Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[fixyurdivot]

3 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

There no issue. The ruling bodies don’t like the pro game and that since Tiger came on scene we have seen better athletes arrive on tour and thru launch monitors, 3d swing videos, the current equipment more people are hitting it 300 yards. They only want a couple people do that that. Many ignore that the pga tour sets up their courses to create more distance and lower scores. The ruling bodies don’t like that either. Professional golf is an entertainment product. The entertainment comes from long drives and low scores.

Going to leave this here from Mr Snell

Thanks for sharing, I've been wanting to hear from the likes of Dean and his peer group.  We're in agreement that there is no excessive distance issue and, as such, no bifurcation or rollback is necessary. All I'm saying is that if the USGA and R&A implement a change, I'd prefer it only be applicable to tour play.

Also, I love the argonomy test.  The simplest, least disruptive answer has been right in front of everyone's nose since this discussion started.  I'm kind of wondering if the USGA isn't using the threat of rollback and bifurcation as a way to get the PGA to committ to course set-up changes?  Heck, courses are set-up differently for tour play anyway (faster greens, thicker roughs, etc.)... so it seems we have bifurcation already.

[Hook DeLoft]

13-15 yard decrease for longest hitters; 9-11 yards for most PGA players; 5 yards for recreational players -- those are the estimates from the USGA according to what I am seeing on the Golf Channel.  I can live with losing 5 yards.  I've also noticed that golf courses have multiple sets of tees -- just sayin'. 

[Dead Solid Bogey]

2 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

I am guessing this thread will be popping off today with the expected announcement. I am curious how they will twist it or if they will to give a positive spin to the masses. Will they have any data or hard facts which they can share or is it still in the proposal idea stage and more testing to be done later?

Could it be, this is another prime example of an answer in search of a problem.

[skraeling]

Thought it funny, but why not move the pros up several boxes on some holes such that hitting driver would be a poor choice?

Would that be a thing that could be done?  Variable tee box play?

 

Edited December 6, 2023 by skraeling

[FrogginBullfish]

Here we go...

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/usga-randa-golf-ball-rollback-for-everyone

 

Edited December 6, 2023 by FrogginBullfish
Hit submit too early

[jolter1]

Well from what I read in the USGA announcement, for the average golfer, it doesn't take affect until January 2030. At that time I will be 77, hopefully, and who knows if I will still be able to play. I do feel sorry for others as to me the powers that be should be addressing only those who are professionals or elite amateurs who play in elite events. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

25 minutes ago, fixyurdivot said:

Thanks for sharing, I've been wanting to hear from the likes of Dean and his peer group.  We're in agreement that there is no excessive distance issue and, as such, no bifurcation or rollback is necessary. All I'm saying is that if the USGA and R&A implement a change, I'd prefer it only be applicable to tour play.

 

But why? Theres nothing wrong with tour play and bifurcation only makes the ruling bodies look even sillier than they do right now.

 

[GolfSpy_SHARK]

18 minutes ago, Hook DeLoft said:

13-15 yard decrease for longest hitters; 9-11 yards for most PGA players; 5 yards for recreational players -- those are the estimates from the USGA according to what I am seeing on the Golf Channel.  I can live with losing 5 yards.  I've also noticed that golf courses have multiple sets of tees -- just sayin'. 

This is my feeling on it. Really not fully enveloped, realistically is not going to effect my game or many others especially the lower you get down the SS pole.

[RickyBobby_PR]

21 minutes ago, Hook DeLoft said:

13-15 yard decrease for longest hitters; 9-11 yards for most PGA players; 5 yards for recreational players -- those are the estimates from the USGA according to what I am seeing on the Golf Channel.  I can live with losing 5 yards.  I've also noticed that golf courses have multiple sets of tees -- just sayin'. 

Theres no data provided to support their stated distance loss. They are just telling you what they think will happen.

and from the USGA report is 8-11 yards for elite males at 110 mph. But in the very first prototype testing by Srixon there was significant distance loss for everyone and nobody liked it. Keegan lost 30-40 yards. That’s a lot of adjusting in design to get it down to the ruling bodies stated distance loss

[RickyBobby_PR]

Even if we take the ruling bodies at their word for the expected distance loss it does absolutely nothing to solve the problem they claim to be fixing.

All the guys that are flying hazards, trees, bunkers now will still be doing it with the new ball. The guys who are keeping distance in the tank will just step it up a bit. These guys will make up that distance lose pretty easily as Sasho explained. 
 

This really is nothing more than the ruling bodies flexing their fake muscles to show they are in charge.

Its seems like it’s going to be the first step for future rollbacks. Going to be we tried with the current ball and and it didn’t work, we need to do more then we will see them take more action to further reduce distance. Chip away slowly and people don’t notice. Can’t take it all away at once 

[RickyBobby_PR]

Sucks when data refutes the narrative especially the one that closes have been expanding.

 

 

[fixyurdivot]

28 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

But why? Theres nothing wrong with tour play and bifurcation only makes the ruling bodies look even sillier than they do right now.

 

Agree.  What I'm saying is that were you only given two choices, bifurcation or rollback, which would you choose?

[chisag]

2 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

It certainly could have a knock on effect for many. I still keep in my mind this is years and years out from being implemented and the longest drivers of the golf ball are still going to be just that. Changing the ball isn't going to narrow that gap for the shorter guys and for tour purposes if it helps fair enough. I am all good with a Tour ball, it is more the knock on effect to us mortals that I find it hard to justify. 

 

... Other than a few forum members, especially those that love to argue debate,  I don't know anyone that objects to bifurcation. Certainly none of my playing partners. What a bunch of rich, pampered and spoiled pro's play has absolutely nothing to do with what the vast majority of Am's play. I honestly don't care what rules the USGA, the PGA TOUR or the R&A may impose on Professionals as long as they all have to abide by the same rules. The rough is too long at a US Open?   The deep pot bunkers at The Open are too penal?   They don't like the rakes Jack uses at The Memorial?   LIV deserters got so much money so the PGA needs to pay us millions more? 

... I know I keep beating this same drum but the roll back isn't gonna effect the average golfer anywhere near what it effects the pros because most Am's just don't regularly hit the sweet spot on any off their clubs. While the LPGA has swing speeds much more similar to the above average Am, they hit the middle with uncanny accuracy. Of course they have instructors, practice and play every day for hours on end so it would make sense and they will be effected more than Ams. 

... And while I am not in favor of a roll back for Am's I will deal with it if and when it happens and loose no sleep at all. I imagine the guy anchoring his putter, still using their old Ping wedges with illegal grooves, moving the ball out of a divot and taking one or more mulligans isn't gonna pay attention to whether or not their ball is illegal. And if all the OEMs stop making "illegal" balls, they will just play with whatever is available. 

... While interesting to all of us that love the game for our own personal reasons in the end it is Much Ado About Nothing. If they made the change today and my group had to use a rolled back ball, other than maybe needing another 1/2 club at most there would be non difference in our scores, our enjoyment of being outdoors in the fresh air and sun and appreciating the camaraderie of being together for 4-4.5 hours. Our lives will not change at all.  

[cnosil]

 

[Subdiver1]

2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

it doesn’t sound like they don’t have a lot of data or testing.

Sorry, I'm confused...from the rest of the post I think youbare saying they don't have the data, but the 2bl negative lost me.

Agree if you are saying they do NOT have supporting data.

Cheers

[BigBoiGolf]

3 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

I am guessing this thread will be popping off today with the expected announcement. I am curious how they will twist it or if they will to give a positive spin to the masses. Will they have any data or hard facts which they can share or is it still in the proposal idea stage and more testing to be done later?

Look on the bright side! They're estimating hackers are only losing 5 yards!

[RickyBobby_PR]

43 minutes ago, Subdiver1 said:

Sorry, I'm confused...from the rest of the post I think youbare saying they don't have the data, but the 2bl negative lost me.

Agree if you are saying they do NOT have supporting data.

Cheers

Brain to keyboard not working right. Correct they don’t have the supporting data. Same with the statement about 30% of balls today comply. If that’s the case it’s them and people can see if the ball the play is on the list and for others they can see the list and go test for themselves to see what the results are.

But I doubt any ball today complies.

[RickyBobby_PR]

 

1 hour ago, fixyurdivot said:

Agree.  What I'm saying is that were you only given two choices, bifurcation or rollback, which would you choose?

there were 3 choices and they decided the third choose wasn’t an option. Doing nothing was the best and only good choice.

the data doesn’t support any of their claims. And arguments about what the pros play are weak and lack no substances because their equipment has to match the same specs for equipment the amateur plays. Doesn’t matter if they have a one off loft on driver or a slightly different shape or from Callaway a different face design to optimize their flight it has to match the specs. Anyone here could make a club that’s one off and if it meets the specs it conforming and doesn’t cause equipment bifurcation.

 

49 minutes ago, cnosil said:

 

So punish the player for working out, getting fit for equipment and ball, for doing speed training in an effort to be the best because it doesn’t meet their standard of how golf should be played.

This video should be the icing on the cake showing the ruling bodies are full of it and all they want to do is impose their ideas on the professional game because the tour doesn’t meet their standard

[MattWillGolf]

2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

This is exclusive what’s going to happen. Rory’s own words say it will benefit the longer golfer and that he wants the rollback for selfish purposes. When the ball gets shorter it’s the equivalent of lengthening the course. Broadie published a piece about this and that the longer course(shorter ball) from strokes gained benefits the longer player. So what happens is that distance becomes even more of an advantage so more people work harder at getting longer. The ones that are successful at it will stay on the tour and the ones who don’t will slowly find themselves out of a job. Then you have everyone hitting the same distance and still in the 300+ driving distance that the ruling bodies want to get rid of. As Sasho Mackenzie pointed out the players have speed an distance in the tank and they will be back at their current distances easily.  The other thing it doesn’t do is create that one standout golfer who is different than everyone else, longer than everyone else ala Jack and Tiger. It does the opposite because everyone is long and when everyone is long nobody is long
 

This is the ruling bodies dictating how golf should be played in their eyes. It’s another one of their power grabs to show the pros and tours who is in charge 

Regarding the ruling bodies. I heard on a podcast not sure which one now as they have all been discussing this issue, that they exist due the will of the people. I'm not sure I fully agree but should the USGA and R&A get enough feedback that no one will abide by this change, and they start to see a decline in membership will they change the ruling?

[MattWillGolf]

1 hour ago, chisag said:

 

... Other than a few forum members, especially those that love to argue debate,  I don't know anyone that objects to bifurcation. Certainly none of my playing partners. What a bunch of rich, pampered and spoiled pro's play has absolutely nothing to do with what the vast majority of Am's play. I honestly don't care what rules the USGA, the PGA TOUR or the R&A may impose on Professionals as long as they all have to abide by the same rules. The rough is too long at a US Open?   The deep pot bunkers at The Open are too penal?   They don't like the rakes Jack uses at The Memorial?   LIV deserters got so much money so the PGA needs to pay us millions more? 

... I know I keep beating this same drum but the roll back isn't gonna effect the average golfer anywhere near what it effects the pros because most Am's just don't regularly hit the sweet spot on any off their clubs. While the LPGA has swing speeds much more similar to the above average Am, they hit the middle with uncanny accuracy. Of course they have instructors, practice and play every day for hours on end so it would make sense and they will be effected more than Ams. 

... And while I am not in favor of a roll back for Am's I will deal with it if and when it happens and loose no sleep at all. I imagine the guy anchoring his putter, still using their old Ping wedges with illegal grooves, moving the ball out of a divot and taking one or more mulligans isn't gonna pay attention to whether or not their ball is illegal. And if all the OEMs stop making "illegal" balls, they will just play with whatever is available. 

... While interesting to all of us that love the game for our own personal reasons in the end it is Much Ado About Nothing. If they made the change today and my group had to use a rolled back ball, other than maybe needing another 1/2 club at most there would be non difference in our scores, our enjoyment of being outdoors in the fresh air and sun and appreciating the camaraderie of being together for 4-4.5 hours. Our lives will not change at all.  

Well said.  I could not agree more. 

[MattWillGolf]

1 hour ago, cnosil said:

 

I think the ruling bodies should reach out to John Daly and put him in charge of player fitness. If you want to maintain your tour card you must strictly adhere to the "John Daly Method" of golf fitness. Problem solved. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

5 minutes ago, MattWillGolf said:

Regarding the ruling bodies. I heard on a podcast not sure which one now as they have all been discussing this issue, that they exist due the will of the people. I'm not sure I fully agree but should the USGA and R&A get enough feedback that no one will abide by this change, and they start to see a decline in membership will they change the ruling?

Interesting since I see alot of people who have serious disdain for the ruling bodies and have seen people stop supporting them more and more over the heads after continued bad decisions. I could see a large exodus over this issue.

Will they change as a result I doubt it.

[chisag]

3 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

I still have no issues with bifurcations at all. That route is something that doesn't bother me in the slightest. 

 

... And bifurcation just for the PGA TOUR. Leave out the Champions Tour and especially the LPGA Tour.  I think Jenny Shin has a point, a 152yd 7 iron is in no need of a roll back. 

@JennyShin_LPGA

I finally got my 7iron to fly 152yards, carry, now they want to roll it back. How depressing. Why can't men just have different driver heads.

[Rob Person]

7 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Interesting since I see alot of people who have serious disdain for the ruling bodies and have seen people stop supporting them more and more over the heads after continued bad decisions. I could see a large exodus over this issue.

Will they change as a result I doubt it.

As long as doesn't affect their paychecks, I doubt it too.  I see it cresting an even bigger stigma and possibly forcing players to move towards a different league when it does 

[Josh Parker]

2 hours ago, chisag said:

 

... Other than a few forum members, especially those that love to argue debate,  I don't know anyone that objects to bifurcation. Certainly none of my playing partners. What a bunch of rich, pampered and spoiled pro's play has absolutely nothing to do with what the vast majority of Am's play. I honestly don't care what rules the USGA, the PGA TOUR or the R&A may impose on Professionals as long as they all have to abide by the same rules. The rough is too long at a US Open?   The deep pot bunkers at The Open are too penal?   They don't like the rakes Jack uses at The Memorial?   LIV deserters got so much money so the PGA needs to pay us millions more? 

... I know I keep beating this same drum but the roll back isn't gonna effect the average golfer anywhere near what it effects the pros because most Am's just don't regularly hit the sweet spot on any off their clubs. While the LPGA has swing speeds much more similar to the above average Am, they hit the middle with uncanny accuracy. Of course they have instructors, practice and play every day for hours on end so it would make sense and they will be effected more than Ams. 

... And while I am not in favor of a roll back for Am's I will deal with it if and when it happens and loose no sleep at all. I imagine the guy anchoring his putter, still using their old Ping wedges with illegal grooves, moving the ball out of a divot and taking one or more mulligans isn't gonna pay attention to whether or not their ball is illegal. And if all the OEMs stop making "illegal" balls, they will just play with whatever is available. 

... While interesting to all of us that love the game for our own personal reasons in the end it is Much Ado About Nothing. If they made the change today and my group had to use a rolled back ball, other than maybe needing another 1/2 club at most there would be non difference in our scores, our enjoyment of being outdoors in the fresh air and sun and appreciating the camaraderie of being together for 4-4.5 hours. Our lives will not change at all.  

100%

[BigBoiGolf]

Without OEMs giving the data that shows how their current golf balls perform and how the prototype short ball would perform, and because the USGA is stating that existing models conform (They just don't coveniently say which so we have a launch monitor comparative basis), I have absolutely 0 confidence that the USGA is telling the whole truth here.

Mind you, this is all supposedly over 15 yards or less at the Elite level, which is absolutely NOT going to stop courses from needing to lengthen as professionals will simply become more athletic, nor that prior venues will suddenly start hosting professional tournaments again.

There's a reason I play Left Dash and not Wilson 50/50, it's because the Left Dash doesn't suck when I take it out to 7000.

I will predict within 5 years of this becoming applicable to the pro tours, the average clubhead speed will be 120 vs 115 now.

[MGoBlue100]

1 hour ago, MattWillGolf said:

I think the ruling bodies should reach out to John Daly and put him in charge of player fitness. If you want to maintain your tour card you must strictly adhere to the "John Daly Method" of golf fitness. Problem solved. 

Most of today's tour players couldn't keep up with that regimine.  Maybe Kisner and a select few others.

[Bosox04]

I hear the USGA is pushing hard for the return of Sans a Belt slacks, too.

[RickyBobby_PR]

56 minutes ago, BigBoiGolf said:

Without OEMs giving the data that shows how their current golf balls perform and how the prototype short ball would perform, and because the USGA is stating that existing models conform (They just don't coveniently say which so we have a launch monitor comparative basis), I have absolutely 0 confidence that the USGA is telling the whole truth here.

Mind you, this is all supposedly over 15 yards or less at the Elite level, which is absolutely NOT going to stop courses from needing to lengthen as professionals will simply become more athletic, nor that prior venues will suddenly start hosting professional tournaments again.

There's a reason I play Left Dash and not Wilson 50/50, it's because the Left Dash doesn't suck when I take it out to 7000.

I will predict within 5 years of this becoming applicable to the pro tours, the average clubhead speed will be 120 vs 115 now.

Agree with most of your post. The bolded part has some truth and also something that isn’t accurate.

Courses aren’t having to lengthen and haven’t been. Its a choice they make but the superintendents association posted a long study that shows it’s not happening and in some cases fairways narrowed a bit.

the part about golfers getting more athletic will definitely happen and we will see more athletes continue getting into the sport because the purses are so high. Also what’s going to happen as Sasho Mackenzie pointed out on social media pros have speed they aren’t using now. Finau has said the samething. They will just tap into that and be back to the same distances are. 
 

depsite everting the USGA claims it’s all been debunked by experts in the sport.

[vandyland]

Is there any possibility, again, that it makes the game easier? (Looking on the brightside, ) Selfishly, this does not consider those who cannot move up a tee box or two so, apologies. But if you have room to move up a tee box, think of it like this. 

If the golf ball reduces distance by 6-7% then major clubs in my bag drop as follows:

Driver - 265 --> 245
34* 7 iron - 161 --> 149
50* GW - 115 --> 106

The tees I currently play are 6,400 yds so if I reduce the tees I play to those by 6% it drops me to 6,000 yds and that effectively nullifies the distance loss (right?) The gain I think I will see (assuming no tightening of the golf course) is that I now will have a smaller dispersion cone with every golf club. Less offline, etc. I would assume that would mean more balls stay in the fairway, more balls hit the green and overall closer proximity to the hole? What am I missing? 

So what keeps us from moving up a tee box (if we have the room to?) Ego? Familiarity? 

Honestly, I think I would have a bigger problem if they came out with a golf ball that went 7% FARTHER.