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

[Jayjay_theweim_guy]

5 minutes ago, LeoLeo99 said:

 

The USGA/RA proposed a local rule saying the PGAtour and other pro tours could use the shorter ball and the Tour said no way.  We're not going to use the short ball.  So, the USGA/RA said fine, we'll roll it back for everyone.  

The Tour said, "We're not going to pay for making a shorter ball."  Longer distances is not a problem for our product.

 

OEMs said, "We're not making a different ball for the pros for free." 

 

OK, so who has a problem then?  Some elite courses and the two regulatory agencies.  Fine, you pay OEMs to make a separate ball for your tournaments.  Cool, they can do that if they want.  It's their tournaments; the pros/elite Ams will adjust ahead of time or not show up. 

 

That's not what's happening though.  The same regulatory agencies that were complaining the last decade that we all needed to move up a tee box because we all suck and we don't hit it that far, are now saying that we'll get to suck with even less distance on our strikes than before.  They are asking the golf community as a whole to pay the costs of fixing a Pro-only problem.

 

[caniac6]

I will tell them by not renewing my membership. There’s really nothing more I can do.

[klebs01]

52 minutes ago, Jayjay_theweim_guy said:

Lol no.  Maybe for your group.

 

But every statistical analysis of amateur golfers, using data from Arccos, Grint, Shotscope, whatever, shows that most golfers just don't hit it that far.  Average driving distance for scratch is in the 250s, not 350s

 

620 par 5 easily reached...  So, how was Q School?

You obviously play with short hitters. Long hitters are way more common than a lot of folks around here care to admit. 
 

there is no reason anyone halfway athletic shouldn’t hit it 300 with current technology. 

Edited December 2, 2023 by klebs01

[hammergolf]

3 hours ago, dgarland said:

If you think rolling back the golf ball is dumb (which it is) let the governing bodies know about it.  Below are links so you can voice your concerns.

 

USGA Equipment Standards: testcenter@usga.org

 

R & A Comments Page:  https://shop.randa.org/contactus

They have never cared about recreational golf. Just the power to attempt to control the game.

Edited December 2, 2023 by hammergolf

[hammergolf]

1 hour ago, Ger21 said:

Distance has nothing to do with the price of golf. This past year, all my local courses raised their prices 10%-15%. Because the cost of everything has gone up.

Costs at the big golf resorts are through the roof, due to supply and demand. A lot of people would need to stop playing golf for prices to change.

 

Nobody will be moving up a tee when the "new ball" arrives. And even if they did, do you really think hitting 1-2 clubs less into a green will speed up someone that normally takes 5 hours to play?

 

I've been playing 40 years, and have yet to see a course become obsolete. And I've never seen a course near me (50+ courses within an hour) expand, unless they are hosting high level tournaments.

 

98% of the golfing public does not have this "problem".

Typical usga, punish 98% of golfers instead of regulating the 2%….

[Jayjay_theweim_guy]

7 minutes ago, klebs01 said:

You obviously play with short hitters. Long hitters are way more common than a lot of folks around here care to admit. 
 

there is no reason anyone halfway athletic shouldn’t hit it 300 with current technology. 

Dude, Golf Twitter is that way -->.

 

What, you're next going to ask me if I even lift, bro?

 

Oh, and take it up with all of those groups I mentioned, with literally millions of shots and tens of thousands or more of golfers in their databases, that they're all just a bunch of unathletic slugs.  

 

Your statement about, "...no reason anyone halfway athletic shouldn’t hit it 300 with current technology," isn't born out by what we're actually seeing.

 

I guess Q School didn’t go well..

 

 

Edited December 2, 2023 by Jayjay_theweim_guy

[grochol17]

39 minutes ago, Ger21 said:

Distance has nothing to do with the price of golf.

 

Course length might not be the dominant factor in price, but it does contribute to the cost of running a course... a longer course and more tee boxes means more land, which means more grass to maintain, which means that you need to spend more on things like people, equipment, maintenance of that equipment, and fuel.  How much that contributes to the greens fees will obviously depend on a lot of factors, but it matters to the bottom line.  A few years ago a course near me started introducing "low maintenance" around their tee boxes specifically to cut costs... rather than keep those areas at rough height, wherever they could they'd let the native grasses take over and only trim them down once a month, just enough to keep them out of the way of play.

 

56 minutes ago, Ger21 said:

Nobody will be moving up a tee when the "new ball" arrives. And even if they did, do you really think hitting 1-2 clubs less into a green will speed up someone that normally takes 5 hours to play?

 

Maybe courses start moving all of their tee marker up so that the holes play 95% of what they played before the new ball.  Or maybe the guy that used to be able to carry a bunker decides he wants to keep carrying that bunker, so he moves up a set of tees.  I don't know exactly how people will react and of course, people can still find way to f around while they are playing, but at the very least if you have to cover less ground you should be able to do it in less time.

 

1 hour ago, Ger21 said:

I've been playing 40 years, and have yet to see a course become obsolete. And I've never seen a course near me (50+ courses within an hour) expand, unless they are hosting high level tournaments.

 

I've been playing 39 years and I've seen it multiple times... distance increases make a course start playing "too short" so guys move on to newly built courses that are longer.  If the "short course" can expand or remodel, it does, but if that isn't an option, the number of rounds played goes down, revenue drops, course conditions go downhill, more people stop playing, and either the course continues limping along as a crappy course or the owners sell and suddenly the course is now a housing development.  For example, a course not too far away from me used to host US Open qualifiers in the 80s, but at only 6200 yards people stopped playing when technology passed it by, and the course recently closed and sold to a housing developer after losing something like $1 million over the last five years. 

[st1800e]

Do we really need a third topic on this subject?  

[js707]

This decision will undoubtedly be beneficial for the longer hitters. We know definitively that proximity to the hole does not increase linearly. We intuitively know this (just imagine your dispersion pattern going from 8i to 6i vs 6i to 4h).

 

Wrxers and Golf Twitter should be celebrating this change, not fighting it. 

[klebs01]

1 hour ago, Ger21 said:

I've been playing 40 years, and have yet to see a course become obsolete. And I've never seen a course near me (50+ courses within an hour) expand, unless they are hosting high level tournaments.

 

The short courses that haven’t expanded are the only ones closing.  They are obsolete. Almost every course I’ve played around me within an hour are expanding and adding new tees to stay economically viable. 

Edited December 2, 2023 by klebs01

[grochol17]

1 hour ago, Louis_Posture said:

At shorter length courses (or a long course from the forward tee boxes)  I find playing fairway woods , hybrids, or irons off the par 4 and par 5 tee boxes makes approach shots more interesting and fun to play.

 

Thanks for quoting me by leaving off part of what I said and then explaining to me the point I was making.  Yes, I could hit 3 iron off of the tee, but I like to hit a variety of clubs and that includes getting to hit driver a few times around.

[hammergolf]

Typical usga R&A logic…. Punish 98% of golfers for what 2% can do with a ball! One thing is for sure, I will be buying cases of golf balls in 2030 before they start trying to force golfers to play the short ball. Their ignorance is laughable. In their infinite stupidity they just made the game harder and rounds take even longer for 90% of golfers. 

[grochol17]

2 hours ago, hammergolf said:

Wouldn’t be surprised. The bow ties at the usga have been ruining the recreational game for decades. Hopefully someone with an ounce of intelligence in NJ realizes that the answer has been there the whole time. Condition of competition has been on the books for decades. It’s simple, have different equipment rules for professionals and elite amateurs than recreational players. They are just hardheaded and refusing to enact bifurcation. 

 

I see people say stuff like this in these kinds of threads, but I don't see it... what specifically has the USGA done that has ruined golf?  Like time I checked more people are playing golf than ever and we're all here talking about the game we love, so when and how did it get ruined?

[grochol17]

8 minutes ago, st1800e said:

Do we really need a third topic on this subject?  

 

Would you rather talk about blades?  🙂

[grochol17]

15 hours ago, My2Dogs said:

I think bifurcation is the way to go.  The older players are really going to be hurt moving forward.  I played with a guy over the weekend 66 yo.  I can’t imagine him losing another 20 yards off the tee and even then his next shot will be longer as he won’t be able to use the same club.  He was already hitting woods into par 4’s playing from the whites.  

 

Back in the late 80s I played a few rounds of golf with a guy that was 90 hitting a balata ball with a persimmon driver.  I think a 66 yr old swinging a 460 cc titanium driver and a ball that goes 95% of what a current pro v1 travels will be able to figure out how to get around a course. 

[hammergolf]

1 minute ago, grochol17 said:

 

I see people say stuff like this in these kinds of threads, but I don't see it... what specifically has the USGA done that has ruined golf?  Like time I checked more people are playing golf than ever and we're all here talking about the game we love, so when and how did it get ruined?

More people are playing golf now because Covid opened people’s eyes to the game. The usga had NOTHING to do with that increase. They are so far removed from what the game of golf is. They have consistently made poor decision after poor decision. This entire folly of equipment changes is based on what 2% of golfers can do that in their mind “threatens” the game and obsolete golf courses. So instead of addressing this issue decades ago with bifurcation, they focus on the important things like calling hazards “penalty areas” now or using “tied” instead of halved. And let’s not forget the game saving change to the drop rule…. 

[st1800e]

8 minutes ago, grochol17 said:

 

Would you rather talk about blades?  🙂

Slow golf is my fave. 

[trebleclef]

So the ball goes too far for the professional game. Hmm...🤔

 

Maybe it's the tournament conditions that could be considered first before affecting 99.999% of golfers where this is not a material issue. 

 

So if you want to make golf more interesting and bring strategy back into the game maybe start with growing up the rough and removing the spotters.

 

Then move the ropes back so that spectators aren't close enough to see where drives land. Or just move them away from the landing are altogether. Rope that part off. 

 

Think of how many of us mere mortals would appreciate having someone to point out where our ball landed when we can't find it after we know we hit a good drive. 

 

Now Tour Pro, are you going to bomb and gouge it out there with no reassuarnce that someone points out to you where you ball may have landed? Maybe you weren't hitting driver this morning on the range as well you were hitting in the tournament yesterday? 

 

Rolling back the ball should be done only after everything else has been tried. 

 

And yes pro golf is already slow but it isn't like you are doing anything other than watching TV anyway. 🙃

 

Tour Pro: "I didn't see where that landed."

 

Caddie: "Better hit a provisional."

 

Tour Pro hits provisional

 

Tour Pro: "Was that in the same place?" 

 

Caddie: "I think so. Better hit another one."

 

Tour Pro: "F**K!" 

Edited December 2, 2023 by trebleclef

[grochol17]

Just now, hammergolf said:

More people are playing golf now because Covid opened people’s eyes to the game. The usga had NOTHING to do with that increase. They are so far removed from what the game of golf is. They have consistently made poor decision after poor decision. This entire folly of equipment changes is based on what 2% of golfers can do that in their mind “threatens” the game and obsolete golf courses. So instead of addressing this issue decades ago with bifurcation, they focus on the important things like calling hazards “penalty areas” now or using “tied” instead of halved. And let’s not forget the game saving change to the drop rule…. 

 

I didn't say the USGA was responsible for the COVID bump.  What I'm asking is for the things that "ruined" the game as you stated.  The things you've mentioned are all things that people made fun of on the internet for being silly, but did anyone quit the game because you drop from knee height instead of shoulder height?  I seem to remember people claiming the new groove rule was going to ruin the game, but that definitely turned out to be a non-event.  So what were the things in the past few decades that the USGA did that caused a mass exodus from the game?

[Ger21]

54 minutes ago, klebs01 said:

there is no reason anyone halfway athletic shouldn’t hit it 300 with current technology. 

PGA Tour average is 299.9

Half of them must be really out of shape, or have zero athletic ability.

Edited December 2, 2023 by Ger21

[hammergolf]

3 minutes ago, grochol17 said:

 

I didn't say the USGA was responsible for the COVID bump.  What I'm asking is for the things that "ruined" the game as you stated.  The things you've mentioned are all things that people made fun of on the internet for being silly, but did anyone quit the game because you drop from knee height instead of shoulder height?  I seem to remember people claiming the new groove rule was going to ruin the game, but that definitely turned out to be a non-event.  So what were the things in the past few decades that the USGA did that caused a mass exodus from the game?

It’s simple, they’ve made the game harder and rounds longer for the majority of golfers because they insist on punishing the average and recreational golfer because they only focus on what professionals and elite amateurs can do with equipment. If a driver goes 15yds further and is more forgiving for a 15 hdcp then GREAT! Maybe he or she will have more fun and play a little faster. If a 10hdcp golfer who struggles to hit par 4’s in regulation and finds a ball to give them 10 more yards then GREAT! Neither of those players I just mentioned are going to “make a course obsolete” or “threaten” the game. God forbid they have more fun playing the game and can maybe play a little faster. This entire ball/equipment fiasco could have been addressed decades ago have they just made different equipment rules for the professional game as other sport’s controlling bodies do. In fact, a precedent is there when the r&a and usga used to use different golf balls…… 

[My2Dogs]

15 minutes ago, grochol17 said:

 

I didn't say the USGA was responsible for the COVID bump.  What I'm asking is for the things that "ruined" the game as you stated.  The things you've mentioned are all things that people made fun of on the internet for being silly, but did anyone quit the game because you drop from knee height instead of shoulder height?  I seem to remember people claiming the new groove rule was going to ruin the game, but that definitely turned out to be a non-event.  So what were the things in the past few decades that the USGA did that caused a mass exodus from the game?

Before the COVID bump. We had a big problem with golf.  Courses were closing, memberships were down.  Remember they were doing everything to try and grow the game, get new blood, get younger, get minorities, etc into the game.  
 

 

[Pepperturbo]

Golf will NOT roll back green fees, nor will OEMs roll back equipment prices.  That does NOT happen in the business world.

 

Courses only become obsolete if owners hope to host a PGA Tour level event.  Otherwise, the average golfer doesn't give a hoot, and six thousand yard courses are not considered potential tour venues; hell, the LPGA hardly considered that length.  Plus, rolling back the ball is likely to have a devastating effect on the LPGA.  They will have to shave tuff down to cement for LPGA to realize distance.  

The only golfers that will enjoy the rollback are senior citizens and youngsters that don't have a game or hit the ball very far to begin with.  Regardless of how hard better amateurs work on their game, they will suffer.  

 

NOPE, I can't support letting the slowest and oldest ships in the convoy define the game and pace.

[NoTalentLefty]

15 hours ago, TheBiles said:

Yeah, let’s punish all golfers to solve a make-believe problem that effects maybe 500 professionals. Woo!

Exactly! You’ve hit the nail on the head and drilled it through the board. I’m getting too old for to rebel against the USGA but I will not be renewing my membership. They have a purpose for rules and such but the ball is already regulated, leave it alone. 

[LeoLeo99]

55 minutes ago, grochol17 said:

 

Course length might not be the dominant factor in price, but it does contribute to the cost of running a course... a longer course and more tee boxes means more land, which means more grass to maintain, which means that you need to spend more on things like people, equipment, maintenance of that equipment, and fuel.  How much that contributes to the greens fees will obviously depend on a lot of factors, but it matters to the bottom line.  A few years ago a course near me started introducing "low maintenance" around their tee boxes specifically to cut costs... rather than keep those areas at rough height, wherever they could they'd let the native grasses take over and only trim them down once a month, just enough to keep them out of the way of play.

 

 

Maybe courses start moving all of their tee marker up so that the holes play 95% of what they played before the new ball.  Or maybe the guy that used to be able to carry a bunker decides he wants to keep carrying that bunker, so he moves up a set of tees.  I don't know exactly how people will react and of course, people can still find way to f around while they are playing, but at the very least if you have to cover less ground you should be able to do it in less time.

 

 

I've been playing 39 years and I've seen it multiple times... distance increases make a course start playing "too short" so guys move on to newly built courses that are longer.  If the "short course" can expand or remodel, it does, but if that isn't an option, the number of rounds played goes down, revenue drops, course conditions go downhill, more people stop playing, and either the course continues limping along as a crappy course or the owners sell and suddenly the course is now a housing development.  For example, a course not too far away from me used to host US Open qualifiers in the 80s, but at only 6200 yards people stopped playing when technology passed it by, and the course recently closed and sold to a housing developer after losing something like $1 million over the last five years. 

 

The short open course near me does quite well.  The short tight course near me doesn't do so well.  

 

I assume the courses will have to move the tee markers up 5% closer to keep the same course ratings.  Has anything been published by USGA on how they will rate courses with the short ball?  During the transition, will there be a box to check on which ball you played?  

[JLew]

Anything that makes golf less enjoyable for the vast majority of players (emphasis on vast) makes zero sense. If the impact of this extends so far that it makes golf so much less enjoyable that play significantly decreases, they won’t worry have to worry about course yardages becoming obsolete, we’ll just see a lot of courses closing. 
 

Less people playing golf means less people watching golf which means less revenue for the PGA Tour / DP / LIV, etc. 

 

For a group with a stated mission to “Grow the Game” going back many years, they sure never make a decision that does that. 

[hammergolf]

1 minute ago, JLew said:

Anything that makes golf less enjoyable for the vast majority of players (emphasis on vast) makes zero sense. If the impact of this extends so far that it makes golf so much less enjoyable that play significantly decreases, they won’t worry have to worry about course yardages becoming obsolete, we’ll just see a lot of courses closing. 
 

Less people playing golf means less people watching golf which means less revenue for the PGA Tour / DP / LIV, etc. 

 

For a group with a stated mission to “Grow the Game” going back many years, they sure never make a decision that does that. 

Exactly!

[Pnwpingi210]

4 hours ago, klebs01 said:

The problem with your simplistic view is that both are true. Yeah old folks and this that are unathletic and picked up the game don’t hit it far and should move up. On the other hand, those under 50 or so that picked it up young, and especial the younger players today hit it WAY too far. Now it’s not uncommon for a 300 yard drive to be a short ball in a group. 620 yard par 5s are easily reached. The current game is unsustainable. 
 

one of the benefits of the roll back is that it rolls back the long hitters more than the short hitters so it compresses the difference in distance between players. That should

be viewed as a good thing. 

I don’t know if you are playing at 7200 feet elevation or playing at a course that has a lot of professionals playing the course.  But I’ve been playing golf a long time and with a lot of different people.  I can probably can count on one hand the amount of people I’ve seen hit a true 300 yard carry drive (people, not total number)

 

I’ve seen plenty of 250 yard carry, roll out to 300 on a baked out down slope but that not representative of what that player hits normally.

[klebs01]

2 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

I don’t know if you are playing at 7200 feet elevation or playing at a course that has a lot of professionals playing the course.  But I’ve been playing golf a long time and with a lot of different people.  I can probably can count on one hand the amount of people I’ve seen hit a true 300 yard carry drive (people, not total number)

 

I’ve seen plenty of 250 yard carry, roll out to 300 on a baked out down slope but that not representative of what that player hits normally.

about 700ft. Not fast and firm. More often slow. I’ve seen a ton of players do it. Most are low single to plus cap. Not uncommon. 

[Pnwpingi210]

1 minute ago, klebs01 said:

about 700ft. Not fast and firm. More often slow. I’ve seen a ton of players do it. Most are low single to plus cap. Not uncommon. 

Right.