USGA and R&A Announce golf ball rollback for everyone!?!?!

[Double Mocha Man]

8 minutes ago, Jayjay_theweim_guy said:

How does it perform when Byron hits it?  Is there a significant likelihood of it losing concentricity with a few hits from a pro-level strike?

 

How are spin, launch affected? 

 

How does it perform when Byron hits it?  -  Don't know.

 

Is there a significant likelihood of it losing concentricity with a few hits from a pro-level strike?  -  Don't know, but that would certainly further shorten things.

 

How are spin, launch affected?   -  The ball is low spin, higher launch.

[Jayjay_theweim_guy]

Just now, Double Mocha Man said:

 

How does it perform when Byron hits it?  -  Don't know.

 

Is there a significant likelihood of it losing concentricity with a few hits from a pro-level strike?  -  Don't know, but that would certainly further shorten things.

 

How are spin, launch affected?   -  The ball is low spin, higher launch.

Fair.  Low spin sounds like lower control, which might mean greater proximity distances and higher overall scores.  Just paraphrasing what I've read and heard here and from pros like Rocco.

 

If you can't control where the ball is going, you might have to adjust by being less aggressive. Which might lead to a poorer televised product, "And here's another well-lagged and brave par from our leader..." but at least the course expansion might slow down.  Until the pros adjust, as they inevitably will.

 

All just guessing here, obviously.

[Double Mocha Man]

13 minutes ago, Jayjay_theweim_guy said:

Low spin sounds like lower control

 

Low spin can mean less curvature.  And more carry if hit on the right trajectory.

[2bGood]

5 hours ago, North Butte said:

I am honestly amazed there are any posts defending this silliness but that's just the nature of Internet discussions, I suppose. I guarantee you not 1 in 100 of the people who are out playing golf at this very moment have any desire to hit the ball 5% (or 6% or whatever) shorter than they do now. If USGA does ever get around to actually implementing this, they will be roundly ignored by the vast majority of golfers.

 

But the more I think about it, the more sure I am that their "plan" (such as it is) will be to threaten to implement this in a few years, then push back the date a time or two and then finally (in their cunning dreams) force the industry to accept the bifurcation that was flatly rejected a couple years ago.

 

In which case, they will also eventually be ignored as a bunch of noisy doofuses with no connection to the actual game at its grassroots level. 

 

No they wont. Most golfer are clueless and don't play by the rules and don't pay that much attention to equipment. I see guys playing with range balls the pocketed, or buying used water balls all the time. The majority of golfers don't follow any of this or care and will keep just playing the cheapest ball they can find as they lose so many.  Then the next groups that carries a handicap are largely going to follow what ever rules are in place. They have the option to play illegal equipment and balls now, and they don't. The elite golfers will follow the rules too. 

 

5 hours ago, phizzy30 said:

Which is why there shouldn't be a rollback.  That way in 2030, you or anyone else that plays in any tournament doesn't need to worry about another golfer cheating by using the older balls.  Also, I absolutely hated playing balata because they spun way too much.  Wound balls were a little better.  The modern ball is king. 

 

People playing in legit tournaments very rarely cheat in this way. It is really not a thing.

 

5 hours ago, North Butte said:

My prediction is if and when that day arrives, multiple manufacturers will keep making something like the current ball and most retail golfers out there will keep using it, no matter what USGA says. at that point it would eventually become the situation where USGA is the organization governing 1 or 2% of golfers at the highest level, and nobody else would give a damn what they say.

 

I know if I ever had the choice between playing a Pro V1X or switching to something that has me hitting two clubs longer into every green, well that’s a no-brainer isn’t it? Pretty sure all the guys I play with regularly would feel the same way.

 

PS I also think USGA knows this and understands that they will never be able to convince retail golfers to adopt their rolled back ball. This is all a backdoor attempt at bifurcation.

 

Maybe times have changes, but remember when Calloway said they would not conform to the driver regulation and keep making non-conforming drivers back in 2000? They walked that back really fast and never saw much in the way of sales. I just can't see the manufactures making non-conforming balls. What the will do is make balls that maximise distance for lower swing speeds, but have the performance reduction for high speed swings required in the regulation. 

 

[Hat Trick]

My course isn't obsolete yet because none of the 300+ members are hitting it too far.

 

Can't wait for the TV commercials... "Pro V1 & Pro V1X - the longest short ball you can play!"

Edited December 5, 2023 by Hat Trick

[phizzy30]

15 minutes ago, 2bGood said:

 

No they wont. Most golfer are clueless and don't play by the rules and don't pay that much attention to equipment. I see guys playing with range balls the pocketed, or buying used water balls all the time. The majority of golfers don't follow any of this or care and will keep just playing the cheapest ball they can find as they lose so many.  Then the next groups that carries a handicap are largely going to follow what ever rules are in place. They have the option to play illegal equipment and balls now, and they don't. The elite golfers will follow the rules too. 

 

 

People playing in legit tournaments very rarely cheat in this way. It is really not a thing.

 

 

Maybe times have changes, but remember when Calloway said they would not conform to the driver regulation and keep making non-conforming drivers back in 2000? They walked that back really fast and never saw much in the way of sales. I just can't see the manufactures making non-conforming balls. What the will do is make balls that maximise distance for lower swing speeds, but have the performance reduction for high speed swings required in the regulation. 

 

I've seen guys cheating in men's championships at their local cc.  It rarely happens at the college or pro level though.  This may be a bit off topic, but there are tour pros that use PEDs although it's few and far in between. 

[2bGood]

1 hour ago, phizzy30 said:

I've seen guys cheating in men's championships at their local cc.  It rarely happens at the college or pro level though.  This may be a bit off topic, but there are tour pros that use PEDs although it's few and far in between. 

Yes people do cheat. But, I am rules official and from what I have seen 'cheating' is way more rare than people may suspect. Most of the time I would not even call it cheating, they broke the rules out of ignorance or confusion. Then you have the guys legit trying to pull a fast one (this is typically magically finding a ball, outright not counting strokes, or ignoring penalty they know they should take). I have had issues with illegal equipment but it has been slope on a range finder (didn't know they had turn it off, and announced to the group after the hole what the slope was) or music with a local rule in place banning music. I have never seen an issue with illegal clubs/balls.

 

I just can't see the cheating being any more of an issue when the ball is rolled back, particularly as I suspect there will be an ample transition time.

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by 2bGood

[dgarland]

Can I just point out that we have people in favor of rolling the ball back because the cost of maintaining courses will be less because they won't have to be 8000 yards AND we have people saying that it's no big deal that you'll be hitting it shorter because courses will just move tee boxes up.  Do you know that it costs money to make new tee boxes?  Again, there is no distance problem with 99.99% of golf players.  This is an absolute blunder by the USGA and R&A.  

[larrybud]

14 hours ago, RCGA said:

How do you guys manage to play golf in the cold? 

 

A 252y drive at 80* is a 244y drive at 40*

 

How do guys in Colorado play in New York? A 280y drive in CO is a 250y drive in NY

 

Playing golf in the cold sucks. Scores go up.

 

And now that 250y drive it will be a 235-240 yard drive. How is that better?

 

[Roejye]

When I first learned of this rule I was very angry. I am definitely one of those people who's in the range to probably be affected the most. Heck, I'm oftentimes one of, if not the longest hitter in my group when I play, and I average only 240. There is no distance problem for amateurs. 

 

Theoretically this would help make the game cheaper, but these days that just doesn't seem to happen too often.  

 

I'm also in the camp of adjusting course conditions to reign in these issues rather than rolling back the ball for everyone. 

 

I'm going to try and take a positive outlook on this. 7 years is a long time, and hopefully what will happen happen is what @bobfoster mentioned, the oem's will effectively make a ball that bifurcates for us. If not, and my body and life allows me to still golf then, I'll simply adjust. 

[larrybud]

33 minutes ago, dgarland said:

Can I just point out that we have people in favor of rolling the ball back because the cost of maintaining courses will be less because they won't have to be 8000 yards AND we have people saying that it's no big deal that you'll be hitting it shorter because courses will just move tee boxes up.  Do you know that it costs money to make new tee boxes?  Again, there is no distance problem with 99.99% of golf players.  This is an absolute blunder by the USGA and R&A.  

Even better: "courses have to keep expanding!!" and "you won't be hitting it shorter".

same people.

[2bGood]

1 hour ago, larrybud said:

 

Playing golf in the cold sucks. Scores go up.

 

And now that 250y drive it will be a 235-240 yard drive. How is that better?

 

How is it worse? Serous question. 

 

Golf course's are design for ideal range of distances to hit each shot from and offer tee option to help each player be in that range. If you play the course too short for your skill/distance or too long for your skill/distance the intended architecture is compromised. If you adjust the tee box to your distance you should have the intended experience. I have played rounds from too far forward and sure my score went down, but it was not really a great golf experience. Same thing when I played tee too long. 

[Louis_Posture]

3 hours ago, Hat Trick said:

My course isn't obsolete yet because none of the 300+ members are hitting it too far.

 

Throughout the world there are no "obsolete" golf courses. If a player hits wedge into every par 5 or drives every par 4 green or shoots 55 on a par 72 that does not make the course obsolete.

[Louis_Posture]

12 minutes ago, 2bGood said:

 If you adjust the tee box to your distance you should have the intended experience.

Or (in the case of playing forward tees) one may play less than driver from the tee boxes.

[My2Dogs]

They tell us we are going to lose 5% off our drives.  Image goes through our minds. 

[st1800e]

11 hours ago, Chiples said:

As a distance challenged senior golfer I will be forced to transition to female and play the ladies tees. 

No, you don’t have to go to that extreme, just accept the ravages of time and play the forward tees.  
 

[2bGood]

2 hours ago, Louis_Posture said:

Or (in the case of playing forward tees) one may play less than driver from the tee boxes.

You are still likely losing the intended experience if you never need to hit driver on any hole (just likely if you only can hit driver on every hole)

[bobfoster]

 

 

This may be a TL;DR - but is offered as an historical perspective. Just an additional thought (as a USGA Patron Club member, accustomed to the RBs being bashed). Those folks generally take quite a long view. This is an old sport, drenched in tradition. The first 18 hole golf course was built over two and a half centuries ago. While they don't take that long of a view, still, the USGA (believe it or not) does take changes quite seriously. They'll study them for several years (as they did with this one). Listen to almost everyone. Understanding that almost no changes are going to be without all sorts of people saying they are ruining golf, and the sky is falling. 

 

Consider this however - the loudest complaints are always temporary, and come mostly from those that have gone out of their way to hyper-optimize for the current rules. The pros, good amateurs, OEMs. None of them will ever want to change anything (almost by definition). However, look at the wedge rule (for instance). The fiercest opponents were - the bomb-and-gouge pros, and the OEMs. To them it was a major change requiring a lot of adjustment.           

 

But! To the young lads, starting golf at 6, 8, 10 years old in 2010 ... that are now playing on HS golf teams (some of whom I played with this past season) that have good, modern equipment? They aren't playing "horrid wedges that they can't spin out of wet rough and are ruining the game" - they are just playing ... golf wedges (and playing them pretty freaking well in fact). They've never known anything else. You buy conforming clubs and learn to play with them.

 

Will be the same with new balls. Yes, they'll go a bit shorter, but the rule won't even take effect for most current amateur golfers until the 2030s (it's not like any of us are going to have to throw out our current balls). And for the next generation (the kids being born today), it won't be some dramatic difference, it will simply be the golf balls you play. The game will have adjusted.

 

Note that this is fourth adjustment to the rule. Distance parameters were actually first set in 1977:

A brand of golf ball, when tested on apparatus approved by the USGA on the outdoor range at the USGA Headquarters under the conditions set forth in the Overall Distance Standard for golf balls on file with the USGA, shall not cover an average distance in carry and roll exceeding 280 yards, plus a tolerance of 8%. (Note: The 8% tolerance will be reduced to a minimum of 4% as test techniques are improved.) (Rules of Golf, 1977)

 

Adjusted in 1986 (as testing methods improved):

The 8% tolerance (4% test tolerance and 4% innovative tolerance) associated with the ODS is reduced to 6% (296.8 yds), reflecting a 4% innovative tolerance with a 2% test tolerance.

 

Adjusted in 2002:

The USGA and R&A implement Phase l of indoor ball testing using the USGA Indoor Test Range (ITR) and Actual Launch Conditions (ALC) from Iron Byron for testing golf balls for conformance to the ODS effective March 1, 2002. The test uses the same set up on the mechanical golfer (10°, 42 revs/s backspin and 235 ft/s ball speed) and sets a limit of 291.2 yards with a 5.6 yard test tolerance. (Notice to Manufacturers, December 19, 2001)

 

Adjusted in 2004 (to take into account new drivers, and increasing distance by players):

Reflecting this goal, Phase II changes both the test conditions and the conformance limit for evaluating golf balls for conformance to the ODS. The test uses a titanium club with a COR of 0.820 and a swing speed of 120 mph. The limit is set at 317.0 yds with a test tolerance of 3.0 yds for a limit plus tolerance limit of 320.0 yds

 

[Note that 2004 was also the first full limitation on drivers: Clubhead volume will be limited to 460 cc plus 10 cc for measurement tolerance of (470cc).Clubhead heel-to-toe dimension will be is limited to 5.0 inches. Clubhead sole-to-crown dimensions will be limited to 2.8-inches. Club length for clubs other than putters will be limited to 48 inches. (Notice to Manufacturers, October 29, 2003)]

 

So the USGA has actually been placing limits of distances for close to 50 years. In the past, those have been eased upwards, as golfers and equipment got better and better, but they started to get concerned about the middle of the 'aughts. Players were starting to use bomb-and gouge, courses were starting to "Tiger proof". And this kept increasing - indeed, you almost need to average close to 300 yards off the tee to be genuinely competitive on the PGAT today (which wasn't the case even a decade ago). Even good amateurs are much longer.

 

When the current 120/317 limit was set in 2004, the PGAT average was 287. The average drive of the longest guy on tour (Kuehne) was 315. The limit did place some restrictions on downspeed swings, the the max was really only conceptual. We've now reached the point where 120 SS is no longer conceptual a lot of people are actually freaking doing it. Average PGAT distance in 2023 has gone from 287 to 297. It is now not uncommon to see drives of 320, 340. With the other clubs commensurately long. Anything less than a 550 - 575 Par 5 is now easily  driver/iron. And even at the amateur level there have been real increases. I played with kids this summer that were almost driving short par 4s on a couple of my local courses. So yes, the previous three changes adjusted distances upwards, to take into account increasing distance, but still place some rough limitations on the extremes. But the USGA did not think they could just keep distance increasing indefinitely - golf courses themselves were starting to be rendered obsolete. 

 

Within that long term context, changing from 120/317 to 125/317 really is not that great of a change. In fact, it mostly keeps the standard current. Modern equipment and training technology have increased driving distance by 10 yards since the last time it was set in 2004. They've now decreased it by about 15 yards - and by the time 2030 rolls around, it is actually going to be mostly breaking even. 

 

Folks - this is not going to dramatically decrease what players can do, it is actually doing nothing more than maintaining the same standard we've lived with since 2004. 

 

Just thought I'd take a shot at articulating what I believe the USGA perspective, and reasoning is. Don't expect everyone to agree with their analysis of the problem, nor the means they chose to address it. But just thought I'd take a shot at expressing the framework and perspective within which the rule was probably formulated. 

 

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by bobfoster

[golf-RN]

On 12/2/2023 at 9:53 AM, klebs01 said:

The problem with your simplistic view is that both are true. Yeah old folks and this that are unathletic and picked up the game don’t hit it far and should move up. On the other hand, those under 50 or so that picked it up young, and especial the younger players today hit it WAY too far. Now it’s not uncommon for a 300 yard drive to be a short ball in a group. 620 yard par 5s are easily reached. The current game is unsustainable. 
 

one of the benefits of the roll back is that it rolls back the long hitters more than the short hitters so it compresses the difference in distance between players. That should

be viewed as a good thing. 

Stereotypical WRX post where 5 inches equals 8

[Ger21]

5 hours ago, bobfoster said:

Folks - this is not going to dramatically decrease what players can do,

You pointed out, that all the previous limits were not taking away distance, only limiting future distance. This change will indeed take away distance. And the distance they want to take away is not because of equipment changes, but because guys are better athletes. If the majority of pros were still swinging at 110mph, there would not be a rule change.

[NoCalHack]

From some of the reactions online you’d think  that some people feel the USGA will be limiting the ball for them only and not their playing partners. 

[jwb10]

These 2 organizations could screw up a 1 car funeral. Like in every other sport, elite athletes are improving. To stop that, say in track, we should make them wear shoes that are too small ? It'll slow them down, records will remain ? Before covid, golf was moribund. Then people discovered that being outdoors with your friends was safe and fun. Now the R/A wants to destroy that vibe because DJ and Rory can mash it. If this happens, and they really are too stupid to stop, the recreational golfer will be having less fun, and people will play other games that take less time and money. Moribund will look good in the rear view. Its always the way, once success finally arrives those that think they are responsible for it conspire to f-it up. BTW, DJ and Rory will still mash it and next it will be the driver, the irons, heck, they may even ban the broomstick (that worked well, didn't it ?) Grow the rough, slow the fairways down and if you are still disturbed that elite players play well, bifurcate. But the leave us, the 99%, the great unwashed, alone. The young and strong will still mash it, the old will try to, and we can have fun. Get out of my sandbox, we're doing fine !

[ChaosTheory]

On 12/2/2023 at 2:11 PM, molecularman said:

f you are playing a lower compression ball, I'd bet it isn't too far off the future legal limit.  

 

There are some soft 2 piece balls today that meet the proposed standard.  I just can't find the place where I read that.

[Double Mocha Man]

1 hour ago, NoCalHack said:

From some of the reactions online you’d think  that some people feel the USGA will be limiting the ball for them only and not their playing partners. 

 

Ah, but for me, I play against the course, not my playing partners.

[NoCalHack]

3 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

 

Ah, but for me, I play against the course, not my playing partners.

 

 

I get that.  But do you really care that much about a number?  Your score?

 

If you were lucky enough to play LACC or Winged Foot from the tips, would go really get upset that you aren't shooting your normal score?  Or if you are playing Pebble Beach in January (FYI- you will hit it 20 yards shorter than you are used to)?

 

A score is just a number.  If you want to shoot the same number you are used to, move up a tee or find an easier course.  I think most of us can assess how well or how poorly we played without just taking into account the number.  Btw, the handicap indexes will adjust I'm sure. Your course handicap will go up accordingly.  

 

 

[mweaver84]

8 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

 

Ah, but for me, I play against the course, not my playing partners.

Then who really cares about this change if thats the case.  You're just out there to do as best as you can.   Can always play from shorter tees if you want easier yardages. 

[Double Mocha Man]

4 minutes ago, NoCalHack said:

 

 

I get that.  But do you really care that much about a number?  Your score?

 

If you were lucky enough to play LACC or Winged Foot from the tips, would go really get upset that you aren't shooting your normal score?  Or if you are playing Pebble Beach in January (FYI- you will hit it 20 yards shorter than you are used to)?

 

A score is just a number.  If you want to shoot the same number you are used to, move up a tee or find an easier course.  I think most of us can assess how well or how poorly we played without just taking into account the number.  Btw, the handicap indexes will adjust I'm sure. Your course handicap will go up accordingly.  

 

 

 

I take pride in the score, or sometimes I take umbrage with it. Here's the thing.  If every course I play, going forward, was a course I've never played before I'd be fine. But seeing myself 10 to 15 yards short of my former landing spots on familiar courses would be painful.

[remlap13]

3 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

 

I take pride in the score, or sometimes I take umbrage with it. Here's the thing.  If every course I play, going forward, was a course I've never played before I'd be fine. But seeing myself 10 to 15 yards short of my former landing spots on familiar courses would be painful.

 

Then it's just your ego getting in the way of enjoying the game of golf. Sorry. 

[Jayjay_theweim_guy]

8 hours ago, bobfoster said:

 

 

This may be a TL;DR - but is offered as an historical perspective. Just an additional thought (as a USGA Patron Club member, accustomed to the RBs being bashed). Those folks generally take quite a long view. This is an old sport, drenched in tradition. The first 18 hole golf course was built over two and a half centuries ago. While they don't take that long of a view, still, the USGA (believe it or not) does take changes quite seriously. They'll study them for several years (as they did with this one). Listen to almost everyone. Understanding that almost no changes are going to be without all sorts of people saying they are ruining golf, and the sky is falling. 

 

Consider this however - the loudest complaints are always temporary, and come mostly from those that have gone out of their way to hyper-optimize for the current rules. The pros, good amateurs, OEMs. None of them will ever want to change anything (almost by definition). However, look at the wedge rule (for instance). The fiercest opponents were - the bomb-and-gouge pros, and the OEMs. To them it was a major change requiring a lot of adjustment.           

 

But! To the young lads, starting golf at 6, 8, 10 years old in 2010 ... that are now playing on HS golf teams (some of whom I played with this past season) that have good, modern equipment? They aren't playing "horrid wedges that they can't spin out of wet rough and are ruining the game" - they are just playing ... golf wedges (and playing them pretty freaking well in fact). They've never known anything else. You buy conforming clubs and learn to play with them.

 

Will be the same with new balls. Yes, they'll go a bit shorter, but the rule won't even take effect for most current amateur golfers until the 2030s (it's not like any of us are going to have to throw out our current balls). And for the next generation (the kids being born today), it won't be some dramatic difference, it will simply be the golf balls you play. The game will have adjusted.

 

Note that this is fourth adjustment to the rule. Distance parameters were actually first set in 1977:

A brand of golf ball, when tested on apparatus approved by the USGA on the outdoor range at the USGA Headquarters under the conditions set forth in the Overall Distance Standard for golf balls on file with the USGA, shall not cover an average distance in carry and roll exceeding 280 yards, plus a tolerance of 8%. (Note: The 8% tolerance will be reduced to a minimum of 4% as test techniques are improved.) (Rules of Golf, 1977)

 

Adjusted in 1986 (as testing methods improved):

The 8% tolerance (4% test tolerance and 4% innovative tolerance) associated with the ODS is reduced to 6% (296.8 yds), reflecting a 4% innovative tolerance with a 2% test tolerance.

 

Adjusted in 2002:

The USGA and R&A implement Phase l of indoor ball testing using the USGA Indoor Test Range (ITR) and Actual Launch Conditions (ALC) from Iron Byron for testing golf balls for conformance to the ODS effective March 1, 2002. The test uses the same set up on the mechanical golfer (10°, 42 revs/s backspin and 235 ft/s ball speed) and sets a limit of 291.2 yards with a 5.6 yard test tolerance. (Notice to Manufacturers, December 19, 2001)

 

Adjusted in 2004 (to take into account new drivers, and increasing distance by players):

Reflecting this goal, Phase II changes both the test conditions and the conformance limit for evaluating golf balls for conformance to the ODS. The test uses a titanium club with a COR of 0.820 and a swing speed of 120 mph. The limit is set at 317.0 yds with a test tolerance of 3.0 yds for a limit plus tolerance limit of 320.0 yds

 

[Note that 2004 was also the first full limitation on drivers: Clubhead volume will be limited to 460 cc plus 10 cc for measurement tolerance of (470cc).Clubhead heel-to-toe dimension will be is limited to 5.0 inches. Clubhead sole-to-crown dimensions will be limited to 2.8-inches. Club length for clubs other than putters will be limited to 48 inches. (Notice to Manufacturers, October 29, 2003)]

 

So the USGA has actually been placing limits of distances for close to 50 years. In the past, those have been eased upwards, as golfers and equipment got better and better, but they started to get concerned about the middle of the 'aughts. Players were starting to use bomb-and gouge, courses were starting to "Tiger proof". And this kept increasing - indeed, you almost need to average close to 300 yards off the tee to be genuinely competitive on the PGAT today (which wasn't the case even a decade ago). Even good amateurs are much longer.

 

When the current 120/317 limit was set in 2004, the PGAT average was 287. The average drive of the longest guy on tour (Kuehne) was 315. The limit did place some restrictions on downspeed swings, the the max was really only conceptual. We've now reached the point where 120 SS is no longer conceptual a lot of people are actually freaking doing it. Average PGAT distance in 2023 has gone from 287 to 297. It is now not uncommon to see drives of 320, 340. With the other clubs commensurately long. Anything less than a 550 - 575 Par 5 is now easily  driver/iron. And even at the amateur level there have been real increases. I played with kids this summer that were almost driving short par 4s on a couple of my local courses. So yes, the previous three changes adjusted distances upwards, to take into account increasing distance, but still place some rough limitations on the extremes. But the USGA did not think they could just keep distance increasing indefinitely - golf courses themselves were starting to be rendered obsolete. 

 

Within that long term context, changing from 120/317 to 125/317 really is not that great of a change. In fact, it mostly keeps the standard current. Modern equipment and training technology have increased driving distance by 10 yards since the last time it was set in 2004. They've now decreased it by about 15 yards - and by the time 2030 rolls around, it is actually going to be mostly breaking even. 

 

Folks - this is not going to dramatically decrease what players can do, it is actually doing nothing more than maintaining the same standard we've lived with since 2004. 

 

Just thought I'd take a shot at articulating what I believe the USGA perspective, and reasoning is. Don't expect everyone to agree with their analysis of the problem, nor the means they chose to address it. But just thought I'd take a shot at expressing the framework and perspective within which the rule was probably formulated. 

 

 

Another great post, Bob, but all of those problems you list are Tour problems.  Or ultra-elite amateurs, same/same.  They, or the courses that are having a hard time keeping up, want to mandate a nerf ball for the Tours?  Have at it.  As noted, Mike Trout isn't swinging an Easton in the batter's box.  Baseball pros there do it differently than even college baseball players.

 

So should it be for pro golfers, and only pros, if the professional tours think there's a problem.  Certainly Augusta can make Masters participants use a 60 compression or some other nerfing so that 13 doesn't have to be 556 yds to take PW out of their hands on the second shot.  Do so.

 

But stop it with inflicting this upon the 99.9999% of golfers for whom hitting it too far isn't a problem.  We're the same group of people that the Reg. Bodies had been complaining about the last decade because we don't hit it far enough for the tees we're on, and it screws everything else up.

Edited December 5, 2023 by Jayjay_theweim_guy

[Double Mocha Man]

Golf is difficult and oftentimes frustrating. This golf ball rollback would just add one more frustration.

 

When do the ruling bodies start adding some success and satisfaction to our games?