USGA and R&A, “Distance Insights,” Not That You Care.

The USGA and the R&A released their combined “Distance Insights” project in February. It’s 102 pages and takes roughly a short stint in solitary confinement to parse through.

At least the “Distance Insights” project has pictures, well, charts and graphs, actually, measuring sophisticated analytical data like the coefficient of restitution at increasing impact speeds, which is basically the USGA and R&A laughing at everyone who doesn’t swing 100mph playing a $60 golf ball.

After analyzing over a hundred years of distance data gleaned from a variety of unconventional sources, the “Distance Insights” project shockingly found that players of all skill levels are driving the ball further than ever. The supposed problem of distance on the PGA Tour is then found on page 62…

"“the correlation between driving distance and various positive statistics, such as birdie making, bogey avoidance and green in regulation (GIR) % has increased over the last three decades.”"

The report goes on to say,

More from Pro Golf Now

• Golf Rumors: LIV set to sign Masters Champion in stunning deal
• Fantasy Golf: Grant Thornton Invitational DFS Player Selections
• Brutal return leaves Will Zalatoris looking towards 2024
• Stars You Know at World Champions Cup Starts Thursday at Concession
• Fantasy Golf: An Early Look at the 2024 Masters Tournament

"“Over the same period there has been a steady decrease in the correlation between driving accuracy and these statistics.”"

Put another way, the USGA and R&A are tired of their events becoming glorified putting contests.

The “Distance Insights” report goes to great lengths in analyzing the cost-benefit of simply lengthening courses to combat increased distance citing numerous environmental impacts (including the general lack of green space for people to do activities for free), the capital costs of moving ground, and most relevantly, the pace of play implications.

"“In its simplest form, increased course length would result in increased transit time (walking or riding).”"

Concluding from a study done by Tiger and Salzer, which analyzed recreational golfer movement around golf courses…

"“a golf course with an additional 500 yards added, without congestion, could take between 5.5 and 7 minutes longer to play, on average.”"

Without congestion.

I’d be happy to spend an extra seven minutes playing an uncongested golf course. I’d also be happy if I was an international art thief who lived on Lake Cuomo and ate more fruit. Golfers may not be the most social-protesting types, but don’t be surprised if you see thousands of middle-aged men lying down in front of bulldozers sometime soon.

Interestingly, the report cites Shot Link data from 2016-18 that determined the percentage of drivers used on par-4s of varying distances. On holes less than 424 yards, drivers were used for less than 50% of tee-shots. Holes between 325 and 374 yards saw just 27% of tee-shots hit by a driver. Between holes that are 225 and 274 yards, drivers were used for just 14% of tee-shots (mostly because even the average drivers on the PGA Tour would fly the green by approximately 16 yards).

This graphic, found on page 38, implies an architectural solution without the environmental or capital costs of expansion and without any equipment changes. If the goal of the USGA and R&A is to reduce the impact of driving distance on scoring, tightening the dispersion of approach distances is the answer, which the great short par-4s of golf are already doing.

Many of the holes described by these lengths are the great short-4s of golf; the 10th at Riviera, the 12th at TPC Sawgrass (on display this week), the 12th at St. Andrews, and the 3rd at Augusta National. Think as well about the great local short-4s you might play (shoutout to the 14th at TPC Potomac). What these holes do is solicit indecision off the tee. They present not only the question of, to go for it or not to go for it, but of how far to go and where to go. They penalize errant shots no matter the club and reward only the great shot, followed by a great putt.

Not only are the short-4s in golf the most equitable, but they are also the most exciting. The potential for eagle, or even an ace, weighed against the potential for bogey or double-bogey presents a challenge uncommon to the bomb-and-gauge then two-putt for par fest that dominates the majority of events on the PGA Tour.

Among the equipment changes proposed in the report, the USGA and R&A will certainly look into set-up changes within the preexisting parameters of the existing golf course. As well, if they wait long enough for the Earth’s climate to deteriorate, playing tournaments in hurricane-like conditions could prove to be its panacea (it’s quite difficult to hit 300-yard drives into a 50mph headwind).

Whatever the solutions may be, the goal will be to protect the fundamental challenges of the game…

"“An enduring foundation of golf is that success in getting a ball from the tee to the hole in the fewest strokes should depend on using many different skills and judgments, rather than be dominated by only one or a few”"

Not that you care about the supposed distance problem anyway.

The final section of the report compiles numerous surveys illustrating what you, the fan, think. Surveying almost 30,000 spectators, detailed on page 85, just 10% cited long drives as what makes golf interesting to watch (that number jumps to 19% for non-playing spectators). The top four factors overall were: Shot tracer (45%), recovery shots (44%), high-profile players (42%), and the venue itself (39%).

It seems we’ve taken for granted just how beautiful it is to watch a Rory-rocket off the tee, and it provides empirical cover for any changes the USGA and R&A conclude to make. They asked us how important long drives are to professional golf, and we responded with an eh.

Professionals should be wary because, heck yes, golf’s governments are coming for their balls and drivers. For everyone else, the only distance problem is a lack of it. So enjoy the bombs while they last and start working on your short game.