USGA Distance Rollback and the Future of Golf?

[8602081]

Why don't they reduce the COR on the drivers to shorten the drive..

 

What Is Coefficient of Restitution (COR) in Golf Clubs?

 

"To give a frame of reference for performance, with a driver the difference in carry distance between a head with a COR of 0.820 and another head with a COR of 0.830 would be 4.2 yards for a swing speed of 100 mph. It is true that as swing speed increases, the distance difference is greater. And likewise, as swing speed decreases the distance difference for each increment of the COR measurement is less. This is one of the reasons why the USGA rule which limits the COR of a clubhead has the effect of penalizing the slower swing speed golfer much more than the high swing speed player."

[Soloman1]

Why make it so complicated? A higher minimum spin ball is easy. Spinny ball with Tour size head driver (maybe 300 cc) and a high minimum dead weight.

 

For the 2,690,599th time, no aluminum bats in MLB. What's the big deal?

[CasualLie]

12 hours ago, Golf10 said:

 

You're okay with them hitting wedge into every par 4 and some par 5s?  

 

Not at all, it makes for some seriously boring golf.  I was being facetious about my idea for those thinking if you take away the long irons from the game, then it is no longer a skill game.  So bring it back with a bunch of par 3s.  But clearly, this is not the solution because that would be boring to watch too.  If a tour player has a wedge in hand, I am expecting a lot of birdies.  A lot will be made which makes it pretty common...and therefore boring.

 

I am not going to say BDC has killed golf because of what he did to Winged Foot.  He kind of got lucky the tee shots didn't find more trouble, but he did hit great short shots.  Rory out drove him, how did he play?   The USGA has had it wrong in course setup to combat distance advantage for so long.  Just like Tiger proofing a course by making it longer was a dumb idea as well.

 

I don't know the answer to this question, but what would a tour pro prefer 8 iron from the fairway, or PW from deep rough?  Or a better question, what would open the course up to more of the field?  Make the course more accessible for the "shorter" (not short) players, and extremely penal the closer you get to the hole.  Now you have brought back mid iron skill to the game to at least have a chance and longer hitters still have an advantage if they keep it straight.

 

The BDC freak experiments are fun to watch 1-2 times, but am I going to regularly watch a tournament all about who gets the best bounce or lie after hitting all out 350-375?  Nope.

 

 

[Golf10]

23 minutes ago, CasualLie said:

 

Not at all, it makes for some seriously boring golf.  I was being facetious about my idea for those thinking if you take away the long irons from the game, then it is no longer a skill game.  So bring it back with a bunch of par 3s.  But clearly, this is not the solution because that would be boring to watch too.  If a tour player has a wedge in hand, I am expecting a lot of birdies.  A lot will be made which makes it pretty common...and therefore boring.

 

I am not going to say BDC has killed golf because of what he did to Winged Foot.  He kind of got lucky the tee shots didn't find more trouble, but he did hit great short shots.  Rory out drove him, how did he play?   The USGA has had it wrong in course setup to combat distance advantage for so long.  Just like Tiger proofing a course by making it longer was a dumb idea as well.

 

I don't know the answer to this question, but what would a tour pro prefer 8 iron from the fairway, or PW from deep rough?  Or a better question, what would open the course up to more of the field?  Make the course more accessible for the "shorter" (not short) players, and extremely penal the closer you get to the hole.  Now you have brought back mid iron skill to the game to at least have a chance and longer hitters still have an advantage if they keep it straight.

 

The BDC freak experiments are fun to watch 1-2 times, but am I going to regularly watch a tournament all about who gets the best bounce or lie after hitting all out 350-375?  Nope.

 

 

 

That's really well put.  Like you, I'd like to return skill to the game.  I'd also like to roll back the ball.  It's great when Merion can host an Open and not be a joke.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Golf10

[BirdieBob]

I have seen the graphs of the distance changes for Tour players in Tourneys.  Some increase but not alarming; amateur distance basically unchanged.

Q.  How much of that increase for tour is equipment and how much is firmer fairways?

Soften the fairways and then see what the distance changes show.

[trilerian]

1 minute ago, BirdieBob said:

I have seen the graphs of the distance changes for Tour players in Tourneys.  Some increase but not alarming; amateur distance basically unchanged.

Q.  How much of that increase for tour is equipment and how much is firmer fairways?

Soften the fairways and then see what the distance changes show.

Problem is when you soften the fairways it is point and shoot.  No rolling off the fairway anymore into the thick rough.  How many shots ended up in the rough because the fairways rolled so well at WF? Well, just being devil's advocate with that.

 

The thing I find comical in all this, it is a skill to hit the long ball.  Some posters are claiming that the driver is the easiest club to hit.  I disagree, I struggled with the driver for years.  Faults would show up with my driver that didn't show with the shorter clubs.  Just this season I have started to work some things out with the driver and found some distance and accuracy.  

 

But in the end I don't think the golf industry would survive a ball rollback for everyone.  Too much new inventory out there.  Think about the used market for golf balls too.  Courses will all have to be re rated and new tees added.  

 

Drama, drama, drama...

 

 

[mahonie]

3 hours ago, PJE said:

Good point, also I don't think anything is wrong with it. But, I think there is an aversion to it. People really seemed to be shocked with DeChambeau's approach or rather ability to muscle out of the rough with short irons. I was wondering if that would be the straw that breaks the camel's back. 

 

No...that will be when he annihilates Augusta in a few weeks...you heard it here first ?

[BirdieBob]

14 minutes ago, trilerian said:

Problem is when you soften the fairways it is point and shoot.  No rolling off the fairway anymore into the thick rough.  How many shots ended up in the rough because the fairways rolled so well at WF? Well, just being devil's advocate with that.

 

The thing I find comical in all this, it is a skill to hit the long ball.  Some posters are claiming that the driver is the easiest club to hit.  I disagree, I struggled with the driver for years.  Faults would show up with my driver that didn't show with the shorter clubs.  Just this season I have started to work some things out with the driver and found some distance and accuracy.  

 

But in the end I don't think the golf industry would survive a ball rollback for everyone.  Too much new inventory out there.  Think about the used market for golf balls too.  Courses will all have to be re rated and new tees added.  

 

Drama, drama, drama...

 

 

 

Correct, with softer fairways the ball will likely stay in the fairway more often.  That could reduce scores...oh my.

But this is not about score...USGA is looking at pure distance with the driver.

Softer fairways will reduce distance with the driver and that is objective achieved.

So simple!

[CasualLie]

1 hour ago, BirdieBob said:

I have seen the graphs of the distance changes for Tour players in Tourneys.  Some increase but not alarming; amateur distance basically unchanged.

Q.  How much of that increase for tour is equipment and how much is firmer fairways?

Soften the fairways and then see what the distance changes show.

 

This is one of those times where the data is not really telling the story.  Maybe total driving distance does not seem like it is increasing at an alarming rate, but the carry distance is increasing.  BDC was bombing it into rough, no roll.  And so was Wolff, and others.

 

And this is the just the beginning of the trend.  There will be others who are coming up the ranks from college and mini tours who grew up under the philosophy of hit it as hard as you can.  Learn swing speed first then later you can learn accuracy.  

 

I don't agree with the above it takes skill to hit the ball long; at least not as much as an iron.  Either you bulk up or from an early age you learned to swing out of your shoes (Justin Thomas).  Some skill yes, but it's not that hard.  There are long hitters all over the place, most just can't pitch/putt.

 

To top it all off, technology has gotten to the point that irons are easier to hit.  What fool growing up would play blades?   You only need to master three clubs - Driver / wedge / putter.  You can hit garbage irons all the time and your wedge will save you.  When you mastered those three clubs, then you can learn irons so your pars become birdies.

[chippa13]

About every 10-15 years we get some other extra long hitter and everyone thinks the sky is falling.

[badboggs]

I totally agree with the MLB comparison.

[PJE]

3 hours ago, mahonie said:

 

No...that will be when he annihilates Augusta in a few weeks...you heard it here first ?

Yes, that will be interesting. He putted pretty well at Winged Foot and he was hitting greens in the right spots with the approach shots.  Prior to that he was driving it a mile but his approach shots frequently flew over greens or ended up in the wrong places.

November is away off but if he stays hot, stand by. 

[mahonie]

7 minutes ago, PJE said:

Yes, that will be interesting. He putted pretty well at Winged Foot and he was hitting greens in the right spots with the approach shots.  Prior to that he was driving it a mile but his approach shots frequently flew over greens or ended up in the wrong places.

November is away off but if he stays hot, stand by. 

 

I honestly didn’t think he had a chance at Winged Foot but always thought that Augusta would be ideal for him. Not too long to wait and see.

[CasualLie]

1 hour ago, chippa13 said:

About every 10-15 years we get some other extra long hitter and everyone thinks the sky is falling.

 

What?  More like after 15 years of stability, half the tour can bomb it.

 

2000 - 1 player over 300yd avg and total pgatour 272 avg

2005 -  26 players, big jump...and total pgatour 288 avg 

2010 - back down to 12 players, hmmm...why is that? total pgatour avg stays flat at 287

2015 - 26 players again over 300, but tour average does not go up much to 289

2020 -big leap to 74 players over 300 avg and tour average up to 297

 

It is not that the sky is falling, far from it, it's just golf, but it is a boring brand of golf.

[farmer]

To Casuals stats, about 20 yards over 20 years is not a quantum leap.  About 8 yards over 5 years coincides with the time that fitting and how to maximize equipment really got going.  There were also more guys working out, working at being stronger and maximizing their potential.  The assertion that the RB's are going to mandate a 20% rollback is absurd.  That would have made WF tip out at about 6000 yds, shorter than original length.  Does anyone, even in golfnerd forum world, really want to smash a drive that goes 160 yards?  There has been a Covid driven spike in play, and whatever the RB's choose to do, they must not damage the appeal to the consumer.  If only 20% of the new or re-invigorated golfers stay, that will be a huge boost to what has been a struggling industry.  

[CMCSGolf]

9 hours ago, trilerian said:

Problem is when you soften the fairways it is point and shoot.  No rolling off the fairway anymore into the thick rough.  How many shots ended up in the rough because the fairways rolled so well at WF? Well, just being devil's advocate with that.

 

The thing I find comical in all this, it is a skill to hit the long ball.  Some posters are claiming that the driver is the easiest club to hit.  I disagree, I struggled with the driver for years.  Faults would show up with my driver that didn't show with the shorter clubs.  Just this season I have started to work some things out with the driver and found some distance and accuracy.  

 

But in the end I don't think the golf industry would survive a ball rollback for everyone.  Too much new inventory out there.  Think about the used market for golf balls too.  Courses will all have to be re rated and new tees added.  

 

Drama, drama, drama...

 

 

The golf industry already survived a rollback.  Before the 1980s, the US played a big ball and the rest of the world played a small ball that went further.  The british open was played with the small ball and all the US tour players figured it out in a week when they went over there.  In the early 80s, the rest of the world switched from the longer small ball to the shorter big ball.  Everyone in the UK, Australia, Japan, etc lost 20 yards over night.  There is no evidence that people quit the game.  Golfers would adjust in a few weeks and it wouldn't be a massive deal. 

 

Distance is a skill, but it's relative.  I have a hard time seeing how the OEMS would be hurt financially because people would still need balls and marketing would still try to sell better clubs.  Bryson would still be incredibly long by comparison, but he might have to hit 8 iron rather than wedge into a few par 4s.

[trilerian]

8 hours ago, CMCSGolf said:

The golf industry already survived a rollback.  Before the 1980s, the US played a big ball and the rest of the world played a small ball that went further.  The british open was played with the small ball and all the US tour players figured it out in a week when they went over there.  In the early 80s, the rest of the world switched from the longer small ball to the shorter big ball.  Everyone in the UK, Australia, Japan, etc lost 20 yards over night.  There is no evidence that people quit the game.  Golfers would adjust in a few weeks and it wouldn't be a massive deal. 

 

Distance is a skill, but it's relative.  I have a hard time seeing how the OEMS would be hurt financially because people would still need balls and marketing would still try to sell better clubs.  Bryson would still be incredibly long by comparison, but he might have to hit 8 iron rather than wedge into a few par 4s.

A lot more golfers now.  And we are talking a 40 yd distance loss for someone who hits it 200 yds off the tee with a 20% rollback.  All courses will have to be re rated and a lot of them will need new tee boxes.  The following is taken from mgagolf.org

 

"All courses rated under the USGA Course Rating System are rated using the same parameters that have been established by the USGA. A male scratch player is defined by the USGA as an amateur golfer who has reached the stroke play portion of the U.S. Amateur Championship. On average, he hits his tee shot 225 yards in the air with 25 yards of roll. His second shot travels 200 yards in the air with 20 yards of roll. The male bogey golfer is defined as having a USGA handicap index of 17.5 - 22.4. By definition, he can hit his tee shot 180 yards in the air with 20 yards of roll. His second shot travels 150 yards in the air plus 20 yards of roll for a total distance of 170 yards. Therefore, the bogey golfer can reach a 370 yard hole in 2 shots and a scratch golfer can reach a 470 yard hole in 2 shots."

 

Your scratch golfer can get to a max of 470 yds with 2 shots now, take 20% away and that turns into 376 yds, your average bogey golfer will only be able to reach 300 yds with the reduction.  

 

Yeah, no thanks.  

[PhilsFanDrew]

14 hours ago, CasualLie said:

 

What?  More like after 15 years of stability, half the tour can bomb it.

 

2000 - 1 player over 300yd avg and total pgatour 272 avg

2005 -  26 players, big jump...and total pgatour 288 avg 

2010 - back down to 12 players, hmmm...why is that? total pgatour avg stays flat at 287

2015 - 26 players again over 300, but tour average does not go up much to 289

2020 -big leap to 74 players over 300 avg and tour average up to 297

 

It is not that the sky is falling, far from it, it's just golf, but it is a boring brand of golf.

But how much different is the equipment from 2015-2020?  The difference is not the equipment but the focus on data.  Prior to 2015 the thought process among pros and amateurs was that being 150 out in the fairway is better than being 100 out in the rough.  Data has proven in most cases that is not true for tour players and amateurs alike.  Tour pros are hitting driver more because the data says they should.  Tour pros are also changing their fitness regimen to focus on flexibility, function, AND strength.  The athleticism on the PGA Tour has grown and is much more of a logical reason for the leap in driving distance.  

[jvincent]

39 minutes ago, trilerian said:

A lot more golfers now.  And we are talking a 40 yd distance loss for someone who hits it 200 yds off the tee with a 20% rollback.  All courses will have to be re rated and a lot of them will need new tee boxes.  The following is taken from mgagolf.org

 

.....

 

Your scratch golfer can get to a max of 470 yds with 2 shots now, take 20% away and that turns into 376 yds, your average bogey golfer will only be able to reach 300 yds with the reduction.  

 

 

The problem with their analysis is that drag is a function of speed. A 20% reduction of distance for the tour guys with 200 mph initial ball speed will NOT result in a 20% reduction for your average golfer with 140 mph (generous) ball speed. 

[davep043]

1 hour ago, trilerian said:

A lot more golfers now.  And we are talking a 40 yd distance loss for someone who hits it 200 yds off the tee with a 20% rollback.  All courses will have to be re rated and a lot of them will need new tee boxes.  

Let's be clear, the OP was guessing that distance will be reduced, and guessing that the reduction will be 20%, based on no new information from the USGA, based only on his interpretation of some of Mr. Davis' remarks about his impending retirement.  Mr. Davis' remarks are completely unchanged from any remarks he's previously made.  The USGA/R&A report  indicates that no changes in across-the-board distance were being contemplated, contradictory to Mr. Davis' stated (personal) preferences in the months and years leading up to the report.

[CMCSGolf]

3 hours ago, trilerian said:

A lot more golfers now.  And we are talking a 40 yd distance loss for someone who hits it 200 yds off the tee with a 20% rollback.  All courses will have to be re rated and a lot of them will need new tee boxes.  The following is taken from mgagolf.org

 

"All courses rated under the USGA Course Rating System are rated using the same parameters that have been established by the USGA. A male scratch player is defined by the USGA as an amateur golfer who has reached the stroke play portion of the U.S. Amateur Championship. On average, he hits his tee shot 225 yards in the air with 25 yards of roll. His second shot travels 200 yards in the air with 20 yards of roll. The male bogey golfer is defined as having a USGA handicap index of 17.5 - 22.4. By definition, he can hit his tee shot 180 yards in the air with 20 yards of roll. His second shot travels 150 yards in the air plus 20 yards of roll for a total distance of 170 yards. Therefore, the bogey golfer can reach a 370 yard hole in 2 shots and a scratch golfer can reach a 470 yard hole in 2 shots."

 

Your scratch golfer can get to a max of 470 yds with 2 shots now, take 20% away and that turns into 376 yds, your average bogey golfer will only be able to reach 300 yds with the reduction.  

 

Yeah, no thanks.  

This is a straw man.  No one is seriously considering taking 40 yards off a 25 handicaper's drive.  Those players have gained very little with the new ball and likely wouldn't lose much with a new ball.  It's been mentioned in this thread that it is possible to design a ball with diminishing returns that punishes 120 mph swings more than 90 mph swings.  That would be the ideal solution in my opinion.  You're arguing against something no one is advocating for.  If you're an average player who hits a 220 driver and a 150 7 iron, losing at most 1 club of distance would be a reasonable outcome for me.  

[trilerian]

29 minutes ago, CMCSGolf said:

This is a straw man.  No one is seriously considering taking 40 yards off a 25 handicaper's drive.  Those players have gained very little with the new ball and likely wouldn't lose much with a new ball.  It's been mentioned in this thread that it is possible to design a ball with diminishing returns that punishes 120 mph swings more than 90 mph swings.  That would be the ideal solution in my opinion.  You're arguing against something no one is advocating for.  If you're an average player who hits a 220 driver and a 150 7 iron, losing at most 1 club of distance would be a reasonable outcome for me.  

I really have nothing nice to say, so I will keep this short.

Any distance loss to the general golfing population is taking something they have away from them.  And I don't agree with takers.  The status quo is fine, no need for change.  Hopefully the USGA will stand by their assessment.  

[dlygrisse]

18 hours ago, CasualLie said:

 

What?  More like after 15 years of stability, half the tour can bomb it.

 

2000 - 1 player over 300yd avg and total pgatour 272 avg

2005 -  26 players, big jump...and total pgatour 288 avg 

2010 - back down to 12 players, hmmm...why is that? total pgatour avg stays flat at 287

2015 - 26 players again over 300, but tour average does not go up much to 289

2020 -big leap to 74 players over 300 avg and tour average up to 297

 

It is not that the sky is falling, far from it, it's just golf, but it is a boring brand of golf.

Go back another 10 to 20 years when everyone was playing persimmon and steel shafts/ balata. I think you will find another 20 -30 yards. In 2000 we were early stage titanium, the heads weren’t 460cc 

yet, but they were approaching 400 cc. and most everyone had graphite. Tiger was playing a solid core ball, the Strata was on the market, the ProV was hitting the shelves. 

[The Pearl]

The USGA's angst with distance has nothing to do with distance.  It is about the money. It is always about the money.

 

 

[CasualLie]

Perhaps I should have highlighted the more telling stat.  It's not the 8 yards gained on average in 5 years.  Who cares?  It is the tripling (from 26 players to 74 players) in 5 years of number of players who average over 300.  Take the same number, 26, who averaged over 300 yards in 2015 and let's go to number 26 for 2020; it is 306 yards.  That is a 17 yard gain off average from 5 years ago.  Who wouldn't want that?  And I guarantee the number is going up for 2021 season.

 

74 players last year over 300 and growing.  It has gotten to the point if you are a 290 hitter, forget it, you cannot compete over the long haul.  Sure, you might get hot for a month, get a few top 5s, maybe even sneak in a win, but as time goes on it will just get tougher.

[Sean2]

I am guessing the distance gains amateurs have seen in the past decade or so, are not similar to the gains the professionals have seen. 

[Soloman1]

only low handicap ( <6 ) amateurs have gained distance on average. In the last 5 years, handicaps > 6 have lost driver distance.

 

Now, that could be because so many people quit the game and very few players start, thus the high handicap - less distance numbers.

Edited September 24, 2020 by Soloman1

[storm319]

1 hour ago, CMCSGolf said:

This is a straw man.  No one is seriously considering taking 40 yards off a 25 handicaper's drive.  Those players have gained very little with the new ball and likely wouldn't lose much with a new ball.  It's been mentioned in this thread that it is possible to design a ball with diminishing returns that punishes 120 mph swings more than 90 mph swings.  That would be the ideal solution in my opinion.  You're arguing against something no one is advocating for.  If you're an average player who hits a 220 driver and a 150 7 iron, losing at most 1 club of distance would be a reasonable outcome for me.  

 

It depends on how it is regulated.

 

Ball speed efficiency is fairly linear regardless of swing speed so this will not accomplish what you are suggesting (keep in mind that the USGA's initial ball velocity regulation dates back to the 1940's and has remained unchanged).

 

Spin/launch are dependent on the delivery of the club more than anything else and so any rollback focused on these could be potentially circumvented by changing how the club is delivered (basically just changes the optimal launch conditions). 

 

The only attribute that could substantial rollback at high speeds with little to no impact at low-moderate speeds would be aerodynamics. In the 1930's, the USGA has increased the minimum diameter (which the R&A refused to full adopt until 1990) and maximum mass both of which result in increased drag, however these could have a greater impact on lower speeds in certain conditions. Ultimately my guess is that we will see the USGA create a new overall distance standard regulation for the one ball or possibly a completely new local condition for use in elite events (essentially bifurcation) and we may see OEMs use less efficient dimple patterns to meet that regulation.

[PJE]

4 hours ago, The Pearl said:

The USGA's angst with distance has nothing to do with distance.  It is about the money. It is always about the money.

 

 

What do you mean?

[Golf10]

On 9/22/2020 at 7:32 PM, golfarb1 said:

According to the annual USGA distance report, average distance is around 220. Of course , average distance for lower handicappers is longer , around 245 for 0-5 handicappers.Looking at these stats it is obvious that most golfers are not bombing it and that only the better amateurs and pros have been have been able to maximize the advantages of technology .

Between increased costs and  5 hour rounds , golf’s future looks questionable .If the USGA decides to  add to these headwinds by lowering distance off of the tee for average golfer, it will be a death knell.

 

Long courses are the cause of slow play, not to mention the expense!