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

[Shilgy]

On 3/12/2024 at 2:06 PM, bekgolf said:

There are already threads on this subject.

👍Numerous 

[bobfoster]

30 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

On 3/12/2024 at 5:06 PM, bekgolf said:

There are already threads on this subject.

👍Numerous 

Yeah. 

 

And really? Was like the wedge change. Massive tempest in a teapot when first announced, then turned out to be a shrug of the shoulders. Actually not much of a change at all. 

 

The USGA, folks, thinks in terms of years, decades (I know some of these people). Any change will always provoke the people that have optimized for current equipment. The OEMs will complain (they need to alter designs and manufacturing designs - but they are already doing so. ) And some (a few) golfers will furiously stock up on old balls.

 

But mostly, four years from now golfers will go into stores and pro shops on courses and buy balls off the rack. And the balls will all be conforming (the OEMs are not going to do two different production lines for "old" balls and "conforming" balls ... as they didn't with wedges. (Doesn't make supply chain sense economically). 

 

I mean, c'mon guys. The OP is (kinda) right. The ball roll back is quiet. But not really "eerily" quiet. There's gonna be a new ball, but very few golfer's scores are going to be affected much, if at all. 

 

This is not a big deal. 

 

Edited March 14 by bobfoster

[Shilgy]

2 minutes ago, bobfoster said:

Yeah. 

 

And really? Was like the wedge change. Massive tempest in a teapot when first announced, then turned out to be a shrug of the shoulders. Actually not much of a change at all. 

 

The USGA, folks, thinks in terms of years, decades (I know some of these people). Any change will always provoke the people that have optimized for current equipment. The OEMs will complain (they need to alter designs and manufacturing designs - but they are already doing so. ) And some (a few) golfers will furiously stock up on old balls.

 

But mostly, four years from now golfers will go into stores and pro shops on courses and buy balls off the rack. And the balls will all be conforming (the OEMs are not going to do two different production lines for "old" balls and "conforming" balls ... as they didn't with wedges. 

 

I mean, c'mon guys. The OP is (kinda) right. The ball roll back is quiet. But not really "eerily" quiet. There's gonna be a new ball, and very few golfer's scores are going to be affected much, if at all. 

 

This is not a big deal. 

 

The age old question…then why do it?

[bobfoster]

18 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

The age old question…then why do it?

 

Will explain at length tomorrow if you'll keep an open mind. Have a lot of friends in the USGA leadership (am a President's Circle member - I talk to these guys). They have very specific reasoning. You may not agree with it, but it is probably worth considering. 

 

These aren't just old, conservative control freaks just doing it to exercise power (as they are so often, incorrectly, portrayed here). In my experience, they genuinely have the long term good of the game forefront in their minds. 

 

But it is 1:30 AM, and I have a very early conference call this morning, so I gotta get to sleep ... 😎🏌️‍♀️Will give you their reasoning at length when I get a chance. 

[wantacigar]

I'll be 61 in 2028.  I'm 57 and am still lucky I generate 130-140 mph ball speed off the driver.  On a good ball striking days my drives go 230-235.  Avg. is 225.  And, besides, I already use Ksigs which means I already am losing distance if you believe everything you read 🤣.  If I lose 5 more yards on my driver, I'll just tee up from the gold tees.  

For me, getting to the golf course at sunrise and watching the "dew fog" rise off the fairway is just so relaxing before teeing off.  I won't know the difference between a 235 yd drive or a 230 yd drive or a 225 yd. drive.  Still a 7i into the green.

 

Bethpage Green #1 from behind the tee box with Bethpage Black #1 on the left

 

Edited March 14 by wantacigar

[North Butte]

6 hours ago, bobfoster said:

The USGA, folks, thinks in terms of years, decades (I know some of these people).

 

Yes. They think in terms of years such as 1953 and decades such as "the 60's". 

[nitram]

6 hours ago, Shilgy said:

The age old question…then why do it?

 

To keep Jack happy.

[bcjim]

8 hours ago, bobfoster said:

 

Will explain at length tomorrow if you'll keep an open mind. Have a lot of friends in the USGA leadership (am a President's Circle member - I talk to these guys). They have very specific reasoning. You may not agree with it, but it is probably worth considering. 

 

These aren't just old, conservative control freaks just doing it to exercise power (as they are so often, incorrectly, portrayed here). In my experience, they genuinely have the long term good of the game forefront in their minds. 

 

But it is 1:30 AM, and I have a very early conference call this morning, so I gotta get to sleep ... 😎🏌️‍♀️Will give you their reasoning at length when I get a chance. 

I'll be interested to hear this.  I think it's quite possible the op is on to something and that the usga is trying to figure out how to make this go away quietly. The reaction from stakeholders has been heavily negative and I'm not at all convinced there will acceptance of such a rule by enough of the golf community. 

 

And as I've asked elsewhere,  why don't they just implement a nerf ball at *their* events as a demonstration of how great an idea it is.  That would be leadership. 

Edited March 14 by bcjim

[Shilgy]

8 hours ago, bobfoster said:

 

Will explain at length tomorrow if you'll keep an open mind. Have a lot of friends in the USGA leadership (am a President's Circle member - I talk to these guys). They have very specific reasoning. You may not agree with it, but it is probably worth considering. 

 

These aren't just old, conservative control freaks just doing it to exercise power (as they are so often, incorrectly, portrayed here). In my experience, they genuinely have the long term good of the game forefront in their minds. 

 

But it is 1:30 AM, and I have a very early conference call this morning, so I gotta get to sleep ... 😎🏌️‍♀️Will give you their reasoning at length when I get a chance. 

One thing I really dislike on golfwrx is the cryptic answer.

 

 

”just wait and all will be revealed”

 

As I’ve said before the suits would be happiest if all players…including the pros….just continued to go to the bar rather than working on fitness.

 

Hrrumph! 

Edited March 14 by Shilgy

[jvincent]

On 3/11/2024 at 10:31 PM, brucedeuce said:

2nd Thoughts? or creeping in unnoticed?  Seems the longer hitters and retired guys cheering on the most, while the have fun guys don't want to give up distance or just move up a box. Will the OEM's run two lines??  What if LIV lets them play pre-'28 balls??  Interesting Times.

 

Well, the dates and requirements have been published so presumably the aero and materials nerds at the major ball manufacturers have already dusted off their slide rules and are busy designing prototype balls.

 

I would guess that tour pros will start testing early prototypes in 2025 with more serious testing in 2026 once they provide feedback on feel/trajectory of the early prototypes. 

 

[bekgolf]

3 hours ago, jvincent said:

 

Well, the dates and requirements have been published so presumably the aero and materials nerds at the major ball manufacturers have already dusted off their slide rules and are busy designing prototype balls.

 

I would guess that tour pros will start testing early prototypes in 2025 with more serious testing in 2026 once they provide feedback on feel/trajectory of the early prototypes. 

 

 

Keegan Bradley and Lucas Glover have already reported on a prototype.  They lost 40 yards minimum on the drive and neither of them are the long hitters on tour.

[Shilgy]

3 hours ago, jvincent said:

 

Well, the dates and requirements have been published so presumably the aero and materials nerds at the major ball manufacturers have already dusted off their slide rules and are busy designing prototype balls.

 

I would guess that tour pros will start testing early prototypes in 2025 with more serious testing in 2026 once they provide feedback on feel/trajectory of the early prototypes. 

 

The funny thing is no one else wants to be the “official”rules of golf. The USGA and R&A currently release the official rules but some of this behavior by them creates discord in the game.  Would it be surprising if the tours decided to have their own “official rules”.

The USGA does not make equipment but they do like to mandate changes.  If none of the manufacturers decided to do so what happens? No majors? No PGA Tour?  They couldn’t comply with the rules of golf so then what?

 

Between this bs and the fracture caused by the Saudis I’ve never been more disappointed with a game I’ve loved for over 50 years.

[jvincent]

12 minutes ago, bekgolf said:

 

Keegan Bradley and Lucas Glover have already reported on a prototype.  They lost 40 yards minimum on the drive and neither of them are the long hitters on tour.

 

Whatever they were using was not what I would consider a real prototype. The final parameters from the USGA weren't even released yet.

 

It was a FUDotype.

[bekgolf]

1 minute ago, jvincent said:

 

Whatever they were using was not what I would consider a real prototype. The final parameters from the USGA weren't even released yet.

 

It was a FUDotype.

 

They said it was a prototype.  I'm going to believe the players who were involved in an actual test.

 

With that said most of us have had this discussion at least in two other threads.  Maybe this one can be folded into an existing running argument where nobody cedes anything?   

[phizzy30]

1 hour ago, bekgolf said:

 

Keegan Bradley and Lucas Glover have already reported on a prototype.  They lost 40 yards minimum on the drive and neither of them are the long hitters on tour.

Wow, that's crazy if true and concerning at the same time.  Lucas is mid to high 160's and Keegan is low to mid 170's so they both need all the ball speed they can get. 

[bekgolf]

3 minutes ago, phizzy30 said:

Wow, that's crazy if true and concerning at the same time.  Lucas is mid to high 160's and Keegan is low to mid 170's so they both need all the ball speed they can get. 

 

Here's one of the articles that quote Keegan:

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/usga-ra-golf-ball-rollback-players-reaction-tiger-woods-keegan-bradley-rickie-fowler

[Shilgy]

3 hours ago, bekgolf said:

 

Here's one of the articles that quote Keegan:

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/usga-ra-golf-ball-rollback-players-reaction-tiger-woods-keegan-bradley-rickie-fowler

I normally respect the heck out of Tiger but the ball has not “been speeding up my entire time on tour”.  Yes, the advent of the Pro V1 brought the new ball type to the tour but increases since are about 95% on the players and their work.  The ball is already capped and any minor gains in distance will not be due to the ball.

 

It’s funny.  Those that support the rollback seem to not realize, or refuse to admit, that the equipment has changed for the better year after year decade after decade.

   But now it’s a problem because those dang kids hit it too far!  They don’t hit it further than 20years ago but there are certainly more of them.  For some reason the ruling bodies want to turn back the increased interest in playing golf and reduce the numbers playing.  

Snobbery on their part? They are supposed to be stewards of the game for all and instead are listening to a very few that really want the smaller game.

 

For those of you about to jump on this post…..you like to say well…just move up a tee box if you lose too much.  My reply would be then you should be playing just hickory or classic clubs and enjoy playing the smaller game and leave the rest alone.

 

[nitram]

What happened to @bobfoster?? I was looking forward to the report.

 

[bekgolf]

26 minutes ago, nitram said:

What happened to @bobfoster?? I was looking forward to the report.

 

 

He's still typing it.

[bobfoster]

21 minutes ago, nitram said:

What happened to @bobfoster?? I was looking forward to the report.

 

Caught up in a business thing today. Only even got to watch some of the Players. Sometimes work gets in the way of golf. 

[grochol17]

14 hours ago, bcjim said:

I'll be interested to hear this.  I think it's quite possible the op is on to something and that the usga is trying to figure out how to make this go away quietly. The reaction from stakeholders has been heavily negative and I'm not at all convinced there will acceptance of such a rule by enough of the golf community. 

 

And as I've asked elsewhere,  why don't they just implement a nerf ball at *their* events as a demonstration of how great an idea it is.  That would be leadership. 

 

US Open Final Qualifying is on June 3rd, the day after the RBC Canadian Open and the Monday of the Memorial Tournament.  How do you think that is going to go if guys playing on the PGA tour have a US Open qualifier using a completely different ball sandwiched in between two tour events?  And the US Open is the week after the Memorial... using a "USGA ball" at the open would put all of the guys playing in the Memorial signature event at a huge disadvantage to those guys that had the week off and could spend more than three days getting used to the USGA ball. 

[grochol17]

5 hours ago, bekgolf said:

 

Here's one of the articles that quote Keegan:

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/usga-ra-golf-ball-rollback-players-reaction-tiger-woods-keegan-bradley-rickie-fowler

 

A quote from Lucas Glover:

 

"That was with my driver, and I promiss I'll would tell you if I misshited, I don't misshited this one. It was 45 to 50 yards shorter. That was one of the balls, who knows how those parameters are gonna look like when it actually comes out in five years."

 

(source: https://www.sportskeeda.com/golf/news-lucas-glover-illustrates-key-differences-golf-balls-dialled-back)

 

The key thing there is at the end... we have no idea how the ball that Glover or Bradley tested compares to what will eventually be produced by any of the manufacturers.  For all we know Srixon handed both of them a repainted range ball and said "this conforms... let's see what happens." 

 

The idea of losing 40-50 yards is clearly concerning, but I'll wait until we actually get some "final" prototypes and see what they do before I freak out over distance loss.

[bobfoster]

1 hour ago, bekgolf said:

 

He's still typing it.

I know you're giving me (hopefully friendly) s*** about this. But actually, I am. May take a couple days, because I actually want to give a thoughtful response (and I do, in fact, run a company where I've been dealing with a client crisis the last couple days). Yeah, it will be long, and prolly no one will read the whole thing, and I won't change anyone's mind (long ago gave up thinking - or caring if - I'd change anyone's mind on the internet). Nor will I even claim to be right. Only that I might be able to give a different angle of vision that might be worth listening to.

[st1800e]

17 hours ago, wantacigar said:

I'll be 61 in 2028.  I'm 57 and am still lucky I generate 130-140 mph ball speed off the driver.  On a good ball striking days my drives go 230-235.  Avg. is 225.  And, besides, I already use Ksigs which means I already am losing distance if you believe everything you read 🤣.  If I lose 5 more yards on my driver, I'll just tee up from the gold tees.  

For me, getting to the golf course at sunrise and watching the "dew fog" rise off the fairway is just so relaxing before teeing off.  I won't know the difference between a 235 yd drive or a 230 yd drive or a 225 yd. drive.  Still a 7i into the green.

 

Bethpage Green #1 from behind the tee box with Bethpage Black #1 on the left

 

Nailed it.   I’m at the point where the ball rollback and the other tour debates are a waste of time and inconsequential. I just look forward to playing, and second to that watching some dramatic finishes on TV.  

[LeoLeo99]

22 hours ago, bobfoster said:

 

Will explain at length tomorrow if you'll keep an open mind. Have a lot of friends in the USGA leadership (am a President's Circle member - I talk to these guys). They have very specific reasoning. You may not agree with it, but it is probably worth considering. 

 

These aren't just old, conservative control freaks just doing it to exercise power (as they are so often, incorrectly, portrayed here). In my experience, they genuinely have the long term good of the game forefront in their minds. 

 

But it is 1:30 AM, and I have a very early conference call this morning, so I gotta get to sleep ... 😎🏌️‍♀️Will give you their reasoning at length when I get a chance. 

Why doesn't the USGA share their specific reasoning with all golfers?  What's the big secret?

[bobfoster]

Did not say "just wait and it will be revealed". I claim no special secret knowledge. What I might be able to do is convey a perspective. There are a lot of people that accuse the USGA/R&A of just being old, out of touch power hungry dudes that impose rules for no reason just because they get a buzz out of control. I hear that said here a lot. Always stated as though it is just some self-evident fact. Anyone that wants to can certainly assert it and believe it. And I will not attempt to persuade anyone to think any differently. Anyone that wants to vigorously stand on that belief is gonna do so no matter what anyone says. Just saying from my experience it is simply not the case. For anyone actually open to another point of view, I'd offer the following.

 

First. I'd invite you to consider the massive blind spot on WRX, and in most golf discussions. Dig. Here we have a great number of golf fans, and great number of amateurs, a lot of really good amateurs - scratch golfers. Even some pros, some pro tour caddies. OEMs advertise here. WRX has a PGAT deal to do WITB. There are Tour forums, Equipment forums, Rules forums. Seems to fairly comprehensively cover the golf universe, right? But what constituency is somewhat glaringly missing (when you think about it)?

 

Course Owners and Managers. They, and their issues and concerns, are almost entirely absent from any discussions here. And yet they are the very backbone of our game. Understand this carefully. Without them, you don't play golf this weekend. Young golfers dreaming about the tour don't play golf. The OEMs don't sell anyone clubs. Golf doesn't exist without the people that build and run the courses we play on. 

 

There are over 15,000 golf courses in the US (over 40% of the golf courses in the world). We simply take them for granted. But owning and running a golf course is a fiendishly difficult thing to do as a business proposition. Huge numbers of constantly shifting variables, many completely out of an owner/manager's control. And it is getting more and more difficult over time. Covid skyrocketed the cost of fertilizer. Courses are increasingly coming under environmental scrutiny.

 

So then, if you actually are thinking in terms of the total game of golf, the sport, and it’s long term well being, when we here on WRX talk about the ball rule, we hear from all the amateurs and scratch golfers, we get links about the OEMs and PGAT players complaining and commenting during the open comments period. The USGA listens to all of them.

 

But -  please consider this. The USGA is also in daily contact with course owners and State golf associations. They have to be. That is how the GHIN system runs. Every course has course and slope ratings, usually for multiple tees. The many Local Model Rules are developed with significant input from the people that run courses.

 

So think for a moment about this. The USGA folks really do look at rules from within the context of “what is hurting the game itself, and what can help it”. But  every individual constituency looks at everything the USGA does from the perspective of “does this hurt me or help me”. Do you care about golf course owners, or mostly about how you will get 5 yards less on your 6i? Guess what the USGA cares about. 

 

THE PGAT guys – and many of the people here - complaining talk solely about how it will affect their individual scores. Th interests of course owners are never even mentioned, they simply aren’t even on the radar screen. But they are (and rightly should be) a significant concern for the USGA if it is looking at the health of the game itself.

 

A personal anecdote to move this from 30K feet to reality? I have a good friend that owns one of my favorite local public courses. He’s a fanatic golfer that loves his course. Goes out of his way to make it interesting ) His ideal “I want my golfers to use every club in their bag”. Does trees and traps and tees to create an experience that is accessible to beginners, but incredibly challenging to good golfers. A lot of course owners are like this. We take them for granted. We shouldn’t (and the USGA doesn’t).

 

Anyway he was talking to me about the “distance problem” several years ago. His course was 6400 (short but really interesting). Over the last 2 – 3 years he bought a bunch of land, put huge dollars into new tee boxes and other adjustments. He felt he had to, because teens and 20-somethings – aided by new clubs and technology are just bombing it. They were starting to see his course almost as an Executive course. He told me he did his course extension this time – but it is the end. Maintenance and land costs go up for every 100 yards you add (he added 400), and he’ll simply sell the land for condos if he has to do another extension.

 

This is just one small example of a course owner’s perspective, but please take it into account if you want to understand the USGA perspective on how to keep out game thriving.

 

Second huge point. The USGA always does things very carefully, and slowly. The know they are setting rules for a 250 year old game. All changes will be incremental, and only after a lot of thought and research.

 

What this new ball rule actually did was just treaded water. Average driver distance on the PGAT has increased by about 10 yards in the last decade. This new ball rule will take 10 yards or so off the average drive. Actually, will not affect even pro golf very much. Will affect amateur golf even less. (I mean, c’mon guys, distance for most of us has far more to do with distance from center-club than it does the damn ball.)

 

So – you say (rightly) “then why make the change if it is such a minor change”?

 

Here’s the answer to that.  And this is important to understand about the USGA perspective. They never just look at how golf is at the moment, they look at trend lines. Guys are getting longer and longer, due to technology. With no changes in equipment rules, golf course owners would be faced with extending their courses longer and longer. This ball rule isn’t so much about limiting current golfers as it is about saying this trend can’t continue.

 

Okay. This is probably way TL;DR.

 

And feel free to totally disagree, Just trying to offer an alternative perspective. Not actually trying to persuade anybody to think any differently here. Just trying to convey how the folks at the USGA might be thinking about this. Not saying I 100% agree, but I mostly do, and think it is a legitimate perspective. 

 

I do know that - whether you agree with them or not, these people are in it for the genuine long term good of the game. Knowing full well that every decision they make will get virtual bananas thrown at their heads. 

 

Edited March 15 by bobfoster

[bobfoster]

23 minutes ago, LeoLeo99 said:

Why doesn't the USGA share their specific reasoning with all golfers?  What's the big secret?

They actually do share it. At length. No one bothers to read it - they just trash talk.

[LeoLeo99]

16 hours ago, bobfoster said:

Did not say "just wait and it will be revealed". I claim no special secret knowledge. What I might be able to do is convey a perspective. There are a lot of people that accuse the USGA/R&A of just being old, out of touch power hungry dudes that impose rules for no reason just because they get a buzz out of control. I hear that said here a lot. Always stated as though it is just some self-evident fact. Anyone that wants to can certainly assert it and believe it. And I will not attempt to persuade anyone to think any differently. Anyone that wants to vigorously stand on that belief is gonna do so no matter what anyone says. Just saying from my experience it is simply not the case. For anyone actually open to another point of view, I'd offer the following.

 

First. I'd invite you to consider the massive blind spot on WRX, and in most golf discussions. Dig. Here we have a great number of golf fans, and great number of amateurs, a lot of really good amateurs - scratch golfers. Even some pros, some pro tour caddies. OEMs advertise here. WRX has a PGAT deal to do WITB. There are Tour forums, Equipment forums, Rules forums. Seems to fairly comprehensively cover the golf universe, right? But what constituency is somewhat glaringly missing (when you think about it)?

 

Course Owners and Managers. They, and their issues and concerns, are almost entirely absent from any discussions here. And yet they are the very backbone of our game. Understand this carefully. Without them, you don't play golf this weekend. Young golfers dreaming about the tour don't play golf. The OEMs don't sell anyone clubs. Golf doesn't exist without the people that build and run the courses we play on. 

 

There are over 15,000 golf courses in the US (over 40% of the golf courses in the world). We simply take them for granted. But owning and running a golf course is a fiendishly difficult thing to do as a business proposition. Huge numbers of constantly shifting variables, many completely out of an owner/manager's control. And it is getting more and more difficult over time. Covid skyrocketed the cost of fertilizer. Courses are increasingly coming under environmental scrutiny.

 

So then, if you actually are thinking in terms of the total game of golf, the sport, and it’s long term well being, when we here on WRX talk about the ball rule, we hear from all the amateurs and scratch golfers, we get links about the OEMs and PGAT players complaining and commenting during the open comments period. The USGA listens to all of them.

 

But -  please consider this. The USGA is also in daily contact with course owners and State golf associations. They have to be. That is how the GHIN system runs. Every course has course and slope ratings, usually for multiple tees. The many Local Model Rules are developed with significant input from the people that run courses.

 

So think for a moment about this. The USGA folks really do look at rules from within the context of “what is hurting the game itself, and what can help it”. But  every individual constituency looks at everything the USGA does from the perspective of “does this hurt me or help me”. Do you care about golf course owners, or mostly about how you will get 5 yards less on your 6i? Guess what the USGA cares about. 

 

THE PGAT guys – and many of the people here - complaining talk solely about how it will affect their individual scores. Th interests of course owners are never even mentioned, they simply aren’t even on the radar screen. But they are (and rightly should be) a significant concern for the USGA if it is looking at the health of the game itself.

 

A personal anecdote to move this from 30K feet to reality? I have a good friend that owns one of my favorite local public courses. He’s a fanatic golfer that loves his course. Goes out of his way to make it interesting ) His ideal “I want my golfers to use every club in their bag”. Does trees and traps and tees to create an experience that is accessible to beginners, but incredibly challenging to good golfers. A lot of course owners are like this. We take them for granted. We shouldn’t (and the USGA doesn’t).

 

Anyway he was talking to me about the “distance problem” several years ago. His course was 6400 (short but really interesting). Over the last 2 – 3 years he bought a bunch of land, put huge dollars into new tee boxes and other adjustments. He felt he had to, because teens and 20-somethings – aided by new clubs and technology are just bombing it. They were starting to see his course almost as an Executive course. He told me he did his course extension this time – but it is the end. Maintenance and land costs go up for every 100 yards you add (he added 400), and he’ll simply sell the land for condos if he has to do another extension.

 

This is just one small example of a course owner’s perspective, but please take it into account if you want to understand the USGA perspective on how to keep out game thriving.

 

Second huge point. The USGA always does things very carefully, and slowly. The know they are setting rules for a 250 year old game. All changes will be incremental, and only after a lot of thought and research.

 

What this new ball rule actually did was just treaded water. Average driver distance on the PGAT has increased by about 10 yards in the last decade. This new ball rule will take 10 yards or so off the average drive. Actually, will not affect even pro golf very much. Will affect amateur golf even less. (I mean, c’mon guys, distance for most of us has far more to do with distance from center-club than it does the damn ball.)

 

So – you say (rightly) “then why make the change if it is such a minor change”?

 

Here’s the answer to that.  And this is important to understand about the USGA perspective. They never just look at how golf is at the moment, they look at trend lines. Guys are getting longer and longer, due to technology. With no changes in equipment rules, golf course owners would be faced with extending their courses longer and longer. This ball rule isn’t so much about limiting current golfers as it is about saying this trend can’t continue.

 

Okay. This is probably way TL;DR.

 

And feel free to totally disagree, Just trying to offer an alternative perspective. Not actually trying to persuade anybody to think any differently here. Just trying to convey how the folks at the USGA might be thinking about this. Not saying I 100% agree, but I mostly do, and think it is a legitimate perspective. 

 

I do know that - whether you agree with them or not, these people are in it for the genuine long term good of the game. Knowing full well that every decision they make will get virtual bananas thrown at their heads. 

 

Can we see the data or the math calculations that shows the new ball rule will take 10 yards or so off the average drive?  What is the length of the average drive today?  This is a lot of hullabaloo to render everyone's stash of golf balls obsolete to only knock the average drive down 10 yards. 

[hollabachgt]

On 3/14/2024 at 2:11 PM, bekgolf said:

 

They said it was a prototype.  I'm going to believe the players who were involved in an actual test.

 

With that said most of us have had this discussion at least in two other threads.  Maybe this one can be folded into an existing running argument where nobody cedes anything?   

Starting back in 2012 the USGA started contracting manufactures to make reduced flight test balls. All with varying distance limiting characteristics and different distance reductions. These balls were tested over the years using pga tour players, Korn ferry players, lpga players, and amateurs of all abilities.

 

its most likely that they hit one of these balls at one point in time, or a ball based on a research spec, which may not exactly correlate to a ball under the the new testing spec. It’s also likely that both of them are just giving out exaggerated anecdotes of their experience.

Edited March 16 by hollabachgt

[bobfoster]

8 hours ago, LeoLeo99 said:

Can we see the data or the math calculations that shows the new ball rule will take 10 yards or so off the average drive?  What is the length of the average drive today?  This is a lot of hullabaloo to render everyone's stash of golf balls obsolete to only knock the average drive down 10 yards. 

So then - you're saying that, um, the USGA is in some sort of secret collusion with ball manufacturers to ... what? Deliberately render everyone's "stash" of balls obsolete to force them to buy new ones? (How many golfers do you know with a stash of golf balls that will last for four years?)

 

You want the stats? You could find them yourself, but I'll try to help you. I was approximating off the top on my head in my post - the specific differences (since you asked) are a bit greater.

 

The USGA/R&A have been imposing standards on balls for a long time. (First ball rule dates to 1952.) There's not anything new going on here. Updated once or twice a decade ever since. First time "Iron Byron" (the testing robot they use) was mentioned was in 2002. The standard was:

 

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).

 

The new rule:

 

The revised ball testing conditions will be as follows: 125-mph clubhead speed (equivalent to 183 mph ball speed); spin rate of 2200 rpm and launch angle of 11 degrees. The current conditions, which were established 20 years ago, are set at 120 mph (equivalent to 176 mph ball speed), 2520 rpm with a 10-degree launch angle.

The revised conditions are based on analysis of data from the worldwide tours and the game over several years and are intended to ensure that the ODS (whose limit will remain unchanged at 317 yards with a 3-yard tolerance) continues to represent the ability of the game’s longest hitters. An analysis of ball speeds among golf’s longest hitters in 2023 shows that the fastest 10 players had an average ball speed of 186 mph, while the average ball speed of the fastest 25 was 183.4 mph (the very fastest averaged 190 mph).

The longest hitters are expected to see a reduction of as much as 13-15 yards in drive distance. Average professional tour and elite male players are expected to see a reduction of 9-11 yards, with a 5-7-yard reduction for an average LPGA or Ladies European Tour (LET) player.

 

In 2002, the drive of the average PGAT pro was 279 yards. In 2023, it was around 296. A difference of 17 yards. And that's just the average. The long hitters are even more extreme. I think Rory was the first one to hit an average of 320. Can you even imagine what it means to average 320 yards?) In the 2021 Arnold Palmer (playing this week) Bryson hit a 370 yard drive. That's right around the current length of the average par 4 on US golf courses. 

 

So then - the new ball rule cuts the longest hitters by 14 (three less than the actual increases we've seen since 2002). Average PGAT pros by 10 yards. And maybe four or five yards for us amateur golfers. We'll barely notice. And that's the change with driver distances. Shorter clubs will see a commensurately shorter differential. Your average PW distance will likely be a yard or two. 

 

I actually thought this was pretty clever. The USGA didn't "bifurcate" (though there was much discussion about it). But actually (functionally) kinda did - came up with a rule that put real limits on the gigantic distances the elites (both pro and amateur) are now reaching, while affecting the average amateur at barely noticeable levels, and giving amateurs (and OEMs) plenty of time to clear out their old balls.

 

As I said, I long ago gave up trying to convince anyone set in their perspective to adopt anything different. If you want to believe this is just a lot of hullabaloo instituted for some frivolous reason, go for it. But course owners certainly will notice, and likely almost universally applaud the decision. 

 

I'd simply ask you to be a bit open to an alternative point of view. The USGA had compelling reasons to think distance was becoming a problem (initially driven largely by course owners and managers) - it is in the raw stats I've mentioned. And they did a multi-year study on both the issue, and the possible approaches to address it. A lot of ideas were tossed around. 

 

I actually think they came up with a pretty inventive solution. Many will disagree (in fact, many will disagree with everything the USGA does). But this thread was started by someone asking "why is everyone eerily silent about this"? Good question. When they changed the wedge rule (over a decade ago now), there was huge controversy that went on for months. Not the case here. There was maybe a month of the (predictable) complaints and trash talking - from the OEMs, PGAT pros, and good amateurs. But it subsided really quickly, probably because 

for most of us, it isn't that big of a change (except to the biggest bombers, and course owners). 

 

Hope you'll read this with an open mind.