Opinion & Analysis
Barney Adams: Ball rollback isn’t the right move to combat “The Golfer of Tomorrow”
The announcing crew at the 2020 U.S. Open seemed obsessed with “the bombers”—players who drove the ball extreme distances with little regard for the occasional tee shot into the rough. TV has selected Bryson DeChambeau as their representative, given his length and victory.
I thought I’d wait a bit to see what the industry sources had to say. I can’t say it’s unanimous, because I haven’t seen everything, but the theme is: “Get Ready for The Golfer of Tomorrow”
- 350-yard carry
- Clubhead speed which tears through the rough allowing the ball to launch high and carry to the green
- The ‘new’ instructor who teaches distance be it ground up or whatever new method is used
- Gym sessions producing athletes who look more like football players
- And last, a whole new shelf of steroids for golf
At the same time the USGA and its organizational allies are planning meetings focusing on not if the ball will be rolled back, but when—clearly, influenced by visual evidence from a great Winged Foot course in our national championship.
Let’s look deeper!
A hypothetical: go back a few months. You are on the planning committee for the U.S. Open to be held at Winged Foot, one of America’s great venues. This year because of COVID-19 there will be no galleries, something never experienced at a USGA major golf event. I repeat, your committee is planning for the U.S. Open. That implies “Open Rough” a term that is significant on its own. You don’t play from Open Rough, you escape…maybe.
The nature of Open Rough is a thick chunky base with long tendrils reaching skyward. These make it very difficult to find your ball in the best of circumstances and when attempting to advance these tendrils wrap themselves around your hosel closing the face, sending your ball deeper into hostile territory. That’s if you can even find it, Open rough has “disappeared” many balls over the years and done so within full view of gallery spectators aiding course marshals. The rule of thumb for competitors has always been to find the most reasonable patch of fairway and get out.
But this is the year of COVID-19. No galleries. Marshals, but relatively few because of no galleries. Now, considering that normal U.S. Open rough will produce many searches where marshals are important, the shortage of them will cause endless searches—which don’t make for great TV viewing. So, a decision is made, cut the rough down so shots can be found. Still in the rough but sitting on the chunky base and very often can be played. A tough call for the purist but an objective economic evaluation leaves no choice.
The announcers regale us with astonishing distances and swing speeds that allow escape from Open Rough that used to be impossible! The golf publications jump on this theme and predict that the Golfer of Tomorrow will be “DeChambeau-like” not sweet swingers but physical hulks rewriting the book on distance strongly influenced by no fear of the rough.
My point here is those publications and instructors, jumping on the “longer and slightly crooked is better” bandwagon have added 2+2 and gotten 5 when using the 2020 U.S. Open as a premise.
DeChambeau is a great and powerful player, however, I don’t think he’s known for his putting. Now I may have dozed off but I don’t remember him being widely praised for his putting. He should have been, it was terrific, probably influenced his score! He is our National Champion, an unsurpassable honor. But his style has me betting that the USGA is working on dates to discuss changing the golf ball, as in making it shorter.
I’m 100% against such a move. Golf is a game where amateurs can go to the same course play the same clubs and given a huge difference in skill achieve some measure of affiliation with the pros. A birdie is a birdie, not a long or short ball birdie. From a business perspective, the overwhelming majority of those golfers financially supporting golf are over 50. And we want them to hit it shorter?
Well, Mr. Adams what would you do? I know zero about golf ball manufacturing, but keeping the distance the same I’d change the dimples to increase curvature—just enough so it doesn’t affect slower swings that much but very high swing speeds so it’s in the player’s head
More thoughts. As an admitted TV viewer, get rid of those yardage books. Fine for practice rounds but when the bell rings it should be player and caddie, not an “on green” conference. What’s next, a staff meeting?
I’ll conclude with a note to the PGA Tour and, importantly, an admonition. To the PGA Tour: The minute a tee goes into the ground on #1 every player is on the clock. Stroke penalties, not fines, will get their attention.
To the rest of the golfing world: Let’s not blindly pursue the Golfer of Tomorrow concept without considerably deeper study.
As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
Larry
Oct 26, 2020 at 3:20 pm
Ultimately is there an audience for what is basically a Pitch & Putt match. Without fans professional golf will vanish.
John
Oct 26, 2020 at 5:28 am
The PGA have, for years, tried to put the shackles on the big hitters by lengthening the courses when, in fact, all they are doing is playing into their hands. The solution is simple and blindingly obvious – make the courses shorter and and trick them up so that skill and imagination is rewarded rather than sheer brute strength.
8thehardway
Oct 25, 2020 at 3:32 pm
Gentlemen, allow me to suggest a solution that burdens neither courses nor manufacturers of equipment; one that eliminates a pre-existing bifurcation and draws us closer to our favorite players as they traverse difficult courses; in short, I propose ruling bodies eliminate the caddy.
A moment’s reflection suggests that the energy required to lug a tour bag over 18 holes, searching for errant drives by yourself under time constraints, raking traps, cleaning clubs and confirming yardages reduces both the ability and incentive to launch 400-yard drives while holistically involving each pro in the more complete and authentic process we experience daily.
geohogan
Oct 25, 2020 at 1:37 pm
“Gym sessions producing athletes who look more like football players
And last, a whole new shelf of steroids for golf”
Seems Bryson has a lock on the last two points, that go hand and hand.
Karsten’s Ghost
Oct 25, 2020 at 3:23 am
No equipment bifurcation. If you want to, make 80-compression a maximum for everyone. Then your amateurs don’t get dumped on.
ray arcade
Oct 24, 2020 at 11:49 pm
Don’t do anything to the ball. Limit clubhead speed. Every tournament has a launch monitor on the tee… Anything over some PGA/USGA defined limit is penalized.
Ur legit insane
Oct 25, 2020 at 3:03 am
Lol what buddy
Larry
Oct 24, 2020 at 10:33 pm
Just cut the max club length for PGA events to 42 inches and we will see only a few 320 yard drives.
Speedy
Oct 24, 2020 at 2:47 pm
Rock on, Barney, you’re always a good read.
WiggyM
Oct 24, 2020 at 2:08 pm
Some golf holes could have an “offside/hazard” line that runs across the hole at a certain yardage, be it 380, 400 yards, whatever it may be on depending on the actual strategy of the hole. One stroke penalty if your ball crosses that line with your tee ball.
It would still reward distance but it would make you put some thought into your tee shot if you were a long bomber. It would never be a factor for 99.9% of amateurs so no need to roll back any equipment…. Or they could just not play golf courses and hold long drive contests on a Trackman every weekend.
Jack
Oct 24, 2020 at 8:21 am
Yes, Mr. Adams, you obviously “dozed off”. Sort of like Rip Van Winkle. Over the past few years, DeChambeau has transformed himself into one of the best putters on tour. Perhaps you should drink more coffee.
Brad
Oct 24, 2020 at 11:29 pm
Unfortunately, Jack, II think you may have “dozed off” during English class. Mr Adams was correctly making the point that Bryson is not KNOWN for his putting, but that he SHOULD be. The opposite of what you are implying he said.
“…I don’t remember him being widely praised for his putting. He should have been, it was terrific…”
Paulo
Oct 24, 2020 at 5:37 am
I’m sick to death of this debate. Golf is a sport and like any sport the athlete pushes themselves and the champion is the one who breaks the ceiling. When the first sub 10 second 100m was recorded they didn’t make a 100m longer. So what if we keep going and going until 49’s are winning ? As long as there’s separation keep pushing the boundaries until everyone is tied. Well done Bryson. WhT he’s doing now isn’t different to what tiger did to the likes of Tom Kite abd Colin Montgomery back in 97.
Rich
Oct 24, 2020 at 2:19 pm
Several holes in that logic:
— Running faster doesn’t make the track obsolete, but hitting the golf ball so much farther has taken some golf courses out of the scene for professionals
— Sports like track (and tennis and baseball and football and basketball) are competed against other competitors, not the course or venue. That’s why NBA players can be much taller and stronger, yet the court can stay at 94 feet and the basket can stay at 10 feet. Golf is played against the course. As we know, courses have gotten a lot longer–and some made obsolete–because of the distance phenomenon.
This has been an issue since a long time before BDC, but it still hasn’t been addressed. I’m in favor of returning the risk/reward factor in distance. Distance would still be an advantage, especially when coupled with accuracy. But when distance totally trumps accuracy, you have little more than a long-distance contest….and those are really boring.
My solution: change the ball and clubs in ways that hamper the pros and yet do not really affect the weekend duffer. Spinnier balls, lower COR, and less-effective grooves would be where I’d start.
Paulo
Oct 27, 2020 at 11:56 am
You’re completely wrong. Players play against each other on a course. Lowest score wins , so worst if somebody shoots 57,57,56 etc etc to win. Lowest score wins . I just don’t get your logic here at all
Bear
Oct 24, 2020 at 5:27 am
The opinions posted here show how small minded the amateur golfer is. Roll back the ball 20%. Deal with it. Its not about punishing any one player, its about returning the game to a spot where courses aren’t obsolete. There will always be a bomber on tour but the golf ball of today goes 20-30% further than in 1930 regardless of who’s swinging the bat.
Jbone
Oct 24, 2020 at 8:28 am
20% is absurd and will never happen.
Let’s be serious and not even try to appeal to somebody like this.
Barry
Oct 24, 2020 at 10:27 am
No, not absurd, very doable. Probably a necessity at this point.
Would be good for golf at every level.
Bad for a ball manufacturers for a few months, but they’ll go back to making the same profits as before when they realize “wow, people still need these.”
Bear
Oct 24, 2020 at 10:44 am
20% Is absolutely accurate and should happen. People will quickly get over it when they realize they are still the longest hitter in their foursome. If you can’t reach the green in two Jbone, maybe its time you moved up a set of tees or took up croquet.
Jbone
Oct 24, 2020 at 8:34 pm
It won’t ever happen so what’s the point in arguing. It is absurd imo. People like you can continue to be pessimistic about the state of the game.
Not dumb barry
Oct 25, 2020 at 3:04 am
You’re really really dumb
Matt
Oct 24, 2020 at 12:11 am
2 piece golf balls only. Want short game spin you also get high driver spin. Want low driver spin to hit long bombs you sacrifice short game spin and feel. Core and cover thats it. Simple fix.
Hogan Mike
Oct 25, 2020 at 2:23 pm
This is actually a cool idea! It will also make golf balls more affordable
Rwj
Oct 23, 2020 at 10:14 pm
Ban metal spikes. Most Local clubs have for everyone else. Make stability an issue
Rwj
Oct 23, 2020 at 10:02 pm
Im a fan of banning green reading books. Green reading should be a skill.
Yardage books are okay, just not fully detailed.
Make bunkers true hazards. Long teeth rakes, not beautiful smooth beaches that are easy to play from.
Plant trees
More “out of bounds” stakes and areas
Out of box ideas for pro tournaments:
Make the hole smaller
Limit # of clubs
Limit the maximum club length
Required grooves on entire driver faces
Rich
Oct 24, 2020 at 2:20 pm
Grooves don’t affect driver spin.
Rwj
Oct 24, 2020 at 9:38 pm
Alright. Good job ?
Rich
Oct 23, 2020 at 8:57 pm
No manufacturer–like the author–wants bifurcation. The only other sport that bifurcates (other than some accommodations for women, like forward tees or a smaller basketball) is MLB with its wooden bat requirement. No sport commonly played by adults is bifurcated.
But I like Barney’s thinking around making errors at high speeds more dangerous. (Like NASCAR?) Or changing other characteristics–driver length comes to mind, or limits on wedges’ lofts or grooves–that professionals and top players can take advantage of that most weekend duffers cannot. As Barney says, perhaps the ball can be changed to make it more dangerous at high speeds–frankly, the way wound balls with balata covers were at one time.
Jeff Allen
Oct 23, 2020 at 8:57 pm
Because I want to see Usain Bolt running in Jesse Owens’ track shoes to protect Track & Field par. athletes and people are bigger, stronger and faster. Even with all that WRX just published an article that said the average single digit index hits the ball less than 225 yards. I say bombs away
Chadd
Oct 23, 2020 at 7:44 pm
How about going back to V groves? We no longer see flyers coming out of the rough. And I would second the comment above regarding wedges not exceeding a certain loft.
The dude
Oct 23, 2020 at 8:59 pm
This gets ZERO consideration
The Truth Jr.
Oct 23, 2020 at 7:21 pm
I enjoyed this article. Not sure why people are so bent out of shape with BAD. He won a few tournaments, so what. Throughout history some of the best golfers were long hitters. I’m sure Bobby Jones pounded the ball in his day. Remember Tiger Woods? He hit the ball super far too.
Don’t change equipment, don’t modify rules to limit ball flight. Let BAD play the game his way, that’s what’s cool about golf. Let the sport evolve, let people hit it far. Hitting it far is a skill, its really hard to do and its every golfers dream to hit bombs. If someone says they don’t want to hit the driver farther they are lying.
Lets move on and enjoy the ride! The pros who are complaining need to step up their games or loose their cards.
Bobby44
Oct 23, 2020 at 6:13 pm
Why does everyone blame the ball?
Amateurs are not hitting it any further.
And why is Bryson hitting it 30 yards further, the ball?
Hell no! He went to the gym, put on 40 pounds and focused on one thing; speed!
I’m pretty sure he was using the same ball pre-Bryson 2020 so it’s not the damn ball.
If you wind back the ball, the guys that hit the gym and do the work will have an even bigger advantage.
Let’s say no Bryson hits SW into a par 4 that other guys are hitting with a 7-iron.
You think they’re gonna do better if he’s hitting 7-iron and they’re hitting 3-iron? I doubt it!
There are always guys that come and go that are super long, but most aren’t prolific winners or winners at all because they can’t chip, pitch or putt like Bryson. So it ain’t just the length, it’s the short game that goes with it.
Last time this happened no one complained! There was a kid who was hitting it 20 yards past everyone, with his 2-iron no less, and he had a short game that matched too. He was incredible and no one complained that he hit it too far, which was due to his superior technique and physicality.
His name was Tiger Woods.
Jeff
Oct 23, 2020 at 5:09 pm
Get rid of yardage books and lines on the ball. Also you are only allowed to mark the ball once on the green unless you are in another golfer’s line. Finally get rid of the alignment line on the ball. Nothing worse that watching these guys fiddle with the ball trying to line up the hole with the line on the ball.
Barry
Oct 23, 2020 at 4:59 pm
Breaking news! “Equipment industry lifer against additional equipment regulations.” In related news…sky blue, water wet.
Just as turkeys will never vote for Thanksgiving, those with a financial stake in manufacturing and selling equipment will never support anything that threatens the illusion that “we play the same game as the pros” because it is financially beneficial.
In another surprise, readers of GolfWRX, a website of the hardest core equipment junkies known to man, think anything that might even cost them two yards off the tee is unthinkable. We are talking about people who regularly drop $500 on a driver shaft that maybe provides a 1% performance gain. Yeah, another shocker folks here are dead set against a rollback.
Mr. Adams, you say you are 100% against a ball rollback, I am 100% for it. I think it’s entirely possible that this could be accomplished in such a way that 99% of golfers would never know the difference. It’s by far the best and most sensible idea because:
1)You cannot regulate athlete size, physical training, or coaching. You can barely regulate the performance enhancing substances modern pros put in their bodies (and that is highly suspect).
2)The golf ball is for all intents and purposes a consumable commodity. It is by far the easiest item to regulate and adjust and keep the game in scale.
3)PGA Tour golf is first and foremost an entertainment product. Watching pros go driver lob wedge into every hole is as boring as golf can get. Seriously, why bother putting? Let’s just go full LDA because accuracy doesn’t matter at all in the modern game.
4)All non-insane sports realize that some adjustments to rules are necessary to keep a product entertaining over time as athletes improve. When something gets out of balance, you test a few theories, then you try some things to restore balance. You don’t sit on your hands for 20 years saying “This is fine” because you’re deathly afraid of an Acushnet lawsuit.
5)Preparing a golf course that presents a comprehensive test of a golfer that carries the ball in excess of 350 yards with driver is an absurd and unnecessary use of water, land, and energy. Golf needs to be becoming more ecologically aware, not less.
Do we really want a game where you can’t play the Open at St Andrews? We are in such a poor state of affairs because the USGA and R&A have been asleep at the wheel on this issue for decades.
Bear
Oct 24, 2020 at 11:22 am
I think we’d get along Barry. No BS. You should try the hickory game! Its a breath of fresh air although these turds are finding ways to slowly ruin that too.
Darnie
Oct 24, 2020 at 10:36 pm
Correct. “that carries the ball in excess of 350 yards with driver is an absurd and unnecessary use of water, land, and energy. Golf needs to be becoming more ecologically aware, not less.”
The ball limits were wrong, the COR limits were wrong and the driver size limits were wrong.Where does it end? 20% increase in 1980’s PGA courses would put them at over 8000+ yards. They are playing courses that would be equivalent of a person hitting it 275 playing the up tees at many courses. It just illogical for this to continue.
Barney Adams
Oct 26, 2020 at 4:36 pm
I had to re read my article. There it was , change the spin , makes the tee shot much more challenging ! A perfect solution ? Nobody knows but it’s a relatively painless way to start.
Dave
Oct 23, 2020 at 2:57 pm
Barney, why do you assume the ball has to roll back also for the weekend duffer? You kind of jumped the shark there…
Dave
Rich
Oct 23, 2020 at 9:34 pm
Because golf manufacturers are absolutely against bifurcation. They thrive on the illusion that the equipment you buy is the same as the equipment the pros use.
They also conveniently ignore the fact that professionals play an entirely different game. Their courses are immensely more difficult, they have a personal assistant with them who knows their games intimately, etc.
Mike
Oct 23, 2020 at 2:39 pm
Dechambeau, over 4 days, averaged 1.5 strokes under par per round & his short game / putting was fantastic. That’s 1.5 strokes per round, & I don’t think anyone else broke par over the 4 days. Sorry, looking at those scores, I don’t see the ruination of golf as we know it.
Jbone
Oct 23, 2020 at 2:06 pm
Persimmon, wound balata, no graphite, 56* limit wedge.
Travis
Oct 23, 2020 at 5:36 pm
Should they also play in full wool suits and knickers too?
The dude
Oct 23, 2020 at 9:02 pm
Funny
Trav's Mommie
Oct 25, 2020 at 1:50 am
Your mom does
Carolyn
Oct 23, 2020 at 1:16 pm
Just adjust the COR on the driver face to give less or NO rebound…90% of players do not swing fast enough to get any benefit anyway…so with out rebound effect the 350 drive becomes 325..better.
Jason G
Oct 23, 2020 at 11:58 am
Bifurcation is the answer to rolling the golf ball back. College football players play with a slightly smaller ball than the NFL and it is much stickier than the “Duke” that is played in the NFL. Junior High basketballs are smaller than high school. The 3 point line in high school is closer than the NBA. NASCAR had the “car of tomorrow” that was required for particular races and ended up teaching us a lot about how to better protect drivers.
Jbone
Oct 23, 2020 at 12:44 pm
Ridiculous comparisons that just do not translate to golf
Moosejaw McWilligher
Oct 23, 2020 at 2:12 pm
The apt comparisons in golf would be that shorter players use shorter (and lighter) golf clubs, and that there are multiple sets of tee boxes which you can choose based on strength and handicap. AND, there is the handicap system.
Bifurcation in golf changes one of the core premises of golf – that we are all playing the same game.
There are also MANY questions unanswered about what a golf ball “rollback” would mean: a “single” tour ball? Is that fair? Would this ball affect the longest hitters disproportionately? Is that fair? Will the current short hitters drive the ball even less far – and would that eliminate their chances anyway?
Like Tiger said, it’s pretty hard to put the genie back in the “bag”.
Joey5Picks
Oct 23, 2020 at 3:26 pm
Excellent comparisons. There’s already bifurcation in golf. Professionals play 7200+ yard courses. We don’t. Pros play on 12+ stimp greens. We don’t. Pros play under the “one-ball” rule. We don’t.
Who cares if my score wouldn’t be directly comparable to a Tour Pro because they were playing a “tour ball”? It’s already not comparable because:
1) even if we play the same course, it’s not in PGA Tour tournament condition
2) we’re playing a course that’s ~1,000 yards shorter
Again, it’s already bifurcated. Shave 5% off the Tour Ball
Moosejaw McWilligher
Oct 23, 2020 at 7:49 pm
You can take %5 off the ball all you want. Pros will find a way to get that distance right back with their fitting, their fitness, etc. That’s what has happened in recent years – the “ball” has not continued to fly further. Everything else has gotten better as well. You would need a seriously limited “tour ball” to achieve any significant reduction in current distance. And if that happens – will it remove XX% across the board? Will longer players be “penalized” more than shorter hitters? Is driving distance not at all part of the golf skill set? Maybe just make drivers illegal – let everyone tee off with hybrids and long irons.
Jbone
Oct 23, 2020 at 11:50 am
Good thoughtful article.
The rollback of the ball is such a shortsighted and elitist view.
Roy
Oct 23, 2020 at 3:18 pm
“The rollback of the ball is such a shortsighted and elitist view”
And that why it scares me what the USGA might do about it…..