Luc_Van_Daele Like there is no problem with 99% of the golf courses
That is just not true. As recreational golfers, we don't see the problem, because we aren't the problem.
Most courses host competitions using USGA regulations. And currently, junior golfers are growing up thinking they need 300-350 yard drives to be competitive. The competition golfer will continue to push courses longer and longer unless limits are dialed back.
Sparky The competition golfer will continue to push courses longer and longer
That all depends on the mindset of the course owners. If they all start saying 'no more', it's a done deal. Play on!
Competitions are not about scores, as we may be concerned about as bad amateurs, it is about winning/placing/money. Scores be damned. They mean nothing at banks or on trophies.
jmo, but the powers that be, just do not get that.
MartinD if there were stricter limits on the equipment used at the top level, with the aim of reducing forgiveness - that's the second option above.
But again, those restrictions are going to be paced on everyone. OEMs are not going to want to be making a lot of different clubs. And any competitions will always use 'the rules'. Best that everyone 'suffers'.
We will just have to get used to no more pancake driver heads. And maybe knocking off another inch of length of them.
And better learn how to hit centerface!!
I really think they will do something with the FW clubs, maybe more so than drivers. Those 300 yd. hits off the deck are getting a bit ridiculous, esp. when some of the gals are approaching that length now.
Yes, you're correct. I misspoke. You can legislate against athleticism and that's what they're trying to do. Athletes are getting bigger and stronger. That won't change. For me it's an exercise in futility.
The USGA was for bifurcation and now they're not. Restrict all you want for competitive golf, but don't punish the recreational golfer.
Par4QC Competitions are not about scores, as we may be concerned about as bad amateurs, it is about winning/placing/money. Scores be damned. They mean nothing at banks or on trophies.
jmo, but the powers that be, just do not get that.
Bingo.......... If there never was a thing called par there wouldn't be this call to restrict things. They will never do it, but get rid of par. Just add up the strokes and the fewest strokes win.
Forget about how many under par the winning score is. Just announce it like The Open does. With a score of 270 and the winner of the Gold medal and the Champion golfer of the year is.......................
The USGA and R&A are concerned about embarrassing legacy courses. It's stupid. So what if golfers are getting bigger and stronger. The winning score no matter what it is wins.
When I was in high school (early 70's) they banned dunking in basketball (from 1967 to 1976). That was dumbass as well. But again, the USGA can do whatever they want and if the Tours go along with it I really don't care.
But leave the recreational golfer out of it. Allow bifurcation.
Sneakylong Forget about how many under par the winning score is. Just announce it like The Open does. With a score of 270 and the winner of the Gold medal and the Champion golfer of the year is.......................
The USGA and R&A are concerned about embarrassing legacy courses. It's stupid. So what if golfers are getting bigger and stronger. The winning score no matter what it is wins.
It would be an interesting experiment to deliberately set some of the majors up for a -25 target score and see if the better players still gravitate to the top of the leaderboard in the later stages of the tournament. Anecdotally, it feels like the best players flow to the top in tournaments where the winning score is close to single digits to par and good, but not great players flow to the top in tournaments where the difficulty to par is significantly lower. The relationship to par doesn't matter, but the difficulty of the course seems to. I don't have data to back that up though and there isn't enough variation in the majors' difficulty level over time to make much correlation.
Bifurcation won't work. It doesn't work now. Nobody is stopping the recreation golfer right now from playing non-conforming balls and clubs. Nobody is stopping the recreational player from taking gimmes, taking mulligans, kicking the ball out of the rough, rolling it onto some nice grass, going back to the tee after a lost ball instead of dropping the ball and saying "this is close enough", taking the eraser to the scorecard.
You will still be able to do all of these things after a ball rollback.
Sparky You will still be able to do all of these things after a ball rollback.
Unless you are in a competition that states USGA rules apply, all those things are true and not change anything. Almost everyone on here will lose more than 5 yards by 2030. Want to beat the new rule, use the right ball for you and pure the hit more often. Oh, and from 5 iron to PW, it will be hard to note the difference. Agree Sparky.
Now, I’d not be happy were I a 16 yo now. 
Spuzz ...but only after being unnecessarily punished
I chose to think of it terminating a period where we were unnecessarily rewarded. I'll still be hitting it as long if not longer than when I took up the sport in my 20's. Of course I'm probably fitter and more athletic now at 63. Better looking too!
Sparky Bifurcation won't work. It doesn't work now. Nobody is stopping the recreation golfer right now from playing non-conforming balls and clubs. Nobody is stopping the recreational player from taking gimmes, taking mulligans, kicking the ball out of the rough, rolling it onto some nice grass, going back to the tee after a lost ball instead of dropping the ball and saying "this is close enough", taking the eraser to the scorecard.
You will still be able to do all of these things after a ball rollback
Of course bifurcation with the ball will work. It works now with what you described and is the essence of bifurcation (2 sets of rules). We already have bifurcation with no one playing exactly by USGA rules. Gimmes, mulligans, kicking the ball, preferred lies etc..
The USGA can't punish someone for taking a breakfast ball on the first tee. They can't hurt my game there. But by not allowing bifurcation with golf balls they are punishing peoples golf game for absolutely no reason.
I would hope the ball manufacturers would weigh in and tell the USGA that they will make two categories of golf balls. The restricted one for competitive golf and a non restrictive one for the non competitive recreational golfer.
I was hoping the PGA Tour was going to tell the USGA to go pound sand, but now I'm not so sure. But maybe the ball manufacturers will stand up to these elitists at the USGA. We'll see.
The manufactures as far as I know haven't commented yet.
Sneakylong The manufactures as far as I know haven't commented yet.
Taylormade CEO was on GC this morning. You may want to check it out. Almost all the biggies have made statements. Good respectful give and take this morning.
What’s the consensus from them? Anything about the USGA and R&A now announcing a “universal ball rollback?”
All I hear from the USGA and R&A is talking about the ball speeds from the Tour players. Nothing about the ball speeds from the other 99 percent of golfers.
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?
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'!! 
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
Eguller This new ball may well stunt TW's comeback!! He was already coming up short last weekend, with irons. Driver was blasting past his partners though.
Oh wait...he'll be a Champion Tour member when it applies. Shorter courses anyway.
Never mind.
Eguller Rory on average would lose approx. 15-26 yards.
No wonder Rory is all for this new ball.
It's going to keep him out of the trees!!
Spuzz but only after being unnecessarily punished, and punishing those who only play for fun.
But if you are a recreational player and you don't want to be punished...move up a tee box. Problem solved. Isn't that easier than adding 600 yards to every course that hosts a competition?
If maximum enjoyment is the target here, then recreational golfers should be playing the front tee boxes at all times.
But if you want to play the back tees, but now your 250 yard drive only goes 235, then yeah, you're not going to like golf. If you want to play the back tees and feel like a Pro, well, that takes more than equipment.
Another story from my local muni. #16 is a dogleg left, all hazard left. Maybe 320 on a straight line, but you must carry 260-270. The safe route right is a 220 tee shot short of trees, leaving 200 in. But you can hit a 220 yd shot over a tall tree on the corner and leave 150 in. That shot to 150 was the usual choice and made this hole very playable.
This course was built in the 50s. I never saw anyone try to go straight at the green. Then about 10-15 years ago, that changed. All of a sudden, numerous players started taking the chance. I am sure a few heroic efforts succeeded, but the vast majority failed miserably. And many of those failures went far left into a row of houses. I remember sitting there watching a couple of 20 somethings each try 5 or 6 tee shots to drive that green. 1 may have made it, but I am certain 4 or 5 hit houses.
The homeowners sued, and won. The muni course (that means our tax dollars) had to pay for repairs, AND they had to rebuild the tee box placing large tees left. Not only did that take away the straight line shot, it also took away the 3 wood over the tree. Now you either play a duck hook, or you hit the 220 shot and leave yourself 200 in. If you hit a fade, forget it.
And guess what, the owners of the 60 year old houses left and long of the green have just sued the course, saying that the changes in the tee box have significantly increased the number of balls hitting their homes.
We'll all be playing solely on simulators soon and none of this will matter.
Sneakylong I would argue all of the technology gains over the last 30 years have made the game better / more enjoyable for the average golfer.
And I would argue that it’s only made it easier … not better, … and for the occasional golfer not average. Just like bumpers in the gutters for when kids go bowling.
