USGA/R&A Changes to the Equipment Standards?

[iacas]

14 minutes ago, StuM said:

Best argument against a rollback I have seen.  And I would think they have a very good data set to support the numbers they quoted.

Meh.

Since it's not bifurcation, I don't really care. Take it back 10%… it's still golf. At more than 10% (which is pretty extreme), green and fairway targets start to get a bit out of whack.

[chspeed]

59 minutes ago, iacas said:

Titleist's response is what you'd expect.

Statement from Acushnet CEO David Maher on USGA and R&A Golf Ball Rollback Announcement

---

At a time when interest in golf is vibrant (2023 will mark the 6th consecutive year in which the number of golfers has grown), golf...

It includes this:

We note that the mean of the fastest 1% of measured clubhead speeds on the PGA TOUR was flat from 2019-2021 and declined in 2022 and 2023. The mean of the fastest 5%, 10%, 20% and 50% of measured clubhead speeds has been flat since 2017. We consider that the average course playing length on the 2023 PGA TOUR is less than 7,200 yards, just as it has been every year since 2004. We also note that U.S. golf courses built during the period 2010-2020 averaged 6,652 yards - 274 yards shorter than those built between 1990-2010, which is at odds with the notion that equipment has forced courses to expand. 

I read the statement as noncommittal.

I don't think they know if/how this change will help or hurt their golf ball business.

[ChetlovesMer]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Meh.

Since it's not bifurcation, I don't really care. Take it back 10%… it's still golf. At more than 10% (which is pretty extreme), green and fairway targets start to get a bit out of whack.

I was really REALLY against the rollback. BUT, then I saw that 30% of the balls being sold today already comply with the rollback and I was like "Eh, maybe it ain't such a big deal"?

19 hours ago, chspeed said:

Heavier rods? 😜

[Ty_Webb]

58 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

I was really REALLY against the rollback. BUT, then I saw that 30% of the balls being sold today already comply with the rollback and I was like "Eh, maybe it ain't such a big deal"?

Right - because they basically did next to nothing. They paid lip-service to it, but that's it. 

I've been listening to the Hack It Out podcast - I'm about half way through so far. It's quite fun listening to Lou Stagner basically eviscerate all the arguments in favor of rollback using the USGA's own reports. Basically new courses built since 2010 are typically larger footprint than courses in the 1980s, but most of that is other changes - specifically that many new courses are built in housing estates and those need more room, so average size is up, but it has nothing to do with how far the golf ball goes. Fairway, green and tee space is virtually the same and that's where most of the "environmentally responsible" points come in. PGA Tour courses median length in 2023 was less than 7200 yards, so it's not like the PGA Tour is playing ridiculously long golf courses. He also regularly posts on Twitter the spread of lengths of second shots on par 4s and par 5s and they do hit plenty of long shots. Also made the point that distance is basically pegged by how wide you hit it and, per Sasho's data, that is basically all to do with how far you hit it, so if you limit balls by 5%, most tour players have that 5% in the tank, which they can use to get back to where they are today without any additional accuracy issues.

Haven't got to integrity yet, but Lou sounds excited to get to that and I think he's quite strongly anti-rollback.

[saevel25]

I've listened to a few podcasts on this. The more I listen, the more I don't have a strong stance for any of the cases. It is a difficult situation for the USGA. They are trying to balance this, but I think I agree that they didn't roll it back enough if they are going to roll it back. I rather them juts roll it back 10% and see how that goes for the next 30 years. I've played golf before hitting it 270 yards. It hasn't been that way since 2002, but golf is golf. I will just adjust my tee box selection and still play. 

I do not know if the concerns about golf course selection being at jeopardy for amateur golf. I do not know the number of players that are bombing it versus like 15 years ago. I understand where the PGA Tour player are at. I do not know where college, high school, ect... are at. 

If the USGA is continually having a shorter and shorter list of courses the host tournaments at for amateur golf, then maybe it should be rolled back. I also do not know what would happen to golf when golfers suddenly see a 10% drop in distance. How many will just not play?

[colin007]

I would have to imagine there's gonna be a (small) market for non-conforming balls. I would prolly play them

[Missouri Swede]

30 minutes ago, colin007 said:

I would have to imagine there's gonna be a (small) market for non-conforming balls. I would prolly play them

Non-conforming balls (non-conforming to the current standard) are already available, if you want to play one.

A friend of mine (in his 80s) was playing this one for a while: 

Golf Balls - MG Senior at mggolf.com

---

Shop for Golf Balls - MG Senior at mggolf.com. Pro Golf Gloves, Golf Balls, Golf Hats, Laser Rangefinders and Golf Bags.

So it wouldn't be completely unheard of to have non-conforming balls for sale. 

By the time this new change becomes effective, I might be of an age where I'll want to retain yardage for fun. I currently go through about 6 sleeves a year (maybe 4 this year).  If I buy a dozen boxes in 2029, that might last me long enough.

[rocket23]

I gotta tell ya. By the time 2030 rolls around. I’ll still be hitting today’s golf balls. I have over 300 and rarely use over a dozen in 6 months. To space out my collection. I use found balls which I have over a hundred. So they can do what they want it won’t add a weekend hacker like me. 

[boogielicious]

4 hours ago, Ty_Webb said:

Right - because they basically did next to nothing. They paid lip-service to it, but that's it. 

That is kind of how I see it. It’s not nearly as much as I though it would be.

1 minute ago, rocket23 said:

I gotta tell ya. By the time 2030 rolls around. I’ll still be hitting today’s golf balls. I have over 300 and rarely use over a dozen in 6 months. To space out my collection. I use found balls which I have over a hundred. So they can do what they want it won’t add a weekend hacker like me. 

Plus you’ll have 6 years to find a ton more.😉

[rocket23]

13 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

That is kind of how I see it. It’s not nearly as much as I though it would be.

Plus you’ll have 6 years to find a ton more.😉

My home course has a small fescue patch that I walk thru after the season. The hard freezes kill off the high grass and it’s easy pickings. It’s on a steep grade, catches the slices off of five and the slices of of everyone coming the other way on eight. I walked away with a full carry bag a few days ago. Granted a few dozen were range worthy but the rest are all keepers. 

[iacas]

4 hours ago, Ty_Webb said:

I've been listening to the Hack It Out podcast - I'm about half way through so far. It's quite fun listening to Lou Stagner basically eviscerate all the arguments in favor of rollback using the USGA's own reports.

I will just say you and I clearly have different definitions of "eviscerate."

The Distance Insights Report is about the past. It is what has happened. It's not about the future. This "holdback" is about the future, not the past.

That's one of the things that Lou is missing.

4 hours ago, Ty_Webb said:

Basically new courses built since 2010 are typically larger footprint than courses in the 1980s, but most of that is other changes - specifically that many new courses are built in housing estates and those need more room, so average size is up, but it has nothing to do with how far the golf ball goes.

That's largely an assumption. From the 2000s to the 2010s it went up over 20 acres, from 200-something to 229. The acreage of fairways increased too, and that's not got much to do with housing developments.

4 hours ago, Ty_Webb said:

Fairway, green and tee space is virtually the same and that's where most of the "environmentally responsible" points come in.

4 hours ago, Ty_Webb said:

PGA Tour courses median length in 2023 was less than 7200 yards, so it's not like the PGA Tour is playing ridiculously long golf courses.

It's not just about the PGA Tour.

[rocket23]

I have to admit. The course in our state. ( there’s only been one). Is not a yardage fest by any means. But the better equipment has shortened it up quite a bit.  
 The balls have (so they say) have also improved. But the weekend hacker who savors every foot of a decent drive will probably never have noticed if never told. Moho. 

[Marty2019]

My stance is that they are penalizing the average hacker who hits the ball barely 200 yards as it is, and these people are the ones who buy most of the golf balls, golf clubs, lessons, and pay most of the greens fees.  And therefore they are hurting the golf business by rolling back the ball and making a frustrating game even more frustrating.  

But I wonder, are my assumptions true?   Does the average hacker who barely hits the ball 200 yards actually buy most of the golf balls, golf clubs, lessons, and pay most of the greens fees?  

However you want to argue everything I said above, I am just asking that one question which is underlined.  Is the business of golf actually supported mainly by that average hacker?  

 

[StuM]

8 minutes ago, Marty2019 said:

However you want to argue everything I said above, I am just asking that one question which is underlined.  Is the business of golf actually supported mainly by that average hacker?

I say “Yes” us average players support golf.  The pros mostly get free clubs, balls, cloths, etc.  if no average golfers most courses would struggle to cover expenses.

i do not know if that relevant to the rollback however.  I do not see the guys I know giving up playing golf over a couple yards lost in distance.  Avg drive of 200 less 4% rollback is still 192.  They will still have drives over 200 (that’s how averages work)

[iacas]

5 hours ago, Marty2019 said:

However you want to argue everything I said above, I am just asking that one question which is underlined.  Is the business of golf actually supported mainly by that average hacker?

Not really the topic here. Also, you losing 4 or 5 yards isn't going to change your game very much.

[Nutsmacker]

On 12/9/2023 at 12:13 PM, Marty2019 said:

My stance is that they are penalizing the average hacker who hits the ball barely 200 yards as it is, and these people are the ones who buy most of the golf balls, golf clubs, lessons, and pay most of the greens fees.  And therefore they are hurting the golf business by rolling back the ball and making a frustrating game even more frustrating.  

But I wonder, are my assumptions true?   Does the average hacker who barely hits the ball 200 yards actually buy most of the golf balls, golf clubs, lessons, and pay most of the greens fees?  

However you want to argue everything I said above, I am just asking that one question which is underlined.  Is the business of golf actually supported mainly by that average hacker?  

 

Hey man, I totally agree with you.  Rolling back distances is not a good idea.  I don't know about the people on the forum that are scratch players and what not, but at all of the public courses I play...I generally hit farther than most of the randoms I play with and my golf friends and have done so for 20 years.  I hit the ball about 270 Yards average off the tee and I hit it about as far today as I did when I was 21 years old.  Most players including a lot of my age 40+ friends can't hit the ball 230.  The game is supposed to be fun and hitting the ball further is fun.  This seems like a fun sponge of a ruling and will likely hurt the overall game for the older folks and recreational golfers.  I don't want to hear about "its not going to hurt you that much" - every single one of my friends and acquaintances would do anything for 10 more yards off the tee.  They are making rule changes for the elite players that we will never be.   I spend 100 bucks to go play golf and the last thing I want is to be rolling the ball back.  99% of the golfers I play with aren't hitting it "too far" - they are barely able to even attempt to get on GIR.  Many have given up playing now when they have to layup on a par 4.  

[chspeed]

15 minutes ago, Nutsmacker said:

Many have given up playing now when they have to layup on a par 4.  

They're likely playing from the wrong tees.

[Nutsmacker]

2 minutes ago, chspeed said:

They're likely playing from the wrong tees.

How often do you think a guy that is 43 years old is going to want to move up to the senior or ladies tees?  We have the Tips, a Blue, a White(men's), Senior, Ladies.  We usually play white's.  When I don't play with them I play the blues.  Again, I feel like everyone is just thinking about themselves and not the overall impact of the game and the revenue(and likely more golf course closings) that will result from this.