Opinion & Analysis

Looks or numbers: What makes a better golf swing?

Published

13 years ago

Oct 7, 2013

I have seen many things come and go during my 20 years on the lesson tee. But the two things that have stuck around and will continue to be a necessity for golf instructors are digital video analysis (the best is V1 by Interactive Frontiers), as well as club and golf radar systems such as Flightscope and Trackman. Those technologies have revolutionized the golf teaching industry and allowed golfers to improve faster and easier than ever before.

If you don’t think video and golf radar tools have made golf instruction easier, try to shorten a golfer’s swing without using video to show him or her the length of the old swing versus the new one. Or try and help someone to understand the ratio between swing direction, face angle and angle of attack without power of golf radar.

But all of the focus on modern teaching tools reminds me of a day on the lesson tee with a tour player I taught almost 15 years ago in Destin, Fla., named Don Reese, who said one of the most powerful things I have ever heard. Don and I were working on his backswing. I was trying to get his club and arms into a “more classic” position at the top, because it was my view that if there was less motion to the top, he would have an easier time with his transition and improve his consistency.

At the time, Reese was in his late 40s and had played professional golf for most of his adult life, so obviously he could play and didn’t need too much with his swing. But I wanted him to move into a much tighter position than he was used to at the top. As we discussed the new position and checked the video comparisons, Reese said that while he knew the new position looked better on camera, he “couldn’t play from there.” Since the player he has the final say, we moved in a different direction.

At that point in my instructional career, I incorrectly believed that if it looked “better” on camera that it MUST translate into better swings and better scores. This brings me to the current debate on golf radar and its merits or lack thereof when it comes to helping people play better, especially tour professionals. My question is this: Do better “looks” or better numbers always mean “better” swings?

Who knows if Nicklaus would have been better if he tightened his right elbow at the top, or if Tiger would have broken Jack’s record at this point in his career if his head was steadier. Would Phil have hit the ball more consistently off the tee if he shortened his backswing? Or would all these players have played WORSE if you they tried to correct these “flaws?”

I firmly believe that everyone has something in their swing that they always “fight.” Some golfers cannot get their grip right, while others can’t seem to get the takeaway on track. As always, there are many things that teachers and players can tighten up without too much work. But when I do so I am very cognizant that I keep the player’s individuality within their golf swing.

I do not believe in model swings, or forcing everyone into better “looks” or better “numbers” at all costs because my job is to take everything into account in order to make the best decision for the player in front of me. It is my job to maintain playability while improving the player’s overall motion based on his goals, not mine.

All too often, inexperienced teachers formulate their ideas of how the student should swing instantly after checking the video or launch monitor. These teachers are only making sure the “looks” are there without regard to what the player feels or what the ball actually does in the air.

So in order to more effectively use the modern tools of video and golf radar, I suggest interviewing the player, figuring out his goals, gathering the video and data during the course of a few shots using different clubs and then discussing with the player what you suggest as the best course of action. I firmly believe the better the player, the more give and take there should be between the teacher and the student. It’s my thought that I am only on the lesson tee to facilitate the gap between what the player feels and what fundamental changes will move them in the best direction.

A final thought: Sure, in most cases as the look and numbers get in a more positive direction the player should improve to some degree. However, sometimes it’s OK to have a flying right elbow, a funky grip or slight head motion on video. You can win golf tournaments with a faulty angle of attack, a path that is too across the line or launch angles that are not quite optimal. It ALL must work into what the player and you decide TOGETHER!

Remember, golf instruction is not all about pleasing the machine or making everyone look the same. It’s about what works best for that particular player in the end.

Read More Tom Stickney II : What Flightscope and Trackman can tell you (and me)

Opinion & Analysis

5 Things We Learned: Thursday at the PGA Championship

Published

2 weeks ago

May 15, 2026

Ronald Montesano

Aronimink is not a storied club, but when Donald Ross himself proclaimed it to be as good as he can design and build, one had to take notice. Jay Sigel was the pre-eminent male amateur golfer from the mid-1970s to the mid-1990s. He might have called any number of Philadelphia clubs home, but he chose Aronimink. It served him well. Gary Player won a PGA Championship here in 1962, and was followed by the 1993 winner … nobody. Aronimink gave that event away to Inverness, for reasons of which it is certainly not proud. So be it. We had to wait sixty-four years for the PGA to return to Newtown Square, but here we are. Aronimink has been neo-restored by Gil Hanse and team, to return Ross features with an eye toward defense against the dark arts, errrr, high-tech equipment.

Day one saw Rory McIlroy and Bryson DeChambeau dig big holes, to the tune of plus-four and plus-six, respectively. Since the first-round lead will be minus-three at worst, many shots will need to be made up for the power couple to reach contention. By nightfall, seven golfers held the day-one lead at three-under par 67. Shots and sticks caught our attention, and we are proud to present Five Things We Learned on Tech Thursday at the 2026 PGA Championship. Thanks to InsideTourGolfer, Today’s Golfer, and GolfWRX for initial equipment research.

First, meet Min Woo Lee

Min Woo Lee, aka Dr. Chipinski, has once again thrust himself into the conversation of Can he, will he, when will he? Lee has so much talent, wins not nearly as often as we believe that he should, and has no major near-misses (much less titles) on his wiki. The young Aussie is getting older and wiser, but is he able to avoid the scarring that holds the older and wiser back from breaking through? Philadelphia offers another opportunity. Min Woo signed for five birdies and two bogeys on day one, and grabbed a share of the opening-day lead at Aronimink. Winners transcend history and the moment, and Lee will need that sort of ascent to lift the Wannamaker on Sunday.

Second, meet Aldrich Potgeiter

The young South African golfer can rip driver with the best of them. Aronimink tips out at nearly 7400 yards, but beyond the fairway bunkers that ensnare only the mortals, Potgeiter can take his chances with wedge from the rough. On Thursday, he spent plenty of time in the spinach. Like Popeye, he used his muscles to gouge and thrash and dig his way out. Six birdies against three bogeys on the card brought AP in a three deep.

Third, meet Martin Kaymer

Not a major event takes place without a where’s he been throwback moment. We know that Martin Kaymer left the PGA and DP World tours for LIV golf, but the two-time (US Open and PGA) major winner has a lifetime exemption into at least one major event, and he seizes the opportunity each May. Kaymer joined the six-seven brigade with four birdies and a solitary bogey on day one. Kaymer was never a long hitter, and the years are kind to no golfer. The German champion will need to uncork every bottle of guile and strategy in his cabinet to remain in contention. For today, though, he occupies a rung on the ladder of Tour Tech.

Fourth, meet Scottie Scheffler

Let’s see, he’s the defending champion at the PGA, and he found his way back to the top tier with five birdies against two bogeys. To be a favorite and then play up to that stature and expectation is quite difficult. Just ask Rory, Bryson, and some of the other pre-tournament heartthrobs. Scheffler’s game is complete, and to knock him off the OWGR #1 pedestal, one needs to defeat him at the majors. Aronimink is the sort of course that fits Scheffler’s game. Better yet, it unfits the game of many of his challengers. Don’t expect Scheffler to go away anytime soon. Come Sunday, he’ll be around.

Fifth, meet Stephan Jaeger

Clocking in for the unheralded players shift are Ryo Hisatsune and Stephan Jaeger. Hisatsune logged seven birdies on day one, but gave most of them back with four bogeys. Still, he’s tied at the top for a time. Jaeger pitched five birdies against two bogeys, including a run of three consecutive, from holes four through six. Odds are that one of the two will hang around through 36 holes. Odds also suggest that both will be gone by Saturday evening. Still, the PGA Championship has historically been the major most likely to be won by an under-known. Both Hisatsune and Jaeger feature on that list, so good luck, lads!

Club Junkie

Club Junkie’s Titleist GTS driver fitting results!

Published

2 weeks ago

May 14, 2026

Brian Knudson

On this episode of the Club Junkie Podcast, I head to the Titleist Performance Institute for a full driver fitting with the new Titleist GTS lineup. We dive into the fitting process, talk about what made the biggest difference in performance, and break down how the different GTS heads and shaft combinations compare on the launch monitor. If you are thinking about a new driver setup for this season, there is a lot to take away from this one.

I also get into Brooks Koepka and the gear setup he brought to the PGA Championship, including the putters that caught my eye during the week. There are some interesting equipment trends showing up at the highest level right now and we break down what stands out.

To wrap things up, I talk about reshafting a few wedges, what I learned during the process, and swapping an adaptor onto a new shaft for another build project in the shop. A gear packed episode from start to finish for anyone who loves golf equipment and club building.

Follow Club Junkie everywhere:
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/clubjunkiepod/
X: https://x.com/ClubJunkiePod
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@clubjunkiepod
Threads: https://www.threads.com/@clubjunkiepod

Club Junkie

Club Junkie WITB, week 16: New Titleist GTS woods!

Published

2 weeks ago

May 14, 2026

Brian Knudson

Excited for this week’s WITB as we get to add the new Titleist GTS woods to the bag! I was fit at Titleist’s TPI facility in Oceanside California a few weeks ago and my new clubs just showed up. I am also adding a cool set of irons that I built last year some wild custom wedges into a new golf bag. Speaking of the bag I have a new Ghost Anyday Black Ops stand bag that I will be using on my Motocaddy Remote M7 electric cart.

Driver: Titleist GTS3 (11 degrees @ 10.25)
Shaft: Fujikura Ventus Red 6s

3-wood: Titleist GT1 3Tour (14.5 degrees)
Shaft: Graphite Design Tour AD CQ-7s

5-wood: Titleist GTS (18 degrees)
Shaft: Fujikura Ventus Red 7s

9-wood: Titleist GT1 (24 degress)
Shaft: Fujikura Ventus Red 7s

Irons: Bettinardi CB24 (5-PW)
Shafts: KBS C-Taper Lite 110 stiff

Wedge: TaylorMade MG5 (50-09 SB)
Shaft: Mitsubishi MMT 125 Stiff

Wedge: TaylorMade MG5 (56-12 SB)
Shaft: Mitsubishi MMT 125 Stiff

Wedge: TaylorMade MG5 (60-08 LB)
Shaft: Mitsubishi MMT 125 Stiff

Putter: Dan Carraher ZT Proto

Ball: Callaway Chrome Tour

Bag: Ghost Anyday Black Ops Stand Bag