The proposed rollback of the golf ball by the USGA and the R&A is now moving to its next, and perhaps most definitive — and potentially most contentious — stage.

The deadline for companies, golf associations and individuals to file documents with the USGA and R&A on a proposed rule that could essentially roll back the ball for elite male professional events like the US Open and Open Championship passed on Monday, and while the ruling bodies have not made public any of the comments they received, they apparently received plenty.

The USGA released a statement to Golf Digest on Thursday that reads: “The close of the comment period marks another important step in a thorough and inclusive governance process for golf. We’re grateful for the insightful feedback we’ve received across the game. It’s now our job, in partnership with The R&A, to thoroughly review this latest round of information we’ve received. One thing is clear‑there are many who care about golf’s future as much as we do, and all voices play a critical role as we determine the best path forward. We anticipate providing further direction on this topic in the coming months.”

The distance issue has been a front button topic for the R&A for the last five years, culminating in an announcement in March seeking comment from any and all constituents on a proposal to institute a new testing procedure for golf balls. That new test could be used to create what’s called a Model Local Rule, which is basically a stipulation that an event or tour could put in place for its participants. This particular stipulation would raise the swing speed used for testing balls for conformance in specified events from 120 miles per hour to 127 miles per hour. That could reduce driving distances by as much as 20 yards. The USGA and R&A have stated firmly they would plan to implement such a rule at their respective open championships, and they have stated that “the MLR is intended for use only in elite competitions and, if adopted, will have no impact on recreational golf”. As proposed, it would go into effect beginning in 2026.

Recently, both the PGA Tour and the PGA of America released statements saying they will not support the proposed rollback MLR. As well, several manufacturers contacted by Golf Digest have expressed their disagreement with the need for any such MLR on golf ball distance, off the record. However, no statements or documents on the comments they’ve received have been made public by the ruling bodies, and it appears the next step is several months away. That next step could be a decision to go forward with the proposed MLR, to pull back from any proposed distance-related changes, or to adjust any of the specifics in the current proposed ruling or testing process, thus beginning another notice and comment period.

According to the USGA’s official process for making equipment rule changes, comments will be published on the USGA and R&A websites, although “appropriate controls will be in place to prevent comments from being published without the submitter’s permission”. Under the terms of the process, “The USGA and The R&A will consider all comments equally, whether or not the submitter gives permission for the comments to be published.”

USGA’s Mike Whan. Rob Carr

While the official guidelines for the equipment rulemaking process stress transparency, it is also clearly stated that the final decision rests with the USGA and the R&A. The leaders of both organisations, USGA CEO Mike Whan and R&A CEO Martin Slumbers, have been clear that a change to distance at the elite level of men’s golf is required. Whan said in announcing the proposed MLR in March: “You want to critique the USGA and the R&A over the last 20 years, on: ‘Why didn’t you do this five, seven, 10 years ago?’ Fair comment, and we’ve taken that on, too. But taking another 10 years off, looking the other way and saying: ‘Distance is great, everybody is excited, and of course [distance] is going to grow by more than a yard a year for the next 20 years, and we all know it but we’ll just turn the other cheek’? Well, that would be a shame.”

The PGA of America’s memorandum to the USGA on the MLR, which was co-signed by eight other PGAs worldwide, called for the ruling bodies to pause and reconsider the “unintended consequences” of the proposed change. “We fear that the proposed changes could seriously interrupt the current momentum in the game and be fundamentally damaging and detrimental in the long run. We are also very aware that there are sets of data that conflict with the R&A and USGA materials … We would ask that the R&A and USGA firstly extend the consultation period to allow a review of the conflicting data being presented and for more data to be gathered to prove or disprove if change is indeed required.”

Currently on the PGA Tour, the average driving distance is 299.8, 0.2 yards ahead of where it was this time a year ago. While that marks the fifth time since 2015 that the average declined or was less than a yard, four other times that increase was 2.5 yards or more. If it finishes at that number, it would be 12.4 yards ahead of where it was in 2013. As well, the percentage of drives 320 yards or longer was about seven per cent 10 years ago. Today, it is 19.45 per cent. Conversely, according to data provided by Arccos, the GPS stat-tracking app that’s recorded more than 750 million shots, the average drive for the average male golfer dropped by half a yard from 2018 to 2022 to 226 yards.

The post USGA ends comment period on ball rollback: ‘All voices play a critical role as we determine the best path forward’ appeared first on Golf Digest Middle East.

If you didn’t know or realise what was happening, then let me send a heartfelt congratulations to you. It means you’re probably enjoying a normal existence as an avid golfer, but informed enough to read an article like this, and learn.

I, sadly, am not one of those people. I’m so in the weeds I could do with some weed killer. But that’s good news for you, because it means I can give you a brief overview so when the topic comes up at your local club, you’ll know the basics.

Before we even get going: No, this isn’t going to affect you, and any golfer it does affect won’t be affected until 2026.

Ok, let’s get into it…

What are we talking about?
The latest update on a potential golf ball rollback.

What’s that?
It’s the idea that a golf ball goes too far, and needs new rules to make it go shorter.

Why do people think that the golf ball goes too far?
Not all people, just some people.

Why do some people think that the golf ball goes too far?
Because over the years golf equipment had got more and more advanced (think about the shift from wooden to metal drivers, for instance) until basically the mid 2000s, when equipment companies started bumping into the ceiling of what they were allowed to do. Bumping into that ceiling did slow down players’ distance gained, but it didn’t flatline them like they thought would happen.

Why not?
Mainly because equipment companies and players are super smart, and keep figuring out ways to innovate in other areas. Different materials on the equipment side, for instance, or smarter training techniques on the player-coaching side.

Why is this a problem?
Well, not everyone thinks it is.

*sigh*
Why do some people think this is a problem?
Mainly because it means in response, golf courses need to get longer in order to avoid becoming obsolete and keep up with the modern game, often past the point where they can (AKA, they literally start running out of space). It also means they trick up the course in other ways, like getting the greens super fast, which slows pace of play and makes the game a little silly.

What does the other side think?
It’s sort of a mind-your-own-business mindset. That long drives make for an entertaining product to watch, that players hitting it longer is the product of various innovations that should be celebrated not derided, and that it’s backwards to shape the future of the game around the idea that a golf course from a different era should be as relevant in the future as it was in the past.

Don’t quite understand costing golf companies millions of dollars to change the rules on .0001% of the golfing population. Tournaments won’t go to a few courses, big deal. Would the usga make these changes if it were them cutting the checks? Going back to the 90s seem overboard

— Michael S. Kim (@Mike_kim714) March 14, 2023

Where do you stand on the issue?
Personally, I’m skeptical that a rollback rule can be implemented well, but this isn’t about me. It’s about you.

That’s a bit of a cop-out answer, but anyway, what happened?
After years and years of deliberation, the USGA and R&A said they were planning on implementing a potential new local rule that would change the way they test golf balls which, in practice, would chop an estimated 15-to-30 yards of driving distance off the top of golf’s longest hitters. Effectively, it brings us back to the late 90s.

Wait! I don’t hit the golf ball very far though, why am I getting punished?
Good news! You’re not. The powers-that-be were adamant that they didn’t want to and won’t impact the recreational golfer. They’ve designed the potential local rule so it can be adopted at-will by any organisation that runs tournaments, and that it’s intended only for “elite” male players, because the governing bodies didn’t see evidence of a distance problem in the women’s game. It effectively amounts to bifurcation.

Bi-fur-what-now?
It means a different set of rules for amateurs and pros, just like your high school baseball team uses metal bats and the major leaguers use wooden ones. Golf historically has stayed away from large-scale bifurcation, but here we are.

Acushnet CEO David Maher responds to ball rollback proposal: "“As we see it, existing golf ball regulations are highly effective. …The proposal of golf ball bifurcation is in many respects a solution in search of a problem.”

— Mike Stachura (@MikeStachura) March 14, 2023

Could I play the pro ball even if I’m not that good?
I mean sure, the same way you could swing an extra stiff shaft. It may well turn out that whatever new golf ball comes out of this affects higher-speed tour golfers while the rest of us don’t really notice the difference. Though we’re just speculating now.

So if it’s not affecting me, who will adopt these new rules?
We’re starting to veer into the unknown realm of speculation now. In the press conference about the potential new local rule, the USGA and R&A heavily implied they would implement the local rule in its championships. “Yes,” was R&A chief Martin Slumbers’ exact answer in response to a question about it.

Does that mean it’ll adopt it for local qualifiers?
Unclear, but probably not.

What about elite events like the US Amateur?
Even more unclear.

What about tournaments run by other organisations, like the NCAA and PGA Tour?
Also more unclear.

It seems like you’re pulling me into the weeds with all this.
You’re right, let’s back up.

Ryan Pierse

So what’s next then?
The USGA and R&A have to go around and get feedback from everyone on their idea now, which probably means a lot of getting yelled at from tour players and equipment companies, who generally don’t like the idea.
By the end of the year they’ll decide on whether to go through with it, with or without changes, and if they do, it’ll go into effect on “Jan 1, 2026”.

Got it, any closing thoughts?
Well, I guess thank you for reading all this, if you still are.

Let’s not get too personal, meant more specifically on the rollback thing.
I can’t shake this gut feeling that, because people generally hate messy and confusing things, it’ll end up organising itself once one domino starts to fall.
If the majors adopt the new ball, players may want the tour to adopt it, too, because they don’t want to have to switch back-and-forth between the two.
Of course, it could also go the other way. Players and equipment companies could really hate the idea to the extend that the tours refuse to adopt it, and the sole holdouts are the majors, creating a game of chicken that I’m not sure how it’d end.
All of which is to say, we’ll have to wait and see!

The post The USGA and R&A’s golf ball rollback announcement, explained for us regular golfers appeared first on Golf Digest Middle East.

It’s the kind of scientific explanation Mickelson might have invented if in fact it weren’t actual science. Which, as it turns out, it is.

The lines, what Mickelson’s equipment manufacturer Callaway calls “Triple Track Technology,” are an example of vernier acuity, according to Carl Bassi, a Ph.D. professor at the University of Missouri-St. Louis College of Optometry. In the simplest terms, vernier acuity refers to the ability of the brain to process subtle differences in alignment detected in the eyes. By having the right kind of multiple reference points (like a centre line flanked by two parallel lines), the brain perceives the straightness of aim better. It’s a technology used in gun sights and the landing strips on aircraft carriers.

“Your ability to discern small levels of discontinuity or levels of change in a signal is 20 times greater than just the optics of the eyeball itself,” said Alan Hocknell, Callaway’s senior vice president of research and development. “That’s the kind of phenomenon being used here.”

Bassi researched the design with Ray Barrett, the 80-something inventor and retired founder of a St. Louis biomedical research firm. Barrett came to Prof. Bassi after he started drawing the lines on his golf ball in hopes he might see his tee shots better.

“With my group, when we hit a tee shot, the first thing we ask is ‘Where’d it go?’ and the only thing we ever hear is, ‘Well, it sounded good,’ ” Barrett said. “But we all started putting better, and I wanted to know why this might be working, if it is working.

“When I brought it to [Bassi], he looked at it and said, ‘Well, you’re trending toward vernier acuity.’ I said, ‘Oh, hell, that sounds like a disease.’”

On the contrary, Barrett’s lines on the golf ball served to activate in the brain what’s called “hyperacuity,” Bassi said.

“If you just go by the optics of the eye itself, there are just certain limits the eye imposes,” Bassi said. “We know that with these vernier acuity effects, the hyperacuity exceeds the limit that you would have predicted based on the anatomy of the eye by itself. What we’re doing is we’re taking advantage of this hyperacuity by optimising these parameters.”

The parameters of the lines include having three lines so that the two outside lines flank the centre line. The distance the lines are apart is crucial as are the varying colours and size of the lines. In the case of Callaway, the colours are a wide red centre line flanked by thinner blue lines.

Harry How
Mickelson’s ranking in three-putt avoidance has shot up this season.

The alignment feature is seen on Callaway’s new ERC Soft golf ball, but Mickelson is using it on a specially made version of the Chrome Soft X ball he plays.

Bassi’s lab at the UMSL College of Optometry tested Barrett’s idea by embedding a laser in a golf ball and compared the aiming accuracy of three lines versus the typical single alignment line found on most golf balls. The testing showed a 12-percent improvement in accuracy for the three-lined ball on a 10-foot putt.

While Mickelson’s putting stats generally haven’t shown dramatic improvement this year, his three-putt avoidance has gone from 55th in 2018 to 12th so far.

Bassi said the lines’ effects work independently of how good your vision is.

“Even for people that don’t have optimum refraction and may not have perfect visual acuity, they still have very, very good hyperacuity,” he said. “I could imagine someone being tired might be able to function better.”

Like, say, someone late in a six-hour round played in near darkness who said he could see perfectly fine.

The post Those aren’t just three lines on Phil Mickelson’s golf ball – They’re Science appeared first on Golf Digest Middle East.

By Mike Stachura
The distance debate will now have an official website.

In their joint efforts to study the issue of driving distance and its effect on the game, the USGA and R&A announced Tuesday the launch of a website that will solicit opinions on distance’s role in the game from all golfers and stakeholders. The initial focus of the website will be to gather research and opinions on how distance affects each individual.

The announcement is part of a multi-faceted project to study distance in a broader way that goes beyond statistics on the professional tours, which has been the focus of annual distance reports the governing bodies have released to the public annually since 2016.

“The topic of increased distance and its effects on the game have been discussed for well over a century,” said Mike Davis, CEO of the USGA. “We believe that now is the time to examine this topic through a very wide and long lens, knowing it is critical to the future of the game. We look forward to delving deeply into this topic and learning more, led by doing right by golf, first and foremost.”

Davis’s tone, at least in this more deliberate approach to understanding distance, lies in contrast to comments attributed to him that suggest he is more bullish on a ball rollback. Both in statements from Jack Nicklaus and veteran club professional Bob Ford, Davis was seen suggesting that a ball rollback was a priority or at least in the offing. For example, Nicklaus said when he discussed his concerns over distance with Davis earlier this year, “Mike said, ‘We’re getting there. I need your help when we get there.’ ”

R&A chief executive Martin Slumbers, who also recently has suggested a line in the sand has been crossed requiring further study, echoed the more measured approach in his statement.

“Distance in golf is a complex issue which is widely debated at all levels of the sport,” he said. “It is important that we collate all of the relevant data and hear the many different perspectives on this issue that exist in the international community. We intend to conduct this process openly, comprehensively and promptly and will work with all of the key stakeholders to ensure we have a fully rounded view of distance and its implications.”

Related: USGA indicates increasing concern in latest distance report

Those statements may be read with a sense of foreboding, but those managing this project suggest any pre-determined agenda does not exist.

“I think just in terms of Step 1, this is not about a ball rollback,” Rand Jerris, the USGA’s senior managing director of public services, told Golf Digest. Jerris, along with Matt Pringle, senior director of USGA research, science and innovation, and John Spitzer, USGA managing director of equipment standards, is guiding the USGA’s team researching the distance question. Jerris made it clear that the research project is about fact-finding and understanding the issue in a way that’s not been fully attempted in the past. Jerris said there is particular interest in “the health of our golf facilities.” But the knowledge gleaned from this research project should be the foundation for any future debate, he said.

“We are looking at distance in a very holistic way. The golf ball is not the focus of this project. I think we see this research resulting in multiple insights, multiple recommendations and multiple solutions. … We need to broaden the discussion, get a variety of perspectives and re-set the conversation about distance.”

David Cannon/Getty Images
USGA officials insist that contrary to a statement from Nicklaus, the USGA and its CEO, Davis, are not predisposed to an aggressive approach to the distance issue.

The website will be a key component of that research. Termed the “Distance Insights” project, it will feature a survey on both the USGA and R&A websites that will be open to anyone and everyone to submit opinion or personal research. Specifically, via both usga.org/distanceinsights and randa.org/distanceinsights, respondents will be asked to identify themselves in terms of their position in golf, whether they are interested in participating in future research about distance and specifically how distance affects their view of the game.

Golf’s ruling bodies also announced that in addition to its own in-house research teams specifically committed to studying all aspects of distance in golf, they will be seeking multiple third-party researchers to undertake further distance studies. Those additional projects will involve stakeholders that include amateur and professional golfers, worldwide professional golf tours, golf course owners and operators, golf equipment manufacturers, golf course architects and golf course superintendents.

A report based on this project is expected sometime in 2019 and would be in addition to the annual Distance Report. The Distance Report chronicles driving distance and related data from the preceding season on the seven professional tours.

Related: The most important questions answered on the distance issue

Tuesday’s announcement reflects the tone of the preamble to the 2018 Distance Report when it was released in early March. In it, the USGA noted that the gain of three yards across all tours was “unusual and concerning and requires closer inspection and monitoring to fully understand the causes and effects.”

Toward that directive, the USGA and R&A announced at that time: “We will conduct a thoughtful conversation about the effects of distance prior to making any specific proposals. We remain open-minded and our absolute priority is to ensure that all key stakeholders are involved in an open and inclusive process, and that we move forward together in the best interests of golf at all levels. There is no fixed timetable, but we will commence this process immediately and endeavor to reach a conclusion as promptly as possible.

“The USGA and the R&A intend to consolidate previous work conducted by the two organizations, as well as others in the golf industry, regarding the effect of distance on the footprint and playing of the game, conduct new research on these same topics to augment the current state of knowledge of the issues and, most importantly, in the coming months, engage with stakeholders throughout the golf industry to develop a comprehensive understanding of perspectives on distance.”

The Distance Insights project will be categorizing the research in several sub-topics, including the effect of distance on the golf course, pace of play, player behavior and development, rules questions not relating to equipment, historical elements, as well as equipment standards.

[divider] [/divider]

WATCH: GOLF DIGEST VIDEOS

[divider] [/divider]

The post USGA/R&A announce distance research project, website appeared first on Golf Digest Middle East.

On Monday, the USGA and the R&A, golf’s joint rulemaking bodies, released their third annual report on driving distances on the world’s professional tours. While the first two reports generally found consistent but unremarkable growth, that all changed with Monday’s report which cited all-time highs in 2017 on all five of the men’s tours it tracked in the survey (PGA Tour, PGA Tour Champions, Web.com Tour, European Tour and Japan Golf Tour), as well as an increase on the Ladies European Tour. (The LPGA Tour saw a modest decline last year.) The “unusual and concerning” record-setting distance numbers prompted a call to action from the ruling bodies for more research in the coming months.

So rather than wading through the 24-page report and all its 200-level statistics charts and graphs (oh, you can if you want, but what we’re talking about is much more fun), we thought we would step in here and help you understand what all the fuss is about. Maybe as a result we might help bolster their research, too. After all, even the USGA itself said it wanted to “conduct a thoughtful conversation about the effects of distance prior to making any specific proposals.” Certainly, golf’s distance debate could use some thoughtful conversation. We hope these questions might serve as a good start for both you and the rulemakers who clearly have distance under the microscope.

Why is distance perceived as a problem?
Aside from stating way back in 2002 that they didn’t want any more significant increases in distance (but not actually giving a number or drawing a line in the sand), neither the USGA or the R&A has specifically defined the problem with distance. The easy answer, of course, is that golf’s leaders want to protect the game’s traditions and “prevent an over-reliance on technological advances rather than on practice and skill.” (That language is right there in the USGA’s equipment rules section of the rule book.) But there are several schools of thought percolating beneath the surface of the distance debate. First, there’s a fear that distance has become a skill that overwhelms all others required of top players. Second, the extreme distances elite players are hitting the ball may be making golf’s environmental footprint too great, increasing demands on resources, cost and time. Third, the elite players’ distance gains will obsolete golf’s traditional major championship venues (see Old Course at St. Andrews). All can be argued one way or another.

Stuart Franklin/Getty Images

If distance is out of control, then scoring records should be falling left and right, no?
Not exactly. Although some have been toppled recently (Justin Thomas’ 253 at Sony, Henrik Stenson’s 258 at Wyndham and Marc Leishman’s 261 at the BMW in 2017 being recent examples), most 72-hole totals have held up. In fact, 11 scoring records have stood for 15 years or more, with several dating back to the 1990s.

I worry the pro game is becoming pitch-and-putt instead of a full test of golf.
The answer to this depends on what your definition of pitch-and-putt is. The idea that insanely long drives leave approach shots that only require wedge shots, the easiest full-swing club in the bag to hit, is a clear concern that driving distance is negatively impacting the skills required at the elite level (better players should be required to hit a wide variety of approach shots, including long and middle irons). But here are the facts and you can decide for yourself. In the 2016-17 season there were 76,464 approach shots hit between 50 and 150 yards according to ShotLink. In that middle ground of 150 to 175 yards there were another 44,342 shots. For shots 175 yards and longer there were 80,121 shots. Granted, this includes second shots into par 5s when going for it, but a 4-iron shot is a 4-iron shot regardless of the par of the hole, isn’t it?

Christian Petersen/Getty Images

What numbers in the Distance Report were the ones that cause the greatest concern?
The one-year jump of nearly seven yards in driving distance on the developmental Web.com Tour may draw the most attention because it is the first time a major professional tour averaged over 300 yards for a season. But also hidden in the report is the steady decline in scoring average that has mirrored the increase in driving distance. The PGA Tour average score is nearly 1.5 strokes better than it was in 1980, the Web.com Tour average is more than 2 strokes better than it was in 1990 and the LPGA Tour is nearly 2 strokes better than it was in 1994. That’s a concern.

Does this mean there’s going to be a distance rollback?
No. But maybe. First, the report is just a report and mentions no rollback plan, just that the record highs “required closer inspection.” Those can be viewed as code words, or at least a precursor to a proposed rule change. Or it could lead to a discussion that sways the ruling bodies to opt to do nothing. Either way, a rule change of this importance could take years to develop and implement. The groove rule process started with an announcement of a study in 2005, was implemented in 2010 and still does not technically restrict amateurs from using non-conforming grooves until at least 2024.

But, really, there’s going to be a rollback, right?
When the ruling bodies make it clear that they are looking at an issue, it’s not because they want to publish a paper at the next World Scientific Congress of Golf. Whether it was adjustable drivers, grooves or anchored putting, in each case the public statement led to a proposed—and eventual—change in the rule book. But rollbacks are the third rail of equipment rules, so we’ll see.

If they roll back the ball 20 percent like Jack Nicklaus suggests, would that help the shorter hitter in the pro game?
That would seem to be logical, but so was “Tiger-proofing” golf courses and that didn’t work out all that well. Although there is no firm answer, it’s not a stretch to think that although the longer hitters would suffer a greater loss of distance if going by a strict percentage, they still would be considerably longer than the short hitters. So while now Dustin Johnson might have gap wedge and Matt Kuchar a 9-iron or 8-iron, that’s at least somewhat of a fair fight. DJ with an 8-iron and Kooch with a 4- or 5-iron might be a different story.

Mike Ehrmann

What equipment could be rolled back? For whom? When?
Obviously the ball is everyone’s favorite target. But any discussion would have to include other elements such as clubhead size, for example. There has been evidence over the years that the larger impact on distance is more the driver than the ball, especially with its more stable forgiving heads, longer lengths and lighter weights. As for whom, the USGA is on record as saying it does not want to bifurcate the rules. That would mean any action would apply to all, which presents a problem. The report shows average male driving distance at 208 yards and women at 146 yards (albeit in a small sample, but hey, it’s the USGA and R&A’s report). Try taking any of that away and the game gets more difficult for everyday players. While the topic of whether to rein in the pros is a legitimate discussion, it’s pretty clear the game the rest of us play is hardly in danger of being overpowered. When might something happen? If the governing bodies propose anything at all history shows implementation is rarely swift.

I’ve heard manufacturers, the PGA of America, the PGA Tour and possibly the LPGA are opposed to any rollback, but none of them make the rules of the game. Can’t the USGA just make whatever rule it wants?
It can and it might. Certainly, manufacturers almost universally have disagreed with equipment rule changes over the last two decades. And their pleas at best had only moderate impact on any rule changes. But when the PGA Tour decides it doesn’t want to follow a rule, it’s unlikely that rule is going to be proposed, so whether they can get the tour on board is something that bears watching. As former USGA Executive Director David Fay once put it nearly two decades ago, “It gets to the issue of power and authority,” he said. “The power is in enforcing the rules in our own 13 championships. The authority comes through the positions that we’ve taken over the years and whether those positions are regarded as persuasive by those who play the game.”

PGA Tour commissioner Jay Monahan says the tour getting younger has helped lead to distance increases. True?
The tour has definitely gotten younger. Using the commish’s 2003 benchmark, the 190 players who qualified for the distance stat were 35.37 years on average compared to 33.39 in 2017. There were also 32 players in their 20s in 2003, and 58 in 2017. However, the increase in those youngster’s driving distance is 7.34 yards—pretty close to the average increase during that time frame. That said, there’s little doubt those coming onto the tour today possess a more polished game, having grown up with tools such as launch monitors to develop an efficient swing and played in formal competition, not to mention likely being more physically fit than those of the same age 15 years earlier.

The report says driving distance on the PGA Tour is 292 yards but every time I look at TV guys are blasting it well over 300. What gives?
Remember, television is often showing the leaders, or put another way, players who are on their game that week. What they’re not showing you is Gavin Green and his 279-yard average in Mexico that evens out those prodigious blasts on the stat sheet.

Sam Greenwood/PGA Tour

Fair enough, but the 400-yard tee shot seems to be hit with alarming regularity. That would seem concerning.
It absolutely is something to keep an eye on. Through the 2014 WGC-Cadillac Championship (now WGC-Mexico Championship) there were zero 400 yards drives. In 2015 there were 11. In 2016 there were four and last year there were nine. This year there are 80. Forget the fact 69 that were hit at the Sentry Tournament of Champions at Kapalua. That’s a pretty big leap.

The USGA talks about sustainability of courses. Are courses really being lengthened to a great degree? Do they need to be?
We’re all for saving the earth and there seems to be some anecdotal evidence regarding the lengthening of everyday courses, but no real data as to whether this is an issue at the everyday player level. But here’s a thought: Have the USGA provide data from its GHIN handicap system breaking out the number of scores posted from every 100 yards from 5,000 to 7,500 yards. That would give us a feel for where people are playing from and whether courses are being lengthened out of need or ego. Water and resource conservation is a real issue and most golf course superintendents have made tremendous strides in this area over the last decade, but we need more data to determine whether or not golf’s environmental footprint needs substantial shrinking.

I really like watching pro golf at the classic courses. Are they really in danger of becoming obsolete?
We dig it, too, but here’s the thing: Did you watch this year’s AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am? On three courses all measuring under 7,000 yards and in perfect weather no one tore it up and the winner, Ted Potter Jr., won with shotmaking and putting, not pure strength. Most of the “classic” courses on tour such as Pebble, Harbour Town, Riviera, Colonial, tend to hold their own, often ranking in the middle of the pack or better in resistance to scoring. Last season five courses on the PGA Tour were under 7,000 yards. Excluding majors, eight were over 7,500 yards. The difference in weighted scoring average was 15/100ths of a stroke.

One of the joys of golf is that I can hit shots the pros hit. Isn’t that going away as they get so incredibly long off the tee?
We don’t know, does it? Fact is you probably never came close to hitting it as far as them anyway. But that doesn’t mean the game isn’t relatable. You can relate when knocking an iron shot close, spinning a bunker shot to within a foot or jarring a curling 25-footer. Those are all things we all can do. Besides, if you want to relate to distance off the tee, compare yourself to Lexi Thompson (although she probably blows it by you, too). Deep down most people want to watch that which they cannot do on their own. It’s why people watch the NBA or Major League Baseball. Or John Daly.

The post The most important questions – and answers – on distance appeared first on Golf Digest Middle East.

By Alex Myers
Whether golf’s governing bodies decide to do something to curb how far tour pros hit the ball remains to be seen, but it’s certainly a hot topic of conversation. Earlier this week, Jack Nicklaus, long a proponent of rolling back the golf ball, said USGA executive director Mike Davis assured him they’re “getting closer” to reaching such a decision. But even if arguably the greatest golfer of all time is for something, that doesn’t mean all current PGA Tour pros would be on board.

On Friday, two-time PGA Tour winner James Hahn issued this little jab at the USGA on Twitter:

Breaking news. In addition to limited flight balls, the USGA plans to ban working out, proper diet and swinging faster than 105mph. They are also planning on removing the 3 point shot in the NBA.

— James Hahn (@JamesHahnPGA) February 23, 2018

Funny stuff, James. Well, not the part about the 3-point line. Don’t joke about that, please. We already learned earlier this week that Major League Baseball might let managers choose who gets to bat in the ninth inning. Where does it end?!

The post James Hahn takes a jab at the USGA over possible golf ball rollback appeared first on Golf Digest Middle East.

By Ryan Herrington
We’ll admit, we’ve been smitten by Tiger Woods’ slow reveal the past month of his work-in-progress swing via a series of social-media posts, leading up to his announcement on Monday that he’ll make his competitive return to golf at the Hero World Challenge later this month. The intriguing part, besides the obvious of whether Woods’ will be able to make a truly legitimate comeback this time, is that it hints there might be something different about Woods as he gives it another go. Maybe, just maybe, the old, standoffish superstar finally be willing to drop his guard.

Tiger offered another sign of this with his candid comments as a guest on UConn women’s basketball coach Gino Auriemma podcast. Asked about the distance increases seen in pro golf, Woods strayed from the usual, bland response and took an interesting stand.

“We need to do something about the golf ball,” Woods said. “I just think it’s going too far because we’re having to build golf courses, if they want to have a championship venue, they’ve got to be 7,400-7,800 yards long. And if the game keeps progressing the way it is with technology, I think the 8,000-yard golf course is not too far away. And that’s pretty scary because we don’t have enough property to start designing these type of golf courses and it just makes it so much more complicated.”

RELATED: When Tiger returns, what should we be looking for?

Wow. Where has this Tiger Woods been all our lives? You know this had to put a smile on the face of Jack Nicklaus when he heard Woods’ comment, the Golden Bear being a vocal critic of the distance the ball flies..

Woods noted that there is some reason for optimism in that the USGA has been researching a reduced-flight golf ball. That said, he also didn’t think this is something that would happen “in the near future, but at least there’s talk about it now.”

More importantly, Tiger Woods was will to talk about a sensitive issue in the game, taking a stand that seemed highly unlikely in the past. Will this comeback include a more candid Tiger? We can only hope.

The post Tiger Woods speaks out about the golf ball going too far: ‘We need to do something’ appeared first on Golf Digest Middle East.

—Stephen Hennessey/@S_HennesseyGD

The post Practice Ball Looking to Take Flight appeared first on Golf Digest Middle East.