• Announcements

    • iacas

      GAME GOLF Ryder Cup Contest   09/22/2016

      Join our GAME GOLF Ryder Cup Challenge to win an autographed GAME GOLF, a Pebble Steel watch, and many more great prizes!
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
bSd

Golf Magazine vs. Golf Digest

0  

  1. 1. Golf Magazine or Golf Digest?

    • Golf Magazine
      27
    • Golf Digest
      93
    • Other
      9

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

42 posts in this topic

If you had to choose one or the other, which one would you go with and why? Personally, I am a little bit biased in favor of Golf Digest, I just find that it has articles and sections that are a bit more interesting and captivating. Also, they usually can get the "big names" more often to do guest articles/tips for them.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

Golf Digest is still a great magazine but there are SO many instructors segments that I think its lost some cohesion...you could really tie your swing in knots if you tried to follow all of them. GOLF is going away from its classic drawings and becoming the same way...

I like LINKS best, my only complaint is that its not monthy.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I subscribe to them BOTH, and look forward to reading each for different reasons. I think both are equal with their Majors coverage, but here's where I think their strengths are...

GOLF DIGEST
Great equipment reviews
The standard course rankings
Tiger/Annika on staff

GOLF MAGAZINE
Great instruction for the average player
Strong new Sports Illustrated partnership
Better website ( www.golf.com )
David Feherty on staff (Golf's Rick Riley)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually read both regularly. If I had to pick one it would be Golf Magazine, simply because of Feherety.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I subscribe to Golf Digest and I enjoy the equipment reviews and instruction (except for David Leadbetter - "Find your swing chi" - Seriously?). I also like the columnists David Owen and the Golf Guru.

Jorgesgolf
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Golf Magazine, I love David Feherty.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I have to go with Golf Magazine too. Better articles on tour players and I love George Peper. I like GD but there is too much instruction. I want to read about cool places to golf and about life on tour.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I subscribe to Golf Digest; I only read some of the tips, as I find if you read them all you get the classic paralysis by analysis, but I find their instruction more useful than Golf. I really like GD's interviews and columns, and the Hot List issue is my favourite of the year. That being said, since Golf became a SI publication, I find myself buying it more and enjoying it more than I used to. The one thing I don't like about GD is Dan Jenkins; I know his history and all, but I've never found any of his articles funny. The guy seriously needs to retire, and if he doesn't, they should send him off to pasture.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, GD > GM.

I find the major previews in Golf Digest to be superior, as well as the product reviews and golf course rankings. I agree that GD has become too instruction heavy, and I do enjoy Feherty's articles. Regardless, I still prefer Golf Digest.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed the club test in GM this year(this month), over the hot list in GD.. although more equipment was reviewed, I felt some of GD's reviews may have been biased. Getting to meet each tester and have different hanicaps rate the clubs is better than taking the editors word for it. Plus the hot list's rating system was a complete miss. Whoever came up with the categories and square box's of different colors with stars in them should be fired. I read both monthly and I no longer pay attention to the instructional articles in either because they're so bogus. "hit it 50 yards further" The "O" factor "how to hit it like Tiger". It's like taking a lesson from 5 different pros in one day and trying to apply what they've said on the golf course.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been getting Golf Magazine for almost a year now and decided to order Golf Digest (haven't gotten first issue yet) as well. I like Golf magazine, but some of the "lessons" tend to be contrary to what my teaching pro is telling me. Every pro has there own "system" and it can get confusing, but I do like to read some of the items regarding the short game.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a subscription to Golf Digest and buy a copy off the shelf of Golf Magazine. I look forward to both every month. The only thing I think Golf Digest could do less of is the travel section. It should only be a page or two and sometimes it seems like it takes up half the magazine.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't justify paying off the rack price for any magazine I buy regularly so I subscribe to, and enjoy, both.

$12 vs $48? That's a no brainer...
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I subscribe to Golf Digest, but I read Golf Magazine regularly as well. In my opinion, Golf Digest gets big name people to do swing tips, but I do agree that its not good to follow them all.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had to choose one or the other, which one would you go with and why? Personally, I am a little bit biased in favor of Golf Digest, I just find that it has articles and sections that are a bit more interesting and captivating. Also, they usually can get the "big names" more often to do guest articles/tips for them.

Like most people who have taken the poll I think Golf Digest is the better magazine (especially when it comes to instruction). Among the Playing Editors with Golf Digest are: Justin Leonard, Phil Mickelson, Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer, Nick Price, Tom Watson, and Annika Sorenstam (oddly Ernie Els and Karrie Webb are no longer listed). Among the Teaching Professionals listed for Golf Digest are Butch Harmon, David Leadbetter (who hasn't wrote anything good in a while

), Jim Mclean, and Rick Smith. They also tend to have swing sequences of better players (Fred Couples in the April issue). Golf Magazine's current instruction is awful with instruction that isn't logical and doesn't make sense by people I've never heard of before. Back in the 80's and 90's Golf Magazine was the better magazine with Greg Norman, Butch Harmon, Peter Jacobsen, Nick Price, Nick Faldo, and Jack Nicklaus writing articles for them.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • I like it. Especially compared to nearly all past US Ryder Cup kits. Actually before I dish out too much praise, do they have a huge Stars and Stripes flag emblazoned on the back?
    • I would say it depends on what club you're talking about. For drivers I would say that the best performing drivers of all time have been made within the last five years. Aerodynamics, material science, and the proliferation of launch monitors and data driven design have resulted in improvements across the board in distance and forgiveness as of late. I know that I personally saw a decent improvement on my G10 when I switched to a G30, in that I gained between 10 and 15 yards without sacrificing accuracy. This is on the high end of what aerodynamics can provide though, simply because higher swing speeds receive a greater benefit from decreased drag. Depending on the individual you may not see much difference so long as the driver itself was made within the last ten years or so. For irons I would be inclined to say that the main difference in the irons of yesteryear and the irons of today is forgiveness. The irons made today are much easier to hit than previous irons, simply because they aren't as drastically punishing on mis-hits as the old blades. The PING Eye2 irons seemed to be the first "widespread" GI iron that sparked the trend towards irons that were easier for the layman to hit. That being said, I found my s55 irons (their "blade" from several years ago) to be more forgiving than the Eye2's. Based on that and observations from other clubs I have hit I would say the average golfer would be best suited by irons made within the last 10 to 15 years that are in good condition with sharp grooves. If you play muscleback irons though, there's pretty much zero difference between modern "true" musclebacks and those of yore, though the current muscle-cavity irons (like the iBlade and MP-15) will likely be at least a bit easier to hit than the older blades while maintaining a similar style.  Wedges are the only thing that I would argue the "latest and greatest" provides a tangible benefit for. The reasoning for this is entirely different however, in that it's based solely off the condition of the grooves in older wedges. As wedges grow old, and get used, the grooves wear to the point that there becomes a noticeable performance difference - especially when playing out of the rough. For this reason alone do I say that the average golfer (assuming they golf at least once a week during the golfing season) is best suited by wedges no older than two or three years old.  Putters are the odd man out here. I don't think it matters in the slightest when your putter was manufactured, so long as you keep a reasonable grip on it so that it doesn't slip out of your hands. I personally am a fan of the newer milled putters for the feel they provide, but it doesn't mean I couldn't probably putt nearly as well with an original Anser putter in the same style. I think the average golfer is best suited by whatever putter style and features allow them to consistently roll the ball along their target line, with no age requirement. In summary, considering the advancement of technology, I would feel comfortable putting these "maximum age caps" on equipment for the average weekend golfer to get the most out of his/her game: Drivers: ~10 years old or newer Irons: ~15 years old or newer Wedges: ~3 years old or newer Putter: Whatever works best for you That being said, you may still enjoy the game with any kind of equipment out there. I just think that equipment that follows these guidelines will let the average weekend golfer get about as much as they can out of their game without necessarily breaking the bank. Like @iacas said, you may find incremental improvements by purchasing the R1 over an old G5 but the question then becomes whether or not this improvement is worth the price difference. This question can only be answered by the person buying the club. It can't be denied, however, that a driver from the 1960's will be severely outclassed by the G5 and the R1, making either of them a much better choice than the 1960's driver. Interestingly enough, I have had the desire to go the opposite way for a while now. I bought the s55's my last go around, and I'm thinking that my next set of irons will be a more "traditional" muscleback iron (since the s55 is mostly a CB), along the likes of the MP-4 irons by Mizuno. I hit the ball consistently enough that I don't care about the lack of forgiveness, and I believe that the wonderful look and feel of those irons, along with the little bit of extra vertical control (can thin it slightly to make punch shots even easier) would offset whatever I lose in forgiveness. I know that I would most certainly never go to an iron like the AP2, the G, or the M2. The chunky look of the club (along with the offset) gets into my head nowadays and makes me feel uncomfortable standing over the ball in a manner similar to how I used to be intimidated by the look of blades at address. I would gain forgiveness, but at the price of distance and trajectory control - an unacceptable trade for me considering I value distance and trajectory control much more highly than forgiveness.
    • My newest clubs are pretty old. Maybe 2006? I don't really remember. The other day, just for the heck of it,  I played using my old Bazooka Iron Woods. (2i-LW) Shot my normal score. Those Ironwoods are probably 15-16 years old. I don't think at this stage of my life, that a new set would make that much difference. 
    • My irons are from 1978, driver and woods from 2004 (same G5 as you)....at my current playing level, I don't feel like my clubs are holding my scores back. I will be updating my wedges to something designed this century in the near future but I'll probably regrip and keep playing my grandfather's old Eye irons a couple more years. There's something to be said about being familiar with your equipment too. The control you talk about with your driver comes from hitting a lot of balls with it and getting to know how it responds to different things. That's tough to give up considering that it could take weeks to develop that relationship with a new driver...at least that helps me cure the new toy bug and keep the wallet closed. :)
    • Hah, I was thinking the same thing when I saw that pic go up on the landing page.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. mahariji_slice
      mahariji_slice
      (35 years old)
  • Blog Entries