Sneakylong
I’d rather hear a statement from The Golf Course Superintendents Association of America saying that amateur club level tee box lengths would be rolled back 5% as well (reinstitute those from 1990-ish). Where would complaints lie then?
USGA/R&A Distance Report
- Edited
Just saw a rerun on the Golf Channel from the USGA and the R&A. And the CEO from TaylorMade.
Two things I came away with. Just as I thought. Their minds were made up from the get go. They’re only worried about the elite player with high swing speeds.
They make most of their money from The Open and U.S. Open. Once again money talks. It’s all about the big hitters and elite players.
The CEO from TaylorMade is against this change, but will abide by it. They did say they’ll look at driver forgiveness next. Make it less forgiving. They said it will only affect the professionals and they’re not going to make the game harder for the average golfer.
I think I’ve heard that before. 
Don’t trust these guys at all. Bottom line is what I already knew. They’re hell bent on making the game harder for the elite player.
But as we know their decisions will filter down to the average hacker.
Edit: Seth Waugh CEO of the PGA of America said the changes will affect the recreational golfer. And they oppose any change that lessens the enjoyment of the game for recreational golfers.
Sneakylong They did say they’ll look at driver forgiveness next. Make it less forgiving. They said it will only affect the professionals and they’re not going to make the game harder for the average golfer.
No one is going to make 2 drivers, not financially practical. Besides, certain groups of golfers, and they are not 'elite' from seeing their scores, will still want the exact same clubs that the Pros play. Hell, these idiots are already out there with blades!! And 'just broke 90'!! 
- Edited
Par4QC No one is going to make 2 drivers, not financially practical.
Exactly, it’s too expensive to retool and produce two drivers. So the less forgiving driver will be the only one offered.
They are totally out of touch. It’s the hardest sport to play and they’re so short sighted. Golfers are aspirational. They always trying to get better. The governing bodies mindset is trying make that harder to do.
Sneakylong I take my Launcher 400, or my 455DB, or Indio out ocassionally. I'm fairly good at hitting center so I don't see any loss of distance nor forgiveness over newer models.
These bigassed pancake driver heads have made everyone lazy golfers. Hit center and even an old 975 will go as far as the new.
- Edited
Sneakylong They always trying to get better
But without actually “trying”.
I’ve been told, repeatedly, that pros hit it further because todays athletes are getting bigger/stronger, swing mechanics are better, clubs are fitted to them … yet the guys I play with are not more fit, they use the same old ugly swing, and grab stock clubs off the rack … yet they still gained distance. This is good news! If they want to get that 5% back they can actually try by tapping all that potential rather than just buying it. Sacrilege, I know.
Par4QC No one is going to make 2 drivers, not financially practical.
Sneakylong Exactly, it’s too expensive to retool and produce two drivers. So the less forgiving driver will be the only one offered.
Have you looked at the current offerings from the large manufacturers recently?
Callaway have 13 different driver options currently available (on their GB site), although this does include some of last year's models (the Rogue ST line). Titleist have 4 current models, Taylormade 7, and Ping have 9 (although that includes the 425 series as well as the 430).
There are several good arguments that can be made against having different equipment standards for high-level competition, but 'it's too expensive for the manufacturers to make several different types of club' is not one of them.
Par4QC I take my Launcher 400, or my 455DB, or Indio out ocassionally. I'm fairly good at hitting center so I don't see any loss of distance nor forgiveness over newer models.
I suspect that this won't be the case for most people - there have been significant advances in driver technology over the last 30 years in addition to the obvious change in size.
This YouTube video came up in my suggestions yesterday - not conclusive evidence (as it's a relatively small test, and doesn't show the full dataset), but I suspect that this will be closer to what most people would experience if comparing a modern driver against what was state of the art 20 or 25 years ago.
I’m for anything that helps make the game easier, thus more enjoyable for the masses.
MartinD but 'it's too expensive for the manufacturers to make several different types of club' is not one of them
Including such variants as the Cally triple diamond LS models. Same applies to balls - easy to tweak as they
already do it for the Pros. I don't have any concerns for the OEM Manufacturers - they'll survive.
However, it will be interesting to see how the OEM's 'advertise' the new products when the time comes.
Par4QC I take my Launcher 400, or my 455DB, or Indio out ocassionally. I'm fairly good at hitting center so I don't see any loss of distance nor forgiveness over newer models.
I’m sure we all have anecdotal stories. But there’s no question there’s measurable forgiveness gains that have been made. Maybe it’s not perceivable to some, but engineering wise it’s there.
Again, I’ll take all the latest technology that helps make the game easier. I’m never going to be in favor of going backwards.
Ok, now they aren't talking about '5%' loss. They are saying the PGA Pros will lose 9-11 yds., LPGA 5-7, and amateurs only 5.
We wasted 527 posts on something trivial. We could have discussed boobies.
They seem to keep getting bigger, albeit artificially most times.
- Edited
MartinD There are several good arguments that can be made against having different equipment standards for high-level competition, but 'it's too expensive for the manufacturers to make several different types of club' is not one of them
Not my opinion, but from someone I heard on PGA Radio. They said retooling head size, forgiveness etc., with driver heads will cost money.
Just as retooling the golf ball will. How much is relative I suppose. But that’s the reason given as to why bifurcation isn’t happening.
Sneakylong
Easier isn’t inherently better, nor more enjoyable. I would much rather play a game of chess than tic-tac-toe. And, yes, I realize that golf is tough (not tic-tac-toe simple), but the distances added to the game over the last thirty plus years have not made me enjoy the game any more. The addictive part for me was in the challenge. Making the challenge harder simply makes the reward greater.
Stu1961 I chose to think of it terminating a period where we were unnecessarily rewarded
So you're saying I should be thankful that the hockey pucks I use are still the same size and weight as when I started?
I should embrace the day that they make them heavier and/or larger since all the pros shoot harder these days due to non-wooden sticks that are here to stay?
That is utter and complete asinine nonsense.
Stu1961 The addictive part for me was in the challenge.
+1!!
But, I'm not going to take out my old MacGregor blades and play any more. Challenging yes, but not quite the fun it used to be.
Challenges now consist of building something new and taking it out, without any trials, and just play. Or trying different balls. And see if shots and scores are affected.
- Edited
Par4QC We wasted 527 posts on something trivial
Maybe, maybe not. They said they’re not going to stop. They’re going to continually revisit. Next up driver forgiveness. What’s after that?
I’ll probably stop playing golf before this takes place anyway. I’m debating this out of principle.
It’s the only governing body of any sport that is trying to regress. Mind boggling. 
Again, I would have no issue if they just were doing this at the elite level and we had bifurcation.
But because of cost etc., bifurcation is off the table.
- Edited
Stu1961 the distances added to the game over the last thirty plus years have not made me enjoy the game any more.
I would argue all of the technology gains over the last 30 years have made the game better / more enjoyable for the average golfer. It’s cumulative. Why regress?