What if golf isn’t just a game, but maybe moral code or even more? I open up and share the moments that made me see golf as a kind of secular faith—rituals, standards, and the quiet work we do when nobody’s watching.

We talk about how COVID packed tee sheets without truly creating more "golfers", why bunkers go unraked and greens riddled with ball marks, and what Scotland gets right: community at the heart of the course, honest handicaps, firm ground that teaches scoring from the soil up. From there, we build a case for self-policing and leading by example. Fix three ball marks a green. Rake every bunker that needs it. Take your hat off inside. Thank the staff. These aren’t fussy rules; they’re small choices that protect pace, conditions, and the shared experience that makes golf feel sacred.

Along the way, we get into accountability and the inner game: the solitude between shots, the sting of imperfection, and why progress comes from owning the miss, not excusing it. We explore golf karma, the difference between talking improvement and doing it, and the story of a competitor reminding Tiger Woods to replace his mark with a title on the line—a perfect snapshot of honor over outcome. If you’ve ever felt the course ask more of you than a number on a card, this conversation is for you.

If this resonates, subscribe, leave a review, and share it with a playing partner who needs to hear it. Tell us your code: what standard do you hold when no one’s looking?

The roars at Bethpage were real—but so was the unease. I was on the ground for the 2025 Ryder Cup, and what I witnessed was a jarring split-screen: world-class golf from both teams and a fan atmosphere that too often went from passion to hostility. Europe executed in foursomes and four-ball with poise and precision, while the U.S. mounted a gutsy Sunday charge that turned the final day into must-watch drama. From JT’s magic to Rose vs. Cam Young on 18, the shots were worthy of the stage. The question is whether the stage—and the crowd culture around it—honored the game they showcased.

We talk through how the event tipped toward spectacle: chants that crossed lines, personal attacks aimed at players and families, and a security presence that told its own story. I unpack why the TV narrative missed how tense it felt on the course, why this wasn’t just “New York energy,” and how operating decisions—from choosing an MC to tolerating provocation—shaped behavior. Then we get practical. Bethpage’s fallaway surrounds erased sightlines, corporate structures walled off views, movement clogged in choke points, and basic amenities lagged. If the goal is to grow the game, pricing out families while delivering a poor live experience is a losing play.

We also tackle the pay debate head-on. These are professionals, their allocations go to charity, and comparing them to Olympian amateurs is a category mistake. Respect the craft, reward the performance, and focus on reforming fan culture rather than scapegoating players. Finally, I lay out fixes: choose venues with natural viewing berms (consider anchor sites), reduce corporate obstruction, enforce a clear code of conduct with real ejections, and channel crowd energy into supporting your team rather than demeaning the other. The rivalry is the point; contempt is not.

If you care about golf’s future—and love the Ryder Cup at its best—listen, share, and tell us what you’d change. Subscribe, leave a review, and join the conversation so we can push this event back toward the standard the players set.

The debate about optimal short game technique has heated up in golf instruction circles, with many coaches advocating for the "double-digits down" approach to chipping and pitching. But does this technique really deliver the promised results for all golfers? Michael dives deep into the biomechanics of the short game with scientific precision and measured data.

Using sophisticated equipment including Swing Catalyst dual force plates and TrackMan launch monitors, Michael demonstrates the actual effects of different attack angles on ball flight and spin production. The findings are eye-opening: increasing attack angle from 7.8 to 11.5 degrees downward only added about 150 RPMs of spin while significantly decreasing landing angle from 30.4 to 23.5 degrees. The result? A ball that actually rolled out further despite the steeper attack—precisely what most golfers are trying to avoid when seeking more spin.

What makes this analysis particularly valuable is the clear distinction between center of pressure and center of mass—concepts often confused in golf instruction. The data reveals that pressure distribution (83% on the lead foot with steeper attack angles versus 64% with more neutral setups) is what creates the difference in club delivery, not body position. This has profound implications for how golfers should approach their short game technique based on their individual biomechanics.

For players who struggle with vertical force production—which includes most amateurs—staying heavily on the lead side through impact creates significant challenges. It restricts the backswing, steepens the club too early, and requires precise timing that many find difficult to master consistently. Michael makes a compelling case for tailoring your technique to your physical capabilities rather than following trends that might work beautifully for tour players but poorly for your unique body.

Whether you're a coach looking to better understand the science behind different short game approaches or a player trying to find the most effective technique for your game, this episode provides evidence-based insights that cut through the noise of competing instructional philosophies. What matters isn't which technique is "right"—but which one is right for you.