One Fan's Perspective on this Week in Golf

I’m not really sure how we got here.

This has been one of the wildest weeks in golf that I can remember, and it has everything to do with the sheer number of golfers affected. News of Jon Rahm, inarguably one of the best golfers on the planet by any measure, signing with LIV Golf was only overshadowed by the golf ball rollback announcement from the game’s governing bodies. While the latter directly affects but one player, the former impacts every golfer. It’s as dramatic a combination of news golf fans have ever seen in seven days.

Change, of course, has not been reserved to only men’s professional golf. It could be argued that 2019 marked the beginning of massive change in every walk of life for reasons completely unrelated to golf. In the years that followed you’ve seen change everywhere you look, including your neighborhood, social media feeds, news broadcasts, family conversations and even in your workplace. Questions previously reserved for water-cooler conversations are now amplified for all to hear, accuracy and legitimacy be damned.

Everyone suddenly had an audience, most of whom were also locked indoors staring at their screens arguing with one another.

During the pandemic everything was up for debate. Questions about every walk of life abounded. What the hell else did we have to do, besides stir up controversy by closely examining mundane aspects of life we previously took for granted? “You know what… why do we do things this way?”

Golf was no different, both professionally and at the recreational level. While conversations about the PGA TOUR’s business dealings and inquiries about how far the golf ball was flying have been around for years, the “cool thing to do” became finally voicing those concerns on a grand scale.

Or, maybe we just had time to finally think about it.

Suddenly, or at least more loudly, we started hearing about unhappy PGA TOUR players. Then we started hearing more. And more. And more. The only show in town was now being questioned by the game’s elites, leaving fans to wonder: what the hell is going on with that joint?

And here we are.

There is nothing wrong with Jon Rahm signing with LIV Golf. He plays golf for a living — despite his insistence he “doesn’t golf for money” — and it’s entirely his right to make as much money as possible. If the argument stops there, we should all agree.

The golf ball, especially at the pro level, is flying farther on average than ever before. Technology has improved, personal fitness has improved, and many courses have been lengthened to account for this change. If we stop the argument there, we should all agree on those facts.

We all know that life doesn’t operate in a vacuum, either.

As such, everything else that creeps in to either conversation leads to my frustration with golf at this moment. Consider the perspective of Rahm. He chose to remain loyal to the PGAT in 2022, literally brushing off LIV talks as rumor, citing legacy and format as reasons for his “pledged fealty.” Then Jay Monahan has a secret meeting, tells no players, enters into a perceived framework agreement to accept money from the same source he told other players to decline, and slaps the likes of Rahm right in the mouth.

Simultaneously, golf’s governing bodies are rolling back a portion of Rahm’s skillset (he is one of the best drivers of the ball in the game), potentially impacting his livelihood. If you’re him, who just saw your Tour’s leadership betray you financially, and are now being told the tools you use to make a living are also changing… well, I can’t fault him.

While the equipment change will still impact players no matter where they play golf, this is all about issues compounding one another. Followers of the game, myself included, are driven to debate in an attempt to make sense of it all. Such is the new routine.

I’ve not been shy to share my opinions on all of the above in the past. It probably aligns with some of yours while conflicting with others. Regardless, we can all agree that this much change at one time leads to an impression of chaos and disorganization. It doesn’t feel like a natural progression that would have happened anyway, but rather drinking from a firehose due to some arbitrary deadline nobody understands.

How we got to this place in the game isn’t as important as where we will end up. I am hopeful the dust will settle and the game will self-correct, offering the mountain of new golfers a reprieve from blustery debate lead by those of us unable to see past our own noses.

Here is the Golf Ball Rollback Announcement from the USGA and R&A

On Wednesday, December 6th 2023, golf’s governing bodies — the United States Golf Association (USGA) and the Royal & Ancient Golf Club (R&A) — formally announced their proposal to change testing perimeters for golf balls moving forward. Deemed the “golf ball rollback” by many, the two-page proposal included details on what was to change about the testing perimeters, summarized data on what the change will mean for different golfer types, and implementation timeframes.

The full announcement can be found below.

You can also read the same announcement on the USGA website here.

Don't get mad at the USGA for the golf ball rollback

An announcement about the upcoming golf ball rollback is expected this week and per our interview with Mike Stachura of Golf Digest it’s reach will be universal across all golfers. Public response has been as severe as it was predictable with amateurs and professionals jumping into the fray, directing anger at the USGA and R&A for a perceived overreaction to a problem that might not exist.

This vitriol is misguided, however, as golf’s governing bodies aren’t the interested parties serving as catalysts to a universal rollback. It’s the golf ball manufacturers and a segment of elite professionals raising a stink about any talk of bifurcation that lead to a one-size-fits-all decision.

It’s incredible that people need to be reminded of this, but the main responsibility of the USGA and R&A is to protect the future of the game. Say what you will about questionable rules changes, putter bans and wedge groove alternations, but golf’s governing bodies are tasked with balancing dozens of variables and interest groups while somehow protecting golf’s longevity.

It is an indisputable fact that golf ball distances have been increasing annually since 1980. The numbers don’t lie, and while the rate of increase has slowed since the early 2010’s, professional golfer data clearly shows an upward trend with no ceiling.

Whether you believe this increase presents a problem or not continues to be a dividing argument among golfers. Regardless, it shouldn’t be too much of a stretch to suggest if left unchecked, distances will eventually render many courses obsolete. It might not be in the next 10 years, but at some point something has to give. Golf’s governing bodies want to act on something now to prevent a bigger problem later.

Bifurcation was that potential solution. The governing bodies even heard public commentary on the idea (and others), allowing anyone in the golf industry to offer their opinion on the proposal. The response was as swift as it was unsurprising: golf ball manufacturers and professionals hated the idea of bifurcating the game.

The rationale behind their disagreement remains unclear. On the manufacturers’ side, a game with two sets of rules clearly impacts a brand’s bottom line and causes headaches for marketing departments. How do you sell two different types of the same golf ball? Never mind that these brands employ some of the brightest scientists and engineers in sports, capable of designing little round spheres with aerodynamic capabilities inspired by rocket launches. Introduce a little marketing dilemma and POOF, all of that intelligence goes away in a flash.

Give me a break.

Response from some professional golfers has been even more questionable. While the likes of Rory McIlroy and Padraig Harrington have offered sensical arguments for the rollback proposal, others like Keegan Bradley and MacKenzie Hughes likely view this as more of a threat. They are not alone in that opinion, mind you, as many other pros have lamented on what a rollback might mean for their own bottom line (in a matter of speaking).

It was this combination of manufacturer and golf pro anxiety that pressured the USGA and R&A to amend their bifurcation proposal. As a result, the governing bodies decided to just roll back the ball for everyone, allowing the proposal’s biggest dissenters to figure out what it means to them.

In turn, all golfers are now faced with a future reality where their golf balls will be different from what they play today. If that phrase reads as being painfully obvious… it should. Any assertion that amateur players who play once a week (or less) will suddenly have their enjoyment of the game ripped away is nonsense. At worst, “common person” golfers will experience a marginal decrease in distances coupled with a marginal boost in accuracy due to reduced flight balls.

Golf Ball Rollback is Coming Soon

A proposed golf ball rollback for all golfers is on the horizon, and it’s not likely to make the masses very happy.

According to Bob Harig of SI.com, golf’s governing bodies — the USGA and R&A — are on the cusp of implementing what equates to a reduced-distance golf ball that might affect all players, both professional and recreational.

Martin Slumbers — the chief executive of the R&A — told Golf Digest in a recent interview that he expects a final decision on the matter “soon,” potentially ending speculation on the magnitude and scope of a golf ball technology change. The originally proposed Model Local Rule that would have essentially bifurcated the game between professional and recreational golfers was met with much hostility by the likes of the PGA of America, PGA TOUR, and legions of golfers across the globe.

However, according to Slumbers, any change might need to be one that affects everyone as opposed to creating a world where bifurcation is a fact of life.

(Of note, Tiger Woods and Rory McIlroy have expressed support for the MLR, much to the chagrin of their golf ball equipment sponsors.)

As someone who has long believed that rolling back the golf ball for elite players and not the rest of us could be a good compromise, I’m not sure that a “one-size-fits-all” approach is the answer here. There’s no way that recreational golfers will take this change lying down, nor should they. Distance is not a problem with the Average Joe or Jane and therefore should be left untouched and unaltered.

The irony here, of course, is that recreational golfers will not notice if their golf balls suddenly start flying shorter distances. The once-a-week golfer is unlikely to have their overall experience diminished should a reduced-flight golf ball be introduced to the market, nor will there be any way to enforce its use among amateurs. Of course, any change in golf ball technology will be rolled out with as little advertising as possible.

Professional golfers — whether you believe it is a problem or not — are hitting the ball farther than ever before. There are many reasons for that including an increased premium on fitness, shortly mown fairways, explosive driver heads and aerodynamically optimized golf balls. It would be foolish to only focus on one variable of this equation and not the others, however I suppose you have to start somewhere.

The golf distance debate’s premise rests solely on the assertion that golf courses are becoming obsolete, including the ones that neither you nor I will ever have the luxury of playing. Municipal golf courses across the globe have stood the tests of time in terms of the game’s technological progression. Amateur golfers still struggle to break 100, and the world still turns.

Adjusting the game for every player doesn’t seem like the best path forward here, especially with signs of golf’s Covid Boom dwindling. The delicate balance of protecting the integrity of the game for future generations while muffling the progress from this generation is not to be taken lightly.

Summarizing the Golf Ball Roll Back Arguments

On March 14, 2023, golf’s governing bodies — the United States Golf Association (USGA) and Royal & Ancient Golf Club (R&A) — announced plans that would modify testing conditions for golf balls used in elite competition. This would be accomplished by implementing a model local rule by January 2026, which would reduce hitting distances at the game's highest levels.

That same day, golf’s ever-faithful fanbase on social media and beyond collectively lost their goddamn minds.

A topic that has been debated ad nauseam for what feels like decades, red herring and straw man arguments rose from the ashes on both sides of the conversation. Original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) like Titleist, Bridgestone and others offered their takes. Pro tour stars like Justin Thomas and Bryson DeChambeau didn’t hold back. Snark on social media flourished.

Let’s summarize what was actually announced by the USGA and R&A, along with some of the more common arguments I’ve seen.

The Announcement

At a high level, all that was announced was a plan to alter golf ball testing parameters that already exist when deeming if a piece of equipment is conforming or not. Nothing has been implemented, nor will they be implemented until 2026.

There is a distance standard that must be met by any new golf ball variant before being allowed in competition. Currently, the testing procedure includes measuring how a golf ball behaves once struck by a golf club traveling 120 mph, 42 revolutions per second of spin, and 10 degrees of launch. The proposed plan would increase the clubhead speed to 127 mph, reduce spin to 37 revolutions per second, and maintain launch at 11 degrees.

This is coupled with a standard that a golf ball, when tested, should not exceed 317 yards (+/- 3 yards).

These are all numbers that 99% of golfers in the world will never hope to achieve on a regular basis. The changes, according to the governing bodies, could equate to golf balls traveling 14 to 15 yards shorter.

This would allow tournaments the option of implementing a model local rule that would require golfers to use “elite player golf balls” should they choose to do so. There is no mandate, nor does this automatically extend to any other levels of the game.

That’s it. That’s all that was announced. Nothing else. But what could this mean for the game at the elite level, and why is this an issue in the first place?

Argument 1: This is a solution in search of a problem

That depends on who you ask.

It is common knowledge that golf courses — especially those where pro tournaments are being held — are routinely altered, upgraded, and/or lengthened in response to modern shot distances. This has been happening for decades. At some point, land becomes an issue when there is no more land to use on the golf course.

While hitting drives over 350 yards might not be a problem for elite male pro golfers, it’s certainly a big problem for golf courses. Especially those that might otherwise be deemed obsolete or no longer difficult, which could prompt a tournament to be moved from that location. This becomes a big problem for the community surrounding that golf course in terms of lost tournament stop revenue.

Argument 2: OEMs are just against this because they are scared of losing money

Of course they are and they should be.

Think about every golf equipment advertising you have seen in the last 20 years. The promise of “more distance” accounts for a substantial volume of the marketing messaging every single year. The next driver, golf ball, hybrid, or iron set almost always promises “more distance” than last year’s.

OEMs have literally been selling us more distance every chance they get. Golf’s governing bodies just took a massive dump on every brand’s pitch deck for the foreseeable future. But that’s not their problem.

Don’t be fooled by a brand’s carefully worded press release in response to the roll back announcement. The truth: they were unprepared, they called a bluff, and now they’re scared to death because of their own ineptitude.

Argument 3: Shorter hitters are going to be punished the most

If you believe this, then you don’t think very highly of the best professional golfers on the planet. In fact, believing this only reinforces the point that distance plays too big of a factor in the pro game!

Yes, there are long-ball players who have made a career on hitting it farther than everyone else. Heaven forbid that they now have to hit a 6-iron into a green instead of an 8-iron. If that player’s entire game plan has been constructed around bomb-and-gouge, then it’s a shitty game plan.

Instead, maybe we can sit back and appreciate true shotmaking ability (or lack thereof) from the only humans on earth who are skilled enough to hit the shots in the first place.

Argument 4: Golf is special in that amateurs can play the same equipment as pros

This might be the worst argument of the bunch, because it’s simply not true across the board. At least not in the simplest interpretation of the point.

Can you go and buy the same Titleist ProV1 golf balls that pro golfers also use? Yes. Are there prototype golf balls made specifically for a player that amateurs will never have the chance to play. Also yes.

Bifurcation already exists. This point has been made hundreds of times already, yet nobody wants to listen. This is even true at the recreational level when you consider what’s available to purchase off the rack or from a custom fitter. None of us play the same equipment! There are advantages everywhere!

Stop pretending that “we’re all the same” when it comes to playing golf equipment. That’s just a bullshit line from brand PR firms that holds no basis in reality.

Argument 5: Where do we draw the line?

There are plenty more arguments that could have made this list, but variants of this final one basically suggest that these changes could extend well into the recreational golfer’s golf bag.

Look: that may or may not be true. I’d be more willing to concede that had the governing bodies announced a complete rollback for every level of golf. But they didn’t, nor do I believe they should.

It is true that we are talking about how professional golfers make their livelihood and not whether the club champion at your course can repeat this year. It is reasonable for tour pros to have impassioned opinions on something that affects their earning potential.

However, it is also reasonable for all stakeholders in this debate to hold opinions that affect their livelihoods. Without golf courses there are no tournaments, and without players there are no tours. Taken a step further, without fans, there are no sponsors, and therefore no professional golf.

So where does this leave us?

The golf ball roll back is going to happen in some form or fashion. I personally believe it’s the right move to protect some of the game’s most historic courses, but one man’s opinion is just that.

On the flip side, we also cannot lose sight of the fact that the only constant in life is change. Sports evolve. Players become stronger and more talented. Science and technology continue to advance in all aspects of life. Golf is no different.

Often times when one thing evolves, another becomes extinct.

Yes, we’d love to continue playing tournaments at classic courses like Augusta National, St. Andrews and more.

But what if it’s time to move on?