Jump to content
IGNORED

USGA/R&A Distance Insights Project (Updated Feb. 2021)


iacas
Note: This thread is 801 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

On Tuesday, the USGA and R&A announced their areas of interest for further exploration on the “Distance Debate.”

The  proposals are:

Proposal 1: Club length – reduction to 46 inches available as a Model Local Rule (MLR) (Original proposal delivered in 2016 and paused in 2017 due to the Distance Insights Project). Comment period ends on March 4, 2021.
Proposal 2: Update on testing method for golf balls. Comment period ends on Aug. 2, 2021.
Proposal 3: Change to testing tolerance – Characteristic Time. Comment period ends on Aug. 2, 2021.

Read the press release here https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/RSI/distance-insights-2021-docs/DI Equipment Research Areas of Interest Details - 01-02-2021 Final w-logos.pdf

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • iacas changed the title to Usga/Ra Distance Insights Project
  • iacas changed the title to USGA/R&A Distance Insights Project (Updated Feb. 2021)
  • Administrator

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/articles/2021/02/distance-golf-equipment-research-topics-areas-interest-usga-randa.html

Quote

A review of the overall conformance specifications for both clubs and balls, including specifications that both directly and indirectly affect hitting distances. This review would consider whether any existing specifications should be adjusted or any new specifications created to help mitigate continuing distance increases. It would not consider revising the overall specifications to produce substantial reductions in hitting distances at all levels of the game. A list of club and ball specifications to be reviewed can be found in the official notice.

When someone can find those, please post them here.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, iacas said:

I believe this is what you want From the PDF titled R&A/USGA Research Topics - Areas of Interest. I provided a link in my original post.

Regarding club and ball specifications we will evaluate the following:

• Reduction in the limit within the overall distance standard

• Modification in the limitation of ball efficiency (update to IV)

• Other ball specifications (size, mass)

• Reduction in the performance of drivers: club length and clubhead dimensions (including volume)

• Changes in the clubhead specifications on spring-like effect and moment of inertia, also considering the utilization of radius of gyration limitations

• Production of spin from all clubs from all areas of the course

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
13 minutes ago, MiuraMan said:

I believe this is what you want From the PDF titled R&A/USGA Research Topics - Areas of Interest. I provided a link in my original post.

No, I want "A list of club and ball specifications to be reviewed can be found in the official notice."

What you listed there are not the actual specifications. We need the official notice, and that was sent to the manufacturers.

I'm expecting something more precise, but maybe they're actually that vague.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Ok I found a Document titled "1 February 2021 Notice and Comment" with the following text 

Therefore, as a separate workstream, we have taken the opportunity during the last year to progress our work on some specific topics.

The purpose of this communication is to issue, as a Notice and Comment to manufacturers, three specific proposals for their feedback.

The link to this document is in the document you linked above: The text in there reads Document Link:  Official USGA/R&A Document  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I honestly don’t agree with any of this. Just a waste of time and eventually money. FFS let them play. Plenty of bogeys are being made on tour. Bifurcation is asinine.

  • Upvote 1

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

17 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I honestly don’t agree with any of this. Just a waste of time and eventually money. FFS let them play. Plenty of bogeys are being made on tour. Bifurcation is asinine.

I don't know if you have seen this paragraph - But it feels like Bifurcation. I am in the "leave the game alone" camp

Other than the three specific proposals everything else is "research". It seems like they are "fishing" or throwing a lot of stuff out there to get reactions.

We will also evaluate the potential use of a Local Rule option to specify use of a defined subset of conforming clubs and/or balls intended to result in shorter hitting distances and/or an enhancement in the balance between distance and other skills. The concept is that a Committee or golf facility would have the option of requiring the use of equipment meeting these specifications or a subset of them. We are seeking feedback from manufacturers and stakeholders on this concept and how any of the above listed research topics could potentially be considered for use as a Local Rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Moderator
6 minutes ago, MiuraMan said:

I don't know if you have seen this paragraph - But it feels like Bifurcation. I am in the "leave the game alone" camp

He agrees and thus his comment:

29 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I honestly don’t agree with any of this. Just a waste of time and eventually money. FFS let them play. Plenty of bogeys are being made on tour. Bifurcation is asinine.

 

  • Thumbs Up 1

Driver: :callaway: Rogue ST  /  Woods: :tmade: Stealth 5W / Hybrid: :tmade: Stealth 25* / Irons: :ping: i500’s /  Wedges: :edel: 54*, 58*; Putter: :scotty_cameron: Futura 5  Ball: image.png Vero X1

 

 -Jonny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

36 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I honestly don’t agree with any of this. Just a waste of time and eventually money. FFS let them play. Plenty of bogeys are being made on tour. Bifurcation is asinine.

I agree that bifurcation is not the way to go. I personally would prefer, however, that the USGA and R&A worked to make it so that accuracy became as important as distance. Watching them whack it out of the "rough" near the fairway at Torrey Pines made me think that it wasn't as much of a penalty as it might have been had the rough been a good bit longer. Make the bunkers deeper and steeper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
Just now, Zippo said:

I agree that bifurcation is not the way to go. I personally would prefer, however, that the USGA and R&A worked to make it so that accuracy became as important as distance. Watching them whack it out of the "rough" near the fairway at Torrey Pines made me think that it wasn't as much of a penalty as it might have been had the rough been a good bit longer. Make the bunkers deeper and steeper.

Accuracy is important. The fairway is worth 60 yards or so over being in the rough. Slightly more at Torrey Pines.

And accuracy is VERY important on approach shots.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, Zippo said:

to make it so that accuracy became as important as distance.

Distance is a skill. And the farther you hit the ball the bigger risk of being farther off target. Hitting it 325 is harder than hitting it 250 straight.

  • Upvote 1

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Equipment is not the problem... I am so over the whining about distance. 

The average golf handicap nor average driver distance has not moved substantially in two decades. I do not see the problem... the 0.00001% of golfers (the pro tours) should not be causing this much concern.

There is a theoretical limit imposed by materials that will be reached, it is inevitable. You let titanium out of the box, live with it. You allowed 460cc live with it... no one wants anything rolled back.

Why are we not talking about the issues of course design and agronomy (grass uniformity advances)? Make accuracy an issue by inserting angles back into the game, plant trees and steepen/deepen bunkers.

Why are we not talking about limiting the physical training of athletes?Koepka/Bryson/Dustin physiques vs Player/Hogan/Palmer. Golfers are bigger, stronger, faster and train year round with a STAFF of fitness/nutrition professionals. This is certainly an unfair advantage... 

Why are we not talking about taking away launch monitors, blast motion, and force plates? Players on tour are spec'ed to the micrometer to maximize EVERYTHING. This is another unfair advantage... 

Equipement is the devil because the best 125-250 players in the world are making Pebble Beach and Augusta obsolete... sorry. Lakewood Country Club in Lakewood NJ held the 1896 US Open... the course was made Tour obsolete by the indented dimpled golf ball... why shouldn't we outlaw dimples? 

Things change, the world evolves, golf needs to as well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Moderator
5 hours ago, BaggerVM said:

Equipment is not the problem... I am so over the whining about distance. 

The average golf handicap nor average driver distance has not moved substantially in two decades. I do not see the problem... the 0.00001% of golfers (the pro tours) should not be causing this much concern.

There is a theoretical limit imposed by materials that will be reached, it is inevitable. You let titanium out of the box, live with it. You allowed 460cc live with it... no one wants anything rolled back.

Why are we not talking about the issues of course design and agronomy (grass uniformity advances)? Make accuracy an issue by inserting angles back into the game, plant trees and steepen/deepen bunkers.

Why are we not talking about limiting the physical training of athletes?Koepka/Bryson/Dustin physiques vs Player/Hogan/Palmer. Golfers are bigger, stronger, faster and train year round with a STAFF of fitness/nutrition professionals. This is certainly an unfair advantage... 

Why are we not talking about taking away launch monitors, blast motion, and force plates? Players on tour are spec'ed to the micrometer to maximize EVERYTHING. This is another unfair advantage... 

Equipement is the devil because the best 125-250 players in the world are making Pebble Beach and Augusta obsolete... sorry. 

Things change, the world evolves, golf needs to as well.

You seem to contradict yourself (see underlined text), but maybe I’m not catching it right.

As for the bolded text, why is it unfair? To whom is it unfair? All the professional golfers have access to those things...it’s their modern day culture.

Unless you mean these things are unfair to the amateur...it that case, in what sport do not the professionals have all the time, coaching, money, equipment, and research techniques available to them where their amateur counterparts do not? I don’t see that as being unfair to the amateurs, to me that’s comparing apples to oranges because the professionals chose to pursue this as their profession, whereas the amateur did not. That’s a product of choice in that, should one have the aspiration, could not anyone attempt to turn pro should they be willing to invest the time, money, work to get there like all of the current professionals have done in their past? They have worked to be where they are...it’s not unfair to anyone...it’s a natural consequence of work and talent. If the aspiring amateur doesn’t have the talent, then it’s not a “fairness,” issue to be regulated...that’s just life, some are blessed with certain talents and abilities, some are not.

As for the fitness, that’s hard work that anyone can attain if they are willing to sacrifice the time and effort (which they do). That’s available to all, professional and amateur alike, so I don’t see how it’s unfair to anyone. It’s simply a natural consequence of work.

Sports are by nature competitive and not egalitarian, so the idea of trying to make a sport “fair,” for those either unwilling to put in the work or don’t have the necessary talent is by nature unnatural to sports.

With regards to your closing sentence, golf has evolved... is not the equipment and launch monitors, fitness, coaches, and other things product of evolution you were just discussing as being unfair?

I completely agree with you that the distance issue is overinflated and that course design strategies may be a good part of the “solution” for the so called “problem.”

  • Thumbs Up 1

Driver: :callaway: Rogue ST  /  Woods: :tmade: Stealth 5W / Hybrid: :tmade: Stealth 25* / Irons: :ping: i500’s /  Wedges: :edel: 54*, 58*; Putter: :scotty_cameron: Futura 5  Ball: image.png Vero X1

 

 -Jonny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, woodzie264 said:

As for the bolded text, why is it unfair? To whom is it unfair? All the professional golfers have access to those things...it’s their modern day culture

I figured he was being sarcastic.

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
23 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I figured he was being sarcastic.

I honestly didn't consider that at all. @BaggerVM, if you were be sarcastic, my apologies 😒

Driver: :callaway: Rogue ST  /  Woods: :tmade: Stealth 5W / Hybrid: :tmade: Stealth 25* / Irons: :ping: i500’s /  Wedges: :edel: 54*, 58*; Putter: :scotty_cameron: Futura 5  Ball: image.png Vero X1

 

 -Jonny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator

My position on all of this, as briefly as I'm capable of saying it 😉

  • Whatever the USGA/R&A does, fine. There's a difference between not thinking they had to do or should roll back distance and, I don't know, protesting it or not moving on if they do? I lobbied against the flagstick bit in the 2019 rules, even set up a website for it, but then when it was announced I said "okay then" and moved on. I had my chance to share my opinion, and they decided the other way. That's how it is supposed to work.
  • At this point, these are just proposals open for comment. And of those, my thoughts on the three big ones at the top are:
    • Drivers 46": okey dokey. Affects WLD guys mostly.
    • Reduce tolerance on CT time: okey dokey. This is a yard or two.
    • Use of optimized launch conditions within ODS: good. And in hindsight, they should've been doing this all along. I wonder how many currently legal balls might run through their grace period and be done if this is put into effect?
  • There are six more areas of "research," but those are a ways from being reality. Reducing the ODS, for example… the ODS dates back to 1976 or something. Changing the size or weight of the ball… these research areas are BIG, and the USGA/R&A are throwing everything at the wall here. Good for them. I think reducing driver head size is fine, but they may also find that stuff like that affects average golfers much more than PGA Tour players. It'll be interesting, too, how they may want to reduce the spin on clubs but add spin to the ball.
  • I still don't think we should set the Rules of the game (or equipment) based on a tiny fraction of the game. 6500 yards is enough for the vast majority of golfers. And I strongly dislike the idea of bifurcation. I think that putts the R&A/USGA events in a weird spot. It puts handicapping in a weird spot. There are orders of magnitude more people at the "good amateur or pro" level than "worldwide Tour" level. If I only had a choice between universal roll-backs and bifurcation, I'd take the universal. Keep everyone playing the same game under the same rules.
  • The best argument, IMO, for regulating distance is the land use argument. There were a lot of bad arguments that made the rounds in support of a "rollback." For example, the whole "sanctity of the game" line… that's not going to change. We still know what we know now about how to play, how to score, how to maximize chances for success. Short of massive changes to the game, that won't change. We won't unlearn those things.
  • Overall, the three things (46", reduced tolerance, ODS optimized launch) feel like the line in the sand, not a "rollback." Do 'em all! I've never argued that we should get MORE distance via equipment, or that we should expand the ODS or something, and this firms up the stopping point.
  • If the USGA/R&A want to make small changes with the argument that it will cap distances against advances in player conditioning and speed, I'm fine with that too. Change CoR from 0.83 to 0.8. Reduce driver head sizes to 400cc. I just don't think we need to reduce the distance the ball flies by 20% (and not everyone has supported 20%).

Interesting times. And kudos to the USGA/R&A for their six areas of research. 😄

i did a thing GIF

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 801 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • I had to think about this topic for a while. I don't tend to remember specific details about my putts, but a few do stand out in my mind so I guess they're worth noting. I don't know that I'd call them my favorite but it's close enough. #18 at Spooky Brook Might be the hardest 4' putt I've ever had. Pin was back right and I hit my third shot just to the right of it. The green slopes fairly severely back to front. I read the green but I knew the putt anyway as I've seen it before. I told the guys I was playing with that the putt was it was going to break almost 3' and if it doesn't go in I'd have a longer coming back up for par than I was looking at. It went in. #12 at Quail Brook I'm not even sure how to describe this green properly. It's not quite a two-tiered green, but the back and front are separated by a ridge that goes across the middle of it, with the green sloping harder off the front than the back. You can generally putt from the front to a back hole location but good luck keeping the ball on the green if you putt from back to front. On this particular day, I was looking at the latter. I had to putt up into the apron due to how the ball was going to break and that helped slow the ball down enough to hit the hole at the perfect speed. One of the rare birdies I've seen on that hole. #2 at Hyatt Hills Short par 5. This makes the list because it's the first eagle putt I've ever made, which funny enough happened the day after the first eagle I've ever made. I've made two eagles in all my life and they came on back to back days. I wasn't even planning on playing golf - it was a Monday - but I was doing some work at the place I used to work at when I was younger and catching up with some of the guys I've known for years. They were going out to play in the afternoon and had a spot available. I used to see these guys every day for years but we've never played together, so I said I'm in. I hit a really good approach shot into slope that separated the two tiers on the green and spun the ball closer to the hole. Had roughly 8' left to the hole, a downhill right to left breaker. One of the guys said, "You've got to make this, I've never seen an eagle before," and I said, "I've never made an eagle putt before." And then I made it. #17 at Stoneleigh @GolfLug's post reminded me of my own heroics on #17 a couple of years ago. The hole was back left, in the bottom tier. I hit my approach short of the green and flubbed my chip so it stayed on the top tier. I read how the putt was going to break after the ramp (is that what you call it?), then read my putt up to that point. It needed to basically die at that point because if it hit the slope with any kind of speed, it would long past the hole and possibly off the green. I hit the putt perfectly and holed the 40-footer center cup. #6 at Meadow at Neshanic Valley, #15 in the Round This was during the stroke play qualifier of my tournament. It might be a little bit of recency bias and I hit some really good long putts in the four rounds I played, but this 7-footer was my favorite putt of the entire tournament. The hole was cut on the top of a ridge. I hit my tee shot short right but hit a pretty good chip just long and below the hole. Play had backed up at this point, with the ladies waiting on the tee while we were finishing up. I hit the putt just a hair on the high side and it curled around the hole, fell back a couple of inches and stopped on lip. We all looked at it incredulously, "How does that not fall in?" Before I took my first step towards the hole, the ball must have thought the same thing and decided to drop.
    • I don't remember a ton of putts, but I've thought about this a bit and came up with 2 good ones. #5 at Mid-South: 2017 Newport Cup I remember the putt pretty well, but the surrounding details are a little hazy. I believe this was in my singles match against @cipher, and it was a hole he was stroking on. I had hit a mediocre approach to the front of the green and had what must have been a 50 foot putt to a back pin. If I remember correctly, @cipher was pretty close for an easy par at worst. I had @mvmac help me out with a read, which ended up being a great read by him. Hit the putt and jarred it for birdie. It was perfect speed, too, would have been an easy 2 putt if it hadn't gone in. I think we ended up tying for the hole. But I rarely make putts that long, and doing it to steal half a hole was really nice. #3 Fox Hollow (Links): 2023 Match Play This was on the third extra hole of a scratch match against a legitimate 0 handicapper. We had tied after 18 holes and traded pars on the first two extra holes. On the third extra hole, he had about 30 feet for birdie; I had about 25. We were on pretty much the exact same line. He missed his putt just on the low side, and I conceded the par. I felt good over this putt - I knew the break well and just needed good speed. I hit a great (not perfect) putt, and BAM, back of the cup for the victory on the 21st hole. I will say that the speed wasn't great, as it would have been a few feet past if it didn't hit the cup. But I wanted to give the ball a chance and take a bit of break out of it. I went on to win the match play tournament, which is my only tournament victory in a scratch event.
    • there will be lots of changes.  i mean, look at newey past, each team fell off a cliff when he moved on i think max is the magic bullet   if red bull loses him then whee are they going for drivers?   lots of young talent but he is a proven winner and i’m sure top engineers love to work with him  
    • I too, like @GolfLug, remember great wedge, iron shots, or my missed putts, more than my made putts. My most memorable recently, would be: #17 Old Course St. Andrews (last year) I had been putting awful all day (I started 3 putt, 4 putt, 3 putt, 3 putt), but found a putting stroke on the back 9 and was 1 under on the back going into 16 and of course I 3-putted it for a bogey. Got to 17 and my playing partner just hit it into the hotel, so I went a little more left and decided to not try and hit it over the hotel.  And as soon as my ball was in the air, I heard one of the other caddies do the chicken noise.  LOL My shot was a little more left than I wanted, about 185 yards, I hit a 6-iron and it was drawing right at the flag.  The pin was just to the right of he bunker and towards the front of the green. My ball hit short (and just missed going into said bunker) and stopped about 15 feet left of the hole. Had a little left to right break and as soon as I hit it, I knew it was in.  Birdie on the road hole, looked at the caddie and said not bad for a Chicken.  Parred 18 (missed 10 foot birdie putt) for a 35 on the back 9 at the Old Course. #18 Springfield G&CC Last year while playing in our season long match play event, my partner and I get the 18th hole needing to win the match to move on into the knockout round.  We are tied going into 18.  A tie and we lose on overall points by .5.  Our teaching pro is on the other team (very good golfer), so we were pretty sure we needed a birdie to have a chance to win the match, I hit on of the best drives I hit all day and had about 135 yards to the pin, but it was in a place where you didn't really want to be long.  So I hit a PW and it landed just short of the flag but released about 12 feet past the hole, so have a devilish putt coming back down the hill.  Our competitors were away and the pro missed his birdie putt by inches, I thought it was in when he hit it.  So after reading the putt, which probably had a 2 cup left to right break, I made the putt to win the match.   #15 Springfield G&CC A few years back, was playing in the first round of the Club Championship (against the previous years runner-up) and my putter was balky all day.  Got to the 15 hole, 2nd Par 5 on back, and was 3-down with 4 to play.  We both hit good drives, both hit good second shots and we both hit decent 3rd shots.  I was about 15 feet and he was just a hair longer.  He missed his putt, I had another slider putt down the hill, with about a foot of right to left break and made the putt.  I birded the next hole, to go 1 down, but not a memorable putt as I only needed a bogey to beat him on that hole, he had all kinds of issues going on.  Lost on 17, as he birdied it, right after I missed mine to lose 2&1.
    • Wordle 1,049 3/6* ⬜⬜⬜🟩🟨 ⬜⬜🟨🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...