Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

The Wedge Guy: A discussion of bounce

Published

on

Based on my 25+ years as a wedge designer and marketer, I can easily say that ‘bounce’ is the most mis-understood aspect of wedges and wedge-fitting. I’ve learned that a great number of golfers are totally confused about this very important design feature of wedges. So here goes.

A primer: What is bounce?

Very simply, “bounce” is the design feature of the sole of a wedge (or actually, any golf club) that helps it perform properly when it makes contact with the turf. A “worm’s eye view” of any wedge shows that the sole of the club has a downward angle from the leading edge back to the trailing edge. That angle, in relation to the horizontal line of the turf is what is defined as the “bounce angle”.

low bounce

high bounce

In general, the higher that angle (measured in degrees from the horizontal plane of the turf), the more the club will tend to be “rejected” by the turf upon impact. Conversely, the lower the angle the less “rejection force” will be experienced. But also realize that the width of the sole and the bounce angle combine to produce a certain playability. A wide sole with a low bounce angle might perform very similar to (but also very differently than) a narrow sole with a higher bounce angle. Bounce is just not a simple subject.

How do I pick the right bounce?

To further compound the confusion you might have, the wedge marketplace offers hundreds of choices of loft/bounce combinations, and the industry has settled on this basic advice to help you navigate through this maze.

  • For soft turf or fluffier lies, you want a higher bounce angle.
  • For firm turf or tighter, you want a lower bounce angle.
  • If you have a steep angle of attack, you want a high bounce.
  • If you have a shallower angle of attack, you want a lower bounce.

Here is where I’ll call on my analysis of over 40,000 wedge-fitting “interviews” through the online fitting tools I have designed to share a couple of interesting facts that challenge that entire line of reasoning

  • Over 80 percent of golfers of all skill levels say that the turf they play on is varying in its firmness (I can’t imagine the golf course the other 20% play that they think has the same turf quality throughout), and
  • Over 75 percent of golfers of all skill levels say they vary their swing path; either on purpose to hit various shots…or unintentionally because they are not tour pros! (Again, I am suspect that 25 percent of golfers take the same divot all the time.)

Here is where my “respectful irreverence” to the industry’s reasoning about bounce fitting comes out, and I offer a few more examples of why I challenge the entire concept

  • What if I have a tight lie on soft turf?
  • What if I have a fluffy lie on firm turf? (And just where are these courses that have the same kind of turf conditions everywhere on them?)
  • What if I have a shallower angle of attack, but the lie is on soft turf?
  • Conversely, what if I have a steep angle of attack but the shot is on firm turf?
  • Wait, I’m a good player and vary my angle of approach based on the shot I’m facing; what kind of bounce should I play?

And the biggest one: I’m not a tour pro, but a mid- to high-handicapper. The courses I play have every kind of lie, turf firmness and sand texture imaginable (and some that aren’t). My angle of approach is not consistent (duh, I’m a mid- to high handicapper). How the heck do I sort through this?

Bear with me, because I’m going to offer you some advice after I cover this last piece of the puzzle.

Custom grinds

This seems to be a growing trend offered by some wedge brands, always at a premium price over their standard offerings. But who really needs a “custom grind” and how would you know what you need?

Understand that tour players typically spend lots of time with their equipment sponsors to have their wedges custom ground because they spend hundreds of hours and hit thousands of shots perfecting their skills. They have the most highly refined set of skills and sense of touch . . . you can’t even imagine. As a result, they can do things with a wedge that your best local club players don’t even dream of. Even more importantly, if they get to a tournament where course conditions change, all they have to do is go to the equipment trailer and get some more grinding, or even new wedges that are right for that particular course that particular week. Oh, and they are F-R-E-E.

Tour players have their wedges made so that the sole gets “out of the way” of their skills. Amateurs need wedges that have a sole that gets in the way, to help compensate for the fact that they didn’t hit 2-300 wedge shots since their last round of golf.

So, what do you do?

In my opinion, you simply cannot select a wedge out of a retail display and expect to be satisfied. You cannot test wedges on a hitting mat in a store and learn anything about how they are going to perform for you on the courses you play. I’ll apply that same advice to selecting wedges based on a driving range session.

I firmly believe the only way to figure out what wedge sole configuration works best for you is through trial-and-error…on YOUR golf course(s), with the shots YOU face on a round-by-round basis. You simply must take demo wedges onto the course and hit the shots you know you will have, from the lies you will be required to navigate and the sand you will play from.

If you cannot demo the exact wedges you are considering, then you might think about moving on until you can. My bet is that your golf professional will have demo wedges you can take out on the course to see how they work for you. And he or she can also help you learn some wedge techniques and skills that will broaden your short-range options to quickly impact your scoring.

I hope that helps, and I look forward to sharing more equipment industry insight and opinions with you next week.

Your Reaction?
  • 481
  • LEGIT62
  • WOW16
  • LOL3
  • IDHT4
  • FLOP11
  • OB4
  • SHANK78

Terry Koehler is a fourth generation Texan, a native of a small South Texas town and a graduate of Texas A&M University. He has had a most interesting 40-year career in the golf industry. He has created five start-up companies, ranging from advertising agencies to golf equipment companies. You might remember Reid Lockhart, EIDOLON, SCOR, or his leadership of the reintroduction of Ben Hogan to the golf equipment industry in 2014. For almost 25 years, his wedge designs have stimulated other companies to slightly raise the CG and improve wedge performance. He has just announced the formation of Edison Golf Company and the new Edison Forged wedges, which have been robotically proven to significantly raise the bar for wedge performance. Terry serves as Chairman and Director of Innovation for Edison Golf, which can be seen at www.EdisonWedges.com. Terry has been a prolific equipment designer of over 100 putters and several irons, but many know Koehler as simply “The Wedge Guy”, as he authored over 700 articles on his blog by that name from 2003-2010.

28 Comments

28 Comments

  1. ChipNRun

    May 1, 2019 at 12:11 pm

    Terry,

    Some of the Golf Evolution pros suggest short-game wedge play of “engaging the bounce.” This means for chips and pitches the golfer skims a high bounce wedge along the ground to contact, rather than engaging the leading edge (hitting down) on the shot. This supposedly encourages more consistent contact.

    Edel wedges (some sole grinds with 20+ degrees bounce) are popular with this group.

    Any thoughts on this technique which encourages higher wedge bounce for everyone?

  2. A. Commoner

    Apr 25, 2019 at 12:52 pm

    By last count, there were a half dozen characters labeled “THE wedge expert” (or some sort descriptor)…..Will the real ace of clubs please stand? and pretenders bow out!

  3. Donn Rutkoff

    Apr 23, 2019 at 10:53 am

    Anybody tell or feel if any difference in feel in the new Mizuno wedges with boron, beginning with the T7 and now S18? I love my pre-boron S5. Wonder whether to buy another S5 or move up to S18 when the S5 grooves are too worn?

  4. Steve Wozeniak PGA

    Apr 20, 2019 at 11:34 am

    Still got my Eidolon 60 degree, guess you can tell I can’t play much!!!!!

    About to order my new Black Hogan 60 degree to replace!!!!! Going to LOVE having that Hogan name on it, Thanks Terry.

    Steve Wozeniak PGA

  5. David Bloom

    Apr 18, 2019 at 8:20 pm

    A great explanation. If you have time in the future would you comment of wedge shafts? Just purchased a new set of Titleist wedges(50 and54) with light weight steel shafts. My irons have UST senior shafts in them and these new Titleist wedges feel so very heavy. Should I have the same shafts in my wedges as my regular irons, or is there another way to determine which shafts would work? Thanks

  6. Jamho3

    Apr 6, 2019 at 5:35 am

    Jeez was it 1998 or 1997 I think I heard something similar..

    Four Scottish Gents played the 1st round of golf in the America’s

    Former Hogan exec

    No big box

    Green grass only

    Sound familiar to anyone not named TK? Here’s a pic of the old boys Reid is in the middle.

    h ttp://www.fathersofgolf.com/uploads/3/1/0/6/31065683/2731918.jpg?428

  7. Jamho3

    Apr 6, 2019 at 5:23 am

    Terry you’re still the man! Stop pre-selling & get out and start manufacturing! Seriously.

  8. David Bloom

    Apr 5, 2019 at 8:00 pm

    Hard Sand. Very little sand Our traps are poor…Any ideas for a sand wedge

  9. kevin moran

    Apr 5, 2019 at 4:06 pm

    The article makes sense and I think the writer was trying to stress the difficulties in following the manufacturers oft-repeated fitting suggestions. I will say however as to the demo part of the article, that too many of these things are aimed at country club types where the pro may offer these services. I’m a daily fee and public course guy. We don’t have the option to try and then buy.

    • Simms

      Apr 15, 2019 at 7:30 pm

      Amen brother, it would be great if someone would start a site for the public golfer and give tips and ideas that are not for the low handicapper or Pro. But then no one is going to fund anything that is aimed at the non Country Club types..no money in it.

    • Alfredo Smith

      Apr 22, 2019 at 1:33 pm

      Not completely wrong about finding new demo equipment, you need the access to a local shop or GC that supports demos. Another option would be to purchase older wedges to test out which bounce options work for you.

  10. Terry Koehler

    Apr 4, 2019 at 8:00 am

    To all,
    Thank you for both the kudos and the challenges to my article on bounce. As I said, this is the most complex aspect of wedges and you all make very good points. In this article I was trying to cover bounce from the most basic angle, so I could not get into as much detail as the subject demands and should get. Based on your input, this next Tuesday I will take a bit deeper dive into the subject, specifically those comments about manipulating the face angle to affect the bounce, carrying a variety of loft/bounce combinations and ways to get around that “on course trial” issue.
    I appreciate all of you taking the time to comment, as that helps me become a better resource for you as we go forward together.

  11. Terco

    Apr 4, 2019 at 7:52 am

    I play on thigh turf but soft soil. To make it worse I have an steep downswing. The fat shot happens all the time with low bounce. Tried all kinds of 60’s . My teacher allways said that the 60 is a dangerous club. Probably a 58/8 is the best club for the amateurs.

  12. Leftshot

    Apr 3, 2019 at 8:39 pm

    Wish I could give two reactions. Because I thought his analysis was honest and insightful and his advice on what to do terrible. As noted by others, it isn’t practical or possible to put his trial and error suggestion into practice. Plus as the author himself stated we don’t have the finely tuned senses the pros have to detect the best fit anyway.

  13. W

    Apr 3, 2019 at 5:46 pm

    Terry bring back the SCOR wedges still the best…

  14. Steve Cartwright

    Apr 3, 2019 at 4:29 pm

    That’s what not to do now let’s hear how to do it. Just hitting shots during a round is not sufficient. You need a practice routine off grass with the same make of ball hitting a number of different shots. If you can’t measure the results reliably you cannot compare the results.
    I liked the article but it’s not complete
    By the way I have just changed my wedges after a process sonos to the above.

  15. Jack Nash

    Apr 3, 2019 at 4:03 pm

    I would think the grain would effect how or what wedge you would use?

  16. Dave r

    Apr 3, 2019 at 3:22 pm

    I don’t know where this gentleman plays but my pro would be like are you nuts demo wedge. Here’s one for $150.00 it will work now run along can’t you see I’m busy . Never heard of a demo wedge or a place that has them for that fact . Oh I have some the ones I bought that didn’t do the job want some ? Thanks for the article but no thanks.

  17. Tee Lassar

    Apr 3, 2019 at 2:27 pm

    It’s not just about the bounce–there’s the issue of GRIND. If you look at, for example Vokey wedges there are T, C, P, L, R grinds which in combination with different lofts and bounce give a massive number of choices. Only trial and error on the range will help pick out the right ones. I suggest getting your gapping right, then select the wedges that work for the majority of lies and turf conditions you are likely to encounter, then take a short game course from Pelz et al and learn how to use your wedges properly

  18. Brian Terry

    Apr 3, 2019 at 11:43 am

    WOW! The guy simply tells the truth and everybody piles on cause they didn’t hear what they expected. What he’s saying is the wedges YOU NEED will vary from course to course and sometimes from hole to hole. What does this mean???? You need to learn how to hit the right shots when you don’t have the ideal wedge. Sure, get the wedges that suit your typical swing and course, but practice in those areas that aren’t typical so you have experience to overcome NON-typical situations.

    BT

  19. Jack Wullkotte

    Apr 3, 2019 at 10:29 am

    Sorry, but this article is nothing but a bunch of double talk. Time and again, I have seen the touring pros skull shots, shank them, chili dip them and even whiff them. They very seldom show these shots on “the shot of the day.” How do you determine the amount of bounce you need to prevent skulling the ball? Duh.

  20. Mark

    Apr 3, 2019 at 9:13 am

    Mr. Koehler, after reading your opening statement, and I quote “Based on my 25+ years as a wedge designer and marketer”, I thought here is an article which will add to my knowledge of wedges and bounce angles. Sadly, it did not. At all.

  21. Alex

    Apr 2, 2019 at 6:46 pm

    Or maybe vary bounce per wedge…fluffy sand but also like to slide under it on chips go 56/14 and a 60/04 or 06 or 54/14 58/04 or something. Bounce doesn’t seem to be a full shot issue, but a partial shot or bunker issue. Maybe you are a 52 58 guy that uses your 58 for everything bunkers and chipping then go 8 bounce with a versatile grind that allows you some bounce in sand but not so much or versatile enough to slide under it. You really just gotta step up and hit the shot and rule of thumb bounce helps in the bunker unless the bunkers are rock hard then chip it out anyway and low bounce helps a lot on hitting the nipper with tons of spin. Personally think the worst is having a shot that calls for a ton of spin where you are short sided or need to really clip it and you stare down and find out you are holding a shovel and you know you are most likely gonna skull it cause the leading edge is 1/4 of the way up the ball.

    • Alex Fong

      Apr 4, 2019 at 3:00 am

      Bravo! Best answer of the bunch. This is what I do as well. One sand and one lob wedge will never be perfect for every situation, but if they are different in bounce and sole width, they can handle a wider variety of lies than if they are very similar. And in addition to their aspects on paper, the bounce of each wedge can varied by opening and closing the face. This expert could have taught us something by saying this and explaining how to handle his mixed-demand lies with the players differing angles of attacks. He could have also explained the difference uses/effects of wide vs. narrow sole as they are mixed with high bounce vs. low bounce. He gave us problems but gave us no guidance to think through the situation so each player could and pick the best tool for the job for them. Just suggested that we do what we’re already doing, experiment.

  22. Larry

    Apr 2, 2019 at 3:35 pm

    I had to check the date on this article because it reads like an April fools joke. So, to sum-up the only way to know what wedge works the best is to try it on the course. That’s brilliant!

    • Rick

      Apr 3, 2019 at 2:08 am

      I was thinking the same…lol. Also the courses I usually play dont have a pro,they have “the guy at the desk”. This article is worthless.

    • A. Commoner

      Apr 16, 2019 at 2:24 pm

      This article will be followed by “The Sun Rises in the East and Other Useful Information.”

  23. Richard

    Apr 2, 2019 at 3:12 pm

    I have a steep angle of attack. This is why, even as a single-digit handicap, I played Ping G series clubs instead of the I series.

    When I switched to single-length clubs more than 2 years ago, I went to Wishon Sterlings. Loved them–and still game them without ever looking back at the Pings I left behind. But I really struggled with the gap wedge. I kept sweeping the club under the ball and popping it up. Then I looked over the specs and found that the bounce angle in the Sterling GW was 4 degrees shallower than in the Ping. No wonder! In fact, this was true throughout the set.

    I still play with the same angle of attack, but I have the ball slightly further back in my stance. (Easy to do since it is the same with every iron!) I’m trapping it more, which actually increased both distance and spin, which I like. I don’t know if I could even return to a higher-bounce set, especially in the wedges.

Leave a Reply

Cancel 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.

On Spec

On Spec: Dr. Paul Wood, Ping Golf’s VP of Engineering

Published

on

Host Ryan Barath talks all things design and innovation with VP of Engineering at Ping Golf, Dr. Paul Wood.

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

Want more GolfWRX Radio? Check out our other shows (and the full archives for this show) below. 

Your Reaction?
  • 0
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

Clark: A teacher’s take on Brandel Chamblee’s comments

Published

on

Because I’m writing to a knowledgeable audience who follows the game closely, I’m sure the current Brandel Chamblee interview and ensuing controversy needs no introduction, so let’s get right to it.

Brandel Chamblee, a former PGA Tour player, now plays a role as a TV personality. He has built a “brand” around that role. The Golf Channel seems to relish the idea of Brandel as the “loose cannon” of the crew (not unlike Johnny Miller on NBC) saying exactly what he thinks with seeming impunity from his superiors.

I do not know the gentleman personally, but on-air, he seems like an intelligent, articulate golf professional, very much on top of his subject matter, which is mostly the PGA Tour. He was also a very capable player (anyone who played and won on the PGA Tour is/was a great player). But remember, nowadays he is not being judged by what scores he shoots, but by how many viewers/readers his show and his book have (ratings). Bold statements sell, humdrum ones do not.

For example, saying that a teacher’s idiocy was exposed is a bold controversial statement that will sell, but is at best only partly true and entirely craven. If the accuser is not willing to name the accused, he is being unfair and self-serving. However, I think it’s dangerous to throw the baby out with the bathwater here; Brandel is a student of the game and I like a lot of what he says and thinks.

His overriding message in that interview is that golf over the last “30-40 years” has been poorly taught. He says the teachers have been too concerned with aesthetics, not paying enough attention to function. There is some truth in that, but Brandel is painting with a very broad brush here. Many, myself included, eschewed method teaching years ago for just that reason. Method teachers are bound to help some and not others. Maybe the “X swing” one player finds very useful, another cannot use it all.

Brandel was asked specifically about Matthew Wolff’s unique swing: Lifting the left heel, crossing the line at the top, etc. He answered, “of course he can play because that’s how he plays.” The problem would be if someone tried to change that because it “looked odd.” Any teacher worth his weight in salt would not change a swing simply because it looked odd if it was repeating good impact. I learned from the great John Jacobs that it matters not what the swing looks like if it is producing great impact.

Now, if he is objecting exclusively to those method teachers who felt a certain pattern of motions was the one true way to get to solid impact, I agree with him 100 percent. Buy many teach on an individual, ball flight and impact basis and did not generalize a method. So to say “golf instruction over the last 30-40 years” has been this or that is far too broad a description and unfair.

He goes on to say that the “Top Teacher” lists are “ridiculous.” I agree, mostly. While I have been honored by the PGA and a few golf publications as a “top teacher,” I have never understood how or why. NOT ONE person who awarded me those honors ever saw me give one lesson! Nor have they have ever tracked one player I coached.  I once had a 19 handicap come to me and two seasons later he won the club championship-championship flight! By that I mean with that student I had great success. But no one knew of that progress who gave me an award.

On the award form, I was asked about the best, or most well-known students I had taught. In the golf journals, a “this-is-the-teacher-who-can-help-you” message is the epitome of misdirection. Writing articles, appearing on TV, giving YouTube video tips, etc. is not the measure of a teacher. On the list of recognized names, I’m sure there are great teachers, but wouldn’t you like to see them teach as opposed to hearing them speak? I’m assuming the “ridiculous” ones Brandel refers to are those teaching a philosophy or theory of movement and trying to get everyone to do just that.

When it comes to his criticism of TrackMan, I disagree. TrackMan does much more than help “dial in yardage.” Video cannot measure impact, true path, face-to-path relationship, centeredness of contact, club speed, ball speed, plane etc. Comparing video with radar is unfair because the two systems serve different functions. And if real help is better ball flight, which of course only results from better impact, then we need both a video of the overall motion and a measure of impact.

Now the specific example he cites of Jordan Spieth’s struggles being something that can be corrected in “two seconds” is hyperbolic at least! Nothing can be corrected that quickly simply because the player has likely fallen into that swing flaw over time, and it will take time to correct it. My take on Jordan’s struggles is a bit different, but he is a GREAT player who will find his way back.

Brandel accuses Cameron McCormick (his teacher) of telling him to change his swing.  Do we know that to be true, or did Jordan just fall into a habit and Cameron is not seeing the change? I agree there is a problem; his stats prove that, but before we pick a culprit, let’s get the whole story. Again back to the sensationalism which sells! (Briefly, I believe Jordan’s grip is and has always been a problem but his putter and confidence overcame it. An active body and “quiet” hands is the motion one might expect of a player with a strong grip-for obvious reason…but again just my two teacher cents)

Anyway, “bitch-slapped” got him in hot water for other reasons obviously, and he did apologize over his choice of words, and to be clear he did not condemn the PGA as a whole. But because I have disagreements with his reasoning here does not mean Brandel is not a bright articulate golf professional, I just hope he looks before he leaps the next time, and realizes none of us are always right.

Some of my regular readers will recall I “laid down my pen” a few years ago, but it occurred to me, I would be doing many teachers a disservice if I did not offer these thoughts on this particular topic!

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

Your Reaction?
  • 200
  • LEGIT23
  • WOW4
  • LOL3
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP6
  • OB4
  • SHANK22

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

A trip down Magnolia Memory Lane: Patron fashion at the 1991 Masters

Published

on

Like a lot of golfers out there, I’ve been getting my fix thanks to the final round Masters broadcasts on YouTube via the Masters channel. Considering these broadcasts go back as far as 1968, there is a lot we could discuss—we could break down shots, equipment, how the course has changed, but instead I thought we could have a little fun taking a different direction—fashion.

However, I’m not talking players fashion, that’s fairly straight forward. Instead, I wanted to follow the action behind the action and see what we could find along the way – here are the 1991 Highlights.

I love the “Die Hard” series as much as anyone else but one fan took it to a new level of fandom by wearing a Die Hard 2 – Die Harder T-shirt to Sunday at the Masters. This patron was spotted during Ian Woosnam fourth shot into 13. Honorable mention goes to Woosie’s gold chain.

There is a lot going on here as Ben Crenshaw lines up his put on 17. First, we have the yellow-shirted man just left of center with perfectly paired Masters green pants to go along with his hat (he also bears a striking resemblance to Ping founder Karsten Solheim). Secondly, we have what I would imagine is his friend in the solid red pants—both these outfits are 10 out of 10. Last but not least, we have the man seen just to the right of Ben with sunglasses so big and tinted, I would expect to be receiving a ticket from him on the I20 on my way out of town.

If you don’t know the name Jack Hamm, consider yourself lucky you missed a lot of early 2000s late-night golf infomercials. OK so maybe it’s not the guy known for selling “The Hammer” driver but if you look under the peak of the cabin behind Woosie as he tees off on ten you can be forgiven for taking a double-take… This guy might show up later too. Honorable mention to the pastel-pink-shorted man with the binoculars and Hogan cap in the right of the frame.

Big proportions were still very much in style as the 80s transitioned into the early 90s. We get a peek into some serious style aficionados wardrobes behind the 15th green with a wide striped, stiff collared lilac polo, along with a full-length bright blue sweater and a head of hair that has no intention of being covered by a Masters hat.

Considering the modern tales of patrons (and Rickie Folwer) being requested to turn backward hats forward while on the grounds of Augusta National, it was a pretty big shock to see Gerry Pate’s caddy with his hat being worn in such an ungentlemanly manner during the final round.

Before going any further, I would like us all to take a moment to reflect on how far graphics during the Masters coverage has come in the last 30 years. In 2019 we had the ability to see every shot from every player on every hole…in 1991 we had this!

At first glance, early in the broadcast, these yellow hardhats threw me for a loop. I honestly thought that a spectator had chosen to wear one to take in the action. When Ian Woosnam smashed his driver left on 18 over the bunkers it became very apparent that anyone wearing a hard hat was not there for fun, they were part of the staff. If you look closely you can see hole numbers on the side of the helmets to easily identify what holes they were assigned to. Although they have less to do with fashion, I must admit I’m curious where these helmets are now, and what one might be worth as a piece of memorabilia.

Speaking of the 18th hole, full credit to the man in the yellow hat (golf clap to anyone that got the Curious George reference) who perfectly matched the Pantone of his hat to his shirt and also looked directly into the TV camera.

It could be said the following photo exemplifies early ’90s fashion. We have pleated Bermuda shorts, horizontal stripes all over the place and some pretty amazing hairstyles. Honorable mention to the young guys in the right of the frame that look like every ’80s movie antagonist “rich preppy boy.”

What else can I say except, khaki and oversized long sleeve polos certainly had their day in 1991? We have a bit of everything here as Tom Watson lines up his persimmon 3-wood on the 18th. The guy next to Ian Woosnam’s sleeves hit his mid-forearm, there are too many pleats to count, and somehow our Jack Hamm look-alike managed to find another tee box front row seat.

You can check out the full final-round broadcast of the 1991 Masters below.

 

Your Reaction?
  • 37
  • LEGIT2
  • WOW0
  • LOL3
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending