Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[LICC]

1 minute ago, jaskanski said:

There has always been strategy and challenge in the game. The trouble is, in the professionall game, the way that courses have been set up with slick fairways and little real protection of any note, the driver bomb and gouge tactic has become a dumb reach no brainer. Take that option off the table, no matter what ball you're using you have more strategic options.

 

Was Winged Foot set up that way in 2020? 

There is no strategy in targeting a small landing area. Hit the one available spot you're good, miss and you're not. That is not strategy.

Edited April 3, 2023 by LICC

[jaskanski]

6 minutes ago, LICC said:

Was Winged Foot set up that way in 2020? 

There is no strategy in targeting a small landing area. Hit the one available spot you're good, miss and you're not. That is not strategy.

Was the Masters set up that way in 1976 when Ray Floyd posted 271? Or Jack in 1965? Was St Andrews set up that way when Curtis Srange shot a 62 in 1987?

I'm sorry, but your reasoning has no relevance or logic. Dechabeau's strategy other than bombing everything he can is what exactly? Did it work out for him at the Masters with his 'strategy'?

[cnosil]

2 hours ago, chisag said:

Personally I want to see every golfer faced with a tough decision at Augusta on #13 and #15. When virtually every player can reach those two greens with their 2nd shot you have completely changed the design of those holes. A long hitter on #15 with a great drive may have a 5 iron compared to a shorter hitter using a fairway wood and they may elect to lay up putting a premium on their short game and to me that is compelling golf. 

Players have been reaching the greens in 2 for a long time;  it isn't just because of the increase ability to hit the ball farther.   

From Lou Stagner:  

15th hole. Greg Norman hits 7 iron from 195 yards just over the green. No wind. 22:51 point in the video

Ben Crenshaw has 185 yards to hole on 13th hole.  Sandy Lyle has 150 yards to hole on 13th hole. 1:25:55 mark

Seve hits 4 iron from 220 over the 15th green. Stadler has 210 yards to hole on 15. 1:36:01 mark

 

13th hole:

15:33 Hubert Green was ~210 to front edge

16:16 Miller ~190 front edge

1:06:40 Watson ~165 front edge

1:07:30 Norman ~150 front edge

Green was 157th out of 167 in driving distance in 1981

[LICC]

18 hours ago, jaskanski said:

Was the Masters set up that way in 1976 when Ray Floyd posted 271? Or Jack in 1965? Was St Andrews set up that way when Curtis Srange shot a 62 in 1987?

I'm sorry, but your reasoning has no relevance or logic. Dechabeau's strategy other than bombing everything he can is what exactly? Did it work out for him at the Masters with his 'strategy'?

What point are you trying to make, bringing up tournaments when the courses were 700 yards shorter and the setups were not as you described that you want to see?

[jaskanski]

1 hour ago, LICC said:

What point are you trying to make, bringing up tournaments when the courses were 700 yards shorter and the setups were not as you described that you want to see?

The point is - there is no point in rolling back the ball which is the topic of this discussion. Any player has the ability on their day to demolish any course if allowed to. The ball has nothing to do with it.

Maybe we should roll back the players? Like maybe make Bryson to wear a lead glove and an eye patch?

[fritzychacho]

Unpopular opinion but I definitely see the merits of bifurcation. I think it'll make the tour a lot more interesting seeing more mid irons into greens on par 4s and three shot par 5s. I'm in favor of making tour players having to be able to hit all of the clubs in their bags. It also is beneficial on the conservation and sustainability side of things, which I doubt many people would be against. And it may allow for more interesting courses that were previously too short a chance to show up on tour.

Having said that, if they had a rolled back ball this past Saturday at the masters, it would've been a nightmare for those guys in those conditions. I see the arguments on both sides but ultimately I agree it's a good first start with the way equipment and athletes are evolving.

[RickyBobby_PR]

17 minutes ago, fritzychacho said:

mid irons into greens on par 4s and three shot par 5s. I'm in favor of making tour players having to be able to hit all of the clubs in their bags. It also is beneficial on the conservation and sustainability side of things, which I doubt many people would be against. And it may allow for more interesting courses that were previously too short a chance to show up on tour.

Mid irons are already pretty common into these holes. I’m not going to dig back into the thread on wrx for a chart that shows clubs used on approach shots but it’s a lot more of mid irons than short irons 

Many of the shirt courses aren’t in the rotation because they don’t have the infrastructure to support a pga event and not because of distance not to mention the majority of current tour courses are in the 7000-7200 range 

[LICC]

Surprised no one had commented:

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/usga-ra-rollback-announcement-december-2023

Big news! I hope they have tested this and determined this won’t impact the 95-105 mph swing speed in any significant way. Maybe less than 5 yards compared to 15 for the 120 mph elite golfers. 
 

From the article: 

The USGA and R&A are expected to announce early next week that they will be changing the rules to roll back distance in golf—and not just for elite players. The expected decision likely would make nearly every popular golf ball played both professionally and recreationally non-conforming. The news comes from multiple industry sources with direct knowledge of the plans of golf’s governing bodies, speaking on background.

The change involves a revision to the way golf balls are tested to see if they conform to the rules. Specifically, it is expected to be announced that the test for the Overall Distance Standard would increase the swing speed at which golf balls are tested from the current standard of 120 mph to 125 mph. While increasing the swing speed, the test would not change the distance limit of 317 yards.

Edited December 2, 2023 by LICC

[TimT]

37 minutes ago, LICC said:

Surprised no one had commented:

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/usga-ra-rollback-announcement-december-2023

Big news! I hope they have tested this and determined this won’t impact the 95-105 mph swing speed in any significant way. Maybe less than 5 yards compared to 15 for the 120 mph elite golfers. 
 

From the article: 

The USGA and R&A are expected to announce early next week that they will be changing the rules to roll back distance in golf—and not just for elite players. The expected decision likely would make nearly every popular golf ball played both professionally and recreationally non-conforming. The news comes from multiple industry sources with direct knowledge of the plans of golf’s governing bodies, speaking on background.

The change involves a revision to the way golf balls are tested to see if they conform to the rules. Specifically, it is expected to be announced that the test for the Overall Distance Standard would increase the swing speed at which golf balls are tested from the current standard of 120 mph to 125 mph. While increasing the swing speed, the test would not change the distance limit of 317 yards.

I came here after seeing that same article… and to say I’m not a fan of the decision at the moment. Changing the whole game for everyone to “fix” a length problem presented by only a fraction of the already tiny fraction of the best players in the world is crazy. 
 

If we amateurs hit it “too far” we almost always have another longer tee box available.  
 

It feels 100% like the golf powers that be are protecting ball manufacturers from needing to produce two separate products for pros/ams with the idea everyone should play the same ball for the good of the game. 

[GolfSpy_APH]

43 minutes ago, LICC said:

Surprised no one had commented:

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/usga-ra-rollback-announcement-december-2023

Big news! I hope they have tested this and determined this won’t impact the 95-105 mph swing speed in any significant way. Maybe less than 5 yards compared to 15 for the 120 mph elite golfers. 
 

From the article: 

The USGA and R&A are expected to announce early next week that they will be changing the rules to roll back distance in golf—and not just for elite players. The expected decision likely would make nearly every popular golf ball played both professionally and recreationally non-conforming. The news comes from multiple industry sources with direct knowledge of the plans of golf’s governing bodies, speaking on background.

The change involves a revision to the way golf balls are tested to see if they conform to the rules. Specifically, it is expected to be announced that the test for the Overall Distance Standard would increase the swing speed at which golf balls are tested from the current standard of 120 mph to 125 mph. While increasing the swing speed, the test would not change the distance limit of 317 yards.

They are going to do what they want. Then we get to figure out how to navigate any possible changes. 

People have said plenty on social, nothing that's been announced or speculated changes what has been said in the previous 44 pages of threads.

[DaveP043]

43 minutes ago, LICC said:

Big news! I hope they have tested this and determined this won’t impact the 95-105 mph swing speed in any significant way. Maybe less than 5 yards compared to 15 for the 120 mph elite golfers.

That's not what the GD article suggests, rather it will be pretty proportional to swing speed, but that will be an area of research for the golf ball designers.  They do remarkable things with the layering of the balls, it might be possible to design a ball that stays within the limit at really high swing speeds, but doesn't lose as much at lower swing speeds.  The marketing will be "This ball goes longer at 100 mph swings than any other ball".  I have no doubt that the big manufacturers have been looking at this for a few years now, its not like this news should surprise anyone.

The article also discusses a survey made, saying 

Quote

In a Golf Digest internet survey this week that was open to all golfers, with more than 600 people responding, a significant majority (64.6 percent) said they would not abide by rules that reduce ball distance

Its easy to say now that they won't follow the Rules, but in 7 years (the limit won't apply to most of us until 2030) I imagine that just about everyone will be using legal golf balls.

 

11 minutes ago, TimT said:

I came here after seeing that same article… and to say I’m not a fan of the decision at the moment. Changing the whole game for everyone to “fix” a length problem presented by only a fraction of the already tiny fraction of the best players in the world is crazy. 
 

If we amateurs hit it “too far” we almost always have another longer tee box available.  
 

It feels 100% like the golf powers that be are protecting ball manufacturers from needing to produce two separate products for pros/ams with the idea everyone should play the same ball for the good of the game. 

If you read the interim reports on distance, you'd know that the distance increases over the years coincide with lengthening of existing courses, and increasing the length of new courses, all of which require more land, and maintenance of which requires more resources, and more cost to the golfers, all of  us.  Its more than simply the perception that the best players in the world are "too long".

And to me, bifurcation would a poorer choice, golf is one of the few sports where every one of us can play the same courses under the same rules and using the same equipment as the best players in the game.  I believe having separate standards for the top levels would be more of an issue.  

[bens197]

IF there is an impact to slower swing golfers I do wonder how it will affect several aspects of the game, notably club sales.  

What I can say confidently while this still develops, if there is a reduction in distance, it may have an adverse effect club OEM's who rely upon YOY improvements in distance / forgiveness to sell clubs.

There have been many conclusions drawn without any definitive word on how** this will occur so I will reserve my opinion until that time.

[DaveP043]

3 minutes ago, bens197 said:

What I can say confidently while this still develops, if there is a reduction in distance, it may have an adverse effect club OEM's who rely upon YOY improvements in distance / forgiveness to sell clubs.

I'm not sure, golf ball "speed" has been at the same limit for years, driver "spring" effect has been the same, yet the marketing still gets based largely on distance increases.  No matter what the regulations require, the marketing will still be based on whatever features the manufacturers think their potential customers will want.

[Shapotomous]

17 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

And to me, bifurcation would a poorer choice, golf is one of the few sports where every one of us can play the same courses under the same rules and using the same equipment as the best players in the game.  I believe having separate standards for the top levels would be more of an issue.  

IMO you really aren't playing the same courses.  You may be on the same piece of real estate but you are using much different tees, the setup is much different regarding fairway width and rough length, the pin positions we play are not going to be in the tourney spots on many holes.  The prep of the greens wont be double cut and rolled.  We all know these things drastically change how a course "plays".

I don't think bifurcation would be a big deal for the sport.  Since the players are supplied with balls anyway, just give them the new conforming ball to use.  I suspect the currently supplied balls to the pros go through extra QC anyway much like their clubs.  The manufacturers have to be ahead of the announcement making and refining and testing with their tour players the new ball recipe.  The quantity they need for tour use is tiny compared to the general golfing population.  A tour production line would also allow for some extra built in QC they probably don't want to spend on the balls for mass production.

[DaveP043]

13 minutes ago, Shapotomous said:

I don't think bifurcation would be a big deal for the sport. 

I know this was discussed somewhere back in this thread, but I'll ask again.  Where do you draw the line, what level of events requires the "short" ball?  High school?  College?  USGA amateur events?  State am championships?  Club championships?  Only pro events?  What level of Pro events, all the way down to local or regional PGA events for club pros?  Some players would inevitably have to switch back and forth. And smaller ball manufacturers will be strained to run two separate research and development lines, with you and I finding both.  I think its a bigger deal than you suggest.

[TylorJudd]

I guess we’ll see stock piling of balls lol

This won’t prohibit a manufacturer from producing a product with a disclaimer. I doubt we see a huge issue, but as someone who can swing between 118 to 133, put a damn bunker in the fairway and let me gamble on it, or a damn tree. Courses could start this process now, s*** all the courses around here set tournament pins all year round everyday to make it more difficult, which I also don’t agree with. The bifurcation will hurt those who recreationally play this sport, and I hope they take that into consideration. Time will tell

[chisag]

... Of course we can speculate til the cows come home but we really don't know how this will shake out. While this effects Am's in tournaments I have to think this will not effect most Ams, especially if OEMs still make and sell "illegal balls". While most wont play an illegal driver they do move the ball out of divots, take breakfast balls, drop near where their ball went OB along with a myriad of other infractions and my guess is more than a few are playing illegal wedges without even knowing they are illegal, although if informed probably wouldn't care. So if Maxfli produces a shorter ball that meets the standards but still sells a non conforming ball I have to think many will buy the ball they have always played with. 

... If it all goes into the rules as suggested and you want to play by the rules and easy fix is just moving up a tee box and you will be hitting it similar or even a little farther than before the rule changes. But as Ben and others have said, this is just conjecture and if it goes into effect as suggested and the feedback is overwhelmingly negative we may see a pivot to something different. Or there may be great gnashing of teeth for a few years and then it ceases to be an issue. 

Edited December 2, 2023 by chisag

[Rob Person]

Forgive me if I stimulate a rabbit hole in this topic. besides the recent test ball summary conclusions, I can't help but wonder how much of an impact this will have on ALL of the ball manufacturers out there.  In the last 2- 5 years alone there have been dozens of up and coming ball makers breaching the market. Do they all have the ability that the top 10 tournament ball providers do to suddenly invest in this conformance change so quickly? How will this affect the clubs and stores that have contracts for the many many brands?

Is there a secret concentrated effort by major persons of influence in the USGA/PGA to gain control over which will be allowed to be used? ($$$$$$ talks) in the hopes to stifle the recent flood of new brand balls available ?

I understand that the ability to dump millions into course changes to make them playable for pros is a huge struggle and primary factor in this. But certainly there is more than any of us can imagine that's happening behind the curtains.

Will LIV and other future off the path events be affected by this or annexed into it as well?

[Middler]

3 hours ago, TimT said:

I came here after seeing that same article… and to say I’m not a fan of the decision at the moment. Changing the whole game for everyone to “fix” a length problem presented by only a fraction of the already tiny fraction of the best players in the world is crazy. 
 

If we amateurs hit it “too far” we almost always have another longer tee box available.  
 

It feels 100% like the golf powers that be are protecting ball manufacturers from needing to produce two separate products for pros/ams with the idea everyone should play the same ball for the good of the game. 

I was surprised reading the article, would they really roll back the golf ball for everyone? I guess we'll have to wait and see, but I wouldn't think that would be a popular decision for anyone who plays golf.

I'm not much worried about ball and equipment manufacturers, their marketing teams will always find a way to sell us more. I can see the ad copy now, your existing equipment is optimized for the old ball and therefore obsolete, our new driver technology maximizes your performance with the new (inferior) ball.

Edited December 2, 2023 by Middler

[MGoBlue100]

32 minutes ago, Rob Person said:

Forgive me if I stimulate a rabbit hole in this topic. besides the recent test ball summary conclusions, I can't help but wonder how much of an impact this will have on ALL of the ball manufacturers out there.  In the last 2- 5 years alone there have been dozens of up and coming ball makers breaching the market. Do they all have the ability that the top 10 tournament ball providers do to suddenly invest in this conformance change so quickly? How will this affect the clubs and stores that have contracts for the many many brands?

Is there a secret concentrated effort by major persons of influence in the USGA/PGA to gain control over which will be allowed to be used? ($$$$$$ talks) in the hopes to stifle the recent flood of new brand balls available ?

I understand that the ability to dump millions into course changes to make them playable for pros is a huge struggle and primary factor in this. But certainly there is more than any of us can imagine that's happening behind the curtains.

Will LIV and other future off the path events be affected by this or annexed into it as well?

Any of the tours can adopt a local rule and use whichever ball type they prefer. If the PGAT and DPWT decide not to abide by the rollback, it’ll just be the majors. (The Masters with THEIR own ball finally?!?) I’d love to see it. Nothing wrong with professional golf or amateur golf. USGA (as usual) doing what THEY want, not what’s good for golf. “Grow the game” indeed. Fools. 

[LICC]

4 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I know this was discussed somewhere back in this thread, but I'll ask again.  Where do you draw the line, what level of events requires the "short" ball?  High school?  College?  USGA amateur events?  State am championships?  Club championships?  Only pro events?  What level of Pro events, all the way down to local or regional PGA events for club pros?  Some players would inevitably have to switch back and forth. And smaller ball manufacturers will be strained to run two separate research and development lines, with you and I finding both.  I think its a bigger deal than you suggest.

I agree with you both. Recreational golfers by and large don’t play the same field as pros, so the game is bifurcated as is. But I’ve changed my mind on the ball. If they can roll it back exponentially more for the highest swing speeds with minimal effect on average swings speeds, that would work best to address the issues. 

[Preeway]

I still think the bigger “problem” with increased distance is how easy club manufacturers have made it to hit solid shots. When I was in high school it was really hard to hit “perfect shots”. MOIs were smaller and material wasn’t as forgiving either. If a change is coming I’d rather see them tweak the tech in club manufacturing to make it challenging to hit those great shots and make it rewarding when you hit one on the screws. All that being said, I can’t think of a time when I wished this game was harder while shooting a score in the mid 80’s . 

[Bosox04]

I think, at the recreational level, they made mistakes with the groove rule and the anchoring rules. I really don’t see bifurcation as a bad thing, and while I see an occasional golfer that can overpower a course, I see many more that don’t hit it far enough. Hopefully they develop some magic formula where the average player isn’t penalized too much. They are worried about some courses becoming obsolete, but the Opens at The Country Club and Merion were pretty darn good.

[DaveP043]

2 hours ago, Rob Person said:

In the last 2- 5 years alone there have been dozens of up and coming ball makers breaching the market. Do they all have the ability that the top 10 tournament ball providers do to suddenly invest in this conformance change so quickly?

Everyone will have 4 full years to develop a conforming ball before the top levels are required to use it, and 6 full years before it will go into effect for all golfers.  These small manufacturers had to spend the money developing a conforming ball before they began selling to the public, I'm comfortable that most will find a way to produce a conforming ball by 2030.

2 hours ago, Rob Person said:

Is there a secret concentrated effort by major persons of influence in the USGA/PGA to gain control over which will be allowed to be used?

Please get it straight, its the USGA and R&A who did the distance research and who will produce the Rules.  The PGA Tour has been involved all along, as have manufacturers.  They may not be happy, but they'll survive.

 

1 hour ago, MGoBlue100 said:

Any of the tours can adopt a local rule and use whichever ball type they prefer. If the PGAT and DPWT decide not to abide by the rollback, it’ll just be the majors.

They certainly don't have to use the Rules of Golf, but if they do, they'll need to use the complete Rules of Golf, or else write their own Rules.   They cannot write Local Rules that aren't consistent with the USGA/R&A requirements. In spite of the occasional whining from disgruntled tour pros, "we need or own rules", the Tours have shown absolutely no willingness to try to start rulesmaking from scratch.  

1 hour ago, MGoBlue100 said:

USGA (as usual) doing what THEY want, not what’s good for golf.

Once again, the R&A and the USGA write the Rules together.  If you read the Distance Reports, there really are valid reasons to consider regulating driving distances.  You may not agree with the conclusions, or the route taken, but it goes beyond the optics of the PGA Tour.

[bens197]

7 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I'm not sure, golf ball "speed" has been at the same limit for years, driver "spring" effect has been the same, yet the marketing still gets based largely on distance increases.  No matter what the regulations require, the marketing will still be based on whatever features the manufacturers think their potential customers will want.

 

Driver "spring" hasn't changed...the forgiveness on poorly struck shots has...

There's a cooperative relationship between better golf balls and better club tech...it's the same reason why vendors who use launch monitors use a premium ball rather than a 2 piece range ball...optimal distance.  

If this does in fact compromise distance for the consumer, I would bet anything that the big brands go to war with the USGA & RA.

[bens197]

6 hours ago, chisag said:

... Of course we can speculate til the cows come home but we really don't know how this will shake out. While this effects Am's in tournaments I have to think this will not effect most Ams, especially if OEMs still make and sell "illegal balls". While most wont play an illegal driver they do move the ball out of divots, take breakfast balls, drop near where their ball went OB along with a myriad of other infractions and my guess is more than a few are playing illegal wedges without even knowing they are illegal, although if informed probably wouldn't care. So if Maxfli produces a shorter ball that meets the standards but still sells a non conforming ball I have to think many will buy the ball they have always played with. 

... If it all goes into the rules as suggested and you want to play by the rules and easy fix is just moving up a tee box and you will be hitting it similar or even a little farther than before the rule changes. But as Ben and others have said, this is just conjecture and if it goes into effect as suggested and the feedback is overwhelmingly negative we may see a pivot to something different. Or there may be great gnashing of teeth for a few years and then it ceases to be an issue. 

I wish the "move up" a tee box movement had worked.  

[jolter1]

Honestly, bifurcation of golf rules should have happened a long time ago. Professional and top amatuer competition should have more substantial rules as opposed to the recreational golfer. But then again, the horse left the barn years ago when the powers that be let technology get out of hand and since then, unsuccessfully, have tried to real it in.

[chisag]

19 minutes ago, bens197 said:

I wish the "move up" a tee box movement had worked.  

 

... Amen. Combating ignorance evidently takes time and maybe an outside influence. I talked my 81 yr of pard into moving up to the forward tees on all par 4's and he is enjoying his rounds much more and has moved up to the forward tees on all holes and regularly shoots his age or close to it now. I had tried talking my other mid 60's pard into moving top to the (senior) tees with no luck. I will suggest from time to time but I am not gonna push. After coming down with inoperable throat cancer and Cheno/radiation this summer (he is now cancer free ) he was still pretty weak when he returned in late October and I convinced him to move up ... you know until he regains his full strength.   He is pretty much back to normal and has no plans to go back to the mens tees as he has enjoyed his rounds much more than playing the mens tees. 

... I tried to tell them if they can't reach several par 4's with a normal drive and a normal 2nd shot, they are playing the wrong tees. I think both felt like with a really good drive and a really good 2nd shot they could reach, but that only happened about once in every 10 tries. 90% failure is no way to play golf imo. So two intelligent guys that trust me when it comes to equipment and how to play just didn't wanna admit they needed to move up. Until they did. It really is a battle.  
 

[fixyurdivot]

43 minutes ago, bens197 said:

If this does in fact compromise distance for the consumer, I would bet anything that the big brands go to war with the USGA & RA.

I agree.  This entire issue is at the tour golf level (perhaps collegiate), and it's pretty limited at that.  The neutered balls should only be enforced at those levels - absolutely no reason to reduce distance for amatuers.

Edited December 2, 2023 by fixyurdivot

[bens197]

3 minutes ago, chisag said:

 
... I tried to tell them if they can't reach several par 4's with a normal drive and a normal 2nd shot, they are playing the wrong tees. I think both felt like with a really good drive and a really good 2nd shot they could reach, but that only happened about once in every 10 tries. 90% failure is no way to play golf imo. So two intelligent guys that trust me when it comes to equipment and how to play just didn't wanna admit they needed to move up. Until they did. It really is a battle.  
 

It makes sense when so many golfers anchor their average distances to the purest shot they can hit with that club.