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?