Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

“Who’s the most overrated golfer of all-time?”

Published

on

In this episode of “Yo, GolfWRX?!” equipment expert Brian Knudson and Editor Andrew Tursky cover a variety of topics including rolling back the golf ball, Tiger’s stinger vs. Stenson’s 3 wood, and the most overrated golfer of all-time.

Watch the video below, and enjoy!

Leave your questions for next week in the comments below, or Tweet it using the #YoGolfWRX hashtag.

We share your golf passion. You can follow GolfWRX on Twitter @GolfWRX, Facebook and Instagram.

22 Comments

22 Comments

  1. Golfy McGolface

    Nov 14, 2017 at 4:46 pm

    Everyone will just respond with who they don’t like.

  2. Tommy

    Nov 11, 2017 at 10:22 pm

    It’s a stupid question that begs for a stupid answer. Rated by whom? In whose mind? Johnny Miller!?…seriously? I know you weren’t around then, but, Johnny Miller? He came out of nowhere and won EVERYTHING for a few years…then family replaced golf as his main focus. Johnny Miller was Ricky Fowler on steroids and before someone says, “yeah, Fowler’s overrated too”, he’s not. Underrated, if anything. If they got paid for their stats, Ricky Fowler would have won it all last year….waaay better than Justin Thomas.

  3. stephenf

    Nov 11, 2017 at 10:14 pm

    Tiger Woods. Widely thought of as greatest ever, without being best in U.S. tour wins (Snead) or majors (Nicklaus), or even close in worldwide wins (Player and DeVicenzo). Awesomely talented, tireless worker, possibly the best combination of short shots around the green and consistently excellent putting over a long time of any player ever. Terrible representative of what the game is supposed to be about.

    • stephenf

      Nov 11, 2017 at 10:21 pm

      Also: Obviously an awesome ballstriker, but not smart about settling on a technique that would allow his body to keep making swings for decades; too important to hit 200-yard 6-irons and beat every player on every shot, distance-wise and otherwise. (Cf. the other piece on Bernhard Langer for contrast.) Absolutely, no question a man among boys in terms of competitive fire and mental toughness. Stood out in an era of skilled but mostly mentally soft competition. If we’re talking about ballstriking, short game, and scoring at the highest level on any given day, and adjusting for differences in equipment and the kind of play demanded in the game now, inarguably he’d be there with the best ever — Jones, Snead, Nelson, Hogan, Nicklaus, all of them. But if we’re talking about accumulated record and completeness as a representative of the game’s best qualities, no.

    • Mike

      Nov 11, 2017 at 10:41 pm

      This may be the worst comment ever. TIGER OVERRATED????? Remember that out of Snead’s wins 4 or 5 are team events so TIGER does have the most US individual PGA wins. I could rant forever at how dumb this comment is.

      • stephenf

        Nov 12, 2017 at 1:59 am

        Please do rant, Mike. When you do, be sure to cover who Woods had to beat that was the equal of Hogan and Nelson.

        But sure, go ahead and rant. What else ya got on majors or anything else? You wanna go on a little trip through Tiger’s “toughest competition ever” and see what people shot when they were tied with him or close to the lead in final rounds, what he had to shoot to beat them, what he had to shoot to win playoffs, etc.? We could go awhile. Start.

        • RG

          Nov 13, 2017 at 3:56 am

          Uhm…In golf we measure ourselve snot against others, but against courses and history. Tiger Woods won a US Open by 15 strokes. That is all.

    • stephenf

      Nov 12, 2017 at 1:55 am

      Also also: I’m not saying he’s the “most” overrated in the sense of “widest gap between reputation and actual skill/accomplishments.” I’m saying he’s the most constantly overrated by the most people, even if the difference between “best ever” and “one in a group of best-evers” isn’t all that big. It isn’t.

      It’s actually kind of hard to come up with “overrated” golfers, since golfers just are who they are, by record and by scores. I get why somebody would mention Daly, for instance, but I’m not sure anybody ever thought of him as an all-time great. He just is who he is.

      Before Dustin Johnson went and figured out his wedge game — which he really did, to his credit, because it was exactly where he was failing to take advantage of his length — I would’ve put him at the top of an overrated list. Not now.

      There are all kinds of guys who had stretches of Hall-of-Fame-level play and then faded, but it’s a little cruel to call them “overrated,” if they were never really “rated” in the first place by anybody who knew anything about the game. Same for guys who came out and looked really promising, got a lot of press, and then just didn’t get to top tier for any length of time, or at all. Hardly anybody remembers Keith Clearwater now, but he was going to be the next great player. Even Hogan touted his swing as being mechanically sound. It just didn’t work out.

      But as long as the question is who is or was the most overrated “golfer,” we’ve got Michael Jordan, who was widely talked about as having “tour-level talent,” but…come on.

  4. BeerandGolfandLuke

    Nov 11, 2017 at 1:17 pm

    Michelle Wie

  5. Ole Tom

    Nov 11, 2017 at 8:44 am

    John Daly

    • Ross

      Nov 11, 2017 at 12:25 pm

      Sorry Daly is 2 time Major champion, and if he had some sense of discipline he would of won a lot more imho. He is universally popular and a heck of a nice chap.

  6. TeeUp

    Nov 10, 2017 at 8:08 pm

    Tiger Twig

    • Ross

      Nov 11, 2017 at 12:28 pm

      That is an interesting name, I assume you mean Tiger Woods. Now given he is often tagged as the Greatest of all Time he could be considered overrated however as he has 14 Majors it would be impossible to call him overrated unless you had an agenda.

  7. Markallister

    Nov 10, 2017 at 6:48 pm

    fred couples

    • stephenf

      Nov 11, 2017 at 10:09 pm

      In what way is Couples overrated? In any discussion of who’s “overrated,” you have to arrive at an agreed idea of how he’s “rated” at all. Most people think of him as a beautiful swinger of the club who had some great streaks, was never a consistent putter, missed too many short putts, loves the life out there, capable of some low scores and very good tournaments. Won a major — probably the right one for him and his style — and contended in others. I’m not aware of anybody thinking of him being on the short list of all-time achievers in the game. So how is he overrated? I’m seriously asking.

  8. TGK

    Nov 10, 2017 at 5:39 pm

    colin montgomerie. Could not win in usa until he was a senior.

    • Ross

      Nov 11, 2017 at 12:26 pm

      Monty was not overrated he was however an underachiever, He dominated the European Tour for a Decade and is a Ryder Cup Legend.

      • TGK

        Nov 11, 2017 at 3:22 pm

        What is the difference of being an underachiever or being over rated? LOL.

        • Original_dan

          Nov 14, 2017 at 9:10 am

          Underachiever – Not living up to your full potential
          Over Rated – Full potential lower then how people perceive you.

          Almost Opposites

          • Ross

            Nov 18, 2017 at 4:43 am

            Cheers _dan, I wrote the exact response at the time but it’s still awaiting moderation?

  9. Rich Douglas

    Nov 10, 2017 at 5:25 pm

    Fred Couples. Love him, but seriously.

  10. Travis

    Nov 10, 2017 at 3:14 pm

    Brandel Chamblee

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.

Opinion & Analysis

The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

Published

on

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!

Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.

Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.

One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?

Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.

Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.

Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”

For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…

Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.

Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…

That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.

@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic

Continue Reading

Podcasts

Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Published

on

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Published

on

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by BBC SPORT (@bbcsport)

“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”

Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.

That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.

As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.

I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.

One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.

The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.

If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.

Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.

As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.

It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.

David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.

In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:

“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”

Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”

Eventually, though, something shifts.

We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.

Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.

Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.

Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.

So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.

I see someone evolving.

He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.

It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending