Golf terms/golf analysis you don't 100% get or find funny


Warning: this is meant to be a fun topic in which you admit you aren’t Brandel Chamblee… maybe one more geared to the guy who plays a “Taylormade M1 3wood” and not so much to the guy who plays the “2018 TM M1 3HL w/ Hzrdus Red 6.0 75 + 2* w/ slight Fade Bias off the tee but draws from the deck” 3wood guy.

Anywho - I’ve was a casual golf fan most my life and then got really into it about 3-4 years ago. Started playing/practicing a lot and now watch the sh*t out of the golf channel and follow the tour closely. Yes, I can now spot an over-the-top swing, understand what a double cross is and can see that DJ has a bowed wrist at the top… but…

But… I’ll admit, there are still times when I hear various golf analyst say something that - while I accept it’s true - I have to admit I wouldn’t have spotted it on my own or don’t 100% understand it to the point where I could say it later and keep a straight face.
So - question is: what technical aspect of the game is still a little above your paygrade?


  • "this is a “ballstrikers course”. What? Aren’t they all? When are you guys ever going to say “now this is a course where the subpar ballstrikers can thrive”?
  • “oh, as you can see there, he releases the putter head beautifully”. Dont really see it.
  • As much as I play golf… I don’t think about, or analyze, the grain all that often. The commentators mention it on every putting surface.
  • While I can clearly see when that Jordan puts left hand low, or Phil uses the claw grip… I don’t exactly know how these grips work.
  • “one piece takeaway” - great little nerdy golf term.
  • “as you can see there, the club is across the line at the top of the swing”
  • Of course, I am still working on my ability to ID various grands strands.

Anybody else?

  • Not necessarily technical but the term “Nuance” is a tough one. The course is nuanced, the shot is nuanced, the putt is nuanced, the wind is a nuance. Seems like its just a general term for something out of the ordinary.

  • “Flighting the ball” - is it always a knockdown shot?


you mentioned the “doublecross” as one of the terms you know. My understanding is that you meant to hit a cut and you end up hooking it badly. Is this right? My guess for why it would be calling it that is that when you try and hit a cut your path would be right to left and your face would be open to cause it to spin back to the right, but if you “doublecrossed” it, both path and face would be going to the left, hence the “double” cross. I thought I had this down, but a buddy was trying to tell me it was something else

and to do my best to try and answer your question about the ballstriker’s course would be that I think there are some courses that emphasize short game with tougher green complexes, but of course better ballstriking is always an advantage. I think golf analysts just need something to fill the broadcast sometimes…


You got it right.
Worst thing that can happen in golf. Setup aimed at left rough with the intentions or playing a fade into fairway… then you accidently double-cross yourself and hook it even further left.

Only one man has mastered he double cross: @ClubProGuy and he embraces it.
It takes balls to setup aimed at right side AND play a cut…


Thanks for this thread.

What the hell is Strokes Gained, and why do I care about that as a stat?


Do you want answers for any of these or is the thread just for people who want to know more? Not trying to be a dick, just asking as I think I can help on some of them.


You are correct on the double cross. Usually happens if the hands release while trying to hold the face open to fade the ball, at least in my case.


Strokes gained is a great measurement. It’s how many strokes an individual player gained or lost, in relation to the field for any of tracked categories, in the most basic of terms. Here is a link that breaks it down.


( I wasnt really looking for answers)…

… more just looking to point out overly analytical golf terms that only we hear on the reg, understand to be true, but can’t 100% explain ourselves. So many good ones out there.


That makes sense and why I wanted to check first.


I love it when the pros say “yea, on 17 we decided to hit 2iron and just throw is up into the wind.”

What?? I don’t have a 2 iron and if I did I probably couldn’t get it more than 20 feet off the ground… let alone “just throw it up into the wind”


This has been an analysis pet peeve of mine for years but EVERY SINGLE TIME Tiger shoots a round over par the announcers fall over themselves talking about how “he really grinded out there” or “you know what Johnny 74 is just about the best Tiger could have shot today”. It’s incredible. They act like the most physically gifted and dominant golfer in the history of the game is some journeyman pro who is hitting 3 shots into par 5s and trying to ram home 15 foot par putts to make the cut on the number.


Breaking news: Sergio fan doesn’t like Tiger. Golf world shocked.


I’ve always loved people discussing “ballstriking” or a “ballstriker’s course”. I’ve always assumed it meant someone who kept the ball in play or a course where you really had no room to miss, but not really based on anything. Never actually seen any kind of definition for it.


I have noticed that good ballstrikers really compress the ball nicely.


“There is just no getting around it… this is just a ballstrikers golf course.” - Trip Isenhour

“Here we get a live look at Russell Knox… consistently one of the best ballstrikers on tour; year in and year out.”

I’m still waiting for the day when one of them says “Now THIS is a course in which you don’t really have to be a great ballstriker… and thus I think (_______) has a decent shot this week”.