Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[BigBoiGolf]

There's no need to remove the driver from the bag. Marco Simone #16 made plenty of pros wet and embarassed this year at the Ryder Cup and it was 350 yards, most of it downhill. Sawgrass #17 routinely embarasses pros every year and it's only 130 yards.

I think the USGA is just envisioning a bland US golf landscape where every course is essentially the Daytona 500.

[DaveP043]

9 hours ago, storm319 said:

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. 

Something was GOING to be changed, given the research presented many times over the past 5 or 6 years, there was never any doubt that something was going to change in regards to distance.  You can certainly disagree with the Ruling Bodies as to whether that is appropriate, reasonable people can disagree, but they clearly made that decision.  The Ruling Bodies proposed a solution that would have reduced distance only at the top levels, and Titleist and Taylor Made and the PGA Tour and many others opposed that.  Based on the feedback presented, the Ruling Bodies revised their plan so that it affects all of us.  THAT change to the planned new testing rules was based on the wishes of Titleist and the PGA Tour.  I'm still waiting for Acushnet to applaud the USGA and R&A for doing what Acushnet wanted them to do.

3 hours 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.

You spend hundreds of words telling us that there's no reason for the R&A and USGA to even exist, certainly no reason for them to have any authority at all, and when asked what you'd prefer, you say "I DON'T CARE"???  Clearly you DO care, you just don't have a better idea.

[RickyBobby_PR]

14 minutes ago, Duffer_E said:

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.

The ruling bodies can’t just take driver out of the bag or reduce the size of it. 1) it would greatly impact the amateur game which if they did a driver size reduction they would essentially make themselves irrelevant in the game. 2) the tours and OEMs aren’t going to let that happen. The tours and pga of America don’t want to see bifurcation so if the rulin bodies make it a rule for professional golf only there would be revolt there as well again making themselves irrelevant. 3) they can’t just take the ball back significantly at once for the same reasons. They have to chip away. They are doing what they always do. Make a change to say they are doing something for the game without impacting the amateur golfer. They still haven’t finalized the groove rule as they let that date slip by because they ended up realizing it was dumb. They messed up the anchored putter deciosion. Their track record isn’t good 

Edited December 7, 2023 by RickyBobby_PR

[RickyBobby_PR]

13 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

Something was GOING to be changed, given the research presented many times over the past 5 or 6 years, there was never any doubt that something was going to change in regards to distance.  You can certainly disagree with the Ruling Bodies as to whether that is appropriate, reasonable people can disagree, but they clearly made that decision.  The Ruling Bodies proposed a solution that would have reduced distance only at the top levels, and Titleist and Taylor Made and the PGA Tour and many others opposed that.  Based on the feedback presented, the Ruling Bodies revised their plan so that it affects all of us.  THAT change to the planned new testing rules was based on the wishes of Titleist and the PGA Tour.  I'm still waiting for Acushnet to applaud the USGA and R&A for doing what Acushnet wanted them to do.

You spend hundreds of words telling us that there's no reason for the R&A and USGA to even exist, certainly no reason for them to have any authority at all, and when asked what you'd prefer, you say "I DON'T CARE"???  Clearly you DO care, you just don't have a better idea.

The research was using cherry picked numbers and the pga tour had someone on the golf channel talking about this yesterday. They tour presented it to the players over the summer and several said the samething.

PGA of America and several OEMs have pointed out the differences in how the ruming bodies are interpreting the various data.

Theres plenty of data out there some posted in this thread that contradicts the story they are tryin to sell. The USGA has already contradicted themselves twice. One guy stated in their testing of np-500 their testers saw a 4% reduction in distance from a 220 yard drive that only went 210. Then their equipment guy says that it’s the golfer themselves that has led to the increased distance on tour and not really the equipment. 
 

Even Mike Whan can’t keep a secret. He let slip in an interview yesterday saying these proposals before catching himself and correcting it to decisions.

 

To the bolded part it’s because what’s best for the game of golf as a whole. You don’t ruin a game that is again growing and per Mike Whan healthy. You do things that continue to promote that not make it worse

[Big C]

Guys I’m retired n I play 4-5 times a week I’m 66 I still hit the ball 260 -274 sometimes 280-290 depending on what course but I’m accurate with my irons always try to hit every club n ur bag to get ur distance right forget what USGA says play ur game

[EMacK1961]

Like so many of you, I have worked hard on my body and my technique to hit it 245. Now, I have to deal with a roll-back because the USGA/R&A are afraid that all courses will become obsolete? Paleeze. I never play from the tips. I play from where my handicap says I should play and I still have fun. The game is still a challenge.

Bifurcation is the answer here. The pros (men) are hitting it out of the park, so to speak, on these old courses that the USGA uses. So what? Personally, I don't care if they play them again. I have no stake in keeping them in the rotation for the US Open. The R&A still goes to St Andrews and players there are not scoring -30 to par there. 

If we go by a curve of driving distance among all players, I imagine that we are talking a small percentage of golfers who, legitimately, hit it 300+. You mean to tell me that those golfers are ruining the game for the rest of us? I guess so. With this ruling to roll back distance. I don't agree with this decision and I'll leave it there.

[BigBoiGolf]

33 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

You spend hundreds of words telling us that there's no reason for the R&A and USGA to even exist, certainly no reason for them to have any authority at all, and when asked what you'd prefer, you say "I DON'T CARE"???  Clearly you DO care, you just don't have a better idea.

 

No I'm just trying to imagine what the USGA could exist for that doesn't involve getting upset for fingerquotes tradition.

You know, the tradition of mowing St. Andrews fairways with greenmowers just as Old Tom intended, while I duct tape 40oz booze bottles to my hands for the Waste Management Open.

 

Edit: Oh yeah, mind you this is all for 10 - 15 yards max at the absolute top of elite players, with the USGA themselves saying it shouldn't affect long, mid, and short irons.
So... all of this MLR nonsense and stick swinging from the big honchos that exist to protect golf from being "too easy" and all they have to show for it is that Rory or Scottie will still hit driver, and then instead of their precious hand ground pitching wedges of pure artisinal craftsmanship... they'll use a 9 iron.

Reminds me of my mothers HOA in the worst possible ways. At least they're defending and protecting the sanctity of golf while deflecting blame onto OEMs and Pro players that are tired of this nonsense and focusing on the lightning in a bottle that is COVID golf new players.
 

 

Edited December 7, 2023 by BigBoiGolf

[storm319]

20 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

Something was GOING to be changed, given the research presented many times over the past 5 or 6 years, there was never any doubt that something was going to change in regards to distance.  You can certainly disagree with the Ruling Bodies as to whether that is appropriate, reasonable people can disagree, but they clearly made that decision.  The Ruling Bodies proposed a solution that would have reduced distance only at the top levels, and Titleist and Taylor Made and the PGA Tour and many others opposed that.  Based on the feedback presented, the Ruling Bodies revised their plan so that it affects all of us.  THAT change to the planned new testing rules was based on the wishes of Titleist and the PGA Tour.  I'm still waiting for Acushnet to applaud the USGA and R&A for doing what Acushnet wanted them to do.

The ruling bodies own data for the past two decades counters the course lengthening narrative that is primarily driving this (no point in bringing up anything from the prior century given that it has been clear that the ruling bodies do not intend to rollback distance levels prior to their 2002 joint statement line in the sand).

Also, let’s not give too much credit to the ruling bodies. While they may have considered feedback on the “how”, it is clear that they did not consider any feedback on the “if” which means that the decision process was not as open as they led us to believe.

Again, the PGAs and R&As have not been advocating for ANY change and being strongly against bifurcation does not mean they support a global rollback. Ultimately the ruling bodies are the ones making this change and they need to own it. 

[Javs]

Found this article. Maybe recreational golfers will not lose as much distance as they think. I fully acknowledge that no one wants to lose any distance. Length off the tee is a key aspect of my game. However, when the rollback happens I’ll probably be too old to notice….

https://golf.com/instruction/how-many-yards-lose-rollback-usga/?utm_campaign=PANTHEON_STRIPPED&utm_content=PANTHEON_STRIPPED&utm_medium=PANTHEON_STRIPPED&utm_source=PANTHEON_STRIPPED&amp=1

[Fred Mitchell]

7 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.  

[fixyurdivot]

10 minutes ago, EMacK1961 said:

Like so many of you, I have worked hard on my body and my technique to hit it 245. Now, I have to deal with a roll-back because the USGA/R&A are afraid that all courses will become obsolete? Paleeze. I never play from the tips. I play from where my handicap says I should play and I still have fun. The game is still a challenge.

Bifurcation is the answer here. The pros (men) are hitting it out of the park, so to speak, on these old courses that the USGA uses. So what? Personally, I don't care if they play them again. I have no stake in keeping them in the rotation for the US Open. The R&A still goes to St Andrews and players there are not scoring -30 to par there. 

If we go by a curve of driving distance among all players, I imagine that we are talking a small percentage of golfers who, legitimately, hit it 300+. You mean to tell me that those golfers are ruining the game for the rest of us? I guess so. With this ruling to roll back distance. I don't agree with this decision and I'll leave it there.

Exactly.  If this tour distance issue was a cosmetic mole on our arm and the USGA was the surgeon, we'd be amputee's. 

Like you and many others, I have been putting in the time exercising for added strength and flexibility, and practicing.  This has helped me gain 10+ yards off the tee and a handful of yards through the rest of the bag.  I too play from the recommended tee based on driving distance and I in no way overpower courses.  Gaining added distance is no easy task for most of us (particularly older players) and I for one don't want to give any up... NONE... NADA... as a solution for a problem that I'm not cause.

To have the USGA and R&A completely ignore the feedback from the vast majority of amateur players, who they are supposed to be representing, and force a change that, by their own account, targets less than 1% of golfers worldwide, is complete bull$^^!

It's been mentioned by several here that this is more a pissing match power struggle between the ruling bodies and the OEM and tours.  I am now believing that is more and more the case.  I am also surprised by the number of folks who are so willing to comply.  Without us there is no them... stand up and be heard... this is our damn game!

[ShimmyCocoBop]

All of us reading this topic will eventually make the decision to move up to a shorter set of tees.

Whether you will think that it's embarrassing, something to keep you competitive, still shooting the scores that make you feel good, or deciding to keep playing/a club membership, it will happen. 

Who cares about the game for the Top 500 players in the World?  At this point of my life, I play golf for me. 

 

Edited December 7, 2023 by ShimmyCocoBop

[Big C]

I agree I’m 66 I’m not ashame to move to gold tees I’m still a long hitter if u can hit every club in ur bag distance won’t b a problem that’s what ur range finder is for distance to the hole go play 

[ballhawk]

Are you ready for this?!!!!

Here's the real solution, but first we shall have to back track in history. Prior to the introduction of the solid ball (top flight), The only balls available were balata and even before that the feathery gutta perch and so on. We had wooden shafts and then metal shaft and finally graphite and ti shafts. Clubs lengths went from say a standard 7 iron was 35.5/36" and now a 7 is 37.5. Driver was 43/43.5 You get the idea. The ruling bodies let the genie out and it's since run wild. 

The driver length of today has been rolled back to 48" max. Now if they control that aspect, perhaps they should roll everything back to the pre explosion standards. Drivers max length 43.5 Irons length/lofts back to whatever the pre specs were. Balls now all have 50 compression rating. The overall results then become golf courses now longer need to be 7K+ yardage. The OEM's now can refocus their R&D to start the entire genie process over and if this forum is still around, we can do this dance over again in 20 some odd years............. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by ballhawk

[skraeling]

14 minutes ago, Cecil Williams said:

I agree I’m 66 I’m not ashame to move to gold tees I’m still a long hitter if u can hit every club in ur bag distance won’t b a problem that’s what ur range finder is for distance to the hole go play 

I already have more than 10yd variance between drives... literally anywhere from 220 - 270.

The other thing is being amateurs... as above we CANT hit every club very well every time.

Now I got just one more thing thats going to gut my distance so my poor hits got even poorer, and my great hits are now "eh ok".

Kinda awful.

 

[Hook DeLoft]

The last ball roll back resulted in an average loss of 20 yards for amateur golfers. That was in 1990 when the smaller British ball was deemed non-conforming by the R&A. It didn’t affect us in the USA but certainly affected ams in the UK and Australia. I imagine there were plenty of people who were upset, but, according to what I’ve read, play by amateurs did not decline. The only problem I have with the new roll back is it doesn’t go far enough for professionals and elite ams. 

Obviously, that is based on what I find boring about the modern game—driver wedge putt, go to the next hole. I recognize that there are plenty who love to see pros hit the ball a mile and that’s fine, just not my cuppa.  

If the average pro was suddenly hitting the ball 265 yards, we would be oo-ing and ah-ing at 300 yard drives. 
 

And if the new rule cost me 20 yards, I would still play as often as I do now and enjoy it just as much. 

[Kenny B]

47 minutes ago, fixyurdivot said:

Exactly.  If this tour distance issue was a cosmetic mole on our arm and the USGA was the surgeon, we'd be amputee's. 

Like you and many others, I have been putting in the time exercising for added strength and flexibility, and practicing.  This has helped me gain 10+ yards off the tee and a handful of yards through the rest of the bag.  I too play from the recommended tee based on driving distance and I in no way overpower courses.  Gaining added distance is no easy task for most of us (particularly older players) and I for one don't want to give any up... NONE... NADA... as a solution for a problem that I'm not cause.

To have the USGA and R&A completely ignore the feedback from the vast majority of amateur players, who they are supposed to be representing, and force a change that, by their own account, targets less than 1% of golfers worldwide, is complete bull$^^!

It's been mentioned by several here that this is more a pissing match power struggle between the ruling bodies and the OEM and tours.  I am now believing that is more and more the case.  I am also surprised by the number of folks who are so willing to comply.  Without us there is no them... stand up and be heard... this is our damn game!

Way to go Bill.  I have already moved up to the senior tees because I could no longer get to par 5's in three shots and some par 4's in two shots; it just wasn't much fun.  I have added some distance through exercises and swing improvements, but even a 5 yard distance loss will be devastating to my game.  One of our par 5's has an upslope in the fairway that I could not clear from the Blue tees which meant I was not going to get to the green with two fairway wood shots.  From the Senior tees I can get over that upslope and once over, it's downhill and I gain another 25 yards.  Now I can reach the green with a good fairway wood and an iron.  That 5 yard loss from the ball rollback will mean that I will be back in the same position I was hitting from the Blue tees with no chance for a GIR.  The course designer built in these upslopes on several holes and longer hitters are definitely favored.  

I'm hoping that I will still be playing golf in 2030 at age 83, and if I am I can guarantee you that I will never be playing a rolled-back ball.

[RickyBobby_PR]

10 minutes ago, Hook DeLoft said:

The last ball roll back resulted in an average loss of 20 yards for amateur golfers. That was in 1990 when the smaller British ball was deemed non-conforming by the R&A. It didn’t affect us in the USA but certainly affected ams in the UK and Australia. I imagine there were plenty of people who were upset, but, according to what I’ve read, play by amateurs did not decline. The only problem I have with the new roll back is it doesn’t go far enough for professionals and elite ams. 

Obviously, that is based on what I find boring about the modern game—driver wedge putt, go to the next hole. I recognize that there are plenty who love to see pros hit the ball a mile and that’s fine, just not my cuppa.  

If the average pro was suddenly hitting the ball 265 yards, we would be oo-ing and ah-ing at 300 yard drives. 
 

And if the new rule cost me 20 yards, I would still play as often as I do now and enjoy it just as much. 

Except that the bolded part isn’t true. You see what tv shows you for certain shots. Go to an event and see how many aren’t hitting wedge. Also with strokes gained data out there now pros and any am looking to play better is going to be looking to get closer to the hole regardless. People oh and ah at good shots regardless of distance. It’s why the pga tour setup is fast and firm fairways. It’s what sells.

nobody wants to watch 265 yard drives from 99% of pros. I can go play golf and watch regular hacks hit that or shorter.

Modern ball play smaller heads still equals 300+ yard drives. 
 

Golf isn’t going back that far. Pga tour will break off from the ruling bodies if that ever was proposed 

[RickyBobby_PR]

47 minutes ago, ballhawk said:

Drivers max length 43.5 Irons length/lofts back to whatever the pre specs were.

Most pros play this already and are hitting are hitting then all too far. Even if you limit loft pros will optimize flight to get the ball higher with less spin to get the distance.

[MattWillGolf]

As more details emerge and the debate continues, I’m leaning towards bifurcation as the practical solution for the game. I understand the manufacturers are against it, which is a big reason why the players are against it. I listened the Fire Pit Collective podcast and Matt Ginella raised a point that resonated with me. The ruling bodies are reacting to such a small subset of golf in an effort to restrict those who are paid to play golf (minority of golfers) will penalize those who pay to play golf (majority of golfers). While I think this change will have little to no effect on my game there are some who will be impacted unfairly. A suggestion that was made during the podcast that I liked was in the Majors at least use a restricted ball as specified my the Majors. In baseball and football for example, the league provides the ball. (Well, ok maybe Tom Brady was the exception ) St. Andrews, Augusta National and many of the classic venues for Majors are being neutered by the distance gains. Bifurcation exists in baseball with the change from aluminum to wooden bats. Rory made an excellent point that the equipment he plays is already different than what we play.

[ballhawk]

32 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Most pros play this already and are hitting are hitting then all too far. Even if you limit loft pros will optimize flight to get the ball higher with less spin to get the distance.

Every informational review that I have been able to see has suggested that the actual shaft length could be/is at 43/43.5, when the addition of the shaft adapter is included, the overall total length of the driver from ground to top of grip becomes 44.5-45. 

[Hook DeLoft]

53 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Except that the bolded part isn’t true. You see what tv shows you for certain shots. Go to an event and see how many aren’t hitting wedge. Also with strokes gained data out there now pros and any am looking to play better is going to be looking to get closer to the hole regardless. People oh and ah at good shots regardless of distance. It’s why the pga tour setup is fast and firm fairways. It’s what sells.

nobody wants to watch 265 yard drives from 99% of pros. I can go play golf and watch regular hacks hit that or shorter.

Modern ball play smaller heads still equals 300+ yard drives. 
 

Golf isn’t going back that far. Pga tour will break off from the ruling bodies if that ever was proposed 

The bolded part is hyperbole.  But based on reality.  I believe the percentage of second shots hit with short irons is much higher than 40 or 50 years ago.  And no, I don't have numbers to back that up.  As I pointed out in the post you quoted, those are MY opinions and mine alone.  We obviously disagree and that is fine.

[Shrek74]

Admittedly, I haven't read all 64 pages of this thread. But I'm just going to add my thoughts on the distance thing and leave it at that.

There are 3 things that have contributed to the distances we see today compared to the turn of the millennium, in my opinion - Healthier Golfers, Course Set Up, and Technology.

The first one is pretty easy. Golfers today are far more fit and healthier than they were even 10 years ago. There are so many trainers that travel with the tour and there are golfers who have their own on top of that. There's even a truck that travels with the tour that has a full gym in it that many of the guys use. Nutritionist, trainers, massage therapists, and all of that are available and most golfers utilize more than one of these to help keep their bodies healthier, stronger, and more flexible than ever before.

The course set up (grass in particular) is one that I'm sure some will argue with. But if you actually go to an event, it's hard to really argue with it. The fairways are so tightly cut, it's like hitting onto and off of a mat. The ball rolls forever on them, adding a ton of distance to a tee shot. I recall some events this past year where they'd show rollout of some 50 yards at times. That's just stupid. The rough is a joke outside of the US Open and The Open. The first cut is what most of us play on the fairways at our local courses. The rough is cut/kept so low that the pros don't get punished for hitting into it hardly at all. That's why the fairways hit number hasn't gone up, but down over the years. You get some pros that have great FW Hit stats, but those are most likely ones that aren't the longer hitters and really need to be more accurate than guys like Rory or Rahm who blast it out there and don't really care if they land in the rough. There are reports out there about course set up and grass height that are fascinating and really would have the affect the PGA/USGA/R&A want, with so much less impact on the game.

Technology has several different affects on the game these days - launch monitors, on-course stats, statistical analysis, speed training, among others. We see every golfer on the range with one and sometimes 2 different launch monitors. They know exactly what their swing is doing with each and every club. They also know what that swing does to the ball and how any small tweak in the swing affects the flight and distance. They are dialed in so completely, they get the absolute most out of their swing and gear. Statistical analysis has really skyrocketed so much, that we as am's even have access to it with Arccos and Shot Scope to name the two largest options. Pros have their own data from the tour and from outside sources. With Trackman and Shotlink on course mixed with the data they have from their launch monitors on the range and other available statistics services, they can analyze every shot on any course to plan the absolute best way to play each and every hole. Speed training relates to the health comments above, but a ton of technology and analysis has been put into designing the systems to be the most effective and beneficial as possible. PhD's galore along with aerospace and mechanical engineers are cranking out speed training systems so effective and efficient, no time or effort is wasted allowing the pros to continue utilizing their time for other things to help make them better. Finally, golf equipment technology has come so far so fast that it can even sure slices that were thought to be unfixable. AI super computers are designing clubs to the most forgiving and longest in history. They can take the design right up the limit without breaking it thus getting the absolute most out of their designs. Golf balls are no exception. Dimple patterns, layer thickness, layer materials, layer compression, etc are all on the cutting edge of technology, again going right up to the limit allowed. Not sure anyone really saw all this technology coming, but it's here and it's helping everyone. Not just the pros.

The USGA and R&A have no clue what's happening with 99% of the golfers they exist to support. They only see what the pros are doing and making adjustments for the 1% and applying it to the rest of us. Like the PGA, there's a huge lack of leadership happening in all golf governing organizations. Sadly, we're the ones who suffer for it.

That's my $0.02.

[FrogginBullfish]

6 minutes ago, Hook DeLoft said:

The bolded part is hyperbole.  But based on reality.  I believe the percentage of second shots hit with short irons is much higher than 40 or 50 years ago.  And no, I don't have numbers to back that up.  As I pointed out in the post you quoted, those are MY opinions and mine alone.  We obviously disagree and that is fine.

Not looking to start anything, but something to consider is the changes in loft of clubs from 40 or 50 years ago. 40-50 years ago a 5 iron had the same loft as a 7 iron does today. So it's a hard apples to apples comparison to make.

[MGoBlue100]

15 hours ago, LICC said:

“The way it works, especially if you make the change through aerodynamics [of the ball], it goes actually to the square of the velocity,” John Spitzer, the USGA’s managing director of equipment standards, told GOLF.com.

“I’m from the USGA and I’m here to help you…”

I’d sooner believe what I read on line than what those people tell me. 

[MGoBlue100]

7 hours 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?

They’re only “in power” b/c we allow them to be. Why do they get to be the sole arbiter of what’s in the best interest of the game? Because THEY say so? Uh-uh. That’s a “No” from me dawg…

[Stuka44]

31 minutes ago, Shrek74 said:

Admittedly, I haven't read all 64 pages of this thread. But I'm just going to add my thoughts on the distance thing and leave it at that

100 % correct, and the ball is in my opinion the least important thing to change of all of the items you listed.

[DaveP043]

26 minutes ago, MGoBlue100 said:

They’re only “in power” b/c we allow them to be. Why do they get to be the sole arbiter of what’s in the best interest of the game? Because THEY say so? Uh-uh. That’s a “No” from me dawg…

I'm not aware that anyone else has volunteered for the job.  

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, MattWillGolf said:

As more details emerge and the debate continues, I’m leaning towards bifurcation as the practical solution for the game. I understand the manufacturers are against it, which is a big reason why the players are against it. I listened the Fire Pit Collective podcast and Matt Ginella raised a point that resonated with me. The ruling bodies are reacting to such a small subset of golf in an effort to restrict those who are paid to play golf (minority of golfers) will penalize those who pay to play golf (majority of golfers). While I think this change will have little to no effect on my game there are some who will be impacted unfairly. A suggestion that was made during the podcast that I liked was in the Majors at least use a restricted ball as specified my the Majors. In baseball and football for example, the league provides the ball. (Well, ok maybe Tom Brady was the exception ) St. Andrews, Augusta National and many of the classic venues for Majors are being neutered by the distance gains. Bifurcation exists in baseball with the change from aluminum to wooden bats. Rory made an excellent point that the equipment he plays is already different than what we play.

Unfortunately it’s hard to say what the impact will be. Even the USGA rep said in an interview the testing shows a 4% reduction for a 221 yard drive that only went 210 and he said yeah it’s not than tne 3-4 yards but it’s really only 3-4 yards. We haven’t seen anything about the impact on iron and wedge play for all golfers.

Playwrs threatened to not play the U.S. Open if they put a different ball in play so that suggestion won’t work either. 
 

Those courses aren’t being neutered by distance. That is just rhetoric from people who are anti low scores. The USGA picked St Andrews for the Walker Cup this year. Also like any links course it’s defense is the weather. Nobody complains it plays too hard when the weather is bad.
 

The equipment that Rory and any other pro plays isn’t different from what we play. All equipment has to meet the same specs that retail equipment does. If it doesn’t it can’t be put in play for an official event. 

49 minutes ago, Shrek74 said:

Admittedly, I haven't read all 64 pages of this thread. But I'm just going to add my thoughts on the distance thing and leave it at that.

There are 3 things that have contributed to the distances we see today compared to the turn of the millennium, in my opinion - Healthier Golfers, Course Set Up, and Technology.

The first one is pretty easy. Golfers today are far more fit and healthier than they were even 10 years ago. There are so many trainers that travel with the tour and there are golfers who have their own on top of that. There's even a truck that travels with the tour that has a full gym in it that many of the guys use. Nutritionist, trainers, massage therapists, and all of that are available and most golfers utilize more than one of these to help keep their bodies healthier, stronger, and more flexible than ever before.

The course set up (grass in particular) is one that I'm sure some will argue with. But if you actually go to an event, it's hard to really argue with it. The fairways are so tightly cut, it's like hitting onto and off of a mat. The ball rolls forever on them, adding a ton of distance to a tee shot. I recall some events this past year where they'd show rollout of some 50 yards at times. That's just stupid. The rough is a joke outside of the US Open and The Open. The first cut is what most of us play on the fairways at our local courses. The rough is cut/kept so low that the pros don't get punished for hitting into it hardly at all. That's why the fairways hit number hasn't gone up, but down over the years. You get some pros that have great FW Hit stats, but those are most likely ones that aren't the longer hitters and really need to be more accurate than guys like Rory or Rahm who blast it out there and don't really care if they land in the rough. There are reports out there about course set up and grass height that are fascinating and really would have the affect the PGA/USGA/R&A want, with so much less impact on the game.

Technology has several different affects on the game these days - launch monitors, on-course stats, statistical analysis, speed training, among others. We see every golfer on the range with one and sometimes 2 different launch monitors. They know exactly what their swing is doing with each and every club. They also know what that swing does to the ball and how any small tweak in the swing affects the flight and distance. They are dialed in so completely, they get the absolute most out of their swing and gear. Statistical analysis has really skyrocketed so much, that we as am's even have access to it with Arccos and Shot Scope to name the two largest options. Pros have their own data from the tour and from outside sources. With Trackman and Shotlink on course mixed with the data they have from their launch monitors on the range and other available statistics services, they can analyze every shot on any course to plan the absolute best way to play each and every hole. Speed training relates to the health comments above, but a ton of technology and analysis has been put into designing the systems to be the most effective and beneficial as possible. PhD's galore along with aerospace and mechanical engineers are cranking out speed training systems so effective and efficient, no time or effort is wasted allowing the pros to continue utilizing their time for other things to help make them better. Finally, golf equipment technology has come so far so fast that it can even sure slices that were thought to be unfixable. AI super computers are designing clubs to the most forgiving and longest in history. They can take the design right up the limit without breaking it thus getting the absolute most out of their designs. Golf balls are no exception. Dimple patterns, layer thickness, layer materials, layer compression, etc are all on the cutting edge of technology, again going right up to the limit allowed. Not sure anyone really saw all this technology coming, but it's here and it's helping everyone. Not just the pros.

The USGA and R&A have no clue what's happening with 99% of the golfers they exist to support. They only see what the pros are doing and making adjustments for the 1% and applying it to the rest of us. Like the PGA, there's a huge lack of leadership happening in all golf governing organizations. Sadly, we're the ones who suffer for it.

That's my $0.02.

Nailed it. They should be focused on the amateur game and growing the game and not worry about how the PGA tour, DP world Tour, LPGA or LET setup their courses on a weekly basis. 

39 minutes ago, MGoBlue100 said:

S“I’m from the USGA and I’m here to help you…”

I’d sooner believe what I read on line than what those people tell me. 

Funny I was just thinking of this last night reading this thread and the one on wrx

26 minutes ago, MGoBlue100 said:

They’re only “in power” b/c we allow them to be. Why do they get to be the sole arbiter of what’s in the best interest of the game? Because THEY say so? Uh-uh. That’s a “No” from me dawg…

Exactly. They claim to be for the amateur and to take care of the game yet everything they do is controlled by them and how they want it to be. No elections, ignore input from experts not on their board/committees.

Waiting for another org to step up and do it the right way 

[chisag]

15 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

I'm not aware that anyone else has volunteered for the job.  

 

... My personal favorite comment on this polarizing subject is from my 65 yr old playing pard that had chemo/radiation on his throat for inoperable cancer this past June (Thankfully cancer free now ) who also bought all new Callaway clubs last Spring including Driver, 5 wood, 3/4 hybrids, 5-SW Rogue Max OS irons and his game has improved pretty radically after ditching his knock off clone clubs when asked his opinion on the USGA Ball Rollback yesterday "I don't even know what that is."