Sneakylong
Oh, I think they are more than aware of stats like these. The majority of golfers probably plateau because they donât play often enough, and/or train and practice, or even care. They also probably donât donât know or play by the rules, or even keep handicaps. I canât blame the USGA for not catering to them. Plus, if your stats are accurate, and the improvements to equipment over the last 35 years have not led to these golfers having lower handicaps - then the ball rollback should not effect those handicaps either. You canât bemoan a loss of something which you never took advantage of.
I do not believe their primary goal is, as many have stated, âprotecting parâ. They could do that with 8000 yard courses, or many of the alternatives mentioned in this thread. I think they believe that equipment (balls primarily, then club sweat spot/forgiveness) has made the game easier at all levels and that it has leveled the playing field (like a muddy track in horse racing). Lower pro scoring averages (even with lengthened courses), number of first time winners, the drop in age of winners, the number/frequency of sub 60 rounds ⌠lots of stats bear this out. They WANT to make it more difficult again so that the cream can rise to the top more frequently. Stars sell. The fact that this could also result in protecting par is simply gravy. Well, IMO.
