USGA/R&A Changes to the Equipment Standards?

[saevel25]

18 minutes ago, Marty2019 said:

How will the rollback affect the average casual golfer who can on average hit his driver about 200 yards?  

If you play the same tees (course length). Expect to hit one 1-2 clubs more into every green. Probably closer to two. You will lose about 8-10 off every driver hit. You will then lose about 4-6 yards off every full swing iron shot. So, about 12-16 yards of total distance loss on each hole. 

If you hit 9 irons into a par 4, you will hit 8 or 7 iron. A long par 4 now, where you hit 5 irons, you may need to hit a hybrid or fairway wood. Those par 5's you use to barely reach in two, you now do not reach at all.  

If you play a 6000 yard course, you may need to move to a 5700 yardage to play the course the same way, having the same irons into the greens. 

[gbogey]

I'm thinking about it this way - 4% of 6300 is 250 yards. If I play a set of tees that are 250 yards longer than my norm, the course rating combined with slope usually goes up about a stroke, so my expectation is that it'll make the course a stroke harder. I'll be 65 by then, so it'll be an excuse to move forward. No big deal.

It feels like this is similar to the square grooves issue - remember that one - big todo over very little.

[Missouri Swede]

54 minutes ago, Marty2019 said:

I haven't been here in several years, but I know that there are a lot of serious golfers here, so I thought this would be a good place to ask this question.  Forgive me if it's been asked before.  

How will the rollback affect the average casual golfer who can on average hit his driver about 200 yards?  

The reason I ask is because I am getting older, and I think if I was forced to give up distance because of this ball rollback, I might just quit playing.  And I think a lot of people would agree with me.  

 

I've lost more than 4% (presumably due to age) over the last 3 years, so any change I would see would get attributed (by me) primarily due to age, unless I were to do a side-by-side comparison on the course. So maybe it adds a year or two to my "golf age".

I would be very interested to see a list of currently conforming balls that conform to the new criteria. (edit: criterion.  It's only a single data point that's being changed, if I understand correctly.)

Regarding quitting the game, I happened to notice fly fishing equipment while walking through Cabella's earlier this year, and the thought passed through my mind, "well whatever they end up doing, if it makes golf less fun, there are other hobbies I can take up and spend money on in retirement."

I also note in the letter by Slumbers and Whan that they basically said that they're coming for our drivers next. Okay, that's an exaggeration; "expand our testing approach" and "explore possible additional options related to distance" is what they wrote. But yeah, they're coming for my driver next.

22 minutes ago, gbogey said:

It feels like this is similar to the square grooves issue - remember that one - big todo over very little.

In a way, yeah. But I've got a full set of TaylorMade irons in pretty good condition sitting unused in my garage, non-conforming to the groove rule.

Maybe I'll keep a bunch of current balls and use those clubs to play out my years after 2030.  Be a complete non-conformist. It's not like I keep a handicap.

Looks like Orvis is having a sale on fly fishing gear.

Edited December 6, 2023 by Missouri Swede

[DeadMan]

This is an interesting explanation from Mike Whan on why he wants this rollback:

 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, bkuehn1952 said:

It seems like after the PGA and PGA Tour gave a thumbs down to the proposed reduced distance ball Model Local Rule, that would have solely affected professionals and elite amateurs, the USGA moved to plan B: limit everyone's distance.

I think it was more the manufacturers, but you're right that the PGA and PGA Tour said no to bifurcation, too. And if that was the USGA/R&A's plan the whole time… cool.

Also, I really hated the PGA of America's response. And the PGA Tour's response. I liked the LPGA Tour's response: “We don’t think we have a distance issue, but we support their right to make the rules and we are glad there’s no bifurcation.” (My summary)

1 hour ago, bkuehn1952 said:

Unfortunately, they decided to throw everyone under the bus in order to capture the professional and elite amateur golfer.

GOOD! I don't want bifurcation, and this rollback is basically almost nothing. So "thrown under the bus" is a bit melodramatic.

Rory talking about how it'll "bring some skills back into the pro game"? No. Nowhere near enough of a change to do anything of the sort. Dead wrong.

1 hour ago, bkuehn1952 said:

The 4% reduction does not seem like much. Also, the implementation date of 2030 is a long way off (2028 for pros/elites).

Exactly.

1 hour ago, bkuehn1952 said:

Once we all become accustomed to the idea of a rollback, further reductions may follow.  Afterall, the original Federal income tax rates started at 1-7% in 1913.

They might need to do something like that, absolutely.

1 hour ago, DeadMan said:

• I'm fine with the rollback. It's not going to be that big of change for most of us. I'd still prefer no rollback, but this is fine. Heck, if it makes tee times easier to come by in 2030, great.
• Somehow, I'm mad at the PGA Tour for being against this rollback. They said they wanted something more "modest." It's hard to imagine anything more modest than what the USGA did here.
• I don't think this really solves much with distance concerns except with extreme cases. Maybe Augusta can close a few tee boxes or something. It won't affect most courses. I don't think it will impact the important of distance on tour at all. NGLA is not going to host a US Open anytime soon, either.
• What are the odds that golf sees a downturn in the next 7 years that makes this rollback look like a really bad idea? Recreational golf is probably in its golden age right now. You can really only go down. It's possible that, in 2029, you don't want to scare golfers away by losing more distance.

I agree with all of that.

1 hour ago, Marty2019 said:

The reason I ask is because I am getting older, and I think if I was forced to give up distance because of this ball rollback, I might just quit playing.  And I think a lot of people would agree with me.

Apparently, there's like a 1 in 3 chance you're already be playing a ball that conforms. So you might not notice anything.

46 minutes ago, DeadMan said:

This is an interesting explanation from Mike Whan on why he wants this rollback:

HODL!

Oh, and I agree, that was a good response.

[saevel25]

1 hour ago, DeadMan said:

This is an interesting explanation from Mike Whan on why he wants this rollback:

 

Great response. I agree with what he said. I get the idea of trying to slow it down now before it gets really out of control. It might be the case that incremental decreases in distance over time will be more sustainable and agreeable than just saying something like, 15% reduction in distance right now. 

To think outside the box, why not have specific courses match up with specific ball characteristics for a few specific events. Let's say you want to take the US Open back to a course that it <7000 yards. Well, give the PGA tour players a year notice of this and their ball reps a year notice that they need to use these characteristics for these one or two events. These are the best players in the world, go figure it out. You ball manufacturers, you pay these guys enough money and make enough that you can figure it out. Guess what, you can then turn around and release special edition golf balls used at such and such tournament and make some money on the side from someone out there who would be into limited edition merch. 

 

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

To think outside the box, why not have specific courses match up with specific ball characteristics for a few specific events. Let's say you want to take the US Open back to a course that it <7000 yards. Well, give the PGA tour players a year notice of this and their ball reps a year notice that they need to use these characteristics for these one or two events.

No, I don't want that at all. You're going to make players play with unfamiliar equipment (it takes a long time at their level to fully adjust to a new golf ball, which is why many will switch over the winter and why many are still playing the 2017 Pro V1x or something) in a major? No way.

That's an even worse version of bifurcation.

[saevel25]

6 minutes ago, iacas said:

No, I don't want that at all. You're going to make players play with unfamiliar equipment (it takes a long time at their level to fully adjust to a new golf ball, which is why many will switch over the winter and why many are still playing the 2017 Pro V1x or something) in a major? No way.

That's an even worse version of bifurcation.

Ok, just spit-balling. 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, saevel25 said:

Ok, just spit-balling. 

It's just an opinion (mine and yours). If you think it's good, argue it. If you think what I said make sense, say that.

[chspeed]

4 hours ago, Missouri Swede said:

Looks like Orvis is having a sale on fly fishing gear.

How do you know they're not coming for your fishing gear next? Seems a bit too easy to catch those things. Heavier rods? 😜

[jxdama]

This  is a  pinprick, a nothing  burger. If the  object is to put a stop to runaway scores its easy to do. Push tees  back, narrow fairways, eliminate  par 5's where players are  hitting irons for the  2 nd shot and  convert them to par 4's, deep rough around greens and fairways and  deepen bunkers. If you dont  hit the fairway or  green expect to be  penalized. 

Edited December 6, 2023 by jxdama

[iacas]

46 minutes ago, jxdama said:

If the object is to put a stop to runaway scores its easy to do.

It's not. That's never been stated by the USGA or R&A as a reason.

46 minutes ago, jxdama said:

Push tees  back, narrow fairways, eliminate  par 5's where players are  hitting irons for the  2 nd shot and  convert them to par 4's, deep rough around greens and fairways and  deepen bunkers. If you dont  hit the fairway or  green expect to be  penalized. 

Like on LIV?

🤣

[StuM]

2 hours ago, jxdama said:

eliminate  par 5's where players are  hitting irons for the  2 nd shot and  convert them to par 4's

That does nothing to change actual score.  A 4 on a par-4 is the same as a 4 on a par-5.  Four strokes. And players would use the Danes clubs to get that score.

The Over & Under par on leaderboards is just to simplify how far ahead of behind a player is from another player.  The actual winner is determined by sho took the fewest strokes..

You could say every hole is a Par-3 (every course would be Par 54). The players would play the holes the same as today and have the same total strokes overall and if the shot a 65 now they would still shot a 65 after changing par.  NO DIFFERENCE!

Your change does nothing about actual scores nor does it make a hole harder nor does it change what clubs a player uses.  Also, it has 0 relation to a rollback in the ball.

i know you are having fun with your stale argument but dang, you must be easily amused.  

[jxdama]

11 hours ago, StuM said:

That does nothing to change actual score.  A 4 on a par-4 is the same as a 4 on a par-5.  Four strokes. And players would use the Danes clubs to get that score.

The Over & Under par on leaderboards is just to simplify how far ahead of behind a player is from another player.  The actual winner is determined by sho took the fewest strokes..

You could say every hole is a Par-3 (every course would be Par 54). The players would play the holes the same as today and have the same total strokes overall and if the shot a 65 now they would still shot a 65 after changing par.  NO DIFFERENCE!

Your change does nothing about actual scores nor does it make a hole harder nor does it change what clubs a player uses.  Also, it has 0 relation to a rollback in the ball.

i know you are having fun with your stale argument but dang, you must be easily amused.  

You are quite wrong. If you change a  530 yd  par  5 into a  530 yd  par  4 then you  go from an  eagle/birdie  fest to a struggle  for  par. The ball rollback accomplishes absolutely nothing and  its a total waste  of  time.

[Ty_Webb]

7 minutes ago, jxdama said:

You are quite wrong. If you change a  530 yd  par  5 into a  530 yd  par  4 then you  go from an  eagle/birdie  fest to a struggle  for  par. The ball rollback accomplishes absolutely nothing and  its a total waste  of  time.

It changes what you call it, but it doesn't change anything about who wins or anything like that. 

The ball rollback does IMO accomplish absolutely nothing, but it's got nothing to do with whether a 530 yard hole is called a par 4 or a par 5

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, jxdama said:

You are quite wrong. If you change a  530 yd  par  5 into a  530 yd  par  4 then you  go from an  eagle/birdie  fest to a struggle  for  par. The ball rollback accomplishes absolutely nothing and  it’s a total waste  of  time.

🤦‍♂️

[iacas]

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 courses are broadly adding forward tees, back tees are used for l...

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. 

[StuM]

3 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 courses are broadly adding forward tees, back tees are used for l...

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. 

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.