The distance debate

Russman

Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere, Mods feel free to move/close

Announcement expected tomorrow, potentially about rolling back the ball…..

https://irishgolfer.ie/latest-golf-news/2023/03/13/ra-usga-joint-statement-expected-to-announce-further-measures-to-curb-the-golf-ball/

big_drive

Not sure if i agree or not but it would certainly be interesting

Rikand

Just when I was finally hitting the ball over 200 yards, they are going to rein me back in

CSWS101

Wouldn't expect any changes on the amateur level. Definitely the right thing to do, there is absolutely nothing appealing about near 500 yard par 4s.

Russman

https://www.golfpass.com/travel-advisor/articles/usga-r-a-golf-ball-distance-rollback-2026

Hard to disagree with a lot of it IMHO. Plus it would likely eventually filter down into the amateur game over time I reckon. If anything I'd have taken a little more than 15 yards off it 😀

monkeybutter

so its the start of a consultation process?

seems a bit pointless really

was Bay Hill better without someone trying to punch it across the water? not really

blue note

I'm certainly glad to see this. Far too many courses on the pro circuit are being overpowered. Taking away 15 yards might have more than 15 yards of an effect on holes too, if suddenly the pros can't cut that corner. Some of the Open courses in particular were becoming slightly dull because they were too easy to overpower. Please God this will bring them a step back to the challenges they used to be for the pros.

I'd actually like to see this imposed on us too. It's a brave thing to say, because you're opening yourself up to people misinterpreting what you're saying to be that you find courses too easy (with your mid-teen handicap). But in reality new courses for amateurs are longer than they would have been 30 years ago because they have to be. Older courses have been lengthened, because even the mid-teen handicappers are carrying the trouble from the tee on lots of holes (essentially making it pointless) or reaching par 5s in 2 with irons. The best example I can think of is the 4th hole in Tramore. It was probably the stand out hole on the course. When I started playing around 1998, most men would have hit driver to get up on a plateau. Any slice was down in a valley of trees - provisional required. A tricky chip out was the best outcome you could hope for. If you got it up onto the plateau you were still probably leaving yourself a low-mid iron to the green. Short on the approach was going to run back into a stream. If you were too safe on your drive and went left, you might have been looking at a wood from the rough or simply playing the hole as a par 5. The odd guy could carry it over the valley and deserved the reward of a pitch on for his second. Before the works on the course around 06, you were probably looking at a fairway to the end of the plateau to leave yourself a wedge to the green. Loads of people could carry the valley. A 5 wood for me aimed at the top of the ledge would take the valley out of play. Sliced a little was perfect, where I was aiming was still just a wedge to the green and even pulled left was a high iron. A hole that a society might talk about in the bar after had become an unremarkable par 4. Shorter courses mean that clubs can do more with the land they have, less walking for the golfers and less need for course upgrades due to courses becoming obsolete. And rowing back on distance for amateurs would help this.

Thankfully I'm brave enough to say that because of my massive balls. If I was a pro the R&A would be discussing whether to make them illegal.

Infoseeker1975

Should have happened years ago, I hit the ball miles further now [heading towards 50] than I did in my twenties & have a much lower handicap as a result, as much as I would like to believe it is all down to me😀 it is not!!!

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120358297#Comment_120358297

hard as it might be to hear, this isn't currently for you Bryson 😁

CSWS101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120358289#Comment_120358289

Amateurs playing these now longer courses with balls not going as far is a disaster for pace of play. Don't see how a roll-back has any positives for the amateur game due to the impact on pace and ease of play.

FixdePitchmark

15 yards if that is what it is - is not enough.

Would be great if the drag / COR / changes impact on higher ball speeds more.

It doesn't seem to make sense that it would be used at certain times and not others.

Anyway - the game was becoming silly as you could just bang ball up there - get loft on the ball, close to green even in rough - go for par 5s with wedges, classic courses - that are important for the history of the game were becoming pointless like - St Andrews - Augusta National - some of the classic US open courses.

This has been a debate for 10 years - and it was on the cards for a while - just off the top of my head - a few events were a bit silly for me.

Ryder Cup in 2021 - when they had no rough - mill the ball - wedge - putt - completely removed the range of skills required in golf - and turned it into a non contest

Bubba Watson in 2014 Masters - particularly on the 13th - turning an iconic risk reward hole into a drive and a wedge

What Byson was doing was amazing - and he has changed the game and debate. He basically used the distance to take his odds in the rough with very high loft - meaning he could use wedges etc and get spin. It was fascinating to watch - but whilst it was only one shot - he did cause panic and an acceleration of the debate when he went for the par 5 in Bay hill.

Then St Andrews this year - was a big moment - guys taking stuff off their final drive (even 3 woods( on 18 and easy eagle putts - it was an ok moment - where can the game go next.

Again - just a few that spring to mind - and single cases don't make good law - but there was a problem a long time ago - and it is just getting worse for course design - the history of the game etc.

I would prefer if this would not impact on amateurs at all - but that will be part of this process. They are full time athletes now - we need all the help we can get - they work at it.

paulos53

The fact that this is an optional local rule means it could get very messy. What happens if there isn't an agreement between tours or between majors to all use the same golf ball?

The announcement today mentions that it will apply to elite competitions. Will this include elite amateur competitions? Top amateurs play in a wide range of competitions so it will tricky for them to continually switch golf ball. It would also have an impact on WHS as different equipment will surely require different calculations to work out the Score Differential in elite amateur events.

spacecoyote

Interesting point from a guy on twitter (think he's a golf writer for CBS)

Basically saying, if it'll be a standard per cent reduction across the board that it would still hurt the shortest guys on tour more

This is his calc

CSWS101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120358735#Comment_120358735

Exact same thing as lengthening the courses, gives the bigger hitters more advantage. Need a less forgiving driver which emphasises centre strikes

dan_ep82

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120358760#Comment_120358760

Pretty sure most of them hit the center when they ping it 350

Imagine going to the Masters and watching Rory smoke a drive 220 down the middle, it would be hilarious

Heres the top 10 in driving distance, it doesn't correlate to the people you see on top of the leaderboard every week. Rahm and Rory are in there sure but the other 8 aren't exactly running away with it. Scottie is 22nd,Max Homa is 66th. If the top 10 in distance was the top 10 in the world they might have something,as it is it seems more about preserving courses than anything else.

Russman

I’m glad they’ve done something at least. I’d have gone further, but 15yds is a fairly significant drop off. Presumably there would be a drop off with iron performance too, albeit not as large. Imo if it makes a par 4 play driver 4 iron instead of driver 6 iron (and let’s be honest how often do the guys hit anything as long as a 6 iron on a par 4 ?) it’s a good thing I think.

Not fully sure I buy the pace of play argument for club golfers tho. It’s long been said that the real benefit in the modern ball was only for those swinging upwards of 110/111mph. Whether that’s totally true or not, I’ve no idea. Not too many club golfers at the speed. Besides the average joe has no business playing anything up around 7,000 yards anyway (I know lots will disagree with that). Play the appropriate tees and there will be no pace of play issue imho.

AyeGer

I've noticed some of the commentators in recent years being in awe if a player hit a 400 yard drive, it didn't sit well with me. How much longer could they make these courses to accommodate the bigger hitters. On balance its probably a good thing that they are reigning in the distance.

We will get to see the pros hitting more long irons and fairway woods into greens now instead of wedges. Maybe I'm being too optimistic, the reduction probably wont be that much.

bakerbhoy

They have the design already i would argue with the 90's ball from Titleist . Professional 90 and 100.

It was the parent design of the modern day pro v. It still had the liquid core.

spacecoyote

https://mygolfspy.com/usga-and-ra-announce-golf-ball-rollback-plan/

Decent write-up explaining some of the likely impacts here.

Interesting that Titleist are saying the only ball in their overall range that would currently conform to the proposed standard is the Pinnacle Soft.

Infoseeker1975

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120358598#Comment_120358598

I have no idea what you mean; I hit the ball much further now than 25 years ago due to the ball I use and the club, I have not advanced as I have simply aged!!

In my course there are a couple of par 4s' that I can drive in the summer which was never the case in the past, therefore my point would be that on my course if I was off 3/4 handicap 25 years ago, it probably equates to 1 now.

Russman

Having thought about it a little more, I'm wondering, IF its true that you only see the real substantial benefit of the modern ball at swing speeds of c110mph+, would it / could it also be the case that you won't see any drop off in the "new" ball if you're below that sort of speed ? Basically, would the average Joe even notice the drop off if he's well below 110mph ?

I dunno, the debate on some of the sites, particularly the US ones, seems to be between those who think 350yd drives and 25 under par totals are great entertainment, and those who think that's a bit ridiculous. Personally I don't find it any way entertaining to see a pro hit a drive and a 9 iron to a par 5 and hear the announcers fawn over it. That's not a par 5 its a par 4 in reality.

Then again, is it worth having two sets of ball rules for the sake of 200 guys on the PGA tour Vs the millions of club golfers the world over ? It'll be an interesting debate over the next while.

OEP

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120358760#Comment_120358760

The bigger hitters should have an advantage over shorter hitters - it's a skill to be able to hit it far. Reducing distance by a % is the fairest way to do it.

CSWS101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120360805#Comment_120360805

I'm not saying they shouldn't have an advantage, I would just like driving to become more challenging like it used to be. Think it would be more interesting if they look at the size of the driver and forgiveness. Players that can pull it off will still be rewarded, look at tiger before the introduction of bigger size heads reduced his advantage.

I mean look at this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puXMNw5rLz4

These lads are trying not to hit the center of the face and the driver is still so good. I have no sympathy for the manufacturers when they release garbage like this.

coillcam

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120360992#Comment_120360992

Consider the scenario where you nerf the driver in some way like changing the head size, reducing forgiveness + increase spin etc. Or just de facto ban entirely by loft/head size restrictions. Look at the high CHS pros, they can still hit a 3 wood around 300 yds or chase a 2 iron well out there in the right circumstance. Is that acceptable and do you ban drivers for amateurs also?

What about reducing the number of clubs allowed in the bag to 10? Would it be more important to have good gapping at the top of the bag VS versatility for short game and approach?

Driving is a skill and it'd be a shame to see it disappear. Swing speed can be trained. Most teenagers and elite amateurs nowadays are brought up with optimal swing mechanics. They've been schooled on trackman, video feedback and there's much better knowledge on S&C too. Yes, the ball and club advancements have helped without question. However, it's so easy to access to key technology and knowledge now.

I'd imagine all the Ball OEMs will fight and lobby this into purgatory for a while. I doubt they want to re-tool their R&D efforts and change materials/characteristics. They've made long term investments and there's too much on the line for them. Not to mention trying to redact their longer low-spinning drives, workable irons and short-game zip spiel for each ball. Eh actually sorry lads it's now shorter and drops like a stone 😂.

If equipment or balls don't change and they want to punish big drivers/CHS you can only look at the courses. Narrow the fairways, lengthen the rough, add more bunkers or change layout. The first two happen for US Opens but changing layouts would get pushback from courses/clubs due to cost.

It's a tough one to solve but I don't see the potential nerfed balls being implemented for 2026. The conundrum of how to ensure amateurs and pros all use the same rules plus gear is also part of it. Though largely they only want to punish big hitters who are essentially 1% of amateurs or tour pros.

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120360522#Comment_120360522

currently it is only for pros, that might change

if you at 50plus are driving par 4s then fair play to you, how many plus 50s do you think are doing that, it would be exceptional

how long are these par 4s, at what point do you think you jumped up in distance

Infoseeker1975

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120361347#Comment_120361347

Not quite at 50 yet but only a few years off it. The par 4s are circa 310-330 yards so in summer conditions they are reachable, got custom fitted with the driver probably 5- years ago which made a big difference re length.

AyeGer

Rolling back the ball is only part of the solution imo. I think we will face this problem again in the future as more athletes come into the game due to the money. All it takes is a new generation Kyle Berkshire to come along with a decent overall game and take over. We should be incorporating far more dog legs that force longer 2nd shot and making courses trickier. As russman said above it’s a bit tedious to see someone hit a 9 iron into a Par 5. I’d far rather see them needing a decent 3 wood off the deck over a bit of danger.

I enjoy watching the LET and LPGA as they don’t overpower courses and have very impressive iron and short games.

FixdePitchmark

I didn't think it would be so divisive - good POD from NLU today - and after you hear the talk about it , it completely makes sense to prevent course lengthening any more.

For the sake of avoiding the argument - they would be better off making the change for everyone. If it is 15 yards for pros - it will realistically only be 10 or less for amateurs - who cares. The great WHS will sort us.

Also with modern design , materials . and aerodynamics - and to add to that the squared relationship of Drag and Energy - I'm surprised that they can't make the changes, so that they are more impactful for higher speed than for amateur speeds - meaning that 15 yards for higher speeds would be 3 or 4 for us - or even no loss for us.

Anyway - I know I can be delusional - and golfers are delusional - but I didn't see this aspect coming, of , I want to play the same ball as the top pro - a guy who would probably have a handicap of + 8 or more - swing well over 20 % faster - when you think about it - there was a time we all picked a ball to suit our game and speed.

Seen a piece with Justin Thomas giving out that there is no problem to be solved (that guy is a bit spoilt at best ) - someone posted a photo of the new tee box at Augusta - a place that can afford to do this.

They are doing the right thing - but it looks like there will be kick back. I'd love if one of the manufactures came out and said - we can do this , for the future of the game - for sustainability of the game - I'm not sure I'm ready to listen to any poor mouth from them - as they push the driver price to near 1000 euro - and the eye watering price of golf balls - they can take this one for the sport.

billy3sheets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120358735#Comment_120358735

It would be a huge change for amateur golf if courses were effectively lengthened by 10% by such a ball change. It would effectively turn forward or society tees into the Championship tees and make the game way more difficult for the club golfer. I presume all slope ratings would be completely invalidated as a result too.

Assuming that 10% distance reduction would apply across all your clubs.

So, what might have been a good drive and a 7 iron would now require a good drive and maybe a 5 iron to compensate for the shorter length of both clubs.

That would be a very negative and unpopular impact I think.

GreeBo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120364002#Comment_120364002

Its a lot easier to move a tee forward than keep moving them back.

AyeGer

Even with the new balls the pros will still be blasting them miles further than we amateurs ever could. After a few months we wont even notice that JT or Rory are hitting their drives 20 yards less. They will still be among the longest hitters on tour at around 300 yards avg. But it will make the great courses more of a challenge for them, which is only a good thing.

fullstop

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120358760#Comment_120358760

This. The ball is a big part of the problem, and to be honest I think they should just go back to wound balls and ban the once piece core, but the driver heads are also a huge part of the problem. 460cc head means that elite players can basically smash drives as hard as they want without fear of missing the sweet spot by too much. Reducing back to original Big Bertha or Great Big Bertha head size would make a huge difference and put an emphasis on finding the sweet spot.

billy3sheets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120364061#Comment_120364061

Sure. There's a limit to how far back they can be moved and in many cases it's not feasible as the room is not there. However, tee boxes are not just flat pieces of earth. Moving them costs a lot of money. In some clubs you'd end up with a situation where the current back tees become redundant as the course is too long off them for the vast majority of members.

A problem created for them which currently does not exist, just to resolve a problem in the professional game.

Russman

I've no manufacturing/scientific knowledge about this, but does anyone know for sure if the reduction in distance would be equal across all swing speeds and all clubs ? I have my doubts but can't really prove anything, particularly from a normal club golfer point of view. We don't have a practice ground but there's a spot on the course that I sometimes hit balls from late on a quiet summer evening and having being doing it for 20 years or so, my drivers were still finishing in the same spot in 2022 as in 2002. OK I'm 20 years older but my swing speed has remained pretty much exactly the same - on a good day I hover right around 100mph so its easy to remember if it ever moved. I doubt I'm fast enough to get the big benefit from the modern ball. I'd love to know would it follow that I also wouldn't see the big drop off with the new proposed ball.

Russman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120363309#Comment_120363309

Couldn't agree more with all that Fix.

I agree it would be best if the change was for everyone. I think they're probably scared of the initial vocal gut reaction from amateurs about losing 10 yards and stopping playing yada yada. Whether that's justified or not, time will tell I guess. I reckon one of two things will happen, 1) we'll have bifurcation for a few years and over time, eventually almost everyone will migrate to the new ball, or 2) after the consultation period they'll make the change for everyone. I think it will be 1) tbh, and eventually, like with the groove rule a few years ago, inter-club golf will be with the new ball only and that will be that for the old one.

spacecoyote

I think if the change was for would be an easier sell to the manufacturers.

With a split model, they have to spend a fortune on R&D and production to create a ball that they can't sell to the public (or the public won't want to buy). Its not exactly a profitable business model for them.

In terms of the performance, the guys in MyGolfSpy, in the article I posted above are saying that they think that the actual drop off in distance could be much more than the 15 yards claimed. This is based on thr fact that the speed and launch conditions that they're basing the 15 yards on are realistically unachievable.

Will be very interesting to see how it progresses as the reaction generally has been pretty hostile to it from all areas of the industry.

But given its the USGA and R&A, you'd assume that, if it goes ahead, they'll insist on it being implemented on the PGA tour and the majors that are under their control

RoadRunner

I'm not convinced that there's a problem currently, although I recognize that I may be in the minority on this. While I don't consider myself a traditionalist, many argue that changes to the game are necessary to uphold its traditions (that an excellent drive then followed up by a pitching wedge into a par 4 are seen as a bad thing). The idea of bifurcation, where different sets of players have different rules for key aspects of the game, is concerning given the game's history and that the rules have always been the same for everyone since a Scottish player first hit a ball over 400 years ago.

I've had the privilege of playing some of the world's best courses played weeks later by the greatest players in history, on equal footing. I knew at the time it was a special treat. Technically, I could have shot a score of 65 and been their equal (though, as it happens, I didn't 😀). Playing at these places allowed me to see why they are so special. However, if the version of golf being played there requires an asterisk next to my score because it's essentially a different sport than what the best players are playing, then the allure of these places would be diminished for me. Like driving a moped around Monte Carlo's open roads in traffic, walking those special fairways would be disconnected. Shouldn't traditionalists be feeling uneasy about needing an asterisk to denote which version of the sport they are playing?

Bifurcation would be the biggest change to golf since it's inception. With the emergence of new breakaway tours and the possibility of separate rules for elite and amateur players, the sport risks becoming fragmented at a time when many are already opting to play golf digitally or in topgolf scenarios.

Barnaboy

Great post @RoadRunner LIV has already split the game once. Don't need another one. Equipment manufacturers need it to be the same. So they can sell the idea our ball is best, Justin Thomas plays it etc.

Changing the allowed balls could be very tricky in the amateur game. Will people be expected to have their ball inspected on the first tee on a Sunday morning singles?

No need to change any equipment. Solution is to design in trouble on holes that makes pros think before pulling the big stick.

OEP

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120364002#Comment_120364002

Amateurs are hitting the ball further too. So most courses will revert back to how they were played 10 - 20 years ago. I'm definitely at least a club shorter (if not 2) into most holes at my home course now than I was 10 years ago and that's not all down to me improving my swing or swing speed.

spacecoyote

One of the points I saw raised around the tradition and impact to older courses was exactly how slow it was in St Andrews last year. The rounds were all 6 hour plus, and that was primarily driven by the fact that so many of the par 4s were now driveable resulting in backlogs on a ton of tee boxes waiting for greens to clear.

billy3sheets

On the costs to manufacturers to develop new balls- haven't they all got R&D teams constantly working on ball technology? Would development of a slightly slower ball need that much change? A tweak to some of the material used? A change in dimple count or depth perhaps?

I think most amateurs play a different ball to the Pros anyway. The difference coming is that the amateurs might have the better performing ball 🤔

Russman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120365422#Comment_120365422

That's a fair point, but just on designing in trouble on holes to make them think about pulling the big stick, the already sort of do this in a fashion, most years at the US Open and half the pros whinge like b1tches about it, usually something like "....it takes the driver out of our hands..." etc etc.

TBH I'm not sure what the answer is. I'd rather see the same ball rules for everyone rather than bifuraction, but that would be an incredibly hard sell in the States.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120365330#Comment_120365330

I don't think an excellent drive and a pitching wedge into a par 4 is a bad thing at all, but if its into a par 5.....maybe it is. I suppose if its a one off like a John Daly back in the 90s its fine, but if its most of the field its probably not, I think. I'm probably old and grumpy enough to remember Faldo's 2 iron at Augusta Vs Bubba's was it wedge or 9 iron (?) into the same hole (13th) 14/15 years later. Both hugely impressive but I'd hate to see the Bubba scenario become the norm tbh.

I haven't looked it up yet, but reading on Golfwrx, someone was saying that TXG have done a few tests comparing balls and apparently there was one showing a Pro V against some Wilson Duo Soft or something, and the Pro V was significantly longer at 120mph but there was no difference at I think 95mph. As I say, I haven't looked it up yet, but it was something along those lines. I'd say the likes of TXG will be all over this and do plenty of new tests. Interesting times.

RoadRunner

• I don't think any change is necessary.
• If there is to be change, I think the best way to bring about this change is across the board affecting all players the same. Bifurcation is the worst that can happen.
• I don't like reducing the ball effectiveness as a way of dialing back. Even though I don't think any change is necessary I prefer the idea of reducing driver head size. If golf has a distance problem (bear in mind I don't think it does) then the problem is manifested by having poor drives go great distances. Smaller head (reduced COR if you like) will allow the best players in the world to still hit good drives. But it will make them swing within their abilities more often.
• If rollback is neccessary, do it right and the best drivers of the ball can continue to keep their natural advantage that they should have.
• To aid regulation of drivers, (not ball) it could be phased in at different pace for pro/amateur. EG: pro needs to use new small head driver by 2025. But amateurs are given deadline of 2030 to switch. This idea removes bifurcation and means you wont get too much crankiness from someone who just bought a new driver and doesn't want to get rid of it in 2 years.

El Guapo!

Apparently this is only for elite level golfers and not to affect the amateur game. But no doubt it will eventually trickle down to the amateur level.

I personally dont agree with it. There's no need to disrupt an entire sport just to curb the distance of a handful of top level players. Courses are long enough for most amateurs and part of the enjoyment is bombing it around as much as possible. Why make the game harder for amateurs? It's not as though every second amateur is crushing 340 yards drives in the monthly medal.

I think this is primarily to preserve courses like St. Andrews that no longer present much of a challenge unless the wind is crazy.

I don't agree with this change as I think there are better ways to do it..... make sure the rough is up really high to punish offline tee shots, strategically placed fairway bunkers, grow the grass up slightly longer on fairways to curtail roll out, protect the greens with punishing bunkers, and firm up the greens to make them more difficult.

Having said all that, I don't know the exact figures but I don't think the scoring average has dropped astronomically since pros started bombing it off the tee. I don't see much of a problem here that needs fixing tbh.

Miley Byrne

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120365330#Comment_120365330

Unless you played off the tips and with green speeds the same as at a tour event then any comparison with the pros is utterly pointless.

spacecoyote

Comment from Tiger a few years ago

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120361954#Comment_120361954

the numbers of golfers hitting the ball over 300 total is minute, 330 even smaller

blackbox

It should be possible to do something with the aerodynamics of the ball rather than the elasticity to reduce distance.

This would have most impact on elite players who create a higher ball speed and less impact on amateurs.

Changing the clubs would be a huge cost if players had to dump their current clubs.

fullstop

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120365030#Comment_120365030

Could be a number of factors why your ball is finishing in a similar spot all these years later, but it’s likely down to the drivers that were in play in 2002. There were the ‘high CoR’ driver in the market in those days, the rules around which changed in 2004 (I think) yo reduce the trampoline effect. The golf balls since then have got significantly longer.

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120367441#Comment_120367441

what is the purpose of a bunker though?

You could have a 150 yard range of shots just off the tee

are they there to catch the bad shot of to make the long player lay up because they are in their landing zone

dan_ep82

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120367409#Comment_120367409

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxijRy2nrWs

It would be a mistake to change the amateur ball, we don't hit it far enough as it is. No one in club golf is walking away with prizes because of their length off the tee.