For months, people in the golf equipment world have speculated about what changes the USGA and R&A would make to rein in distance. On Monday afternoon, I finally found out in a chat with USGA’s chief governance officer, Thomas Pagel.
He described the proposed Model Local Rule (MLR) that, if adopted, would allow tournaments and high-level tours to mandate the use of reduced-distance golf balls. He hammered home the USGA and the R&A’s talking points and fielded my questions. Many of those questions were asked again Tuesday morning in a press conference that included USGA CEO Mike Whan and R&A chief executive Martin Slumbers.
They talked about several things, and here are my takeaways and thoughts.
No. 1: Bifurcated golf is coming
For years the USGA and the R&A have said they do not believe in bifurcation or having different rules for different levels of golf. However, if the proposed MLR is adopted, that’s precisely what golf will have.
“In this instance, if somebody wants to call this bifuration, I’m not going to have an argument over words with them,” Pagel said during Tuesday’s conference call. “The use of Model Local Rules is something we have consistently done over the years. We’ve always said that it gives the game options.”
Others don’t see it that way.
A statement released by Titleist on Tuesday said, “The USGA and R&A have announced a Notice and Comment to manufacturers, proposing a potential rule change to golf ball testing that results in a Model Local Rule (MLR) that provides for reduced-distance golf balls intended for professional and elite amateur competitions and a different set of rules for all other play. This bifurcation would divide golf between elite and recreational play, add confusion and break the linkage that is part of the game’s enduring fabric.”
If the PGA Tour and other professional tours adopt the MLR and require distance-reducing golf balls, but recreational golfers remain free to use balls tested to the old standards, that’s two sets of rules. If Justin Thomas, Rory McIlroy and Jon Rahm are required to use a distance-reducing ball in the 2026 U.S. Open at Shinnecock Hills, but the same rules do not bind the members playing the course in July, that’s bifurcation.
No. 2: The USGA and R&A need to define 'elite golf'
“The proposed MLR would enable golf event organizers and committees to use specific balls for certain elite championships and tournaments but would not impact the current recreational game in any way.”
That quote was taken directly from the USGA and R&A’s Notice to Manufacturers, which was sent Monday. As with other MLRs, it can be adopted by a tour or an individual tournament as organizers see fit. The USGA and R&A see MLRs as tools that give events and organizations versatility. However, no one is saying precisely what elite championships and tournaments are, and that’s a problem.
“As custodians of our sport, we are of the view that at the elite male level, both amateur and professional, we have crossed the Rubicon with regards to where hitting distance is, but more importantly, where it is trending,” Slumbers said.
It is safe to assume that the USGA and R&A consider PGA Tour events, DP World Tour events and Korn Ferry Tour events to be elite. And it sounds as if Slumbers thinks the U.S. and British Amateur are comprised of elite golfers, but is college golf elite? Is AJGA golf elite?
When asked if their respective championships would adopt the MLR that requires distance-reducing golf balls to be used, both Whan and Slumbers said yes, meaning the U.S. Open and British Open would require them. But would the USGA Boys Amateur Championship be considered elite? Would golfers competing in the R&A’s 9 Hole Challenge be considered elite and therefore need to use the shorter-flying balls?
The distance debate has raged for years, and the USGA and R&A have mountains of data at their disposal, so it was disappointing to see them not take the lead and say something to the effect of, “Events where golfers have an average swing speed of ____ should strongly consider using the MLR [if is passes], but events below that threshold do not need it.”
Leaders lead, but the USGA and the R&A are sidestepping this thorny issue.
No. 3: Women's golf is not a problem
There is no distance problem in women’s golf, and thankfully, the USGA and R&A appear to agree.
Slumbers said he does not think the proposed MLR that would require golfers to use distance-reducing balls should be adopted by the LPGA, LET or other top-level women’s tours.
No. 4: Nothing will change for recreational golfers
The USGA and R&A’s joint press conference hammered this point, and both organizations want recreational golfers to know they are not the problem. No one is going to force club players to make any changes.
If the proposed MLR is adopted and made available for implementation starting in 2026, nothing at your local club will change. Not now, not in 2026 and likely not at any point in the future. Use any approved driver you like, and play any already-conforming ball you buy in the pro shop. You, Mr. and Mrs. 13 Handicapper, are not the problem.
“The number one piece of feedback we’ve heard, from virtually all aspects of the game is, ‘Please don’t negatively impact the recreational golf,'” Whan said moments into Tuesday’s press conference.
Less than three minutes later, Slumbers talked about the feedback he had heard most. “As Mike has already mentioned, but let me repeat, ‘Please don’t do anything to affect the recreational game,'” he said. “Golf is doing well and we don’t want to undermine this.”
No. 5: However, golf ball prices are going to rise
If the MLR is passed and adopted by the PGA Tour and other men’s tours, golf equipment companies are going to be compelled to make tens of thousands of golf balls that pass the modified Actual Launch Conditions (ALC) test, and that is much more complicated than just going to a filing cabinet and pulling out the blueprints for the 2008 Pro V1, TaylorMade Penta and Callaway Diablo.
Brands must dedicate R&D resources to designing the new balls, change manufacturing processes and coordinate testing and logistics to get the distance-reducing balls to the appropriate players and events. And remember, guys like Jordan Spieth, Collin Morikawa and Hideki Matsuyama don’t pay for their golf balls. Covering those costs has to come from somewhere, meaning the retail prices golfers pay for equipment will likely rise.
