Most golf reviews you read were written after a two-hour manufacturer event. Ours are written after weeks of controlled testing, real rounds, and enough data to be useful — not enough to be marketing. Here’s exactly how we do it.

Our Testing Lab

Since 2017 we’ve operated a permanent testing bay in our studio. The core stack:

• Foresight GCQuad. Our primary launch monitor — radar-agnostic, quad-camera photometric. Calibrated quarterly.
• TrackMan 4 (as a cross-check). We don’t trust a single data source. When Foresight and TrackMan disagree by more than ~2%, we re-test.
• SAM PuttLab. For putter roll, loft, face rotation, and delivery.
• Pressure plate + 3D mocap. When we assess swing trainers, we measure actual weight shift and kinematic sequence — not “it felt good.”
• Real courses. Indoor data is a baseline. Every club hits at least five real rounds at two different courses before we publish.

Who Does the Testing

Every product is tested by at least three golfers representing different skill levels. Our testing pool:

How We Source Products

You’ll find three kinds of product in our reviews. We’re always explicit about which is which.

1. Purchased retail. The default. We pay full market price — same as any reader would — and the purchase receipt is retained. This is the majority of what we cover.
2. Review sample, returned. Occasionally a brand sends a sample. We test it, publish, and send it back. The review states “sample provided, returned” at the top.
3. Review sample, retained. Rare. Used only when the item has no secondary market or the brand cannot accept returns (e.g., custom-fit clubs). The review states “sample retained, valued at £X, not gifted for coverage.”

We have never received — and would never accept — a fee, a trip, an event, a gift, or any form of compensation in exchange for coverage. Our expense policy is published alongside our editorial standards.

The Scoring Rubric

Every club, ball, bag, and accessory is scored on a category-specific rubric published with the review. Weights vary by product class — you’d score a putter on “feel” more than “distance” — but every rubric is visible before you read the score.

The Photography Rule

Every photograph in our reviews is taken by us. If you see a product image on this site, we physically had the item in hand. We don’t use manufacturer press shots — they’re polished, retouched, and don’t show what you’ll actually unbox.

Data We Publish

Where it’s useful, we publish the raw data behind our conclusions. For club reviews, that includes:

• Ball speed, launch angle, spin rate — mean and standard deviation across all test shots.
• Dispersion plots (shots downloaded straight from GCQuad).
• Tester-by-tester notes, unfiltered.
• Comparison against the product’s most likely competitors, same conditions.

You can request the underlying session files from any review by emailing us. We keep them indefinitely.

What We Don’t Test

Methodology is about knowing your limits. We don’t test:

• Golf balls in extreme conditions (below 40°F / 5°C) — our data is warm-temperature only, and we say so.
• Durability beyond 30 rounds for most clubs. Long-term wear claims are labelled as anecdotal.
• Performance at Tour swing speeds (120+ mph). We partner with PGA Tour testing outlets when coverage requires it and cite them clearly.

Our testing evolves. When we change methodology — a new launch monitor, a revised rubric, an expanded tester pool — we note it here and flag affected older reviews for re-test.