How far is too far? The U.S. Golf Association is exploring research that could lead to new rules controlling balls and drivers
At the center of that controversy is the U.S. Golf Association. In March the debate escalated when the USGA e-mailed a notice to equipment manufacturers announcing, among other things, it will conduct research that may lead to new rules that control ball spin and limit clubhead moment of inertia. (Moment of inertia is a club’s resistance to twisting, or more simply, its relative forgiveness.) Less than two weeks later, the USGA sent a second notice outlining plans to test prototype golf balls designed to meet an overall distance standard 15 and 25 yards shorter than the current 317-yard limit.
The heart of both documents echoes the language of the Joint Statement of Principles, issued by the USGA and Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews (golf’s ruling body outside the U.S. and Mexico) in 2002. It reflects golf’s governors’ desire “to prevent an over-reliance on technological advances rather than skill.” That concern has been fueled recently by the PGATour’s use of ShotLink, a sophisticated data system that provides instantaneous details (including driving distance) of every shot hit on tour.
Nevertheless, the specific nature of the USGA’s most recent communiques has given pause to the equipment industry. “There’s a saying that without smoke, there’s no fire,” says Benoit Vincent, chief technical officer at TaylorMade. “Why would you communicate around these three subjects if it were just for communication purposes? I call that preparing for the battle.”
At this year’s Masters, Augusta National chairman Hootie Johnson, who has contemplated a “Masters ball,” said he was encouraged the game’s ruling bodies were considering regulation. One day after the Masters concluded (but completely unrelated, according to Rugge), the USGA sent a notice to ball manufacturers seeking their participation in a research project to study “how a reduced-distance golf ball would affect playing of the game.” While that sounds like a rollback, over the years the USGA has been reluctant to revert to standards that would make existing equipment nonconforming. “I would advise those who are trying to predict the future to base that prediction on our history,” says Rugge. Depending on the results, Rugge expects the research project on prototype golf balls, which will include both laboratory and on-course testing, to be concluded before the end of the year. Ball manufacturers generally applauded the USGA’s search for information, but still had some concerns.
“The question is how much are we going to open up our future product portfolio,” says Tom Kennedy, Top-Flite Golf’s senior vice president of research and development. “Our fear is that we’ll paint ourselves into a box with our own technology. They are taking their time so far and not making a knee-jerk decision, which is good. I laud them for going slowly. I’m sure they’re getting a lot of pressure.”
As for moment of inertia, many engineers believe it would be easy to administer such a test, but wonder whether the current rules on clubhead size (among them, a limit to 460 cubic centimeters) already sufficiently cap significant improvements in the future.
“It’s clear to me they have a fundamental fear about the driver,” says TaylorMade’s Vincent. “They have so much fear that they keep creating rules. It’s an avalanche of rules in one area. It’s enough.”
If the USGA is at an information-gathering stage, then equipment companies still have time to make the case that the game is not in jeopardy. Rugge concedes that possibility. “The more knowledge we have, the better we’re able to make a decision to enact a rule,” Rugge says. “Or choose not to enact a rule.”
Additional reporting by Mark S. Murphy and E. Michael Johnson
Author: Mike Stachura