PGA Of America Asks For (2026) Rollback Delay Citing "Conflicting Data"

The commerce-first organization says it members don't want to deal with the issue and asks for more time five years into the distance study.

Delay, delay, delay. This is the way. As the Mandalorians like to say.

The PGA of America came out against the proposed distance solution and put out a memo sounding suspiciously similar to the PGA Tour’s position revealed last week to help Jay Monahan fend off the Titleist wolves. (The PGA of America memo was reported exclusively by GolfChannel.com’s Rex Hoggard).

For added punch, the organization of club professionals known for rarely taking a stance on much of anything since the anchoring ban, billed their position as coming from the “World Alliance” of PGA’s.

I wonder what the World Alliance would think of moving the PGA Championship to international sites every four year? I digress. s

Notably, the American organization hosting of the PGA and KPMG Women’s PGA seem very focused on protecting the synergy between selling every day golfers what a few hundred male professionals play. The memo suggests the PGA is also disinterested in how their two biggest championships are played or whether time-honored skills still matter in deciding a winner. This hardly comes at a shock after the PGA of America, contradicting the findings of their lockstep partners at the PGA Tour, allowed rangefinders in the PGA Championship and KPMG Women’s PGA. You know, expensive devices that allow a severe mishit to be rewarded by allowing players to dial in an easy yardage from the wrong fairway.

Anything to help pace of play bogged down by all players reach every par 5 in two and a few par 4s in one.

I’ve summarized the memo key points below, with the full memo screen grabbed after:

• The PGA of America believes the change to a Model Local Rule ball in elite events could “seriously interrupt the current momentum in the game and be fundamentally damaging and detrimental in the long run.” (The pandemic-fueled change in work and lifestyle patterns or a healthier-than-expected economy apparently pales compared to the pleasure of buying high-priced equipment all because a tour pro endorses it.)

• They claim to have seen “sets of data that conflict with the R&A and USGA materials” and call the data used “confusing”. The PGA of America does not say what data troubles them even though a vast majority of the Distance Insights data comes from the PGA Tour’s uber-reliable ShotLink.

• The PGA of America “firmly oppose” bifurcation, saying it will lead to division and “lose a very precious characteristic of golf.” Which is, in theory, golfers buying and playing what the pros play, even if most of that business is no longer handled by club pros and is instead sold online or in non-green grass shops helmed by a mix of PGA and non-PGA members.

• “We all play on the same course with the same club and balls.” Except most people pay for the stuff that pros get for free and play from about 1000 yards shorter tees if they can get on the “same course” pros play.

• “Need to scope out all unintended consequences before the introduction of any significant change.” The study started in 2018 and the elite ball would not be an option until 2026.

• They cite operational issues including policing players, the horror of “retailers” stocking two different spec balls (don’t they already do this on a grander scale?), and ranges having to provide different balls for different golfers (a very country club problem not likely to happen).

• The PGA cites handicap course ratings needing revision in a rare show of concern for the course rating and handicap system handled entirely by the USGA and R&A. It’s a fair point that the two organizations should address.

• The PGA of America has concerns about the image of elite women playing the recreational ball “at a time when we are all trying to promote and champion women’s golf and participation.” This is the lone time the memo cites a topic of note related to the conducting of a major championship.

• The PGA requests to extend the consultation period to review the conflicting data. Also known as just buying time and hoping this whole thing goes away.

• The PGA proposes to create a “white paper” using alternative data and pitching possible solutions other than what has been proposed. They also could have already done this if they weren’t just waiting to do what the PGA Tour asks them to support.

• The PGA offered to set up a phone call to discuss their position. How, uh, white of them.

• The PGA of America believes any altering of golf ball testing for elite players will lead “to changes to virtually all golf clubs which are built to perform best around the characteristics of the golf ball.” First, that’s total horse pucky. And even if true, this is something a launch monitor-proficient PGA of America instructor can help an elite player figure out in about fifteen minutes, maybe thirty if they stop for a breakfast burrito at the driving range comfort station.

Overall, the PGA landed a few punches regarding policing and concerns about super-high end driving ranges in the cloistered country club world where they get practice balls pyramid-stacked. But outside of this small percentage of upscale courses, a vast majority of range offerings are glorified ping pong balls:

The USGA and R&A have not done enough to explain how they see the policing of elite competitions would work with their proposed “Modified Local Rule” ball, nor have they shared data showing what would happen if all golfers played the ball under the updated testing proposed. Quite a few wise folks believe that a vast majority of golfers would not be impacted if they, too, adopted the Model Local Rule ball.

In a 2023 interview with high school students, former U.S. Amateur champion and Masters Tournament Chairman Fred Ridley said he would lose around six yards off his drives if he played the new ball. He made clear this is not a big deal to him.

Did I mention he governs one of the four majors, of which two already plan to adopt this Model Local Rule? The math still isn’t on the PGA’s side.

Without offering what it is that they see in the “confusing” numbers versus what was presented in hundreds of pages of detailed studies posted online, it’s tough to take the PGA of America seriously until they specify actual data to back up the claims. Or, if they’d even be open to an overall rollback that disproportionately impacts the super-elite sector of extreme clubhead speed?

Notably, it would be ideal if they could also offer numbers linking the pandemic-fueled growth of golf and how many golfers came to the game for the privilege of paying $52 for a dozen golf balls or $699 to get a new driver.