Golfzalo, on 20 April 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:
I bet that more than 50% of people that voted Titleist ProV1/V1x never tried anything else...for example Bridgestone...way better ball. I think it is all marketing
Couldn't have said it better myself. After reading an article a few years back (must be about 5 or 6) about the Bridgestone B330S I picked up a dozen as they were being sold really cheap at my local chain (American Golf Discount in the UK). I was blown away by how good the ball was. Similar experience with the Srixon Z-Star. I really think (implore) people should go try out one of the competitors balls. I think if they were completely honest, and unbiased in their opinion, they would find that Bridgestone and Srixon perform as well, and in most cases better than the goliath that is Titleist. Now, I'm not saying that the ProV1 is a bad ball by any means. In fact I have played the Pro V1x a number of times when I was gifted some, and found it to be a great ball. I just wish people would take the blinkers off for a moment and try something different. Admittedly Bridgestone / Srixon don't have the ball count on tour that Titleist does. But ask yourselves this. Does ball count on tour really and honestly reflect which ball is best...or who devotes the largest amount of their budget to marketing and sponsorship? I know from reading and researching about Srixon, nobody, but nobody outstrips them when it comes to R&D, technology patents filed and production quality. Just go and look up how many patents Srixon filed compared to the competition. You'll be blown away. Not only that, but Sumito Rubber Industries ( aka Srixon ) hasbeen designing and manufacturing balls for decades ( Dunlop balls is one example ) and on top of that their research labs and facilities are so advanced that BMW and Mercedes Benz borrow them to do aerodynamic testing on their vehicles.
I'll step down from my soap box now shall I ? ;o)