Opinion & Analysis
The Wedge Guy: Lessons from The Players Championship

If you read this column regularly, you probably would think I don’t care much for the PGA Tour, but that’s not exactly true. I just don’t think the majority of us recreational golfers can learn all that much from watching these young and supple, big and strong athletes show off their strength and skills.
While there is no question that equipment has changed the game and added yards for all of us, take a look at these guys’ physiques. Even the older guys like Lee Westwood and relatively small players like Justin Thomas are spending countless hours in the gym to optimize their strength. The equipment allows them to go at the ball much more aggressively than was possible back in the days of persimmon woods and tiny forged blade irons and balls that took on an amazing amount of side-spin if not hit just right.
With the majority of U.S. golfers being on the far side of 45-50 years old, and most of us not working out every day specifically to optimize our bodies for our golf swing, we don’t have a chance of matching these guys’ distance. Last fall, I posted a column asking if were playing a harder course than the pros, which received some challenging pushback. But the point of the column was about the relative length and difficulty of the courses you play as compared to those the PGA Tour players play every week. Yes, our skills and strength profiles are vastly different from these guys so let me ask a different way.
Think about the last round you played and ask yourself these questions:
- Could you reach the green on all the par-fives with your second shot if you hit a pretty good drive . . . maybe even with a middle iron?
- Did you have at least one par four where you had a chance of driving the green, maybe even with a fairway wood?
- On the other 13 holes, did you have a wedge or short iron second shot at least 9 or 10 times?
If the answer isn’t “YES” to all those questions, you played a longer (for you) golf course than what the best players in the world played (for them) at the TPC this past weekend. And this wasn’t a “pushover” golf course by any means.
I’ve long opined that tee markers on most golf courses are not anywhere near where they should be for the vast majority of players, so the game is playing much, much longer (and therefore, harder) for most of us than the PGA Tour courses play for them. I also take issue with the inadequate guidance as to the tees you should play–this is not about gender or age, but rather your ability. Why should a 69-year-old single-digit handicap who still hits a tee ball 240-260 be given a shorter course than the 45-year-old 18 handicap who drives it 210?
Regardless of your age and handicap, and assuming reasonably solid tee shots, I believe the game is supposed to be played…
- At a length where you can reach every par four with your approach shot, and
- At a length where at least half of your par-four and par-three approach shots can be played with a short iron or wedge, and
- At a length where no more than 3-4 of your par-four and par-three approach shots require more than a 5-iron, and
- At a length where you cannot at least have a chance of reaching one or two of the par fives with a long iron or fairway wood shot.
- With only a few exceptions these four conditions define every course the PGA Tour players face each week.
If you want to see how well you should be scoring, the next time you tee it up, choose a tee on each hole that will let you play the game at the same relative shotmaking challenge the pros face every week. If there isn’t one, just pick a spot up the fairway that will. My bet is that you will find the game to be a lot more fun and that your scoring will go down measurably.
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.
Frank
Mar 18, 2021 at 9:32 pm
The shortest shot if you drove it 305 yards on all the par 4’s and 5’s at Augusta, which is the average distance of PGA Tour winners’ drives on par 5’s that led to birdies/eagles for the past 30 events, is 45 yards on #3. Then the next longest shot is actually #12 at Augusta at over 155 yards if you hit every par 5 green in 2. Only one shot under 155 yards at Augusta. Yeah, I’ll stick to practicing the long game over short game.
Ms. Maddie
Mar 18, 2021 at 6:35 pm
As a lady golfer in her 70’s, you’d think I’d always play from the 5000 yd tees. And sometimes you’d be right. But I also enjoy playing from the 6000 yd tees and the 6500’s, too, often all in the same round. Because despite my age and gender, I’m still a fit athlete and a single digit handicapper with an intimate understanding of the architecture and physical layout of the courses I frequently play. I’ve been doing exactly as Mr. Koehler suggest for years, taking each hole individually and playing it from the tees that offer me the most intriguing strategic challenge and the most fun. I wouldn’t have it any other way.
snowman9000
Mar 18, 2021 at 9:37 am
My whole life, I have never found par 5’s to be reachable with two good shots.
And, par 3’s are tending to be too long for the particular tee boxes too. I suspect the par 3’s and 5’s are where the course find extra yardage to get to the final number they want to see. If they made all the par 4’s longer, people would notice. Maybe ask a couple of architects and see what they say.
Danie Mare
Mar 18, 2021 at 2:43 am
It is even worse for women. The tee options for my wife is that, apart from 1 or 2 par 3s, she uses fairway wood ON EVERY approach on our home course. Ans she does not have the option of moving forward. She plays of a 15, so she is a reasonable golfer. But I consistently wonder if I will enjoy the game if I had to use 3 wood so much.
Radim
Mar 18, 2021 at 2:11 am
The article is missing any explanation how it works today. Here in Europe you get the teebox based on your handicap index. Is it the same in America?
iutodd
Mar 18, 2021 at 11:19 am
How it works today is that golfers can tee up wherever they want.
Ex-American
Mar 24, 2021 at 4:31 am
Radim, that’s how it *SHOULD* work.
Americans all think they’re on tour. They play stroke, not stableford, from as far back as they can, and everyone complains about 5 hour rounds.
The mentality is questionable at best.
Mike
Mar 17, 2021 at 2:21 pm
Thank you, This is so true.
DFM
Mar 17, 2021 at 12:50 pm
I completely get the intent of the article, and agree that people should play the game from a tee that suits their game, and allows them to feel comfortable. However, the game is the game. Since I am older and slower than I once was, should I play basketball on a 7 ft. goal where I can dunk like the pros? No, of course not. It might make me feel more like one of the pros to do so, but that isn’t the way the game is played. Rather than concentrating on how we do or don’t compare with pro athletes, people should simply play the course in front of them from whatever tee they feel is most appropriate. If it is harder for you than a pro athlete, so be it. Teeing it up from the middle of the fairway so that you can say you shot even par is silly.
iutodd
Mar 17, 2021 at 11:20 am
I completely agree with your breakdown on this. Long par fours/par 3s are certainly part of the game – and the challenge of hitting hybrid/4/5/6 iron into the green is a challenge that should be a part of every round. But only a PART. I’ve played with guys that were hitting those clubs into EVERY par four and most par threes and I have no idea why they do that to themselves. Assuming a combined 14 par 3/par 4…I think 3-4 of those requiring a 5 iron or higher to get to the green is about right. That’s 21-28% of your iron shots on those holes. Which seems like plenty.