Opinion & Analysis
Our obsession with par is killing the game

Remember that time you played great and burst into the 19th hole and slammed that scorecard down, bragging to your friends: “I FINALLY broke 8-over par!” No? Me either. Because that’s not how we play golf; we care about total score.
Match play? My 5 beats your 6. The par on that hole is immaterial. The $2 Nassau bet? My front, back, and totals versus yours. Whether the course is a par-70 or par-71, still immaterial. None of what you or I do on a course is related to “par.” We live and die by total score. So why is golf so obsessed with par these days? The par obsession has got the Golf Brass all out of shape, because the long-ball means par is under fire (or the du-jour thing: “shot values” need to be saved).
Par, as is told, comes from the idea of measuring. That’s our giant homo sapien brain doing what it does best: cataloging, organizing, resource counting. The history of golf says it came from estimating/measuring how many strokes it would take to win a tournament, Old Tom winning at 2 “under par” at Prestwick. From here, it evolved into how many shots a “scratch” player would be expected to take on a certain hole, based on its distance. Measuring, counting; our brains liked that.
But that doesn’t mean we play differently, does it? We all just want to shoot LOW. Mark Broadie is doing wonderful things with the strokes-gained metrics he’s measuring. One item stands out from an earlier article of his: this idea that the easiest hole is usually a par 5 with the field averaging 4-point something. Excuse me, but any hole averaging close to 5 shots is ALWAYS harder than the hole that averages 2-point something. Period. You don’t get paid for pars, you only get paid for the lowest total score. Only when you shoehorn the word “par” into the conversation does stroke average equate to holes being seen differently (hard/easy).
We can blame Augusta National a bit here. The Masters switched its TV coverage to report scores to under/over par and the golf world has fallen in line. Was math too scary? I mean, we still track it, still report it as a total. But what gets the headline, often, is this over/under total. It’s created some problems. Now a membership feels shame if its track gets torched “under par” by the Tour (we better make it longer!). The USGA is all kinds of bent out shape about in its championships: Gotta protect par! (kill the ball!).
It would not be a bad thing to rewind the clock a bit. Go back to reporting total score the way most of us think, write and brag anyway. Don’t worry; you can still print your scorecards with “par” on it. We can still report which shot they’re playing at the moment. We can still show the leaderboard, keeping the player’s position on it intact. We might just have to do some math (try to breathe).
Then the USGA and Augusta can go back to breathing normally, too. Their target score could still be 284 or whatever. It would become immaterial how they get there. A “par-5” being changed to a “par-4”? No big deal, we’re still protecting our 284. Maybe, just maybe, you kill the “par-5” entirely for Tour play. They could create/manipulate the course to defend that total without the shame of reporting a whatever-under-par that sounds so scary to them. We could just crown the guy who shot 275 and move on. We can still get that info if we decide we care about it. “Wow! 20 under par. Who wants tacos?”
Meanwhile, stay tuned for my new instructional series: “Breaking 28/18/8-over par!”
Opinion & Analysis
The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

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
Podcasts
Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

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!
Opinion & Analysis
On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

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
“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.
nyguy
Jul 31, 2018 at 8:36 am
dumbest argument ever… It’s like saying, scoring runs in baseball is ruining the game, or the pitchers pitch too fast, it’s ruining the game..
PAR is the challenge in golf. If you don’t like par, then go to the driving range…jeesh
Gerald Teigrob
Aug 1, 2018 at 2:04 pm
Seriously? So you find that you are too religious about par that you can’t enjoy golf? Par is often the score I tend to throw my game over and to determine where my game is at. I can be playing bogey and double-bogey golf and that is immaterial. Oh I didn’t shoot par. But I drove the ball down the middle 250 yards or so. I had a number of bogeys and double-bogeys. I kind of like par being whatever I shoot! Par is only important in tournaments. But even then. who needs to be so focused on getting a damn par that they forget to enjoy the game! Enough pros have anger management issues over missing par. Let’s make it fun so we can grow the game instead of being so rigid and fixated on par! I am hoping to shoot in the 80s for 18 holes soon enough but life is too short to be so focused on rigidity in golf! Just ask the family of Jarrod Lyle how much more important enjoying life is while he prepares to have his final good byes!
Wiger Toods
Jul 31, 2018 at 6:11 am
“Your comment is awaiting moderation.”
I don’t want it moderated. I’d like to say it how I feel…
Wiger Toods
Jul 31, 2018 at 6:12 am
Apparently, you didn’t like the other thing I said…? Apparently being critical isn’t working?
Christopher Brooks
Jul 31, 2018 at 11:33 am
Apparently you think I’m the moderator; I am not.
Wiger Toods
Jul 31, 2018 at 3:39 pm
I had no such thought, but just like the article, you are way off base again.
commoner
Jul 31, 2018 at 6:23 pm
You need to understand if a ‘shadow’ feels your comments are objectionable he must bury them in the interest of saving mankind.
TP
Jul 31, 2018 at 2:28 am
I want to break Par, on every hole, is why I play this game. What’s wrong with a birdie on every hole. Nobody has done it, and I love the challenge. Otherwise there is no point in playing this game. You picked the wrong game. And doomed your kids as you taught them that not going for a goal is OK. I feel sorry for them.
commoner
Jul 30, 2018 at 1:30 pm
To call this blather is way too complimentary. The author’s primary concern should be an alias or pen name.
Joe
Jul 30, 2018 at 1:00 pm
I don’t get it…
Gerald Teigrob
Aug 1, 2018 at 2:14 pm
What don’t you get? Would you rather be a scoring machine with anger issues if you don’t shoot par or better, or would you rather accept your game as improving while not feeling the need or pressure to shoot par or better on every hole? We are trying to grow the game! How can we grow this great game if we continue to keep to standards that only the top players can achieve…and the rest of us can aspire to?
Ron
Jul 30, 2018 at 11:57 am
What a waste of 5 minutes reading this.
Thomas A
Jul 30, 2018 at 11:04 am
The only thing I agree with is that we need to play more match play. I think at least here in the USA we are obsessed with handicap, and people won’t play matches because they can’t record their stroke play (or feel that they can’t). And if you didn’t record your GHIN, then did you really play golf? PGA Tour should have at least 4 match play tournaments, not counting the WGC.
chris
Jul 30, 2018 at 9:07 am
Short answer. No it isn’t killing it. If you are a true golfer its hard to believe you really feel like this. It sounds more like you are looking for an attention grabbing headline to get your clicks up.
Tim J
Jul 30, 2018 at 8:49 am
Nothing is killing the game. The game is fine. Par, total score, who cares.
This is like discussing what material hockey nets should be made out of. It really doesn’t matter man.
BDeC
Jul 30, 2018 at 1:51 am
I see no real golfers comment here. You must all suck
TONEY P
Jul 30, 2018 at 3:30 pm
Are you a real golfer.
Dave Pustizzi
Jul 29, 2018 at 10:41 pm
Par is the game the miscommunication comes when you forget that is you against the course and not you against the leader board
Brandon
Jul 29, 2018 at 6:26 pm
A man does not ask his wife if he can play golf, a man tells his wife he is playing golf. If she has a problem with it, she isn’t a keeper anyway.
Graeme
Jul 29, 2018 at 6:26 pm
Jimenez wins the Senior open and still nothing. Even golf.com were before you guys! What’s up?
Lovejoy
Jul 29, 2018 at 6:16 pm
Another meaningless piece of fluff.
Hawkeye77
Jul 29, 2018 at 6:05 pm
It’s like the author just discovered this yesterday? Killing the game? LOL, that’s silly and I missed the examples and evidence of that. Golfers have always been aware of par, some fuss over it, some don’t. Not sure what I just read, but it was pretty superficial.
iutodd
Jul 29, 2018 at 11:13 am
Watching golf and playing golf are two different things. I’m obsessed with par because my goal last summer was to break 80. So making par on as many holes as possible is pretty darn important. I shot 79 finally and it felt great. Individuals set their own goals and think about them however they need to think about them.
But I can still watch the Canadian Open and enjoy it whether they report that the lead is 199 or -17.
And how would we track the leaderboard in the middle of the round exactly? Golf is a TV sport and a second screen sport – if a golfer is at 42 strokes through 11 holes…where is he at on the leaderboard compared to a golfer who is at 13 strokes through 4 holes? And having golfers start on 1 and 10….I can do math but…like…would we just list names with no score next to them? At the completion of the round things get easy – but certainly DURING the round it’s a lot easier to track things by using + or – numbers. I just don’t know how that would work exactly – how would the announcers compare players throughout the coverage?
Christian
Jul 30, 2018 at 12:33 pm
average strokes per hole?
Scott
Jul 30, 2018 at 1:32 pm
Average stokes per hole? LOL . That would be like watching a stock ticker.
Travis
Jul 29, 2018 at 10:57 am
Interesting article, but our game is based on a score and over/under par is part of that. You can ignore it or downplay the significance but it’s still the core of the game…