Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[vandyland]

2 hours ago, ejgaudette said:

The Shotgun Start I think had a good line when talking about this (note they are very pro rollback so think of this how you will) does anyone complain when playing in 45 degree weather in the northern parts of the globe and we loose tons of distance then., or do we just play the game before us and enjoy the nature and the company, or even some solitude from time to time. The game will still be the game, as it was 200 years ago and will still be a challenge.

I listen to SGS religiously and I agreed with a lot of their points. I think the one place where I disagree with Andy is his playing vintage equipment (he also seems really proud of playing vintage equipment because I swear he has mentioned it like 30 times by now). His stance that his current clubs are too easy to play has got to be like 0.01% world view of golf. I would also posit that he has been playing golf his ENTIRE life and seems to almost be exhausted by playing golf (he is a big time complainer) even though he plays some of the coolest golf courses in the United States every year. Obviously that is a "don't make your hobby your job" kind of issue but that is one place I find him a bit tiresome. Also when he complains to Brendan about some issue with his ONE kid to Brendan who has FOUR kids. Andy is, lowkey, kind of a wimp in my opinion. But I DIGRESSED SORRY. 

Overall maybe they have just beaten me down but I guess I don't see an "angle" for them to favor rollback outside of the fact that Andy is an architecture nerd (I also like architecture) and the current state of the game is making more and more courses obsolete. 

Not to toot my own horn but I can hit a few drives every round that go more than 300 yds. I am a 40 year old, fairly average golfer with 2 (soon to be 3) children. As someone who has worked out heavily my entire life, my max bench has gone down 15% in the last 4 years, squat has dropped 20%, deadlift 20%, etc. Yet I can hit a driver about 35 yds farther than I could when I was 25. If you made me go back to a Callaway Big Bertha and NXT Tour golf ball, I think I would see some major reduction in distance (and the NXT Tour is still a faster ball than the tour Balata for sure). I would say equipment is the primary reason I hit it farther, not improvements I have made to my game. 

[d0m41n]

54 minutes ago, ejgaudette said:

Exactly and if we all lose the same 5% then your drive will still be relatively the same amount of impressive.

Oh of course but it still feels like raising the rim in all basketball settings just because 1% can dunk it with their head above the rim. Every once in awhile I could touch the rim but now it's further out of reach. Just more of that feeling than anything with this whole shebang. As we all do, we adjust. I love golf entirely too much for this to stop me and certainly won't get all that upset about a hobby. Just gotta get some more speed training in this offseason  

[chisag]

12 minutes ago, vandyland said:

For all the people bad mouthing the USGA, what is the primary reason you think they are doing it (seriously, I am not trying to trap anyone)?

 

... They have said while it may not be a serious problem at this moment, it is certainly going to be at some point. It was gonna happen sooner or later and they chose now to draw the line in the sand for the future. I don't see how this is different than when they "rolled back" the distance on a drivers cor and made illegal those that produced too much speed. Whether or not anyone agrees with their stance, and certainly the average golfer may not, I do think they are truly attempting to protect the game as a whole. 

[LICC]

1 hour ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

and the shorter hitters are leaving the tour

Which shorter hitters have left the Tour in the last ten years? Do you think players who were long hitters haven't left the Tour?

[LICC]

2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

But you can say the same about distance between 80s and 90s and so on.

From 1980 to 1989 the Tour driving distance average went up 5 yards. 

[Steve S]

1 hour ago, chisag said:

 

... Steve you have your own road to travel but I have found many that moved up a tee box were much happier they did. I play with a group that can use all 4 tee boxes. I am 70 and play a Tip/Sr combo. 35 yr old pard plays the tips. 60 yr old plays the mens tees. 65 yr old plays the Sr. an the 81 yr old plays the forward tees. And one of the wives that joins us a couple times a week plays the forward tees too. 2 years ago we all played the mens tees and the transition has been no problem for any of us. We play ready golf and even though we creep ahead on tee boxes, many times we still congregate at the Mens tees and then move to our own tee boxes the it is time to hit. Still all walk and talk and it is more enjoyable for all playing appropriate tees so everyone have a chance at par on any given hole as well as some birdies/eagls for the more skilled in the group. 

... I would much rather play in front of my 35yr old pard that not play with him all. Fwiw, he is usually about 30yds longer than me off the tee. And I do think the numbers being thrown around are going to be much less than 10-15 yds for older players. Add to that the difference when miss hitting a drive may be no different al all, just those drives when we hit the sweet spot. I look at it this way, in MGS testing the Kirkland V3 is a good 10 yds shorter than Maxfli Tours. My 81 yr old pard actually hits the V3 a little longer than MT's. We have just barely scratched the surface of what this will all mean. 

" I look at it this way, in MGS testing the Kirkland V3 is a good 10 yds shorter than Maxfli Tours. My 81 yr old pard actually hits the V3 a little longer than MT's."   It may be because he can't hit the MT's with enough spin to keep them in the air.  The V3's spin a lot and will be shorter for a higher swing speed player but will actually help a sub 85mph player get more carry.  So you are correct, we haven't seen the all of the impact of this change, yet.  And I'll bet that there will be some of the DTC guys out of Taiwan, Korea, China and Viet Nam that will keep producing the old balls.  The Japanese market has a number of clubs that sell well there that are technically non-conforming by USGA standards.

[Berg Ryman]

3 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Thankfully you have roughly 6 years to loose all those golf balls before this will come into play. 

At the rate I lose them, not counting the MD trip, I might make it that long... jeez.

[RickyBobby_PR]

2 hours ago, MadisonGolfbum said:

With all of the tech available to ball manufacturers, it seems a ball could be developed that would resolve the speed issue on the high end without hurting the vast majority of us. Surely over 99% of the golfers in the world do not hit the ball too far.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

It’s not possible to have a ball that only affects high speed players and not low speed. There were tests done by the USGA in the past that showed a reduction of 8% for high swing players resulted in a 7% reduction for 80-90 mph swingers. 
 

There is going to be some affect to the slower speed players.

1 hour ago, vandyland said:

 For all the people bad mouthing the USGA, what is the primary reason you think they are doing it (seriously, I am not trying to trap anyone)?

Is it they are obsessed with protecting an arbitrary score? Are they protecting old golf, golden age private clubs that don't want to lengthen their course? Or are they chasing an invisible problem?

I guess I have an easy time seeing why the pros, the equipment manufacturers and the club fitters are against it. The pros don't like change and are paid by the equipment companies who have invested a lot of R&D and marketing into making the best ball possible and the club fitters sell top-end performance through fitting. 

 

The USGA has backed off lots of older courses even before the current equipment era. There are courses that were used in the mid 80s and not used at all in the 90s.

They want to protect a handful of current courses in the U.S. and UK for the two open championships. They cherry picked data from the PGA tour to say distance is an issue. The claim the average distance has increased over the last 20,30,40,50 years which it has. But they haven’t shown that top end distance changed because that would defeat the narrative. Their issue is that too many golfers at the elite level hit the ball 300 yards which in their eyes takes away from the Open championship courses and also they are getting money from designers and course owners who claim more land is needed to build championship courses so they want to appease these people rather than the designers find better and more creative designs instead of using purely distance as a design

 

What it boils down to is the ruling bodies don’t like current professional tour game and wants to dictate how golf should be played

Edited December 4, 2023 by RickyBobby_PR

[ejgaudette]

1 hour ago, vandyland said:

I listen to SGS religiously and I agreed with a lot of their points. I think the one place where I disagree with Andy is his playing vintage equipment (he also seems really proud of playing vintage equipment because I swear he has mentioned it like 30 times by now). His stance that his current clubs are too easy to play has got to be like 0.01% world view of golf. I would also posit that he has been playing golf his ENTIRE life and seems to almost be exhausted by playing golf (he is a big time complainer) even though he plays some of the coolest golf courses in the United States every year. Obviously that is a "don't make your hobby your job" kind of issue but that is one place I find him a bit tiresome. Also when he complains to Brendan about some issue with his ONE kid to Brendan who has FOUR kids. Andy is, lowkey, kind of a wimp in my opinion. But I DIGRESSED SORRY. 

Overall maybe they have just beaten me down but I guess I don't see an "angle" for them to favor rollback outside of the fact that Andy is an architecture nerd (I also like architecture) and the current state of the game is making more and more courses obsolete. 

Not to toot my own horn but I can hit a few drives every round that go more than 300 yds. I am a 40 year old, fairly average golfer with 2 (soon to be 3) children. As someone who has worked out heavily my entire life, my max bench has gone down 15% in the last 4 years, squat has dropped 20%, deadlift 20%, etc. Yet I can hit a driver about 35 yds farther than I could when I was 25. If you made me go back to a Callaway Big Bertha and NXT Tour golf ball, I think I would see some major reduction in distance (and the NXT Tour is still a faster ball than the tour Balata for sure). I would say equipment is the primary reason I hit it farther, not improvements I have made to my game. 

Yeah I agree he goes too far that saying all clubs are too easy to hit, but not sure that changing the ball makes anything harder to hit just harder to hit 300 yards but if you play the right tees the game scales down but it round about the same challenge.

[KC Golf]

I am keeping all of my existing Srixon’s.  I will likely buy more so that I can play my current distance and laugh at this whole mess.  Sticking with my existing tee box too.  

[FrogginBullfish]

If distance at the elite tour level of the men's game is something the governing bodies want to control, artificially limiting the distance the ball travel doesn't seem to be the best place to start, in my opinion. It's come up in other posts, but overcoming a "slower ball" isn't going to be all that difficult for these players. We're going to be back where we are now, before this rollback even hits the recreational golfer. And what will we have achieved? Nothing, really.

Scores on tour aren't typically any lower than they have been over the last 30-40 years, despite the increases in distance. Courses that have added additional length rarely utilize all of it in a given week, despite distance on tour being complained about all the time by certain factions of the golf community.

Ultimately, I don't think anything the governing bodies try to do here with the ball will be successful in stopping people from chasing distance. Strokes gained opened up a floodgate that cannot be closed.

If they want to mitigate it, I think Adam Scott had the right idea, don't go after the ball, go after the equipment first. If you want to freeze the golf ball where it is, sure, but it doesn't need rolling back. Just don't let it advance further than it already is from a distance/aerodynamics standpoint. Maybe set a limit for drag coefficients and spin rates too if necessary.

But if they truly want to control distance at the higher levels, shrink the heads. Limit the drag coefficients. Reduce allowable MOI. Limit bulge and roll. Make the clubs harder to hit basically. Distance will still be advantageous, but you'll see at least some dropback in distance simply for better control, at least at the beginning. Again these guys are too good not to be able to compensate and coaching methods and biomechanics understanding have come too far for things not to be overcome eventually, but I think that equipment bifurcation, which in a way already exists, is going to be at least a more medium term solution than rolling back the ball is. Rolling back the ball just feels like an off-brand Band-Aid that got wet before application. In my opinion at least.

In a perfect world, I don't necessarily see anything needing to be done, but if the usga and the r&a are intent on doing something, then at least do it properly. This move, to me, isn't that.

My two cents anyway...

[pdr747]

The problem with the comparison to baseball in the bifurcation debate is that amateurs don’t play with pros in any event in baseball.  The line between a pro and an amateur is therefore clearly drawn. 
 

If you are a junior amateur when would it be best to switch to the limited ball?  A good jr amateur will play in the us jr am and attempt to qualify for the am.  They will also play a lot of other jr events.  If these are not considered high level then they would be at a detriment not to switch back but the challenge of switching golf balls would be to a great disadvantage and thus hinder the progress of the next gen of players.  Making a change for all is the most reasonable move. 

[pdr747]

Also….  Why wouldn’t Titleist keep making their current ball for those of you who will have to quit (as some are claiming) with the rolled back ball.  If there is a market then people will buy. 
 

Self-bifuricate if you will be so harmed by the new rule.  Heck most people don’t play by the rules anyways.  
 

Maybe there should be a thread to make people aware that mulligans are against the rules. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

10 minutes ago, FrogginBullfish said:

If they want to mitigate it, I think Adam Scott had the right idea, don't go after the ball, go after the equipment first. If you want to freeze the golf ball where it is, sure, but it doesn't need rolling back. Just don't let it advance further than it already is from a distance/aerodynamics standpoint. Maybe set a limit for drag coefficients and spin rates too if necessary.

Even a 200 cc head isn’t going to stop the distance issue the USGA claims. The fast guys still hit 195cc and smaller heads far and can go more in the tank.

 

11 minutes ago, FrogginBullfish said:

But if they truly want to control distance at the higher levels, shrink the heads. Limit the drag coefficients. Reduce allowable MOI. Limit bulge and roll. Make the clubs harder to hit basically. Distance will still be advantageous, but you'll see at least some dropback in distance simply for better control, at least at the beginning. Again these guys are too good not to be able to compensate and coaching methods and biomechanics understanding have come too far for things not to be overcome eventually, but I think that equipment bifurcation, which in a way already exists, is going to be at least a more medium term solution than rolling back the ball is. Rolling back the ball just feels like an off-brand Band-Aid that got wet before application. In my opinion at least.

The only way to do this is thru bifurcation because it would make the game harder for amateurs and many would leave the game. Nobody wants bifurcation, it’s bad for the game

There is no equipment bifurcation regardless how many say it or try to justify it. All the equipment on tour meets the same specs as the equipment at retail. The faces aren’t hotter and in many cases they are slower because overtime they get faster and the players will end up having to replace the head ala schauffele.

Do they get special grinds, prototype heads, balls designed specifically to a player aka Phil with the chromesoft? Sure but it’s still the same specs.

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

3 minutes ago, pdr747 said:

Also….  Why wouldn’t Titleist keep making their current ball for those of you who will have to quit (as some are claiming) with the rolled back ball.  If there is a market then people will buy. 

Because it’s not good for business. It’s why they wouldn’t make a mlr ball for free. The same reason they didn’t continuing making the old grooves despite the long lead time for them to be illegal. Golfers aren’t buying non conforming gear

[Just_the_Chip]

I'm sure someone else said this, but I saw online a really well written idea around growing the grass longer. Get the fairway a little bit deeper by like 1/16th of an inch and supposedly it will drastically reduce the total yardage. 

Or we should make all tour players play with wood shafts again. 

[jak29672]

For those who are worried about bifurcation, think again.  It all ready exists. Do you think the pros are playing the same Prov1 that you buy in the store?

[FrogginBullfish]

59 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Even a 200 cc head isn’t going to stop the distance issue the USGA claims. The fast guys still hit 195cc and smaller heads far and can go more in the tank.

 

The only way to do this is thru bifurcation because it would make the game harder for amateurs and many would leave the game. Nobody wants bifurcation, it’s bad for the game

There is no equipment bifurcation regardless how many say it or try to justify it. All the equipment on tour meets the same specs as the equipment at retail. The faces aren’t hotter and in many cases they are slower because overtime they get faster and the players will end up having to replace the head ala schauffele.

Do they get special grinds, prototype heads, balls designed specifically to a player aka Phil with the chromesoft? Sure but it’s still the same specs.

 

That's why I said do more than just shrink the heads. And I also said it's not likely to be a permanent solution anyway but probably a longer lasting one than a simple ball rollback. I also said I don't see anything needing to be done, but if they had to, then that's how I'd like to see them go about it.

I said bifurcation in a way exists not that it does outright. When some of the equipment played on tour, albeit meeting the same regulations, is not what anyone off the street can buy, there's a hint of bifurcation there in my opinion, whether you agree with that or not.

[DaveP043]

26 minutes ago, jak29672 said:

For those who are worried about bifurcation, think again.  It all ready exists. Do you think the pros are playing the same Prov1 that you buy in the store?

Check the Conforming Ball List, see if you find more than one entry for each edition.  The boxes the pros receive may see additional QC testing to ensure improved consistency, but they're the same formulation.

[RickyBobby_PR]

12 minutes ago, FrogginBullfish said:

That's why I said do more than just shrink the heads. And I also said it's not likely to be a permanent solution anyway but probably a longer lasting one than a simple ball rollback. I also said I don't see anything needing to be done, but if they had to, then that's how I'd like to see them go about it.

I said bifurcation in a way exists not that it does outright. When some of the equipment played on tour, albeit meeting the same regulations, is not what anyone off the street can buy, there's a hint of bifurcation there in my opinion, whether you agree with that or not.

Dj hit jacks persimmon driver 300 and it’s not even a fit for him. Give the manufacturers a chance to actually make a head, shaft companies to design shafts and with trackman they will be hitting it over 300 with a small head. 
 

there is no bifurcation of anything right now. Same ball specs, same clubs specs used by pros and amateurs. Sayin bifurcation exists in some way because pros have a one off club or a prototype ball as reason to have separation between the pro game or that it somehow explains the differences in how the pros play the game compared to ams or any other argument doesn’t hold any water. Just like saying they play by different rules because of things like lift clean and place doesn’t hold water.

Same rules including being able to use any of the MLRs in the rule book like lift clean and place can be used by the weekend Joe. 

[Jim Shaw]

32 minutes ago, jak29672 said:

For those who are worried about bifurcation, think again.  It all ready exists. Do you think the pros are playing the same Prov1 that you buy in the store?

Yes they do, a friend of mine just reached out to a friend of his at the RCGA who is dialled in with the touring pro's, the answer he got back was "titeist has about 10 different Pro V's in production and most of the touring pro's use the ones that you and I play" 

I have to say that I trust the source and my friend who is in the Canadian Golf Hall of Fame. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

34 minutes ago, jak29672 said:

For those who are worried about bifurcation, think again.  It all ready exists. Do you think the pros are playing the same Prov1 that you buy in the store?

It’s the same ball. Same specs. You can even buy the left dash version at retail and when available the left dot. Are there some other prototype balls on tour? Sure but they have to meet the current specs and they are there for a very small percentage of players. The prototypes are what usually end up becoming or having a role in the design of a future retail release just like the left dash and left dot did 

[RickyBobby_PR]

Callaway makes a thicker face for their tour pros but it still has to meet the CT specs as the ones in retail. But most amateurs have no need for that because they don’t have the speed to damage a face. 
 

Not bifurcation.

 

[William P]

I guess I have a different perspective than most on this issue...

The USGA and R&A are going to make their decision on this matter regardless of all the opinions for or against the ruling by the amateur or the professional golf communities. We can agree or disagree with the reasoning for the ruling, however, if we choose to continue the sport, we will make the necessary adjustments to comply with and continue to enjoy the game. If the choice is to leave the game, then that is an individual decision as well.

I choose not to let the upcoming ruling deter me from the enjoyment I get from time spent with old friends and new friends on the course.

This does not mean that I won't mourn the loss of yardage, however, I will not let it ruin all other aspects of the game that bring me pleasure...

While this may be a simplistic view, remember, it is just my opinion.

[Preeway]

1 minute ago, William P said:

I guess I have a different perspective than most on this issue...

The USGA and R&A are going to make their decision on this matter regardless of all the opinions for or against the ruling by the amateur or the professional golf communities. We can agree or disagree with the reasoning for the ruling, however, if we choose to continue the sport, we will make the necessary adjustments to comply with and continue to enjoy the game. If the choice is to leave the game, then that is an individual decision as well.

I choose not to let the upcoming ruling deter me from the enjoyment I get from time spent with old friends and new friends on the course.

This does not mean that I won't mourn the loss of yardage, however, I will not let it ruin all other aspects of the game that bring me pleasure...

While this may be a simplistic view, remember, it is just my opinion.

I hear ya. I enjoyed the game a great deal 20/30 years ago and I’ll enjoy it 10 years from now (god willing). As dumb as I find this proposal, it won’t change my enjoyment of the game. 

[LICC]

7 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Dj hit jacks persimmon driver 300 and it’s not even a fit for him. Give the manufacturers a chance to actually make a head, shaft companies to design shafts and with trackman they will be hitting it over 300 with a small head. 

DJ did that with a modern ball. Maybe the top 5% or so would hit it over 300, but most players would not.

[FrogginBullfish]

11 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Dj hit jacks persimmon driver 300 and it’s not even a fit for him. Give the manufacturers a chance to actually make a head, shaft companies to design shafts and with trackman they will be hitting it over 300 with a small head. 
 

there is no bifurcation of anything right now. Same ball specs, same clubs specs used by pros and amateurs. Sayin bifurcation exists in some way because pros have a one off club or a prototype ball as reason to have separation between the pro game or that it somehow explains the differences in how the pros play the game compared to ams or any other argument doesn’t hold any water. Just like saying they play by different rules because of things like lift clean and place doesn’t hold water.

Same rules including being able to use any of the MLRs in the rule book like lift clean and place can be used by the weekend Joe. 

I don't know why you feel the need to continue to try to prove to me something that I already acknowledged in my original post about smaller club heads. Again I don't think the governing bodies actually need to do anything about distance. I simply offered an alternative solution that I feel would be more effective than a simple ball rollback. Nowhere do I say it's a perfect solution that'll hold for eternity. Just that I think it's a better solution than a ball rollback.

As for bifurcation, I don't care to discuss any further. You're welcome to your thoughts as I am mine.

[Golf2Much]

I understand that the most powerful lobbying organization in the world is moving forward to get an exemption to help their members deal with the golf ball rollback distance loss. 

Yep, AARP is petitioning the USGA and R&A to allow AARP card carrying members 65 years and older to be able to play golf with the current golf balls without penalty.  They look at this exemption as potentially being one the most popular benefits it can offer it's members.  Of course, that's after their restaurant and hotel discounts, driver safely program and their Medicare supplement program.  

As a member for the last 17 years, I can't think of a better use of my membership money!

Only kidding (but it does make a little sense)!

 

[cnosil]

Read this on Twitter/X; it was a post from Michael Breed and I personally cannot confirm that it is accurate since I haven't seen any of the data:

 

[FrogginBullfish]

2 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Read this on Twitter/X; it was a post from Michael Breed and I personally cannot confirm that it is accurate since I haven't seen any of the data:

 

Wild if true...