Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[storm319]

29 minutes ago, Hook DeLoft said:

You may be right, but I look at long drive competitors and wonder how long before the highest club speed on tour is 140 mph and the average is 128. It would take great athletes with exceptional golf skills to be able to keep balls in play and score well at those speeds, but with 8.1 billion people on Earth and the continued growth of the game overseas, we will see more and more of those exceptional athletes playing golf. 

When typical major and tour venues are designed with fairways the width of an LDA grid, then that will be a more valid concern (also count how many miss the grid next time you watch an LDA event). Ultimately, we saw an attempt with Bryson and while he has had some success with this approach, it has not been sustainable.

Either way, this forthcoming proposal doesn’t solve that potential problem nor will it make The Old Course a relevant Open Championship venue for the next century.

[MGoBlue100]

1 hour ago, pantleggs said:

How many courses are really affected by increased distance? It’s not like Bryson or Rory are popping by my local muni for a round, causing the super there to say, “hey, we really need to add 100-150 yards to each hole to combat length gains.” The courses I play have largely been the same length/layout for decades. The majority of courses impacted will never be played by amateurs like ourselves. 

THIS. A million times this. If it’s a problem (I don’t think it is…) it’s a problem for 0.5 - 1% of players. I’m not sure about you, but I’m not often hitting it TOO far. 

[TimT]

Swing speed training is about to get very popular lol! Everyone is going to want to add 5% more speed to get back what the ball manufacturers want to take away. 

[MGoBlue100]

7 minutes ago, storm319 said:

When typical major and tour venues are designed with fairways the width of an LDA grid, then that will be a more valid concern (also count how many miss the grid next time you watch an LDA event). Ultimately, we saw an attempt with Bryson and while he has had some success with this approach, it has not been sustainable.

Either way, this forthcoming proposal doesn’t solve that potential problem nor will it make The Old Course a relevant Open Championship venue for the next century.

It’s my thought that most tour players would consider a US Open, Arnie/Bay Hill and others slightly more than “some success”. Granted he wedged and putted like a savant especially at Winged Foot, but his system worked. 

[storm319]

27 minutes ago, MGoBlue100 said:

It’s my thought that most tour players would consider a US Open, Arnie/Bay Hill and others slightly more than “some success”. Granted he wedged and putted like a savant especially at Winged Foot, but his system worked. 

I say “some” success considering his performance over the past couple of seasons and the fact that he has backed off some (not to mention few others following suit). He did have a top 5 at this year’s PGAC, but aside from that his major performances since winning the 2020 US Open have been disappointing. 

[fixyurdivot]

5 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

You would, but they've known of this study for years, and haven't done it.  They say in baseball that "chicks dig the long ball", and professional golf marketing uses the same approach.  

No doubt but they also may have just assumed this "problem" would quietly fizzle and go away... like LIV.  I suppose there is the possibility the PGA and other tours simply decided to not to enforce the rollback.  That would certainly speak volumes and definitely get my vote .

 

3 hours ago, bens197 said:

I think this is a cop-out.  Every region of golf courses have their particular nuance however they share one commonality...fairways reward bombs.  I try to unsubscribe from black & white logic however it's difficult when raising a mower deck and then verifying grass length is not an arduous task.

Worse than that is the conditions at tour events.  I just recently attended the Charles Schwab Championship at Phoenix CC.  We spoke to some club members who said the fairways looked like billiard tables compared to normal.  Raising the cut height is easy and, by most accounts, reduces watering costs. 

Sometime back I read an article (may have been a link in one of our threads) that discussed how fairways used to be cut higher.  If that's true, part or all of this problem could be addressed.

Edited December 3, 2023 by fixyurdivot

[RickyBobby_PR]

2 hours ago, Hook DeLoft said:

I may be the only one, but yes I watch tournaments and wish they didn’t hit it so far. I think it is boring to watch “driver/short iron” over and over again. On tour, they have resorted to extremely fast and hard greens in an attempt to keep the scores in hand. I would much rather watch a pro hit a 5 iron into a par 4 green that is receptive to a long iron or hybrid. Oh, and get off my lawn!

The tour like every pro sport is entertainment. The tour sets up courses that provide long driver and lower scores because that’s what sells. You can see so with the larger purses, bigger tv contracts, advertising dollars. 
 

you think It’s boring now wait til the rollback takes effect and everyone on tour is hitting it the same distance off the tee and the short guys who can’t keep up are no longer playin. Broadie has a good paper on the whole subject and that longer courses increase the strokes gained advantage for the longer hitter. A ball rollback is the equivalent of a longer course.

This rollback won’t do what everyone in support of it thinks It will do and because distance will become a premium everyone will be chasing it and only those who can achieve it will be successful

2 hours ago, Hook DeLoft said:

You may be right, but I look at long drive competitors and wonder how long before the highest club speed on tour is 140 mph and the average is 128. It would take great athletes with exceptional golf skills to be able to keep balls in play and score well at those speeds, but with 8.1 billion people on Earth and the continued growth of the game overseas, we will see more and more of those exceptional athletes playing golf. 

If it paid to be that fast and the fastest guys were winning you would see more of the longer guys doing it and winning. Look at the stats for driving distance and ball speed and compare it with who are winning on tour. It’s not the fastest and even some of the fastest are dialing back. Cameron Champ his avg driving distance. Bryson is capable of high speeds but even with the distances he was hitting a coupe years ago It wasnt his max. Finau has the capability of going in that range but dials it back because the risk of the bigger miss isn’t worth it. The longer a ball is in the air the bigger the miss. 
 

The data doesn’t suggest that we will see any increase in the top end of distance increasing under the current equipment and ball guidelines. Theres been a 5 yard increase in longest distance in the last 2 decades and only an increase of about 10 yards in the average on tour and that’s because the number of people hitting It 300 has gone up. 

[jolter1]

It just seems funny that the USGA, R&A, the PGA of America, et al all claim to want to benefit the average golfer except when it comes to equipment(clubs and balls) where the average golfer will never come close to a the level of a professional or high elite player. 

[MGoBlue100]

1 hour ago, storm319 said:

I say “some” success considering his performance over the past couple of seasons and the fact that he has backed off some (not to mention few others following suit). He did have a top 5 at this year’s PGAC, but aside from that his major performances since winning the 2020 US Open have been disappointing. 

61 / 58 at The Greenbrier to win a tournament this season.  He's playing a'rite. 

[chisag]

... I took some time out from this serious 1st world issue to donate to Feeding America. Turns out 99.99% of the rest of the world view the Roll Back "problem" like this:

[storm319]

17 minutes ago, MGoBlue100 said:

61 / 58 at The Greenbrier to win a tournament this season.  He's playing a'rite. 

Impressive, but in general he has underperformed against those weaker LIV fields. Far from his 2020 form. 

[Bosox04]

46 minutes ago, jolter1 said:

It just seems funny that the USGA, R&A, the PGA of America, et al all claim to want to benefit the average golfer except when it comes to equipment(clubs and balls) where the average golfer will never come close to a the level of a professional or high elite player. 

Actually, I think the PGA is the only group that cares about the average golfer.

Edited December 3, 2023 by Bosox04

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, jolter1 said:

It just seems funny that the USGA, R&A, the PGA of America, et al all claim to want to benefit the average golfer except when it comes to equipment(clubs and balls) where the average golfer will never come close to a the level of a professional or high elite player. 

The PGA of America pushed back on the MLR. It’s another example of them actually caring.

The statement that came out from the R&A mentioned they pushed back so there were the two major tours and 1 of the hosts of a major that said we aren’t going to implement the MLR.

 

[MattWillGolf]

9 hours ago, MGoBlue100 said:

THIS. A million times this. If it’s a problem (I don’t think it is…) it’s a problem for 0.5 - 1% of players. I’m not sure about you, but I’m not often hitting it TOO far. 

That’s exactly my problem, hitting it too far. Too far off line.

[Ding-dong]

Shorter ball … less lost by amateurs thrashing at it, back in the bar quicker more turn over of playing groups. Add in a 2 minutes on the green rule per group and then fields can be bigger … 

[GolfSpy_APH]

18 minutes ago, Ding-dong said:

Shorter ball … less lost by amateurs thrashing at it, back in the bar quicker more turn over of playing groups. Add in a 2 minutes on the green rule per group and then fields can be bigger … 

I definitely think the opposite. For many that I play with if they loose some distance they are going to miss that... a lot. They are going to want to swing harder to regain that lost distance and could lead to more wild swings and more off line shots. Unless we are talking 50 yard difference for the average golfer lost balls and balls being searched for is still going to be what it is. That won't change and it will still be very course dependent. The solution there is more red stakes less OB and what we have which is "biotope" essentially red stake and no go zone at all. 

I know they say most won't loose much if any, which fair enough. See it to believe it. However so many I play with have zero distance issue. Of the 80 rounds I played this season with 100s of different golfers there were 3 that I said over powered the course. Both were higher handicaps and erratic off the tee, but they also played the one ups. Moving them back (which we did for future rounds) actually helped because they played the tees which were more suited to their distance. The third golfer was myself and depending on the tees I could easily leave driver at home. 

80% of the others I played with were thrilled with a green in reg and pars. Often needing to play bogey golf and too young to move up to senior tees or just didn't have the distance to make the holes play as their par intended. 

We still had a ton of lost balls and distance was not a factor there. 

[Ding-dong]

1 hour ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

I definitely think the opposite. For many that I play with if they loose some distance they are going to miss that... a lot. They are going to want to swing harder to regain that lost distance and could lead to more wild swings and more off line shots. Unless we are talking 50 yard difference for the average golfer lost balls and balls being searched for is still going to be what it is. That won't change and it will still be very course dependent. The solution there is more red stakes less OB and what we have which is "biotope" essentially red stake and no go zone at all. 

I know they say most won't loose much if any, which fair enough. See it to believe it. However so many I play with have zero distance issue. Of the 80 rounds I played this season with 100s of different golfers there were 3 that I said over powered the course. Both were higher handicaps and erratic off the tee, but they also played the one ups. Moving them back (which we did for future rounds) actually helped because they played the tees which were more suited to their distance. The third golfer was myself and depending on the tees I could easily leave driver at home. 

80% of the others I played with were thrilled with a green in reg and pars. Often needing to play bogey golf and too young to move up to senior tees or just didn't have the distance to make the holes play as their par intended. 

We still had a ton of lost balls and distance was not a factor there. 

To be honest, modern golf is a different animal. Larger driver heads promote swinging hard, which has in turn impacted golf ball development. They are intrinsically related. Your average golfer who has never played classic or played prior to the big Bertha era won’t know about this.

I remember having a lesson 40 years ago using a Mizuno impact 7 iron and being told “wind it back , control it, shelling it 180+ yards is not required”. Driving was the same, be efficient find the middle swing inside yourself even Nicklaus was advocating using a 80-85% of your power and to control. 
The pros don’t miss the middle by much, the amateur misses enormously but we need to discourage them from trying to hit too hard and encourage them to be accurate. By having a ball that gives you nothing beyond a certain point is the solution…it won’t ruin the game that’s just fertile imagination running out of control.

Hitting in shaped long irons are a thing of beauty … mashing wedges is boring 

[GolfSpy_APH]

7 minutes ago, Ding-dong said:

To be honest, modern golf is a different animal. Larger driver heads promote swinging hard, which has in turn impacted golf ball development. They are intrinsically related. Your average golfer who has never played classic or played prior to the big Bertha era won’t know about this.

I remember having a lesson 40 years ago using a Mizuno impact 7 iron and being told “wind it back , control it, shelling it 180+ yards is not required”. Driving was the same, be efficient find the middle swing inside yourself even Nicklaus was advocating using a 80-85% of your power and to control. 
The pros don’t miss the middle by much, the amateur misses enormously but we need to discourage them from trying to hit too hard and encourage them to be accurate. By having a ball that gives you nothing beyond a certain point is the solution…it won’t ruin the game that’s just fertile imagination running out of control.

Hitting in shaped long irons are a thing of beauty … mashing wedges is boring 

Golf is hard enough. Trying to make equipment less forgiving is not a solution. 

Yes the game has evolved and changed over the years, but show me a sport that hasn't? 

It's not a bad thing to evolve and adapt and we can't blame equipment manufacturers. They are trying to improve and make the game easier and better for us (while making a ton of money along the way). All while staying within the rules. 

[Ding-dong]

13 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Golf is hard enough. Trying to make equipment less forgiving is not a solution. 

Not really is it , when your seeing the pros smash it out there, someone finds it then they get a wedge on it and then have a couple of putts at worse.

The amateur doesn’t have an audience who have trampled the rough down or found their ball … 

I would also argue that if you took your 150 yard club and played it off every par 4 or 5 the score for the high handicap would be better … that’s making it easier and showing you it is not a hard game it’s the choices you make. .. might be boring though. ( sweeping generalisation I accept but it would cover the majority)
 

This ball stuff is just a storm in a tea cup, and those who are unsettled by it have probably not got any other dimension or imagination to their game .

[PJVicary]

 

The USGA and the Royal and Ancient golf association are set to announce the roll back the distance golf balls can travel as early as this week. The PGA Tour players are knocking at Commissioner Moynahan’s door demanding a meeting to discuss this and other proposed changes due to roll out in a few weeks. To this end, the following are my comments.

Golf ball roll back for everyone?? Just when I’ve come to the point where I need to hit a sprinkler head to hit the ball 200 yds they are going to make it go shorter? What do we seniors do with the 1000’s of old marked up balls we have it crates in the garage or the 100’s we carry in our bags? I say no, no, no! Let’s take it to congress or better yet the Supreme Court . They, like us are older than dirt and must be fuming over this as well. We seniors are not going to take this lying down. Will it mean that seniors will all break out their ball retrievers and be fighting over that shiny yellow ball in the pond or spend an extra 10 minutes in the bush looking for that errant shot and six hr rounds become the norm? Help!!!

At least that’s how I see it.

[RickyBobby_PR]

4 hours ago, Ding-dong said:

Shorter ball … less lost by amateurs thrashing at it, back in the bar quicker more turn over of playing groups. Add in a 2 minutes on the green rule per group and then fields can be bigger … 

Shorter off the tee isn’t going to pick up the pace of play. I believe broadie has studied this and published a report on it.

pace of play is from not playing ready golf and just bad etiquette.

The ones who play the forward tees have nowhere else to go. Their short tee balls are now shorter. Their shots that rolled onto the green now miss, the shots that were short of the green are now 10-15 yards shorter. Those with bad short games are going to end up taking more shots around the green.

The game is in a good spot even Mike Whan said so himself earlier in the year.

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by RickyBobby_PR

[RickyBobby_PR]

Here’s the part not many are talking about. When the MLR was first proposed it was only for elite men’s golf(nobody defined what that meant and how far down the amateur ranks it would go). The everyday golfer and the women’s pro tours wouldn’t be impacted.

If their decision is to make it a change for all of golf that means the LPGA and LET tour, women’s college golf, women’s amateur events will all have to use it too as they have had no say on the matter up to this point because they weren’t impacted. 
 

Can’t wait to see what they have to say about the pending announcement if it is what many expect it to be with a rollback for everyone.

i suspect multiple lawsuits to come from the suspected announcement 

[NoRebound]

I remember back a couple of years ago when the USGA and R&A "updated" the handicap system.  It was supposed to make it simpler and encourage everyone to have a certified handicap.  Then we discovered that meant the USGA took away the ability of clubs to handle handicaps in-house and suddenly there was a $45-60 membership fee for a USGA local.  Many of us dropped our handicaps.  

Now the same people are telling me that a less dynamic ball will be good for the game.  That it's fine if I can't drive a ball 250 anymore or that my present 7 iron water carry will be fine at a 5 iron.  Their track record on these rulings has been out of touch with 99% of us who go play once a week.  

I suspect that companies like LostGolfBalls.com are going to make a fortune in the years ahead.  

[Preeway]

Going to play devil’s advocate and throw this out just to add another variable into an already convoluted discussion. What if all the tours decide to govern themselves and disband from the USGA and R&A? In essence, they decide to play by their own rules and keep everything in tact except for the ball conformance rules? By extension, the ball manufacturers wouldn’t have to worry about any of this. Not advocating for this but it’s interesting to see how the NCAA for example is making themselves more obsolete each year and are already on this path if they aren’t careful. 

[DaveP043]

15 hours ago, Bosox04 said:

Actually, I think the PGA is the only group that cares about the average golfer.

 

15 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

The PGA of America pushed back on the MLR. It’s another example of them actually caring.

The statement that came out from the R&A mentioned they pushed back so there were the two major tours and 1 of the hosts of a major that said we aren’t going to implement the MLR.

The PGA Tour cares about the PGA Tour.  They've been marketing driving distance for decades, of course they oppose any reduction in driving distance.  The PGA Tour also cares about their "industry partners", the ball manufacturers among them, and the manufacturers had strong reasons to oppose bifurcation.  Sure, running two different R&D programs would be a problem, but more important, they wouldn't be able to sell us the "same ball" that the top Tour players use.  

 

3 minutes ago, Preeway said:

What if all the tours decide to govern themselves and disband from the USGA and R&A? In essence, they decide to play by their own rules and keep everything in tact except for the ball conformance rules?

Disgruntled players have often whined that the Tour needs their own Rules, and the Tour as a whole has shown no interest in developing them.  As for "keep everything", I'd bet there are significant copyright issues involved, the Tour might have to start completely from scratch.    

I'm not sure I have anything more to add to this.  The roll-back is going to happen, the Tour will begin to see the effects in 4 years, the rest of use shortly after that.  We'll see what happens, but I'm pretty sure the sky won't be falling.

[Stuka44]

I'm not sure where this discussion is at exactly, but the state of the game can be summed up very simply for the elite professional game.  It has nothing to do with the ball at all.

I have to be honest I literally watched about 40 seconds of the Hero, and couldn't take it anymore.  In that 40 seconds they were showing Tiger Woods.  The announcer says and I'm quoting..... "Well he made an EXCELLENT 2ND, shot to here, lets see what he can do with it."  2nd Announcer...    "Yes indeed very well placed"! 

They were referring to his 2nd shot on a par 5 ending up in a greenside bunker.  This is what is WRONG with golf.  Any shot landing in a fairway or greenside bunker, should cost said golfer a stroke.  Professional par 4's where the pro has less than 150 yards in on 2nd shot the rough around the green should be so deep that missing the green is in essence a penalty.  This will bring scoring down rapidly.

The problem is the PGA still wants to have its cake and eat it too.  For the almighty dollar they are trying to make it harder, without affecting how it looks on television, and without their golden children actually having to struggle to get up and down, or make double bogey from a fairway bunker.

[Trevor613]

Rory's comments on this topic seem to ring true to me.  Just like everything else in this world, it revolves around money.  Bifurcation was the answer, but the manufacturers thought it would hurt their sales.

"You think we play the same stuff you do? They put pressure on the governing bodies to roll it back to a lesser degree for everyone. Bifurcation was the logical answer for everyone, but yet again in this game, money talks."

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

6 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

The PGA Tour cares about the PGA Tour.  They've been marketing driving distance for decades, of course they oppose any reduction in driving distance.  The PGA Tour also cares about their "industry partners", the ball manufacturers among them, and the manufacturers had strong reasons to oppose bifurcation.  Sure, running two different R&D programs would be a problem, but more important, they wouldn't be able to sell us the "same ball" that the top Tour players use.  

We agree and not sure if you read where I said PGA of America not the PGA tour. As for the bolded part I said that at the very beginning of the discussion on the proposed MLR

 

7 minutes ago, Stuka44 said:

They were referring to his 2nd shot on a par 5 ending up in a greenside bunker.  This is what is WRONG with golf.  Any shot landing in a fairway or greenside bunker, should cost said golfer a stroke.  Professional par 4's where the pro has less than 150 yards in on 2nd shot the rough around the green should be so deep that missing the green is in essence a penalty.  This will bring scoring down rapidly.

There are guys that can reach par 5s in 2 and a miss in the bunker is better than being in the rough. Many pga pros have said this over time. It’s one of the reasons they are some of the best and why some amateurs will remain mid to high handicaps, they don’t understand where the miss should be, and they struggle to get out of bunkers and some out of the rough.

The issue isn’t the ball, it’s not the equipment nor is it the athleticism and hard work the professionals have put in to be where they are. The issue is that the ruling bodies don’t like the way the professional game is played. They want to dictate how every golfer should play the game. 

The PGA tour is selling a product and they believe longer drives, lower scores is the winning model. Based on the latest tv deal and the advertising costs for commercials those spending the money see the numbers of viewers, streams, etc and agree.
 

There have always been guys who hit for longer, had easy shots into greens. What those who I’ve seen against the current distance don’t like is that more people can do that today and that there isn’t a “standout” player like a Tiger, Jack, Arnie, etc. those guys are generational and it may be a bit before we see one in golf. But if we look at other sports there is similar situations where there isn’t that MJ(sorry it’s not lebron), there isn’t a Nolan Ryan, Barry bonds, Rickie Henderson in mlb either.

Tiger came on the scene and out worked everyone and spent time working out. It forced pros at the time to rethink how they approached the game and those that watched Tiger also started spending time in the gym and training. Then add in better equipment, better technology to optimize ball flight, better tools for teaching and analyzing the swing. At the end you get a professional tour that has better athletes and more money so it draws even more to the professional ranks. Over time the older shorter guys leave the tour and with more people hitting the ball 300 you get a rise in the average driving distance. Hank Keuhne averaged 321 on four before the prov1 and the current equipment. Outside of Rory for 2023 321 or less is the averaging driving distance so there has been no significant change in the longest in tour for over 24 years despite the improved equipment and ball. And the average driving distance has only gone from 289 to 299. 
 

There are fare more players hitting around 300 than there are those hitting 315+
 

A rollback is only going to make the professional game more boring because only the longest will be on tour and those that are will all be hitting the ball to the same spot off the tee and nobody will standout 

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

34 minutes ago, Preeway said:

Going to play devil’s advocate and throw this out just to add another variable into an already convoluted discussion. What if all the tours decide to govern themselves and disband from the USGA and R&A? In essence, they decide to play by their own rules and keep everything in tact except for the ball conformance rules? By extension, the ball manufacturers wouldn’t have to worry about any of this. Not advocating for this but it’s interesting to see how the NCAA for example is making themselves more obsolete each year and are already on this path if they aren’t careful. 

It’s unlikely. They could have done this at several points in time. They really don’t want that responsibility. It would be more likely to see something like the pga of America try to take over and have tours and such join them and they could use grint for their handicap system and it would effectively make USGA irrelevant 

if grint decided to get clubs and such to join them and they became the official handicap organization it would greatly damage the USGA 

Edited December 4, 2023 by RickyBobby_PR

[Stuka44]

On 4/3/2023 at 4:27 PM, chisag said:

But when the entire field can reach easily and the long hitters have short irons, the design of the hole has been completely compromised.

I'm just catching up, but everyone can't reach the green in two.  Many reach greenside bunkers in two which, only offer and impediment to eagle not to birdie.   The longer hitter should only be rewarded for Long & Accurate shots not simply longer ones.  Rough that you can't hit out of, and bunkers filled and designed to run the ball up against the lip, where the only play is out sideways or backwards, will make accuracy key not length.  It could require that your ball actually land ON THE GREEN, not in a greenside bunker or rough.  Course and hole conditions should render any failed attempt to reach a par 5 in 2,(AND I MEAN ACTUALLY LAND & STAY ON THE GREEN) should result in 6 being about the best score you can hope for. 

Length should only be an advantage, if you are finding fairways, as the game was designed.  A ball ending up anywhere else should be punished by course conditions, to make finding fairways, and landing actually on greens primary.  Not just coming close.  It is a failure of imagination by professional course tournament set up people.