The bat shall be a smooth, round stick not more than 2.61 inches in diameter at the thickest part and not more than 42 inches in length. The bat shall be one piece of solid wood.NOTE: No laminated or experimental bats shall be used in a professional game (either championship season or exhibition games) until the manufacturer has secured approval from Major League Baseball of his design and methods of manufacture.
There you have it.
It’s really shocking that the USGA didn’t do this. Just putting simple restrictions on “Woods” in the 1980’s when “metal” woods came to the market.
A simple rule such as:
"A golfer’s woods (clubhead) must be made of one piece of wood and not laminated or experimental in nature. The hitting surface or clubface must not be more than 3 inches wide by 2 inches high. The maximum length of a driver or fairway wood must not exceed 44 inches. The shaft can be made of any material.
Like baseball, this would have preserved the parameters and integrity of the game, kept all the great classic courses relevant and playabe as intended, and not created a need for expanding the length of championship golf courses.
This also would have ended any discussions about bifurcating the game… or rolling the ball back.
Baseball doesn’t seem to be suffering from a lack of popularity using their archaic wooden bats.
The USGA really messed up here.
I was thinking about these torpedo bats. To me it seems that what they really are is bats with face radius. Bats naturally had roll. Funny that it took so long for MIT science to figure out what golfers already knew.
You are all correct about woods being made of wood but I am preaching to the choir with that one.
Even regardless of material, putting restrictions on head size, clubface hitting area and shaft length just seem obvious… yet golf didn’t do that in the name of “growing the game” or making it an easier game.
But isn’t it easier to hit a stationary ball compared to a 95 mph breaking ball?
They needed stricter size, material, and COR restrictions sooner. They did eventually put limits in place, but they didn’t mirror traditional club design, unfortunately.
A huge miss by the USGA, PGA, and R&A. It’s obvious but also a few decades too late now. The good news is most courses average golfers play still set up pretty well with vintage gear and you can have a great time.
Jesse and I were talking the other day… and thinking about this situation.
MLB has their rules for the bat. MLB would be golf’s PGA Tour… meaning they control the pro game. The USGA controls the rules of the game, but I don’t think there is a USGA version of baseball. In other words, there is no blanket organization that controls the rules of baseball for all levels and enforces it.
People just know the rules of baseball. College baseball has their own rules run by NCAA I assume. Each separate organization would have their own rule book.
So the question we were discussing… why do we need the USGA? Junior golf could have their own rules… NCAA could have their own rules… for example maybe aluminium bats are allowed or titanium drivers allowed… but when you go pro… and play MLB their rules are wooden bats… or persimmon drivers. Why the USGA? What do they actually do?
At your home course, nobody plays by USGA rules. Charlie doesn’t walk back to the tee when he loses his ball. He’s not allowed to wear steel spikes in his shoes (which are USGA legal).
The only events where USGA should have any control is THEIR events… USGA events. Nothing more… not your club, your state golf association nor the PGA Tour.
We played a few events down in Las Vegas for the TRGA events and we DID NOT play by USGA Rules… and no one was arrested or spent the night in a jail cell in North Las Vegas for violating USGA Rules. People spent the night drinking martinis playing blackjack at Ceasar’s Palace and tipping the waitresses…
No reason PGA Tour can’t have their own rule book. The Masters should have their own rule book. Any tour anywhere or golf association should have their own rule book.
Baseball doesn’t bow down to some universal ruling body that imposes the same rules across the game from local kids diamond in the park to college ball to MLB. R&A used to have their own smaller ball… I think that was great. Makes the game more interesting. Can you win with the big ball and the small ball? Different styles of the game… and different rules make it more interesting.
All very good points John. And it was all going quite well until Frank Thomas retired as Technical Director of the USGA. I used to play with Frank and had more than an few beers with Frank Hannigan, PJ Boatwright, and later David Eger. Frank always told me that in 30,000 decisions on equipment during his tenure, the only time he was over ruled by the executive committee was about the long putter. He was dead set against it and they allowed it because the then POTUS was using one. Did not matter that the POTUS gave himself putts of Trumpian length when he played. On the driver the ball could not come off the face at more than 250’ per second at the set in stone Iron Byron clubhead speed. This is how balls and clubs were regulated and it goes back a long way from then. However, when he retired Dick Rugge took his place. The fox had the keys to the hen house. The Trojan horse of golf. From Taylor Made to regulating the equipment. Frank used to use Nick Price for testing all the time, and David Glenz, a great ball striker and pro at my club, would test for grooves - how much effect they had with wedges. Things were still real life then. The equipment companies have won. I go to the range around here and most golfers are hitting their ball and instead of watching what it does, immediately turnaround to see their “numbers.” And, as you have said, the numbers are meaningless without the mass of the club being part of the computation. Not to forget the compression of the ball which has had the crap beat out of it. It was so refreshing to hear that yesterdays winner in Texas, Brian Harmon, doesn’t have a Trackman, just hit balls on the range and looks to see what the ball is doing. 
Thanks for the post… and it’s very interesting to hear a bit about what was going on behind the scenes. I have only imagined that there must have been some serious push back when these changes were being allowed into the game.
So much of the rhetoric is absolute rubbish (I’m being nice here!)… for instance
the “it’s the ball” mantra we hear over and over.
So if it’s the ball… really? Then why am I not picking up 15% when I hit a persimmon driver with a modern ball vs a balata? My 260 balata ball when struck well would now be 300. I’m doing some simple math here… 260 x 1.15= 299. The ball off persimmon is not going further by anything significant.
While the ball might have some effect, it’s not the ball. It’s the fact the driver is 10 ounces and 46 inches with a huge head that has a trampoline effect and because of it’s size a golfer can swing as hard as they possibly can every time it’s in their hands. The driver is the problem.
Why is it that when they give modern tour pros persimmon drivers at a clinic or demonstration, they hit the ball about the same distance as the long hitters of the past? Not 50 yards farther.
Who’s buying this? Is anyone thinking for themselves at all?
Cap the hitting area on the clubface at 3 inches by 2 inches and cap the length of the shaft at 44 inches. That’s all they had to do. Pro tour could be persimmon like baseball… easy and supported by another parallel sport…
I am just so disappointed with the USGA. I really hope another organization rises and resets the game, even at a smaller level, it would give the traditional game some kind of justification and exposure. I won’t even watch The Masters this week. I have no interest in watching the pros flip short irons into all the par 4’s and the par 5’s have no risk and reward scenarios anymore.
Looks like MLB might have to do something about these torpedo bats…they are within the rules but balls are flying… another MIT professor changing the game.
It’s unfortunate that, as you infer, the governing bodies seem to have lost their way. They were more concerned with releasing their membership to Pine Valley, Cypress Point, or Baltusrol et al. because of the their lack of woman members than having the foresight to protect the game.
A clubmaker friend of mine was at the I think PGA show a number of years ago and was invited to a demonstration. The R&A and USGA were in attendance. An Iron Byron was set up to swing a modern driver at 80mph. The ball flew over 400 yards. The clubface exploded. The scientist/designers turned to the R&A and USGA and said “You have to do something because we will perfect this.”
One would think that the “caretakers” of the game, at one of their pow-wows, when they discussed dangers to the integrity of the game they thought grooves on the clubface were more important than distance control.
I really like your 3"x 2" hitting area on the clubface concept. Since 2006 there has been no increase in ball speed off of a center hit. Hence all the tech is now geared to making the whole clubface equivalent to a center hit. Wail away boys!
Quick asides, in the late '80s early '90s I asked Frank what the best ball was. He stated “I am not allowed to tell you,” while at the same time holding a Titleist up to his cheek. He later said Titleist had the best quality control by far. He told Jack Nicklaus after his career was over that if he had played a decent ball he would have won twice as many majors. Seems Jack was loyal to MacGregor and their balls tested terribly.
Oh, and the FedEx Cup Tour? They play par 68’s and 66’s now, 5 irons into par 5’s. Not the same
If you measure any classic persimmon driver… the face is 3 inches wide, and 1.5 inches deep. The deep face drivers were 2 inches deep. But history shows us that the deep face drivers with the extra 1/2 inch were not overly popular. The shallower drivers had a lower center of gravity and would get the ball up a bit more with the same lofts. Not a big deal.
What has happened with the drivers is total insanity. It makes no sense to render the greatest courses in the world obsolete. And regardless of the arguments from the naysayers that “its all good” it simply is not. The courses do not play as they were intended, and it’s not about "progress "it’s about ignorance and disrespect for those that laid the framework and foundation for the great game of golf. Anyone that is pandering to it in anyway is partly responsible. Obviously some more than others. The worst offenders are those who “blame the ball”. It’s not the ball.
Go play a round with a 14 to 16 ounce persimmon driver and notice how you are NOT hitting the ball the same distance as your frying pan driver.
Last year I played a persimmon game with Louis Brown who is the current USGA Senior Amateur Champion. Louis said he was hitting the ball at least 30 yards less in distance with the persimmon than his modern driver. Is he lying?
Is he a “flat earther?” Not likely.
He said he actually enjoyed playing persimmon more because now the classic course we were playing Richmond CC was being played correctly, and all the driving areas and angles into greens and shapes of the greens based upon likely incoming trajectories all made perfect sense. We talked a lot about it after the round and he agreed 100% that the game was better when the clubs and courses were in harmony.
That being said, there is a place for the modern clubs and courses. Frying pan drivers that move the ball 350 yards off the tee work well on 8000 yard courses. Pick your game.
You won’t find me there however.
Too much history and great designs already proliferated before this madness happened. I see no reason why I would enjoy playing an 8000 yard course while driving the ball so far I can no longer see it land with the naked eye. Again another thing no one talks about.
Solution is simple. New Tour and Ruling Organization arises and gives credibility to the classic game, all the history, courses, traditions etc, that made the game great in the first place.
I’m also tired of the “let’s go back to hickory etc (sarcasm)” because hickory game does still exist… so it is fine, and there are courses that were built in that era that play correctly and there are events. However the courses built in the persimmon era have no proper regulation at the professional level and are being disrespected and overrun by all the modern gear that has no place upon them.
The worst offense I have seen at the pro game was the US Open at Los Angeles Country Club. In the persimmon era, it would have been one of the toughest and potentially greatest US Opens in history. Instead it was a total mockery of the course with not one… but TWO players shooting 62 in the opening round.
Shame on the USGA.
I never thought about seeing the ball land. Not sure if it’s my eyes or the distance but when I was young I could always see the ball off the tee but 250 was long back then and I averaged about that and an 8 iron from 150 was super long… now I can’t see the ball land and I hit it further. I went back to a Donald Ross course I used to play in Boston. I know all my landing areas from when I was 21 and under. I hit one way over a hill on a par 5 that I could never reach back then. It sure has changed the game. This course was a tree lined gem that almost hosted a US Open. They were going to do a Bethpage to it. I was so lucky to have cut my teeth on this course and two other Donald Ross courses. Didn’t realize how lucky I was at the time…USGA 
. Nothing better than looking down at a nice persimmon driver. Also when you swing outta your shoes the potential for the 150 yard pop up exists or the heel/toe shot that goes nowhere. I just watched Max Homa hit a 368 drive on par 5 #2 and flared an iron. I turned it off.
https://www.golfdigest.com/story/us-open-brookline-ponkapoag-2022
I turned the TV on Sunday for final Masters nine… first shot I see is Bryson hitting a short iron or wedge left into the drink on 11. I shut off the TV.
Then later I see a highlight reel of Rory hitting wedge into the right bunker on 18.
Just can’t imagine Trevino, Nicklaus, doing that. I need to see proper pro level ball control at Augusta. 350 yard drives with wedges everywhere… it’s not how the course or event was meant to be played.
Yea agreed. I remember Norman hitting that second shot at 18 right into the grandstands with a 5 iron. Crazy! Rory hit 7 iron into 15:joy:
Augusta for some reason had Norman by the throat. Not sure why because it would seem the course should have fit his game nicely.
As far as The Masters now… I feel like I am supposed to watch it.. but it’s just got to a point that I’d rather go fishing or focus on something positive, doing a brake job on the El Camino or something else.
It probably should have been the one event that remained “Big League” golf and kept woods in their hands like baseball. There is no technical reason why The Masters couldn’t depart from the USGA and have their own equipment standards and rule book. It’s kinda a separate thing, not the USGA Open or R and A Open.. or the PGA of America or the PGA Tour. They made a mistake there in my opinion.
The other mistake was getting rid of the Bermuda Grass which would have naturally kept the green speeds correct for the shape and slope of the greens.
A shot on the 16th… back right Sunday flag… landing right of the pin should NOT roll down stiff. It should require a tricky downhill putt, and the player who goes at the pin directly should be rewarded over the guy bailing out to the right.
This is the kind of poor decision making that has been going on there for a long time now. It’s just not a great test of elite golf anymore.