Golfweek – Golfing Networks

Motocaddy Electric Caddies Used by University of Wyoming to Win the Golfweek National Golf Invitational

admin — Mon, 15 Jun 2026 04:13:11 +0000

-NGI event marked the first time an electric caddy was used in NCAA golf-

Motocaddy, the world’s leading electric caddy brand, announced today that the University of Wyoming used its game-enhancing products en route to victory at the Golfweek Women’s National Golf Invitational (NGI) over the weekend.

The 54-hole stroke-play event, held at Ak-Chin Southern Dunes in Maricopa, Arizona, saw the University of Wyoming’s four lowest players experience a Motocaddy M1 DHC electric caddy to help secure a record-breaking wire-to-wire victory in the fourth edition of the Women’s NGI. The Wyoming Cowgirls carded an impressive three-round total of 873 (+9) to beat the previous NGI record by four strokes.

From a performance standpoint, participants who used an electric caddy scored six shots better on average than those who opted to carry their clubs. This included a three-shot difference in the final round alone, where using an electric caddy provided a clear advantage in the hot and windy conditions when fatigue had undoubtedly set in.

Motocaddy’s sponsorship of the NGI offered participants the unique opportunity to experience an electric caddy for the first time in NCAA golf, with 70% of players using an electric caddy, and 85% of the field relying on a Motocaddy product (electric caddy or push cart) to play without the strain of carrying a golf bag over the three days. The final leaderboard showed that nine out of the top 12 players used a Motocaddy product over the weekend.

“We’d like to congratulate the University of Wyoming team on their success at the NGI where we were thrilled to see such strong usage of our leading products,” says Andy Warren, VP of Sales at Motocaddy. “This is a real landmark moment for Motocaddy and the electric caddy market as a whole, and we are proud to be leading the charge in helping collegiate golfers get the best out of their game.”

Commenting on the response from participants, Golfweek’s Lance Ringler, NGI Tournament Director, says: “It was really cool to see so many players using the electric carts. All the comments were positive, with most saying how easy it was! To have the NGI be the first college tournament to use this was exciting for us. This week represented something that could become more widespread in college golf.”

According to Josey Stender, Head Women’s Golf Coach at the University of Wyoming, Motocaddy electric caddies were a tremendous benefit to her team throughout the competition. “From the initial instruction through to the competition itself, the user-experience was seamless, and the caddies really supported each player’s physical and mental endurance – especially in the heat when tiredness kicked in,” she says. “They relieved the enormous stress of carrying a golf bag for three successive rounds and we’d absolutely look to use again if permitted.”

The Motocaddy electric caddy range is comprised of the award-winning M7 GPS REMOTE and M7 REMOTE, offering ultra-responsive remote navigation and exceptional control on all terrains; the M5 GPS DHC, featuring next-generation GPS software and a 3.5” LCD touchscreen display; and the M1 DHC models, widely recognized as the world’s simplest-to-use compact-folding model. Each model showcases strikingly modern looks with advanced technology, premium finishes and a streamlined design to deliver a smarter, more intuitive walking experience.

Additionally, the individual champion used a Motocaddy QB2 push cart on her way to a tournament-record victory, following rounds of 71, 68 and 70 for a three-day total of 209 (6-under par).

“The entire Motocaddy team is incredibly proud of the association with the NGI and we are delighted with the overwhelmingly positive reaction to our game-enhancing products,” adds Warren. “It’s made us super excited to work with coaches and players at next week’s men’s event and showcase why using an electric caddy is the best decision an elite-level golfer can make.”

For more information about Motocaddy products, including electric caddies, push carts, bags, and accessories, please visit www.motocaddy.us, email andy.warren@motocaddy.com or follow @motocaddyusa across all social media platforms.

-ends-

For further information, please contact Matt Curtis at Sports Impact at matt.curtis@sports-impact.com or Oliver Churcher, Marketing Director at marketing@motocaddy.com.

Source link

Golfweek Q&A: Why TaylorMade is slowing its driver release schedule

admin — Fri, 29 May 2026 13:46:25 +0000

Learn why TaylorMade believes longer product cycles could benefit golfers, fitters and future innovation.

Last Friday, TaylorMade Golf confirmed that it is moving its metalwood lineup (drivers, fairway woods and hybrids) to a two-year product cycle. That means the Qi4D family introduced in 2026 will remain the company’s flagship metalwood line through 2027, with the next major driver launch expected in 2028.

Golfweek spoke with Brian Bazzel, a vice president at TaylorMade who is in charge of product creation, as well as research and development, about why the company made the decision, what it means for golfers and fitters, and how modern driver production is changing.

Golfweek: TaylorMade, for a long time, has been one of the companies that leads the metalwood category. The cadence has been that every year new drivers come out. What changed internally that made you decide the time is right to now move to a two-year product cycle?

Bazzel: I don’t know if it was so much an internal change as it was sort of studying what was going on in the market. Certainly, there’s things happening inside the building related to the advancements of innovation, and the impact or the complexity of those innovations to deliver more performance. We’re definitely studying and understanding what it takes these days to stay on top of things. And the reality is, it just is more complicated to show significant gains. So, between what consumers are doing externally and what it would take internally to do the things that we think are meaningful, it kind of added up to this decision.

Golfweek: How much did the fact that you’re getting close to the limits on things like moment of inertia (MOI), ball speed and overall performance factor based on the USGA and R&A rules, go into this decision?

Bazzel: We still believe there’s meat on the bone. We do believe there are advancements. And if you think about it, in a perfect state, I know they won’t allow it for it, but if you can get maximum COR [coefficient of restitution, a measure of a club face’s springiness] across the entire face every time for the player and add all the corrective nature to that driver so that even your worst swings would result in something better. I mean, that’s still what we’re going after. And there’s still ways to do that. But the reality is we are pushing up against a lot of the rules. But, I’d also say that the creativity and sort of innovative spirit that we have here still leaves us with a lot of opportunity.

Golfweek: Do you think golfers have become skeptical about year-over-year gains in drivers?

Bazzel: I think humans are naturally skeptical. To some degree, it’s a good quality of people to question things. And I would say in this world, and certainly with our company in the golf space, when we make these advancements, even if they’re small things, we like to ‘story tell’ them. We like to speak loudly about them and be proud of them. And sometimes I think people either don’t see it the same way or are expecting something more. Or (they) think maybe what we’re talking about is not as consequential as it would be to them as it is to us. It is the nature of the business and that’s okay.

Golfweek: How much does price factor into this? Drivers have become significantly more expensive over the last several years.

Bazzel: Well, I think every company is dealing with the same thing. It’s quite challenging to push performance without any cost. I mean, if you want to stay ahead, these products are complicated. The manufacturing, the materials, and so on. And so, I think more than anything, what we’re looking at is the understanding that golfers are forking over real money for these products, a meaningful amount of money. And we want to ensure that they’re getting every bit, if not more, than they even expected out of that product. And I don’t think it’s going away. I don’t think an extended life cycle gives us huge opportunities to be more efficient or more cost-effective. But planning our business, I think, will become a little bit more stabilized. And if it does turn out to stabilize pricing in the future, that would be great. But I don’t think that’s the spirit of the decision at this point. It’s just, again, I would say if there’s any connection, it’s the value of what people are spending versus what they’re getting.

Golfweek: How does a two-year cycle change the way TaylorMade approaches product development internally?

Bazzel: “Well, it’s still a little bit new, but as we look to the future, we’re so used to having these ideas just constantly flowing and then chipping away at those ideas. As you get further out, the funnel gets a little wider. For us, now, I would say it’s changing right now internally and it’s exciting. It’s energizing to the teams because I think we feel like we can dive even deeper on these products than we maybe have been able to in the past.

Golfweek: You’ve mentioned that keeping Qi4D in the market for two years could benefit fitters and consumers. How?

Bazzel: “Yeah, I think, honestly, it’s an exciting time for our fitters to be able to recognize the fact that they’re going to be able to use this tool, this sort of weapon, and that they can ensure that the golfers that for they’re fitting, it’s optimized for them. And it takes time, learning the product. And they don’t just learn TaylorMade products. They have to learn across the whole breadth of our competitors as well. But, understanding the nuances and how it applies to all these unique swings out there, I think this is an area where we’re really interested in and we want to be very supportive to our fitters

We have a fitting council, and they’ve asked for some things like this. And again, I think they’re just as excited as we are to be able to, in this case with Qi4D, kind of continue down the path. And they know they’re going to be able to feel more confident, I think, in what they’re doing on a daily basis. That leads to golfers being more enthused with their product, which is what we’re all trying to do.

Golfweek: Were you surprised by how much attention this decision received in the equipment world when the news broke last week?

Bazzel: I don’t know if I’ve read all the reactions, to be honest. I think we believe we’re doing this for all the right reasons. And honestly, and transparently, we’re constantly looking at the portfolio of our products in Qi4D and beyond. Are we addressing all the golfers out there in the way that’s most beneficial? And if we find opportunities that we’re not currently addressing, we’re going to introduce things that make sense

At the end of the day, I think most golfers have leaned in and said this is the right move. They’re listening, they understand, and can kind of see the bigger picture on this one. So far, even our partners, our retailers, have embraced this idea as we’ve been talking to them over the last couple of months. They’re in the business of selling more products as well, but they think this can lead to, again, a better business in the future.

Golfweek: You mentioned that fitting technology continues to evolve rapidly. How important is that to the future of metalwoods?

Bazzel: I think the fitting tools that are coming at us, the data acquisition, is enabling us to learn more. Even if you did get fit a year ago or two years ago, I think the advancement in fitting, and being able to apply these products in a way that golfers and understanding golfers at a deeper level, is going to lead to even better products in the future. Let’s just say you had an incremental change in a product, but you had a massive improvement in the fitting technologies and understanding the golfer so that you can get an even better fit. That’s part of this as well.

I think that’s changing rapidly in terms of understanding the golfer’s swing, 3D motion, certainly launch monitors and so on and so forth. And then, just the understanding of the golfer’s psyche within that. I mean, there’s so much opportunity that we think beyond just the physical part itself, but the applying of the part to the golfer, this is ripe for innovation.

Source link

Golfweek course-rating guru completes Irish top 100 tour

admin — Sat, 31 Jan 2026 03:39:57 +0000

Want to know more about some far-flung golf course that most people have never heard of? Want to dig into the details of the Golfweek’s Best course rankings, or those of other publications? Or just want to sit and listen with fascination as one of the most well-traveled players in the world speaks with incredible intelligence about great golf holes, long walks and dream vacations?

Jonathan Cummings is your guy. Conveniently, he works as a consultant for Golfweek, running the database that drives all our course rankings. He also authored “The Rating Game,” an absolute insider’s book that takes a look at various course rankings and features a foreword by architect Tom Doak, whom Cummings has known for decades.

A retired mechanical engineer and general math whiz who also worked as an anti-submarine warfare consultant for DARPA within the U.S. Department of Defense, Cummings must begrudgingly admit to being a list “chaser,” one of those afflicted souls who tries to play every course on various best-of lists. This summer he completed a doozy, having finished a list of the top 100 golf courses in Ireland, counting both the Republic and Northern Ireland. He already was more than halfway through the list when he acquired Irish citizenship and set about playing 45 more top courses around the Emerald Isle.

Following are his thoughts on list chasing, golf in Ireland, how rankings work and what’s next.

How did you get into the chase, and why?

I’ll bet, like many other chasers, you really don’t make a beginning “decision” to chase lists. It’s more likely you wake up one day, having traveled for golf significantly and having just read a magazine top-100 list, and ask yourself, “Geez, I wonder how many I’ve played?” If you find you’ve played a significant number, then it’s not a stretch to set the goal for yourself to try for them all.

There are obstacles. For me (and undoubtedly many others), it was Augusta National. As ANGC is on most of the top lists, until you’ve checked that off, completing a top list is not reachable. I was lucky to have a friend of a friend invite me for a few days to ANGC, so after that, completing a number of top-100 lists became within reach.

The “why” is easy. If you love to travel, love to play golf, are intrigued and want to investigate how no two golf courses are alike, then a top-100 list can be viewed as a road map, channeling your travel plans.

How did you compile your top 100 in Ireland, what with lists changing within the span of you playing them all?

There are only several top-100 Ireland lists published that I’m aware of (there are probably others). Golf Monthly’s Irish Golfer top-100 lists have been published for 20 years or so. It’s an Irish magazine with a panel of mostly writers run by the editor of Irish Golfer. Top100golfcourses.com also does an Irish top-100 list. I asked some knowledgeable friends which list was considered “more the standard” and was told Irish Golfer. I made a spreadsheet with every course on all Irish Golfer annual lists since the IG lists had been published. As of October 2024, I had played 55 of the most recent 2024 list.

At about this same time I received word that after applying and submitting paperwork, I was granted Irish citizenship (a whole story in itself). So while I had been to Ireland many times before, I decided that in tribute to my new passport, it would be fun to spend a summer there and play the 45 courses I hadn’t played on the 2024 Irish Golfers top-100 list.

Because there have been few new courses built in Ireland over the span of Irish Golfer’s lists, it turns out it really didn’t matter which list I had chosen. Unlike Golfweek’s Top 200 Modern course ranking, which changes with each publication as new courses are added, the Irish Golfer lists were mostly the same. In fact, I only have to play 15 more Irish courses to complete all the lists of the past 20 years. It was the same for top100golfcourses.com. I’m essentially done with those lists (maybe missing one or two) as well.

Question everyone will ask: What are your top five in Ireland, and why those?

A list of my top Irish golf courses would likely be similar or even the same as those lists from many others. The “Big Five” of Ireland – County Down, Lahinch, Ballybunion, Portmarnock and Portrush – are broadly considered to sit at the head of the Irish class. I don’t disagree.

To me, Royal County Down ranks so highly because of its sheer jaw-dropping beauty. It’s not without its warts: too many blind shots, and it may border on being too penal. But to see Royal County Down in the autumn when the heather and gorse are in bloom, with the sea to one side and the noble steeple of the Slieve Donard hotel framed by the Mourne Mountains on the other … well, it doesn’t get much better than this. If there is something close to spiritual in the game of golf, this is it.

My love for Portrush is based on my admiration of the well-contoured, sometimes terrifying putting surfaces. The Ballybunion “why” is based on pure awe as to how the course (back nine in particular) is ingeniously routed up, over, below, alongside and through the dramatic dunes. Portmarnock’s circular routing, like Muirfield’s, continuously changes a player’s wind-correction adjustments, brilliantly confounding targeting. And the “why” for Lahinch is more emotional. It’s undeniably a world-class tactical challenge with some surprising and even whimsical holes, great beauty and an 18-chapter book tied together to tell a compelling overall story – Lahinch is all this but something else. The farm my grandfather was born on (still in the family) is not far away, and Lahinch is the first great U.K. course I ever played many years ago.

Next question everyone will ask: Which of the non-big-name courses stood out to you, and why?

Links highlights included: Arklow, Rosslare, North West, RCD Annesley and the fabulous Wild Atlantic Dunes nine at Carne (I played the original 18 at Carne some 30 years ago.) Why? Because with only about 250 true links courses in the world, it’s a delight to find any new ones with character that you haven’t played.

Parkland highlights included Dun Laoghaire, Bunclody, Ballinrobe, Royal Belfast, Malone, Belvoir Park, Naas and Tulfarris. Each commands a noteworthy setting, which is one reason that sets them apart, particularly with Bunclody, Belfast and Tulfarris.

Also, quite a number of the second-echelon parklands I found were mostly American and somewhat forgettable. There are easily 20 to 30 courses on the Irish Golfer top-100 list that I would not be interested in playing again.

What makes Irish golf special and distinct for you, as compared to Scotland or other links-golf destinations?

Man, put me most anywhere in the U.K. and I’m in seventh heaven. Scotland, Wales, England, Ireland, Cornwall, the Hebrides and everywhere else in the U.K. — I’ve been to most all of them many times. I don’t think any one area in the U.K. is better than any other. Some areas like Liverpool, Troon, Fife, The Lothians, Dover, et cetera, have more concentrations of great links golf, probably more so than any one area of Ireland, but for me Ireland gets the edge on being special because of my Irish heritage. And besides, the Guinness tastes better in Ireland.

What’s it like for an American to spend such a long summer in Ireland? Any highlights?

I’m lucky enough to be quite familiar with the Emerald Isle. Being in Ireland for an extended time was really not too different from being over there for a “standard” trip of one to two weeks.

As you may imagine, the required planning involved was extensive. It took all winter, but it worked out well as I basically had no hiccups during the trip. I was by myself the entire time, which is probably something I wouldn’t like to do again. I ended up with many tee times at the end of the day behind full tee sheets, which often made for long rounds. I was also almost never paired with anyone, so I didn’t end up meeting a lot of folks.

Some other random observations: I put a ton of miles on a rental car, 2,500 miles without leaving the island. I also found that I enjoyed the smaller towns more than the big ones. Finally, I was insanely lucky with the weather. It was warm (even sometimes hot) with little rain – while I was rained on during a few rounds, I was not rained out of any of the 45 courses I played.

When you look at the various lists, especially in Ireland, does anything make an eyebrow stand up?

I was surprised by the lack of depth of the various Irish lists before it dawned on me how few candidates any Irish top-100 list draws from. There are around 400 courses on the entire island, of which around 50 are 9-holers. That means that around 30 percent of all the 18-hole courses make a top-100 Irish list. Compare that to the U.S. with 16,000 courses, meaning that only around the top half a percent of the U.S. courses make a top-100 list.

That is likely why I was a little disappointed in some of the Irish top 100 in the second half of the list. They were certainly worthy courses, but not in the same league as the second half of courses in an American or combined U.K. top-100 list.

You have so much experience with rating, and have written the book — what oddities jump out in course rating?

Umm. I believe that all the magazines concentrate too much on rating courses. At the end of the day, all magazines that I know of publish lists of golf courses that are rank-ordered (including all published Golfweek lists). While assigning numbers in an attempt to measure golf course quality is a common approach, it’s really done because it simplifies post-processing — running averages and sorting results. The problem is this intermediate processing step introduces errors in the final sorted lists.

I’m a firm believer that the best rater uses a spreadsheet and sorts his/her own list without the initial use of numbers. A simple best-to- worst personal list, with new courses added to the spreadsheet as they are played, should be developed by every rater. There is a method that is outlined in “The Rating Game” of laterally combining many personal ranked lists into one overall ranked list.

I’m not a big fan of categories, either, for much the same argument. Categories can be hard to quantify and sometimes of questionable value. Quantifying categories and summing them based on some formula is doubly bad as it introduces not one but several intermediate steps, each with associated errors.

What’s next for you? I don’t believe for a minute that you’re done looking at great courses.

Probably a little more “chasing” in me, but at 73 I’m not far from list-chasing retirement.

I’ve played 30 to 40 of the top courses in Australia, but I’ll never complete the Aussie top 100. Same for Europe, especially Eastern Europe – I’ve played the European world-ranked courses but am unlikely to get to many of the others. Again, same for Asia – played the greats, but there are many on various lists I haven’t played and am unlikely to see.

I’m intrigued by Canada. Scores Magazine has listed the top 100 courses in Canada for years. I’ve played 30 or so of them, so I think over maybe three years, the current top 100 would be doable. Getting in a car from home and going for a drive for a month or so sounds appealing as compared to recovering from jet lag after flights over the ponds.

I’ll need to practice, “Oh Canada!”

Source link