Important U.S. Cup Practice Round Info
Northeast Region to Hold Pro-Am
USGTF Member Benefits
“PRO” File – Touring Professional Collin Morikawa
Editorial: Don’t Forget the Ball
I Tested It: Equipment Beliefs
We’ve all heard teaching pros and regular golfers alike expound on and repeat beliefs regarding golf equipment: “Regular shafts go longer than stiff shafts, but stiff shafts are straighter”…“Tour balls are shorter than ‘distance’ balls,” etc.
There are a number of equipment beliefs and sayings that are taken as gospel. Some are grounded in sound science, while others may be more anecdotal. Being naturally curious about this, I decided to test some of them out. Keeping in mind that I am not a robot, I tried to introduce some sort of consistency in each of the tests I did so that they, while not being perfectly scientifically precise, will allow some real-world insight into how equipment differences affect a real person.
Belief: Tour balls spin more than distance balls
Tour golf balls are made with softer urethane covers, while distance balls have firmer ionomer covers, usually consisting of Surlyn®. (As a side note, golf balls back in the day were often marketed as having Surlyn covers, but the material became associated with hardness, so the term “ionomer” is used today.) They may also differ in core construction and material. I tested the belief that tour balls spin more than distance balls. For this test, I hit balls with a 56° wedge and all balls landed between 51-55 yards, using a GC Quad launch monitor. Only solid strikes were recorded, three shots each.
Conclusion: The two tour balls, the Callaway Chrome Soft and Bridgestone BX, had the highest spins rates, which was to be expected. The Bridgestone e6 Speed and Callaway Superhot, the distance balls, had lower spin rates, but surprisingly, the Superhot had a spin rate very comparable to the premium tour balls. I hit the Superhot three more times to see if this was some sort of aberration, but came up with similar results. There are likely other balls considered “distance” balls that also offer good spin on wedges.
Belief: Clubs with regular shafts go farther than clubs with stiff shafts
For this test, I used a Titleist AP2 7-iron and a Ping G400 Max driver to test both iron and driver shafts. I used the stock True Temper AMT White shaft for the iron test and a Ping G400 Max 10.5° with the stock Alta shaft. Three solid shots with each shaft were recorded. Results of the iron test:
For the driver test, I made sure my clubhead speed was between 94-95 mph each time, again using three solid strikes for each shaft.
Conclusion: There were virtually no differences in performance between the iron shafts. The peak height of the balls for both shafts was identical, 31 yards. There was also no difference in dispersion, either. As for the driver test, my swing speed averaged 94.9 mph with the stiff shaft and 94.5 with the regular. The stiff shaft’s ability to lessen backspin was the main factor in increased distance. Why there was a difference here and not in the iron shafts is something on which I can only speculate.
Belief: Lower-kickpoint shafts launch the ball higher than higher-kickpoint shafts
Here, I used the same Titleist AP2 7-iron with an AMT Red shaft, which is the lowest kickpoint shaft in the AMT family, while the White (used in the previous test) is the highest.
Conclusion: Surprising! The shaft with the lower kickpoint actually launched lower and with less spin than the higher kickpoint shaft. But again, I am not a robot, although I felt like I made similar swings with each shaft. The shaft did produce a higher ball speed and lower backspin, and thus more distance.
Belief: Choking down on the grip reduces distance
Choking down on the grip lessens the swing radius and theoretically should result in lower clubhead speed and distance. Using the Ping driver with the stiff shaft, I choked down 1 ̋.
Conclusion: Choking down does indeed result in a loss of clubhead and ball speed, but if control is gained, this may be a good tactic in given situations.
Belief: Distance balls go farther than tour balls
The driver tests already mentioned were conducted using a Callaway Chrome Soft ball. Because the Bridgestone e6 Speed spun noticeably lower in the wedge test, I used that ball for this test. I used the stiff shaft, and I made sure the three swings I used had a similar clubhead speed as with the above test to make sure I was testing the ball and not the club. (Please refer to the driver shaft test for tour ball data.)
Conclusion: Given similar ball speed and launch angle, the lower backspin literally carried the day for the distance ball, producing four more yards of carry distance.
Belief: Iron lie angles influence left-right ball dispersion
Iron lie angles that are too upright will result in a clubface that is aimed more closed, while iron lie angles that are too flat will result in a clubface angle that is more open. I used three different lie angles in this test with that being the only variable. I was drawing the ball this particular day, but I did manage to record three good shots with each lie angle.
Conclusion: Iron lie angles definitely affect the direction the ball takes because this is a geometric fact. Although it is theoretically ideal to have a lie angle that produces a flat clubhead to the ground at impact, some players may need to deviate from this to produce the desired ball flight.
Summary
These tests produced some results that conformed to long-held beliefs and some that did not. It is always good to question these beliefs and better yet, test them in a real-world setting. As we are all individuals with different reactions to the equipment in our hands, these results will not necessarily apply to every golfer we come across. It is quite possible – indeed likely – that another golfer will obtain different results than I did. This experiment shows that our students must test equipment before they buy…and we should, too.
Daily Junior Golf Clinics: Discover These New All-The-Rage Tactics To Teach Golf To Kids
By Jordan Fuller, USGTF Contributing Writer
It’s important to the growth and continued success of golf to introduce children to the game in a way that allows them to enjoy it and succeed quickly. Golf can be a very difficult game to learn at any age, but kids are actually uniquely suited to understand and develop good swing habits. So, it’s incredibly important to make sure they’re having fun while learning the building blocks that will translate into a lifetime of fun and success on the golf course.
Here are a few tactics to make sure your junior clinics keep everyone entertained while teaching them important golf lessons!
Putting contests
The classic putting contest is still one of the best ways to foster friendly competition and teach kids the importance of getting the ball close to the hole on their first putts. However, a traditional method of simply pitting children head-to-head is best reserved for the last day of a clinic. Prior to that, the contests should be more individually focused, so kids can set a baseline of performance and improve on it through the week.
I like to use large rings to create a 2-3 foot circle around the hole, and set up “tees” for them to start from. You can also use strings on tees to guide them around the putting green on a specific “course.”
They’ll receive a point for getting the first putt inside the big circle, then three more points for making their second putt. If they actually hole the first putt, they get ten points. If they take three putts, they’ll get a single additional point. This scoring system where they accumulate points is easier to explain than trying to have them make a “par” of two or three on each hole. It also gives them a high number to shoot for the next time, and drives them to try the course again and again to achieve more points.
It’s also important to reward each child for their performance. While you can have a cool prize for the single highest point total, you can also give a reward (maybe a sleeve of balls or a towel) for improving their score, or making the most one-putts.
While “everyone gets a trophy” is often ridiculed, golf is a game that most of us play for fun. Sure, some of the kids may grow up to be tournament winners, but for most of them you’re trying to develop a lifelong love affair with the game. It’s important to reward improvement as much as achievement.
Individual instruction
When demonstrating a basic skill, such as a bump-and-run chip, it’s tempting to simply explain it and demonstrate it a few times before letting the kids loose to try it themselves. But while they’re out there working on it, take a few minutes with each child individually to lightly direct and heavily praise the job they’re doing.
With very young kids, too much technical input will just muddy the issue; it’s best to give them minimal direction (just enough to make sure they’re making half-decent contact) and praise their good instincts. For older kids (8 and up), you can start drilling down on fundamentals (such as how to hit the ball properly) to make sure they’re not developing any bad habits that will take years to undo.
This extra level of individual instruction and praise is what the kids will tell their parents about: “Coach Jones helped me with my chipping grip, and I won this sleeve of balls when I chipped one into the hole!” is much better feedback than “Billy and I got to play a lot of Fortnite.” One-on-one time is key to keeping kids engaged and letting their parents know that you’re really interested in developing their kids’ skills.
Once kids have been to a few clinics and are ready to hit the links, the PGA Junior League has great programs for innovative competitions and tournaments that appeal to particular ages and skill levels. Rather than sticking to traditional 18-hole stroke play formats, PGA Junior League tournaments have different scoring systems and are played on fewer holes. Kids learn about golf, but also teamwork and self-reliance. It’s a great program to move them from beginner clinics to championship golf.
The Vision Telescope
By Norm Crerar, USGTF Contributing Writer Vernon, British Columbia
I have been in the recreation business for over 50 years, both actively and lately as a consultant. Most of my time was spent in the ski industry as an active player and the golf industry a participant and consultant. I ski recreationally – and still do some teaching – and golf recreationally. As a result of my unique background, I have trouble just going out there with a clear mind just skiing or golfing. I am constantly looking around at what is out of place, asking myself why doesn’t someone fix this or adjust that, make a subtle change here or there that would give the visitors a better experience, or save the company some money. I love it! I am concerned, though, as both the ski industry and the golf industry are suffering from the same thing, declining numbers of participants. Some of this was due to the economy, but most is due to the Baby Boomers getting older or disappearing for health reasons. Shockingly, there are very few programs designed to get more people skiing and/or golfing more often.
Back in the 1970s, skiing had a program called GLM (Graduated Length Method). The clients started on very short skis on very gentle terrain, and as soon as they could turn the skis easily, they graduated to slightly longer skis and were taken to the top of the mountain, where they skied down a specially-tailored run that got them to the bottom quickly and safely. This was instant success for almost everyone. These thousands of people were the ones who bought the first condos at Vail and Whistler and allowed the ski industry to really take off. This same age group took up golf and found the time and money to take lessons, buy memberships, rent carts, hit thousands of range balls, find new and better equipment and buy resort properties. Both industries are now struggling to find new members and new markets.
How Free Bets Became a Staple of Australian Sports Wagering Culture
Australian sports betting has undergone a remarkable transformation over the past two decades, evolving from a landscape dominated by TAB agencies and telephone accounts into one of the most competitive online wagering markets in the world. Central to this evolution has been the rise of the free bet — a promotional mechanism that operators have used to attract new customers, retain existing ones, and differentiate themselves in an increasingly crowded field. Understanding how free bets became embedded in Australian wagering culture requires looking at the regulatory shifts, technological changes, and behavioural patterns that have shaped the industry since the early 2000s. Far from being a simple marketing gimmick, the free bet has become a structural feature of how Australians engage with sports wagering, influencing everything from which platforms punters choose to how they approach risk when placing wagers on events ranging from the Melbourne Cup to NRL finals.
The Regulatory and Technological Conditions That Made Free Bets Possible
The story of free bets in Australia cannot be told without first understanding the legal framework that allowed online wagering to flourish. The Interactive Gambling Act of 2001 was a pivotal piece of legislation that, while restricting certain forms of online gambling, explicitly permitted online sports betting with an account-based model. This created a legal pathway for licensed operators — initially those based in the Northern Territory, which had established a relatively permissive licensing regime — to offer wagering services across state and territory lines. Companies like Sportsbet, which launched in 1999 and obtained a Northern Territory licence, were among the first to recognise that the internet could fundamentally change the scale at which promotional offers could be deployed.
Before the internet era, promotional offers in the wagering industry were constrained by geography and logistics. A TAB outlet in Sydney could run a local promotion, but reaching punters nationally required expensive broadcast advertising or direct mail campaigns. The internet collapsed these barriers entirely. By the mid-2000s, operators could sign up customers from any Australian state within minutes, verify identity digitally, and credit a free bet to an account almost instantaneously. This logistical ease meant that free bets could be offered at scale without the administrative overhead that would have made them impractical in earlier decades.
The proliferation of smartphones accelerated this process considerably. By 2012, the majority of Australian adults owned a smartphone, and wagering operators moved quickly to develop native applications. The app environment proved particularly suited to free bet promotions because push notifications could alert users to time-sensitive offers — a free bet on a particular race meeting, a bonus for an upcoming football round — in a way that was impossible through desktop browsers alone. Nielsen data from around this period showed that mobile wagering was growing at rates exceeding 40 percent year-on-year in Australia, and operators competed fiercely to be the app installed on a punter’s device, using free bets as the primary incentive for initial downloads.
The entry of international operators into the Australian market further intensified this dynamic. When William Hill acquired Sportingbet’s Australian operations in 2013 and Paddy Power merged with Betfair before eventually entering the local market, they brought with them European promotional cultures where free bets had been standard practice since the early 2000s. These operators understood free bets not merely as a customer acquisition cost but as a mechanism for establishing brand recognition in a market where punters were increasingly willing to hold accounts with multiple operators simultaneously.
How Free Bet Mechanics Shaped Punter Behaviour
The mechanics of how free bets are structured have had a measurable influence on how Australian punters approach wagering decisions. A standard free bet in the Australian market typically takes one of two forms: a matched deposit bonus, where the operator credits a percentage of an initial deposit as a free bet token, or a no-deposit free bet offered simply for registering an account. In both cases, the free bet token differs from cash in one critical respect — the stake itself is generally not returned with the winnings. This means a punter who places a ten-dollar free bet at odds of three-to-one receives twenty dollars rather than thirty, because the ten-dollar stake is retained by the operator.
This structural feature has pushed many punters toward using free bets on higher-odds selections rather than favourites. The mathematical logic is straightforward: since the stake is not returned regardless of the outcome, the value of a free bet increases proportionally with the odds at which it is placed. This has had the practical effect of encouraging punters to explore markets they might not otherwise have considered — exotic racing bets, multi-leg accumulators, or less prominent sporting events where bookmakers offer longer prices. Operators are aware of this dynamic and have sometimes used it deliberately, offering free bets tied to specific events or markets where they hold a stronger margin.
The phenomenon of bonus hunting, known in Australian wagering circles as “bonus bagging,” emerged as a direct response to the proliferation of free bet offers. Sophisticated punters developed systematic approaches to extracting value from promotional offers, often by placing a free bet on one outcome and a corresponding lay bet on a betting exchange like Betfair to hedge their exposure. This practice, while entirely legal, prompted operators to introduce increasingly complex terms and conditions — minimum odds requirements, turnover conditions, and sport-specific restrictions — designed to limit the profitability of purely mechanical approaches to bonus extraction. The ongoing tension between operators refining their promotional terms and punters adapting their strategies has been one of the defining features of the Australian free bet landscape since approximately 2015.
Resources documenting these evolving promotional structures have become increasingly useful to punters navigating a complex market; for instance, http://free-bets-online.com/ aggregates current offers and explains the specific conditions attached to each, reflecting how much more sophisticated both the offers themselves and the information ecosystem around them have become compared to the early days of online wagering in Australia.
The Regulatory Pushback and Its Consequences for Promotional Culture
The expansion of free bet culture in Australia did not occur without significant regulatory scrutiny. Concerns about problem gambling and the aggressive marketing of wagering products — including free bets — led to a series of legislative and regulatory responses that have materially shaped how operators can promote their services. The most significant of these was the implementation of the National Consumer Protection Framework for Online Wagering, which was agreed upon by Australian state and territory governments in 2018 and progressively rolled out through 2019 and 2020.
Among the framework’s provisions was a requirement that operators allow customers to set deposit limits, take breaks from wagering, and self-exclude from all licensed platforms through a single national register. More directly relevant to free bets, the framework addressed inducements — the category of promotion that includes free bets — by restricting how and to whom they could be offered. Operators were prohibited from offering inducements to customers who had set deposit limits or who had previously self-excluded, and there were tightened rules around unsolicited contact promoting wagering products, including free bet offers, to existing customers.
The Broadcasting Services Amendment (Online Gambling) Act of 2018 had already introduced restrictions on in-play betting advertising and the promotion of wagering services during live sports broadcasts, which had become a flashpoint for public concern about the normalisation of gambling among younger audiences. While this legislation did not directly target free bets, it affected the channels through which operators could promote them, pushing more promotional activity toward digital channels — email, push notifications, and social media — where the regulatory environment remained somewhat less prescriptive.
State-level measures added further complexity. South Australia had introduced a 15 percent point-of-consumption tax on wagering in 2017, and other states followed with similar measures over the subsequent years, with New South Wales implementing its own framework in 2019. These taxes, calculated on net wagering revenue rather than turnover, created financial pressure on operators that had implications for promotional budgets. Some smaller operators reduced the scale of their free bet offerings in response, while larger operators with greater economies of scale maintained or even expanded their promotional activity as a means of defending market share. The net effect was a degree of consolidation in the market, with the largest operators — Sportsbet, TAB, Ladbrokes, and Neds — accounting for a growing proportion of total wagering revenue and free bet volume.
Responsible gambling advocates have raised persistent concerns about the role of free bets in encouraging wagering among people who might not otherwise participate or in increasing the frequency of wagering among existing customers. Research published by the Australian Institute of Family Studies and various state gambling research bodies has consistently found that promotional offers, including free bets, are cited by problem gamblers as a factor that influenced their wagering behaviour. The industry, through bodies like the Australian Wagering Council, has argued that free bets are a standard commercial tool analogous to promotional offers in other retail sectors, and that the appropriate response is consumer education and access to support services rather than prohibition. This debate remains unresolved and continues to inform the regulatory agenda.
Free Bets in the Context of Australian Sports Culture
To understand why free bets have become so deeply embedded in Australian wagering culture, it is necessary to appreciate the particular relationship Australians have with sport and with wagering as a social activity. Australia has one of the highest per-capita rates of gambling expenditure in the world — figures compiled by the Queensland Government Statistician’s Office have consistently placed Australia among the top two or three countries globally on this measure. Sports betting, while a smaller component of total gambling expenditure than electronic gaming machines, has grown substantially as a share of the total since online wagering became mainstream, and free bets have been a significant driver of this growth by lowering the perceived cost of entry.
The cultural significance of events like the Melbourne Cup, the AFL and NRL finals series, and the Sydney to Hobart yacht race as wagering occasions cannot be overstated. These events function as focal points around which operators time their most substantial free bet promotions. In the weeks leading up to the Melbourne Cup carnival, for example, it is common for major operators to offer free bet credits tied to account deposits, multi-bet bonuses, and race-specific promotional tokens. The social dimension of wagering on these events — the workplace sweepstake, the group bet among friends — creates an environment in which a free bet offer can serve as an entry point for someone who might not otherwise engage with a wagering platform.
Cricket has also become an increasingly important context for free bet promotions, particularly since the growth of Twenty20 formats and the Big Bash League, which generates a high volume of matches across a compressed summer schedule. The regularity of matches and the variety of in-play and pre-match markets available on cricket have made it an attractive vehicle for promotional activity, with operators offering free bets on specific outcomes — the highest scorer, the number of sixes in an innings — that encourage engagement with markets beyond the simple match result.
The integration of wagering into sports media coverage has reinforced the prominence of free bet culture. While restrictions on broadcast advertising have limited some promotional activity, digital sports media — podcasts, YouTube channels, and social media accounts run by former athletes or sports commentators — have become significant channels for communicating free bet offers to engaged audiences. The line between sports analysis and wagering promotion has become increasingly blurred in this environment, a development that regulators are beginning to examine more closely as part of broader reviews of wagering advertising standards.
It is also worth noting the role that loyalty and rewards programs have played in extending the free bet concept beyond simple sign-up promotions. Programs like Sportsbet’s Rewards, which credits points for wagering activity that can be redeemed for free bet tokens, represent a maturation of the free bet model from a customer acquisition tool into a customer retention mechanism. This evolution mirrors what has happened in other consumer industries — airlines, supermarkets, credit card providers — where loyalty programs have become a standard feature of the competitive landscape rather than a differentiating innovation.
The Australian free bet market has also been influenced by the growth of same-game multis — accumulator bets constructed entirely from markets within a single match. Major operators introduced these products around 2017 and 2018, and they quickly became one of the most popular wagering formats among younger punters. Free bets are frequently deployed in conjunction with same-game multi promotions, either as a reward for placing a qualifying multi or as a standalone offer tied to a specific match. The combination of a complex, high-odds product with a free bet token creates a compelling proposition for the target demographic, though it also raises questions about the extent to which such promotions encourage higher-risk wagering behaviour.
In summary, the trajectory of free bets in Australian sports wagering reflects a broader story about how a traditional leisure activity has been reshaped by technology, competition, and regulatory intervention. Free bets began as a straightforward customer acquisition tool borrowed from European wagering markets and have evolved into a multifaceted promotional category that intersects with questions of consumer protection, sports media, and cultural attitudes toward risk. The regulatory framework continues to develop in response to evidence about the impacts of promotional wagering, and the industry continues to adapt its practices accordingly. What seems clear is that free bets, in some form, will remain a feature of Australian wagering for the foreseeable future — the competitive pressures that created them have not diminished, and the appetite among Australian punters for value-added wagering experiences shows no sign of abating. The challenge for regulators, operators, and public health advocates alike is to find an equilibrium that allows a legal commercial activity to function while managing the genuine harms that can arise when promotional mechanisms interact with vulnerable individuals in a high-engagement wagering environment.
Now both the summer and winter resorts are heading in a difficult direction. Look at this as a triangle: The very few at the top do not care what the cost is; they pay their money and are off to play. The ones in the middle can afford to pay and play but decision time is around the corner; the many at the bottom will drop off at the next price rise, leaving the triangle smaller and with fewer people. Enter the accountants. Their training is to count beans. When the beans are black, they are happy. When the beans are red, they know only two things, raise prices and cut expenses (which means cutting services). People drop off the bottom line of the triangle. The triangle is now smaller. Cut expenses again. Smaller triangle, and on it goes. Sadly, this is where the “telescope” comes into the equation. For some reason, the accountant types have only been trained to look from the big end to the small end of a telescope and only see the very small picture, usually only the bottom line.
The USGTF was started with a vision born from necessity and opportunity. Looking from the other end of the telescope, your current president could only see the big picture, found a few like-minded people, offered some courses on learning how to teach golf, and the rest is history.
But the challenge remains. Both the golf industry and the ski industry need the same thing. They desperately need people to look out of the right end of the telescope and see the big picture and need to find ways of getting more people skiing and golfing more often. Doing nothing is hard, because you never know when you are finished.
What end of the telescope are you looking through?
When Adversity Strikes
Sometimes we are forced to play in adverse conditions, but this article isn’t talking about the weather. No, we are talking about something that is rarely spoken about except for perhaps at the 19th hole after the round – people who are difficult to play with.
Difficult playing partners run the gamut with all sorts of behavior. We can let it affect our own games or we can ignore it. Granted, ignoring certain behaviors can be quite hard to do, but if you or your students want to play your best, you’ve got to figure out a way to work your way through it.
Let’s keep in mind that, absent any sort of physical altercation or making noise in your routine or swing, what someone else does has no direct bearing on what we are doing. We can only let it affect us when we put a negative judgment on a person’s actions, as Hamlet stated. And once we make a negative judgment, it tends to get into our psyche and then, by definition, we are focused on that person and their behavior. When we’re trying to put up a score or just have fun on the golf course, that goes out the window when we do that.
As hard as it may be to not get upset with certain people or their actions, it is imperative that we stay in our own world when that type of adversity strikes. There are several types of difficult playing companions that all of us have encountered at one time or another:
The Club Thrower
Let’s be honest. Most of us have tossed a club in the past. Rory McIlroy famously hurled his 3-iron into a lake at Trump Doral in Miami during the tournament, and other examples abound. Club breakers also fall into this category. But most of us either matured or realized that our stature in the game demanded a better showing of class, so we no longer do it. If we’re paired with a club thrower or breaker, instead of putting a negative spin on it at the time, we have two choices: to let it affect our game negatively or not. Of course, if the club thrower is firing clubs left and right and endangering others, this is not to be tolerated, and at that point we might have no choice but to get worked up about it. But most club throwers are only making fools of themselves, in the end.
The Rules Expert
From anecdotal evidence, it appears women are more guilty of this than men. Stories about where a strict adherence to the Rules of Golf is demanded by the matriarch of the group, and even the most minor violations are met with great scorn and the figurative hammer. If you are the victim of a USGA and R&A wannabe, simply thank them for their information and move on. You’re not going to get them to change their ways, and just make it a point of not playing with them anymore. If they’re part of your regular group and this can’t be avoided, they’ve surely annoyed others, too. A group intervention should be convened for the sanity of all.
The Golf Instructor
You lifted your head” is something you may hear after you hit a poor shot, especially one that was topped, as if that was the sole cause of your poor shot. If keeping your head down was the magic secret to golf, there would be no need for real golf teaching professionals, and everyone could enjoy magical ballstriking for the rest of their lives. Even if you’re not taking lessons from a golf teaching professional (and plenty of teaching professionals take lessons from other instructors), just inform the person you’re working with so-and-so and you and your teacher/ coach are aware of the problem.
The Chatterbox
Some of us are extroverts; some of us are introverts. Some of us take time to warm up to people; some of us can be lifelong friends after five minutes. Some of us are serious on the course; some of us are fun seekers. Those who tend to be quiet can be very easily rattled by someone who is not, but rarely is vice versa the case. Jim Peters, the winner of the 2018 Harvey Penick Trophy for Excellence in Golf Teaching, said some of the best advice he ever received was that we have two ears and one mouth, so use them in proportion. If you’re paired with the Mouth of the South, let him or her ramble on. Or, with the acceptance of listening to music on the course these days, you can pop some ear buds in and tune them out.
The Narcissist
This person thinks mainly of themselves, both through their words and actions. If you’re in the same cart and he’s driving, he’ll often drive right by your ball and go directly to theirs, nevermind that your ball is 30 yards back. Or, at the slightest hint of being in trouble, they make a beeline to their ball, all the time lamenting how he didn’t keep his head down or his left elbow straight. They keep up a running monologue of their game and sometimes their life. It can be exhausting to play with such a person, but remember that you’re not going to change who they are in one round of golf. As best you can, put your focus on something else, maybe the beauty of the course or the interesting design of your current hole.
The Complete Hacker
People new to the game are not going to be very good. There are also some long-time players who aren’t very good, to put it mildly. If they keep it moving, fine. But if they insist on looking for every errant ball and refusing to pick up when they’re on their 10th stroke 100 yards from the green, you have every right to say something, even to the point of abandoning them and going ahead.
The Cheater
There is a difference between cheaters and rule breakers. Cheaters deliberately break the rules, while ordinary rule breakers do so unknowingly. If you’re simply playing a casual round, it’s not a big deal. However, if you’re in a tournament, it can, of course, become a very big deal. But surprisingly, it also may not be.
An example of the latter is a cheater or rule breaker whose score is not going to win them any prizes in the competition. After the round is over and the scorecards are signed, you can advise them of what the rule is that they broke. But be careful that you are 100 percent — and we mean 100 percent — certain that you are giving the correct information. If the cheater/rule breaker is violating a rule and they are in contention for a prize, you have an obligation to say something on the spot. After the scorecards are signed is not the time to speak up. Yet, even here it may be inadvisable to say something. We hate to separate rules into “minor” or “major” categories, but if the person gained absolutely no advantage (such as having his son carry his putter to the green while employing another caddie, a violation of the one-caddie rule), then it might be best to remain quiet. Cheaters/rule breakers who are called out almost always react in a volatile manner, so this definitely calls for extreme discretion and diplomacy.
Wrapping Up
We are not advocating condoning rude or ill-mannered playing partners. But we are saying that there is often little one can do to change the situation for the better, as we’re dealing with people with long-ingrained habits. Speak up when appropriate, as when someone damages the course or other course property, but keep in mind that most behavior we find distasteful is simply annoying. Play your game and enjoy the rest of the day by focusing on those aspects you find satisfying. Your sanity might depend on it.