USGA and R&A announce proposal to limit golf ball performance for elite level competition

[Pnwpingi210]

8 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

I doubt there is a ball which meets the new rollback criteria that you would play. The balls that meet the criteria are very likely the super soft marshmallow balls which currently compromise distance and spin, but "feel" good.

I’m curious to find out some examples of this as well. 
 

the Bridgestone bxs is an example of a tour ball that spins off irons and wedges, but not off driver however I lose considerable distance off the tee due to over compression (roughly 7-8% in carry distance measured by track man)

[chisag]

11 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

I doubt there is a ball which meets the new rollback criteria that you would play. The balls that meet the criteria are very likely the super soft marshmallow balls which currently compromise distance and spin, but "feel" good.

 

 

... I am just guessing at numbers but that guess would be if every single forum golfer quit playing golf over the ball rollback, it would barely be a blip on the radar. Most of the Am's I am paired up with at my winter muni and summer semi private course either use whatever ball they find, what cheap ball was on sale and love super soft balls. I have turned my pards onto the Maxfli Tour X and two of them are now playing them. One 36yr old qualified for the AZ State Am next week and will be using the MF Tour X and the other plays to a 7 and switched from ProV1's. But 3 others are playing Kirkland Signatures, 2 are playing yellow Q Stars they found on sale splitting 10 dozen and 1 plays whatever he finds on the course. I have to believe they are much more indicative of the average US muni golfer than those of us that understand equipment and our ball choice can make a big difference. 

[Pnwpingi210]

13 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

 

... I am just guessing at numbers but that guess would be if every single forum golfer quit playing golf over the ball rollback, it would barely be a blip on the radar. Most of the Am's I am paired up with at my winter muni and summer semi private course either use whatever ball they find, what cheap ball was on sale and love super soft balls. I have turned my pards onto the Maxfli Tour X and two of them are now playing them. One 36yr old qualified for the AZ State Am next week and will be using the MF Tour X and the other plays to a 7 and switched from ProV1's. But 3 others are playing Kirkland Signatures, 2 are playing yellow Q Stars they found on sale splitting 10 dozen and 1 plays whatever he finds on the course. I have to believe they are much more indicative of the average US muni golfer than those of us that understand equipment and our ball choice can make a big difference. 

My regular 4some has: (all of us carry a ghin)

1 ksig player (private club member)

1 whatever he finds player (private club member)

1 plays srixon xv or diamond

1 prov1/tp5x player

 

 

[storm319]

1 hour ago, chisag said:

 

 

...  From the USGA "A significant portion of golf ball models that are currently in the market – and more than 30 percent of all golf ball models submitted for conformance across the game – are expected to remain conforming after these changes are applied". With respect to Henry Penny, the sky isn't falling. 

 

... I try to avoid being snarky as it just invites snarky in return, but you really should consider a cable news anchor position as you seem to be so fair and balanced. You constantly state as "fact" just your opinions nobody I know shares. In my circle of golfing friends, all are in favor of a Pro rollback or simply don't care one way or the other. Others circles of friends may be different and there is no way for me to know of course. As many of us have said, if the rollback happens it will come and go with business as usual. Sure a few may ignore the rules and play a non conforming ball and a select few may stock up on non conforming balls but I have to think most will do the same thing they have done with every other USGA rule change. Continue to play golf and use what is legal. Other than a handful of golf forum malcontents that are still furious and quit the game over the USGA Groove, a=Anchoring and Driver Length rules. Oh wait, none of them did. 

While I agree this rule notice is not to “sky is falling” levels, it will likely be more impactful than “business as usual”. 
 

The anchoring ban and driver length rollback are poor analogies as they both impacted a very small percentage of players and are easier to adopt equipment to conform (easy to cut down a shaft, not really possible to do anything physically to a golf ball to make it conform). The groove rollback’s lack of impact proves it was a pointless exercise and failed in its intent. Given the USGA’s equipment regulation track record, I think it is fair for people to be skeptical that this ball rollback will succeed.

[ThinkingPlus]

2 hours ago, chisag said:

 

 

... I am just guessing at numbers but that guess would be if every single forum golfer quit playing golf over the ball rollback, it would barely be a blip on the radar. Most of the Am's I am paired up with at my winter muni and summer semi private course either use whatever ball they find, what cheap ball was on sale and love super soft balls. I have turned my pards onto the Maxfli Tour X and two of them are now playing them. One 36yr old qualified for the AZ State Am next week and will be using the MF Tour X and the other plays to a 7 and switched from ProV1's. But 3 others are playing Kirkland Signatures, 2 are playing yellow Q Stars they found on sale splitting 10 dozen and 1 plays whatever he finds on the course. I have to believe they are much more indicative of the average US muni golfer than those of us that understand equipment and our ball choice can make a big difference. 

The MF Tour X is a very good ball. Pretty much maxes out distance and iron/wedge spin. I have used it and liked it. I don't currently play it because of performance consistency concerns (quality control). I have had those issues before with other balls. The guys playing Kirklands are just cheap. Those playing Q Stars are giving up performance at a lower price point pure and simple.

[ThinkingPlus]

3 hours ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

I’m curious to find out some examples of this as well. 
 

the Bridgestone bxs is an example of a tour ball that spins off irons and wedges, but not off driver however I lose considerable distance off the tee due to over compression (roughly 7-8% in carry distance measured by track man)

If it is a soft ball and you over compress, you are probably getting more driver spin than you need. It would be more interesting to compare ball speed with a Pro V1x.

[Pnwpingi210]

7 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

If it is a soft ball and you over compress, you are probably getting more driver spin than you need. It would be more interesting to compare ball speed with a Pro V1x.

You are correct, the bxs is a slower ball over the driver for me by a substantial amount.

 

spin is a wash on the driver compared to prov1x, the the v1x is longer off the tee due to being firmer and providing more ball speed.

 

 

[Archimedes65]

10 hours ago, chisag said:

 

 

...  From the USGA "A significant portion of golf ball models that are currently in the market – and more than 30 percent of all golf ball models submitted for conformance across the game – are expected to remain conforming after these changes are applied". With respect to Henry Penny, the sky isn't falling. 

 

... I try to avoid being snarky as it just invites snarky in return, but you really should consider a cable news anchor position as you seem to be so fair and balanced. You constantly state as "fact" just your opinions nobody I know shares. In my circle of golfing friends, all are in favor of a Pro rollback or simply don't care one way or the other. Others circles of friends may be different and there is no way for me to know of course. As many of us have said, if the rollback happens it will come and go with business as usual. Sure a few may ignore the rules and play a non conforming ball and a select few may stock up on non conforming balls but I have to think most will do the same thing they have done with every other USGA rule change. Continue to play golf and use what is legal. Other than a handful of golf forum malcontents that are still furious and quit the game over the USGA Groove, a=Anchoring and Driver Length rules. Oh wait, none of them did. 

 

What are you talking about?  None of the golf balls being played by the pros right now (and many of us) will be conforming after the roll back.  Not the current ProVs, TP5s, ChromeTour, TourBs, etc.  None.  You don’t know what you’re talking about.  If those balls were to remain conforming, there wouldn’t even be a debate.

 

And it’s great that you and your friends don’t care, but the rest of the golfing world does.  The pros don’t even want it, as most of them said in interviews when it was announced.  Even the PGA of America President said, based on his discussions with his club members, he expects most of them to stockpile years of balls during the year prior to the rollback.  He made this statement during the press conference at last month’s PGA Championship.

 

I’ve talked to a lot of golfers about this and I’ve yet to find a single person who is for the rollback, including this week while playing in a member-guest at a prominent old line country club that plays to only 6,600 yards from the tips.

 

Edited June 16 by Archimedes65

[Archimedes65]

13 hours ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

To the point of the earlier posters, what’s stopping those golfers from breaking the rules today?  There are likely many golfers who dislike many of the rules today (stoke and distance for white stake vs red stake, no relief from hitting out of fairway divot are just a couple I hear frequently) but still abide by them.  
 

 

This isn’t about the rules of the game, it’s about turning back the clock on the performance of a key piece of equipment that has the potential to materially impact the game of many amateurs.  I think there will be pushback and I think it’s stupid of golf to shoot itself in the foot like this just when the game is growing.  But like I said, to each his own.  I expect some people will comply and some will not.  I asked members of my foursome during a tournament I played in this week.  None were in favor of the new ball and about half said they intend to keep using the current ball.  I imagine people won’t like suddenly giving up 10 yards to their buddies who still play the old balls.

[fbjim]

with the caveat that i am mostly "team bifurcate", if we are talking hypotheticals, I do think the relatively unrestricted advancement, and increasing importance of technology [i]also[/i] has the potential to push people out of the game- and i think it does so at a deeper and more fundamental level than just a golf ball rollback

[bekgolf]

9 minutes ago, fbjim said:

with the caveat that i am mostly "team bifurcate", if we are talking hypotheticals, I do think the relatively unrestricted advancement, and increasing importance of technology [i]also[/i] has the potential to push people out of the game- and i think it does so at a deeper and more fundamental level than just a golf ball rollback

 

AFAIK there are already rules in place for just about everything used in golf save the apparel.  I think that's why the longest hitters haven't gotten any longer for 20 years.  Golfers do learn from each other and we see that in the average distance increasing in the pro ranks but they aren't hitting it any farther than the longest of years past. 

 

I can recall Jack calling up the reserves and poking it out over 350 at will when he needed to do it.  There wasn't a problem when he did it why is it a problem now? 

 

Edit: you didn't say that, I quoted your post but was responding to more than one post.  My apologies for lumping your post in and putting words in your mouth.

Edited June 16 by bekgolf

[fbjim]

2 minutes ago, bekgolf said:

 

AFAIK there are already rules in place for just about everything used in golf save the apparel.  I think that's why the longest hitters haven't gotten any longer for 20 years.  Golfers do learn from each other and we see that in the average distance increasing in the pro ranks but they aren't hitting it any farther than the longest of years past. 

 

I can recall Jack calling up the reserves and poking it out over 350 at will when he needed to do it.  There wasn't a problem when he did it why is it a problem now? 

 

Edit: you didn't say that, I quoted your post but was responding to more than one post.  My apologies for lumping your post in and putting words in your mouth.

This is talking hypotheticals again, but the dangers for the "grow the game" pov are mostly due to pricing. dangers being, say, a) golf tech becomes so important that using non-ideal equipment, even at the amateur competitive level, becomes an unacceptable handicap, or b) golf technology advances so quickly that expensive golf equipment loses its value excessively quickly. 

 

neither of these things make the game more appealing for newer players, even ones who don't plan on seriously competing. and i think that's something that can discourage participation on a deeper level than a simple rollback

[GoGoErky]

6 hours ago, fbjim said:

This is talking hypotheticals again, but the dangers for the "grow the game" pov are mostly due to pricing. dangers being, say, a) golf tech becomes so important that using non-ideal equipment, even at the amateur competitive level, becomes an unacceptable handicap, or b) golf technology advances so quickly that expensive golf equipment loses its value excessively quickly. 

 

neither of these things make the game more appealing for newer players, even ones who don't plan on seriously competing. and i think that's something that can discourage participation on a deeper level than a simple rollback

Why deal in hypotheticals when we know for a fact that are criteria each piece of equipment has to meet to be considered conforming as well as how it’s used.

 

With all the technology that gets claimed in each release of clubs, balls, shafts as was mentioned in the post you’re quoting the leaders haven’t gotten longer so we know those restriction work despite advances in technology. 
 

and if there as some magical breakthrough in technology that increased distance or made the game

easier and didn’t meet the conforming requirements it could sold to the public as non conforming and whoever wanted it could use it to play in casual play. But we know that doesn’t exist either because the regular amateurs would be buying more nonconforming equipment 

[Pnwpingi210]

9 hours ago, Archimedes65 said:

 

This isn’t about the rules of the game, it’s about turning back the clock on the performance of a key piece of equipment that has the potential to materially impact the game of many amateurs.  I think there will be pushback and I think it’s stupid of golf to shoot itself in the foot like this just when the game is growing.  But like I said, to each his own.  I expect some people will comply and some will not.  I asked members of my foursome during a tournament I played in this week.  None were in favor of the new ball and about half said they intend to keep using the current ball.  I imagine people won’t like suddenly giving up 10 yards to their buddies who still play the old balls.

Playing confirming equipment is a rule.

 

Rule 4.

 

 

[Golferpaul]

1 hour ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

Playing confirming equipment is a rule.

 

Rule 4.

 

 

Having fun is the goal—no rule is needed.

 

But, why should the USGA piss off 99% of golfers in the USA?

[Pnwpingi210]

8 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

Having fun is the goal—no rule is needed.

 

But, why should the USGA piss off 99% of golfers in the USA?

Yes having fun is the goal.  I was responding to a poster claiming people would ignore this change in conforming equipment specs and play a non conforming ball, making them in violation of rule 4.  I was asking why this rule vs any of the rules in golf people seem to dislike?

 

as to you last question, I can’t answer that for the USGA.  You will have to ask them.

[maamold]

On 6/14/2024 at 4:56 AM, gvogel said:

Which explains why guys like Tiger learned to play and love the game with balata balls and drivers way smaller than 460CC.

 

Of course, if the USGA mandates a shorter driver, we could all play shorter golf courses to compensate.

The sky will fall, don't you know? /s

[bekgolf]

3 minutes ago, maamold said:

The sky will fall, don't you know? /s

 

Are you sure?  I thought driving distance was causing the sky to fall.  Love watching PGA golf.

[maamold]

22 hours ago, bekgolf said:

I can recall Jack calling up the reserves and poking it out over 350 at will when he needed to do it.  There wasn't a problem when he did it why is it a problem now? 

Because when Jack did it, it was because Jack could do it with a 43.5" 105gram steel-shaft 190cc persimmon and low compression wound balata ball... Now when the top pros and amateurs do it, it's the 45.5" 60gram graphite with a 460cc trampoline faced ultra-forgiving driver with a high compression low spin ball that is the deciding factor in that jump in distance.

FFS why is that concept so hard to understand?

[maamold]

16 minutes ago, bekgolf said:

 

Are you sure?  I thought driving distance was causing the sky to fall.  Love watching PGA golf.

Nope, the equipment driven driving distance is just stupid and takes away from the skill needed to play the game. 

[bekgolf]

2 minutes ago, maamold said:

Because when Jack did it, it was because Jack could do it with a 43.5" 105gram steel-shaft 190cc persimmon and low compression wound balata ball... Now when the top pros and amateurs do it, it's the 45.5" 60gram graphite with a 460cc trampoline faced ultra-forgiving driver with a high compression low spin ball that is the deciding factor in that jump in distance.

FFS why is that concept so hard to understand?

 

The last time I responded my computer decided not to.  Here's my take:  Jack was awesome.

[bekgolf]

2 minutes ago, maamold said:

Nope, the equipment driven driving distance is just stupid and takes away from the skill needed to play the game. 

 

Fans like to see players going all out.  It doesn't matter if the driver is easier to hit and the ball spins less, we still want to see all of the power unleashed.  It was the same when Jack was doing it, we want to see pros doing things we might get away with a few times a year.  They are good.

[Titleist99]

21 minutes ago, bekgolf said:

 

Are you sure?  I thought driving distance was causing the sky to fall.  Love watching PGA golf.

Yep, the sky is falling for rollbackers over the golfball distance, yet we just watched a tournament where player was driving 350 yards and only eight players broke par....🤣

[maamold]

11 minutes ago, bekgolf said:

 

Fans like to see players going all out.  It doesn't matter if the driver is easier to hit and the ball spins less, we still want to see all of the power unleashed.  It was the same when Jack was doing it, we want to see pros doing things we might get away with a few times a year.  They are good.

I like seeing players go all out when necessary. However, if you go all out and miss you should be punished. With pre-1994 equipment a mistake at those all-out speeds was punished - That is what is missing from the game right now.  With current-gen equipment players go all out and mishit the ball and only lose minimal yards distanced and are slightly offline. The result of the modern super equipment - players go ALL out ALL the time.

Again - why is this so hard to understand? 

[bekgolf]

1 minute ago, maamold said:

I like seeing players go all out when necessary. However, if you go all out and miss you should be punished. With pre-1994 equipment a mistake at those all-out speeds was punished - That is what is missing from the game right now.  With current-gen equipment players go all out and mishit the ball and only lose minimal yards distanced and are slightly offline. The result of the modern super equipment - players go ALL out ALL the time.

Again - why is this so hard to understand? 

 

I think I understand where you are coming from.  We have different ideas of what is entertaining in the pro golf world.  I'm usually entertained when I watch a PGA tournament.  Bad shots should be punished, did you see all the breaks BDC had today?  Crazy.  No rough.  I'm all for the pros playing on normal muni course conditions, ie no shaved fairways, no breaks for hitting 40 yards offline (that would be deep in the forest here).

 

My never ending question is why don't they come back to Sahalee?  It would punish bad drives, players would be conservative off the tee.  Why not come back here and face PNW conditions? 

[maamold]

1 hour ago, bekgolf said:

 

I think I understand where you are coming from.  We have different ideas of what is entertaining in the pro golf world.  I'm usually entertained when I watch a PGA tournament.  Bad shots should be punished, did you see all the breaks BDC had today?  Crazy.  No rough.  I'm all for the pros playing on normal muni course conditions, ie no shaved fairways, no breaks for hitting 40 yards offline (that would be deep in the forest here).

And you are getting close to what I see as the issue. BDC had all those good breaks because the equipment is able to send the modern ball extremely straight and far. Even when he hit it offline it wasn't as bad as it should have been, he didn't lose any distance and stayed out of major trouble because there was no real curve or penalty for a mishit. 

 

1 hour ago, bekgolf said:

My never ending question is why don't they come back to Sahalee?  It would punish bad drives, players would be conservative off the tee.  Why not come back here and face PNW conditions? 

Because the narrowness of Sahalee is all it has, other than that it's not a test. it was designed with 1965 in mind and can't handle 2024 (it barely handled 1998 and is why they scraped 2010). Bunkers are easily cleared or off to the side, and the greens are large and flat - the course needs a major redesign before it would be any sort of test. 

[GoGoErky]

6 hours ago, bekgolf said:

 

Fans like to see players going all out.  It doesn't matter if the driver is easier to hit and the ball spins less, we still want to see all of the power unleashed.  It was the same when Jack was doing it, we want to see pros doing things we might get away with a few times a year.  They are good.

Lots of cheers yesterday for all of the big drives and didn’t hear any boos when Bryson was hitting balls past everyone. Guess fans like the long ball

[GoGoErky]

Speed/distance is a skill.

 

Hitting the ball straight with speed is a skill.

 

these guys also have skill through the bag otherwise they wouldn’t be on tour. The ones who have the better skills through the bag are the ones on the leaderboard every week.

 

This lack of skill talk is nonsense. 

[bcjim]

Equipment makers will vigorously push back on any significant changes. If balls go notably shorter who is going to upgrade their equipment?

 

People buy drivers etc because they think it will improve their game. They think they will hit it further.  And sometimes they actually do. What incentive will there be to buy a $600 driver if you're suddenly  250 instead of 265?

 

And if this nerfing of the ball is going to go unnoticed performance wise for golfers,  then it's a totally pointless exercise.

 

Also Nicklaus gets closer to Paul Bunyan every day.  Soon people will be insisting his caddie was actually a blue ox.

Edited Monday at 11:28 AM by bcjim

[Simpsonia]

5 hours ago, maamold said:

And you are getting close to what I see as the issue. BDC had all those good breaks because the equipment is able to send the modern ball extremely straight and far. Even when he hit it offline it wasn't as bad as it should have been, he didn't lose any distance and stayed out of major trouble because there was no real curve or penalty for a mishit. 

 

Because the narrowness of Sahalee is all it has, other than that it's not a test. it was designed with 1965 in mind and can't handle 2024 (it barely handled 1998 and is why they scraped 2010). Bunkers are easily cleared or off to the side, and the greens are large and flat - the course needs a major redesign before it would be any sort of test. 

 

The only thing that is ever going to send the ball further offline is to amp up the spin on the ball to balata levels. The only way to get balata-like spin is to have a cover that is as soft as balata. Having a cover as soft as balata means that sustainability is out the window entirely, as balls are often going to have to be replaced multiple times a round as the covers get destroyed like they often were with balata back in the day. Is that what you're advocating for? A return to the durability of balata days?

 

What about all the sustainability arguments? At a certain point manufacturing millions of extra rubber and plastic balls that will outweigh the sustainability aspects of lengthening a handful of old blue-blood courses. Honestly, it probably doesn't even take much to outweigh that given the relatively small number of courses even in consideration of holding a USO anyways.