would the diffrence be too small to tell?

      Reply

      rick

      8 months ago

      you don’t swing hard enough with the putter to make a difference at all

      Reply

      Neil

      9 months ago

      Great guide, but I think you need to experiment on your home course too. e.g. My home course in Wellington, NZ, you will struggle to get it to spin on the greens, it’s the type of soil, but I play another one and it rips. I have been playing Tour Responses for two years they’ve been fine.

      Reply

      Kydoran

      9 months ago

      I’m interested to know why you picked the 7.5 degree loft for high swing speed. This is rare with tour pros and even rarer in your target audience of scratch or single digit H’caps.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      It’s not about the loft of the driver. It’s about achieving the desired launch and spin characteristics with an understanding that robot delivery does not 100% replicate human delivery.

      Reply

      CryptoDog

      9 months ago

      This other analysis on Youtube by @todaysgolfer called “ROBOT GOLF BALLS TEST | Find the best 2023 model for your game!” also does something similar but has come up with different results and is very interesting

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      The Today’s Golfer’s test was done indoors. With that, you’re stripping aways most of the aerodynamic properties of the golf ball.

      Imagine that shortly after the ball gets into the air you were able to magically put the same dimple patter on every ball. That’s basically what happens when you test golf balls indoors or in a limited-flight environment.

      As we’ve noted on several occasions, the totality of golf ball performance comes from speed, spin, and flight.

      Speed correlates with compression and is set at impact. You can capture speed in an indoor or limited-flight environment.

      Spin is the result of hardness differences between layers. Spin numbers are set at impact. You can capture spin in an indoor or limited-flight environment.

      Flight included the initial launch, max height, descent angle, time in the air, etc. The dimple pattern plays a significant role in how the golf ball performs after it’s in the air. You cannot accurately capture flight/trajectory in an indoor or limited flight environment.

      CryptoDog

      9 months ago

      If that were the case, how is the GC Quad any use at a professional level??? Isn’t it supposed to be one of the best? Thanks

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      It’s important to understand the limitations of your tools. In this case, the tools is the launch monitor.

      Let me start with this:
      Foresight GCQuad is a phenomenal tool.
      Trackman is a phenomenal tool.

      They work differently, and going back to my first point, they both have strengths and weaknesses. As with anything else, you need to identify the right tool for the job.

      The limitation of Foresight is that it cannot see the full flight of the ball and, as such, it has no way to fully understand the influence of the dimple pattern on trajectory.

      Trackman struggles with spin axis capture in indoor and other limited flight environments.

      Different tools…different strengths and weaknesses.

      FYI – There isn’t a ball manufacturer in the world that relies on Foresight for full flight ball testing because removes the aero package from the equation, and the aero package is kind of a big deal.

      This isn’t a knock on Foresight. It’s just the reality of how the tool works (and it’s all documented several other places). We use GCQuad for the overwhelming majority of our tests, but when you need to see the full flight of the ball (as one does in a ball test), it’s just not the right tool for the job.

      In any scenario in which the ball isn’t the variable (club testing, for example), GCQuad works exceptionally well.

      Erik

      9 months ago

      What’s the reasoning for the recommendation Vice Pro Soft instead of the AVX for low spin on mid speed? They have nearly identical spin characteristics but AVX beats Vice PS in ball speed, carry, and total distance.

      Reply

      Jonathan

      8 months ago

      Cost likely. $20 difference between the two

      Reply

      Tim

      9 months ago

      Why the poor showing for the TP5 and TP5x? Why would some notable Tour Pros play them if they test so poorly?

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      they get paid to

      Reply

      Tim

      9 months ago

      I get that, BUT They get paid more to finish high and win!

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      I can’t give you a definitive answer. Looking at the TP5 in particular, relative to balls with similar compression, it launches low, flies higher, peaks closer to the target line and descends more steeply. That would certainly account for the shorter driver distances.

      The results are similar to what we saw in our 2021 test. The industry chatter is that the dimple pattern isn’t well-suited to the ball. Going back to 2019, the TP5 series was among the best we tested. In our tests, the newer ball doesn’t’ perform as well.

      As for why Tour pros would play it. Let’s start with contractual obligations. I mean … guys played Nike balls and drivers for years. That said, TaylorMade has a significant number of TP5/TP5x options on the USGA list, so it’s reasonable to assume that not everyone playing a TP5 is playing a stock retail ball. Iron performance is solid enough, so I’d wager most are getting dialed in on the irons and tuning the driver to get the best results (fit the ball to the irons and the driver to the ball).

      And with all of that said, TaylorMade is just a few months out on a new ball. Given what the company has invested in ball research and development since the release of the current model, my expectation is we’re going to see significant improvement.

      Reply

      Tim

      8 months ago

      Thanks Tony. I appreciate your taking the time to articulately answer my question. Cheers!

      Jay Nichols

      9 months ago

      To MyGolfSpy.com staff,
      Hello Tony and others at MGS, can you tell me why my comments or replies to others aren’t posted? I work in the golf industry in MA and know what I’m talking about, and in some aspects, I know more that MGS, so can you answer that simple question?
      Jay

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      Because you’re a shill for Titleist? GTFO

      Reply

      Jay Nichols

      9 months ago

      I’ll stick with the clear leader, Titleist, the pioneer, The #1 Ball in golf, the ball everyone else tries to match or beat, and the model names that every competitor takes a piece of with their “Pro +, V, and of course X, if they don’t have X in their model name, they’re not even mentioned, or remembered. The PRO V1 & PRO V1x are the clear leaders in golf ball design, performance, market share, the ball that’s played by a majority of players on every tour in the world, and more significantly, college & high school golf programs where players don’t make a dime from anyone, and more importantly, the brand with that leads the industry in golf ball design, golf ball pattents issued annually and throughout history, and continues it’s leadership in bridge builders now into the 4th generation of balls manufactured in America that all others will never dominate like Titleist.
      If you’re cheap and like the fact that you prefer to buy your golf balls made in China with money used to buy America, you go ahead and support the slave labor, I’ll support American workers with American jobs that all golf ball manufacturers aspire to be.

      Reply

      Rob D

      9 months ago

      Golf was invented in the UK. It’s a global sport. What’s the obsession with the United States?

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      when you buy Titleist, you are paying way too much for all the players they are paying, and the marketing. The fact you can buy balls from Vice, Maxfli, and old Snell that are just as good for a fraction of the price shows you that. You actually see “slaves” working in the factories? highly doubt that.

      Reply

      CoryO

      9 months ago

      Always love reading about the tests, but I can’t help but wonder if the weather had an outsized impact. 105 degrees is going to do weird stuff to a ball (even strictly measuring at impact, not visually what’s happening down range), so could that account for some of the strange results? For example, every TM ball performing poorly relative to the field with drivers, if they were all tested at the same location at relatively the same time, the conditions might have been a reason. Looking forward to the deeper dives.

      Reply

      joe

      9 months ago

      So…for every ball, slower swings were associated w/ higher spin? This seems counter-intuitive. Wouldn’t faster swings produce more spin?

      Reply

      joe

      9 months ago

      ** with Driver

      Reply

      CoryO

      9 months ago

      Apples and oranges. The high speed driver testing was a PXG at 7.5* and the mid speed was a Paradym at 10.5*. All else being equal higher speed creates more spin, but that’s not what was being tested.

      Reply

      R. Miller

      9 months ago

      Sadly, this proves what I had found with the new Snell Prime balls. They do not perform well in any aspect. Tag on to that I have had durability issues with them. Due to this they were kicked to the curb. I am testing now to decide between the Maxfli Tour X, Mizuno RB Tour X, and Bridgestone B X.

      Reply

      Snell_to_Maxfli

      8 months ago

      Price/Performance ranks. Take the PRICE for 1 dozen / RANKING with Driver CARRY at say 100mph. Maxfli #6 in Carry/Top 5% in price, Mizuno #11 in Carry/Bottom 20% cost. Numbers are what they are.

      Reply

      george m

      9 months ago

      Once again kudos and a tip of the hat to Tony and the rest of the MGS crew for another informative and enlightening ball performance test. I changed balls after the last ball test in 2021 to the Bridgestone Tour BX…. The result has been, or at least a happy coincidence of the change is a drop in my index number of over 3 points. I’m 69 years old with a driver swing speed of 84.5 mph and an 8 iron swing speed of 71.6 mph, nowhere close to the metrics described by Bridgestone for their ball selection recommendation. Without having had the ability to see hard data as provided MGS I might never have tried the BX believing that someone of my swing speed would see no benefit from the higher compression ball. For that I thank Tony and MGS….
      On another note, and I offer this simply as a suggestion, it strikes me that with regard iron performance, carry distance is a far more important metric than total distance…. It seems to me that carry should have more emphasis in your analytics than total distance…. just an opinion.
      Again, thanks for all the effort in putting this together…..

      Reply

      Rob Shields

      9 months ago

      My take….for faster players the Vice Pro plus is a quality choice and for the price may be tough to beat

      Reply

      Mary McKenna

      9 months ago

      Very interesting. BUT you need to test at a true slow swing speed which is 75 miles per hour. Lots of seniors, lots of women, and a few senior women swing at 75 miles per hour.

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      at that slow a speed, the ball pretty much doesn’t matter, you’re going to duff the ball 100 yards regardless of the ball.

      Reply

      george m

      9 months ago

      That is certainly a rather rude and boorish comment…. and clearly demonstrates an obvious lack of experience playing with seniors…..

      Phillip

      9 months ago

      Rick, your comment is very insulting. To imply that a golfer with a slow swing speed cannot hit well is ludicrous and just plain wrong. As an older golfer with a frozen shoulder, my driver speed is approximately 72mph with an average distance around 170-180 and I probably keep the ball in the fairway much more often than you do. And yes, the ball definitely makes a difference at my slow swing speed. I have tried many different balls on this list as well as others not on this list. As the article states, the correct ball for you depends on what is important to you. For me, I like the ball to hold the green. I have tried balls that go farther off the tee but do not hold greens. The Seed 01 does not go as far off the tee for me, but it holds the green and putts better than any ball I have ever tried. The only reason I do not play the Seed 01 regularly is because the price point is too high after shipping charges compared to others. My current choice is the Legato ball. It gives me about 10 more yards off the tee than most others and holds the green well with any club 6-Iron and in. So, yes, for those of us with slower swing speeds in the low 70s or even slower, the ball definitely does make a difference.

      Terry Grant

      8 months ago

      Rick:
      At 77 yrs. of age my swing speed in about 76 mph. I have been able to maintain a GHIN hdcp. of 3-5 for the last 20 years. I play the correct tees for my age and practice my short game quite a lot.

      Matt

      9 months ago

      Well yeah, but that’s why it’s up to you the player to look and say “the way I deliver the ball (spin loft, etc) I generate a lot of spin and could use something lower spinning” you can look at the list and see what options will be better or worse options for YOU

      Reply

      Matt

      9 months ago

      Sorry this was meant for a reply to a commenter who was saying the test doesn’t mean much because everyone delivers the club differently.

      Reply

      Chris

      9 months ago

      Been working on my swing speed over the last year. Have also switched from a Prov1x to a Tour Response based on last years testing. What an error. Can I have my money back please?

      Reply

      Dave

      9 months ago

      Good stuff here. My take from this is that there’s no one ideal ball for most folks. I really thought that high compression balls were just for fast swingers (I’m 95-100mph) but that’s not what is shown here. And I recall reading the same results in past years. I now only play urethane balls but frankly don’t think it really matters which brand, unless further MGS reports say otherwise. That said, I’m still going to stay away from the firmer balls and play the many others (Chrome Soft, ProV1, Snell, etc.).

      Reply

      BeTheBall

      9 months ago

      Been playing tp5x at 98mph and seems over all a good ball for me, I also play prov1x & Bbxs. I am curious any thought why highly played pga tour ball tp5 & tp5x rated so low overall this year? Do you think Titleist will ever do the left dash in yellow for us?

      Reply

      Physics Teacher

      9 months ago

      I’ve noticed that there has been a trend over the last 3 ball tests that (low) spin isn’t as much of a determining factor for distance as it used to be. In the past balls that spun more went shorter. Now there are balls that spin and fly high, but maintain distance (Mizuno tour x, Srixon Diamond). Wondering if there’s a new delta one could test – the “slipperiness” of dimple patterns so they do not covert horizontal velocity to vertical when they have backspin. For example, comparing the Diamond to the Maxfli Tour X with High Speed iron – Launch is close, the Diamond spins 500 rpm more, yet the Maxfli has a much higher peak height. Would seem like the dimple pattern might have something to do with that – having flashbacks to the low trajectory titleist balata back in the day, If i recall it only had 312 dimples.

      Reply

      Jay Nichols

      9 months ago

      OMG…. You can’t be serious, “Slipperiness” of dimple patterns???? How about the clear coat chemistry? Maybe solvent borne paint is more durable, and slipperier than water borne coatings?
      Tony, break down the chemistry for us pleas??? Lol

      Reply

      Physics Teacher

      9 months ago

      I said I was a physics teacher, never claimed to know a lick about chemistry…I apologize for the simplistic wording, I didn’t want to word it angular velocity vs magnus force promoting energy transfer leading to negative acceleration. Still wondering about the Diamond vs. Tour X data.

      CryptoDog

      9 months ago

      Might also be to do with the softness/hardness of the cover. If the cover is softer and grips more (SpinSkin on Srixon) it may spin the ball more as it gets grabbed by the grooves on irons or rough surface of the face. Dunno physics to that extent myself, but I’m thinking that’s what it is

      Reply

      Malcolm

      9 months ago

      Love the data – Thanks a bunch for doing this !!!

      Question – when you plot spin axis against spin for the driver data – the scatter plot suggests some balls tend to have more spin axis than others
      (sorry – i dont seem to be able to upload the charts)
      What’s the significance of this?
      Bridgestone Tour BRXS has top of range spin axis for all driver speeds however
      Titleist Tour Speed has +ve spin axis at 115 mph, is the most -ve spin axis ball at 100mph and +ve again at 85mph
      I play the tour speed and am curious if there is explanation for this
      Thanks, M

      Reply

      Larry

      9 months ago

      Trust Golf is a division of Kerichem Materials Science Co. Ltd. For the past 25 years, we have been supplying golf ball core and cover technologies to nearly all the world’s major golf ball manufacturers. SO Kerichem makes their own golf balls, sold on Amazon, called Trust with several different versions. Why have these never been tested? A lot of the balls you test are manufactured by the same ball plant, which as you know is more than happy to make a ball for anyone with the money and stamp any name on it you want, and that ball will ALMOST be the same (if not the same,different color core maybe) as many of the ones you test..

      Reply

      Physics Teacher

      9 months ago

      I am writing this because your post interested me into looking into the Trust golf ball. When looking I found that Trust makes a line of 4 3-piece balls of differing compression, and also makes a 2 piece urethane covered ball, and a limited flight range ball, also with a urethane cover (?). I also found a website that does not give me confidence that you are a reputable company…it looked like a lot of the visuals of Chinese knockoff electronics that sell on Amazon. I cannot speak for the people at MGS – but as someone that looks for DTC brands to save money, the lack of confidence the website gave me was stronger than the curiosity I had to try your ball. I hope this is taken as constructive criticism and not an insult.

      Reply

      Brian

      2 months ago

      I started using Trust Aurora Golf Balls, last month. I was playing with Vice Pro+ for the last 2 years and got frustrated with their price increase. I paid about $100 for 4 dozen Auroras.

      In my opinion, the Trust golf ball far out performs the Maxfli Tour & Srixon Q Star Tour (both of which I play intermittently). I find the Trust equal to the Vice Pro+. I’m 71, with a 6 handicap.

      Reply

      Bob Hirsch

      9 months ago

      Thanks for a great article. Still not sure if I will ever change from my Titleist Pro V1x

      Reply

      Tim

      9 months ago

      First off. I appreciate this test and all the incredibly hard work that goes into this type of testing. You guys should hire a few of us for the week to come out and help you execute the test!!. take the load off some of you while you compile the analytics. We would work for lunches to help you guys.

      Secondly, if i had a criticism, i would say the way the data is presented is confusing. Its overly “scientific” and could be “dumbed down” a bit in relation to the charts you put together and the way the categories are explained. The test continues to evolve and i love it more than any other test out there. The BALL is the main piece of equipment that NEEDS to be fit for amateurs. I have been “fit” 5 times by 5 different “fitters” and each time a different recommendation is given. I think fitting for anyone above a 10 HDCP really does not work…..except for the ball. Just my controversial opinion.

      anyway. with the ball comparisons, i thik i want to throw my TP5’s in the trash :) and buy some V1X’s…..thankfully the TP 5’s were win at an outing as I am a lifetime Titleist player….the left DOT is my ball and wish it had been included in this test.

      Thank you for doing this test AGAIN and keeping us updated on all the industry changes. I just wish your web site was easier to view. There are way too many BIG pictures taking up the screen and advertisements that get in the way due to their size. I appreciate what you guys are doing

      Reply

      Ryan R

      9 months ago

      Tim,
      I can appreciate your reply as a reflection of the test. However, I disagree with the “scientific” post from MGS. I believe the entire model of their research & tests is to cater to the over-scientific, nerdy, analytical, and intelligent golfer. I do believe that most of us actually want this sort of over extensive testing… or at least i know that I do. If I were looking for a dumbed down review, quite frankly, i’d go to Rick Shiels videos where he hits a few putts and drives…
      I love seeing the difference in numbers across swing speeds. Great work MGS

      Reply

      Mike

      9 months ago

      Question: If your swing speed falls between the high and mid swing speed categories, should you be considering a ball from the higher or mid swing speed recommendations balls for desired spin level you’re looking for? I know there’s overlap, just wondering which way you’d say we should lean.

      Reply

      AC

      9 months ago

      Good job guys. Knocked it out of the park.

      Reply

      Cody K

      9 months ago

      Purely curious – is there a reason why max height distance is in feet?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      That’s how it comes out of the launch monitor. Same with the standard Max Height Measurment.

      Reply

      Andrew the Great!

      8 months ago

      I like the LMs doing height in feet. I think we understand height better in feet, and distance better in yards (or miles). For example, how high do airlines say their planes fly? In feet. “We’ll be cruising at 35,000 feet today”, not, “We’ll be cruising at 7 miles today”. A basketball hoop is “10 feet high”, not “a little over 3 yards high”. That sort of thing. I can comprehend a ball that reaches a height of 90 feet better than one that reaches a height of 30 yards.

      Golfzilla70

      9 months ago

      Maybe i missed it, but i dug through all the Titleist balls, and only saw the urethane balls tested. I was hoping to see a comparison of the TruFeel and/or the Velocity as well. I thought they had previously said they were going to include a few ionomer balls in this test. It’s a bit disappointing to not see them.

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      why on earth are you playing ionomer balls in this day and age? there’s literally no reason to play them

      Reply

      Golfzilla70

      9 months ago

      I’ve got a couple of good reasons, in no particular order: a) the retail price is significantly less; b) they’re more durable; c) their spin rate is very consistent, even on center-strikes and off-center strikes

      I know the urethane balls spin like crazy and have their stopping power, but i’ve not seen anyone outside of professional golfers that really need anything like that. I’ve got plenty of friends that love those urethane balls, and they’ll hit a ball up beside the hole and sometimes it stops, and sometimes it spins 30′ backwards. I think the pros are good enough to regulary exploit the tech in those balls, but they’re probably the only group that can. And even they get caught spinning a good shot 30′-40′ back away from the pin from time to time.

      Mike

      9 months ago

      Guys, appreciate the testing but as a slower-swing player (85-88 driver mph) I’m done numerous ball tests on my course when it’s not crowded. The softer balls go further for me. All the more reason that while these tests make great reading (& probably a good starting point), you have to test things yourself for your own personal “game”.

      Reply

      Golfzilla70

      9 months ago

      Same here. I’m actually about a 100-mph driver swing speed guy, and i too like the ionomer balls. I feel like i lose a little distance off driver (compared to urethane), but they fly straighter. And they jump off the approach irons a bit faster than the urethane balls, which means i can swing easier on touchy shots. I’m capable of spinning those urethane balls to the point that they’re so unpredictable as to how much they’ll spin (or won’t) that i really dislike hitting them into greens on anything longer than 50-60 yards.

      Reply

      Jay Nichols

      9 months ago

      I think your post on 30′ of spin was real 15 years ago with the Titleist Pro V1 Diamond, not today, you can’t name one event that PGA TOUR pros are spinning any ball back “like crazy 30′.” Lol

      Chris1967

      9 months ago

      It’s part of the limitations of robot testing. Slowing down swing speed but still delivering pro-level consistency (which is what a robot does) simply isn’t something you are going to see very often (if ever) on an actual golf course. Most slower-swinging players carry higher handicaps, and face angles, attack angles, face-to-path and etc. are going to be all over the place.

      Reply

      Da Slammer

      9 months ago

      What balls do you use?

      Reply

      Jon

      7 months ago

      I’m like you and at 82 MPH have tested numerous balls. The premium balls generally don’t go as far and with any side spin I lose them right. Wish they would have tested the ERC Soft and some of the other Titleist balls. Today’s golfer test was a little more thorough while results weren’t too conflicting IMO it was more accurate for slower swing speeds.

      Reply

      Handymn

      9 months ago

      Can you please explain again what the spin axis metric is and why I would care about it?

      Reply

      Da Slammer

      9 months ago

      It’s the direction of the ball. Plus is to the Right and Minus is to the left

      Reply

      Handymn

      9 months ago

      Yes, so does that mean a spin axis measurement closer to zero means that ball is straighter? Do balls with higher spin access numbers fly askew or offline? Does that mean one ball is a “fade ball” and another is a “draw ball”?

      Rob T

      9 months ago

      Love the data as always. Interesting to see the discrepancy between the white and yellow versions of the pro v1 – for the mid swing speed it produces noticeably less spin off the tee with comparable iron and wedge performance… Could it be an option for people who want similar performance to the not publicly available pro v1 left dot?

      Reply

      Tony A

      9 months ago

      Would be interesting to see the difference in performance impact of cold weather for low compression vs. high compression balls. I suspect low/mid swing speed players would see more of a drop in ball speed in cold weather with high compression balls than they would with low compression balls. Thoughts?

      Reply

      John O

      9 months ago

      Slow Swing Speed Picks:

      Tour S is a low spin pick with 5785 rpm and 2856 rpm

      Chrome Soft is a mid spin pick with 5740 rpm and 2861 rpm

      Don’t get that.

      Reply

      Tony A

      9 months ago

      Any theories as to why there is such a performance difference between Pro V1 white and yellow balls?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      Theories, yes.

      It’s something we’re looking at.

      Reply

      John O

      9 months ago

      I’ve been banging the new Yellow Pro V1 model off cart paths and trees for the past month. I am convinced its durability is in a league of its own. Did you notice the same?

      Da Slammer

      9 months ago

      Shitty paint job on the yellow lmao

      Reply

      Bryan Hogan

      9 months ago

      After two rounds, I’m finding the same Pro V1 Yellow durability results that John O describes -> It is in a league of its own. Much more durable than the (now discontinued) Snell MTB-X that I had been playing.

      If that experience continues, it significantly lowers the real-world cost for Pro V1 Yellow balls, at least when compared to the MTB-X.

      Reply

      Peter

      9 months ago

      Awesome job you guys. Based on your findings I am going to try the Maxfli S. Low speed player numbers look great.

      Reply

      ryan V

      9 months ago

      Give the people what they want…..Data on a Nitro we pulled out of the pond and swore we’d never hit but eventually do.

      Reply

      Jason S

      9 months ago

      @TonyCovey, I have a swing speed around 105-107 with my current driver. How should I best deal with the results on driver? Should I average the 115 and 100 results and go from there or should I look at the 100 results since on course I probably swing a little less than the full 105? My 7-iron is upper 80’s so the faster iron test works for me there (don’t ask me to explain why my driver is so slow in comparison, I haven’t a clue).

      Reply

      Rob T

      9 months ago

      I am in the same position as you. In my case my driver swing speed is lower I think because I play a shortened shaft (I was fitted into this build to reduce dispersion) which I am guessing brings my speed down a touch. My plan is to cross reference the data for mid speed driver and high speed irons and see if there are any balls which fit my spin requirements at both speeds. No idea if that’s the right thing to do but that’s my plan!

      Reply

      Chappy

      9 months ago

      If you look at the Stack system, McKenzie says driver SS should be 1.18 times 7 iron. I swing my 7 iron 89mph and driver about 104ish. You are pretty much around me and this is/should be normal. I look at fast iron speed and mid driver speed to figure out a ball. I think Golf Spy has driver speed and iron speeds mismatched. A 115 driver SS implies a 97ish 7 iron or 94ish 8 iron.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      We based our 8-iron speed of Trackman Tour data. Swing Speed on the chart we used is 113, so we went a litte bit faster to keep the numbers easy.

      Tour average 8-iron is (drum roll, please) …

      87 mph.

      Chappy

      9 months ago

      Sure. And average ball speed is 171 on Tour so swing speed is probably higher on the Trackman chart. However you are also looking at ball striking freaks that far exceed their driver potential based off 7 iron. I’m just saying that if you believe the relationship you are going to find more players that fit into speeds governed by the 1.18 relationship than the tour. It’s not that hard to read across charts/speeds, but I still think your classifications are off for the average golfer.

      Dan

      9 months ago

      Great work and thank you for your efforts! Did you measure dispersion (sideways)? Saw someone else asked and didn’t see a reply.

      Thank you

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      Reply

      Da Slammer

      9 months ago

      But with the GC Quad is doesn’t read the wind, it isn’t doppler, so it should show the dispersion right away, I don’t get why it isn’t included in the initial report

      Patrick

      9 months ago

      Guessing the total distance was calculated by an equation. Mid swing speed with an 8 iron running 170 yards TD is optimal. Also suppose Arizona is at some altitude. Did notice the ball going much further even in Palm Springs. Pitching wedges going 150 yards and I’m a 105mph driver.

      Reply

      Da Slammer

      9 months ago

      400 feet elevation in Palm Springs isn’t going to influence the ball. It’s more the heat and wind

      Reply

      scott

      9 months ago

      Great work ,but at the end of the day no ball tests is needed I put into play. ProV1x or Taylormade TP5 or Tour Response, Callaway Chrome soft or ERC. Why so many different balls ? I work at a golf course so there a never ending supply of used golf ball most only hit a few times.

      Reply

      Physics Teacher

      8 months ago

      You’re welcome, and congrats on getting the job at my home course…

      Reply

      Kyle

      9 months ago

      This is pretty great guys, thank you!

      I’m just about out of ‘21 Z-Stars which I can get away with because they had low to mid spin with irons (according to your last test). Was waiting on this data to see if the ‘23 would suit, but I might have to go to AVX or similar to drop iron spin.

      Excellent work as always! Cheers.

      Reply

      JL

      9 months ago

      Thank you guys for all of this!!!!!! Awesome stuff!!!!

      Reply

      Josh

      9 months ago

      Why no full swing wedge data? Once big characteristic of firmer golf balls are that they tend to spin more on full swing wedges. For example the pro v1 and chrome soft x have a 500 rpm difference at a low mid iron. Would be nice to see how much it increases with the wedges.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      Few things are perfect 1 to 1, but past testing has found that full swing wedge spin follow similar to trends to irons. Basically, the balls that spin most off irons will typically spin most off full swing wedges.

      Reply

      CD Osborne

      9 months ago

      Which Oncore Elixr was tested (2020 or 2022)?

      Reply

      John O

      9 months ago

      This is the 2022 version. They did the 2020 version in 2021. There’s a Twitter post with the list of balls that indicated such.

      Reply

      Denny

      9 months ago

      2022

      Reply

      KJC

      9 months ago

      Very helpful. I love the interactive tables.

      Reply

      Ryan

      9 months ago

      No Callaway ERC Soft? I was really looking forward to the numbers on this ball.

      Reply

      Scott

      9 months ago

      Yeah, I’d really love to know how it stacks up against the Maxfli Tour S or the Vice Pro Soft. I’ve seen it perform really well in other tests for mid swing speed golfers, but can’t exactly compare that data set with this lol.

      Reply

      Jon

      7 months ago

      ERC soft was tested on the Todays Golfer test showed up well.

      jason z

      9 months ago

      did i miss the parameters used to identify which balls were “recommended”?

      Reply

      Mike Gifford

      9 months ago

      Very interesting test data. I’ve been playing the Titelist Tour Speed a couple seasons now with no complaints. I can see with this test data it is a consistent performer. I have a question though. I understand all the data with the exception of Max Height Distance. What is that?

      Reply

      Chris

      8 months ago

      How far down range the ball reaches its max height

      Reply

      Jay

      4 months ago

      What’s the question? You can have two players hit the same ball, same driver, same ball speed and same club speed, but the player that hits it higher, like Rory vs. the guy that hits it 15 feet lower mean Rory will hit it further because of longer hang time
      The player who hit more of a flat trajectory will get more roll out, but higher loft leading to higher carry will win every time.

      Reply

      Boris C.

      9 months ago

      Was an 8 iron used throughout the mid iron test? For the low swing speed, all I see is the brand of club.

      Reply

      Stevegp

      9 months ago

      Tony (and your team), you did a fantastic job. Your commitment, time invested, and efforts are appreciated. You delivered a wealth of useful data to consider.
      I do have a question. I see you used an 8-iron for both your fast and mid swing speed tests. Did you also use an 8-iron for the slow swing speed test?

      Reply

      Shamogity Bo

      9 months ago

      Good job Tony! Now you and your team can go on vacation!

      Reply

      Ronald Serre

      9 months ago

      For someone like myself who has immersed deep into golf ball spec’s, your comprehensive research and findings fascinated me to no end. I’m 75 soon to be 76,use PXG Clubs with stiff steel shafts and use premium balls Prov’s and x’s and experiment with other high end balls. I play to a 5 handicap and always looking for an edge, these article will shed a lot of things to experiment with, thank you. I will add,I recently started using a Cut blue 4 piece ball and found it preforms remarkable well, very comparable to the Prov1 and longer off the driver,much to my surprise. Any chance you have any info about that!? Loved the article and look forward to future articles, Ron

      Reply

      Peter Whitford

      9 months ago

      Ron, you sound like me, almost 75 and a 4 Hndcp on a Top 100 course. I changed from a Pro V1X to a Titleist AVX 2 years ago when the AVX came out with a Urethane cover–we both need a soft cover that feels soft off the putter and spins the way we need it too. These stats reinforce that I am actually playing the right ball and studied these stats closely (I am a numbers guy, retired physicist). I just got the new PXG balls in the mail and I got a sleeve from a friend before that earlier. It does feel different off the putter (shorter), it spins a little better with the irons (holds green better), but I need to see how it does with the driver some more (more playing and testing). Give the Titleist AVX a try, good ball for a low hndcp senior.

      Reply

      gary

      9 months ago

      What do you think causes the discrepancy between the balls that are ranked at the top from the driver vs the iron? For example, Taylor Made Tour Response is 4th in longest ball, medium swing speed, but not even close in driver distances.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      It has to do with impact speed and the design of the balls.

      It’s a bit of a simplification, but off the driver, you’re experiencing the full compression of the golf ball. With that, firmer is faster and plus or minus the influence of the spin rates and the aero package, often longer.

      With the lower speeds and higher lofts of mid and short irons (and full wedges), impact is more of a glancing blow, so you’re experiencing more of the mantle (or the cover on two-piece balls). At a minimum, you’re neutralizing the speed advantage of high compression golf balls, and because lower compression balls are almost invariably higher flying and lower spinning, you’re gaining some additional distance through trajectory.

      Reply

      Dave R

      9 months ago

      Been looking forward to this for a long time! The 2021 test steered me towards some unexpected directions with great results. This years test seems to have provided a huge swerve from what I expected to see results wise. I love taking a look at the table at the end, then trimming off models based on certain parameters I’m looking for. Heading to the PGA Superstore tomorrow and wouldn’t you know it, they’re offering double store points for all ball purchases. Almost as if they expected an uptick in ball sales starting today…

      Reply

      Steve Bettencourt

      9 months ago

      Great testing again–really sad to see Snell fall off the charts… Played two dozen of the MTB Prime and it was a major disappointment in performance and durability–Moving to Maxfli Tour X

      Reply

      Flea

      9 months ago

      I agree with you about the Snell – I’ve been playing them since day one. I bought a test pack of the new models my observations are the same as yours. I very very disappointed I have to look at other options. I don’t blame Dean – I guess he had no other options.

      Reply

      MJ

      9 months ago

      I moved to the Maxfli Tour X in the middle of the year. Have seen really good results off the tee and iron shots. I was using the Kirkland v2 ball during my league, and have noticed a significant change in the distance. However, the Kirkland did spin more, and now the Maxfli Tour X goes a little further after it hits the green.

      When I receive birthday or Christmas gifts that are golf balls I always request ProV 1x. No comparison between Kirkland and the ProV 1x for distance, but I am not as hurt when I lose a Kirkland over a ProV 1x. But now the Maxfli Tour X is about half the price (buy in bulk), and I am seeing the distance and a similar stopping power on the green as the ProV 1x, my miss shots will not scar me as bad.

      Reply

      Martin Brown

      9 months ago

      Overall, great work! You are the only source in the world for this kind of information, as far as I can tell.
      A couple of things:
      1. Total distance for irons as a highlighted metric? Carry distance, please!
      2. An Excel or CSV export would be valuable. I tried exporting to PDF and then cut/paste, but it appears the values in the PDF are out of order, so I paste them I get garbage.

      Reply

      rick

      9 months ago

      carry distance is shown in the table. come on man

      Reply

      Martin Brown

      9 months ago

      Hi Rick, the highlighted rankings use total distance for irons. This is one of the big charts you highlighted for each swing speed. Better players, and better informed players, should be paying attention to carry distance for irons. A ball with a flat angle of descent from iron shots will go far in total distance, but is useless. I stand by my comment.
      But even more important, I’d really like to be able to get the data in Excel, and to do that right now I have to type it in.
      In any case, the MGS ball studies are hugely helpful and important.

      Henry

      9 months ago

      Very interesting stuff. As a slower swing slicer I am interested in the degree to which a less-spinney ball can reduce offline slice effect. Stated differently, I would gladly give up 3 yards Total Distance with any ball if it also reduced the lateral offline loss by 3 yards. But I do not know how to interpret this study’s data to choose a ball that slices less. Any help here?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      Save manufacturing defects, a lower spinning ball is typically going to be a straighter ball. It’s an interesting balance because you’re not going to hit every fairway with the less spinny ball and you’re not going to miss every fairway with the spinnier one. So I guess it’s about trying to find a ball that gives you a little bit of help off the driver without costing you too much in other places.

      Reply

      Nick

      9 months ago

      Boys at TXG always talk about spin keeping the ball more on line, so when slicing spin will keep it on the planet. That’s what Ian says a lot.

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      It’s important to differentiate between the club and the ball.

      With a golf club, spin is tied to spin loft (the difference between your attack angle and the dynamic loft at impact). Ultimately that’s driven by the center of gravity, but higher spin corelates with higher spin loft and as spin loft increases it becomes more difficult to tilt the axis of the golf ball. Less tilt on the club side of the equation and you get straighter ball flight.

      At the risk of stating the painfully obvious. A golf club is not a golf ball.

      With a golf ball, the more a ball spins, the more it’s going to curve. The more it curves, the more offline it’s likely to fly. All things being equal, a lower spinning golf ball will curve less.

      I suppose if straight flight is your ultimate objective, you could pair a higher spinning driver with a lower spinning golf ball.

      Nick

      9 months ago

      You might want to check out the latest TXG/Club Champion YouTube video. Because they indeed say that more spin helps for better control. So Henry (OP) might want to look in to a ball with enough spin, not less. He will lose a few yards but more often on the short stuff.

      Da Slammer

      9 months ago

      Yeah. I really would have liked to have seen a more detailed analysis of dispersion, as well as a variety of driver lofts. CG locations as well as various head weights tested in the heads.
      I just don’t think anybody can take this at face value as the numbers for any of the clubs could change DRASTICALLY as the Spin Loft is manipulated properly to get desired results and compression of the strike and energy transfer into the ball.

      Reply

      Matt

      9 months ago

      Well yeah, but that’s why it’s up to you the player to look and say “the way I deliver the ball (spin loft, etc) I generate a lot of spin and could use something lower spinning” you can look at the list and see what options will be better or worse options for YOU

      joe

      9 months ago

      Why did you choose these 3 swing speeds (85, 100, 115mph)? Lots of golfers (ladies, Sr, Sr Ladies) are way below 85 mph. These golfers esp struggle w/ distance and are looking for help from clubs, balls, etc. Can you extrapolate your findings at 85mph down to those w/ speeds in the 60s?

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      no ball is going to help with anything to those who swing in the 60’s. Buy something cheap. Kirkland will help most duffers. That or take up bowling, lol

      Reply

      Steve S

      9 months ago

      You’re right, Rick. At 85mph the difference between the best and worst ball is 10 yards. Drop that to 60mph and you’re probably looking at 3-5 yards. Everyone at that speed can use anything they find or buy Kirklands. Frankly at that swing speed I’d be playing par 3 courses.

      Mike

      9 months ago

      When you’re an 85 year-old fart on the course reduced by Father Time to swinging @ 65 mph, remind me to laugh at you. And I’ll stop & fill you in on some nearby bowling alleys.

      Al

      8 months ago

      Pretty arrogant comments when someone is seeking help.
      At slower swing speeds the difference between longest and shortest ball is less than 5 yards. Your longest ball will be Titleist prov left dash. However, since you are hitting longer clubs into the greens you need stopping power and spin. Left dash is not a high spinning ball. Kirkland last years model, PXG and any other high spinning ball will work best.

      Scott

      9 months ago

      I’m confused how the Vice Pro Soft came out as a mid swing speed recommendation when it didn’t make the top 10 in any of the distance or ball speed tests. The only place it seems to stand out is iron spin rate. Is that correct?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      Distance was a factor in the recommendations, but more as a tiebreaker. Ultimately, I tried to make high, mid, and low flying recommendations for each spin profile. The Vice Pro Soft shows up a lot because for a relatively low compression ball, it offers a good amount of spin.

      Reply

      Scott

      9 months ago

      Thanks for the reply Tony! I just spent a little time noodling around in the table data chart and can now see why this is the case. As a mid swing speed player looking for low to mid spin off the driver (and low cost off the wallet) I’m either switching to the Vice Pro Soft or one of the Maxflis!

      John Polanowicz

      9 months ago

      Thanks Tony – great testing again this year. Had been playing the Vice Pro and recently switched to the Pro Soft (Driver swing averages 94-96 mph from Rapsodo MLM) and like the feel and spin even better than the Pro’s! Was waiting for the test results before I ordered more!

      joe

      9 months ago

      Great Work. So valuable to the golfing world. Well Done…much appreciated. Would be great to see follow-on articles about the use of these data to make choices…the target audience might be those w/ less technical savvy. eg “trade-offs in ball selection” or “the concept of ‘forgiveness’ in a golf ball” many want more distance, but what are they giving up (greenside, straightness, etc) to get it?

      Reply

      Tim

      9 months ago

      Wow

      What did Titleist do to the new prov1x to make it such a strong performer for the mid swing speed group?

      I have been saying for a long time the CSX is under rated and you can see from many data sets, this ball is an amazing all around performer

      Reply

      Greg O'Connor

      9 months ago

      I’ll keep using my Snell MTB Prime.

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      switch to Vice Pro Plus, you can thank me later

      Reply

      Mr.Dutch

      9 months ago

      Great information! While it appears that the left dash is likely the best ball for me, I think the data confirms that I’ve made a good decision w/ the Vice Pro Plus. While I may not be completely optimized, the marginal benefit I’d see from the left dash almost certainly doesn’t justify the price increase.

      Honestly, considering the price points, it seems almost silly for anyone to play a ball besides Vice or Maxfli. Titleist obviously makes a great product, but the cost benefit is just not there. You are clearly paying for marketing and brand awareness.

      Interesting data point, Rory McIlroy just set the PGAT season driving distance record at 326.3 yds. He did that playing a TM TP5x. Imagine what he could have done w/ a Titleist Pro V1 Left Dash?

      Reply

      Emery

      9 months ago

      I just cannot explain it. I found a matte red hot SuperSoft this weekend and was driving that longer than my son whom only plays new PV1’s and we have the same driver and distances. I’ve heard that the matte painted balls have even less spin so I just considered it a SuperSoft Left Dash, haha. Almost tempted to buy some but you know, nothing is ever as good as a free ball and too many of my new balls find a new owner.

      Reply

      Mike

      9 months ago

      This is great data, and a lot of it. Anyone else notice that the Titleist Pro V1 was in yellow? I assume color makes no difference.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      As a curiosity, we included both the white and yellow Pro V1 in the test. We found some interesting stuff that will be part of a future post.

      Reply

      Smac

      9 months ago

      I cant believe there was no mention in the article about this. I am sitting here jaw wide open. I knew there was a difference between them. Hurry up with that follow up.

      Bryan Hogan

      9 months ago

      It’s almost like the Pro V1 Yellow is a hybrid Pro V1 (white) and Pro V1x (white).

      Pat Driscoll

      9 months ago

      Very interesting results, but this high handicapper is waiting for the test where the robot is programmed with over the top swing, which ball goes off-line the least?

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      TAKE. A. LESSON.
      I don’t know why people suffer with a bad swing!! It’s not rocket science, take a few lessons instead of buying gear.

      Reply

      Pat Driscoll

      9 months ago

      Dude, you don’t think I’ve taken lessons? I’ve spent several thousand dollars at golftec and who knows how much elsewhere. I don’t know why people feel they need to jump in and comment about things when they don’t know what they are talking about

      Richard

      9 months ago

      The only difference between an ‘over the top’ swing from an amateur vs the nearly perfect robot swing is that your path at impact has more angle to it relative to the face direction, so you’re putting more spin on the ball, and the spin axis is tilted more. The balls with the least spin on the robot – at your speed – should be the ones that pick up less of that extra spin and go the least offline for you.
      Find the swing speed that is closest to yours, and find the 3 balls that are the lowest spin off of the driver based on that swing speed.
      One of those 3 balls will spin the least for you off of the tee with driver, and will keep the slice closer to the fairway center (not necessarily in the fairway) on a bad shot.
      Remember that this test is only a measure of what the balls do in ‘lab’ conditions – use it as a starting point, not a final answer. Your swing and your home course will be different, so you still need to test things for your self.

      Reply

      Phillip

      9 months ago

      Pat, pay no attention to that Rick person. He is obviously WAY better than the rest of us and is probably wondering how Justin Thomas got the Ryder Cup pick over him.

      Reply

      Tricket3d

      9 months ago

      Just bought the Wilson Triads to try out. Hoping to find a diamond in the rough. Looks like they tested okay in this run.

      Reply

      HikingMike

      8 months ago

      Yeah I was glad to see those included in this test. Before this test came out, I looked for them in the last one but they weren’t included.

      Reply

      Doc W

      9 months ago

      Any analysis done on side spin or dispersion numbers as well? Long is great but dispersion ma6 arguably be more important in choosing a ball.

      Reply

      Scott

      9 months ago

      I figured the highest ball speed would also be the longest distance. In the case of the Maxfli Tour X, it was topping the categories in ball speed for driver, but not in the top 10 for distance. What causes this?

      Reply

      Richard

      9 months ago

      Spin and dimples. Aerodynamics determined by those lead to both drag and lift. Both are also impacted by air pressure (elevation, humidity, and temperature).

      Reply

      Pat Driscoll

      9 months ago

      Interesting that the Titleist Pro V1 yellow seems to perform better than the white version

      Reply

      Pat

      9 months ago

      How did you decide on which clubs were used for the testing?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      Recommendations for Low and Mid Speed drive came from Cool Clubs. At SNGC it was simply a matter of finding the club that could deliver the target launch and spin.

      It’s really a case where the club itself is almost entirely inconsequential.

      Reply

      Julian

      9 months ago

      Interested as to what shafts and flex were used, and were they normal or after market shafts.

      Reply

      WBN

      9 months ago

      Good question. I would be interested too.

      Richard

      9 months ago

      They used a robot to tune the club head impact and hit target ball parameters. Unless you are also a robot capable of the same tuning, the shaft they used is completely irrelevant to your game.

      Trevor

      9 months ago

      Great to see the variety of brands here! Playing around with the scatter plots is fun to compare. I have been playing with Not Your Ball for about a year now, and it is great to see this data show that it is indeed a quality, long ball capable of hanging with the big boys.

      Reply

      Sam

      9 months ago

      For a mid swing, how is the Wilson staff model not recommed? Its numbers are fantastic.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      It’s very good. As noted in the text, we limited our picks to 3, but in many cases could have comfortably gone 5 or 6 deep.

      Staff Model is one that would have been next (or nearly next) in a couple of places. Same with the Bridgestone Tour B X.

      Dan K

      9 months ago

      It will be interesting to compare and contrast relative differences between balls in this test and results from Ballnamic. I can see a few differences already.

      One strange outlier I’ve noticed already, with mid and high swingspeed, the Chromesoft LS is definitely less spinny. Except for the high speed driver, where the LS actually spins MORE. At mid speed, it spins much less with the driver than the X.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      The CSX LS was definitely a curiosity. By the absolutes of the numbers, it spun more than CSX under some conditions, though I’d describe the spin as the same. Regardless, it’s not what’s supposed to happen. Odd, but also clear in the data.

      Reply

      Sherlock

      9 months ago

      Switched to a Titleist Left Dash early this season. Couldnt be happier with my decision. Ball flies further and straighter off the tee for me. On full wedge stop, I am able to get spin back of about a yard or two depending on the conditions. Switched over from Callaway Chrome Soft X LS, which was a good ball as well. Thanks for all the data!!!

      Reply

      Corey

      9 months ago

      You should also pay them to use their robot for the Most Wanted testing, because this info is way more reliable and useful.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      Robots for golf balls, humans for golf clubs. We wrote an entire article about it. That was a while ago, but it’s still the prevailing wisdom from across the industry. It’s what we’ll continue to do.

      Reply

      Brent

      9 months ago

      Anybody know of a way to get the data from the 2023 ball test into an excel or google sheet? I’d like to add a ranking column next to each ball and see which one’s have the highest average position between driver/iron/wedge when it comes to spin, distance etc. I have tried copying and pasting but nothing has worked for me. Any help is much appreciated!

      Reply

      Fred

      9 months ago

      You can download Tableau Public – then you can dowload the chart as a PDF and then export to Tableau Public
      Seems to work pretty go for me

      Reply

      HikingMike

      8 months ago

      It’s remarkable that works for you because exporting to a PDF just to put it back into a tabular file format is ridiculous. There has to be a better way Tableau. Why can’t we get a CSV or something?

      HikingMike

      8 months ago

      Alright I gave this a try but didn’t have much luck. I downloaded one table as PDF, got it into Tableau Public by making a Data Source for the PDF. Then I followed instructions here for “Export your data to .csv file”
      https://help.tableau.com/current/pro/desktop/en-us/save_export_data.htm

      However, neither of the options for export work. On the Data Source tab, I hit the Data menu and the option for “Export Data to CSV” is grayed out. On the Sheet tab, I did what it said and I can see the data with the View Data button, but there is no “Export All” button. I’m stuck.

      Just poking around, I can’t even add the data to a new sheet properly. The data looks ok on the Data Source tab. But the closest on the Sheet is if I add the columns one at a time (F1, F2…). But it ends up adding extra items in each column, messed up. If I try adding the “Page 1 Table 1” (full table that I want) to the sheet, it adds a single blue bar like for a bar graph. WTH.

      Fred, can you say what you did here?

      Tableau is definitely not winning a new user here with its lack of data portability.

      Johnny Eff

      9 months ago

      Looks like the TP5 is a major distance dud. Its consistently the shortest. Wonder what went wrong.

      Reply

      Andy

      9 months ago

      I find the results for the TP5 and TP5x pretty hard to believe. ~20 yards shorter than other tour balls?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      I’d refer you to our 2021 test, where the TP5 was also among the shortest off the driver, most notably at the highest speed tested.

      Whether anyone finds it “hard to believe” isn’t particularly relevant; it’s simply what happened under the conditions tested.

      If you’re looking for an explanation, it may help to visualize the ball flight of TP5 off drivers.

      Relative to longer balls of similar compression, the TP5:

      • Launches lower
      • Has a higher peak height
      • A peak height distance (how far down range it reached its apex) that’s closer to the hitting area
      • A steeper decent angle

      In the interest of using language that should be familiar to most golfers, most of the longer balls offer what we’d call a penetrating flight (some are high and penetrating, others are flatter and penetrating). The TP5 is more of an up and down kind of thing.

      Trajectory is driven primarily by the dimple package, with a bit of influence from the spin properties of the ball (TP5 is a higher spinning model).

      BTW – if you have the opportunity to watch robots hit balls, this is something you can see with the naked eye.

      With all of that said, I’d refer you back to the key takeaways. “There’s not such thing as a bad ball”. Building on that, longer <> better, longer = longer. Big picture, the flight and spin properties of TP5 make it more of a niche ball than perhaps you might think.

      Dan K

      9 months ago

      Ballnamic results for me showed the exact same. Higher flight, bad in the wind, short.

      ck

      9 months ago

      Strictly looking at the raw data, suprised the Maxfli Tour X didn’t get a recommendation or two. Did the compression inconsistency identified in ball lab testing play into that?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      It was a pick for mid spin at lower swing speed (we had an error in the original text). As I noted, we easily could have gone 5 or 6 deep on most recommendations. Maxfli Tour X remains a solid option (and an awesome VALUE option), there were just things we liked a little bit more in most spots.

      Reply

      Ken

      9 months ago

      Gaming them this afternoon after getting that 4 dozen deal during father’s day.

      don

      9 months ago

      This is a joke, right? 137 yds with an 8 iron is your slow group. I guess 2/3rds of our 450 club members don’t even qualify as slow, lol.

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      seems right to me. 137 is a 3/4 PW for me, a high speed player. Most golfer swing like crap, so I’m guessing most of your club members fall in that category.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      Keep in mind, the robot never misses the middle of the face. Parameters for speed are laid out on the post, averages are in the table. I always encourage people to plug them into the Flightscope trajectory optimizer. Allowances for temperate and other environmental conditions, I promise you’ll find them to be very close.

      Reply

      don

      9 months ago

      Live in Arizona, it’s 115 here today, trust me when I say I get that. And also trust me when I say after teaching hundreds of hours that the average golfer here is older and the vast majority read Mygolfspy. That said your driver test is even too fast for the majority. Golfers 50 and younger average 238-220 yards off the tee
      Senior golfers average 211 yards with driver
      Handicaps above 28 average 177 yards
      Single digit handicaps (5-9) average 231 yards off the tee. Trust me when I say the guys hitting it less than 200yds buy alot of drivers. They are always seeking 5 more yards.

      frazzman80

      9 months ago

      Amazing work team! Thanks for all the hours put into this report!

      I’m interested if there are dispersion numbers that we can correlate into these carts/data as well. I’m really interested in distance dispersion (longest vs shortest distance with each swing speed category and club) and then offline dispersion (left/right). Getting the most distance, ball speed, height is just one part of the equation for shots. I’d argue that dispersion is equally, if not more, important than distance, especially with the 8-iron and wedge shots.

      Reply

      Rich

      9 months ago

      I fall in between the low and mid speed category at this time. Would you recommend keying in on the low or mid information?

      Reply

      Bob Davine

      9 months ago

      Exact same issue – I asked this question last year.

      Reply

      Micah McGaha

      9 months ago

      Many comments on the Snell results. A couple things to note for those unaware:

      1. Snell is using new manufacturing partners due to their old manufacturing partner, Nassau, being bought by TaylorMade.
      2. The new balls are made with cheaper injection-mold urethane than their previous MTB Black and MTB-X which were cast urethane.

      Having used both the MTB Prime and MTB Prime X, they both have durability concerns similar to Cut’s offerings.

      Dean needs to find new manufacturing partners or else he will likely be losing business after this test and other testers finding the durability issues on the course. I hope he does soon so that I don’t have to use a $5 golf ball to be able to play a quality ball.

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      play Vice pro or pro plus, great balls, cast cover. Loooooooong!

      Reply

      Brett

      9 months ago

      Since the majority of wedges are not hit at higher club head speeds would a person want a lower club head speed ball for higher spin around the greens?

      Reply

      Jim

      9 months ago

      From what I understand most golf balls have TPU covers and not cast urethane. Only Titliest, TM and some Vice balls have cast urethane covers from what I remember (probably forgetting a number of them) as there are only a few plants that can produce them. As noted Snell lost his manufacturing partner and switched to others for his new Prime/ Prime X balls and they now come with TPU covers, so far they have durability problems, but the balls are pretty good otherwise and I am growing to like them . It would be interesting to hear more from MGS on why they were at the top of the reviews only a couple of years ago and what happened since that point.

      Reply

      Micah McGaha

      9 months ago

      I think that is correct that most urethane golf balls are TPU. I didn’t mean to imply TPU is by nature less durable. I just mean that Snell’s MTB balls used to be durable cast urethane covers and now they are less durable TPU covers. Bridgestone has durable TPU covers, for example. So, regardless of the reason for the drop in quality, it definitely has occurred. And to me, that removes much of the pull for the consumer to buy the golf ball.

      alex

      9 months ago

      Kind of interesting that Taylor Made balls didn’t exactly impress (especially the Tour response)

      Reply

      WYBob

      9 months ago

      First, let me say how much I appreciate all the hard work and effort MGS put into performance testing all these golf balls for us. It was a monumental task and your impressive efforts come through in the article. A couple of quick follow-up questions: 1) While the temperature was mentioned as a variable affecting the results, is there a way to extrapolate the effect of altitude on the test results (i.e. Scottsdale as the test site sits at 1,800 Ft ASL vs. Denver which is at 5,300 Ft. ASL vs, Houston that sits at 82 Ft. ASL)? 2) The test was conducted at two different sites utilizing 3 different driver manufacturers resulting in a 2×3 set of variables. Is there a way to normalize the data? For example, if my driver swing speed is 92 MPH I sit about halfway between the mid and slow swing speed driver groupings. Both might make for an interesting follow-up article. Thanks again for the great work!

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      train and swing faster Bob!

      Reply

      WYBob

      9 months ago

      Rick- aging is a b!t(h amigo. Hopefully, you are a few years away from experiencing the inevitable impact that plagues most senior golfers! When you cross that “Rubicon” you may appreciate that there is only so much that speed training and flexibility exercises can do to overcome the impact of good ol’ mother nature. Until then, enjoy…

      Post-Snell

      8 months ago

      Well, I had been using Magpi Tour-X which i loved for over year.

      Watched Dean Snellenberger’s launch promo video (had been a very happy MTB-X guy) back in June I guess…had 2 dozen Magpi’s left and thought… Prime X they gotta be even longer than the MTB-X! But I kept hearing…. “wait for MGS Revew”….”wait for MGS review”…I didn’t.

      I BOUGHT FIVE(5) DOZEN OF DEAN’S “TOPFLITE 2.0’s”!!!! Just SICK!

      This am, i emptied my short game tube of the old V1X’s and filled with 2-dozen brand new “Smelly’s Prime Hacks”!

      Then i proceeded to but 4 dozen Magpi Tour X’s. Remember- you only live TWICE and its not worth playing SMELLY’s!

      Was shocked by the numbers.

      Jim

      9 months ago

      Terrific testing as always from MGS. As a dedicated Snell golf ball user I am surprised their balls didn’t make any of the favorite lists, especially as they redesigned their balls this year. And given that they finished very high in testing in the past I’m questioning whether their new designs aren’t keeping up with the competition. Are the other manufacturers simply moving farther ahead with their designs?

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      I don’t think they even tested them this time

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      my bad, I do see them now

      Reply

      Ben Johnson

      9 months ago

      Why test with so low launch and decent angles? Tour average is 37 degrees and most balls in your test are about 30 degrees.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      The objective of the test (and the parameters for each condition) was not to fit the robot for a golf ball. The objective was to hit launch and spin conditions that mirror what golfers at that speed do. Effectively, we’re just setting a baseline so we could implement smaller test groups and then compare across them. We ran the numbers past multiple OEMs and there were no issues with the specified parameters. Are the descent angles shallow? They’re on the low side, but still within the acceptable fitting range in most cases (some of the stuff is shallower than others – it’s just the design of those balls).

      The environmental conditions also play a role in descent angle. Elevation in Scottsdale is higher than the US Average. As noted, temperatures were above 100-degrees. Both of those things will lead to shallower descent angles.

      To reiterate, the parameters were in place to establish baseline launch and spin profile for each combination of club and speed. Descent, as with most things in this test, is relative.

      Reply

      Jason S

      9 months ago

      This is awesome work MGS Team (and especially Tony). Now to grab the data from the Crosstab Data link and start working through the data on my own spreadsheet. :-) Yeah, I’m a data nerd and love working through all this stuff on my own after I pair down the list to just stuff I’m interested in. Thanks again MGS Team for all your hard work!

      Reply

      John

      9 months ago

      Very few people in the world hit a straight ball flight. Interesting no analysis on a fade or draw bias swing.

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      It’s all relative John. Duh.

      Reply

      John

      9 months ago

      Not much differences 1-4 yards. So go with the ball you like.

      Reply

      JL

      9 months ago

      Great test! Thanks for providing this information. It is a huge benefit to be able to look at various ball characteristics to help make an informed decision.

      One question- why was the Left Dash not Recommended for Mid Swing speeds? It was significantly longer in both driver and irons than the three recommended. Was it because the iron height was a little lower with a shallower decent?

      Full disclosure- I am a mid swing, Left Dash user.

      Reply

      JL

      9 months ago

      I would assume that a lower height and shallower decent would result in more rollout but it appears the difference between carry and total yardage is very similar in each category (high speed- driver ~30 yards of rollout for each ball, mid speed- iron ~ 12 yards of rollout for each ball, etc.) . Is there an explanation for why they are all so close?

      Reply

      Da Slammer

      9 months ago

      What driver and iron heads were used at what loft???
      With so much ball speed with MaxFli Tour X in most categories, what made it drop out of the sky/fly too high to lose in distance to the others? When you show the ball speed numbers, why not show the launch angle and spin numbers next to that list at the same time to show what really happened to gain/ lose the distances???

      Reply

      Da Slammer

      9 months ago

      Oh and I forgot to ask:
      What about dispersion in correlation to those things????

      Reply

      Steve S

      9 months ago

      Did you read the article? For every swing speed they give manufacturer, model, loft, etc. Probably why they didn’t answer you.

      Reply

      justin

      9 months ago

      awesome data
      maybe in future u Might consider doing wet ball test with wedge and iron
      some balls do act different inwet condition. ie srixon balls were always better at retaining spin in wet condition in my experience (maybe due their so called serm coating?)

      Reply

      FrankF

      9 months ago

      Snell balls have done very well on previous tests but not on this one. Has their new ball design been a flop?

      Reply

      Micah McGaha

      9 months ago

      I think it’s the new manufacturing partners that Snell has had to use after TaylorMade bought Nassau. They’re not the same quality as they used to be due to that.

      Reply

      Tom S

      9 months ago

      How is it possible that the Taylor Made Tour Response has fallen so far from the 2021 results? It was #2 in distance for “Medium Swing Speed Driver” in 2021, and now it’s next to last? From 284 yards then, to 259 now?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      1. Not the same ball (most notably, a different aero package).
      2. Changes to test parameters.

      Reply

      nh

      9 months ago

      so a different aero package results in a 25yards drop ?! So youre saying if i played two balls ..one is 2023 Tour Response and other 2021 Tour Response, there’d be a 25 yard difference ?? lol.

      im joking, im being fictitious lol. i understand this process, but im just genuinely curious., can you bare with me and treat my like a 4 yr old child… can you actually explain to me how my scenario above wouldn’t be the case in real life although the data says so…?

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      What I said was 1) test parameters and 2) it’s a different ball.

      Last year’s setup came from optimization charts. What’s the ideal launch and spin for a golfer who swings X? This year the setup was based not on optimal, but more about what the average golfer at each swing speed does.

      Our list of goals included: adding more spin across the board in our iron tests. Increasing spin for mid and slow speed irons and decreasing launch and spin for high-speed drivers. We succeeded across the board.

      So looking at Tour Response – and in particular, the mid speed driver – (and I would imagine other balls as well), you’re going to see spin rates increase by a fair amount (Tour Response is almost 500 RPM higher this time) and launch angles decrease. Those changes to the setup parameters will result in distance decreases. That’s the math, it’s quantifiable.

      The rest (how much changes in the ball contribute) is a bit more speculative, but obviously can’t be discounted.

      Mark R.

      9 months ago

      Interesting to see the ProV1X have less spin on Driver and Wedge and Pro V1. I’m personally a little sad to see Snell Prime balls get lost in the mix.

      Reply

      Phill S.

      9 months ago

      I realize that there are times all the smaller DTC brands can’t make the test, but one that I am curious about are the Cut DC golf ball. Have they ever been tested by MGS?

      For me as a senior, this is the only ball that I can spin on those half swing chip shots. If they haven’t been tested yet, please put them on your on your test list.

      Reply

      Jason S

      9 months ago

      They’ve been done in the Ball Lab – https://mygolfspy.com/labs/ball-lab-cut-dc-review/. But I don’t believe they’ve done any type of review (at least I couldn’t find it via the search option).

      Reply

      Rick

      9 months ago

      play the Kirkland ball then, superior to the Cut in every way

      Reply

      kevinwho

      9 months ago

      Thanks for conducting such a thorough test!

      Going to take some extra time for me to dig in the numbers, but can you talk about the methodology with different drivers (PXG 0311 GEN6 7.5° /Callaway Paradym 10.5°/PING G430 MAX 12°) for different swing speeds? I’m curious about why drivers changed but irons were consistent. I’m curious if other factors, e.g. specific driver head technologies, could be at play and alter numbers. Also, were shaft profiles consistent or did they change with driver head as well? I understand it’s impossible to completely test every combination, so I do appreciate everything you guys have done here.

      Reply

      MarkM

      9 months ago

      Wow Tony, congrats to you and the crew – you really went balls deep on this year’s test (aar, aar). the info you give us just keeps getting more extensive and I love it!!

      Reply

      KenB

      9 months ago

      This is probably the best golf ball analysis I’ve ever seen! I have been using MyGolfSpy quite a bit in the last six months as I’ve replaced woods, wedges, and putter. Appreciate the “slow swing speed” data, which is often ignored in similar types of analyses, and very useful for seniors like myself.
      Keep up the good work, MGS !!!

      Reply

      Mick

      9 months ago

      What’s the deal with the Pro V1 yellow and white having different numbers?

      Reply

      Sam

      9 months ago

      This has happened in previous tests, my guess is that there is just a certain inconsistency across all golf balls, even in the same model. I’m guessing if you just picked another random ProV, numbers would be slightly different.

      Reply

      Jeff

      9 months ago

      Really helpful. The results seem very consistent with what I got from Ballnamic fitting.

      Reply

      Barry

      9 months ago

      Where are my beloved Volvik golf balls!

      Reply

      MIGregB

      9 months ago

      I’m getting the following error at all the tables, “Uncaught SecurityError: Failed to read the ‘sessionStorage’ property from ‘Window’: Access is denied for this document”. And not just with this report, all the others I’ve looked at recently. Using MS Edge, I’ve turned off all of my restrictions to see if that cleared the issues, but it hasn’t. Any advice for me??? TERRIFIC content, BTW!

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      9 months ago

      I’m using Edge and not having issues, but it may be a capacity issue with Tableau or something to do with the embed code.

      You can try these direct links:

      Scatter Plot: Here

      Bar Charts Here:

      Crosstab Data: Here

      Reply

      BH

      9 months ago

      Whew! Like drinking from a fire hydrant. Well done!

      Reply

      Connor Lindeman

      9 months ago

      First!

      Reply

      BH

      9 months ago

      Insider trading… Way to go, Phil.

      Reply

    Leave A Reply

    required
    required
    required (your email address will not be published)

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Golf Wedges
    May 16, 2024
    Wedge Fitting and the Web: PING’s Stake in the Ground
    Golf Shoes
    May 16, 2024
    Pour One Out for NIKE’s Air Zoom Infinity Tour NRG
    Golf Technology
    May 16, 2024
    18 Luxury Golf Gifts We’re Drooling Over