The R&A and USGA have confirmed their intention to wind back the distance golf balls can travel. What does it mean for you and your favourite players on tour? Here’s our Dummies Guide To The Rollback.
It’s official. Golf, but shorter.
The R&A and USGA formally announced in December their intention to roll back the distance golf balls can travel. The rollback goes into effect in January 2028 for elite competitions and for every golfer from January 2030. The decision, part of the governing bodies’ Distance Insights Project, comes after some three years of “Notice and Comment” in which the R&A and USGA accepted feedback from golf’s stakeholders.
“Governance is hard. And while thousands will claim that we did too much, there will be just as many who said we didn’t do enough to protect the game long-term,” said Mike Whan, chief executive of the USGA. “But from the very beginning, we’ve been driven to do what is right for the game, without bias. As we’ve said, doing nothing is not an option – and we would be failing in our responsibility to protect the game’s future if we didn’t take appropriate action now.”
HOW IT’S GOING TO WORK
The specifics, first reported by Golf Digest, involve the test for the Overall Distance Standard. The governing bodies are increasing the swing speed at which golf balls are tested from the current standard of 120mph to 125mph without changing the distance limit of 317 yards (plus a three-yard tolerance) with a launch angle of 11 degrees and 2,200rpm of spin. In layman’s terms, according to the R&A and USGA, the effect could be a distance loss of nine to 11 yards at the PGA Tour or DP World Tour level, five to seven yards for the LPGA/LET and five yards or less for everyday players.
All golf balls submitted to the two governing bodies for conformance during or after October 2027 will be evaluated using the new protocol. In other words, if everyday golfers want to continue using longer golf balls in 2028 and 2029, they will be older-model balls. There was no mention in the Notice of Decision how one would be able to tell what is an old conforming ball and what is a new conforming ball other than comparing it to the conforming list. However, John Spitzer, the USGA’s managing director of equipment standards, said approximately one-third of balls currently on the conforming list would still be conforming under the new protocol, primarily two and three-piece balls with ionomer covers.
WHY WE’RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER – NOT JUST THE PROS
OK, the proverbial cat is out of the bag. Everyone is getting shorter starting in 2030. But why? Earlier last year Whan firmly stated, “We don’t see recreational golf obsoleting golf courses any time soon.”
So, what changed?
At its base it came down to the fact few were in favour of bifurcating the rules (as the originally proposed Model Local Rule would have done), some might not have abided by the Local Rule and manufacturers and golf associations didn’t want the confusion that would be caused by producing different balls for elite golfers and everyday players.
Thomas Pagel, chief governance officer for the USGA, spoke to Golf Digest on the topic of why the decision to include a rollback for all levels of golfers.
“While frankly, some of us were uncomfortable because it did enter into the realm of bifurcation, we thought for this issue, for the topic of distance, focusing on the elite level was the proper thing. We then had overwhelming feedback on this concept of bifurcation or Model Local Rule for the golf ball. Some of that feedback came from manufacturers, although I’ll be the first to tell you, not every manufacturer had the same feedback. We’ve heard from the PGA Tour. We’ve heard from other tours. We’ve heard from elite players. We’ve heard from the PGA of America and their members. We’ve heard from folks like our allied golf associations who talked about the concept of defining elite golfers. Do I use this at my state amateur? Do I use this at my state open? What about my junior amateur? What are you guys going to do for the US Amateur? Then the LPGA I think was faced with the challenge of, Jeez, do we stay tied to the professional game and use a Model Local Rule or do we stay tied with the recreational game? Everybody was looking at it through their own lens, but the feedback was loud.”
Those practical challenges led to some very frank conversations that, according to Pagel, included some stakeholders saying if there were a Model Local Rule they weren’t going to use it.
“At that point, it becomes a bit of a paper exercise,” Pagel said. “If it’s not used, you’re not providing a solution for the game. So ultimately, it led us to making a change across the game.”
HOW BALL COMPANIES TOOK THE NEWS
In summary? Not great but they’re begrudgingly accepting of it.
Golf-ball maker Bridgestone Golf issued a statement effectively saying they don’t like the change, but they have taken it on board and are moving on.
“While we would prefer that any new rules did not impact recreational players, we believe further commentary is no longer productive,” says Dan Murphy, president and chief executive of Bridgestone Golf.
“At this point, we need to concentrate on creating conforming products that allow both professionals and amateurs to play their best golf. Bridgestone Golf has total confidence in our ability to design and manufacture the world’s best golf balls, regardless of the parameters, and our team of over 700 polymer engineers will develop models that provide optimal performance under the new rules for the full range of players.”
TaylorMade Golf also gave off opposition-but-acceptance vibes. On Golf Channel, the company’s chief executive David Abeles said: “This decision has been made, and we will move forward. As a brand that prioritises improving product performance for golfers of all skill levels, the decision to proceed with the golf ball rollback is disappointing. While appreciative of the opportunity to have a seat at the table and a voice in the debate, we feel like the rollback is simply disconnected from what golfers believe is best for the game. Throughout the decision-making process, the USGA provided a platform to express our views, provide new data sources, and engage in candid discussions. In the spirit of collaboration, we acknowledge and respect the rules that form an integral part of our game’s fabric, even when we disagree with them.”
Callaway Golf carved out a unique position, expressing disappointment that the R&A and USGA moved away from a bifurcated proposal. Topgolf Callaway Brands president and chief executive Chip Brewer had this to say after the rollback news broke: “Topgolf Callaway Brands respects the perspectives of the governing bodies and knows they are acting in what they believe is in the best interest of the game. However, when viewing the same data, we have consistently communicated that we would not have chosen to roll the ball back and we would have preferred bifurcation over a change across the board. Having said that, we would like to thank and compliment the USGA and R&A for their approach and process in making this decision. Throughout this process, we believe they have been open and thorough in their analysis. They took the time to actively seek input from multiple stakeholders, including us, on multiple occasions and levels. They clearly listened and were thoughtful in their responses; and, when they deemed it appropriate, they modified their approach in ways that benefitted both the game and the industry that supports it. Along these lines, we appreciate the lead time the ruling bodies have provided to conform to the new rule. This will give us time to redesign and implement new products successfully. Most Importantly, they sought to minimise the impact on the end consumer by providing an adequate grace period for the transition in recreational golf.”
In any change to the Rules of Golf that involves golf balls, there is one company that has the most to win or lose: Titleist. It is the brand most associated with golf balls and has dominated sales in that section of the market for years. In Acushnet Co.’s 2022 Annual Report, Titleist’s parent company said that 74 percent of balls played on professional tours around the world sported the distinctive Titleist logo, and in that season, all four of the men’s major winners played the company’s golf ball. The golf ball kingpin made it clear it isn’t laying down on the rollback but asking for more talks. Acushnet chief executive Dave Maher did not hold back in assertions that taking away distance from players from all skill-sets is not good for the game.
“At a time when interest in golf is vibrant (2023 will mark the sixth consecutive year in which the number of golfers has grown), golf courses are broadly adding forward tees, back tees are used for less than 5 percent of rounds, and the average carry distances for female and male golfers are 147 yards and 215 yards, respectively, it is appropriate and necessary that the merits of any proposed equipment rollback are thoroughly evaluated in pursuit of a high degree of consensus and support around meaningful change,” Maher said in a statement.
Maher continued by expressing that the “golf ball rollback overly impacts golfers and does not fully reflect the input of those closest to the game. There have been requests to align on what data is used and how it is used to draw conclusions prior to any equipment changes being made. Many important stakeholders do not see distance as a problem the way the governing bodies do, and therefore come to differing conclusions about how to proceed to ensure the best possible outcome for
the sport.”
Maher’s statement noted that Titleist believes that the current ball regulations work well, and that manufacturing is “tightly controlled” and ball speeds “have been moderated as was the intent of the rule”.
Finally, Acushnet encouraged further collaboration with the R&A, USGA and stakeholders to produce a “meaningful examination of this decision and its consequences, and to discuss alternatives as we look to protect golfers’ enjoyment of the game and the health of golf courses around the world to ensure golf’s promising future”.
WHAT AUSTRALIA’S GOVERNING BODIES THINK
Golf Australia endorsed the rollback decision, issuing this statement:
“Our organisation supports this decision for all the detailed reasoning throughout the joint announcement, and especially for the stated goal to protect the integrity of golf courses and the required variety of skills needed to play them. These two core elements of the game have been greatly impacted by increased hitting distances, with further, and more significant impacts likely, if not addressed now.”
The PGA of Australia was wary at first about any rollback talk, but ultimately agreed with the decision, saying: “As a member of the PGA World Alliance that brings together leading vocational Professional Golf Associations around the globe, the PGA of Australia initially raised concerns over some of the proposed changes, and we are pleased that the R&A and USGA continue to take our views into consideration that will cover the entirety of the game with a view towards protecting the courses and skills required that are the fabric of our great game.
“The PGA of Australia are also encouraged that while changes will come into effect at the elite level in 2028, the changes for recreational golfers become active at January 1, 2030, allowing our PGA members, both vocational and tournament, time to plan and adjust.
“As one of the many organisations working for the betterment of the game of golf globally, the PGA of Australia has great respect for the R&A and USGA as the rule-makers of golf and appreciates the opportunity for involvement in this process following the Distance Insights Project that has ultimately resulted in this decision.”
PREDICABLY, THE WORLD’S BEST PLAYERS REMAIN DIVIDED
“It’s one of the dumbest things I’ve heard of.”
Tell us what you really think, Keegan!
One of the things Keegan Bradley has done during the offseason is test golf balls. Srixon made him a special set of balls. They were of the potential rollback variety. So, the six-time PGA Tour winner already has some practical experience with what the R&A and USGA might be getting ready to do and he wasn’t afraid to share his data – or his thoughts – on the matter.
“Srixon made whatever the USGA was saying, and it was 40, 50 yards [shorter] with my driver,” Bradley, 37, says. “I was a club or two shorter. I think that the USGA… everything that they do is reactionary. They don’t think of a solution. They just think we’re going to affect a hundred percent of the population that plays golf. For the amateur world to hit the ball shorter is monstrous. I can’t think of anything more stupid than that. I don’t think it’s very smart at all, especially when golf’s growing in popularity literally coming out of COVID.”
Among players who were asked about the pending rule change, no one thought a universal rollback was a good idea. And only Tiger Woods thinks it would be the right thing to do in the professional game. He and world No.2 Rory McIlroy have been the biggest proponents of reigning in the ball at the elite level.
“We’ve been hammering the ball needs to slow down,” Woods, 48, says, “but it has kept speeding up my entire time on tour and here we are. I’ve always been for bifurcation. I’ve always said that. Just like wood bats and metal bats [in baseball].”
McIlroy believes the rollback will bring the best players – not just the longest – back into the contest. “I think this change will make the game at the top level a little more skilful again,” he says. “It will also bring some of the great classic courses back into consideration when we go to major championships.”
Former US Open champion Justin Rose was surprised to hear that the governing bodies were set on an across-the-board change for amateurs as well as professionals.
“I think the way I saw it going was the tour doing one thing [with a model local rule] and maybe major championships doing another. And that puts a lot of pressure on the tour,” Rose, 43, says.
“Now if recreational golf is rolling back, too, it doesn’t make sense for the tour to stay where we were. Because I think if the amateurs were going to continue to stay where they were, the tour, were going to say, ‘OK, we’re going to stay where we are because we want the fan to be able to relate to the tour player.’ That made sense to me. And then obviously if there was a ball for a major championship, then so be it – we’d have to learn how to adapt. So that’s the way I would’ve hedged it going. Now it’s even a weirder situation. The amateurs are playing the ball that’s slower than what we’re playing on tour. That doesn’t feel right either.”
Rickie Fowler is not a fan of the ruling bodies making any change to the ball at any level. “There are other ways of going about this,” he says, adding that they are “20 years too late” on the issue.
But he is especially opposed to a shorter ball for recreational players.
“To take the game and knock it back when it’s in the best position it’s ever been in, I don’t want to see it as the golf ball being necessarily the right move,” Fowler adds.
“I don’t see how when we’re at the best place the game has ever been. ‘Oh, you love the game? Yeah. Hey, thanks for joining us over COVID. Now we’re going to make you hit it 20 yards shorter. Have fun.’ I understand both sides. But looking at it as far as the game and everyone talks about growing the game, I think it’s going to be a huge step back.”
Bradley, who already had to take one step back several years ago when the governing bodies changed putting by outlawing anchoring, wonders how he and his peers will be forced to adjust their games further.
“I don’t know what the ramifications are going to be with the ball – what they’re going to do, what direction they going to go,” he said. “It would have to be a complete overhaul of the equipment that I use, the shafts that I use. Yeah, I mean the amount of change that’s happened just in the course of my career is insane.
“I think we constantly get penalised for mistakes they [R&A and USGA] make. Whether if they let the ball go too far, that’s not our problem. They [are doing this] to punish not only the professional golfers, but the world of golf for something that they screwed up on. I really think it’s one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard of.”
Big-hitting Aussie superstar Min Woo Lee, as only Min Woo Lee can do, cooked up a lighter take on it all with this post on X (formerly known as Twitter): “Hey guys, there is a lot of chatter and arguments about the golf ball rollback. Just want to say I’m sorry. I’m part of the problem. Sincerely, your fave chef, Woozy.”
CONCLUSION: HOW MUCH DISTANCE WILL YOU REALLY LOSE?
Tom Mase admits he dug deep into his files looking for an answer. The professor at California Polytechnic State University, who has a doctoral degree in mechanical engineering and a passion for using his knowledge in golf research, was asked to assess the practical impact of a new test by golf’s governing bodies that will roll back the distance balls will fly in the future. After about an hour of digesting the data, Mase wasn’t sure if he still had anything close to a definitive answer.
“It’s a complex problem with all of the constraints they have,” Mase said, later admitting, “I’ve tried to come up with an ‘ah ha’ quote, but it’s not crystal clear.”
Understand, Mase is a member of the Golf Digest Hot List Technical Advisory Panel – as is Martin Brouilette, Ph.D, also a mechanical engineer and professor at the University of Sherbrooke in Quebec, Canada. Both men have spent hundreds of hours studying various scientific areas in golf. But neither can yet say with certainty how the rule change announced by the R&A and USGA will affect golfers, especially those on the recreational side.
The governing bodies say that the Overall Distance Standard test for golf balls will change in 2028 for elite golfers and 2030 for the recreational players, with the rolling back of distance achieved by the manufacturers through their own means. How they do that is the biggest current blind spot for the scientists outside of the OEM walls, since it’s too early for the biggest companies to have revealed their strategies.
“We can imagine a lot of stuff,” Brouilette said, “but we’re working with very little information.”
In its announcement, the R&A and USGA said the change in the ODS test “will have the most impact on golfers who generate the fastest ball speeds”, which for driving clubs is expected to be 13-15 yards for the longest hitters on the top-level men’s tours, nine to 11 yards for average male pros and five to seven yards for female pros. The governing bodies said the distance reductions will be “minimal” for recreational golfers – five yards or less.
Do the engineers agree?
“What I’m intrigued about,” Brouilette said, “is if they were able to do it with ball speed, maybe you could engineer a rubber that would be worse at high speed than at low speed. If you have a slow swing, maybe you won’t lose the ball speed and it wouldn’t affect [amateurs] so much.”
To alter balls, there are three basic elements that can be changed: the weight (lighter would be shorter), aerodynamics (dimple depth and pattern) and the core make-up of the ball and how energy is affected at impact. Both professors posit that altering aerodynamics would lead to shorter hitting for all players, while ball materials could impact faster-swinging players more.
“To just do it with draft [aerodynamics], that would be proportional for everybody,” Brouilette said. “The drag co-efficients are not so different between a pro and a chopper.”
Said Mase, “Messing with the aerodynamics also can affect how far your 5-iron or 7-iron goes. The ball companies are going to have to dig deep to make sure they have the [distance] gaps they want, and the trajectory that certain players like, as well.
“If you just change the initial velocity of the ball [through altering the core], that’s not going to be as big a change.”
The possibility exists that ball makers will combine at least two of the factors to have the balls meet specifications. If there is a nightmare scenario for average golfers, it’s that they end up losing distance with all clubs, and even in a 4-percent loss scenario, that could be 15 to 20 metres surrendered per hole.
“I think that’s a big distance,” said Mase, an avid golfer. “Two clubs is like going back to the tips, and I’m happy to be on the members tees now. The game is enjoyable that way.
“In the long run, I think it will all adjust itself out,” he said. “The manufacturers may reach back in iron design and make the super-game-improvement irons a little hotter. If we give it time, there’s a lot of smart people in the golf industry who will make clubs and balls to adapt and mesh like they did in the past.”
Brouillette has mostly arrived at the opinion that the impact on recreational golfers will be “minimal”. Further, he said, “How would you know? Who measures each one of their drives on the range and on the course to the yard? Nobody would notice five to 10 yards, considering the wide variability of shots and playing conditions for the recreational golfer.”
As painful as that might be, it’s probably true.
Will those golf balls you’re hoarding still be good when the rollback goes into effect?
As a writer for Golf Digest for nearly 15 years, I’ve been fortunate to have a few free golf balls kicked my way from time to time. The craziest part is that I hardly ever use them. Oh, sure, I break out a fresh sleeve for a really big round or take a box on my annual golf trip, but even then, I often find myself playing Pro V1s or other top-of-the-line golf balls that I’ve found (my group calls them “pieces of gold”) on the course after I lose one or two of the new ones. It helps that as someone whose game revolves much more around precision than power, I don’t tend to lose that many golf balls. And, yes, I’m a pretty frugal guy.
So when this universal golf ball rollback was first floated, one of my first thoughts went to the shelf in my cupboard [pictured] where I’ve collected (OK, hoarded) plenty of treasure through the years. These are brand new balls still in their boxes. Or, at least, they were brand new. In some cases, a decade ago.
I’ve got Titleists, Bridgestones, TaylorMades and Callaways and even a couple of sleeves of that Kirkland ball Costco couldn’t keep on its shelves a few years ago. Don’t sleep on those Wilsons, by the way. Those are from Golf Digest’s ball testing in 2014 and they rated really high. Anyway, I thought these balls would really come in handy now that the R&A and USGA are rolling back how far new balls will fly. Apparently, I wasn’t alone.
Now there are a couple of key things to point out here. For one, this rule won’t go into effect for recreational golfers like myself until 2030 (tour pros will have to make the switch for 2028). For another, to play these golf balls after that date would be to break the rules of golf.
That might seem crazy to some – and we’re certainly not advocating that you should cheat – but a recent Golf Digest poll resulted in 60 percent of respondents said they wouldn’t honour a new rule that restricted distance. And if it’s just a friendly round, I could see myself joining that group – especially if I haven’t gone through my stockpile yet. There’s no way I’m going to let good golf balls go to waste!
But will they even still be good golf balls? That’s the question I posed to Golf Digest’s senior equipment editor Mike Johnson.
“Yes, you can absolutely hoard golf balls,” Johnson said.
Phew.
Of course, there are some caveats. Johnson says the balls should be kept at room temperature, not too hot or too cold, or they will lose some of their juice. My definition of room temperature may be different than some during the winter months – again, I’m frugal! – but he thought my cupboard should be fine.
They also shouldn’t have any water damage, which unless that ceiling leaks, I should be OK. Again, these are unused golf balls. And they don’t really go bad. Not even by 2030.
Johnson added that as long as they’re made in the past 20 years (prior to that was the era of wound balls, which would get smaller over time), you shouldn’t notice much of a difference. And any small loss in distance would more than make up for what recreational golfers are poised to lose when the rollback goes into effect.
In other words, hoard away. Go ahead and turn yourself into a rollback doomsday prepper if you want. – Alex Myers
Getty images: Tracy Wilcox
