Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

The 6 Biggest Myths About TrackMan



Recently, there has been quite a bit of discussion on TrackMan and technology warning golfers and teachers to be wary of TrackMan. I actually agree with some of what has been said, however, I feel as though there are quite a few misconceptions about TrackMan that are either just misunderstood or sometimes flat out “fake news.”

Here are the most common things I hear and have seen from tech or TrackMan naysayers. Inspired by fact-checking websites in the political world we all have been living in, I will grade each of these statements with five categories. TRUE, LACKING CONTEXT, IT’S COMPLICATED, MOSTLY SPIN, or FALSE.

Full disclosure, I worked for TrackMan for three years. If you think that makes me biased, you are entitled to that opinion, but I would strongly argue it only makes me more qualified to make an impartial judgement on these statements. After I left TrackMan, I had the decision just as every other teaching professional out there of what launch monitor to buy. Spoiler alert, I bought TrackMan.

No. 6: TrackMan numbers are wrong if you don’t hit the ball on the center of the face

Grade: FALSE

This one is completely false and comes from a misunderstanding of the numbers. TrackMan always calculates the face angle from where you hit the ball on the face. It doesn’t matter if you hit it center, on the heel, on the toe or in the hosel. TrackMan will tell you where that spot on the face was pointed at impact.

All things constant, if you hit one shot dead center on the face and the next shot exactly the same but 1 inch towards the toe (excluding twist face here) you will get a Face Angle number of 5 degrees more open. When reading these numbers, you will see the face angle open to the path, but the ball will hook.

This is where people don’t understand the numbers and get confused. TrackMan is accurate on both numbers, but because there is gearing in this shot the gear effect overrides the face-to-path ratio in the ultimate curvature of the ball. Great news for this is that TrackMan is about to release a software update that shows where the ball was hit on the face so you can understand the gearing even easier.

No. 5: TrackMan is Measuring a Blob Hitting a Blob


While this isn’t necessarily a completely false statement, it is extremely misleading. If you or I were to look at a raw radar readout from TrackMan (like the one above), we would absolutely just see some blobs — but that by no means says anything about TrackMan or the accuracy of its data.

There are very smart people and highly intelligent software that take the readout and tell us exactly what happened at impact and in the resultant ball flight. For context, I once sent a raw radar file to TrackMan HQ because I didn’t understand what was going on with some of the numbers. After looking at this file one of the TrackMan engineers asked me, “Hunter, are you using a big plastic tee on a mat about 3 inches high and 2 inches in diameter?” He was exactly right. That is what I was using, and unfortunately it caused some interference with the radar.

The TrackMan engineers could look at that “blob” and tell me the exact dimensions and shape of a plastic tee I was using without any prior knowledge. People who say TrackMan is just measuring a blob hitting a blob don’t fully understand the technology… or they have another agenda.

No. 4: TrackMan Takes Out the Feel of the Game


There is no doubt that I have seen and even personally experienced times where I felt like I was trying to perfect the numbers and got wrapped up in the 28 different data points TrackMan offers. This has absolutely nothing to do with the machine, however, and everything to do with the coach or teacher.

If your teacher is using TrackMan in a way that makes you feel trapped by positions and numbers, then your coach isn’t judging you well and is not using TrackMan properly. I still haven’t heard TrackMan ever tell me or one of my students that a shot was “bad” (but maybe Amazon will join in and Alexa can tell us we all stink).

I have used TrackMan for 10 years, and the coolest thing about it is that once you understand the numbers and the relationship they create between golf swing and causality of ball flight, you can get away from being technical. It actually helps to create feel in my students because they can relate the number to a feel in their golf swing. Now that they have the information or feel based on those numbers, they realize and learn how far they have to change things in order to actually accomplish a change in ball flight.

No. 3: TrackMan Can’t See the Face


Yes, TrackMan is positioned behind the ball, driver and golfer. So technically speaking, it cannot directly see the front of the club face at impact. This doesn’t mean that it cannot accurately calculate the face angle of the golf club. With the new Trackman 4, it can actually bend the radar waves around the shape of an object to more accurately calculate club face numbers.

Without getting super scientific, the easiest way to explain this is by thinking about cell phone reception. Just because you are behind a wall or underneath a building doesn’t mean you cannot get cell service. The waves bend. If you would like to learn more on this subject, click the following link:

No. 2: TrackMan is Too Expensive


I know you’re already thinking this is a cop out answer, but I strongly believe otherwise. Because what is too expensive? Isn’t that a relative term? No, I am not saying that $16,000-$25,000 is not a lot of money, and I’m also not saying every golfer should invest in a TrackMan. What I am saying is that there is absolutely a high value in an investment in TrackMan.

If you are a teaching professional or golf course, Trackman is vital to your operation. I know of hundreds of PGA Professionals including myself who have not just paid off their TrackMan, but make more money because of it.

No. 1: TrackMan isn’t Perfect

Grade: TRUE

This is absolutely true, and I have never heard anyone from TrackMan nor users who know the system ever make this statement. TrackMan has limitations as all technology does. It has made a mistake (once or twice) in the numbers. The good news is that TrackMan is and always has been the best, most accurate launch monitor on the market. This is directly due to how TrackMan is operated as a company, the tolerances it has for its products, the hundreds of employees who ensure mistakes don’t happen and the millions of dollars invested testing its own product.

TrackMan continues to push itself and the golf industry by constantly innovating and questioning its own product. So if there is a limitation, you can guarantee the engineers at TrackMan are hard at work trying to solve it.

Your Reaction?
  • 545
  • LEGIT83
  • WOW25
  • LOL14
  • IDHT7
  • FLOP12
  • OB6
  • SHANK127

PGA Member and Golf Professional at Biltmore Forest Country Club in Asheville, NC. Former PGA Tour and Regional Representative for TrackMan Golf. Graduate of Campbell University's PGM Program with 12 years of experience in the golf industry. My passion for knowledge and application of instruction in golf is what drives me everyday.



  1. Doug

    Mar 30, 2018 at 6:12 pm

    What about the health risk with the radar? I read stories about soldiers which got cancer from working with radar systems

  2. randy

    Mar 20, 2018 at 9:38 am

    Most of you people are just mad because you can’t afford it and don’t understand all the data it gives you. And if you think the distance isn’t accurate don’t tell Dustin Johnson!

  3. Myron miller

    Mar 15, 2018 at 10:20 am

    I’ve used a trackman a number of times and have yet to have the distance a drive was hit correct from trackman. And when I talked to a trackman rep at one course, he indicated that they use “pro conditions” for estimating rollout. it has given me consistently total distance in the 250-280 range with the ball actually landing 180-190 and then rolling out according to it’s internal calculations another 40-90 yards. IN real life, if i get 20 yards roll, i’m ecstatic. And i use a gps and also range finders to get actual yardage in real life so i know they’re reasonably accurate.

    Nothing in this article other than author bias that trackman is better or worse than any foresight tool or several others. The article is strictly biased that trackman is the best for everything and nothing else works as well overall. As several replies above indicate, that is not necessarily accurate by a large margin. Each is better depending upon how the person uses it and what information is being derived and used. Trackman can be beneficial and it can be harmful. It depends upon how the person using it actually uses the data. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and user really.

    It’s a good tool that can be misused and is sometimes misleading. Like any tool, one has to understand the numbers and where they come from, which are calculated, which are actual and which are useful to the task being performed at the time. If tracking the swing thru the complete swing, then trackman is mostly useless. Other tools much better, such as swingbyte. Telling what the clubhead is doing at point of impact and path of the ball flight, then Trackman is excellent.

  4. Shafted

    Mar 15, 2018 at 2:06 am

    Trackman 5 will be able to see through your shirt. They will be installing them at airports as you walk thru the barrier with your golf clubs. It is going to know how many inches your shafts are.

  5. Martin

    Mar 14, 2018 at 8:40 pm


  6. Michael Pasquill

    Mar 14, 2018 at 3:12 pm

    My issue with trackman is that it does not take into account is the affect of wind, air temp, or humidity when a person is hitting a ball especially inside it is a vacuum when you are inside. Outside I have seen it have issues too. I would rather do the evaluation on my feel and the trajectory that I am looking for. As a slow swing person under 80 mph many of the drivers are designed for players with higher swing speeds which does not help me a bit. Its about the shaft of the club for the most part.

    • Ben

      Mar 15, 2018 at 3:33 am

      Actually it does.
      TrackMan tracks the full ball flight outdoor incl. temp, wind, humidity.. they even have a normalize feature where you can see how the data would look like if you change to no wind, another temp or elevation.

    • Pat

      Apr 1, 2018 at 1:31 pm

      False. There’s a Normalize function on Trackman to remove outside factors. You can add in temperature as well. Think of it, fitters would never be able to fit on windy days…

    • AndyK

      Apr 1, 2018 at 7:42 pm

      you’re wrong here, its why tour guys travel with them and get their carry yardages based on environment they are in while practicing.

  7. Aaatkr

    Mar 14, 2018 at 2:51 pm

    GC Quad for my money. It shows your lie angle and contact point at impact. Trackman cannot. A picture is worth a thousand words.

    • AZ

      Mar 15, 2018 at 11:03 am

      It lies to you about the angles and a wrong picture costs you thousand of explanations. Just because a system put a number or a picture out there doesn’t mean it’s (close to) accurate.

  8. Dave

    Mar 14, 2018 at 2:35 pm

    How much did Trackman pay you to say all of this, it’s clearly a sponsored article. I work in the military and can catogorically tell you radar can not see round corner and will prove it if you want me to. As you a coach you are brilliant and stick that.

    • Anthony

      Mar 14, 2018 at 4:59 pm

      “THIS” A radar beam can’t bend around corners!
      GC Quad is A much better unit for teaching and fitting and yes, I have used both as I am a custom fitter and instructor. Nice sponsored article lol….
      And about price, GC Quad is too expensive as well!

      • Hunter Brown

        Mar 15, 2018 at 8:40 am

        Hey Anthony thanks for the reply here but see below for info on how TrackMan can see around corners

        Radar waves from TrackMan DO see around the clubhead. The physics are a bit complicated, but here we go:

        The wavelength of the TrackMan radar is ½-1½ inches – this is in the same order of magnitude as the club head and golf ball. This means that the radar reflection, the so-called scattering mechanism, is in the ‘resonance region’ (see f.ex. a simplified explanation of this).

        In the ‘resonant region’ the reflecting objects generates ‘creeping waves’ that wraps around the object. An electromagnetic field that impact an object, will generate a current on this object, current are ‘closed loops’ which means the current will also run on parts of the object that is not facing the incident electromagnetic wave. The current will then generate a new electromagnetic field (the reflected signal) which will consequently also be radiated from parts of the object that is not facing the incident electromagnetic wave.

        However, no matter the physical explanation the raw data from TrackMan clearly shows that we can see ‘around’ the club head. F.ex. it is clear in the radar signal from TrackMan exactly when the ball separates from the club face despite the club head occluding the ball completely.

    • Hunter Brown

      Mar 15, 2018 at 8:46 am

      Dave thanks for reading and the comment. Unfortunately I am not paid by TM, anymore, as I stated in the article I did work for TrackMan for 3 years. Also see below for the explanation on TM seeing around corners.

      Radar waves from TrackMan DO see around the clubhead. The physics are a bit complicated, but here we go:

      The wavelength of the TrackMan radar is ½-1½ inches – this is in the same order of magnitude as the club head and golf ball. This means that the radar reflection, the so-called scattering mechanism, is in the ‘resonance region’ (see f.ex. a simplified explanation of this).

      In the ‘resonant region’ the reflecting objects generates ‘creeping waves’ that wraps around the object. An electromagnetic field that impact an object, will generate a current on this object, current are ‘closed loops’ which means the current will also run on parts of the object that is not facing the incident electromagnetic wave. The current will then generate a new electromagnetic field (the reflected signal) which will consequently also be radiated from parts of the object that is not facing the incident electromagnetic wave.

      However, no matter the physical explanation the raw data from TrackMan clearly shows that we can see ‘around’ the club head. F.ex. it is clear in the radar signal from TrackMan exactly when the ball separates from the club face despite the club head occluding the ball completely.

    • AZ

      Mar 15, 2018 at 11:06 am

      I think i agree with you on that single point. The face angle is calculated based on toe and heel positions, and impact location. And buldge and roll where all brands used to have the same

  9. Coach Vitti

    Mar 14, 2018 at 2:08 pm

    Well, nice try, but superficial. I’m a retired teaching pro and never, once, used a trackman in my sessions. First reason? Cost. I could make zero business sense out of buying or leasing a Trackman or any other expensive launch monitors. Second reason? While I know that spin rates and directions, launch angles, path and club face angles matter, they really only matter to low-handicappers, pros and salesmen!

    I never, once, had a student ask me “Hey, Coach, where’s your $25,000 launch monitor? Don’t we need the 28 ‘data’ points it provides?” Whether 28 points or 280 points, it’s not something that is going to benefit most amateurs as they struggle to get the club back to the ball!

    I’ve only used a launch monitor on my own swing during a fitting. That’s an appropriate use of the technology, even for amateurs. It gives the fitter valuable information to fit the correct clubs to your swing and nothing more.

    Besides, I can get all the information I need during a lesson from a $200 Swingbyte. That fits most pro’s budgets and get a better than 80% solution for 90% of students. Unfortunately, my season-long test of that tech failed to meet my reliability standards.

    Oh, I forgot to mention that I am also a retired Systems Engineer with 20 years in Test and Evaluation. I spent several years around Doppler radar systems. So, please tell me how many ‘data points’ are actual measurements and how many are ‘calculated’? Hmmmmm….

    And how about calibration? How about the human-in-the-loop (operator)? How about software bugs?

    I also know snake oil salesmen.

    • Regis

      Mar 15, 2018 at 7:41 am

      I’m retired in a golf centric area and there are a lot of courses within 20 minutes of my home. I’ve been playing for over 50 years and have taken a lot of lessons. I will take an occasional lesson with any good pro but when it comes to a lesson package I only work with a pro that has launch monitor and video technology preferably outdoors.(I will never take an indoor lesson) Not for every lesson necessarily but integrated into the teaching. And I almost never buy a club without using a launch monitor. I appreciate the cost involved for the pro but from the students perspective that’s what I look for. It’s easily available and at least in terms of a lesson package it should be standard. Like bringing your car to a mechanic. They all have diagnostic equipment. Some have more sophisticated equipment.

    • Hunter Brown

      Mar 15, 2018 at 8:53 am

      Coach Vitti thanks for taking the time to read and reply with your experience. I am glad you had a successful career teaching. I never stated you had to have TrackMan to be a great teacher. There have been plenty of great teachers before TrackMan and still great teachers today who do not use TrackMan like a Butch Harmon. I simply choose to use it and encourage others to use it as it makes the learning process more efficient. Also from my experience TrackMan is best suited for Amateurs not scratch golfers or tour pros. The reason I believe this is because tour pros or already have good “numbers”. That is why they strike the ball so well and play for a living. They use it mostly as you stated for club fitting, distance training, and checking in on things. Amateurs or the 5-25 handicap range can find using TrackMan very positive because it helps them understand the difference between feel and real. If you are ever in Asheville, NC and are curious about how teachers use TM please let me know! I would be happy to show you how I use it and hopefully you will see that it is positive and not detrimental to the game of golf.

  10. JustWellsy

    Mar 14, 2018 at 1:28 pm

    Most people reading this are not Golf pros and for us it’s ridiculously expensive. It would be expensive for most of us at $2,000. You are not considering the little guy at all.

    This article was mostly a waste of time other than the very first point, which is informative for a lot of folks. Plus, one of the “myths” was true! Haha. Honestly, this article feels to me like you had a couple good points in your mind and had to manufacture additional content in order to make an article out of it.

    You are not outwardly bias, but you do have an “entrenchment” bias that is subconscious. I would bet that if you worked for foresight you would have bought a GC Quad. It’s easy for you to refute that by simply saying no, but think of what you’d know about the inner workings of that machine vs trackman and having never worked for them.

    I get the intent and appreciate your work as a teaching pro, but for me you missed the mark for your likely target audience. Consider this like a movie review where I express my opinion and my opinion only. Thanks.

    • Hunter Brown

      Mar 15, 2018 at 8:59 am

      Thanks for reading and commenting your thoughts. I agree with some and think I could have included a little more for the average amateur. What I would suggest here instead of recommending another price point launch monitor is to encourage your pro at your club to look into getting TrackMan or find someone in your area who has and uses TM for teaching and fitting. Also to your point about Foresight, you can definitely make the argument that I have entrenchment but I don’t think that makes this article invaluable. The point of the article was to dispel the misconceptions people make about TrackMan it had nothing to do with other launch monitors. Also honestly I never would have gone to work for Foresight and that is not a bash on them. I worked at 2 clubs before I worked at TrackMan and had the opportunity to recommend a launch monitor purchase. We looked at several and decided on TrackMan because it was the best then and is the best now.

  11. Leonard

    Mar 14, 2018 at 12:43 pm

    Excellent piece. Well thought out and explained!

  12. Frank Xavier

    Mar 14, 2018 at 12:40 pm

    Definitely an interesting analysis and description. It could have been more insightful with some comparative observations to more economic solutions like Skytrak which according to their side by side produces very close results to Trackman for a fraction of the cost.

  13. Tim S

    Mar 14, 2018 at 12:25 pm

    I think TrackMan is in invaluable tool. You can stand on the range and hit different drivers and watch them go, but the info you need really isn’t there without something measuring it. Spin and launch angle are hugely important in distance, and TrackMan gives you that info.

    TrackMan can help you select a club. It’s up to you to dial it in.

  14. Blake

    Mar 14, 2018 at 12:12 pm

    I wish he would have addressed indoor data performance and touched on the comparison to Flightscope. Regardless of that, good article and information.

    • Gregs

      Mar 14, 2018 at 12:33 pm

      Trackman is not great for indoor use for the driver or most clubs that gear effect is more prominent, since trackman can not follow the ball after it hits the screen. Hitting it on the toe comes up as a block even though it would gear back to center if not left of center. Foresight GCQuad is the best for indoor use and indoor fitting as it’s picks up strike zone and it will pick up gear effect. Outside trackman actually follows the ball so it takes in to account gear effect through tracking the actual ball throughout its flight. Trackman wins in the outside environment.

      • Judge

        Mar 14, 2018 at 6:45 pm

        My guess is that the whole indoor debate will change very soon. Just like TrackMan how couldn’t measure impact location or dynamic lie.. Their track record speaks for itself!

      • RJ

        Apr 3, 2018 at 1:08 am

        Thumbs up on your comments…. I use both in different fashions and can boast about features and benefits for both. To each his own based on his / her finances..

  15. MIKEYP

    Mar 14, 2018 at 11:59 am

    I got a trackman and went to a secluded range with a pro and hit several shots. The pro went out into the range and put stakes in ground were the ball landed and were it finished. The trackman said the balls were landing at certain distances and then gave a total distance number. The distances were ALL 4+ yards off from were the ball actually landed and finished. I trust the spin, launch angle and other recorded data is reasonably accurate but the yardages were off every time. Might be the air density, ball, contact etc but the Trackman told a different story than the actual distance.

    • John

      Mar 14, 2018 at 12:12 pm

      Hey Dummy…. It isn’t going to get roll out right every time.

      • Coach Vitti

        Mar 15, 2018 at 10:15 pm

        I think I’m the only guy in Texas who can back up a drive! Trackman can’t calculate that!

    • larrybud

      Mar 14, 2018 at 12:32 pm

      What did you measure the stakes with and how do you know that was accurate?? Did they read long or short? Was this your trackman or the pros? Are you guys certified?

      • MIKEYP

        Mar 15, 2018 at 10:28 am

        Chris Moody is the certified pro. We were at a private range at a country club. Some of the shots came up short and some long. He would go to were the ball landed (he’s dangerously standing down range and would go to where the ball hit) and put a stake in the ground. Then went out to where the ball settled and put another stake. We then compared trackman and the distance was off every time. We were simply testing the accuracy of the distance. And yes John, I am a dummy.

  16. raynorfan1

    Mar 14, 2018 at 11:43 am

    “If you are a teaching professional or golf course, Trackman is vital to your operation.”

    How is Trackman “vital” to the operation of a golf course?

    Teaching professional, I get. Club fitter, I get. Pro shop, I get.

    Golf course?

    • Andrew Cooper

      Mar 14, 2018 at 3:20 pm

      “Vital to your operation…”? I’m sure there are plenty of pros and facilities managing ok with their Flightscopes and GC2 Quads.

      • Hunter Brown

        Mar 15, 2018 at 8:44 am

        Andrew I do not disagree with that my main point was that information is vital and I choose TrackMan because it is the best information out there. However my intent was not to turn this into a TrackMan vs conversation just to explain the misconceptions people have

  17. larrybud

    Mar 14, 2018 at 10:47 am

    Hunter, I’m sorry but this is NOT accurate:

    “it can actually bend the radar waves around the shape of an object”

    No, it CANT actually bend the radar waves, and the link you referenced give a simplified description of how it works, but radar does NOT “bend”. In fact, the link talks about cell phone signals bend through walls, but that’s not accurate either. They go THROUGH them because of the wavelength. See this link for more info:

    Radar is just radio waves, which is a high frequency light wave. Light does not “bend” (* yes, high gravitational objects such as planets/stars/black holes bend space, and thus light does bend around them, but that’s not what we’re talking about here!).

    I think it’s important to be accurate in such articles, especially if your goal is to expel myths!

    • Hunter Brown

      Mar 14, 2018 at 11:32 am

      Larry thanks for taking the time to read and comment. I may have used a slightly misleading word in “bend” I was simply trying to explain the general idea without getting super scientific as I am not qualified to have that kind of conversation. I am just a golf pro! I understand your point though

    • Hunter Brown

      Mar 15, 2018 at 8:42 am

      Larry here is some follow up info on your question

      adar waves from TrackMan DO see around the clubhead. The physics are a bit complicated, but here we go:

      The wavelength of the TrackMan radar is ½-1½ inches – this is in the same order of magnitude as the club head and golf ball. This means that the radar reflection, the so-called scattering mechanism, is in the ‘resonance region’ (see f.ex. a simplified explanation of this).

      In the ‘resonant region’ the reflecting objects generates ‘creeping waves’ that wraps around the object. An electromagnetic field that impact an object, will generate a current on this object, current are ‘closed loops’ which means the current will also run on parts of the object that is not facing the incident electromagnetic wave. The current will then generate a new electromagnetic field (the reflected signal) which will consequently also be radiated from parts of the object that is not facing the incident electromagnetic wave.

      However, no matter the physical explanation the raw data from TrackMan clearly shows that we can see ‘around’ the club head. F.ex. it is clear in the radar signal from TrackMan exactly when the ball separates from the club face despite the club head occluding the ball completely.

  18. Patrucknorm

    Mar 14, 2018 at 10:44 am

    If I were a pro golfer or a golf pro that teaches, I would invest in one these as a tool. As an amateur I’ve seen my numbers and they are helpful. But it’s a tool not an aid. It’s great for actual yardages and quantifying your swing efficiency. I still believe golf is a game of nuances/ feel. But frankly, I’d rather be playing than hitting balls indoors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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


The 19th Hole: Bernhard Langer on his brilliant career, biggest regret, and Payne Stewart



Hall of Fame golfer Bernhard Langer, winner of the PGA Tour’s 2018 Payne Stewart Award, joins host Michael Williams on the 19th Hole for an exclusive one-on-one interview. Langer talks about his brilliant career, his friendship with Payne Stewart, and the thing that he regrets about his career. This episode also features Chip Beck, the second player to shoot a 59, on how that special round changed his life forever.

Check out the full podcast on SoundCloud below, or click here to listen on iTunes!

Your Reaction?
  • 1
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

The 21 best golf podcasts you should be listening to in 2018



What’s the best golf podcast? Debating that may be as fruitless as the Jack vs. Tiger debate, because there are a bunch of darn good ones out there right now. You don’t have to be an astute observer of the media space to know podcasting has exploded in popularity in recent years. Indeed, it seems like everyone has a podcast these days, including your grandmother’s Scrabble enthusiast pod.

Returning to the original question: this is a subjective list that isn’t meant to be exhaustive. If there’s a podcast you enjoy that finds itself outside the ropes, feel free to mention it in the comments.

So grab your earbuds, Beats by Dre, or wireless headphones if you’re really cool, and take a look at some notable podcasts by category.

GolfWRX Radio

Obviously, I’m strongly biased towards the GolfWRX’s podular offerings, and since this is, you know, GolfWRX, we’ll start with our pods.

19th Hole: Michael Williams talks to luminaries of the game and interesting folks alike in his pod. Heck, Michael’s first guest was Bob Vokey! Williams is well-wired and well-traveled, and oh, he has by far the best radio voice of anyone on this list, so he’s got that going for him. Other guests include Jack Nicklaus, Gary Player, Greg Norman, Scott Van Pelt, Rees Jones and many other legends.

Gear Dive: I’ll avoid any play on his last name, but Johnny Wunder’s Gear Dive is an inquisitive look into, well, golf gear. Wunder has spoken with everyone from Charles Howell III, to Fred Couples, to the boys at Artisan Golf. If you love golf equipment, or consider yourself a gearhead, this is the podcast is a must.

Two Guys Talking Golf: Editor Andrew Tursky and resident equipment expert Brian Knudson are the golf buddies you wish you had. The pair discuss equipment, club building, happenings on the PGA Tour, and an abundance of random golf-related and tangentially golf-related topics. Most recently, TG2 answered 30+ AMA-style questions from the @tg2wrx Instagram page, and they’ve had guests on such as Billy Horschel, Ping’s Marty Jertson, Scotty Cameron, Bob Vokey, Aaron Dill, GolfWRX Forum members and many others.

Unlocking Your Golfing Potential: This instructional podcast series hosted by coach Will Robins teaches golfers how to improve their games without improving their technique. If you want to lower your scores, and change your outlook on the game of golf in general, I highly recommend this podcast.

Listen to all the GolfWRX podcasts on SoundCloud or iTunes.

DFS golf podcasts

Golf is one of the fastest growing and most popular DFS sports. Accordingly, every DFS site in the world and most major outlets have a fantasy-related podcast. These three are among the longest running and finest in the space, although Matthew Wiley of Golflandia deserves a special nod for his spectacular rambling ridiculousness and high entertainment value.

Pat Mayo: Mayo is an OG of the fantasy sports podcasting game in general and fantasy golf pods in particular. And honesty, he must have cloned himself sometime in the past because his output absolutely mind-boggling. Plus, he’s one of the few podcasts on this list that records video, so if you’re looking for a pod with a visual component, Mayo is your man. Listen here.

Fantasy Golf Degenerates: Brad and Kenny go together like, well, Brad and Kenny. These two have been grinding out a weekly fantasy golf podcast since PGA DFS was in diapers a few years back. Brad is the ownership god and Kenny’s course previews are second to none. Well worth a pre-tournament listen every week. Best enjoyed with Crown Royal. Listen here.

Tour Junkies: PGA DFS podcasting’s other dynamic duo, David and Pat, have similarly been ‘casting since the early days of the…hobby? Come for the weekly entertainment, but stay for their inside knowledge of Augusta National (where David was a caddie). The pair have branched out into interviews–Kevin Kisner, Bob Parsons, John Peterson–which are well worth checking out too. Listen here.

Now, let’s take a look at some of what the the PGA Tours and Golf Channels of the world have under their umbrellas, as well as the rest of the colorful bouquet of golf golf-related podcasts that focus on everything from the intersection of golf and science to the intersection of Barstool Sports and golf.

From longstanding outlets

Talk of the Tour: While Mark Immelman’s “On the Mark” is good, on “Talk of the Tour” John Swantek “visits with a variety of players, writers, broadcasters, industry leaders and insiders from throughout the world of golf,” as the official description indicates. Given the Tour’s access and reach, the results don’t disappoint. Listen here.

Golf Channel Podcast: Is the title creative? No it is not. Is the podcast good? Yes it is. Not only does the whole range of on-air GC talent appear on occasion–Brandel Chamblee’s recent appearance was excellent, as was Tiger Tracker’s. Listen here.

Golf Digest Podcast: The folks at GD get top-notch (to quote Judge Smails) guests and turn out quality takes from a strong team of writers. Listen here.

European Tour’s Race to Dubai: Yes, turning the season-long points race into the title of a podcast is odd, but Robert Lee’s (not the Civil War general) podcast “features exclusive interviews with star names, incisive analysis of the latest action, all the key news and a light-hearted look at life on tour,” per the description. Listen here.

Matty & The Caddie: ESPN’s Matt Barrie and former comedian/current ESPN golf analyst Michael Collins join forces to interview both athletes and celebrities, inside and outside the ropes. Lately, the list of big name guests includes Golden Tate, Nick Faldo, Chris Webber, Joe Theismann, Alfonso Ribiero, Brian Urlacher, Joe Carter, George Lopez, Jack Nicklaus and more. Listen here.

Other ‘casts

No Laying Up: From Twitterers with day jobs to an upstart media outlet, NLU’s podcast was the tool that led to the merch, the features, and Soly, Tron and company’s other efforts. If you’re unfamiliar, start with the most recent episode (Justin Thomas) and work your way backward. You won’t regret it.

The Fried Egg Golf: Andy Johnson has become a force and a voice in the world of golf media in a very short period of time. While he and his guests do good work in discussing the pro game, Andy’s forte is golf course architecture, and he cooks up architecture discussions better than anyone in the podcast universe right now. Listen here.

Fore Play: Honestly, the iTunes description for Barstool’s golf pod is pretty good: “Trent, Riggs and their wide variety of guests talk about everything golf like normal folks sitting at a bar watching coverage, venting about the game’s difficulties, and weighing in on pro gossip. Your classic golf addicts, the “Fore Play” crew brings a young, unique voice to the rapidly-evolving game, discussing freely and openly everything golf.” Pretty much sums it up. Listen here (warning: explicit).

The Clubhouse with Shane Bacon: Mr. Salt-Cured Pork has had something of a come up, hasn’t he? The Fox hosting duties and more are well earned, as Bacon is a strong voice, and his network affiliation ensures a quality roster of guests. Listen here.

ShackHouse: Geoff Shackelford joins forces with “podcast personality” per the iTunes description, Joe House to “break down the biggest golf stories, interview some of the biggest personalities in the game.” Really, this show is all about Shack’s singular perspective. Listen here.

Feherty: I mean, what can you say? If you like David Feherty and his show, you’ll love his podcast (I do), because it is essentially his show. And if you don’t, you won’t. Listen here.

The Erik Lang Show: Ah, the singular Mr. Lang, who, doing things his own way, wrote his show description in the first person: “Hi! I’m Erik Anders Lang. I’ve worn a bunch of hats in this life from waiting tables, photography, doc filmmaking, hosting Adventures In Golf (PGA TOUR / Skratch TV) and now – a PODCAST! The Erik Lang Show is me pontificating on life, golf and travel.” Listen here.

Callaway ShipShow: Far from a content marketing gimmick, Callaway’s content marketing is, well, really good content. Harry Arnett’s “ShipShow” is kind of like the younger, goofier brother of “Callaway Live.” Billed as discussion about “compelling people, culture, narratives, and current events in golf,” the ShipShow is always a swashbuckling good time. Listen here.

Golf Science Lab: Cordie Walker pulls back the curtain and cuts through the hooey of the “mythology” of golf instruction and the game in general. He says he’s “making a difference in the way golf is taught, learned, and practiced,” and honestly, he’s not wrong. If you’re an instruction and improvement enthusiast, this is your ‘cast. Listen here.

Your Reaction?
  • 32
  • LEGIT4
  • WOW3
  • LOL3
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP4
  • OB3
  • SHANK12

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

Do you know how to drop in 2019? Are you sure?



Starting January 1, 2019, golfers will have to get used to the new Rules of Golf. Many changes were made to create the new rules, but one of the most important changes without any doubt are the dropping rules. You might say: “Come on, it’s easy! We just have to drop from knee height, right?” Well, it’s not that simple. There are quite a few other things you need to know, which I will clarify below.

Q1. What is “knee height” exactly?

“Knee height” means the height from the ground to your knee when in a standing position. 

Q2. So I cannot just kneel and thereby place the ball instead of dropping?

Good thinking… but no 🙂

Q3. What part of the knee do I have to drop from?

It’s not (at the moment) clarified which part of the knee is “the knee,” but there cannot be any doubt that you can drop from the whole knee.



The 2019 Rules of Golf state that you are dropping the ball correctly if all these requirements are fulfilled:

  1. The player himself must drop the ball
  2. It must be dropped from knee height
  3. The player must not give it any spin, etc.
  4. Before the ball hits the ground, it must not touch any part of the player or the player’s equipment (e.g. his bag)
  5. It must be dropped in the relief area (the relief area is defined in the rule you are taking relief under), i.e. it must first touch the ground inside the relief area when dropped.

If just one of these requirements is not fulfilled, you are not considered to have dropped in a correct way. You must re-drop until you have dropped in a correct way (without any limit as to the number of re-drops).

If you play a ball not dropped in a correct way, you incur a one-stroke penalty — unless you played from outside the relief area, in which case you incur a two-stroke penalty in stroke play or lost hole in match play (see FACTS 2).


Q4. What is the penalty for not dropping from knee height?

You can and should correct your error before playing the ball. If you re-drop in a correct way, correcting your error, there is no penalty. If you don’t and make a stroke at the ball, you incur a one-stroke penalty (since you did not drop in a correct way). See “FACTS 1”.

Q5. What if I drop almost from knee height.

Well, as a starting point you have to drop from knee height. If you dont’t, you will have to correct your error by re-dropping correctly (see “FACTS 1″). 

There is a “I-did-my-best-so-please-don’t-penalize-me-rule” saying that when finding a “location,” you are not penalized for finding a wrong location if you made a reasonable judgment. It is for now not certain if this rule also encompasses a situation in which you don’t drop exactly from knee height simply because you cannot see that spot with certainty when looking down.

On one hand, you could argue that this interpretation would be in accordance with the spirit of this rule (don’t penalize a player doing his best). On the other hand, it seems that the knee cannot be that hard to find (!) and that a “location” probably must be interpreted as “a location on the golf course.” My conclusion would be that there is no excuse for not to being able to drop exactly from knee height, and thus this rule did not apply in this situation.

There is also a “naked-eye rule” saying that if the fact (here: the ball was not dropped from knee height) could not reasonable have been seen with the naked eye, the player is not penalized even though video evidence shows something different (i.e. that it in fact was not dropped exactly from knee height). In my opinion, this naked-eye rules is not applicable here, since a player will be said to be able to find the knee with a reasonable effort. 

So… in my opinion there is no excuse not to drop from knee height!



A relief area is the area in which you have to drop (see “FACTS 1”) and in which your ball must end after a drop. 

Example: If you deem your ball in the rough unplayable, you can for example choose with a one-stroke penalty to drop a ball within two club lengths from — and not nearer the hole than — the spot where the ball lay. This area is called the “relief area.”

If your ball ends outside the relief area in your drop, your required action depends on whether or not you dropped in a correct way (see “FACTS 1”). 

  1. If you did not drop in a correct way: You must re-drop again (without penalty) without any limitations as to the number of re-drops until you have dropped in a correct way. 
  2. If you did drop in a correct way: The player must re-drop (in a correct way!) a ball one time (without penalty). If the ball still ends outside the relief area, the player must then (without penalty) place a ball on the spot where the dropped ball first touched the ground in the re-drop. If he player does that, no penalty is incurred. If he does not but plays a ball from outside the relief area, he plays from a wrong place thereby incurring a two-stroke penalty in stroke play or a loss of hole in match play.


Q7. Who should drop the ball?

Only the player can drop the ball. Not the caddie, not other players, not anyone else! See “FACTS 1”.

Q8. What is the penalty if your ball strikes your bag or yourself in the drop?

The answer depends on when it happens (i.e. when it strikes you or your equipment):

  1. If it happens before the ball strikes the ground: There is no penalty presupposing that you re-drop before you play the ball. You have to re-drop no matter how many drops it takes for you not to strike your bag or yourself. If you don’t re-drop and play the ball, you incur a one-stroke penalty.
  2. If it happens after the ball has struck the ground: There is no penalty, and you shall not re-drop.

Q9. Where must I drop?

You must drop in the “relief area,” which is defined in the rule you are dropping under. If you declare your ball unplayable, for example, then one of the options is to drop within two club length – not nearer the hole – than where the ball lay. This area is the “relief area” in which:

  1. Your ball must land in the drop (see “FACTS 1”) and
  2. Must end (See “FACTS 2”)

Q10. What if I drop from shoulder height?

That probably will happen quite a few times in the beginning of 2019. In this case, you are not dropping in a correct way, and you must re-drop without penalty before you make the stroke. See “FACTS 1.”

Q11. When do I have to re-drop?

The re-dropping rules are simplified. Under the current rules, there are a lot of situations where you are required to re-drop, e.g. when the ball rolls closer to the hole than the nearest point of relief, when the ball rolls into a bunker (and stays there), when the ball rolls more than two club lengths from where it first struck the course, etc. These rules are quite difficult.

In 2019, it gets easier. You have to drop in a “relief area,” and the balls needs to end it that area. If you drop outside this area or if the ball rolls and stays outside this area, you are required to re-drop. See “FACTS 1” and “FACTS 2.”

Q12. Do I have to re-drop (as it is today) if the ball rolls more than two club lengths away from the spot that the ball first struck the course in the drop?

First of all, in 2019 there is not such a “two-club-length rule.” The re-dropping rules are explained in “FACTS 1” and in “FACTS 2” above. 

  • If you take relief (e.g. from a path) and must drop within one club length (of the nearest point of point of complete relief), you will always have to re-drop if it rolls more than 2 club lengths (since the relief area is exactly two club-lengths long measured from the two points farthest from each other). 
  • If you drop after a rule requiring you to drop within two club lengths, sometimes you must re-drop if the ball rolls more than two club lenths and sometimes not. The only thing that matters is that the ball must be dropped in the relief area (see “FACTS 1”) and must end in the relief area (see “FACTS 2”). Otherwise, it must be re-dropped.

Q13. I have a bad back and therefore I cannot take my arm down far enough to be able to drop from knee height. What do I do?

I don’t know. My guess would be this: A player who cannot drop from knee-height due to back-problems most likely cannot play golf at all. In other words, a player able to play golf will almost always be able to drop the ball from knee height.

In the extremely rare situations where a player cannot drop from knee height but can play a round of golf, there is a “do-what-is-fair-rule” stating that in situations not covered by the Rules of Golf, you should do what is fair. Maybe that would lead to the conclusion that it was OK for a player to drop from a place higher than knee height (e.g. just from the position the arm is when it is stretched and relaxed alongside the leg).

Q14. Is a taller player going to drop the ball from a higher place than a lower player?


Q15. Isn’t that unreasonable?!

Well, that’s for you to decide 🙂 Who said that the 2019-Rules of Golf where easy to understand?

Rules Mentioned in Article

  • 14-3: Dropping the ball
  • 20-2c: “Naked-eye-rule”
  • 1.3b(2): “Reasonable-judgment-rule”
  • 20.3: “Do-what-is-fair-rule (when the situation is not covered by the rules).
Your Reaction?
  • 7
  • LEGIT2
  • WOW2
  • LOL2
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB0
  • SHANK9

Continue Reading

19th Hole