Bonallack: USGA And R&A Ignoring Legends On Distance

John Huggan reports that in comments related to Royal St. George's getting the 2020 Open Championship, R&A Chief Martin Slumbers said he has worked "very carefully" with high-profile critics of the distance explosion that isn't happening.

Except that in a disturbing but not shocking twist, former head R&A man Sir Michael Bonallack says he and other longtime players and leaders with Jack Nicklaus' Captain's Club a

“I am on Jack Nicklaus’ ‘Captains Club,’” said the five-time British Amateur champion. “We meet at Muirfield Village every year. At one of those we had Jack, Arnold Palmer, Gary Player, Bill Campbell, myself, Charlie Mechem from the LPGA, all with huge experience in golf. Jack was talking about the ball. We all agreed it was out of control and going too far. It had to be pegged back. So a letter was composed and sent off to the R&A and the USGA, signed by all of us.

“The only reaction we got was an acknowledgement. But I happened to see a copy of the memo that was passed from David Fay to Peter Dawson. “Have you got this?” it asked. “Please note the average age of those who signed it!” And that was the end of it.

While that was a few years ago and Slumbers may have a different view than his predecessors, no evidence suggests that the wise old guard will be listened to.

Bonallack goes on to recount a conversation with a golf dignitary defending the governing bodies in which he is told that all distance gains are from fitness. Apparently this person isn't watching much PGA Tour Champions golf, where the gains have been largest both off the tee and around waistlines.

Comments

[Hardy Greaves]

It is such a shame that we don't honor our elders anymore. Hell, we don't pay any attention to them whatsoever.

[Tom Morris]

Let's be honest the period Peter Dawson served was not the R&A 's finest hour, in fact we have to go back to the 1890's to see the R&A working for golf. As for Mr Dawson, has he ever achieved a 'fines hour' while in office?

Again does this not show that the R&A are not fit for purpose let alone Golf - they so badly need to be reformed and made accountable for their actions.

[AF]

You'll have to explain to the various parties with a financial stake in an ever longer ball why it will benefit them to put a lid on things. I'm not sure it will. Distance, like sex, sells.

[Saltwater Golfer]

Hi AF. The only way I see a shorter ball being "sold" to golf's ruling bodies is if the case can be made that the advances in ball and equipment detract from the dominance of the world's best player(s). As Monty noted in an interview last week - Tiger would have been more dominant in bygone eras where equipment was not a great equalizer. What equipment and the golf ball have done is allow parity to creep into the professional game - how often do you hear that anyone can win any given week on the tour? Well that's great, except most fans want a clear cut run away favorite - they don't want parity. Golf's popularity was at its greatest when Tiger was all-world and trouncing fields of his fellow professionals who were saying they didn't stand a chance and were playing for second place. If popularity and growing the game are what the ruling bodies desire than maybe this is the change that is necessary.

[DrBunsenHoneydew]

Now, hang on, I'm pretty sure the long putter ban solved every single problem in golf.

[Coleman]

@Honeydew did I miss something? When was the long putter banned? Aren't those putters Langer and McCarron are using long ones?

[Silly Bodkins]

Saltwater Golfer,

I agree with you wholeheartedly. Modern equipment makes the game easier from tee to green - for everyone. As a result, a decent player with a hot hand on the greens can win. When the equipment was inferior, there were fewer exceptional golfers who could excel at getting the ball from tee to green.

So, golf has become a putting contest. No wonder the interest in the game is declining.

It is to everyone's interest in making the game harder in the shotmaking realm - so the really great players can become dominant again.

[Silly Bodkins]

I find it very strange that the USGA ignores Jack Nicklaus on the golf ball.

Here is a guy who was either the best golfer to have ever played, or slightly eclipsed by Tiger in Tiger's wonder years. In years past, the USGA paid particular attention to Bobby Jones when it came to the state of the game: I give you the 14 club rule, which Jones was heavily invested, and the end of croquet putting, which caused Jones apoplexy when he say Sam Snead practicing that particular art at Jones' own tournament.

In both cases, the USGA quickly changed the rules on the advice that Bobby Jones gave them.

How then, when the most important golfer since Jones, does the USGA ignore the greatest ever, or at least the most accomplished over a long period of time. And even Arnold Palmer agreed with Jack when it came to the ball, as well as Gary Player.

It shows to me the utter arrogance of the USGA at this point in time. It shows just how far the blue blazers have come from a time when the former greatest player ever - Jones - could influence the rules committee.

How much has Jack done for the game. There were legions of admirers in the 1960's to 1980's. He has been a wonderful designer of championship golf courses (and I hasten to add, at my age and skill level, I hope to never play a championship golf course again!). But I love Jack, for his golf swing, his golf game, his approach to championship gold, and his ideal as a family guy.

So, Jack hosts two very important tournaments on the PGA Tour - the Honda, and his own Memorial Tournament. Jack has done so much for golf, so much for PGA tournament golf, and so much for the charities in the Palm Beach and Columbus areas.

I cannot understand how the USGA turns a deaf ear to Jack Nicklaus. The Blue Blazers must be so scared of lawsuits from the equipment guys that they stay up late at night. But that is so wrong. The great players must have the ability to modify the rules for the next generation - they have earned that privilege, and the have the wisdom to steer the game.

The USGA changed the ball in 1931 - it was the floater. It was larger and lighter than the ball in 1930. They tried it for a year; there was much discussion, and ultimately the USGA settled on measurement of weight and circumference that were not as extreme as the "floater", but were changed from the 1930 ball. So there is precedent. A year of a completely different ball from what we have now could be a very positive development for the game of golf.

I am with Jack. GOAT, or next best, take your pick. But don't ignore the wisdom.

[LongBall]

Mike Davis and company fear the responsibility to take action on the ball. It's an issue that would almost certainly bifurcate the game between Tour and the recreational game. Should that happen, it would begin to unwind the USGA's governing role. And if anyone knows Davis, he lacks courage!

[Priussmug]

Geoff
Serious question. Have you spent any time talking to full time Champions tour players to ask what they have done in an effort to gain yardage?
I know what I did to find almost ten yards carrynlast year. Some was a swing change. Some was a much higher launch angle and longer/lighter driver I could manage with my new swing adjustment. With the same higher spinning model ball.

You're an impressive researcher and your golf course material is awesome. I hope you put the same into the commentary before basically talking down to guys who work darned hard at their games. No I'm not dismissing equipment gains btw Longer,lighter ,lower ,spin all contribute, and I respect that. Maybe respect the efforts at improving too

[munihack]

This dismissal by the USGA of advice from all time greats is a great example of why the USGA is not relevant in terms of protecting the game. Their technical prowess when it comes to specification writing is worthless- and they have the lawsuit losses to prove it.

[AJ]

ANGC is ideally suited to take the lead on this issue as the Masters lies outside the purview of all the governing bodies. They could establish specifications for a ball to be played at the Masters. Manufacturers would be given ample time to make the ball for their players. Everyone participating in the event would have to play the "Masters" ball, or not play. Who would turn down that invite? A pretty good laboratory for such an experiment. It's not just the distance of the modern ball, but the lack of curve one can impart (except Bubba). Johnny Miller has said as much about the old balata cover and spin.

[Carl Peterson]

AJ, The Masters is only "outside" because its leaders are no longer members of the USGA Executive Committee.

Do you picture former USGA President Fred Ridley announcing a Masters-ball and fielding questions regarding why he didn't "fix the ball" during his USGA presidency?