Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[d.lama]

1 hour ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Well when the ruling bodies or anyone in support of the rollback claim distance is increasing and that it’s going to be similar too the 1993 to 2003 jump or that we are going to see 350 yards drives from anyon you need to look at the numbers with the equipment in use. Theres been an increase of 10 yards in average distance over the last 20ish years yet the top end distance hasn’t changed. So to claim that there’s going to be an explosion in distance in 20 years if nothing is done and that distance is going to be bad for the game is not an accurate statement. The average distance has gone up not because of the equipment or ball, but because the equipment can be optimized by fittings, the golfer has gotten faster thru speed training and gym work. The shorter guys are leaving the tour and younger guys who hit the ball 300 are coming on the tour. That’s going to  continue to happen because stories gained tells us closer is better. When we look at course playing length over the last 20 years that’s been consistent between 7000-7200 yards(also defeats the argument that courses need to lengthen) the top end distance is unchanged and swing speed is actually down the last 2 years after being stagnant for the 3 years before that. So to expect top end distance to just somehow go up isn’t realistic.

will average distance creep closer to the top end? Sure but that doesn’t mean that distance is actually going up just to that more people that can do it. So if there’s 100 golfers now that can hit it 300 and 150 do it in 20 years, nothing has changed, it’s just more people would be in similar spots off the tee and not further down the hole. But we could say that distance exploded between the 80s and late 90s and yet nobody was upset with that and actually more people came to the game and prize money went up.

It’s the cherry picked data to say see there’s a problem we have to fix and it’s why everyone in the industry from superintendents associations, OEMs, the tours and tour pros and experts like Sasho Mackenzie have pointed out the flaws in their data and conclusion. 
 

If the issue is average distance that’s also a flawed argument that distance is a problem because it’s it causing any actual issues for sustainability on tour or on the vast majority of golf courses. The less than 1% of courses that claim it is are exclusive clubs that have chosen to add distance because they don’t like the low scores that can be had during a pro tour event. 
 

Do you think that the average is going to keep goin up forever at a pace of .45-.55 yards a year forever? I doubt it. 
 

Ye she was because that’s the equipment and standards the game is using and that it’s not the equipment that’s lead to the average going up. Yes it played a role in the initial jump from 1993 but it has remained constant at the top end and again it’s not the ball or the equipment that’s leading to the average going up. It’s guys like Zach Johnson who averaged 280-290 leaving the tour and guys who hit it 300 coming on. As more people hit it 300 the average is going to go up. 
 

The rollback will have the opposite effect on distance than what people think. Strokes gained shows distance is an advantage and those who can hit it far will remain on tour and those who can’t will be gone and you end up right back where they are now except everyone on tour will be close to the top end rather than a few guys.

Whatever the talking heads are saying about the future distance is marketing speak and not what I'm focusing on, personally I think they made a mistake with their messaging.

The 1994 - 2005 time-frame is not cherry-picked, it is correlated to larger headed titanium drivers and proV1 era balls, and that correlation is directly from the USGA/RA study, I'm reading the data that is there. There is a 28.5 yards distance increase over a shorter year frame than the previous years growth and post-years growth is a sign that mistakes were made and things was missed when the did their last test calculations. I also think that the call of "The toothpaste is out of the tube" is a copout, just because an issue isn't taken care of right away does not make the issue irrelevant.

I am not concerned if there is distance growth past 2023 or not, my focus is on the equipment gain years that spiked distance in a shorter time frame than previous or post years.  I'm also not concerned with the rollback having the opposite effect if the distance spike would not have happened and the distance had grown a normal rate would have been (avg of pre and post) 5.9yards from 1995 to 2004 then add the that 8.3 yards from 2004 to 2023 we would be 22.6 yards shorter avg than we are now, arguably Rory's avg 2023 distance would be 304y instead of 326.6y and the tour average would be 287.9 yards instead of the current 308.2y. The ball change only covers 15y of that 28.5 yard leap. Will there be guys shorter than 287.9 now, yep - just as there had always been shorter hitters since the beginning of the game, that's why it's a game, if everyone hit the exact same distance that would be somewhat boring.






 

Edited January 15 by d.lama
Clarity

[RickyBobby_PR]

5 hours ago, d.lama said:

Whatever the talking heads are saying about the future distance is marketing speak and not what I'm focusing on, personally I think they made a mistake with their messaging.

The 1994 - 2005 time-frame is not cherry-picked, it is correlated to larger headed titanium drivers and proV1 era balls, and that correlation is directly from the USGA/RA study, I'm reading the data that is there. There is a 28.5 yards distance increase over a shorter year frame than the previous years growth and post-years growth is a sign that mistakes were made and things was missed when the did their last test calculations. I also think that the call of "The toothpaste is out of the tube" is a copout, just because an issue isn't taken care of right away does not make the issue irrelevant.

I am not concerned if there is distance growth past 2023 or not, my focus is on the equipment gain years that spiked distance in a shorter time frame than previous or post years.  I'm also not concerned with the rollback having the opposite effect if the distance spike would not have happened and the distance had grown a normal rate would have been (avg of pre and post) 5.9yards from 1995 to 2004 then add the that 8.3 yards from 2004 to 2023 we would be 22.6 yards shorter avg than we are now, arguably Rory's avg 2023 distance would be 304y instead of 326.6y and the tour average would be 287.9 yards instead of the current 308.2y. The ball change only covers 15y of that 28.5 yard leap. Will there be guys shorter than 287.9 now, yep - just as there had always been shorter hitters since the beginning of the game, that's why it's a game, if everyone hit the exact same distance that would be somewhat boring.






 

All those distance gains have slowed. I don’t know anyone who is denying that when titanium drivers or even the 460cc heads along with the Prov1 came around that distance spiked a lot.

But we now have 20 years of data with the prov1 and now other brands tour balls along with the 460cc driver and the CT standard. Any comparison between 1993 and 2023 is irrelevant to say distance is continue to increase. 

To say that there’s going to be a 20+ jump in average distance between 2023 and 2033 and beyond isn’t supported by the data for the current equipment which would be what’s used going forward if nothing changed

On top of all that a pga tour course isn’t obsolete with today’s current average distance or top end difference, they still wouldn’t be of the number of players averaging 300 yards increased by another 50, if there was a distance problem at the pro level then the pga tour would be the ones asking for a change and saying we need longer courses, but they aren’t. This supposed problem is nothing more than the ruling bodies trying to protect a handful of courses for their two opens and nothing more.

Whan claims that they are talking to course designers and what those designers claim they are being asked to do. If the ask is to build a course that can hold a major or tour event they don’t need more than 7300 yards, but they want to claim the only way to challenge pros is thru distance. Merion and a couple other courses show that’s not the case

[pbclub]

If you are for this rollback and playing now and don't pick up your ball and walk it backwards 7 yards after every shot you are being a hypocrite. If its that great for the game then do it now yourself. Show all of us how great it is. Otherwise stop trying to fix stuff that isn't broken, we get enough of that out of the current administration. 

[d.lama]

4 hours ago, pbclubdude said:

If you are for this rollback and playing now and don't pick up your ball and walk it backwards 7 yards after every shot you are being a hypocrite. If its that great for the game then do it now yourself. Show all of us how great it is. Otherwise stop trying to fix stuff that isn't broken, we get enough of that out of the current administration. 

The horror... Seriously, the game was played when the equipment hit shorter and was less forgiving, and the ball went shorter - the game survived.

 

Edited January 17 by d.lama
submitted to soon.

[pbclub]

2 hours ago, d.lama said:

The horror... Seriously, the game was played when the equipment hit shorter and was less forgiving, and the ball went shorter - the game survived.

 

It survived in part, because innovation helped push the game forward. That has always been a constant with golf, since the beginning. Golf now competes with the couch for this and likely future generations. Making the game harder/shorter/less fun to watch/do makes no sense.

As an older golfer those few yards are a big deal to me. As such I personally find this absurd. For the game overall I find it ill conceived. I also believe it will not happen. Not with so many other more sensible options available.

I suggest for all the players out there pushing for a shorter ball; You should spend the next few years playing the ball. Put in the work and let us all know how much better off the game is for it. By the time the rule is set to be used you all should have some great feedback. Put your game where your mouth is......or something like that lol

[GolfSpy_APH]

6 hours ago, d.lama said:

The horror... Seriously, the game was played when the equipment hit shorter and was less forgiving, and the ball went shorter - the game survived.

 

Most ppl generally don't like change. Not getting into whether this is good bad or otherwise. I'm out on that as nobody is going to be able to post anything to truly sway or change decisions ppl have already made.

Any change the ruling bodies make is going to be criticized. Again not saying good or bad. Right or wrong. It just is. Those with the biggest opinions will also be the loudest. 

After this happen ppl will still go golfing. If more changes are made again. Ppl will still go golfing. 

The game is what you want it to be and it's changing. Any game deeply rooted in tradition will have various conflicts as the world and game itself progresses forward.

[RickyBobby_PR]

3 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Most ppl generally don't like change. Not getting into whether this is good bad or otherwise. I'm out on that as nobody is going to be able to post anything to truly sway or change decisions ppl have already made.

Any change the ruling bodies make is going to be criticized. Again not saying good or bad. Right or wrong. It just is. Those with the biggest opinions will also be the loudest. 

After this happen ppl will still go golfing. If more changes are made again. Ppl will still go golfing. 

The game is what you want it to be and it's changing. Any game deeply rooted in tradition will have various conflicts as the world and game itself progresses forward.

It has nothing to do with change or being against change. It’s about questioning the decision and the motive of the decision.

Whats being claimed isn’t backed up by data that isn’t refuted by other data. It’s also about a body using the less than 1% of the sport to make decisions for the entire sport.

It’s about them making a change that in essence does nothing to solve the problem they claim is an issue. Its them not understanding strokes gained data or choosing to ignore it and that their proposal is going to have the opposite affect. What did tiger proofing the game do? It lead to more distance. The rollback will do the same. 
 

Its about a body being out of touch with the game.

Its about a body who isn’t going to stop with this rollback and we don’t have to speculate if they will do something because their own words said they are coming after the driver, it’s just a matter of when. When they do the driver they will then have to do the fairway woods and hybrids. It’s not a one and done change.

its about them not being sure about their decision, per Mike Whan in an interview saying they don’t know if they got it right. You don’t risk damaging the game on something you aren’t sure is right.

Mike Whan early in 2023 stated the game is healthy. You don’t change a game that’s healthy by talking it backwards.

[GolfSpy_APH]

49 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

It has nothing to do with change or being against change. It’s about questioning the decision and the motive of the decision.

Whats being claimed isn’t backed up by data that isn’t refuted by other data. It’s also about a body using the less than 1% of the sport to make decisions for the entire sport.

It’s about them making a change that in essence does nothing to solve the problem they claim is an issue. Its them not understanding strokes gained data or choosing to ignore it and that their proposal is going to have the opposite affect. What did tiger proofing the game do? It lead to more distance. The rollback will do the same. 
 

Its about a body being out of touch with the game.

Its about a body who isn’t going to stop with this rollback and we don’t have to speculate if they will do something because their own words said they are coming after the driver, it’s just a matter of when. When they do the driver they will then have to do the fairway woods and hybrids. It’s not a one and done change.

its about them not being sure about their decision, per Mike Whan in an interview saying they don’t know if they got it right. You don’t risk damaging the game on something you aren’t sure is right.

Mike Whan early in 2023 stated the game is healthy. You don’t change a game that’s healthy by talking it backwards.

Yeah you have mentioned all of these multiple times prior. 

[BigMacQue]

56 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

It has nothing to do with change or being against change. It’s about questioning the decision and the motive of the decision.

Whats being claimed isn’t backed up by data that isn’t refuted by other data. It’s also about a body using the less than 1% of the sport to make decisions for the entire sport.

It’s about them making a change that in essence does nothing to solve the problem they claim is an issue. Its them not understanding strokes gained data or choosing to ignore it and that their proposal is going to have the opposite affect. What did tiger proofing the game do? It lead to more distance. The rollback will do the same. 
 

Its about a body being out of touch with the game.

Its about a body who isn’t going to stop with this rollback and we don’t have to speculate if they will do something because their own words said they are coming after the driver, it’s just a matter of when. When they do the driver they will then have to do the fairway woods and hybrids. It’s not a one and done change.

its about them not being sure about their decision, per Mike Whan in an interview saying they don’t know if they got it right. You don’t risk damaging the game on something you aren’t sure is right.

Mike Whan early in 2023 stated the game is healthy. You don’t change a game that’s healthy by talking it backwards.

 

No worse than the NCAA ...... 

[RickyBobby_PR]

47 minutes ago, BigMacQue said:

 

No worse than the NCAA ...... 

most organizations make changes for the worst.

[DaveP043]

4 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Any change the ruling bodies make is going to be criticized. Again not saying good or bad. Right or wrong. It just is. Those with the biggest opinions will also be the loudest. 

In my experience, those who are against a change are the loudest.  Those who are for it, and those who merely accept it as inevitable tend not to be quite so vehement.

[RickyBobby_PR]

2 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Yeah you have mentioned all of these multiple times prior. 

I have and was pointing out how your claim that it’s a resistance to change is false. Nobody pushing back is doing so because they don’t like change.

its people not wanting to give up distance for the sake of a problem that affects less than 1% of the game if there is even a problem (so far the ruling bodies have done a terrible job at convincing people, slumbers resigning shortly after the decision and pushback doesn’t help their cause). Slumber and whan saying they were going to something also indicates they don’t care what feedback was given that disputes their stance. It was their way or the highway.

And not many are trying to convince others to change their opinion, but rather pointing out the flaws in the data and argument that is made by the ruling bodies and those in support of the rollback. It’s to ensure that when readers come to the thread they have all the data.

 

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

In my experience, those who are against a change are the loudest.  Those who are for it, and those who merely accept it as inevitable tend not to be quite so vehement.

You haven’t read the wrx thread then. The ones in support are pretty loud and like many in this thread refuse to accept that their preferences for how golf should be played or their love for the glory days of Jack aren’t facts but feelings.

Again it has nothing to do with change. Its the approach and dishonestly of the ruling bodies in their agenda and how they want to control the game

Edited January 17 by RickyBobby_PR

[GolfSpy_APH]

2 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

I have and was pointing out how your claim that it’s a resistance to change is false. Nobody pushing back is doing so because they don’t like change.

its people not wanting to give up distance for the sake of a problem that affects less than 1% of the game if there is even a problem (so far the ruling bodies have done a terrible job at convincing people, slumbers resigning shortly after the decision and pushback doesn’t help their cause). Slumber and whan saying they were going to something also indicates they don’t care what feedback was given that disputes their stance. It was their way or the highway.

And not many are trying to convince others to change their opinion, but rather pointing out the flaws in the data and argument that is made by the ruling bodies and those in support of the rollback. It’s to ensure that when readers come to the thread they have all the data.

 

 

In fairness there is enough data out there to support whatever argument someone wants to make. The distance report they based their decision on was a key in favor on the roll back and as you have shared a couple hundred other sources countering that. 

Point being if one wanted to they can pick and choose the data to reference to support one side or another.

Loosing distance is a change.

However we all know your stance, arguments or statements and I'm not about to go back and forth on this as it's the same stuff over...and over... And over again.

Everyone can feel as they do!

[DaveP043]

1 minute ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

You haven’t read the wrx thread then. The ones in support are pretty loud and like many in this thread refuse to accept that their preferences for how golf should be played or their love for the glory days of Jack aren’t facts but feelings.

 

True, I generally don't read wrx threads with many thousands of posts, they become even more contentious than this one has.  At MGS, we generally show much more respect for other opinions and viewpoints than the wrx-ers do, and I think we've all done that throughout this discussion.

[d.lama]

9 hours ago, pbclubdude said:

I suggest for all the players out there pushing for a shorter ball; You should spend the next few years playing the ball. Put in the work and let us all know how much better off the game is for it. By the time the rule is set to be used you all should have some great feedback. Put your game where your mouth is......or something like that lol

Then, I suggest not changing the normal course that you play - even with the current ball - because that course might be 252 yards longer (total) than your normal course.

I'm not trying to be flippant, I'm trying to give context to your estimate of 7 yards lost per shot and context to actual distance lost. (10x4's = 140y, 4x3's = 28y, 4x5's = 84y). If you ever play a different course, or if you decide to play different tee's, or if the super moves the tee boxes you normally play you have yards added to the course or removed from the course. The ball rollback is the same thing, it's just a permanent change. 

 

[chisag]

On 1/16/2024 at 3:49 PM, pbclubdude said:

If you are for this rollback and playing now

 

... I don't know anybody in favor of a universal rollback so I have no idea who you (and others) are directing this to. I was and still am in favor of a rollback for the top .01% that play the game so I favor bifurcation. I know several others I play with that agree, while some others don't want any rollback and a few just don't really care one way or the other. 

 

Edited January 18 by chisag

[GaDawg]

6 hours ago, BigMacQue said:

 

No worse than the NCAA ...... 

The difference is we don't play recreational football like we golf.

[skraeling]

4 minutes ago, GaDawg said:

The difference is we don't play recreational football like we golf.

Im sure as hell not getting an NIL deal in my rec golf league.

[Gelli]

If they were to limit driver head size to 230cc and allow only one standard wedge of 45deg and one sand iron of 56deg they wouldn't need to change the ball or trick up golf courses.

[RickyBobby_PR]

8 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

In fairness there is enough data out there to support whatever argument someone wants to make. The distance report they based their decision on was a key in favor on the roll back and as you have shared a couple hundred other sources countering that. 

Point being if one wanted to they can pick and choose the data to reference to support one side or another.

Loosing distance is a change.

However we all know your stance, arguments or statements and I'm not about to go back and forth on this as it's the same stuff over...and over... And over again.

Everyone can feel as they do!

Their distance report was called out by tour pros and multiple other people in the industry. Kind of hard to support their data when many have shown data that direty contradicts their data and talking points. When listening to whan speak it’s easy to see he doesn’t even believe what he’s saying.

Not looking to go back and forth ws pointing out the flaw in your description of those as you call us done loudest as being against change. That characterization is wrong and disingenuous 

Edited January 18 by RickyBobby_PR

[RickyBobby_PR]

8 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

At MGS, we generally show much more respect for other opinions and viewpoints than the wrx-ers do, and I think we've all done that throughout this discussion.

We definitely disagree on this one. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

3 hours ago, Gelli said:

If they were to limit driver head size to 230cc and allow only one standard wedge of 45deg and one sand iron of 56deg they wouldn't need to change the ball or trick up golf courses.

Pros hit their woods that are much smaller than 230cc 300 yards. Wedge loft would not matter. Pros are really good with short clubs.

if the ruling bodies listened to actual experts in the game they would have left the ball stand as it is now

 

[fixyurdivot]

#rollbacktheballrollback

Spoiler

no one was injured and no feeling's hurt in this response .

 

[pbclub]

9 hours ago, chisag said:

 

... I don't know anybody in favor of a universal rollback so I have no idea who you (and others) are directing this to. I was and still am in favor of a rollback for the top .01% that play the game so I favor bifurcation. I know several others I play with that agree, while some others don't want any rollback and a few just don't really care one way or the other. 

... I also think about 95% of those I see play at muni's, don't follow USGA rules. Mulligans, rolling the ball in the fairway or rough, moving their ball out of divots, dropping more than 1 or 2 club lengths and quite a few other moves not within the USGA rules. They all seem to really enjoy playing golf by their own rules. If a rollback ball goes into effect, and OEM's haven't found a way to offset the difference in 6 years, I imagine they will play "illegal" balls to go along with their "illegal" mulligans, gimmies, rolling the ball, more than 14 clubs in their bag and all the other "illegal" things they do and continue to enjoy playing the game just as much as they always have.  

Like it says........If you are for the roll back. At all. The rest of what you wrote has nothing to do with it. Its not wrong, it just is an entirely different subject. 

[pbclub]

10 hours ago, d.lama said:

Then, I suggest not changing the normal course that you play - even with the current ball - because that course might be 252 yards longer (total) than your normal course.

I'm not trying to be flippant, I'm trying to give context to your estimate of 7 yards lost per shot and context to actual distance lost. (10x4's = 140y, 4x3's = 28y, 4x5's = 84y). If you ever play a different course, or if you decide to play different tee's, or if the super moves the tee boxes you normally play you have yards added to the course or removed from the course. The ball rollback is the same thing, it's just a permanent change. 

 

Two completely different things. Entirely different. 

[pbclub]

18 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

After this happen ppl will still go golfing. If more changes are made again. Ppl will still go golfing. 

 

Or less people will.  

Edited January 18 by pbclubdude

[d.lama]

2 hours ago, pbclubdude said:

Or less people will.  

Don't tempt me with easier to get tee-times.

[FrogginBullfish]

14 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Their distance report was called out by tour pros and multiple other people in the industry. Kind of hard to support their data when many have shown data that direty contradicts their data and talking points. When listening to whan speak it’s easy to see he doesn’t even believe what he’s saying.

Not looking to go back and forth ws pointing out the flaw in your description of those as you call us done loudest as being against change. That characterization is wrong and disingenuous 

There are tour pros and people in the industry that support the distance report and the rollback too. The appeal to experts cuts both ways.

[RickyBobby_PR]

Just now, FrogginBullfish said:

There are tour pros and people in the industry that support the distance report and the rollback too. The appeal to experts cuts both ways.

The number of people in the industry and on tour that support are a very few minority.

Callaway is one of not the only oem that supported bifurcation which makes no sense and just another reason outside of their equipment not being a good fit for me and a terrible interaction and nothing but lies from Sean Toulon, that  I will give no money to calllaway or any of their other entities.

the players in support happen to be the longer hitters on tour such as Rory who stayed in his own words he wants the rollback because it gives the longer hitters and advantage. He wants to maintain his advantage while at the same time putting his competitors at a bigger disadvantage c life selfishness for wanting the rollback.

then the courses that want it and are pressuring the ruling bodies represent less than 1% of all courses and are also exclusive clubs that can afford the choice to expand if that’s their desire.

please don’t make it seem like there’s an even split. It’s a big gap between those who want things left alone and those who want a rollback. Which again to date nobody has been able to state what problem is caused by more pros hitting be ball 300 yards in 5,10,15,20 years or what problem is caused by it today. Everything presented as the problem has studies showing the opposite such as courses aren’t getting longer so there’s no sustainability issue that gets tossed around.  It’s about not liking low scores by the best in the world, it’s those who are into course design that want course features preserved which most fans don’t care about. It’s wanting courses that used to be on tour in ten 80s and before to come back. Thats not going to happen because there’s no room for hospitality tents, parking, accommodations for the pros, the areas can’t handle the additional traffic.