FAQs

LaunchPoint Golf translates spec sheets, accuracy test data, and community findings into plain English so that a 14-handicapper can make a confident buying decision without spending 40 hours on Reddit. We cover launch monitors, home simulators, rangefinders, GPS watches, equipment reviews, and the technique and course management ideas that actually move the needle for mid-handicap golfers. The site is built on research synthesis, not marketing copy.

I'm a 42-year-old golfer based in the Pacific Northwest, playing off a 7 handicap. Former tech industry, which means I'm more comfortable with a spec sheet than most golf writers, and probably less comfortable with bunker shots than I should be at this handicap. I came to golf technology through the simulator rabbit hole and never really left. I don't work for any brand and I'm not affiliated with any manufacturer. My job here is to read what the data shows and explain it clearly.

No, and I'm upfront about that. My authority comes from research rigour, not hands-on testing. What I do: synthesise published accuracy data from independent sources like MyGolfSpy and GolfWRX instructors, cross-reference community reports from Reddit r/golfsimulator and r/golf, and compare independent test results against manufacturer claims. When sources conflict, I say so rather than picking one arbitrarily. If I can't find reliable data on a specific claim, I don't make it.

Every review follows the same model: what the published data shows, what actual owners report, and where the specs match or diverge from real-world use. I source accuracy figures from independent testing rather than manufacturer press releases and name the source and date every time. If a product has a known weakness that doesn't show up in specs: firmware issues, software subscription changes, community complaints about specific failure modes. That goes in the review. The goal is the buying decision you'd make with a friend who spent 40 hours researching it, not a friend who played one round with a loaner.

Five types. Articles cover technique, course strategy, analytics, and fitness: knowledge content where the goal is understanding something better. Reviews are deep-dives on individual products, sourced from published test data. How-Tos are step-by-step guides for specific tasks: setting up a simulator room, configuring software, reading a Trackman report. Buyer's Guides are category-level pages that pull together all reviews for a product type: rangefinders, launch monitors, GPS watches, with filter options by price and skill level. News covers what's happening in golf technology: product launches, firmware updates, tour equipment changes, regulatory decisions.

Primarily 10 to 22, which is where the research-versus-just-buy-and-hope decision matters most. Scratch golfers already know what they want. High-handicappers don't yet need to think about spin axis data. The 14-handicapper working out whether a $500 launch monitor is meaningfully better than a $300 one for their home setup. That's who this is written for. The course management and strokes gained content covers a wider range.

Because it's the only metric that tells you where you're actually losing shots. Handicap tells you the total; strokes gained tells you whether it's the driver, the irons, the short game, or the putter. For a data-literate golfer, it reframes every practice decision. You stop grinding on your driver because everyone else does, and start working on the thing that's costing you shots. I find it genuinely useful rather than just academically interesting, which is why it keeps coming up.

Yes. When I link to a product, I typically use an affiliate link. If you buy through it, I earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. The affiliate links are primarily Amazon Associates. I disclose this at the end of every article that contains them. The commission doesn't influence what I recommend. I link to the product I'd actually buy for the specific use case, regardless of whether it pays a higher or lower commission than the alternative. If anything, this site exists partly as a reaction to review sites that clearly optimise for commission rates rather than honest recommendations.

No. The reputational cost of recommending a worse product for a marginally higher commission would end this site faster than any short-term revenue gain is worth. I don't have a commercial relationship with any manufacturer: no review units, no sponsorship, no early access. I'm working from the same public information as everyone else, plus the time to go deeper on it.

Email is the best route: james@launchpointgolf.com. I read everything, though I can't promise a response to every message. Most useful: corrections to anything I've got wrong (I'd rather fix it than leave bad information up), requests for specific product or topic coverage, and owner reports from people who actually use products I've covered. Less useful: requests to add affiliate links to third-party sites, press releases, or guest post pitches.

Reviews are updated when there's meaningful new data: accuracy testing from a new independent source, a firmware update that changes performance, or a model year change that affects the comparison. Articles covering technique and course management are relatively stable. Buyer's Guide pages update automatically as new reviews are added to the site.