Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[cksurfdude]

OK don't shoot the messenger.

Have read through many pages of this thread including the most recent few, but have not seen a link to the actual announcement by the USGA.

-------

DISTANCE INSIGHTS

Revised Golf Ball Testing Conditions to Take Effect in 2028

DECEMBER 6, 2023 | LIBERTY CORNER, N.J.

By Janeen Driscoll, USGA

 

The revised test conditions that address consistent increases in hitting distance will have little to no impact on the recreational golfer. (USGA)

 

The R&A and USGA will update the testing conditions used for golf ball conformance under the Overall Distance Standard (ODS), which will take effect in January 2028. The decision aims to reduce the impact increased hitting distances have on golf’s long-term sustainability while minimizing the impact on the recreational game.

The revised ball testing conditions will be as follows: 125-mph clubhead speed (equivalent to 183 mph ball speed); spin rate of 2200 rpm and launch angle of 11 degrees. The current conditions, which were established 20 years ago, are set at 120 mph (equivalent to 176 mph ball speed), 2520 rpm with a 10-degree launch angle.

The revised conditions are based on analysis of data from the worldwide tours and the game over several years and are intended to ensure that the ODS (whose limit will remain unchanged at 317 yards with a 3-yard tolerance) continues to represent the ability of the game’s longest hitters. An analysis of ball speeds among golf’s longest hitters in 2023 shows that the fastest 10 players had an average ball speed of 186 mph, while the average ball speed of the fastest 25 was 183.4 mph (the very fastest averaged 190 mph).

The longest hitters are expected to see a reduction of as much as 13-15 yards in drive distance. Average professional tour and elite male players are expected to see a reduction of 9-11 yards, with a 5-7-yard reduction for an average LPGA or Ladies European Tour (LET) player.

The change in testing speed is expected to have a minimal distance impact, 5 yards or less, for most recreational golfers. Research shows an average swing speed of 93 mph for male golfers and 72 mph for female players.

Existing balls approved for conformance in 2027 may continue to be used by recreational golfers until January 2030 to give golfers, manufacturers and retailers additional time to adjust. These decisions are in line with the commitments made by the governing bodies at the project’s inception.  

A significant portion of golf ball models that are currently in the market – and more than 30 percent of all golf ball models submitted for conformance across the game – are expected to remain conforming after these changes are applied.

“Governance is hard. And while thousands will claim that we did too much, there will be just as many who said we didn’t do enough to protect the game long-term,” said Mike Whan, CEO of the USGA. “But from the very beginning, we’ve been driven to do what is right for the game, without bias. As we’ve said, doing nothing is not an option – and we would be failing in our responsibility to protect the game’s future if we didn’t take appropriate action now.”

Martin Slumbers, CEO of The R&A, said, “We are convinced that this decision is one of the key ways of achieving a sustainable future for golf, protecting the integrity of the game and meeting our environmental responsibilities. The measure we are taking has been carefully considered and calibrated while maintaining the ‘one game’ ethos deemed to be so important to the golf industry. Importantly, it also keeps the impact on recreational golfers to an absolute minimum. We are acting now because we want to ensure that future generations can enjoy the unique challenge of golf as much as we do.”

The Notice of Decision follows the most thorough and comprehensive examination of the issue in the game’s history through the Distance Insights project, which was launched in 2018 and gathered data, shared research and solicited feedback from golf course owners, players, and stakeholders across the game. Data provided by the seven major worldwide tours has also been analyzed by the governing bodies, who have published Annual Driving Distance Reports every year since 2015.

The reports followed the governing bodies’ joint Conclusions from the Distance Insights Project:

Implication of Hitting Distance in Golf, which shared the reasons why addressing the continuing trend of hitting distance increases and subsequent course lengthening is critical to the game’s long-term sustainability.

All golf ball and club manufacturers were advised of the decision on Tuesday, Dec. 5, and were given full technical details and an implementation timeline. The notice of decision takes into account the extensive research and feedback received from manufacturers and other industry stakeholders throughout the six-year process and following multiple Areas of Interest and proposals starting in 2021 as part of the Equipment Rulemaking process.

The extensive feedback received showed worldwide sentiment that the retention of a single set of playing rules and equipment standards is critically important to the sport and should apply across the game. Feedback from manufacturers resulted in the timeline being extended to 2028 to allow more time for innovation and production of new products for elite and recreational players.

In addition to the new ball-testing conditions, the governing bodies will:

Expand the testing approach to better detect ‘Driver Creep,’ which can result in drivers exceeding the limits set out in the Equipment Rules. This is a change in the testing methodology for submitted drivers, to identify and proactively address driver models that are within current tolerance levels and have Characteristic Time (CT) values that are more likely to exceed the limit through regular use. 

Continue to monitor drivers and explore possible additional options related to distance. Specifically, we will research the forgiveness of drivers and how they perform with off-center hits. This is an ongoing review and we will seek input from and continue to work with the industry, including manufacturers, to identify driver design features that can be regulated as a means to reward center impact position hits versus mis-hits.

The R&A and the USGA are guided by an overarching principle to continue to preserve the fundamental elements of golf – protecting the integrity of golf courses, including their overall length, and ensuring that a variety of skills are needed to be successful. 

Longer golf courses require additional resources such as water, the cost of renovating or moving elements like tees and bunkers continues to rise and other long-term impacts have been identified as a result of increased distance. The governing bodies believe that if the sport is to enjoy a sustainable long-term future then these economic and environmental impacts have to be kept under control. 

The Overall Distance Standard was first introduced in 1976 and has been updated on three previous occasions (1980, 2002 and 2004). This is the first time that test speeds have been updated since 2004, when the current standard was set based on the longest hitters at that time. 

Details on the study and complete technical data on the Distance Insights project can be found at www.usga.org/distanceinsights.

USGA PARTNERS

© 2023 United States Golf Association. All Rights Reserved.

--

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/articles/2023/12/revised-golf-ball-testing-conditions-to-take-effect-in-2028.html

-------

[Subdiver1]

18 minutes ago, fixyurdivot said:

First we have to implement the change before we can see if it works... where have I heard something to that affect before? 

Here's hoping the OEM's and tours form an alliance and send the USGA and R&A a clear and unequivocal message.

You'll have to pass it before we let you read it. Then you'll have to buy it before you know if you need it. Then you'll have to use it before you know if it will do anything. And then we will let you know that it is going to hurt. Trust us...

[funkyjudge]

1 minute ago, chisag said:

 

... I don't know what you are disagreeing with as I said most don't care about bifurcation. Nobody I have talked to cares what they do to the PGA Tour ball as long as it doesn't affect Am's. I never said they or I don't care about a rollback. 

If you have read today’s press release from the USGA, it WILL affect all golfers (all amateur golfers, not just elite players) two years after it is implemented for professional golfers. At that point, it is no longer “bifurcation”, but a complete rollback.

[Muckinfiddle]

I'm not on board with this change. I think that the real reason is always money and the good of the game is lining their pockets for long-term. The good of the game just makes seems like a way to instilling something and not make it look like they're greedy. I don't know any courses that have had problems with distance for 99% of the golfers that play it. USGA is concerned about people not watching their precious golf on TV. I've watched a lot of golf and I can't recall ever complaining to myself or anyone else that the pros hit it too far. To be truthful, most tournaments outside of major ones are somewhat boring and I only watch a small portion of them nowadays. I do think the decision to push pros to have to play in more tournaments was good though and helped make mundane tournaments a little more palliative.

I personally think it would be best if we spoke with our pocketbooks boycotted watching tournaments from television as best we could and not purchase handicap memberships. I know it'd be a hassle but you can get your handicap from other locations. I never like playing in scrambles anyway at my handicap...

If they really want to make the scores higher start having the pros play with longer fairway grass and inconsistent greens that have been punched two days before the tournament starts. That's the kind of stuff I have to deal with.

I don't know, as much as I think this doesn't mean much it also bothers me that people who work hard to generate swing speed and hit the ball well, get punished for their efforts. I know what I'll be missing and I'm already losing yardage as it is and I don't want to drop another 10 yd in one season.

Lastly, I hit the sweet spot on my driver pretty frequently. It may not be the best swing every time but I do hit it fairly often. When I hear most amateurs don't hit the sweet spot it's kind of annoying because I think they do with the driver more often than most people think. Even in my hacky old guy group, the guys hit pretty straight off the middle of the club face shots but just have super slow swing speed.

I can't say the same for my irons however...

[chisag]

8 minutes ago, funkyjudge said:

If you have read today’s press release from the USGA, it WILL affect all golfers (all amateur golfers, not just elite players) two years after it is implemented for professional golfers. At that point, it is no longer “bifurcation”, but a complete rollback.

 

... I understand that Doug. My only point was every Am I talked to was in favor of bifurcation and only one was in favor of universal roll back. The OEM's forced the USGA to take bifurcation off the table. It is the OEMs that keep saying Ams don't want bifurcation when again, everyone I have talked to is fine with the Pro's playing a different ball than Am's. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

2 minutes ago, Muckinfiddle said:

USGA is concerned about people not watching their precious golf on TV.

USGA has little to do with tv golf. That’s the PGA tour. USGA only has the U.S. Open

[Muckinfiddle]

4 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

USGA has little to do with tv golf. That’s the PGA tour. USGA only has the U.S. Open

True I had it thought they had more into the television revenue for some reason.

I still think it's money generated decision making though.

Edited December 7, 2023 by Muckinfiddle

[fixyurdivot]

15 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

USGA has little to do with tv golf. That’s the PGA tour. USGA only has the U.S. Open

And that event represents ~70% of their annual revenue.  Want to get their attention, boycott the US Open.

[storm319]

12 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.  

If the end result is negligible and it doesn’t solve the USGAs/R&As perceived problem at the elite level, then what is the point in doing it at all?!

[storm319]

7 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

From everything I read when the initial proposal came out, for a MLR that would have been in effect primarily at high-level competitions, pretty much all of the stakeholders disliked the potential for bifurcation.  It wouldn't bother me, but I can see lots of potential issues with it.  So if we're going to blame someone for OUR rollback, blame the PGA Tour, blame the manufacturers, blame the stakeholders who shot down the initial plan for bifurcation.

Amen to the second bit.  Sure, I'll miss a sudden loss of distance, but after a short adjustment, it'll be golf as usual.  And as you say, other than a few who decide to buy a 10-year supply of "hot" balls, most of us won't have much choice but to play a conforming ball.  

 

The stakeholders you advocate blame to are NOT changing the rules (nor advocating for this change). The blame still should still be targeted at the ruling bodies. 

[storm319]

6 hours ago, ShimmyCocoBop said:

Today, I took out my old TaylorMade R580 driver (400cc) and felt like I was at least 15% shorter off the tee and much less accurate.  

It made me realize how far equipment has progressed over the past 21 years.

Maybe focusing on reducing head size and COR might be a better approach. 

Think about the likely millions of clubs that would no longer be conforming. Not exactly an environmentally or financially responsible decision. 

The USGA handled the COR limit correctly, cap it when they identified it as a problem and prior to mass adoption. The severely mishandled the size limit but it is way too late to rectify (they should have set the limit just above the Ping TISI in 1998 when they initially set the COR limit). 

[Subdiver1]

8 hours ago, vandyland said:

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

That was one of my thoughts as well, moving up negates (somewhat) the reduction. The problem, as I see it, is that once we have all moved up to the farthest froward tees then the long hitters are still longer than. the short hitters and the advantage still goes to the longer hitters.  Since the USGA have stated they will not be reassessing ratings there is no balancing happening there.

How come baseball stadiums haven't moved the fence farther out. With running backs getting bigger and faster and kickers routinely hitting 50+ yard field goals, how come the NFL hasn't made the football fields longer?  I find this all ironic/funny because when you start taking the USGA Rules courses they talk about simplifying the game, then they do stuff like this...

[Subdiver1]

3 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

It’s 8-11 yards at 115 maybe a little more per the USGA. It’s 5-7 yards for female golfers. If you believe the USGA those are the ranges but even in an interview the USGA admitted that in testing 221 yard drives we’re going 210 yards so they have two stories going on. 

Be still buy beating heart   Disparity between the rhetoric and the data?  That is just, just, so hard to believe 

[Subdiver1]

2 hours ago, cksurfdude said:

Governance is hard. And while thousands will claim that we did too much, there will be just as many who said we didn’t do enough to protect the game long-term,”

How funny is it that I happen to be reading a book on Churchill and the chapters I was reading last night hit on this very subject.

Churchill wrote and spoke about experts running the world and the problem of technical experts implementing policy.  He would agree that the question of how to "control" distance is most assuredly a technical question left to the scientist, engineers, and other "experts" to explore, debate and proffer; BUT theirs is a technical not policy.  Policy needs to consideration the impact on the players and the game, which is something experts and bureaucrats care naught about.  As we see occurring here, from his own statement, the bureaucrats care plain and simply about power.  There really isn't any concern for whether there truly is a problem, or what teh impact of proposed solutions might have; and in their effort to show us how much they know what is best for us stupid, slovenly, lowly amateurs they will employ "experts" to explain to us there is a problem and how we are too small to understand the problem or how it is bringing our lives to such tragedy; and therefore, without regard to the general population, the bureaucrat who knows better than the rest of us will save us.  

I am humored and concerned at the applicability of the content in this book, the timing of my reading it, and the how aptly this chucklehead's statement affirms the fears Mr. Churchill expressed for such bureaucrats and bureaucracies.  Ah well, I'm sure we will have a rule in the near future about not wearing shorts because the amount of exposed leg hair affects drag and swing speed so, since they cannot control leg hair volume they chose pants to make everything "fair."

 

[GolfSpy_APH]

88 new comments since I last opened this thread on this computer... what did I miss?

I will be very curious to see the different numbers coming out form the various OEMs. Most have made statements and there is a ton of information out there, however with no actual ball in hand it is still muddy waters. 

[Subdiver1]

9 hours ago, vandyland said:

Plus, personally, I would much rather them shorten the ball a little than come for the driver face/size/forgiveness. If they take away my Mizuno ST-Z 230 where I can hit it pretty much anywhere on the face and it still goes THAT would change my game significantly. 

I took my "old" 965D out to the course early this year.  The feel, numbers and consistency were amazing.  If I had to go back to that driver I might not get all the forgiveness I have with my G400, but I get almost all the distance. And honestly, it was a pretty good performance for an almost 30-year old piece of equipment.  The measured performance (275 yard average in March in WA state, high 40, low 50 degree weather) kind of helps nullify the "equipment" factor too.

[Subdiver1]

2 hours ago, chisag said:

 

... I understand that Doug. My only point was every Am I talked to was in favor of bifurcation and only one was in favor of universal roll back. The OEM's forced the USGA to take bifurcation off the table. It is the OEMs that keep saying Ams don't want bifurcation when again, everyone I have talked to is fine with the Pro's playing a different ball than Am's. 

@chisag none of the amateurs I talk to are for either, bifurcation or rollback (and that is a wide swath of players covering a broad range of handicaps, no handicaps, and several states).  But my sample group may not be representative of yours.  The gross majority of those I play and converse with, like many here, wonder what the issue really is. They fight for 2-yards off the tee; the thought of giving up 10-yards PER SHOT, because somebody thinks a 24-year old who works out 5 days a week and works on his swing 7-days a week hits the ball too far, is confusing and insulting.  Especially when the data shows that the entire argument is a fabricated solution in search of a problem.

I guess everyone in favor of a ball change will be satisfied if this is implemented. Those in favor of bi-furcation will get 2-years of that; those in favor of wholesale change will get that 2-years after the first group gets their choice.  YAY!  For everyone.  

[BigBoiGolf]

Mark my words they will not stop here. This was the whole point of the groove rule (because "Bomb and Gouge" which still happens), the 46" total length change (Specifically targeting Bryson), and now this.

They will come after your driver head size, the Characteristic Time, and maybe even how the golf shaft stores energy as it loads and releases throughout the swing.

As long as the USGA can parade around the pre-canned talking points concerned opinions of Tiger or Jack or Rory on what golf ought to be, regardless of how mistaken and just out of touch they are, they will do so.

You are a bad person because You understand the statistics behind what shaves strokes, so You have to pay the price for violating the Tradition of the game.

Edited December 7, 2023 by BigBoiGolf

[GolfSpy_APH]

2 hours ago, BigBoiGolf said:

Mark my words they will not stop here. This was the whole point of the groove rule (because "Bomb and Gouge" which still happens), the 46" total length change (Specifically targeting Bryson), and now this.

They will come after your driver head size, the Characteristic Time, and maybe even how the golf shaft stores energy as it loads and releases throughout the swing.

As long as the USGA can parade around the pre-canned talking points concerned opinions of Tiger or Jack or Rory on what golf ought to be, regardless of how mistaken and just out of touch they are, they will do so.

You are a bad person because You understand the statistics behind what shaves strokes, so You have to pay the price for violating the Tradition of the game.

Isn't it part of their responsibility and job with the position they are in to do what is perceived to be best for the game long term?

Whether we like it or not?

[Peaksy68]

Personally it doesn’t cause me any grief. I would have preferred bifurcation, but not hitting it quite as far isn’t going to stop me playing or enjoying the game.

[BigBoiGolf]

29 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Isn't it part of their responsibility and job with the position they are in to do what is perceived to be best for the game long term?

Whether we like it or not?

No. They are self-imposed "leaders" of the game. Nobody elects them, nobody knows who they are other than they're an organization that "sets the rules", and quite frankly they think what golf ought to be is dangerous for the game as a whole. Whether it's an arbitrary groove rollback (targeted at elites and then comes to all of us), ball rollback (targeted at elites and then comes to all of us), anchored putting (targeted at elites and then comes to all of us), etc I could go on and on.

Nobody needs the USGA to exist to tell Course Supers how to take care of their courses, they can and do hire agronomists from the likes of Michigan State University who have an excellent pedigree in those fields of concern. I also don't need to mention the multiple times the USGA showing their incompetency with US Open setups to reduce golf to a laughing stock that was based more on chance and luck than actual skill ala Greenkeeper's Revenge.

Nobody needs the USGA to exist to issue or calculate an agreed upon standard of what a handicap is, apps like The Grint and 18 Birdies already do that. The PGAT can absolutely work with these private providers to set standards of qualifications to their Monday Qs and other events like KFT, et al.

Nobody needs the USGA to exist to set standards on how equipment ought to be tested for qualifications conformance for tournaments they put on. The PGA and other professional tours can already do that. I myself am attempting to build low cost high quality golf club heads and the USGA exists to extort money out of me to be put on the conforming golf product list. Mind you these are the same products coming from the same 5 - 6 manufacturers like Shenzen etc in China that produce 99% of golf clubs and already have pre-determined manufacturing standards such as a "Conforming USGA groove milling pattern". For example, I don't actually care if a driver is too hot. I think the best products in the market that research and develop new technology to pair up with their market offerings should be the winners by choice of consumers alone, because what do I care at the end of the day?

In short, they remind me of door to door salesmen whose sole existence is to tell me or other people that we're doing things wrong and pester me into doing things their way, and for what reason? I'm an adult, I can figure that out for myself.

I think it's actually high time for the PGAT and other pro tours to re-assess why the USGA and R&A actually exist in the first place and whether they need a continuing relationship. I don't have a GHIN because I don't care about the USGA. Life is going swell for me, and I think it's time for Pro tours to show these self-impose governors who actually runs golf.

 

Edit: Also, the fact that they can't even figure out whether a divot is a man-made obstruction or ground under repair in the fairway is ludicrous. These people have always had envy and jealousy of those of us who play golf better than they'll ever do in their lives. They have to use language to show they're kneecapping guys like me who swing 115+ and not those who are at 90 or below. I put in the time and effort to get there, I don't need to be disproportionately held back because they lack talent and dedication to the craft. I also want them to look my disabled father in the face and tell him he doesn't deserve a 180 yard tee shot and needs to tone it down to 170 "for the sake of the challenge of the game". Golf is already challenging enough, it's even more so when these governors are righteously stupid and reject data and basic reasoning.

Edited December 7, 2023 by BigBoiGolf

[GolfSpy_APH]

3 minutes ago, BigBoiGolf said:

No. They are self-imposed "leaders" of the game. Nobody elects them, nobody knows who they are other than they're an organization that "sets the rules", and quite frankly they think what golf ought to be is dangerous for the game as a whole. Whether it's an arbitrary groove rollback (targeted at elites and then comes to all of us), ball rollback (targeted at elites and then comes to all of us), anchored putting (targeted at elites and then comes to all of us), etc I could go on and on.

Nobody needs the USGA to exist to tell Course Supers how to take care of their courses, they can and do hire agronomists from the likes of Michigan State University who have an excellent pedigree in those fields of concern. I also don't need to mention the multiple times the USGA showing their incompetency with US Open setups to reduce golf to a laughing stock that was based more on chance and luck than actual skill ala Greenkeeper's Revenge.

Nobody needs the USGA to exist to issue or calculate an agreed upon standard of what a handicap is, apps like The Grint and 18 Birdies already do that. The PGAT can absolutely work with these private providers to set standards of qualifications to their Monday Qs and other events like KFT, et al.

Nobody needs the USGA to exist to set standards on how equipment ought to be tested for qualifications conformance for tournaments they put on. The PGA and other professional tours can already do that. I myself am attempting to build low cost high quality golf club heads and the USGA exists to extort money out of me to be put on the conforming golf product list. Mind you these are the same products coming from the same 5 - 6 manufacturers like Shenzen etc in China that produce 99% of golf clubs and already have pre-determined manufacturing standards such as a "Conforming USGA groove milling pattern". For example, I don't actually care if a driver is too hot. I think the best products in the market that research and develop new technology to pair up with their market offerings should be the winners by choice of consumers alone, because what do I care at the end of the day?

In short, they remind me of door to door salesmen whose sole existence is to tell me or other people that we're doing things wrong and pester me into doing things their way, and for what reason? I'm an adult, I can figure that out for myself.

I think it's actually high time for the PGAT and other pro tours to re-assess why the USGA and R&A actually exist in the first place and whether they need a continuing relationship. I don't have a GHIN because I don't care about the USGA. Life is going swell for me, and I think it's time for Pro tours to show these self-impose governors who actually runs golf.

Fair enough, so who should regulate and manage the rules of golf? Can't say the PGA Tour because they are small and not relevant to all parts of the world. Which is why the USGA and R&A are involved. 

Not at all trying to pick an argument, honestly curious on what your perceived solution is?

[BigBoiGolf]

3 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Fair enough, so who should regulate and manage the rules of golf? Can't say the PGA Tour because they are small and not relevant to all parts of the world. Which is why the USGA and R&A are involved. 

Not at all trying to pick an argument, honestly curious on what your perceived solution is?

Me personally I don't care. 99% of golfers don't perfectly follow the rules anyways, and when I play money matchplay my opponent and I agree on the rules and stakes.
 

I think the real solution here is that professional tours need to set their own standards. Rec golf should stay recreational, because it's about fun and truly growing the game. That's why I slam beers and play scrambles with my pals who shoot 100, and that's why I give them relief in a way that I perceive as honorable. I don't want to see them hurt because it hurts their enjoyment of the game, that's why I don't care if they take a mully off the tee box, it's always been about the time and experience with them, not the rules of that experience.

Edited December 7, 2023 by BigBoiGolf

[GolfSpy_APH]

3 minutes ago, BigBoiGolf said:

Me personally I don't care. 99% of golfers don't perfectly follow the rules anyways, and when I play money matchplay my opponent and I agree on the rules and stakes.
 

I think the real solution here is that professional tours need to set their own standards. Rec golf should stay recreational, because it's about fun and truly growing the game. That's why I slam beers and play scrambles with my pals who shoot 100, and that's why I give them relief in a way that I perceive as honorable. I don't want to see them hurt because it hurts their enjoyment of the game, that's why I don't care if they take a mully off the tee box, it's always been about the time and experience with them, not the rules of that experience.

So at the core you feel bifurcation is the proper route. 

If so I am all for that path. I don't pretend to say I play the same game as the pros. I am a good golfer, but will never play the same tees they play, will never have the precision they have or have access to all the equipment, coaching, technology and training they go through. 

It will be interesting in a few years time when the spot is bifurcated during that change over period how many change over to the new ball in rec play, how many stay with the current ball and so forth. 

Completely opposite note I was thinking about the timing of all this. If what they say is true and average male golfers are going to loose 5-7 yards on average. This whole change is 6 years away and as a general rule we have seen an increase of driver yardage very roughly at 1 yard per year. Could that possibly mean that by the time this thing actually happens for us we will be back at where we are right now today? If so is that a bad thing for us? If technology was paused and we were left to play the current tech to an extent that we have right now for the next X amount of years would we be disappointed? Are there ways we can look at improving or gaining speed to regain that distance? I am sure not everyone is optimized. 

Last thing I was thinking about (stupid how much this has been on mind). If this is going happen as it seems, I am at a point I don't care. Really, is what it is. I am going to have some fun with it and am marking 2 boxes of balls for DO NOT OPEN TILL 2030! Just for fun. Also I am still going to love golfing. Maybe it is a bit harder, maybe I am taking a 8 iron versus 9 iron, or maybe I am going to tweak the lofts by 1 or 2 degrees to offset that. Or maybe I will move to a players distance iron vs cavity back to gain that back. However it won't stop me from golfing and loving the game, trying to improve. 

[BigBoiGolf]

13 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

So at the core you feel bifurcation is the proper route. 

If so I am all for that path. I don't pretend to say I play the same game as the pros. I am a good golfer, but will never play the same tees they play, will never have the precision they have or have access to all the equipment, coaching, technology and training they go through. 

It will be interesting in a few years time when the spot is bifurcated during that change over period how many change over to the new ball in rec play, how many stay with the current ball and so forth. 

Completely opposite note I was thinking about the timing of all this. If what they say is true and average male golfers are going to loose 5-7 yards on average. This whole change is 6 years away and as a general rule we have seen an increase of driver yardage very roughly at 1 yard per year. Could that possibly mean that by the time this thing actually happens for us we will be back at where we are right now today? If so is that a bad thing for us? If technology was paused and we were left to play the current tech to an extent that we have right now for the next X amount of years would we be disappointed? Are there ways we can look at improving or gaining speed to regain that distance? I am sure not everyone is optimized. 

Last thing I was thinking about (stupid how much this has been on mind). If this is going happen as it seems, I am at a point I don't care. Really, is what it is. I am going to have some fun with it and am marking 2 boxes of balls for DO NOT OPEN TILL 2030! Just for fun. Also I am still going to love golfing. Maybe it is a bit harder, maybe I am taking a 8 iron versus 9 iron, or maybe I am going to tweak the lofts by 1 or 2 degrees to offset that. Or maybe I will move to a players distance iron vs cavity back to gain that back. However it won't stop me from golfing and loving the game, trying to improve. 

I think it's reasonable. We already know pros get different tour-only approved offerings that are exclusively tested for them, just like Long Drivers get LD 5 degree heads from Callaway. What's the real difference there exactly? You can still go on Ebay and buy "Tour Issue" clubs (even though like for example, a TI X100 shaft is just an X100 that was weighed and sorted and has a cool sticker on it).

By the way, the whole "1 yard is a year" is likely statistical noise. I am working on building myself a golf club testing robot and will be releasing not only complete launch monitor data sets of robotic testing, but I will be testing old clubheads on the same testing standard that current market offerings would get, see the attached picture for an example that someone else did. I truly believe excellent testing and data gathering should exist and be available for the public to consume, as opposed to the uh... interesting review standards a lot of people make on clubs such as here or YouTube. It's not bad it's just that there's objective data, like performance on hits on different spots on the face and different launch characteristics, and subjective data, like how people perceive a feeling.

I got like 20 boxes of left dash in my house, and another 40 balls of them in the shag bag. I use the RZN Tours (They're basically the same moulds and process Nike Platinum RZN used before exiting the market) to give to my friends to show them what high tier balls actually are like (well in this case, they're high tier are sailing OB but whatever). Oh yeah, that other picture was for the proof in showing this same OEM/ODM and example clubs they produce, those are all like $20 a head.

Edited December 7, 2023 by BigBoiGolf

[jolter1]

After reading most of the articles, which included the average loss of 5-7 yards using the driver and little to almost no loss in the irons, for the average player, why in heck would the powers that be not bifurcate the rules for the professional and elite levels. Also, call me cynical but does anyone really trust what the so called analytical numbers are at this point.

[Beakbryce]

On 12/7/2023 at 3:26 AM, GolfSpy_APH said:

Fair enough, so who should regulate and manage the rules of golf? Can't say the PGA Tour because they are small and not relevant to all parts of the world. Which is why the USGA and R&A are involved. 

I will be the first to say after some reflection that we actually don't know the result of this ruling for the average golfer that drives it roughly 220. We have years before this issue becomes even halfway relevant. We can though be assured that more changes are inbound concerning the driver and whatever else the USGA thinks they can get away with now that the OEM's are rolling over on this issue. I will say the following though.

We aren't talking the Rule Book, which let's face it has some illogical problems and still could be tweaked in some places and remains a convoluted crap shoot for some. Just ask Morikawa. We are talking about an esoteric equipment ruling that is a response to a situation the USGA created. They have ruined courses for the US Open over the 4 days of play. They insist on hard and fast, when that actually leads to longer drives. The PGA Tour, while not ruining courses, still adhere as much as possible to hard and fast which has provided the USGA the cannon fodder they are using to prove their point.

The USGA whines about the old courses that can no longer be played because the pros hit the ball too far. Well, set those courses up as they would have played in 1930, i.e., don't manicure them, and then make your argument after playing that way. Yes, I know, THEY said this isn't about the old courses they want to remain relevant. Do you actually believe that?

They pretty much have only used the distance averages from the Tours to decide the ball goes too far. They haven't used strokes gained, relative scoring average on Tour or elsewhere, average score value for holes on courses that have been repetitively played for decades to show that increased yardage makes a vast difference for scoring on those holes. Would someone please review all the relative stats, hole by hole, and winning scores for a place like Harbour Town? Has increased distance actually made an impact? Or has a smart routing with some hazards retained its ability to challenge the best golfers? And please stop whining that a more strategic layout takes the driver out of play for the longer hitters. So what? Isn't that why there are 14 clubs in the bag?

If as they say distance is ruining golf, then new scoring records for every course should be being set on a continuing basis. Do we see that on Tour? We do not.

They also set up the discussion among all the stakeholders to make sure they have someone else to blame for applying this solution to everyone. You don't think the comment period was actually this long for any other reason than that do you? Almost every entity involved in the discussion had staked their response at some point over the past 5-10 years so the length of this period was idiotically long. They leveraged enough stake holders that could have busted the rule in to saying no one wanted bifurcation other than you know, the 99% of golfers not appreciably hitting the ball further. Oh, and Rory, Tiger. Of course Rory has already indicated that amateur golfers should consider this much ado about nothing. We can always "play better" to use his ongoing mantra for every question. Or we can move up a tee. Until we can't. Until we run out of tees to move up to. At 71 now, by 2030 this may mean no golf tees to play. Which is when I will buy a simulator for the house and adjust my driver distance and all clubs to conform to Rory's and play his game! 

Elsewhere on the thread it was noted that new courses being built have averaged 6600-6700 yards or thereabouts. This shows that people building courses are NOT building to a perceived distance problem. 

We are seeing record drives in the long drive championship and by members of the Tours. This is self limiting at some point. The human body for most of us isn't a temple we can just work out 5 hours a day to build the necessary structure to swing at a golf ball as hard as possible multiple times a day. If you look at a lot of the recent ball phenoms, like Cameron Champ or Will Zalatoris, they hit the ball a long way and are now going through injury problems. Tiger same way. Sure there are the occasional Phil or Rory that haven't been affected. Do we want to legislate all golf for those few? I love reading the threads in this forum where players talk standard 300+ yard drives but are struggling to break 80 or even 90. The emphasis on training is in the wrong place. 

I recently did a test of the new Mizuno driver, 3 wood, and 4 hybrid. I kept track of yardages more than I ever had before because I have played the same 3-4 courses for the last 20 years and know where I hit the ball. I play in the desert which I believe leads most to think we can have above average drive lengths. But we play early in the morning, the course is soaked so the grass stays healthy all day. The grass is often long enough in the fairway to be called something closer to the Tours first cut of rough rather than fairway grass. Does this make a difference? You bet your booties it does. The difference in driver yardage between most days and the few days the course is scalped and dry for overseed purposes results in 30-40 yard difference in drive length. You know, even for us amateurs.

Edit: the USGA talks about returning courses to the shot value when built. But to do that, you also have to return the course to the agronomy upon which those shot values were originally based. Merion, Winged Foot, Pebble Beach, the Old Course, Pinehurst #2, et al were not built to be set up hard and fast. Augusta has changed dramatically since it's inception, much of the change required because they got better and better at building the course hard and fast instead of leaving it shaggy as when originally built. Do you think the designers of Augusta really thought that sub air systems would be built under the greens so the green speeds could be kept ridiculously high when they designed the slopes of the greens. C'mon man! 

It's a philosophical change that is required by the USGA, not an equipment issue change. We only have their philosophy that a hard and fast course determines the best golfer. Actually, all that determines is the longest golfer having the best putting week. Whose to say that making it a little wet and sloppy with little burns and strategic trees which brings the whole field in to play isn't just as good a way to determine the best golfer. There is a reason Jack used to say there were only a handful of people he needed to beat. He attributed to mental, I attribute it to his length.

Edited December 10, 2023 by Beakbryce

[RickyBobby_PR]

8 hours ago, Subdiver1 said:

That was one of my thoughts as well, moving up negates (somewhat) the reduction. The problem, as I see it, is that once we have all moved up to the farthest froward tees then the long hitters are still longer than. the short hitters and the advantage still goes to the longer hitters.  Since the USGA have stated they will not be reassessing ratings there is no balancing happening there.

How come baseball stadiums haven't moved the fence farther out. With running backs getting bigger and faster and kickers routinely hitting 50+ yard field goals, how come the NFL hasn't made the football fields longer?  I find this all ironic/funny because when you start taking the USGA Rules courses they talk about simplifying the game, then they do stuff like this...

Herein lies the problem. All this does is 1) gives a bigger advantage to the long hitter. Also why Rory advocated for the MLR as he stated in his remarks it benefits the longer hitter which he is. Broadie shows this in a published study that strokes gained advantage goes to the longer hitter on a lengthened course which is equivalent to a rollback. 2) it shows distance being an advantage so more people will work to gain more distance and then you end up back where we are today with the perceived distance issue and 3) it does nothing to fix what some claim is lack of skill from todays players and hitting nothing but short irons because once everyone is long nobody is long and they will all be playing the same shots from the same spots and golf will be even more boring for thosewho find the current game boring.

it also does nothing for the conservation talk some toss around. Courses aren’t going to give back land, they aren’t going to stop using the existing tee boxes so all the land they maintain today will continue to get maintained in 2030 and beyond 

8 hours ago, Subdiver1 said:

Be still buy beating heart   Disparity between the rhetoric and the data?  That is just, just, so hard to believe 

Right

6 hours ago, Subdiver1 said:

@chisag none of the amateurs I talk to are for either, bifurcation or rollback (and that is a wide swath of players covering a broad range of handicaps, no handicaps, and several states).  But my sample group may not be representative of yours.  The gross majority of those I play and converse with, like many here, wonder what the issue really is. They fight for 2-yards off the tee; the thought of giving up 10-yards PER SHOT, because somebody thinks a 24-year old who works out 5 days a week and works on his swing 7-days a week hits the ball too far, is confusing and insulting.  Especially when the data shows that the entire argument is a fabricated solution in search of a problem.

I guess everyone in favor of a ball change will be satisfied if this is implemented. Those in favor of bi-furcation will get 2-years of that; those in favor of wholesale change will get that 2-years after the first group gets their choice.  YAY!  For everyone.  

I don’t know anyone that wants bifurcation. Never even heard anyone talk about it as being an option.

5 hours ago, BigBoiGolf said:

Mark my words they will not stop here. This was the whole point of the groove rule (because "Bomb and Gouge" which still happens), the 46" total length change (Specifically targeting Bryson), and now this.

They will come after your driver head size, the Characteristic Time, and maybe even how the golf shaft stores energy as it loads and releases throughout the swing.

As long as the USGA can parade around the pre-canned talking points concerned opinions of Tiger or Jack or Rory on what golf ought to be, regardless of how mistaken and just out of touch they are, they will do so.

You are a bad person because You understand the statistics behind what shaves strokes, so You have to pay the price for violating the Tradition of the game.

Bomb and gouge doesn’t really exist and most pros have distance in the tank so if it was such a great thing to just hammer away more would do it. As we see in the data from titleist swing speed actually is in the decline in the last 2 years. 
 

With the cat out of the bag with all the strokes gained info, trying to be closer to the hole isn’t going away anytime soon.
 

The rest I agree with. This was just the first step. It gives them the leverage to say we tried to limit distance and it didn’t give us the result we wanted so we have to take further action. It’s much easier to get people to buy into restrictions when they are chipped away rather than taken all at once. By time people realize what’s happening it’s too late.

2 hours ago, BigBoiGolf said:

I think it's reasonable. We already know pros get different tour-only approved offerings that are exclusively tested for them, just like Long Drivers get LD 5 degree heads from Callaway.

They still have to meet the same specs as the retail equipment so despite a different loft, a different AI designed face, a change in dimple pattern on a ball the equipment is the same as everyone plays.

they aren’t playing hotter faces on tour, in most cases they are getting the ones with lower CT so that they have room for the golfer to use it longer as the face gets hotter with time and they don’t want to fail the CT test before a tournament starts and then have to find a new driver with little testing 

Go make yourself a putter that fits you and what you like, have it fall in the specs of conforming putters and now you have something nobody else does. Doesn’t make the putter different than what someone can buy off the shelf other than its uniqueness. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by RickyBobby_PR

[cksurfdude]

7 hours ago, Subdiver1 said:

How funny is it that I happen to be reading a book on Churchill and the chapters I was reading last night hit on this very subject.

Churchill wrote and spoke about experts running the world and the problem of technical experts implementing policy.  He would agree that the question of how to "control" distance is most assuredly a technical question left to the scientist, engineers, and other "experts" to explore, debate and proffer; BUT theirs is a technical not policy.  Policy needs to consideration the impact on the players and the game, which is something experts and bureaucrats care naught about.  As we see occurring here, from his own statement, the bureaucrats care plain and simply about power.  There really isn't any concern for whether there truly is a problem, or what teh impact of proposed solutions might have; and in their effort to show us how much they know what is best for us stupid, slovenly, lowly amateurs they will employ "experts" to explain to us there is a problem and how we are too small to understand the problem or how it is bringing our lives to such tragedy; and therefore, without regard to the general population, the bureaucrat who knows better than the rest of us will save us.  

I am humored and concerned at the applicability of the content in this book, the timing of my reading it, and the how aptly this chucklehead's statement affirms the fears Mr. Churchill expressed for such bureaucrats and bureaucracies.  Ah well, I'm sure we will have a rule in the near future about not wearing shorts because the amount of exposed leg hair affects drag and swing speed so, since they cannot control leg hair volume they chose pants to make everything "fair."

Brilliant!!

[Duffer_E]

I don't have the time (or patience) to scroll through all the posts on this topic, so if what I am saying is already out there, I apologize. My $0.02

1. Is a rollback of 11-15 yards really going to have a significant effect on the pros? Instead of Driver-Wedge into the green, it will now be Driver-9i? How is that going to significantly impact the pro game?

2. If you really want a significant impact on distance, remove the driver from the bag. As per Trackman:

No need for bifurcation. No need for all this debate. With an average 30-yard distance cut. I would give one caveat, which is, if this were to happen, the USGA would need to also put a limit on club lofts. Lock it down, so that a 3W is forever 15°, a 7i for player irons is 34°, for GI irons is 28°, etc. so that loft jacking doesn't become the solution for more distance.