A look at PGA.com’s ground-inspection warning and its conditional recovery-shot options for trees, thick collars and shallow bunkers.
PGA.com published a guide to difficult recovery shots on October 17, 2026. Its clearest safety message concerns a ball near a tree: inspect the surrounding ground before swinging. If a root, rock or trunk lies in the swing path, PGA.com advises taking relief under the Rules of Golf or declaring the ball unplayable.
The guide also covers a ball against a thick collar and a shallow, firm bunker. Across those situations, its message is to choose a shot that fits the lie rather than improvise a difficult swing.
The tree example separates two problems that can look like one. A tree may block the normal stance. A root, rock or trunk may also block the club’s path. PGA.com treats a stance problem as a possible reason to change technique, but a hazard in the swing path as a reason not to swing.
That distinction comes before choosing an unusual club position or stroke. A way to reach the ball is not the same thing as a clear path for the club.
For golfers over 40, the useful link is decision-making rather than a promise about joint health. The guide gives a concrete way to separate a playable recovery from a shot the article advises against.
This is editorial shot advice rather than an injury study. The article gives no injury-rate data and reports no tests of its drills. It does not establish fewer injuries, protected mobility or longer playing years. Nor does it provide a basis for saying older golfers face greater risk than professionals.
Golfergy’s focus is practical, research-led guidance for experienced recreational golfers. For a separate look at physical readiness, our guides on recognising movement limits and choosing between rest and a modified round address a different part of the decision. The recovery-shot guide discussed here is about the lie and the available shot, not an individual health assessment.
PGA.com’s order is useful: inspect the ground before trying to solve the stance problem. If the swing path contains one of the hazards it identifies, the guide points to relief or an unplayable ball rather than an improvised stroke.
Only when the area is clear of hazards does the article offer a reverse-handed chip. It is for a tree that prevents a normal stance, not a way to work around a blocked swing path.
With that condition met, PGA.com describes these separate parts of the motion:
The aim is a small recovery shot toward safety. The article’s option is a chipping motion rather than a full swing.
For a ball pressed against a thick collar, PGA.com describes a toe-down putter stroke. Raise the putter handle so only the toe brushes the grass. Then make a standard putting stroke.
The fit is narrow: the article says this is best when the ball needs to clear only 1 to 2 inches of taller fringe. It points golfers toward a chip or pitch when the shot must carry rough, a bunker or several yards of fringe.
Read that as a lie-specific option rather than a new default around the green. The question is not simply whether the ball is close to the putting surface. It is what the ball has to cross before it gets there.
PGA.com presents a putter as an option from a shallow, firm bunker with a low lip. The intended shot rolls the ball onto the green.
The article rules out that option when:
A bunker putt therefore belongs to a particular set of conditions. A low lip alone is not the whole test; the sand and the path also matter in PGA.com’s guidance.
PGA.com pairs the shots with practice ideas rather than asking golfers to improvise them during a round. For the collar shot, it suggests direction and distance work. For the reverse-handed chip, it proposes a target-corridor drill. In a practice bunker, it recommends comparing wedge and putter outcomes.
That last comparison keeps attention on the actual result of each option in the practice setting. It is a way to assess the choices the article describes, not a reason to assume the putter should replace the wedge.
The useful practice theme is specific: work on the shot that matches the lie. A collar stroke, an obstructed stance and a firm bunker are separate problems rather than one recovery technique.
PGA.com’s documented takeaway is straightforward: inspect the ground before a constrained recovery swing. When the swing path contains a hazard, the article directs golfers away from forcing the shot. When the lie meets the stated conditions, it offers a small chip or a putter-based option.
The remaining questions concern outcomes: how reliably these techniques work in different lies and whether ground inspection changes injury rates. Those are questions for measured evidence. Before the club moves, the decision is whether this is a shot to play at all.
Follow Golfergy for practical insights on performance, mobility, recovery and healthy ageing. Stay connected for new articles, research-led guidance and ideas to help you play better for longer.
Club Champion’s AOSSM partnership raises a post-injury question: do your clubs still fit your swing? Equipment assessment remains separate from medical care.
Track where golf discomfort occurs, when it starts and what you were doing. Use clear notes to discuss back and joint symptoms with a clinician.
Learn which golf symptoms deserve attention, when to pause painful swings, and how a simple activity log can help you discuss recurring problems.
Explore practical resources on performance, recovery, mobility and golf longevity.
Read the Blog
