Opinion & Analysis
Ways to Win: Ham and egg – Teamwork seals the deal for Smith and Leishman

The Zurich Classic of New Orleans is a unique event on the PGA Tour as it is the only team event on the schedule where two tour players pair up for the week. The format is quite different from a typical week of stroke play on the PGA Tour. The first and third rounds are played as a Fourball, where the lowest score of the two players is counted as the team score. The second and fourth rounds are played as alternate shot, where players alternate taking shots while playing a single ball into the hole. This also allows for a unique view into how each format impacts Strokes Gained and the quality of golf. The Fourball rounds allow players to swing more freely and take on more risk as they have two chances at a low round, while alternate shot can be absolutely brutal as nerves can kick in when there is potential to leave your partner high and dry.
The format and the weather was perfect for a couple of Aussies to battle a couple of South Africans and play some spectacular golf. In the end, it took 73 holes to determine a champion as the groups traded blows into a playoff late on Sunday. Cameron Smith and Marc Leishman were able to secure the final par and take down Louis Oosthuizen and Charl Schwartzel.
Using the Strokes Gained Stacked chart from V1 Game, the impact of the format is immediately apparent as the Total Strokes Gained seesaws between a high of gaining 8.9 strokes on the field to losing 0.3 strokes. That is a delta of over 9 strokes between a Fourball (Best Ball) round and Alternate shot. While, intuitively, it makes sense that playing two balls (Fourball) would be easier than having a single crack at it (Alt Shot), there are additional mental hurdles typically in Alt Shot. Therefore, it is interesting to see which parts of the game are most impacted by the format. What jumps off the page at a glance for the Fourball rounds is putting (+6.1) in round 1 and Short Game (+5.3) in round 3. The putting makes sense. If you know your partner has par in the bag, it makes that birdie put much more aggressive, however that mindset also downplays just how good Cam Smith was playing. Leishman said as much after the tournament that he believed Smith would have won the event easily had it been an individual stroke play event.
As a team, they made 168 feet of putts in Round 1. The PGA Tour average for a round is closer to 70 feet. The short game from round 3 is somewhat surprising as to have significant strokes gained in the short game category, you typically have to miss greens. Smith and Leishman gained 2.5 strokes on two holeouts from off the green on 3 and 16. Two different ways to shoot 63, both relying pretty heavily on the play of rising star Smith.
Shifting attention to rounds 2 and 4, which were alternate shot, all strokes gained categories suffered. Specifically, putting and approach were impacted. If you’ve ever played a round of alternate shot, this is relatable. One challenge with the format is that it is much harder to adjust to the greens. Since you are hitting half as many putts and, oftentimes, you are left cleaning up a mess from your playing partner, it is that much harder to get a feel for putting. Add the pressure of not wanting to leave your partner in a tough position and it typically leads to more tentative putting. Still, the team gained strokes putting overall despite only making 63 feet of putts in the final round. I would expect short game performance to increase in Alternate Shot rounds. Mainly because there are typically more opportunities as more greens are missed. Cameron Smith and Leishman ‘ham and egged’ this format perfectly. Picking each other up with great putts and chips at the right times to keep momentum, including a clutch chip-in from Leishman on 16 in the final round.
The team played particularly well in all categories, but they gained the most strokes with the putter. For the week, they gained more than 8.5 strokes over a typical PGA Tour field with the flat stick. How did they do it? Reviewing the Putting by Distance chart from V1 Game, they didn’t have a single three putt. Additionally, they gained strokes on the field from every distance except from 21-30 feet. They made 50 percent of their putts from 11-15 feet. The 50 percent mark is typically closer to 8 feet on the PGA Tour, meaning the duo was significantly outperforming the field with the flatstick.
Lastly, if you want to win in any week on the PGA Tour, you have to minimize mistakes and play to your potential. Referencing the V1 Game Virtual Coach, Leishman and Smith did exactly that. For starters, using the new V1 Game Handicap, the duo played to a +9.0. Incredible! They averaged only 1.1 mistakes per round consisting of a combination of penalties and two chips. A two-chip is when you miss the green from inside 75 yards. Across all four rounds, the team averaged a 67. Had they avoided all mistakes, they could have averaged 65.9 and potentially avoided the playoff. Despite making the rare mistake, they covered them up well with stellar play. The perfect example is the 16th hole on Sunday where an aggressive drive from Smith narrowly missed the green and found the water. Rather than harping on his partner for the mistake that was likely to cost the lead with just a few holes left, Leishman approached the chip with a great attitude telling his playing partner that he was going to hole the chip. He did exactly that and turned bogey into birdie.
There is something about a good attitude manifesting a good result. Leishman believed it could happen and allowed himself to take his best attempt at it. It would be so easy to get down in that moment and blame your partner for potentially costing you hundreds of thousands of dollars and a PGA Tour title. Good teammates and good friends pick you up. Ham and egg. The perfect breakfast combo and the recipe for good team golf.
If you are looking to pair up with a buddy, want to see how you stack up to the tour pros, or just want to measure your handicap trend, V1 Game can help you have fun and reach your goals with its all new Friends mode, V1 Game Handicap Tracking, and the most advanced analytics available in a golf app. Download the free app today and get ready to play your best golf.
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.