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

[remlap13]

29 minutes ago, puttingmatt said:

And the length you hit all your clubs from the shorter distance holes you moved up to. There is no upside to playing a shorter distance imposed ball,

Unless, your goal is always  performing less than optimal.

 

So now your 400 yard par 4 becomes a 375 yard par 4. You went driver (250) 9i (150) before to reach the green. Now you go driver (238) 9i (142) to reach the green. 

 

See how nothing changes under this plan?

 

EDIT: Just to make it perfectly clear, I took the made up driver and 9i yardages and removed 5% from them. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by remlap13

[phizzy30]

15 hours ago, PuffyC said:

Rory has already chimed in by saying the average am would lose 5-10 yards on their tee shot and that those 5-10 yards didn’t matter. Guess time will tell who’s right.

People think that 5-10 yards isn't a big deal until they step onto the tee box, pipe one hoping to carry that bunker or water hazard to have it go in.  Big number waiting to happen.  Also, having a shorter club into the green is going to be better than having something longer in. 

[remlap13]

1 minute ago, phizzy30 said:

People think that 5-10 yards isn't a big deal until they step onto the tee box, pipe one hoping to carry that bunker or water hazard to have it go in.  Big number waiting to happen.  Also, having a shorter club into the green is going to be better than having something longer in. 

 

Anyone who doesn't adjust their carry yardages using the new ball deserves the big number on the scorecard. You're playing golf not golf swing. If you need to use different clubs to achieve the goal of putting the ball in the hole, so be it.

[Swashbuckler]

On 12/1/2023 at 9:30 PM, jvincent said:

 

No. That is not how the physics of drag work. Drag is proportional to the square of speed, i.e. the faster a ball travels the more drag it experiences.

 

Long hitters will lose more, as a percentage, of their distance.

I believe this is true 

[phizzy30]

Just now, remlap13 said:

 

Anyone who doesn't adjust their carry yardages using the new ball deserves the big number on the scorecard. You're playing golf not golf swing. If you need to use different clubs to achieve the goal of putting the ball in the hole, so be it.

Yes, golfers would need to adjust yardages.  However, most golfers think that they can carry the ball farther than they actually do.  Also, there's no guarantee that tee boxes will be moved up in order to offset the shorter ball.  Seems like your another golfer that favors the rollback.  There's absolutely no benefit for ams whatsoever. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by phizzy30

[North Butte]

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. 

[remlap13]

9 minutes ago, phizzy30 said:

Yes, golfers would need to adjust yardages.  However, most golfers think that they can carry the ball farther than they actually do.  Also, there's no guarantee that tee boxes will be moved up in order to offset the shorter ball.  Seems like your another golfer that favors the rollback.  There's absolutely no benefit for ams whatsoever. 

 

I don't favor the rollback. I just don't think it's as big of a deal to the amateur game as some ams are making it out to be. Do I like carrying my driver 260? Sure I do. Do I care if that becomes 240 with a new ball? Maybe the first handful of rounds until I adjust. But then my carry distances become the new normal, I remove the ego from my game, and I either move up a tee box or become OK with playing my mid-irons more often on approach shots. 

 

You're right, there's zero benefit to ams. But I truly believe the detriment to the am game is overblown. People enjoyed golf during the balata ball age. People will continue to enjoy golf in 2030. 

 

My biggest concern is with amateur competitions. Come 2030, if I'm in a competition at my club, how can I be certain my opponents are using the "correct" ball? 

[phizzy30]

Just now, remlap13 said:

 

I don't favor the rollback. I just don't think it's as big of a deal to the amateur game as some ams are making it out to be. Do I like carrying my driver 260? Sure I do. Do I care if that becomes 240 with a new ball? Maybe the first handful of rounds until I adjust. But then my carry distances become the new normal, I remove the ego from my game, and I either move up a tee box or become OK with playing my mid-irons more often on approach shots. 

 

You're right, there's zero benefit to ams. But I truly believe the detriment to the am game is overblown. People enjoyed golf during the balata ball age. People will continue to enjoy golf in 2030. 

 

My biggest concern is with amateur competitions. Come 2030, if I'm in a competition at my club, how can I be certain my opponents are using the "correct" ball? 

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. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by phizzy30

[phizzy30]

Just now, 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. 

Not sure how it works, but if there were enough golfers protesting, wouldn't the USGA/RA be forced to drop the rollback for ams?  I'll be the first in line to sign petitions if that's the case. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by phizzy30

[golfman009]

If the governing bodies think that scores are to low and thus they are trying to make the game "harder", I've always thought that a more interesting approach would be to change the number of clubs allowed in a bag. Make it 9 clubs max and forced golfers to be more creative while still leaving the excitement of the long ball. 

[remlap13]

4 minutes 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. 

 

If that's the argument people want to take regarding rollback I'm all for it. We'll need to start having bag checks before the first tee haha. 

 

It just bugs me when people start talking about their Nana who already plays from the front tees because she only gets 150 on her drives. WHATEVER WILL SHE DO WITH THE SHORTER GOLF BALLS?! That doesn't feel like a good faith argument.

[North Butte]

14 minutes ago, phizzy30 said:

Not sure how it works, but if there were enough golfers protesting, wouldn't the USGA/RA be forced to drop the rollback for ams?  I'll be the first in line to sign petitions if that's the case. 

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.

Edited December 4, 2023 by North Butte

[RCGA]

Just now, North Butte said:

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.

 

With that logic, why don't you play non-conforming gear right now? 

[RCGA]

2 hours ago, BigtimeHC said:

The golf ball is not the problem. Less than 5% of rounds at private clubs are from the "championship tees". These are generally around 7000 yards and long enough to test collegiate and aspiring tour professionals. Your average player tees it up from 6000-6500 and could use an additional 10-15 yards to enjoy the game more.

 

 

Then have a ball for tour pros and a ball for ams

 

Oh wait, everyone hated that idea. 

[Chiples]

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

[gvogel]

How can I be in two rollback threads, when I am not anywhere at all?

[BigtimeHC]

13 minutes ago, RCGA said:

 

Then have a ball for tour pros and a ball for ams

 

Oh wait, everyone hated that idea. 

 

You're missing the point. We don't need two sets of golf balls for pros and joes. Tiger's idea that "we are running out of property" because the ball goes so far is complete and utter nonsense. Courses are plenty long as is. They don't need to play from 7500 yards to make it tough on the pros and Augusta, specifically, doesn't need to be lengthened any more than it already has. Just adjust the course set-up using mowers and irrigation. 

[phil75070]

I am one of those "grandpas" referred to. I certainly notice a decline of 9 yards for my typical drive from just a few years ago. To say I won't notice a further decline of 10–12 yards when the rollback occurs is ridiculous, assuming we are all affected at the 5% level.

 

I belong to a municipal course and play every weekday, weather permitting. Who are the people I see on the course, day in and day out? Seniors and women, with few exceptions. They are the ones who can least afford to play with a ball that has been rolled back. Start reducing the enjoyment for these people and their numbers will decline. Who is going to take up the revenue slack for these courses when the number of rounds played annually gets cut down dramatically?

[pitchnputt]

Tour event should just have a provided ball for all players and have it switch around different tournaments. Tailor the ball distances to pro launch conditions each week and course to make it harder. Pros no longer have a specific ball, it changes week to week and course to course. 

[BirdieBob]

USGA/RA....You can't be serious!!

 

1.  Bifurcation is the way;

2.  Rollback the pros;

3.  Rollout the ams

 

The pros get a ball that goes 5% shorter AND the Ams get a ball that goes 10% longer.

Then all the 20 caps can play the tips and all egos get a boost.

 

 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by BirdieBob

[Double Mocha Man]

6 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

 

Colorado guys playing in NY bring extra long tees and a tall step ladder.  

 

[ColinKelvin]

I'm in favour of the ball roll back.  It makes sense in terms of land/course extension and protecting against obsoletion but isn't enough on its own.

 

If I was in charge I'd also limit driver heads at 360CC!

[RCGA]

43 minutes ago, BigtimeHC said:

 

You're missing the point. We don't need two sets of golf balls for pros and joes. Tiger's idea that "we are running out of property" because the ball goes so far is complete and utter nonsense. Courses are plenty long as is. They don't need to play from 7500 yards to make it tough on the pros and Augusta, specifically, doesn't need to be lengthened any more than it already has. Just adjust the course set-up using mowers and irrigation. 

 

Augusta spent $26 million to move one tee box. The par 5 became a driver-wedge making it the easiest hole on the course. 

 

But you must know better.  

[Double Mocha Man]

1 hour ago, remlap13 said:

My biggest concern is with amateur competitions. Come 2030, if I'm in a competition at my club, how can I be certain my opponents are using the "correct" ball

 

Instead of looking into their bag to see what sandwich they're having for lunch look in to see what ball they're using.

 

[Double Mocha Man]

3 minutes ago, RCGA said:

 

Augusta spent $26 million to move one tee box. The par 5 became a driver-wedge making it the easiest hole on the course. 

 

But you must know better.  

 

So let Augusta be one of the tournaments where they use the shorter ball.

 

[Double Mocha Man]

15 hours ago, PuffyC said:

That’s an idea too far outside the box to ever be implemented but I kinda like the concept. Stake off a line 300 yards from the tee (the PGAT avg) and any tee shot past that is treated as OB. It’s cheap, easy, works for any course, and doesn’t impact OEMs or ams. The strategy and skill of ‘how close can you get’ would add an interesting competitive level as well. But yeah, they’d never go for it.

 

How about just throwing a yellow flag and moving it back to the line?

 

[Jayjay_theweim_guy]

1 hour ago, RCGA said:

 

With that logic, why don't you play non-conforming gear right now? 

Is it offered by "reputable" OEMs? 

 

Or, to play a modern square-grooved wedge, am I forced to resort to ordering equipment off some informercial, that won't be reviewed by media or evaluated through robot testing or the like?

 

Perhaps manufacturers will continue to offer a non-conforming ball in 2030, assuming bifurcation does not occur, and the Reg Agencies persist?  Are production costs for different ball lines similar, less, or greater than setting up a new square-grooved irons line?  I don't know, but those answers would help in figuring this out.

 

 

[Jayjay_theweim_guy]

23 minutes ago, RCGA said:

 

Augusta spent $26 million to move one tee box. The par 5 became a driver-wedge making it the easiest hole on the course. 

 

But you must know better.  

Than ANGC?  Maybe.

 

They want to preserve the old look and feel of Augusta----big hills, long, punitive greens, no real rough---with the modern game.  That's a tall order, if growing actual rough and not shrinking or bikini-waxing the fairways (miss you, Gary) are off the table. 

 

I mean, 13 was always meant to be a two-shoter if you could hit a hook (cf, Lee Trevino) and didn't mind flirting with water.  The second shot wasn't supposed to be a wedge though.  But if you can't/won't alter the driving conditions, or fix the ball, that's what you're stuck with. 

 

Which is unfortunate.  But it's an Augusta problem, or a St. Andrews problem.  It shouldn't be an "Us" problem. We don't hit the ball that far, 'My 625 yd is now an easy Par-5' Guy aside.

 

ANGC demands that a special ball be used for their tourney?  Fine, knock yourself out.  Go pay Titleist to build one for you, but don't lean on your friends in the USGA to mandate your fix for the rest of us.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Jayjay_theweim_guy

[puttingmatt]

2 hours ago, remlap13 said:

 

So now your 400 yard par 4 becomes a 375 yard par 4. You went driver (250) 9i (150) before to reach the green. Now you go driver (238) 9i (142) to reach the green. 

 

See how nothing changes under this plan?

 

EDIT: Just to make it perfectly clear, I took the made up driver and 9i yardages and removed 5% from them. 

Time will tell, but I think your 5% only  yardage loss is a wishful thought.

 

[Double Mocha Man]

10 minutes ago, Jayjay_theweim_guy said:

That's a tall order, if growing actual rough and not shrinking or bikini-waxing the fairways (miss you, Gary) are off the table. 

 

Well, that just got you banned from the Masters.  You and Gary can play golf elsewhere those 4 days...