Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[cnosil]

47 minutes ago, panhndl said:

I haven’t read the whole thread but am very curious how they regulate what 20% is.  What’s to stop a golf ball manufacturer from having the “smallest” 20% reduction.  

Ou can read the current testing protocols here:  https://www.usga.org/equipment-standards/test-protocols-for-equipment-9df6d04f.html

Essentially they they are changing the parameters for launch and club speed and the balls must meet the new standard.  

[doubleduhric]

BASEBALL bats are restricted in the almost ALL leagues by some manner of specification (weight / length ratio, materials, etc)... doesn't seem to prevent anyone from developing skills from T-ball through Little League, Travel, High School, College... or diminish interest in the sport. That said... the pro's still hit more home runs every year with wooden bats.. and the leagues still talk about moving fences back on a regular basis. Maybe they should start making baseballs softer too!? 

...this was just fun to think about... enjoy!

[cnosil]

1 minute ago, doubleduhric said:

 Maybe they should start making baseballs softer too!? 

Baseball has changed the ball in recent years to combat distance 

[doubleduhric]

Just now, cnosil said:

Baseball has changed the ball in recent years to combat distance 

I was curious if anyone would catch on...  

[cnosil]

1 minute ago, doubleduhric said:

I was curious if anyone would catch on...  

baseball is also implementing a clock, can we do that in golf too

[Golfspy_CG2]

Titleist has released a statement about the proposed roll back...much like they did in 2018 when it was mentioned.

 

                                                                                                                                                      

                                                                                                          ACUSHNET RESPONSE TO USGA AND R&A

                                                                                              NOTICE & COMMENT PROPOSING GOLF BALL BIFURCATION  

“The R&A and USGA continue to believe that the retention of a single set of rules for all players of the game, irrespective of ability, is one of golf’s greatest strengths.  The R&A and USGA regard the prospect of having permanent separate rules for elite competition as undesirable and have no current plans to create separate equipment rules for highly skilled players.” 

USGA and R&A Joint Statement of Principles, May 2002

Fairhaven, MA (March 14, 2023) - The sport of golf has advanced and evolved over the years thanks to a thoughtful balance between innovation and tradition. One of golf’s unifying appeals is that everyone in the game plays by the same set of rules, can play the same courses and with the same equipment.  Golfers can watch professionals and compare themselves to the world’s best, aspiring to hit the same shots.  This unification links the professional and recreational games, enriches the connection and viewing experience of the professional game, and contributes to golf’s momentum, unprecedented growth and promising future.  

 

The USGA and R&A have announced a Notice and Comment to manufacturers proposing a potential rule change to golf ball testing that results in a Model Local Rule (MLR) that provides for reduced distance golf balls intended for professional and elite amateur competitions and a different set of rules for all other play. This bifurcation would divide golf between elite and recreational play, add confusion, and break the linkage that is part of the game’s enduring fabric.

 

“Golf is an aspirational sport, and we believe at its very best when equipment and playing regulations are unified. Golf’s health and vibrancy are at historically high levels,” said David Maher, President and Chief Executive Officer, Acushnet Company. “As we see it, existing golf ball regulations for Overall Distance and Initial Velocity are highly effective. During the past two decades, PGA TOUR average course playing length has increased by less than 100 yards and scoring average has remained virtually flat. Average PGA TOUR clubhead speed of 114.6 mph in 2022 was well below the current 120 mph and proposed 127 mph testing conditions. The proposal of golf ball bifurcation is in many respects a solution in search of a problem.”  

 

Under the proposed guidelines, events that adopt this MLR would require players to use a substantially shorter golf ball, similar in distance to what was available in the 1990’s.  The performance changes of any rolled back ball would impact every shot in the round. Players would also be required to adapt to changes in equipment with some players disadvantaged over others by this disruption. Golf ball bifurcation would invite confusion as to what level of competition would use the MLR products and how to effectively manage and officiate. In addition, multiple versions of golf ball models in the market would be confusing to golfers.

 

“Playing by a unified set of rules is an essential part of the game’s allure, contributes to its global understanding and appeal, and eliminates the inconsistency and instability that would come from multiple sets of equipment standards,” continued Maher. “Unification is a powerfully positive force in the game, and we believe that equipment bifurcation would be detrimental to golf’s long-term well-being. As a result, we will actively participate in this conversation with the governing bodies, worldwide professional tours, PGA Professional organizations, amateur associations and federations, and golfers, in an effort to contribute to the continued enjoyment and growth of the game.”  

[revkev]

4 minutes ago, doubleduhric said:

BASEBALL bats are restricted in the almost ALL leagues by some manner of specification (weight / length ratio, materials, etc)... doesn't seem to prevent anyone from developing skills from T-ball through Little League, Travel, High School, College... or diminish interest in the sport. That said... the pro's still hit more home runs every year with wooden bats.. and the leagues still talk about moving fences back on a regular basis. Maybe they should start making baseballs softer too!? 

...this was just fun to think about... enjoy!

Actually they did last year.

 

And we still had a guy break the home run record.  Athletes are getting bigger and stronger, that's not changing.  Even if you were to roll everything back to 1990 you could still fine tune those clubs and balls to get more out of them than they got back then.  Are you going to say that guys can't use trackman to practice and fit?  How would you legislate that?  

 

To me Golf seems very health right now on all levels.  I understand that you can never stand still or you go backwards but when something is healthy radical changes aren't necessary.  We've had tournaments won with a winning score single digits under par as well is mid 20's under par thus far this season.  I don't think it's gotten too easy.  

 

I did think that the response to the press release today was a collective - "Thanks for all you do but no thanks to this one.  We'll pass."  As DaveP wrote none of this is a surprise.  It's been talked about some the 1980's.  They should have done it then when they had the chance.  If this was that big a concern at least.  Instead of this they should forward look, consider what might come next, what might be good or bad for the game and legislate that.  

[DaveP043]

3 minutes ago, Golfspy_CG2 said:

Titleist has released a statement about the proposed roll back...much like they did in 2018 when it was mentioned.

And this seems to me to be a quite reasonable position for them to take, some of the most logical reasons to oppose bifurcation.  Its also reasonably self-serving, Titleist is the most popular ball on Tour, leading to huge sales numbers, and they don't want to lose any of that.  But do any of us believe that Titleist hasn't been preparing for this type of change for at least the last 4 or 5 years?  They're just waiting for the final testing parameters to come out so they can fine-tune whatever they have in the development pipeline.

[Stuka44]

27 minutes ago, Golfspy_CG2 said:

One of golf’s unifying appeals is that everyone in the game plays by the same set of rules

THIS IS ALL ABOUT TITLEIST' COMMENT NOT THE POSTER!

I appreciate Titleist and their comments.  BUT PLEASE SAME RULES !! And I don't want to turn this into a discussion about rules, and the elite PGA game, or what THE PRO'S DESERVE BECAUSE THEY ARE PROS.  But Can Titleist or the PGA, or the R&A, provide spotters so I won't lose any more balls in play.  Can they flip the bill for some tarps to be erected, along holes and behind holes to simulate crowds knocking the ball down before it bounds into the forest, or so I can error on the side of hitting too much club,  to avoid water in front and then if I misjudge it hits the tarp representing a grandstand that will knock it down and keep it out of the head high brush behind the green.  Oh and I've seen the PGA play ball in hand under conditions that represent what I play most of the year.

That is such self serving, and insulting comment  to suggest in any way that the conditions, and circumstance under which the PGA plays in any way resembles what we weekend hackers play.   

Edited March 14, 2023 by Stuka44

[Golfspy_CG2]

20 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

And this seems to me to be a quite reasonable position for them to take, some of the most logical reasons to oppose bifurcation.  Its also reasonably self-serving, Titleist is the most popular ball on Tour, leading to huge sales numbers, and they don't want to lose any of that.  But do any of us believe that Titleist hasn't been preparing for this type of change for at least the last 4 or 5 years?  They're just waiting for the final testing parameters to come out so they can fine-tune whatever they have in the development pipeline.

Yep, agree on all acounts.   

They do make a solid argument, and they do have a vested interest as you point out.  

And you are correct, I can bet there is a ProV1-T somewwhere behind the locked doors of Ball Plant 3

 

[Golfspy_CG2]

5 minutes ago, Stuka44 said:

THIS IS ALL ABOUT TITLEIST' COMMENT NOT THE POSTER!

I appreciate Titleist and their comments.  BUT PLEASE SAME RULES !! And I don't want to turn this into a discussion about rules, and the elite PGA game, or what THE PRO'S DESERVE BECAUSE THEY ARE PROS.  But Can Titleist or the PGA, or the R&A, provide spotters so I won't lose any more balls in play.  Can they flip the bill for some tarps to be erected, along holes and behind holes to simulate crowds knocking the ball down before it bounds into the forest, or so I can error on the side of hitting too much club,  to avoid water in front and then if I misjudge it hits the tarp representing a grandstand that will knock it down and keep it out of the head high brush behind the green.  Oh and I've seen the PGA play ball in hand under conditions that represent what I play most of the year.

That is such self serving, and insulting comment  to suggest in any way that the conditions, and circumstance under which the PGA plays in any way resembles what we weekend hackers play.   

You misquoted them they specicially referred to as rules, not condtions.    And to throw out thngs such as weekend players being at a disadvatage because there aren't grandstands or spotters, misses the entire point. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

2 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

Simple?  Tell me, how are the R&A or the USGA going to write a Rule that defines how long the grass must be?  The ONLY thing they can do to address distance concerns is to limit the equipment in some way.  I'm not saying I think its necessary, but its the only avenue they have.

It’s simple stop messing with the game and they can keep doing what they want in their sanctioned events. There doesn’t have to be a rule per se, they an work with the pga tour on course setup each week to make it more like the USGA events, but the pga tour isn’t going to allow that so what the usga and R&A are doing is trying to force their stance on the tour. Creating a problem because people with money want to build a course to host a pga tour event and they feel like they need more acreage instead of more creative designs.

3 hours ago, edingc said:

Ah yes, forcing ball companies to spend millions on even more R&D and tooling in the interest of "sustainability." Goodness is the USGA so incredibly out of touch.

Grow the grass and stop manicuring the bunkers. Far more "sustainable" than changing the ball.

It would suck if the ball companies said since the usga and R&A want to go this route we aren’t going to have an elite player ball and a line for the non elite golfers so we will put all money into the rollback and will only sell that ball at retail as well as have it played in elite level tournaments.

There would be a lot of ticked off golfers

3 hours ago, cnosil said:

Then from a PGA tour perspective all of this discussion is irrelevant.  They simply don’t have to adopt the rule for their competitions and can do what they feel is best.  

Exactly. As I mentioned this is the ruing bodies trying to force their stance on the professional tours who have not worked well with them.

I hope the tours tell them to pound sand

[GolfSpy MPR]

My hottest take on all this rollback stuff: the panic response to longer hitters was stupid and created the problem.

When guys hit it longer, you should respond by making courses *shorter*. "Tiger-proofing," lengthening the course, just gives longer hitters even more of an advantage over the shorter hitters.

I can (potentially) hang with Scottie Scheffler in a putting contest inside 5'. Every single yard we move away from the hole, his distance and skill advantage over me is exponentially magnified.

The classic courses made "obsolete" by distance gains leaned into their obsolescence by lengthening.

Don't roll back the ball. If you want to "balance" the game by making power less of a factor, shorten the courses.

[Stuka44]

1 minute ago, Golfspy_CG2 said:

You misquoted them they specicially referred to as rules, not condtions.    And to throw out thngs such as weekend players being at a disadvatage because there aren't grandstands or spotters, misses the entire point. 

Again I don't want to divert the thread, but when the "conditions" under which they play, factually come into play to prevent  penalties that I am exposed to, then in reality, we are not playing by the same rules .

[DaveP043]

2 hours ago, GolfSpy MPR said:

the panic response to longer hitters was stupid and created the problem.

I've read most of the Distance Insights reports, and there really ARE impacts based on increasing distance.  There's no question many of them are based on imaging and marketing considerations, very very few courses are played by those really long hitters, but they still want the image of a "championship" length course.  So courses get longer across the board, increasing the cost of building, and the cost of maintenance.  Sure, an owner or manager could buck the trend, market differently, change maintenance practices, but on an industry-wide basis the cost for a "golf course" has increased at least in part due to increasing distance.

I find it interesting that people (not you particularly) talk about how greedy and/or ego-driven the USGA and R&A are being here.  These are non-profit operations, taking serious flak because they're trying to do what they believe is the right thing.  The professional tours and the manufacturers who oppose the changes each have a very significant financial interest in maintaining the status quo.  That's where "greed" comes in.  I don't necessarily agree that distances should be decreased, or that bifurcation is the right way to do it, but I do believe that the Ruling Bodies aren't doing it for selfish reasons.

Edited March 14, 2023 by DaveP043

[funkyjudge]

3 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Maybe now you have two different handicaps!

I will give another example of something similar. In curling (yes the game with rocks, brooms and yelling) in 2016ish teams were using fabrics on the end of their brooms that were very abrasive. These broom heads and with powerful sweeping teams could essentially direct the stones where they wanted them by creating scratches in the ice. This had never been done before and it then became more useful to use one vs two sweepers. 

Traditionally sweeping served two purposes, to make a stone go further and to make a stone go straighter. Now you could slow a stone, make it go further, make it curl more or less etc. 

The TEAMS (as curling is not a association like golf) decided that this was essentially cheating (it also damaged the ice). The governing bodies (World Curling Federation and Curling Canada) then did a whole years worth of testing and ended up creating a rule where in competition leading to world championships a specific fabric had to be used. (Hair brooms were also outlawed) With this fabric it was proven that directional sweeping was ineffective and sweeping was back to normal per say. 

Some teams had an uproar about it, but now 6 years on from that ruling all players even at a social club level use the same competition approved broom heads for play.  They are the only ones sold now and in rare cases you may see an older brooms heads used in fun play, but its rare. 

However teams still want that edge, so there are two thoughts even with these new broom heads. Brand new ones teams still believe they can make a stone curl one way or another so they change every game (they are not allowed to change mid game). Or some teams have found that dirty and very worn broom heads also may help them become more abrasive or effective and use old ones. 

Point being high level athletes will still look and find advantages where they can. It is part of the nature or sport and trying to get better and being the best. So rolling back the ball sure it will help, but there will be other ways golfers will find speed and distances one way or another. 

You mean that you don’t have at least two different handicaps already?  I actually have SIX of them!  # 1 is my “official” USGA Handicap Index (a/k/a GHIN Handicap), which is about 15-16 (currently 16.3); #2 is my “competition handicap” at my home course (a very difficult track, BTW), which is 13; #3 is my handicap on my winter golf tour, which is played in our handicapping “off season”, which varies from 15 to above 20; #4 is my handicap in the NJSGL (New Jersey Senior Golf League, where competitions are not played in strict accordance with USGA Rules of Golf, and it’s currently about a 13-14; #5  is my handicap in the 9-hole recreational league in which I play, where all USGA Rules are adhered to, which is a 4; and finally #6 is for the indoor golf leagues where I play on a simulator (this one means virtually nothing), which is 5.

[revkev]

1 hour ago, Stuka44 said:

THIS IS ALL ABOUT TITLEIST' COMMENT NOT THE POSTER!

I appreciate Titleist and their comments.  BUT PLEASE SAME RULES !! And I don't want to turn this into a discussion about rules, and the elite PGA game, or what THE PRO'S DESERVE BECAUSE THEY ARE PROS.  But Can Titleist or the PGA, or the R&A, provide spotters so I won't lose any more balls in play.  Can they flip the bill for some tarps to be erected, along holes and behind holes to simulate crowds knocking the ball down before it bounds into the forest, or so I can error on the side of hitting too much club,  to avoid water in front and then if I misjudge it hits the tarp representing a grandstand that will knock it down and keep it out of the head high brush behind the green.  Oh and I've seen the PGA play ball in hand under conditions that represent what I play most of the year.

That is such self serving, and insulting comment  to suggest in any way that the conditions, and circumstance under which the PGA plays in any way resembles what we weekend hackers play.   

You seem to be under the impression that course set ups for the PGA are easier that what we face on a regular basis.  They aren't.  Pins are put in spots that would have us whining and screaming at the head pro after the round, rough is far thicker than what we face, fairways and collars are far too tight for most of us to handle and 500 yard par 4's are not my cup of tea, either.  Greens speeds are generally at 12.

 

An issue that the tour faces is trying to keep the condition of the course as consistent as possible for a full field throughout an entire day of golf.  If it's rained, they play ball in hand to be as fair as possible to everyone.  Bunkers are raked for consistencies sake.

 

If you think that the typical tour player would come to your course and struggle because of the conditions of the course - You are mistaken.  Unless you're a member of a place like Oakland Hills or Oakmont he'd shoot in the mid to low 60's in his sleep, playing by the rules, picking up an occasional mud ball, being in a footprint in the sand.  He's hitting a sand or gap wedge into that 420 yard par 4 that beats most of us up.  There was either a thread or a blog post on MGS once in which Lou Stanger was able to provide the spectrum of scores that typical tour players would shoot on the typical courses that we play, there were lots of scores in the low 60's and high 50's in the mix.  They are plus 6's and better if they were to have handicaps, the week that a player wins, he's playing to around a plus 9.

 

We have LPGA and Canadian Tour players at our club, they play from7,200 yards - the LPGA players will break par from there.  Our course rating is 74.4, slope 145 from that set of tees.  That's on a normal day.  They're just good players, they do it for a living.  I don't want to see an MLB game on a field where there are rocks and I don't need to watch touring pros embarrassed, if the course would embarrass them, it would be unplayable for me.  Not interested.  

 

 

[Stuka44]

15 minutes ago, revkev said:

You seem to be under the impression that course

I'm not sure what you are referring to.  I am not making any comparison of what a pro would shoot on my course, I don't care.  That particular post was about Titleist indicating we all play by the same rules.  My point was that if they play with conditions that eliminate possible penalties, or worse outcomes than they ended up with,   then we are not playing by the same rules. 

[Albatrass]

I believe that back in the seventies the USGA and the R&A increased the minimum diameter of a golf ball from 1.62 to 1.68 inches since the smaller diameter ball was straighter and longer.  I would imagine the golf ball manufactures and professional golfers were not too pleased, but they adjusted.  Golf is expensive now and large part due to building courses that are long enough to accommodate longer distances.  Builders and owners need more land which require more construction, maintenance and taxes.  Maybe the minimum diameter should be increased again.  Initially increase it to around 1.70 inches and see how this affects distance prior to changing the "Rules of Golf".  I think this would be fair to everyone and bring more strategic play back to the game.  Maybe courses would not need to be lengthened more yards than they are now.  Golfers can use any tees they want to have fun.  The "Rules of Golf" do not indicate what are considered pro tees, regular tee, women's tees or senior tees.  A golfer can for any set of tees.  This will also reduce the amount of time it takes to play.  An example of reducing distance is baseball.  If there was not limit on how far the ball could be hit, the defensive part of the game would be diminished, and it would turn into an even longer game.  Only my viewpoint.  I am sure there will be many more.

[revkev]

45 minutes ago, Stuka44 said:

I'm not sure what you are referring to.  I am not making any comparison of what a pro would shoot on my course, I don't care.  That particular post was about Titleist indicating we all play by the same rules.  My point was that if they play with conditions that eliminate possible penalties, or worse outcomes than they ended up with,   then we are not playing by the same rules. 

 

45 minutes ago, Stuka44 said:

I'm not sure what you are referring to.  I am not making any comparison of what a pro would shoot on my course, I don't care.  That particular post was about Titleist indicating we all play by the same rules.  My point was that if they play with conditions that eliminate possible penalties, or worse outcomes than they ended up with,   then we are not playing by the same rules. 

Okay I will buy that, perhaps I read too much into this and earlier comments on your part. So I will respond to this by respectfully disagreeing. Grandstands are temporary immovable obstructions from which anyone gets relief. These appear, not grandstands, but temporary immovable obstructions on golf courses all the time. I’ve certainly hit them and caught breaks from them good and bad. I’ve gotten drops from them. I could go up the street and play Copperhead where sone remain up year round and catch those very same so called breaks the pros get. 
 

They are governed by the same rules that we play by. Currently

 

[GolfSpy BOS]

I think we need to get an opinion on this from the only voice that we really need to listen to on this:

 

@Yellow Ball how does it make you feel that the PGA wants to make you softer and slower?  You've worked your whole life to as firm and fit as a little ball can be... and here they are, trying to turn you into a marshmallow, or maybe more accurately a Peep.  

[fixyurdivot]

21 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Will be interesting to see. I guess more interesting to see how it affects us mortals or if it does at all. 

I hate to add to the churn, and I'm not pointing fingers, but we really need a roll-back on excessive iron head patina .  Whether it has distance and/or spin advantage I'm not sure, but it just isn't right . 

Regarding the changes to "roll-back" excessive distance at professional level, I really wish they would just look at some changes in turf conditions first - as in raise the mower deck.  It's been pointed out that fairways have become billiard tables as the decades roll along. No, I don't think that gets us to whatever the ideal average distance is they seek (whatever that is ), but it is so easy as compared to what this will involve. 

Even with a change in balls, they will ultimately have to address throttling physical conditioning and swing speed; which has been a big part of distance increases.  I say, just check current ball and COR technology where it is and at least try some less costly and confusing approaches before making a two tier ball system.

[Golfspy_CG2]

9 minutes ago, GolfSpy_BOS said:

I think we need to get an opinion on this from the only voice that we really need to listen to on this:

 

@Yellow Ball how does it make you feel that the PGA wants to make you softer and slower?  You've worked your whole life to as firm and fit as a little ball can be... and here they are, trying to turn you into a marshmallow, or maybe more accurately a Peep.  

Internet won Today!!

Yes   Let’s hear from the ultimate authority on this!!

 

[DaveP043]

56 minutes ago, Albatrass said:

I believe that back in the seventies the USGA and the R&A increased the minimum diameter of a golf ball from 1.62 to 1.68 inches since the smaller diameter ball was straighter and longer. 

The R&A changed their criteria to agree with the USGA, where the minimum diameter has been 1.68 inches for almost forever.  Here's a little more detail:

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/articles/2017/05/rules-throwback--once-size-didn-t-always-fit-all.html

Surprising to me, the larger ball wasn't adopted by the R&A for all play until 1990, although it was required in the Open Championship beginning in 1974.

[Albatrass]

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

The R&A changed their criteria to agree with the USGA, where the minimum diameter has been 1.68 inches for almost forever.  Here's a little more detail:

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/articles/2017/05/rules-throwback--once-size-didn-t-always-fit-all.html

Surprising to me, the larger ball wasn't adopted by the R&A for all play until 1990, although it was required in the Open Championship beginning in 1974.

Back in the fifties when I started playing golf, depending on conditions I would play the British ball or the American ball.  When the USGA "Rules of Golf" changed I just excepted it and played the larger diameter ball.  It was nicer hitting it shorter but, in the fairway, or just in the rough. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

4 hours ago, Stuka44 said:

Again I don't want to divert the thread, but when the "conditions" under which they play, factually come into play to prevent  penalties that I am exposed to, then in reality, we are not playing by the same rules .

 

3 hours ago, Stuka44 said:

I'm not sure what you are referring to.  I am not making any comparison of what a pro would shoot on my course, I don't care.  That particular post was about Titleist indicating we all play by the same rules.  My point was that if they play with conditions that eliminate possible penalties, or worse outcomes than they ended up with,   then we are not playing by the same rules. 

We do play by the same rules. You’re just upset that because there are more people to help find a ball that is somehow different rules. The on course staff serve two purposes, the main purpose is to keep fans from crossing the ropes and make sure they adhere to the rules. Yes they have a secondary role of locating a ball and if you think that on most those courses the pros couldn’t find their own ball in the roughs you are mistaken. They do it on their home courses all the time when practicing just like you and I do.

The thing is if you don’t want to be penalized as much then make less mistakes 

[oldguy819]

""the bifurcation of the profession into social do-gooders and self-serving iconoclasts""

I know they've been talking about this for years.  I can GUESS what they're complaining about but How can you put restrictions on balls or equipment without destroying that industry.  I'm old enough to remember the BAN of the "Brittish" balls.  There's been no discussion about the "lofts" of the clubs.  Why do they hit lob wedges 100+ yards?  9 irons 180 yards?  Because they manipulate the lofts. You're going to penalize the golfer who strives to have a faster swing or make "pure" hits of the ball.  Isn't this a little (a LOT) like socialism/communism?  Someone is too good so "we MUST penalize the achiever to make the underachiever look better?"  I've been golfing 60 years.  There was a day when I could OCCASIONALLY hit a balata 300 yards with a persimmon.  Made me feel great and impress those I played with.  All that I've read only speaks of "They hit it too far".  What is their ultimate goal? Are we going to limit their engines like nascar? LeMans?  To what end?

I'd look at redesigning the courses. Tighter and shorter dog legs Thicker rough. Longer fairway grass/turf.  The rollouts are INCREDIBLE. One or two more trees they have to navigate? Make the players MANIPULATE or WORK the ball around the course again.  Not that many can fade or draw the ball on command or certain degrees of bend.  This would force the ball makers to redesign the balls again because today's balls, you can't make em bend like you used too.  My two cents

[GolfSpy SAM]

Breaking News!!!! This guy apparently has the scoop from inside Titleist!!!

 

(If my excessive use of punctuation isn't clue enough, this is a joke.)

[MattWillGolf]

7 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

I hate to add to the churn, and I'm not pointing fingers, but we really need a roll-back on excessive iron head patina .  Whether it has distance and/or spin advantage I'm not sure, but it just isn't right . 

Regarding the changes to "roll-back" excessive distance at professional level, I really wish they would just look at some changes in turf conditions first - as in raise the mower deck.  It's been pointed out that fairways have become billiard tables as the decades roll along. No, I don't think that gets us to whatever the ideal average distance is they seek (whatever that is ), but it is so easy as compared to what this will involve. 

Even with a change in balls, they will ultimately have to address throttling physical conditioning and swing speed; which has been a big part of distance increases.  I say, just check current ball and COR technology where it is and at least try some less costly and confusing approaches before making a two tier ball system.

To combat excessive iron head patina I read that the R&A has consulted with Aaron Rai to develop standards for the mandatory use iron head covers which they hope to implement by 2027.

[TylorJudd]

I doubt the PGA adopts, and I know LIV will not. Maybe shake up the courses they play on a regular basis to see what happens. Can't remember the last time shinnecock allowed a really low score to win....