Forgive me if you believe the outraged PGA Tour players, but MBS will not be criticized for such by players under his warrant.
The USGA and R&A chief executives are urging golfers to use an improved ball that will halt the rapid increase in distance at the elite level if adopted in a tournament or tour after January 1, 2026. I suggested an optional rule to enforce. Like everything else these days, the reaction is polarizing. Dewy romantics say they can’t go back enough to a bygone era of balata brilliance, and tour pros sing sponsor standards from “Grow the game!” To “Grow the Rough!” — a view that is always offered while flaunting the logos of companies of commercial interest that no action takes place in the distance.
Sam Burns even went so far as to suggest that players could one day compete in a major tournament, insist on using regular balls, and boldly refuse the organizers. The first opportunity to do so will likely come on April 9, 2026. in Augusta, Georgia. Private Burns would have few people in his fictional army willing to go through with him.
Clearly, rules restricting golf balls are not widely held by PGA Tour players, but they are not non-existent. Jack Nicklaus, Nick Faldo, Tiger Woods and others have argued that the distance should be reduced, and more prominent voices could be added to the chorus in the coming days. Currently, it seems highly unlikely that the PGA Tour and its members will choose to adopt the new rules, but changing circumstances may change their minds.
Whan and Slumbers have revealed that both Opens will implement the rule if it’s an option in 2026. This creates a dilemma for the PGA of America, which prides itself on not bothering its players with either course setup or rule disputes. It is done. If other majors use improved balls, will the PGA of America really hesitate and pull further away from the club in the minds of its fans? Frisco could prove a pretty weak firewall if you want to.
A similarly unappetizing predicament looms over the PGA Tour. Much to the chagrin of the tour, the majors are already on top of weekly contention. To what extent would the Tool be willing to see that recognition grow? Choosing to highlight its entertainment offering risks undermining the Tour’s competitive image, at least when compared to major championships. I have.
In dubious marketing terms, it would be “Golf but longer.”
Discussions of engagement and compromise take place during a five-month comment period set by the governing body, but there have already been many opportunities for feedback during this lengthy process. Claims for tours were presented but not considered. The USGA and the R&A have confirmed that no precinct can claim to have been ignored, but are unmoved by opposition to action. Their proposal feels more like a notice issue than an invitation to negotiate. .
In the three years leading up to the rule’s entry into force, as surely as the political considerations of various bodies will change, so will the outlooks of many stakeholders. Relationships with equipment manufacturers can now affect attitudes, but massive increases in prize money and bonuses will soon make elite stars’ off-course deals smaller. It will increasingly be seen by top players as a waste of time rather than a business imperative. Sponsors aren’t all that important, so players who don’t want to switch balls to legacy-defining majors may decide that playing a changed ball throughout the year isn’t so bad.
Speculative? True, but not implausible. Situations in which both individuals and organizations ultimately make decisions are not the prevailing circumstances during this blowback stage of litigation. Whan and the Slumbers may have calculated that they could get over their anger and wait for the cavalry. All they need is a quick nod of agreement from the true power of this game. Chairman, the floor is yours.
