If you haven’t heard by now, MacGregor has a set of three wedges for $170. That’s less than the price of a single new wedge these days, but more disturbingly, that’s almost the price of a single golf polo from some brands. This is absolutely ridiculous.
In my best polos article, I ranked the best golf polos under $40, under $80, and over $90. The more I sit with my rankings and the more golf I play, I’ve realized one thing: quince makes the best overall polo in golf, and its only real competition is Uniqlo. I’ve said it before: quince too Uniqlo are making polos that punch way above their weight class in terms of price and quality. But the unfortunate reality is this: their performance is fully proportional to the materials used and the cost of production.
No mass-produced synthetic golf polo should cost $100. Honestly, most shouldn’t cost more than $50. Even $50 seems steep, especially considering what the vast majority of golf tees are made of these days: synthetic materials. Yes, you heard that right – most golf clubs these days are 100 percent synthetic– usually a blend of polyester, spandex and/or nylon.
Here’s where all this “premium polo” talk starts to fall apart. Because what, exactly, is premium for a mass-produced synthetic golf shirt in 2026?
I’m not asking rhetorically. I mean it literally. What is the meaningful difference between a $29.90 Uniqlo polo and 120 dollars Grayson polo when both are built around the same basic idea: lightweight synthetic fabric, stretch, moisture-wicking performance, modern fit, and enough shape retention to survive several trips through the wash?
Is it Greyson “Prettier”? Of course. The collar is more unique. The belt is longer and deeper. The shirt has a more elevated visual identity. I’m not pretending those things aren’t real. If you know anything about me, it’s that I care deeply about my appearance on the course. However, I also understand that you can look good without spending a lot of money.
It’s the details a little more elevated in Greyson shirt worth four times the price of Uniqlo?
No.
That’s the problem with premium golf polos today. The category has become so saturated with synthetic performance fabrics that no sort of hierarchy exists anymore. Twenty years ago, perhaps a lightweight, moisture-wicking polo felt completely different from the boxy cotton chutes worn by golfers in the 90s. At the time, performance fabric was a revolutionary invention. Today, it is the minimum.
Almost every modern golf ball stretches. Almost every golf polo is moisture wicking. Almost every golf polo claims to be “breathable, cooling, lightweight, caring and built for all-day comfort.” You can find those features at Uniqlo. You can find them at quince. You can find them at major retailers. You can find them on Amazon. At this point, “performance fabric” is not a luxury feature. It’s a table pin.
And yet, many premium golf brands are still touting these shirts as if they’ve cracked some secret code. Let me tell you something: they haven’t, and their shirts will perform, look, and feel pretty similar to what you can get for a lot less.
A polo of 90 percent polyester with some elastane is not a marvel of modern garment engineering, nor is it expensive to make. It is not inherently luxurious. It is, in many cases, the same basic synthetic recipe that everyone else uses, just with a better logo, a more aspirational brand story, and a much higher margin.
This is where the collar argument becomes so telling. You’ll hear brands talk about the best collar in golf, the perfect collar, the collar that won’t twist, the collar that holds its shape, the collar that makes the shirt look more refined. Good. A good collar is better than a bad collar.
But if the collar is your main selling point, that doesn’t mean much. In fact, it says it all.
Tells me there may not be much to justify the price. If the main difference between a $30 polo and a $120 polo is that one has a slightly better collar and a deeper placket, then the premium brand hasn’t made a product four times better. It has made a slightly nicer version of a product that already exists at a much fairer price.
That’s why brands like it Uniqlo AND quincein my opinion, they really are making the best polos in golf. They’re not making “good for the price” polos in the backhanded compliment sense. They are making legitimately good golf polos at prices that make the rest of the market look ridiculous.
I’m not saying expensive poles are bad. They are not (exactly). This is also not about if Peter Millar, Johnnie-O, Holderness & Bourneor any other premium golf brand makes comfortable or even good golf shirts. Many of them do. The question is whether those shirts are meaningfully better than the budget-friendly competition in a way that justifies charging $100, $110, or $120.
More often than not, I don’t think they are.
The other part of this that is never mentioned enough is what these shirts are actually made of. They are dressed up with words like technical, performance, cooling and moisture wicking, but the reality is that most of these polos are plastic, petroleum-based synthetics: polyester, nylon and elastane.
Look, I can see why golfers like them. I wear them too. Cotton retains moisture and can feel hotter. It doesn’t always work so well in the heat, especially for walkers or anyone who sweats a lot. I’m not claiming that every golfer should abandon performance fabric and start playing summer rounds in cotton heavyweights.
But let’s be honest about what we’re buying. Many “premium” golf polos are mass-produced, synthetic, microplastic molded garments marketed under the guise of luxury. This does not mean that they are useless. It means that the marketing has gone way ahead of the product.
This is also the reason why I have a lot of respect for brands like B. Draddy AND Arnie McNair charging higher prices for 100 percent cotton polo shirts. You may or may not want to wear cotton on the course, but at least they’re offering another proposition. There is a material and philosophical difference.
I’m basically not against expensive clothes. I’m against average products being treated as exceptional because the price says they are. I’m against calling something premium when the fabric, construction and performance features are almost indistinguishable from shirts costing a quarter of the price. I’m not here to tell anyone how to spend their money. If you want to pay four times as much for the expensive shirt, move on.
However, let’s stop pretending that most premium golf polos are premium because of what they are. In many cases, they are premium because of their cost. When a $29.90 Uniqlo OR $34.90 Fifteen pillars can stand next to a $120 shirt without any real quality gaps, the problem certainly isn’t Uniqlo OR quince.
