VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22:08:57 06/10/00 Sat
Author: Mr Hand
Subject: Good post as usual ( NT )
In reply to: GeneO 's message, "Re: No, I saw and read about them" on 21:52:35 06/10/00 Sat

> Wow, how is it that someone who is supposed to be the
> bane of NG gets their NG magazine before me? ;-)
>
> If what you say about the NG mag description is true,
> and I have no particular reason to doubt you, then it
> does cast doubt on the veracity of several threads I
> remember on the "other" forum. But I also vaguely
> remember that even you claimed or agreed at one point
> that offset clubs were no good for SA swings (not
> trying to argue here, and I haven't looked it up so I
> could be entirely wrong). It's just that I thought
> offset clubheads were designed to correct swing flaws
> that NGers don't have.
>
> One thing that I see different in the description of
> these clubs relative to what I see for Orlimars is
> that Orlimar emphasizes the inserts which lower the CG
> to raise the trajectory of the ball, especially on the
> long irons where most duffers tend to have problems.
> The NG irons are advertised on their website as having
> "more mass behind the ball - you get the penetrating
> ball flight and accuracy you need to get distance down
> the fairway". That says (to me) that their whole
> theory of weight distribution is different than
> Orlimar's.
>
> I know that since I've started NG, one thing I DON'T
> need any more is low CG irons! On the few times I hit
> the ball slightly thin, I know what I did and I fix it
> on the next shot. When I don't hit the ball thin, I
> have plenty of height on my shots.
>
> GeneO.
>
> > In the Natural Golf magazine that I got a day or to
> > ago. Seems these clubs have a low center of gravity,
> > are progressively offset, they have all the things
> > that the shills and sycophants (of which I might add,
> > you're not one) claim all that is wrong with
> > conventional clubs!
> >
> > Gee, guess I was right all along!

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

  • Re: Alternate interpretation -- Peter, 22:59:18 06/10/00 Sat
  • Re: Alternate interpretation -- GeneO, 23:13:07 06/10/00 Sat
    [ Contact Forum Admin ]

    Forum timezone: GMT-6
    VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
    Before posting please read our privacy policy.
    VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
    Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.