An authoritative voice speaks out on golf's greatest challenge

For almost four decades hospitable and generous friends have enabled me to spend the first weekend in August each year with a few work colleagues playing some of the best courses in England and Scotland. Only a very alluring invitation could persuade me to break this habit.

Very few things are for ever, though, and the prospect of a short golf holiday on Long Island, which I’d not visited since Covid, was irresistible. Today’s post could therefore easily be devoted to describing the earthly paradise inside which I was briefly incarcerated last week by my good friend Warren.

But it’s barely two weeks since I eulogised about Rosapenna. Dwelling on a second sybaritic experience so soon after the first might give a misleading impression that I am constantly flying off to beautiful places to play golf. The reality is much more mundane. Yes really.

Besides, right now there are important issues on which it’s no exaggeration to say that the survival of golf’s rich heritage of great, historic and beautiful courses depends. Today, therefore, discussing these takes precedence, all the more so because they have been thoughtfully explored in two recent interventions by outgoing USGA President Fred Perpall.

In an interview with Art Strickland for GOLF.com Fred was questioned about the strong resistance shown by the PGA Tour, the PGA of America, and by leading equipment manufacturers, to proposals to reduce the distance the ball can now travel.

“From the beginning of the game, the R&A and the USGA have been delegated the authority to write the Rules of Golf,” he replied. “We are not overly motivated by the professional game or by what’s good for the manufacturers. The professionals are doing their job; they’re getting bigger, stronger, healthier. The manufacturers have done their job; they’ve made better equipment with more precise manufacturing techniques. So, everyone’s done their job, and now it’s time for us to do our job.”

Asked if he saw forthcoming changes or compromises to the plan he announced in 2023, Fred said “we have to look at these extreme distances in golf and the resources required to conduct the game, and we have to take a long term view. So, we’ve been in this process for over eight years. We have come up with a solution that every one of the parties has had a seat at the table, and we have compromised with the PGA of America and the PGA Tour, who heavily drove this process.”

Looking ahead, he went on “we’ve indicated that the rule will change around the golf ball. We’re going to change The Rules of Golf to accommodate that. This will apply in 2028 for professionals and 2030 for all golfers. I suspect there’s a lot of fear and anxiety this side of the change, but my suspicion is once we change and the rules go into effect, that this will be much ado about nothing for regular golfers. Long term we can flatline the ever-expanding footprint of golf, which I think will be better for the game.”

Fred isn’t the only person to think this. His view is shared by Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods. Fred Ridley, chairman of Augusta National, has spoken to it in his annual Masters press conference though, perhaps not surprisingly as a former USGA President, he defers to the R&A and USGA.

But what will happen if some tours elect not to follow the new rules? Fred Perpall is clear. “I feel confident that when you show up to an R&A or USGA event, you’ll be required to play equipment that conforms to the Rules of Golf. Every organization, every tour, every champion will themselves determine if they want to do the same. We’re pretty certain that in USGA and R&A championships, you’ll be playing by the Rules of Golf.”

Last summer I walked a couple of holes with Fred around Sunningdale, watching Great Britain & Ireland cling on to a narrow lead to win a thrilling Curtis Cup match by the smallest possible margin of 10 1/2 to 9 1/2. His passionate concern about the urgent need to end the process of making courses longer and longer comes across vividly in conversation.

Extra length makes golf more expensive and more time consuming to play. It means that courses are less sustainable to maintain. If unchecked, this process will eventually reduce the number of people who can play. And for what purpose? Merely to give an advantage to the microscopically small percentage of golfers whose swing speed is fast enough to benefit from the equipment which sends the ball further and further.

As Fred puts it “we’re literally going to spend billions of dollars renovating courses. It’s not responsible or morally right to threaten the sustainability of wonderful cathedrals of golf that we’ve become accustomed to. At some point we have to put limits on what we’re willing to do.”

He stresses that the USGA, the R&A and Augusta National, who conduct three of the majors (in my view by far the most important), have no financial interest here, unlike those who make their money from playing golf, from selling equipment or from building or extending courses. Doing nothing is no longer an option. “We should not demolish Wimbledon because we lack the courage to regulate the flight of the tennis ball”.

For anyone interested in hearing Fred talk I recommend a podcast Golf, Grit, and Creating Opportunity with Fred Perpall.

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****

My plea a few weeks ago that the 2028 Open should be played at Royal St George’s and be known as the Walter Hagen Centenary Open because Hagen won his third Open and his second at RSG, in 1928 fell on deaf ears. Instead RSG will host the British Women’s Open in 2027. It will be great to see the world’s best lady golfers doing battle on England’s best links but it means that doubt continues to surround the question of where the 2028 Open will be played.

I trust the R&A will at once make clear that the decision will be made solely on what is best for golf and not allow political considerations to influence it. Turnberry is definitely a good enough course but its transport infrastructure is wholly inadequate to accommodate the spectator numbers which the R&A say they want.

In addition, the recent visit of Vice President JD Vance provided a timely reminder of the costs of the security measures which would be needed, a cost which would be borne by British taxpayers. It is also possible that on this side of the pond the popularity of President Trump towards the end of his second term may not be high. Protecting a golf course from hordes of protesters would add to the problems. Surely it’s time to restore Muirfield or Royal Lytham to the rota?

ENDS