Our testing takes the subjective part out of it. With PuttView, we tracked nearly 50,000 putts across 79 blades, mallets and zero-torque putters in 2026. Every putter was tested under the same protocol, regardless of brand or price. That gives us a clear look at how each putter performs and it lets us answer a question golfers ask all the time: Does spending more get you a better putter?

We researched current retail prices for the putters in our test and compared them to the results. If you’re like me and always looking for a deal, you’ll be happy with what we found.

All prices listed are retail. You may find some of these putters on sale or pay more for custom options but this is what the data shows from a retail perspective.

Price didn’t predict performance

The best-performing blades and zero-torque putters cost less on average than the worst performers. In mallets, the top five cost only $17 more than the bottom five.

Across the full test, there was no meaningful statistical link between price and performance. A higher price tag did not reliably mean better putting.

The best blades were among the least expensive

The Mizuno M.Craft Osaka won the blade test at $299.99. The PING Scottsdale Anser 4 and Anser 2D finished second and third at $259.99 each.

Premium blades mostly landed in the middle of the field or lower. Blades priced at $450 or more averaged a PuttView Handicap of −2.2, compared with −3.9 for blades under $300. The $599.99 Toulon Hollywood finished 14th of 24 and the Runner Pro Blade, which converts to roughly $740, tied for 19th.

If you prefer a blade, you don’t need to spend $500 to get one of the best performers in our test.

Google is changing how content is shown. Add MyGolfSpy as your preferred source to ensure you don’t miss the latest gear news, instructional tips and buying guides.

Premium mallets performed but value options were close behind

Mallets were the one category where the most expensive putters finished on top. The Bettinardi BB 6.0 and BB 7.0 ($494.99 each) took first and second. The BB 6.0 was also the only blade or mallet in any of our tests to beat the zero-torque category average.

The putters right behind them cost half as much or even less. The Ben Hogan BHM02 and BHM03 ($249.99) and the Cleveland HB Soft 2 Black Retreve ($199.99) tied for third, just 0.6 strokes behind the winner. Further down, the $139.99 Wilson Infinite Bean outscored the $499.99 Scotty Cameron Phantom 5.

Zero-Torque putters offered the most value

Zero-torque putters led our 2026 testing overall. If all 79 putters were ranked together, the top 15 would all be zero-torque. Many of the best performers are also among the most affordable.

Three of the top four zero-torque putters cost $229 or less.

• Sub 70 011-SQ ($229): second place
• Vice VGP03 ZT ($199): third place
• Wilson ZT Lakeview ($199.99): fourth place, with the best short-putt score of any putter in our 2026 testing

The winner, the Odyssey Ai-Dual S2S #7, retails for $449.99 but has been on sale for around $350. Two of the most expensive zero-torque putters, the $650 Toulon Formula 90 and the $549 Scotty Cameron Fastback OC, finished 17th and last respectively.

A $200 zero-torque putter outperformed every blade and mallet in our testing.

Final thoughts

For a complete look at how all of our best putters of 2026 performed here are the results: Best Putters of 2026.

The post Do Expensive Putters Perform Better? We Checked 79 From Our 2026 Tests appeared first on MyGolfSpy.

Slow swing speed? Play a soft golf ball. More wedge spin? More control. Stronger loft? More distance. Find the driver that goes the farthest and put it in the bag.

Most of these ideas have some truth behind them. The problem is that after spending the last few years of my life looking at MyGolfSpy test data, I’ve found that the shortcut usually leaves out something important.

Here are nine I’d be careful using.

1. Slow swing speed means you need a soft golf ball

This one sounds logical. A slower golfer needs a softer ball because it’s easier to compress. A faster golfer has enough speed to play something firmer.

We went looking for that cutoff in our 2026 robot data and couldn’t find it.

With the driver, softer golf balls did not suddenly create extra ball speed as swing speed dropped. In fact, none of the 11 balls below 75 compression beat the Pro V1 control for ball speed at our 85-mph driver speed.

The iron data was a little different. Some softer balls showed a small advantage at slower iron speeds but not enough to create a simple compression chart that says if you swing X speed, you need Y compression.

Compression matters. Swing speed alone just doesn’t tell you which compression you should play.

I broke down the full robot data here: What Golf Ball Compression Do I Need? Robot Data Says Slow Doesn’t Equal Soft.

2. The fastest golf ball will be the longest

Ball speed matters for distance. It just doesn’t determine distance by itself.

We’ve seen this in multiple golf ball tests. A ball can rank very high for speed and not finish in the same position for total distance. The reverse can happen, too.

That’s because the ball still has to launch in the right window. Spin, peak height, carry and rollout all play a part in where it eventually finishes.

Fast is helpful but fast with the right trajectory and spin is better.

The complete 2026 MyGolfSpy Golf Ball Test is a good place to see how quickly those rankings can change depending on which metric you’re looking at.

3. More wedge spin means more control

Spin is probably the first number most golfers check when they hit a wedge on a launch monitor.

If one wedge gives you 7,200 rpm and another gives you 6,800, the first one looks better. But the goal isn’t to win the spin contest. The goal is to hit the ball close to the hole.

Carry consistency, launch, dispersion and proximity all matter. Conditions matter, too.

Our 2026 wedge test made that last part especially obvious. In dry conditions, all 15 wedges were separated by fewer than 500 rpm from 50 yards. Add moisture and the spread grew to more than 3,700.

The Vokey SM11 essentially kept all of its spin. The Performance Golf ONE.1 went from 7,217 rpm dry to 3,506 wet.

That’s a very different golf shot even though ONE.1 started with the bigger dry number.

4. More iron distance is better

If I gain five yards with an iron, I want to know where those five yards came from. Most of the time it wasn’t magic and there was a sacrifice somewhere else. That sacrifice can impact the overall performance of that iron.

Did ball speed increase? Did spin drop? Did the ball start coming into the green flatter?

A ball or iron that gives you more carry but takes away spin and descent angle may make it harder to hold a green.

We saw how different those flight windows can get in the 2026 golf ball test. Simply changing the golf ball could move peak height by several feet and change descent angle without changing the golfer or the iron.

5. A 7-iron fitting tells you which iron set to buy

Most iron fittings revolve around a 7-iron. If you’re only buying a 7-iron that’s fine but most of the time you’re trying to buy an entire set.

When we do our iron testing we look at 5-iron, 7-iron and pitching wedge. When I compared performance throughout the set, the rankings moved around much more than I expected.

The PING i240 was the best player’s iron in our pitching wedge data while finishing last at 7-iron. The Tour Edge Exotics CB went from near the bottom with the 5-iron to first with the 7-iron and pitching wedge.

A fitting using only a 7-iron would never show you that. I went through the complete data in Hitting A 7 Iron Is Not An Iron Fitting: Here’s What Data Shows.

I still think the 7-iron is a good place to start but if you have the change, try to hit more than the 7-iron.

6. A forgiving driver is the one that keeps the ball straight

Forgiveness gets simplified almost as much as distance. We tend to think a forgiving driver is the one that sends a bad swing less offline. That’s part of the story but it isn’t the whole thing.

In our 2026 driver testing, forgiveness also includes how well a driver maintains ball speed and carry distance from shot to shot and how tight the overall shot pattern is.

Those things don’t always move together.

The Titleist GT1, for example, was the most forgiving driver for slower swing speeds because of its excellent ball speed and carry consistency. It wasn’t the tightest driver from a directional standpoint.

Our mishit analysis made the same point another way. As impact moved farther from center, the distance gap between drivers grew. At bigger misses, first to last could be separated by 17 to 20 yards.

That’s why I care a lot more about what happens to the bad strike than I used to. The Longest Golf Drivers Of 2026 When You Miss The Center Of The Face shows just how much the rankings can change.

7. Loft tells you how an iron is going to perform

Iron loft can explain plenty about why one category goes farther than another. It still doesn’t tell you exactly how the ball is going to fly.

The average player’s 7-iron in my iron loft analysis was 33 degrees. The average super game-improvement 7-iron was 27. That six degree difference is significant.

But static loft is only the starting point.

Head design affects launch and spin and every golfer delivers a different amount of dynamic loft at impact. Two golfers can hit the same 7-iron and produce completely different trajectories.

That’s why I use loft as context but know that there are ways to play with flight that are much more involved than just loft.

8. Your swing speed determines what type of driver you need

It’s easy to start shopping for a driver by putting yourself into a category. Slow swing speeds look at “max” and draw-biased heads and faster players go for lower spin.

Swing speed matters but our 2026 testing showed why I wouldn’t let it narrow the search too quickly.

Some drivers that weren’t necessarily designed with slower swing speed golfers in mind performed extremely well for them. The standard Srixon ZXi, for example, averaged six yards more carry than the ZXi Max in our slow swing speed testing.

That doesn’t mean slower swingers should suddenly start buying low-spin drivers. It means the label on the head doesn’t know what your delivery looks like.

Launch, spin, strike location and how efficiently you deliver the club all matter.

Use swing speed to help narrow the fitting process. Just don’t let it decide which driver categories you’re allowed to try.

9. One compression number tells you enough about a golf ball

The more work I’ve done with Ball Lab, the more I’ve seen how complicated compression can get in golf balls. Most golfers see one number and trust it.

Ball Lab also looks at how consistent compression is from ball to ball across the sample and whether compression is symmetrical within each individual ball.

Those aren’t the same thing.

The Snell PR4 is a perfect example. It graded well for compression consistency across the sample but failed compression symmetry. Every ball in the 36 ball sample showed the same pole-to-seam shape bias.

Kirkland showed another version of the same lesson. There were no critical defects in the sample but compression consistency graded C+ and compression symmetry graded D.

So when I see a compression number now, I want to know two more things: How consistent was that number across the box and how consistent was it within each golf ball? Comparing Ball Lab and our 2026 Golf Ball Test results is a great place to start.

The shortcut isn’t always wrong. It’s just incomplete.

Golf equipment is full of levers. Pull one and something else can change with it.

That’s why I don’t like seeing golfers put themselves in boxes based on one number, one label or one category. Look at how everything works together before you decide what fits your game.

The post 9 Golf Equipment Shortcuts the Data Says You Should Stop Using appeared first on MyGolfSpy.

We tested 48 models with a driver and a 7-iron at three swing speeds. For a handful of them, performance with one club said very little about performance with the other.

That doesn’t mean these balls are inconsistent or flawed. Their strengths just show up in different parts of the bag and where they show up affects your game. The goal is to match the ball to what you need.

A note on speeds: “high speed” means a 115-mph driver swing and a 90 mph 7-iron swing, “mid” is 100 and 80 and “low” is 85 and 65. We’ve noted which speed applies throughout. All rankings are relative to the 48-ball field under the conditions tested.

1. Srixon Z-Star Diamond

High and spinny off the tee, low and penetrating with irons, and it still stops.

The Z-Star Diamond is the clearest example in the test of a ball changing personality between clubs. At all three swing speeds, it finished in the top quarter for peak height off the driver and the bottom 10 percent for peak height with the 7-iron.

Off the tee, it’s also one of the highest-spinning balls available. It ranked in the top five percent for driver spin at high, mid and low speed. If you already launch the ball high with plenty of spin, the Diamond will add to both.

With irons, the flight flattens but the spin stays. At high speed, it was the highest-spinning ball in the test off the 7-iron and at mid speed it was effectively tied for the top spot. Many balls hold greens by coming down steeply. The Diamond holds them with spin.

The tradeoff is iron distance and speed. At high speed, it finished near the bottom of the 7-iron distance chart and its 7-iron ball speed was near the bottom of the field at all three speeds. The whole field was separated by only about 1.5 mph of iron ball speed, though.

Who it’s for: Golfers who want a lower, more controllable iron flight without giving up stopping power and who can live with a higher, spinnier tee ball. If your driver already balloons, look elsewhere.

2. Titleist Pro V1x

Long off the tee, short with the 7-iron (high speed).

At our high swing speed, the Pro V1x was one of the most complete driver balls in the test. It finished in the top 10 percent for total distance while peaking above 91 feet and spinning around 2,400 rpm, about 100 rpm above the field median.

With the 7-iron at the same speed, it fell into the bottom 15 percent for distance. The reason is spin. It was among the highest-spinning balls in the test off the 7-iron at high speed and, in this test, the balls that carried farthest with irons were the ones that kept spin down. That spin is exactly what stops the ball on a green. It just costs yardage.

At mid speed, the change looks different. Off the driver, it ranked in the top 20 percent for carry but only the bottom half for total distance because its spin limits roll. With the 7-iron at mid speed, it was among the lowest-flying balls in the test while still landing in the top half for distance and spinning above average.

Who it’s for: Faster swingers who want driver distance and iron stopping power and who don’t mind taking an extra half-club into greens.

Google is changing how content is shown. Add MyGolfSpy as your preferred source to ensure you don’t miss the latest gear news, instructional tips and buying guides.

3. Mizuno Pro X

Fast off the driver, slow off the iron (mid speed).

At mid speed, the Pro X ranked in the top 15 percent for driver ball speed and the bottom five percent for 7-iron ball speed. That was one of the biggest gaps in the test. Its 7-iron speed was also near the bottom at high speed.

Off the tee, it flies high and spins a lot. It was among the highest-spinning balls at mid and low speed and it peaked above 91 feet at high speed.

The iron speed gap is small in real terms. The whole field was within 1.5 mph at mid speed.

Who it’s for: Mid-speed players who want a fast, high-spin ball off the tee. Just don’t expect that speed to carry over to your irons.

4. Callaway Supersoft

Slow off the tee, quick off the iron (every speed).

The Supersoft is the reverse of the Pro X and the pattern shows up at every speed we tested. It was the softest ball in the test and the slowest off the driver at high speed. At mid speed, it went from the bottom five percent for driver ball speed to the top five percent for 7-iron ball speed. At low speed, the three softest balls in the test were the three fastest off the 7-iron with the Supersoft leading them.

The iron speed turns into real distance. At high speed, it finished in the top 10 percent for 7-iron distance while flying among the highest in the test.

Stopping power is the catch. It was among the lowest-spinning balls off the 7-iron at high speed and at mid speed it flew high but spun very little. The high flight helps it come down more steeply but expect some release on firm greens.

Who it’s for: Slower swingers who want easy height and distance with irons and who can accept some rollout after the ball lands.

5. Snell PR3

High off the driver, low off the iron (mid speed).

Moving from high speed to mid speed, the PR3’s driver peak height dropped only about a foot, even though its ball speed dropped nearly 20 mph. The trajectory stayed the same without the speed to support it and it finished in the bottom five percent for driver distance at mid speed. It was also among the highest-flying balls off the driver at low speed.

With the 7-iron, the flight comes down sharply. At mid speed, it was in the bottom 10 percent for peak height with a 7-iron.

Who it’s for: Faster players who can make use of its high driver flight and want a flatter iron window. Mid-speed players who already launch it high off the tee should compare it with lower-flying options first.

The takeaway

The ball that’s best for your driver may not be the best one for your irons and that can change with your swing speed. Choose a ball that flies the way you need it to through the whole bag and then pick the longest option from that group. The Golf Ball Selector lets you check each of these balls at your own swing speed.

Find the Right Golf Ball for Your Game

Use the MyGolfSpy Golf Ball Selector to compare 48 golf balls using data from our 2026 robot test. Filter by swing speed and see how each ball performs from driver to wedge to find the best fit for your game.

Tony Covey

Employee #2, Editor, Jack of All Trades

The post 5 Golf Balls That Behave Completely Differently With Driver And Irons appeared first on MyGolfSpy.

The reason is pretty simple. Golfers use these clubs from both places. A mini driver works as a tee club on tight holes and as something you can hit off the deck on a long par-5. If we only tested from a tee, we’d only be telling you about half of what the club does.

The important thing to understand from this year’s data is that performance from the tee and performance from the turf are not the same. The numbers change and so does the way you should be reading them.

What changes when you put it on a tee

Here are the averages across all six mini drivers we tested in 2026.

There’s a clear difference in carry distance, a little more than 11 yards on average. The shots off the tee are longer.

What’s interesting is where that comes from. Ball speed only went up 2.6 mph and smash factor barely moved. Almost all of the gain is in launch conditions. When the ball is on a tee, you can catch it slightly on the upswing and that gets you about two and a half degrees more launch with less spin at the same time.

That combination is very hard to create off the turf. Off the deck, the ball is sitting on the ground and you have to hit down on it at least a little which lowers launch and adds spin. Both conditions can produce a good shot. They just don’t produce the same shot.

The turf numbers were more accurate

Every one of the six clubs dispersed more from the tee than from the turf. Shot area grew by about 32 percent on average and proximity was roughly seven feet worse.

This probably comes down to how testers swing at a teed ball. There’s more speed, a longer swing and a little more going on at impact, and that shows up as dispersion. It doesn’t mean teeing it up is a mistake. It means the extra distance isn’t free and if you’re adding a mini driver because you want to find the fairway, that’s worth knowing.

Spin does a different job from each lie

Off the turf, the two highest-spinning clubs in our test were the two best overall performers. Off a tee, the lowest-spinning club came out on top.

That looks backwards until you look at the launch numbers. From the turf, our testers averaged 10.7 degrees of launch. That isn’t much and spin is what holds the ball in the air and gets it to carry. Take spin away from a launch angle that low and shots start coming down early.

From a tee, launch was already up at 13.3 degrees. At that point, you’re not relying on spin for height anymore so extra spin mostly costs you distance.

So a low-spin mini driver is built to shine from a tee. A slightly higher-spinning one tends to hold up better from the turf. Neither one is wrong. They’re solving different problems.

If you’re going to hit this club off the deck fairly often, don’t automatically chase the lowest spin number you can find.

Does the best club change?

At the top of the distance list, things stayed pretty steady. The TaylorMade R7 Quad carried the longest in both conditions. At the bottom, the PXG Secret Weapon finished last in Strokes Gained in both conditions.

Where things moved is in the middle and the reason is that the accuracy versus distance equation shifts depending on where the ball is sitting.

From the turf, the spread in accuracy between these six clubs was large. Straight percentage ranged from 46.4 to 65.3, almost 19 points between best and worst.

From a tee, that spread shrank to about four points. When every club is roughly as accurate as the next, distance becomes the tiebreaker and the longer clubs move up.

It also means something practical for how you shop. If you demo mini drivers off a mat with a tee, you’re testing in the condition where these six clubs look the most alike. Hitting a few off the turf will tell you far more about which one fits you.

Which mini driver for which golfer

• TaylorMade R7 Quad — Longest in both conditions, lowest spin in both. A distance club first.

• COBRA KING TEC-MD — Our best performer off the turf by a wide margin. Half a yard offline. Start here if you’re buying it for the fairway.

• Titleist GTS300 — The most consistent between the two conditions. Safest pick if you’ll use it evenly from both.

• Callaway Quantum Mini — Nearly the longest from a tee with a tighter miss than the TaylorMade. A tee club with some control.

• Tour Edge Exotics Mini — Shortest in the test but the most playable and the tightest dispersion. A 3-wood replacement you can put in play.

• PXG Secret Weapon — Plenty of speed but the widest dispersion from the turf. Worth a fitting rather than a blind buy.

The takeaway

A mini driver is not one club with one set of numbers. It performs differently depending on whether the ball is teed up or sitting on the grass and the best club for you depends a lot on which of those you’re planning to do more often.

If it’s mostly a tee club, lean toward the distance numbers. If you’re buying it to hit off the deck, pay more attention to the accuracy column and don’t be scared of a little spin.

Google is changing how content is shown. Add MyGolfSpy as your preferred source to ensure you don’t miss the latest gear news, instructional tips and buying guides.

The post Mini Driver Off the Tee vs. Off the Fairway: What The Data Shows appeared first on MyGolfSpy.

Matt Fitzpatrick fits that description. He spent most of his career with the same PING S55 irons before finally changing in 2024 and his equipment decisions generally don’t feel impulsive.

That’s what made his driver situation this summer worth watching.

While most of the golf world was focused on the Presidents Cup at Medinah, Fitzpatrick was in France adding a fourth win to his 2026 season. And he did it with the same driver setup he had in play for his first three wins of the year.

The driver that started the year

Fitzpatrick won the Valspar Championship, RBC Heritage and Zurich Classic this season with a Titleist GT3 nine-degree driver paired with a Mitsubishi Tensei AV Raw Orange 65 TX shaft.

Then things changed.

His GT3 head cracked before the Truist Championship in May. Fitzpatrick tried replacements but said he struggled to find one that matched what he wanted to see and feel through impact.

By the Travelers Championship in June, he had made a fairly significant move, putting a PING G430 LST in the bag. He immediately hit 13 of 14 fairways in the opening round.

“The detail is really important,” Fitzpatrick said at the time. “Everyone is different. Their habits, how they move the club, how they react to different clubs.”

Then he went back

The PING worked well enough that Fitzpatrick kept it in the bag into the summer. But in France last week, he went back to the setup that had helped him win three times earlier in the year.

He had the Titleist GT3 nine-degree head and the same Tensei AV Raw Orange 65 TX shaft in his winning bag.

That return ended with a three-shot victory at Le Golf National and his fourth win of 2026.

Matt Fitzpatrick WITB (FedEx Open de France)

Here’s a look at Fitzpatrick’s complete setup for this win:

• Driver: Titleist GT3, 9° with Mitsubishi Tensei AV Raw Orange 65 TX
• 3-wood: TaylorMade Qi35, 15° with Mitsubishi Tensei AV Raw Orange 75 TX
• 5-wood: TaylorMade Qi35, 18° with Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 80 TX
• Irons: PING i210, 4-iron PING S55, 5-9 (Shafts: PING CFS X-Stiff in the 4-iron, KBS Tour in the 5-9)
• Wedges: Titleist Vokey Design SM10 (48.10F, 52.12F, 56.08M, 60.08M) with True Temper Dynamic Gold Tour Issue S300
  Putter: Bettinardi BB1 Fitz
• Ball: Titleist Pro V1x
• Grips: Golf Pride Tour Velvet

Sometimes the answer is something you already had

Fitzpatrick had a setup that worked, lost it because the head cracked, found another driver that performed well and eventually found his way back to the configuration that had already helped him win three times.

The GT3 was one of the best-performing drivers for high swing speed golfers in 2026, finishing third overall and first for distance. It’s a lower-spin, more compact head built more for players who want speed, distance and some shot-shape control than maximum help launching the ball. It can still be forgiving but it’s not the obvious fit for every golfer, especially if you need more spin or launch. It’s priced at $449 making it one of the better values for faster players.

The post Matt Fitzpatrick Went Back To His Old Driver Setup. Then He Won Again. appeared first on MyGolfSpy.

A driver gets replaced, an iron line gets refreshed and suddenly a club you bought two seasons ago is considered “ancient.” And that is particularly true for pro golfers who have unfettered access to the latest equipment.

But pros occasionally decide to hold on to their older clubs because they can’t find a replacement that will beat the original. The bags at the 2026 Presidents Cup show that’s a lot more common than you would think.

Several players arrived at Medinah with club models they were using more than five years ago. Some have held on to a single fairway wood while others have kept much larger portions of their setup.

With that in mind, these are some of the most interesting holdovers.

Patrick Cantlay: An old favorite surrounded by more old favorites

Cantlay could fill most of this story himself.

He has a Titleist 915F 3-wood from 2014, 718 AP2 irons from 2017 and Vokey SM7 46- and 52-degree wedges from 2018 in his bag. His iron setup has shifted to include a Srixon ZXi5 4-iron—the AP2s now run from 5-iron through 9-iron—but the core of it remains familiar.

The 915F sits next to a current Titleist driver (GTS4), yet Cantlay continues to reserve a spot for it. Why?

“Once you find one that you fall in love with, and you learn to trust it, guys don’t want to change” Cantlay said. “I’ve heard Fred Couples used the same ladies’ flex 3-wood for a number of years. And it’s just when you fall in love with a club like a 7-wood or a 3-wood, it’s hard to get out of the bag.”

The irons are just as striking. Keeping one older specialty club is fairly common on Tour but keeping most of an older iron set suggests the player remains comfortable with its shape, flight and distance control across a substantial part of the bag.

Justin Thomas: two fairway woods from different eras

Justin Thomas has updated plenty of equipment over the years but his fairway woods have been much stickier.

When Thomas won the 2021 Players Championship with a Titleist TS3 3-wood and a 915 Fd 5-wood. The 3-wood is eight years old and the 5-wood is 12 years old.

The reasoning is specific to yardage gaps. For instance, he said newer 5-woods he has tried fly farther than he wants. His current one gives him a range of shots. He said he can hit it 230 yards when needed or carry it 265, which is a wide range.

“It’s just kind of a perfect club for me,” Thomas said.

Thomas’s current bag also includes newer options at the top end but those additions haven’t automatically pushed out two clubs with established jobs. A fairway wood has to produce the right flight from awkward lies as well as ideal ones. If an older head gives a player the shot he wants, the appeal of a replacement has to survive more than a comparison of ball speed.

Sungjae Im: a familiar hybrid and iron set

Switching over to the International side, Im’s equipment loyalty extends well beyond a single wood.

Im has continuously played a 818 H2 hybrid for seven years despite hybrids going out of style on Tour.

His T100 irons, TSi2 driver, TS3 3-wood and Vokey SM7 60-degree wedge all date back at least six years since he first used them.

The hybrid is particularly interesting because clubs at that end of the bag often compete with fairway woods and utility irons as players adjust to courses and conditions. Im has kept a place for a model he was using six years ago, even while making changes around it.

Im has said he knows how high the 818 H2 launches, how far it carries and how it behaves from different lies. In a lot of cases like this, a newer hybrid might produce better numbers in one area but create an awkward gap between a player’s 3-wood and longest iron.

Hideki Matsuyama: the wedges that keep coming back

Matsuyama has used Cleveland RTX 4 Forged Prototype wedges for nearly seven years. He is still using the same wedge model that he gamed during his win at the 2021 Masters.

The Cleveland team says Hideki rarely changes the 52-degree wedge’s sole but regularly adjusts the 56 and 60. They can alter the width, bounce and relief without changing how the wedge looks at address. 

There’s also an Augusta connection. Cleveland/Srixon’s R&D team said his love of wide, low-bounce wedge soles reflect his focus on what works for him at Augusta National.

Closing thoughts

None of this means golfers should ignore new equipment.

These players have made changes elsewhere in their bags and a fitting can reveal a genuine improvement.

At the end of the day, pros don’t just blindly replace their gamers. The new club has to offer a meaningful advantage.

Top Photo Caption: Justin Thomas looks on after hitting a shot with his 3-wood. (GETTY IMAGES/Keyur Khamar)

The post The “Ancient” Clubs Presidents Cup Players Can’t Quit appeared first on MyGolfSpy.

It’s me. I’m the wise man.

As I was testing our golf push cart lineup this year, I recognized some real constraints to owning a push cart.

First off, getting it ready before a round and putting it away afterwards can be a nuisance.

Second, these things can be bulky. How much room do you need to store it on the way to/from the course and how much room will you need at your residence to keep it tucked away when it’s not in use?

If you want these questions answered, there’s a clear winner from our 2026 testing pool that led the way due to its simple folding process and compact storage size.

The Motocaddy QB2 Push Cart.

The QB2 narrowly beat the Big Max Blade IP2. Both are great options but the slight edge went to the QB2 due to its cube-shaped storage size.

In terms of storage space, the QB2 will take up minimal space and can be transported to and from the course with ease. Beleive me, the effort it takes to get one on the course and back home matters more than you think.

The QB2 is lightweight and a winner if you’re looking for a simple and practical push cart.

As far as the folding process goes, the QB2 had a quicker-than-average setup and takedown process. Similar to how the effort needed during transport is something to think about, the folding process before and after your round is equally important.

When you finish a round of golf, the last thing you need is a push cart that is a struggle to close and put away. The QB2 helps you avoid this—which is especially helpful after rounds in which you’re considering quitting golf altogether.

A harmless plug

I alluded to this earlier but the Big Max Blade IP2 deserves your consideration as well due to its performance compared to the QB2.

As I said, the QB2 narrowly beat the Blade IP2. When it comes to storage, the Blade IP2 folds into a much narrower profile than the QB2 but it’s longer. The model that’s best for you in terms of storage is completely dependent on your storage situation. When transporting the Blade IP2 to and from the course, you’ll notice the same lightweight feel that the QB2 offers, just with slightly different dimensions.

While the QB2 is my first recommendation for folding and storage size, the Blade IP2 is another option worth considering.

The post The Easiest Golf Push Cart To Fold And Store appeared first on MyGolfSpy.

The Handicap Tracker monitors scores from YouTube golf videos and calculates an on-camera handicap for each player. Here are the current top 10:

• Bryson DeChambeau (+9.5)
• Jason Day (+8.7)
• Ian Poulter (+8.1)
• Nick Voke (+7.3)
• Brad Dalke (+7.2)
• Ryan Ruffels (+6.9)
• Pavan Sagoo (+6.8)
• Sean Walsh (+6.7)
• Chance Taylor (+6.4)
• James Nicholas (+6.2)
• Wesley Bryan (+6.2)

Nick Voke made the biggest move inside the top 10, climbing to fourth at +7.3. Wesley Bryan is also back in the top 10, tied with James Nicholas at +6.2.

Evan Thompson

An 8-under round will move you up the rankings pretty quickly.

Thompson shot 64 at Double Eagle Club, resulting in a 9.1-under adjusted differential. It helped him jump 11 spots, the biggest move of anyone in this update, and pushed his handicap to +3.6.

Nik Neal

Neal’s run at Torrey Pines continued and this time it ended with a club championship.

He shot 4-under on the North Course for a 6.6-under adjusted differential before shooting 2-under on the South Course for a 6.7-under adjusted differential.

Neal won the Torrey Pines Club Championship and climbed another eight spots to +5.1.

Luke Kwon

Kwon gained eight positions after two rounds where course difficulty played an important role.

He went 4-under through nine at Rams Hill for a 5.5-under adjusted differential. He then shot 2-over at Torrey Pines but that still produced a 3.7-under adjusted differential.

Kwon is now at +3.5.

Sam Heung Min

Sam Heung Min also made a big move with rounds at Rams Hill and Torrey Pines.

He shot 2-under through nine at Rams Hill for a 4-under adjusted differential. His 3-over round at Torrey Pines was another good result once course difficulty was factored in, producing a 2.9-under adjusted differential.

Those two rounds helped him climb six spots to +3.5.

Danny Elder

Elder isn’t slowing down after jumping 10 spots in our last update.

He shot 5-under at Monifieth Golf Links for a 5.6-under adjusted differential. Elder gained another five positions and improved his handicap to +4.4.

That’s 15 spots gained across the last two updates.

Matt Fryer

Fryer opened this period with a 2-under round at Seascale Golf Club.

The round produced a 2.4-under adjusted differential and helped him gain three positions. His Handicap Tracker number is now +0.5.

Josh Rutherford

Rutherford continues to move up the rankings.

He shot 2-under at Dutch Legacy at Cragun’s but the course difficulty made the round even better than the score suggests. It resulted in a 5.4-under adjusted differential.

Rutherford gained two spots and is now at +3.7.

Nick Voke

Voke’s attempt to break 30 produced one of the best nine-hole scores of the update.

He shot 6-under through nine at The Harvester, resulting in an 8.7-under adjusted differential. Voke gained two positions and moved all the way to fourth in the overall rankings at +7.3.

Slumpy

Slumpy gained two spots despite shooting 5-over through nine holes at Links Hope Island.

This move had more to do with changes elsewhere on the leaderboard than a standout round from Slumpy. He now sits at +2.2.

Joel Innes

Innes also benefited from movement elsewhere in the rankings.

He shot 8-over at Links Kennedy Bay but still gained one position during the period. His Handicap Tracker number is now 9.2.

Biggest handicap impact (single video)

Evan Thompson had the biggest single-video handicap impact of this update.

His 8-under 64 at Double Eagle Club cut 0.9 from his handicap.

Wesley Bryan and Danny Elder were next at 0.7. Bryan was 7-under through 14 holes in the YouTube Golf Tour Event 2 finale while Elder shot a 5-under 66 at Monifieth Golf Links.

Nik Neal rounded out the top four. His 2-under 70 in the final round of the Torrey Pines Club Championship cut another 0.5 from his handicap.

What did you notice from YouTube golf over the past two weeks?

The post YouTube Golf Power Rankings: Late September Update appeared first on MyGolfSpy.

For nearly a century, these golf clubs dominated the golf industry. They hold an iconic role in golf’s rich history. An entire article can be dedicated to the history surrounding persimmoms, which dates back to the late 1890s. 

However, that isn’t the purpose of this evaluation. The purpose is simple:

How does a persimmon wood fare against the modern golf driver? 

Nothing survives Father Time

We took five current persimmon wood manufacturers and tested them head-to-head against each other. And, we added a twist – a modern day driver, TaylorMade Qi4D. 

• PowerBilt Persimmon
• Larsen Golf Persimmon
• John Hayes Persimmon
• Joe Powell Classic Persimmon
• Louisville Golf Classic Persimmon

In our testing, 10 golfers participated, registering a 101.5 mph mean club head speed across all persimmon models. In comparison, they reached a higher average of 105.5 mph when swinging the modern TaylorMade Qi4D.

The beauty of persimmon woods

There has been a resurgence in the persimmon wood space. You have craftsmen today who dedicate themselves to these artisan pieces of golf history. Golf is a game of honor and there is nothing more praise worthy than individuals seeking to uphold the traditions of the game, and persimmon woods are a prime example.  

The allure of persimmon woods begins with their elegance. Every single club is meticulously hand-carved out of a single block of timber, showcasing remarkable craftsmanship. Looking at the test models, the level of precision is striking—a true testament to the extraordinary skill required by classic clubmakers to shape these wooden heads by hand. They are, without question, works of art.  

The sheer fact that the likes of Jack Nicklaus, Ben Hogan, Arnold Palmer, Sam Snead, and Gary Player all won numerous events with persimmon woods is outstanding. Every golfer in those eras excelled using persimmon woods. Jack Nicklaus alone won 17 of his 18 majors with a persimmon wood. Who knows how those golfers would fare with today’s modern technology? 

Who stands out as a top performer? Let’s take a look. 

Persimmon wood data

No one expects a persimmon wood to outperform a modern day driver. If you do, well, I don’t think we can help you there. But, head-to-head performance between persimmon woods is eye-catching. 

Louisville Golf’s The Classic claims the title of best for distance among the persimmon wood contenders. It also produces the fastest ball speed at 143.4 mph. This is 1.85 mph faster than the slowest persimmon wood for ball speed (Larsen Golf Persimmon Wood). 

Similar gaps in performance show up in our Most Wanted Driver testing. During the 2026 test, ball speeds varied by 3.45 mph from the fastest model to the slowest. This variation proves that even persimmon woods exhibit distinct performance differences. Evaluating equipment highlights these nuances—no two persimmon woods behave identically, just as no two modern drivers perform the same.

Modern engineering is superior

There are glaring differences between a persimmon wood driver and the modern driver. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to make this determination. Yet, it does attest to the advancements in technology and the processing capabilities of manufacturers. These advancements by R&D are evident. 

In this case, the modern driver, TaylorMade Qi4D is exponentially faster and longer than all of the persimmon woods. Here are key ball data metrics:

• 9.20 mph faster ball speed vs the persimmon wood average
• 27.8 yards longer carry vs the persimmon wood average
• 25.7 yards longer total distance vs the persimmon wood average

Ultimately, persimmon wood technology cannot keep pace with a modern driver. A whopping 27.8 yards shorter carry distance on average for the persimmon wood is the glaring metric.

Modern drivers hold a distinct edge over traditional persimmon woods, much like modern race cars compared to classic models. In high-performance racing—whether NASCAR or Formula 1—engineering and design advancements have dramatically evolved. Motorsport engineers meticulously analyze every measurable variable, eagerly capitalizing on even a 1% gain in performance.

Golf equipment R&D operates on the very same principle. Today’s club designers continuously refine technologies to unlock faster ball speeds and maximize forgiveness across the entire clubface. When measured against classic persimmon woods, the performance benefits of modern engineering are unmistakably clear.

Do people still play with persimmon woods?

Nostalgia is intoxicating. Of course, there is a subculture of persimmon wood fanatics. For example, every single one of the persimmon woods we tested are pieces of exquisite art. They’re masterpieces expertly crafted. Each of these craftsmen takes absolute pride in their work. 

You can find a few organizations who honor the game by coordinating competitive events. Two specific ones are: Persimmon Brotherhood & Golf Heritage Society. 

For those of you who have hit a persimmon, you can attest to the feel and feedback they offer versus the modern day driver. This is arguably one of the underlying reasons why golfers will use them to this day.  

Here are a few comments from our testers specific to each persimmon wood:

• “This is a fantastic club. Gorgeous, the best of the group by far in looks, sound and performance.” – Joe Powell Classic
• “I love the custom design with MyGolfSpy. Special thank you to John Hayes. It is GORGEOUS. Performance is decent. Hit some solid shots with it.” – John Hayes Persimmon Wood
• “I can get accustomed to this persimmon wood. LOVE the looks. It is SLICK.” – Larsen Golf Persimmon Wood
• “Classic throughout and easy to hit and control. The glossy finish is a bit bright, but not horrible. The dark wood finish was nice compared to others.” – Louisville Golf The Classic
• “This is decent across the board and the sweet spot was hot, while off-center shots still performed but showed decrease in data.” – PowerBilt Persimmon

History is worth respecting, but newer is better

“Is newer better?” serves as a foundational question for MyGolfSpy. There is zero question that a modern day driver is better for your golf game versus a persimmon wood. The data is undeniable. 

Persimmon woods and their heritage nevertheless command immense respect. As golfers, acknowledging their undeniable role in the sport’s history is essential. They established the groundwork upon which contemporary drivers are designed, leaving manufacturers with a lasting debt of gratitude to those pioneering artisans who shaped golf equipment for more than a century.

Tell us about your experience with persimmon woods in the comments!!

The post Persimmon Woods Tested: Nostalgia vs Pure Performance appeared first on MyGolfSpy.

The 101 MKII won our game -mprovement iron test with a 9.2 MGS Score including a category-leading 9.5 for accuracy and a 9.1 for forgiveness. The 201 MKII also performed well in the player’s distance category, earning an 8.6 overall score with a 9.0 for forgiveness and an 8.8 for accuracy.

MyGolfSpy employees Ty Allred and Britt Olizarowicz put the Takomo irons in the bag for 30 days. Ty took the 101 MKII game-improvement irons. Britt took the 201 MKII player’s distance set.

Neither of us had spent meaningful time playing a set of Takomo irons before this. With both models coming in well below the price of many mainstream iron sets, we wanted to know what those test results looked like once we put them in our own bags.

Since the irons performed so well in testing the goal was to help share things like how they look behind the ball? How they feel? How quickly can you put them into play? And, at this price, where do you notice the difference?

Ty: The 101 MKII was better on the course than I expected

I normally play PING i525 irons and I’ve also been working through a grip change so my swing wasn’t exactly sitting in one perfectly predictable place when the Takomos showed up.

My first impression was that the 101 MKII looked clean and fairly sleek for a game-improvement iron. I could see some places where the finish and overall design didn’t look quite as premium as my PINGs but there was nothing at address that bothered me.

Once I started hitting them, consistency was what stood out.

They felt hot off the face, launched easily and flew a little lower than my PINGs. My initial impression was that they leaned slightly more toward distance than accuracy.

Interestingly, our 2026 test suggests accuracy is probably the bigger story and the more I had them in play that’s what I noticed as well.

The 101 MKII earned the highest accuracy score in the game-improvement category at 9.5. Its 8.6 distance score was solid but distance wasn’t why it won.

After a few weeks with the irons in play, I had one of my best rounds.

I hit nine greens in one round. As far as I can remember, my previous best was six. I also shot in the 70s.

I’m not going to say the irons caused that. There are too many other variables in a round of golf. But the fact that our larger test identified accuracy as the 101 MKII’s biggest strength and then I had my best green-hitting round with them was hard to ignore.

I also did some additional GCQuad work against my PINGs. The builds weren’t identical so I wouldn’t treat those numbers as a true head-to-head test. What was interesting was that some of the same tendencies showed up again, particularly tighter patterns in the scoring clubs.

The 5-iron was a little different. It flew lower and spun less which is something I’d pay attention to if you already struggle to get enough height from your long irons.

My biggest takeaway was pretty simple: for my game, the 101 MKII didn’t feel like an iron I needed to make excuses for because of the price.

Britt: The 201 MKII made the trade-offs pretty clear

I play Titleist T250 irons. I came into this with a pretty good idea of what I expect from a player’s distance iron.

The 201 MKII is bulkier at address than I expected. I like the overall design and think they look good in the bag. From the top, they don’t have quite the same refined player’s distance look I was hoping for.

The bigger profile has a benefit, though. They are easy to hit.

I put the Takomos in my bag and went to the range and out for a quick nine. I played well with them immediately and didn’t notice big changes in performance from one hole to the next. They are consistent and there was no real pressure to hit the center of the face to see a decent result.

That consistency lines up pretty well with our testing.

The 201 MKII earned a 9.0 forgiveness score.

Where my current irons had the clear advantage was distance. The Takomo had a slightly lower flight and I couldn’t quite maximize the distance that I normally do with iron shots. For me, it was a few yards less. If you have some speed and are looking for consistency, I don’t think the distance penalty is enough to worry about.

I also saw a tendency for the ball to work slightly left. Again, that could be related to differences in shaft and overall set makeup so I wouldn’t pin that on the 201 MKII itself.

While the distance performance and overall accuracy were not glaring issues, the feel is probably the most obvious thing you’ll notice when comparing the 201 MKII to a premium iron.

The 201 MKII feels harsher at impact than my T250. If you handed me both sets without telling me what they cost and asked which was more expensive, I could tell you.

That doesn’t mean the Takomo feels bad. It means there is a level of refinement in the more premium irons that you are paying for. If that matters to you it’s something to be aware of.

There will always be somebody who says you can’t pick irons based on feel you have to choose performance and I understand that viewpoint. The on-course performance of the Takomo irons was not better than the Titleist T250 irons for me and with the feel and look differences, there would be no reason to make the switch to Takomo.

Where we both noticed the price difference

This was probably the most interesting part of trying two different Takomo models.

We both noticed areas where these irons felt less expensive than what we normally play. For Ty, some of that showed up in the cosmetics.

For Britt, it was more obvious in the feel at impact and the look from address.

Neither of us came away thinking Takomo somehow found a way to give you every part of a premium $1,200-plus iron set for half the money.

There are differences.

The question is whether those differences show up in the performance that matters. Our 2026 game-improvement iron testing suggests they often don’t.

The 101 MKII won the game-improvement category outright. The 201 MKII finished with an 8.6 overall score and was particularly strong for forgiveness.

Who should play Takomo?

We both ended up in a similar place.

Think about the golfer who has been playing the same irons for years. Their game has improved. Their grooves have seen better days and maybe the set they bought five or 10 years ago doesn’t suit them anymore.

They want something new but spending $1,200 or more on irons isn’t realistic or simply isn’t a priority.

Takomo fits that space very well. It’s also a great option for new players who want a set they can use while they figure out the game and make their way to the iron category they will stay in for years to come.

There are more refined irons that feel better, have polished shaping and, sometimes, more distance. But neither of us felt like we had to fight the equipment once we put these clubs in play.

Our 2026 testing had already shown us that Takomo could perform. Playing them ourselves helped answer the other question.

What are you giving up for the lower price?

The post Takomo Irons Did Really Well In Our Testing So We Tried Two Sets Ourselves appeared first on MyGolfSpy.