How Do You Review?

There is no wrong way scarnici.
Well there is, but that involves not doing the review.

Houdini was not a good reviewer.
 
I focus on the club's performance for me. What things do I like or not like about it. Does it suit my eye, do I like the sound of it, does the club do what I want it to do. Are there certain shots I hit better with it than others. Have I noticed improvements with it compared to previous clubs. Things of that sort.
 
I like to keep my review process pretty short and too the point.

1. What they say it does

2. What I see it do

3. What it does against similar product

4. What can it do for me

5. Is it worth using
 
Only ever tested golfballs so it is different than a club IMO. I simply try to keep it simple and compare the ball to others I am playing and how it reacts to my skill level. Then I give a ball to a friend who is better and can make a ball do way more than I can. I get his feedback and then add it to what I have seen. Take pictures and try to answer questions the best I can. I am not a big technical guy so I don't focus so much on things I don't understand.

Now I would do things different if I ever get review a club or electronics.
 
I like to alternate between my go to and the testing model to notice differences. Preferably on the course but range or sim with a launch monitor.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
1. I actually do the review work.

2. I often start with a product overview or explanation, sort of an introduction to the item for readers. This usually includes some very short blurb about the reviewer so they can have some context about who is testing the club and how that relates to them.

3. Evaluate the club against what the company says it is designed to do.

4. Use the item and generically share my experiences and observations.

5. Look for creative / new / different ways to express information besides just the written word. If I think a putter feels soft and sounds muted I might do a video of some putting. I'm using CobraConnect to gather objective data about drives and sharing that for UST Coool shaft testing. Or maybe it is just pictures or pictures showing a particular feature.

6. Be available to answer questions.

7. Listen to the other testers. They often have interesting observations or experiences which help me think about testing the product in new ways or providing different types of testing information later on.
 
I'm more of a numbers guy, so to the extent I can, I use those, because they are objective. To me, "I normally hit three fairways and the last three rounds I've hit six" is more helpful than "this driver is way more forgiving." On the other hand, I wouldn't attribute increased fairways hit to a new bag. I try to describe my game and my goals and priorities, so the reader (ideally) can understand my perspective in order to figure out whether it's useful to him/her. If I know something about the tech/science, I'll add that as well. I describe my experience with the product. Finally, I conclude with what it does/does not do and whether I would buy it [again].
 
I generally give some thoughts on anything thing in my bag from top to bottom and the ball. I usually start out with some background about what I've been playing vs. what my review is about. I always talk about what it looks like, then how it performs and whether it does what it's supposed to. I'll compare it to what I've previously been playing and give some pros and cons and then talk about how it fits my game. Feel is always a bit g part of it for me, because I'm more of a feel player so that's a big deal for me. Finally I usually check back in to say whether or not the equipment worked out in the long run and tell whether or not my initial thought were correct.
 
With myself being a higher handicapper, I would review things on a macro level of how well it works for me. Does it do the things advertised? Does it make it easier to play the game? Etc.

If it doesn't, then I'd go into a more micro level. Did it not work because of a flaw I have? Is the technology not really geared towards my skill set?

If I were chosen to review an upgrade, I hope it would be something I have some familiarity with the previous version. Then I could compare the technology differences and how it relates to me as a player.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I like to review stuff honestly.

I think a lot of people equate shiny/new to better. And sometimes it is but its not always the case.

I like to review stuff, and compare it to my current clubs. If it can't beat my current gamers it doesn't go in the bag. Regardless how nice it may look.
 
I review in real time on the course. Hitting balls on the range is fine but one can get into a groove and get false positives. I like to take a shaft, slap in my driver and mix it up with the boys. I feel what I see will be the best feedback I can get and there by review the gear. I tend to gravitate toward the club on every hole just so I can get as much feedback as I can. It's all about reps when I'm reviewing.
 
If I am sent a club to review this is how I do it:
1) I would take the club out of the box and immediately take photos of it and post it onto the forum. Nothing like shiny new pics of gear. Included with these pics would be specs provided from the manufacturer and a bio about myself.

2) Before hitting it, I would give a review on the look at address (does it sit closed, neutral, open), comment on the stock grip choice, paint, finish quality, shaft flex (soft to flex, just right or firm), overall looks, and measure the head using a soft ruler and compare it to other clubs I have measured to give the reader a comparison on size.

3) I then would try and get monitor numbers on it. I used to have access to a cg2 pretty much any time I wanted courtesy of Golfsmith and Galaxy but unfortunately I no longer work next door to them (Golfsmith closed anyhow). At the fitting center by me I have been able to "rent" some Trackman time so I am sure this could be arranged again.

4) I would then take it onto the course and hit extra shots with it compared to my gamer club. I use Game Golf to log my shots so it would provide approximate yardage. I would then compare it to other clubs I have tested in the same category.

5) I would then play a few rounds with it in place of my gamer club to see how it stacked up.

6) I would be honest and say if the club had a shot at making the bag or not.

7) Finally report any findings on quality, wear or paint issues.

If it's a ball test, I would putt in the basement using my gamer putter and compare the sound/feel (clicky, muted, hard, soft, etc). I would then take it out to the course and play a couple rounds and report my findings (flight and spin off driver, irons, wedges), compared to my gamer ball and some other balls I'd have around.

If I am reviewing clubs for my own purpose this is how I do it.

I attend annual demo days to see what current clubs work decently well for me.
I make a note of these clubs and when pricing has dropped I save a search on ebay notifying me any new listings.
Once the price gets to a point where a try and turn would only be about a $20 loss on my end I usually buy it.
I take it to the range usually before the course and hit a bucket of balls mixing this club in and out of the rotation.
I will go to the course and put an extra Game Golf tag on the club and use it during the round. I typically do not count this club's shots for score and will hit my normal club for score.
If the club is an utter failure I sell it. If it warrants another look, I will usually put my grip of choice on it and play a few rounds using it for score.
If it ends up being better than what is in my bag, great... if not I sell it.
 
For me performance is all about how something works on the course for me. I absolutely take clubs/equipment to practice to get a baseline of what to expect, but hitting from a flat lie in perfect conditions is rarely an analog for how things perform for me during a round. After that, the best I can do for myself or anyone reading is to try to draw parallels to equipment that I'm familiar with. 'Does this club fly higher/further/straighter than my previous gamer?', stuff like that. I will say that I try to avoid getting too much into feel unless it's quantifiable as I think that's just so personal, plus I don't think I'm as discerning as a lot of people are in that department. I'm very much a 'ball go straight/high/far' golfer, and am willing to forego some aesthetics and accept a little harsher feel (hello Speedblades) if the results are there. Good thing is that's not much of an issue with the clubs available today! Looks definitely play a role, but feel like I'm also pretty lenient there. I gamed the Mashie FWs for a good while, and still do from time to time, but wouldn't identify them as attractive. For looks, it really comes down to comfort standing over the ball, but a cool paintjob certainly doesn't hurt!
 
1. Technical Details of what I'm reviewing.

2. How the product worked for me. Likes/dislikes and how I would improve it *for me* if I had the opportunity to do so.

3. How it might work the same or differently for the intended audience. Assuming I have the expertise. Example: I can review a new guitar MUCH better than a new shaft on a Golf Club I think.
 
I really try to keep making steady updates about any clubs I have in the bag, and I like to keep the threads moving with thoughts, pics, stories from the course, questions and/or answers, and comparisons.
I'm really not a wordsmith of any kind and if I tried I would just come off sounding like a moron so I tend to try and keep my reviews concise and to the point. I make use of bullet form sometimes or other times I'll use a Pro and Con format.
I try to separate club and brand when talking about performance, and I use numbers as much as I can to lend credence to what I'm saying.

Even when it appears that nobody else is even interested in the club I'm reviewing I will plow doggedly forward until it is confirmed nobody cares, or until I feel I've covered everything.
 
Reviewing a club to see if it makes it in the bag? I haven't really thought about it but looking back I do kind of have a process. Assuming I bought it, the looks box has a check mark. My taste has been questionable in the past, but it's an ever evolving thing.

Then out to the range. I don't like going straight to the course not knowing what to expect. At the range, first is feel of the club-shaft combo. Can I feel the head or is it just as dead as all my other clubs? Then it's ball flight: higher, lower, or same? Is it too much of an extreme? Does it highlight my bad tendencies or good? Is the distance in the general area? Given a bunch of beat up range balls I don't expect perfect consistency but I should have an idea given my other clubs' results.

On the course, how does it play? Is the ball flight the same with my real ball? What are my tendencies with this club and am I more accurate? Lastly, did I hit any shots that made me smile? For example, I absolutely pured my new driver the second day out. The shaft felt like it kicked and exploded right through the ball. Oh, baby did I smile. Kicked my old driver out of the bag. She never made me smile like that.

It sounds like a lot, but it really gets done in a week if it's obvious. The ones that aren't obvious are the choices I struggle with and I could flounder back and forth for over a month while deciding.
 
When I do reviews, I always do them with real balls on the course. I am not a fan of going to the range or of the balls used at the range. I have played the same course an average of 2 times per week for 9 years so I know very well where I am accustomed to hitting the ball on every hole. I can best relate the effectiveness of equipment being reviewed to equipment used previously. I do not have access to fancy devices to give me data, so it is all about what I see and feel regarding a new piece of equipment. I also feel it is important during a review to read as much material as possible on what the OEM says about the equipment I am reviewing and convey during my review whether I feel such claims are warranted or not based on my experiences. I try to keep my reviews simple and to the point to aid in the usefulness and understanding to the masses.

Reviewing new stuff is fun!
 
I like to read the tech info out there to see what the club is about. Then when it comes in my bag here are the steps for me. It may not necessarily be a "review" but rather do I like it and does it perform for me

1. How does it look? If I don't like the look I know I will have a hard time justifying it in the bag

2. How do I hit it? Does the head/shaft combo work well with my swing?

3. Lastly does it do what it claims and is it a noticeable improvement over the previous club in my bag


All very backwards and more opinion based rather than a factual review, but it's how I decide whats in my bag lol
 
For me is natural to compare to what I have in the bag. My current setup I feel is optimized for me so comparing new equipment to my current setup gives me a good idea of the performance.

When it comes to feel and sound I'll spend time in the range but when it comes down to performance I need to get out on the course. It seems like I never get a realistic view of my game on the range.

When it comes to putter testing I'll spend a lot of time on the practice green over lunches and both compete against other putters as well as what the claims are of their technology.
 
Since i answered the question the wrong way, Ill take another stab and a useful response.

First this for me is always looks. I have a real hard time gaming something if i dont like the looks of it. Could be logo, could be color, could be finish, but looks are always important to me. Next will be feel/sound. I never knew how much feel/sound meant to me until i started gaming the Apex CF16's. Probably everything im looking for in the feel/looks/sound department so now everything unfortunately gets compared to that set. Then theres performance. After every time i have equipment in play, could be a range session or actual round of golf, I try to drop into each thread and give my thoughts. Sometimes i will avoid the typical repetitive post if i dont have anything different to add but I also feel like if i am reading a review on a piece of equipment im looking to purchase, I want as much positive reinforcement as i can get
 
An outline of a review that I'd write:

Name the club and loft and shaft
Quick Summary
Who I am as a golfer - Speed, issues.
Appearance of club in general
Design and Tech of head and shaft
On the range; On the course --- Results and Pros and Cons, Distance, Sound, Feel, Versatility, Club's Behavioral Issues; discuss shaft.
Any quirks I discovered about me or the club in the test
Who this club may fit; who may not like it and why, what change may make it better - like another shaft or another feature.
Summary
 
Photos are the first place for any item. Never hurts to add more of them throughout the process, which reminds me I should put some up of a couple things I have been able to review.

After that I give a brief (for me) overview of myself/my swing. Try to give the reader an idea of how they might relate to me, if they have similar or not characteristics should be informative. After that, try to get MY opinion of the look/feel/sound/etc and then as much real information as I can provide. If it is a club, getting on a launch monitor or actual carry yardages. Anecdotal evidence is great, but with so much data available, everything we can provide is helpful to those living vicariously through us.
 
I really try to avoid general phrases like "it's a great club!" Or "I like it a lot" and try to be more detailed in what makes that club great or why I like it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The most important thing in my mind is to put myself into the shoes of the person who is going to read the review. In most cases that is several different types of people/players. Then I try to test and provide a review that hits on those things each type will care about.

As Zbuechner4 just said generalities are not helpful. No one cares or knows what you mean when you say, "I liked its look". They have no idea what you are talking about. But if you say, "It has a thin, but distinct topline when you setup that runs parallel to the leading edge making alignment a snap." Now you've said something understandable that can be useful to your reader.

The criteria will be different depending on the club or equipment I'm testing. For example, irons are your scoring clubs. They need to go a specific distance and direction to do their job. So dispersion on the sweet spot and off in the various quadrants is going to be a big part of the testing and emphasized in the review. Distance of course is going to be a bigger factor when talking driver. Then there is some criteria that are a bigger or smaller deal depending on the type of golfer. For example, golfers with an advanced short game are going to care a lot about a golf ball's spin rate around the green. Beginners couldn't care less.

There are also criteria that some golfers have that I don't care about. But the review isn't about ME, it's for others, so you need to cover that stuff. Some guys think a pink colored shaft is the coolest thing ever and others wouldn't be caught dead with one. It doesn't even matter what my opinion is about pink shafts. But if the club has a pink shaft, you better point it out!
 
While I have never done a official review of a product for THP, it is how I found the forum when looking for a laser range finder and doing a google search. I have from time to time given my perspective on some products here and on other sites such as Amazon.

1. When product arrive what are my initial thoughts, appearance, packaging and quality.

2. How does it preform its intended purpose, does it do what it says it will.

3. Explain how I used it to get my results. Did I used it as directed, or found a different use.

4. Rate the product on a scale in various categories versus the product it is replacing or other ones that I have tried. Pointing out strong points and weaknesses.

5. Revisit the product over a period of time as I gain more feedback from prolonged use.
 
Back
Top