It appears as if the USGA and R&A have stumbled forward again with their call for a reduced-flight ball for “elite” golfers (“Whole new ball game,” March 20 GGP). These prestigious organizations seem to make decisions after the fact. Or, as it has been noted, “after the horse has left the barn.”
What if the PGA Tour does not adopt the reduced-flight ball for its tournaments?
What if the bean counters at Callaway, Titleist, TaylorMade, et al., do the cost-benefit analysis and determine that profitability from 1 percent of the ball-buying population is not feasible and decline to manufacture it?
Will the USGA and R&A have the financial resources to contract out and pay to have the ball manufactured for them?
The playability and relevancy of iconic courses partly seem to be behind the motivation behind the ball. How many of the iconic courses, most of them private, will open their doors just because they will be more challenging due to a shorter ball? Will the doors be open because of the paycheck, or protecting the integrity of the game if they do?
So many questions.
Dave Richner
St. Johns, Florida
It seems as if the only courses getting lengthened are tour-played courses (“Whole new ball game,” March 20 GGP). They can always add another tee-off area to the lengthened course.
Donn Byrne
Carol Stream, Illinois
Global Golf Post welcomes reader comment. Write to executive editor Steve Harmon at saharmon83@gmail.com and provide your full name, city, state and country of residence. If your comment is selected for publication, GGP will contact you to verify the authenticity of the email and confirm your identity. We would not publish your email address. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and brevity.