Golf or Golf Digest

[BaronV]

I subscribe to both and like Golf Digest more because they have more equipment review articles which is the main reason I subscribe. The very best golf magazine in my opinion is the British Golf Today magazine. In-depth articles on a variety of items and a comprehensive coverage on equipment that covers a wide range of prices and non-OEM brands. Too bad that when it hits the U.S. news stands the magazine becomes $10 in price.

[Mhinderaker]

I get BOTH for FREE so I can give a very unbiased opinion here, but honestly I just like Golf Digest MUCH better.

Better articles from better players, and the magazine is much better written in my opinion.

[GolfnGriff]

I like both but give the edge to Golf Digest because the articles are Excellent... However, get both if you can they are fun to look through.

[Erlend]

I subscribe to both and like Golf Digest more because they have more equipment review articles which is the main reason I subscribe. The very best golf magazine in my opinion is the British Golf Today magazine. In-depth articles on a variety of items and a comprehensive coverage on equipment that covers a wide range of prices and non-OEM brands. Too bad that when it hits the U.S. news stands the magazine becomes $10 in price.

Holy, stop complaining. I bought Today`s golfer and Golf Digest at one of few shops in Trondheim, Norway today. Price? 95 kroner, or 17 USD after todays currency.

I guess I prefer Golf Digest, as I find the articles in general more appealing, but I buy them all, when they are available, of course, as the golf magazines made here in Norway in general are weak.

[putterboy]

I like them both....but like the articles generally more in golf digest. That said one article in Golf called the O-factor

http://www.golf.com/golf/instruction...593284,00.html

[Big Lex]

Golf Digest, by far.

Just a better product, journalistically.

One time somebody showed me a Golf Magazine individual instruction article on certain aspects of the swing--it was the ones they did on the brown paper that were tailored to certain types of players (Power Hitter, Straight Shooter, Beginner, etc.).

Anyway, there were the instruction sequences with the drawings/sketches that they put in there. Anyway, a Golf Digest instruction article from several months prior showed photographs in the exact poses that were sketched for the Golf Magazine article.

In other words, GOLF ripped off a Golf Digest instructional article, pawning it off as their own.

GOLF Magazine, I think, is aiming at a different demographic...sort of a "Stuff" or "FHM" clientele, for Golf.

I've enjoyed reading GOLF in the past, and there are people I like and respect who subscribe to and read GOLF, so I can't say it's all bad, but I think Golf Digest is clearly superior.

[iacas]

In other words, GOLF ripped off a Golf Digest instructional article, pawning it off as their own.

I don't know, man. Golf tips are so recycled who's to say Golf Digest didn't rip off a Golf Magazine article from 1984*?

Honestly, when was the last time you truly saw a "new" golf tip? I read both, and subscribe to both. I'd give the edge to Golf Digest, but it's probably 60/40 at most. I'm just glad they no longer publish the magazine in that awkward size from the 1990s. * or some year long ago when Golf was being published... I think they were around back then or even much earlier.

[Big Lex]

Yeah, golf tips and instruction is constantly recycled...

But the hilarious thing about this instance was that the artist for GOLF had literally copied - as much as one can with sketching a photograph - the photos from Golf Digest. It was basically counterfeiting, or forgery, or whatever the journalistic equivalent is...plagiarism (spelling?) is the term for words, I don't know if it applies to visual images.

My brother, who is the person who first introduced me to golf and the first low handicapper I know, preferred GOLF for years. I think GOLF under George Peper was different than GOLF today.

[iacas]

But the hilarious thing about this instance was that the artist for GOLF had literally copied - as much as one can with sketching a photograph - the photos from Golf Digest.

I'll have to assume your memory is better than my guessing. I don't know what images you're talking about, but they clearly made an impression on you. If true, I wonder what the back story was there. People behaving badly is always interesting.

My brother, who is the person who first introduced me to golf and the first low handicapper I know, preferred GOLF for years. I think GOLF under George Peper was different than GOLF today.

Agreed.

[WhiteSoxFan]

Thanks for all of the responses.
The responses were so mixed the first week or so of this thread that I went ahead and subscribed to both.

[Guest ShadowXOR]

Thanks to the overwhelming majority I just subscribed to Golf Digest. When someone said Golf is geared towards the FHM/Maxim crowd that instantly sold me on Golf Digest.

[keb]

How does the magazine differ from the free on line site?

[iacas]

How does the magazine differ from the free on line site?

It kills trees?

Also, articles are published more regularly and you can read it without using electricity if you'd like.