Ball Rating System

PHOENIX (December 19, 2011) – John Solheim, Chairman & CEO of PING, is proposing that golf’s rule making bodies consider a “Ball Distance Rating” system (BDR) that would replace today’s single golf ball limit with three different ball distance limits – one that is the same as today’s standard, one that is shorter and one that is longer. Solheim’s “A Long Term Response to Distance” explains how including a BDR system with a new “Condition of Competition” would give professional events and golf courses an efficient way to address future concerns about distance.

“A BDR Condition of Competition would create a simpler way to control distance at the tour level – and keep the competitive design of the world’s great courses in play,” said Solheim. “This concept addresses the unique talents of the top 0.1% of the world’s golfers without hurting the other 99.9%.” Solheim also noted that a key aspect of the idea is to give players who would benefit from it the option of using a longer ball, a choice many golfers may appreciate, especially when taking on today’s longer courses. “The distance rating of the ball used would factor into handicaps, just like slope rating or choice of tee box does today.”

Solheim recently sent his BDR idea to golf’s governing bodies, and suggested it could be a positive factor in helping to sustain and grow the game. “I appreciate the challenges faced by those who help govern the game,” said Solheim. “I am hopeful they give my idea further consideration and use it as a starting point to address some of the issues the game is facing. The positive impact golf has on so many groups requires that we explore a variety of ideas to improve the health of the sport. I hope others have suggestions to offer as well.”

John Solheim’s “Long Term Response to Distance” follows:

A Long Term Response to Distance

For as long as I can remember, golf has been challenged by concerns over driving distance. Unfortunately, over the past dozen or so years, many actions taken in response to that challenge have often been short sighted, costly and/or controversial – such as altering some of golf’s most revered courses and adopting restrictive golf club rules. Now, we learn average driving distance on the PGA Tour just had another increase – it broke through 290 yards for the first time (and with so many dynamic young golfers working toward a Tour card, who knows where it will go from here). So, once again we are hearing the question: “what, if anything, should be done about it?”

With so many other challenges facing the game, we need to be sure any “distance discussions” focus on the long term – on solutions that can quickly and easily respond to future increases in distance (no matter the cause); on ideas that give professional events and courses a tool that allows each to best address the distance concerns unique to their venue; on proposals that recognize it is far simpler to adjust the ball to the course, than to adjust the course to the ball. Finally, we need a response that will resolve this issue once and for all. To get this discussion rolling, here is how I think we can do just that:

- Replace today’s single golf ball distance limit with three different “Ball Distance Ratings” (or “BDRs&rdquo – one that is the same as today’s limit, one that is shorter and one that is longer.

- Adopt a “BDR Condition of Competition” – each event could apply the BDR appropriate for its course design and yardage, and for the skill level of the golfers competing at the event.

- Include BDR as a factor in calculating handicaps – just as “slope rating” or choice of tee box does today, the BDR of the ball you use will factor into your handicap.

BDR golf balls should have similar flight characteristics as today’s ball (trajectory, spin rates, etc) with the only variable being distance. Some details may be challenging, but I have no doubt the USGA and the R&A are up to the task. With distance as the only variable, an example of what could be done would be to adopt a color code for the several BDRs (just like we do with tee boxes), perhaps using “gold, silver and bronze”. A “silver dot” rating could apply to balls that conform to the current distance limits, a “gold dot” rating to balls that are longer (perhaps 30 yards longer), and a “bronze dot” rating for balls that are shorter than today’s ball limit (again, maybe 30 yards shorter). More BDR levels could be added, if needed, to address future increases in driving distance by Tour professionals.

If the game adopted a “BDR Condition of Competition”, I believe the vast majority of events would choose to allow the same balls (and ball limit) used today. Most courses hosting professional tour events were built with, or have added, sufficient length to challenge the world’s best golfers. Perhaps a small number of tournaments, those played at some of the game’s classic courses, would find it exciting to put the original design elements of the layout back in play by requiring shorter rated golf balls. These events may even generate a lot of interest, and TV viewers. A key point of this idea is that it puts control over those decisions with the event itself. It also gives each venue a new “long term” option for responding to future increases in driving distance – bring in the bull dozers, or simply adopt a new BDR.

I recognize asking tour professionals to occasionally switch to a different rated ball creates a new challenge. However, rising above golf’s toughest obstacles is what they do best. These skilled athletes likely realize that imposing equipment limits on tens of millions of amateurs – a group that is critical to golf’s future – is not the best way to resolve issues unique to competitions played at the highest levels. I think the most talented professional golfers in the world would be willing to switch to a shorter ball once in awhile, if that would benefit the remaining 99.9% of us.

Giving amateurs the option of playing a new, longer rated, ball is another key aspect of this idea. Many golfers find it very difficult to play today’s longer courses. Using a longer ball should make that experience more enjoyable. It may even bring some ex-golfers back to the course. Perhaps this idea could even reduce the time needed to complete some rounds, a goal shared by everyone.

There will likely be occasions when amateurs tee it up with a shorter rated ball. Some golfers may choose to do so when playing some classic courses, ones that cannot add yardage, in order to bring out the competitiveness of the original design. Others may choose to do so because it has a positive impact on their handicap. Some courses might even recommend using a shorter rated ball. Higher handicap players may find it easier to play alongside more experienced golfers – from the same tees – when using different rated balls. Each of these choices gives some control over the distance issue where it is needed most – with the golfer and the course.

This proposal could also help the USGA and the R&A. The handicap system may benefit from adding “ball rating” as a factor. This solution is also consistent with the Joint Statement of Principles announced by the USGA and R&A in 2002: it provides an immediate and an efficient way to address future increases in distance, and it is not bifurcation – amateurs and professionals will still play to a ball limit, just not necessarily the same one on the same course. Adopting a few new ball distance ratings is basically the same as adding a few more tee boxes – and adding tee boxes is not bifurcation.

In order to fully evaluate this idea, the constructive input of golf ball manufacturers will be needed (PING currently does not sell or manufacture golf balls, but we did for over 20 years). I realize this suggestion presents challenges, but a BDR system brings with it new opportunities as well. Adding new categories of “conforming” golf balls should lead to exciting new ways for golf ball companies to competitively innovate, and it could increase golf ball sales. If it were as simple to develop a club rating system that included a similar opportunity to innovate longer drivers, I know I would welcome it. However, if golf once again chooses to address driving distance, it needs a practical long term solution, and I believe a BDR system would do the job.

All of us, including those in the manufacturing community, have a responsibility to offer new ideas and appropriately work with the rule making bodies to help improve the game It can be done, as demonstrated by the positive results from the November 2010 Vancouver forum, and the solution PING provided in resolving the Eye2 controversy on the PGA Tour in early 2010. I will continue to do what I can, and I believe others will as well. The game has seen many positive changes over its long history, changes that appropriately recognize the relationship between the challenge and the enjoyment of the game at all skill levels. I believe a BDR system would provide a way to continue do just that – for a long time to come.

John A. Solheim

Chairman and CEO of PING

So the tour average is now 290 yards. Easy to play off scratch with that much start on a hole.

But John, the courses are now 7500+.

TheLyth

Are they indeed my course is 7150 and is the 17th longest in this country. Pick a course Lyth, gps me to 290 yards on  each hole then bet against me getting it round in par. The bet applies to anyone.

John,

The first three venues for the European Tour for 2012 are 6770, 7595 & 7590yds.

TheLyth

Our regular tee at Caversham, Heath, which can be checked, is the whites, and that plays at 6875 yards and already I have played this course from our young professional's drives and managed 1 under par. He might, on occasion be topping 300 yards though.

I might also add that we have only 3 par 3's,

It is about time we went back to the times of skill instead of this penchant for length.

It would also be desirable if courses were set up to cater for everyones abilities, yes, even old men like me who just cannot get the ball high enough to carry all the bunkers that are in front of every green these days, with no option to be able to run the ball on. Why does everything have to be through the air.

My answer to the issue of balls would be a ball tax, or maybe a golf eqipment manufacturer's tax. The ball tax to be paid by the manufacturers to the respective National Golf Unions, and that money to be passed onto clubs for them to add or reposition bunkers/hazards. By doing so there would be no need to extend the length of courses. The current trend of longer courses on the respective tours is rewarding those that can bomb it out to wedge distance from greens and does little to test player's ability to hit every club in the bag.

At present the cost of toughening up/lengthening courses is falling to club members, when in reality the vast majority of members never play off the 'black' tees. In all honesty the tax would see a small rise in equipment prices but at least the cost of course alteration would be met by all golfers.

On the issue of making a course playable for everyone, and creating tees that cater for all; we lose juniors almost before they've started out because courses are too long, and we lose seniors from the game far too soon for similar reasons. Yes, more teeing options but also the handicap sec needs to be reviewing the bottom end of the comp results sheet every week to ensure that older players handicaps reflect their diminishing abilities.

Lyth, at my club I always play off the whites which, as I stated iis 6875 yards. To give myself a chance we do quite often play off the blues (The very back tees) which is 7150 yards. Why do I prefer to play off the blue tees? simple. It does not make the course any harder for me as it will still allow me to get on a par 4 in three, whereas it makes it far tougher for the better players to make greens in regulation.

My argument about the modern courses is the way they are designed only for the better and more powerfuil player, where straight shots are penalised. Hazards should be to catch the wayward shots, not the straight shots, like the old course designers used to do. Penalise the far left and right shots by all means, but build courses to suit everyones abilities.

290 x 15 tee shots = 4350 yards

My Course length is 7150 yards which leaves 2880 yards of playing left. As we have four par fives which would need another 2 shots to reach in regulation, plus the 3 par threes the figure of 2800 has to be divided by 18 plus 4 for the par fives = 22 equating to an average length shot of 127 yards. Not the beast that everyone assumes is difficult. It is a numbers game in all respects.

John,

It annoys me when I hear "you know that 400yd hole, 13 I think, it's stupid, you can't hit driver up there cause you end up in that ditch". To me, that isn't a stupid hole, it's a good design.

TheLyth

Lyth, It is only a good design if, after the lay up, the green is still in range.

Ditches have long been a part of golf courses, usually because of little streams on the land, but the onus is on the designer to produce a hole that is playable for all.

You are forgetting that Water hazards are now prolific on almost every new design of course, usually because the terrrain is barren and open, All the best clubs in Surrey and Berkshire do not have, or need these strange hazards. Not too many to be seen on a links, are there, apart from the burns on Scottish courses.

John,

It's that hated term today "to USGA spec" which means 'target golf' with water everywhere. They should keep them the other side of the pond and let us have proper courses.

TheLyth

Lyth,you having been a professional tour playerwill know that the course set ups that you played were not conducive to the average amateur. I have no doubt you learned many skills from Hedley that are almost obsolete in todays game. So much has been lost by the USGA spec.

Perhaps in the spring when Dave Ley and myself trot up to see Brian W for a game, you might like to make a fourball.

To quote JP, "It is only a good design if, after the lay up, the green is still in range."

The alterations to the last hole at Wentworth have, in my opinion, spoilt one of the best finishing holes in tournament golf. The ditch across the fairway stopped it being a long players hole off the tee but the change to the water hazard by the green has turned it back into a long players hole where only the long players can comfortably go for the green in two.

Ah, the 18th at Wentworth, yes Brian, they have made a mess of it, haven't they. The drive was always critical, especially with the bunker down the left, but I personally have never seen anyone drive into the ditch, so drivers were used most of the time.

They can all reach it in two, always have been able to, but now the shot requires a lot more thought, and quite honestly, it just is not worth the risk anymore.

Off the Canada Cup tees I was home with a drive and four iron on one occasion. Played the course many, many times in the days of the poanna grass on the greens.