Opinion & Analysis
3 reasons why you shouldn’t model your golf swing after a Tour player’s swing
Are you attempting to model your swing after a tour player? In my experience, that is not a good idea. There are at least three reasons why.
1. You don’t have the talent
Please do not be offended, but let’s be honest. I accepted this fact myself years ago. We as everyday golfers have very little in common with touring professionals, aside from that we both put our pants on one leg at a time. Tour players are vastly different than we are for several reasons. They have, for the most part, played golf their entire life. The game has become as natural as breathing to them. They are also talented athletes who possess physical qualities that most of us do not possess. Those qualities include physical strength, flexibility, balance, coordination, stamina, dexterity, and rhythm all working in perfect balance. They are mentally, neurologically, and emotionally wired for competition. In the event that you are a scratch player, even then, you are still lightyears away from the Tour Pro level of talent. Be realistic with who you are as a golfer before you try to precisely emulate a golfer of supreme gifts and talents.
2. You don’t play by position
The golf swing is an entire motion in which you pass through a series of positions seamlessly from beginning to end. In the event that a position is incorrect, the proper way to modify it is to change the motion rather than attempting to achieve a position. In the past, the positions through which a golfer passed as they swung the club were not visible to the naked eye. That changed with the advent of the slow-motion video-camera, which gave teachers a tool they could use to help their students bridge the gap between feel and real.
At the very same time, the video-camera also bred the culture of monkey-see monkey-do, where players were encouraged to adopt isolated positions in the golf swing. The camera has since become a “crutch” for less progressive teachers whose approach became comparing a student’s swing to a Tour Professional.
After seeing their swing, a student might ask, “What am I doing wrong?” The teacher might show the student a stop-action picture of Jordan Spieth or any other professional model and then point out the difference between their two positions. “You should look like Jordan right here,” the teacher might say as he points at the screen. And then he sends the student off to work on duplicating that same position.
What does your common sense tell you? Can you think of any other sport where you would focus on achieving a specific position within a given motion? Baseball? Tennis? Hockey? Of course not, and so why would golf be any different? I’m sorry, but that isn’t teaching. The monkey-see-monkey-do approach produces students who are obsessed with achieving a position that they believe is going to lead them to the “promised land. “What they don’t know, until they arrive there, is that that road leads to nothing more than a dead end. Instead, focus on the actual motion of the golf swing and how you can improve impact with the golf ball; this is what actually matters and can help you improve.
3. No two golf swings are alike
The biomechanics of each and every golfer are different. Based on this principle, the attempt to copy another player’s swing makes no sense once it is understood that there are simply too many variables. They include:
- Height
- Build
- Arm Length
- Hand Size
- Torso Length
- Leg Length
- Physical Strength
- Flexibility
- Nervous System
- Athleticism
- Mental Acuity
These are just a few of the many variables that make each player’s swing unique. And while there may be two swings that look alike, for example, Tiger Woods and Adam Scott at one point in time, they are in their own ways very different.
In Summary
- There is nothing wrong with using a professional swing model for purposes of general comparison, provided you do not attempt to duplicate a specific position.
- The best approach when working toward eliminating a fault in your swing is not to focus on a specific position in the model’s swing, but rather to mimic the total swing motion in the area of concern.
- In the end, the best approach is not to try and copy another player’s swing.
Your “natural swing” must fit within the perimeters of your own biomechanics. As Popeye, the Sailor Man once said, “I yam what I yam.” Popeye had it right. You are what you are, and that is all you can be. Your goal then should be to create a better you, not a new you!
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
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!
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.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
Pingback: 3 reasons why you shouldn’t model your golf swing after a Tour player’s swing - ClickitGolf
lance
Sep 7, 2018 at 1:50 pm
I went for lessons from a Top 100 Golf Instructor who also helped a top tour pro with his golf swing. I got parts of that top pro’s swing into my swing and I am so happy with my semi-pro golf swing.
shawn
Sep 8, 2018 at 1:50 pm
So tell us… are you half-lance and half-tiger ….????
NTL2
Sep 6, 2018 at 5:39 pm
Golf is all about hand eye coordination. Athleticism can help no doubt but if you have mediocre hand eye coordination you will not have a great swing.
shawn
Sep 6, 2018 at 6:03 pm
Only eyes and hands? You forgot feet, legs, hips, torso and arms… where all the problems occur… 😮
Bob Jones
Sep 6, 2018 at 11:40 am
Good advice.
shawn
Sep 6, 2018 at 6:04 pm
…. and everybody reading the article will bookmark it under “Advice”… 😛
John
Sep 6, 2018 at 8:58 am
Hahaha…. hilarious
Tour pros have physical strength, flexibility, stamina….
Last I saw…tour pros were just golfers…not elite CrossFit people.
Bob Denby
Sep 6, 2018 at 10:46 am
The DYNAMICS of the ‘energy transfer’ (between the club and the ball) at impact are all that matter, however achieved. There are too many glaring differences between the pros to justify anything more than attempting to copy any of them in any but the most general way (how often is Craig Stadler used as a model?). How we get to ‘impact’ is all that counts.
stevet
Sep 6, 2018 at 3:41 pm
How we get to ‘impact’ is the Kinetic Chain dynamics that occurs between the ground and feet all the way to the wrists and hands. Impact is a minor 50/10,000th consequence of the golf swing.
greg
Sep 6, 2018 at 1:20 pm
Fully clothed tour pros don’t fully reveal their physical attributes … except for Phil…
RQ
Sep 6, 2018 at 6:17 pm
Yes… Phil’s tour body has matured perfectly over the years ….
Daniel
Sep 6, 2018 at 7:28 pm
So you dont think tour players have increased strength flexibility and stamina.. especially compared to the average amateur golfer.. ill bet greg norman still blows all of us out of the water in those aspects, and he doesnt even play anymore… stupid comment
Coop
Sep 6, 2018 at 8:08 am
Great article Rod. General stuff is ok, but getting into specific positions within the motion and you’re on shaky ground. One thing leads to another, leads to another.. and so much of what we see is simple cause and effect. You can’t shoehorn tour player moves (e.g. shallowing the shaft, using the ground, holding lag…) into a < 1.5 second motions. So much of what we see in pros' swings is pure natural athletic sense and actions and reactions – the "correct" positions then show up.
shawn
Sep 6, 2018 at 6:08 pm
… and then there is the tried and true approach of trial and error and error and error method …. 😀
Jack
Sep 6, 2018 at 4:09 am
LOL true and not true, but mostly true. Most people would give up golf before they could get their swing to look like a pro’s, much less be a poor man’s version of one. I’ve gone down that road, and although my swing still looks nothing like a pro’s, it’s better in some ways but still so far from it and my game suffered hugely for a long while. It’s probably useless for weekend warriors to expect to achieve that kind of change and still enjoy golf. To be a handicapped golfer you can have imperfect swings. If we had great swings we’d be pro’s, and well like the author said we will never be.
Cod
Sep 6, 2018 at 3:18 am
What a load of codswallop
shawn
Sep 6, 2018 at 6:09 pm
… nonsense… !!!!!
Daniel Forbes
Sep 6, 2018 at 7:29 pm
Why???
XOXO
Sep 6, 2018 at 3:02 am
Didn’t almost all of the current PGA tour players live in an age in which they had cameras and teaching pros who used cameras/videos to teach and shape theirs swings?
I was an ex-minor league baseball player, and through my playing career (HS, college, pro) cameras, videos and photos were used to illustrate proper positions when you are doing things right in the swing.
I think emulating someone’s swing is wrong because of the parameters listed, but learning from it to achieve a better swing is certainly not
greg
Sep 6, 2018 at 1:29 pm
“proper positions” = snapshot stills = statue positions
All athletics is dynamic, not static. The mind only feels motion.
XOXO
Sep 6, 2018 at 10:44 pm
“statue positions” to know where you are during the swing, and to “feel” that position in an effort to achieve a better dynamic swing. Like baseball. Or a basketball player looking at still shots of their shooting elbow.
Sometimes trying or even forcing these positions and sometimes exaggerating them through practice leads to better dynamic motion and performance.
I dont think the guy who comes over the top will ever hit a golf ball any better performance-wise doing what he does dynamically. So how does he learn? Watch a split second movement in motion from a teacher or live tv? I don’t think he will even capture what is being done accomplished
reggie
Sep 6, 2018 at 1:48 am
I model my golf swing after the Tour player’s swing… but I start with the clubs, shafts, balls, shoes, clothes… and that’s about as far as I get… 🙁
greg
Sep 6, 2018 at 1:15 pm
LOL
Caroline
Sep 6, 2018 at 12:12 am
Hitting the ball clean going toward where you want it to go and distance you want it to go is the right swing for you…finding a way to hit the ball the same every swing is the answer…Moe Norman knew that his right hand came back to the same position 99.9% of the time in effect tossing the ball toward his target every time…
greg
Sep 6, 2018 at 1:23 pm
Moe Norman altered his swing for his portly old age body. He had to add his right hand into the downswing because he couldn’t hit the ball over 200 yards. It didn’t work.
jack
Sep 6, 2018 at 6:19 pm
How can you say that about Moe “Pipeline” Norman… the Greatest Ball Striker of All Time … according to him.
JM
Sep 5, 2018 at 10:24 pm
Physical qualities are not talent. This article is ridiculous in certain parts. What’s wrong with emulating parts of their swings if its achievable. Being realistic doesn’t mean you have to accept less than your best or can’t set reach/stretch goals. How about a more positive attitude towards improvement instead of this condescending article. Plenty of good things to copy in tour pros swings for the average golfer, tempo, clubhead path, sequence of motion, etc. Who do propose they attempt to emulate as an alternative?
SImmm
Sep 6, 2018 at 12:05 am
There are a million golf instructors out there that love your reply…..
freowho
Sep 6, 2018 at 3:32 am
Physical qualities are talent! Do you think a 2 foot midget with incredible skill could hit the ball as far as Dustin Johnson?
PineStreetGolf
Sep 6, 2018 at 8:38 am
Yes, that midgets nam is Justin Thomas
Julie
Sep 5, 2018 at 7:13 pm
Btsgolf.com for information
chris
Sep 5, 2018 at 6:56 pm
Test for adults who want to take up golf. Stand naked in front of a full length mirror and ask yourself the question: “Is that an athletic golf body, or what?”
J
Sep 5, 2018 at 7:43 pm
Exactly my point. If a fat or old person who doesn’t exercise tried to copy a NBA or NFL “juke” move, he would break his own ankles.
“natural swing” = practice short game and putting if you cant see your belt at address.
greg
Sep 6, 2018 at 1:26 pm
Fat and old adults who attempt golf live in a fantasy world where the entry fee is a set of golf clubs and green fees… they litter the golf courses flailing!
orville
Sep 5, 2018 at 6:54 pm
The guy at the golf store sold me a set of clubs that he said were powerful and straight and that’s why I bought them. They are no good and I want to get my money back. Golf is tough.
Ab
Sep 6, 2018 at 12:15 am
Oh shuddup you Nancy
RQ
Sep 6, 2018 at 5:59 pm
Ab = Nancy2… sooo obvious
J
Sep 5, 2018 at 6:42 pm
If you have a fat belly where you can’t see your belt buckle or over 45 years old and do not exercise, this article applies.
K
Sep 6, 2018 at 6:15 pm
check.. check… and check…. now where do I get my Tour player’s swing?? 😎
Carson Henry
Sep 5, 2018 at 4:59 pm
Fantastic article
Scott
Sep 5, 2018 at 4:21 pm
Yes, yes, and yes.
BJ
Sep 5, 2018 at 4:19 pm
I would also add that, especially for iron and wedge play, effective launch conditions are related to ball speed. And for that reason, attempting to achieve “tour pro” like impact if you don’t have tour pro speed is fraught with danger.
Mike the OK Golfer
Sep 6, 2018 at 2:46 pm
Yes, but what of Calvin Peete or Paul Goydos? Not a lot of “tour pro speed” there. And yet, obviously tremendous impact, Peete was world #1 for a time, I believe.
Bryson DeShamwow
Sep 5, 2018 at 3:44 pm
Nothing you write will tell me that my perfect replica of Furyk’s swing with custom single length Miura’s isn’t what is best for me. Who cares if I take 6 hours a round and shoot 130’s, you’re a joke Rod.