Good evening, everyone!
About that optimization test... the USGA did anounce that it had shelved the test for now. And I know why! Don't ask how...
All the optimization test was meant to do was add launch angle to the other variables (initial velocity, etc.) The fact is that for all top line balls the optimum launch angle is a pretty narrow corridor- eleven to thirteen degrees, approximately. The plain fact is that no one has come close to launching drives at those rates, so the test was pretty meaningless, at least for now.
BTW, the USGA did state, when it initially considered the test, that no ball would fail because of it. However, the balls of the future might be affected.
The reason the USGA continued to use Iron Byron for so long was consistency. The ODS was set in 1974- in laymen's terms, in controlled experiments a ball could go 296 yards. Balls of that time were going about 276 yards. Since then the manufacturers have reduced that gap considerably. But look at the average Tour drive last year... it was not 296 yards.
As for the 109 mph swing speed, the USGA set that standard for testing because it represented the 80th percentile of all golfers, and it still does today! That some Tour pros hit the ball farther is due to their ability to swing at higher speeds (i.e., Tiger at about 120, Daly a little faster, etc.) That's called skill. Very importantly, hard fairways with very short grass (watch a tour drive bounce- they get 30+ yds. bounce and roll unless there has been rain.
Frankly, if Els hits a drive 364 down hill, down wind, to a very hard fairway with grass cut at 1/2 inch, with a swing speed of 115 mph, I'm not going to get to upset about his equipment. It used to be a joke that Chi Chi changed clubs every other year or so, and always clained twenty extra yards. According to him, he should have been hitting the ball 350 with every swing. Take Tour player's claims with a grain of salt- they are helping to sell stuff.
So you know, the USGA has announced going to a Titanium club and looking at the swing speed issue, but Ol' Iron Byron is now only used for calibration and verification of computerized, indoor ball measurement equipment.
As for different rules for different players, it will not happen, for several reasons. 1) It's just not right. For the game to have any meaning, we all need to play by the same rules. Baseball and other sports that have adopted different rules for different catagories of players have diminished those sports significantly. 2) Go to any course- public or private- and see how many are playing strictly by the rules. Even if there were a second set of rules for non Tour players, many if not most golfers would add or disregard to suit themselves, so what's the point? 3) The Tours rely on their fan's Walter Mitty-esk dreams. If they played by a separate set of rules they would be cutting their umbilical cord to the people who make that $225,000,000 prize fund possible.
The reduced speed ball won't fly, either. (ugh) The tour's sybiosis with manufacturers won't let it happen. Manufacturers compete to get their equipment highlighted on tour, so that we'll by more of it. Is it a mystery as to why those Darrell surveys are so well distributed? The essence of competition (among advertisers) is differentiation. Every manufacturer will stand against a standardized competition ball. That is the only reason it hasn't already happened. It could have happen under the rules as they exist today.
I think the recent stand the USGA took on COR pretty much squashed any talk about their fear of getting sued. They've never lost, you know. They are not as flush as everyone thinks, given the ever increasing scope of USGA operations, and the amount of their net worth that is tied up in property. (Land in Far Hills and NYC ain't cheap.) If you want to see the effect of the USGA's money, go look at your front lawn (almost all grasses available today are the descendents of USGA sponsored research); look at programs like the First Tee (the USGA is a major financial contributor); look to your local golf association (USGA funded interns), your local VA and rehabilitation Hospitals (USGA funded golf programs), etc, etc. But they will give it all up to defend their right to produce a set of rules, one that, though slowly and thoughfully modified through the years, has served, and continues to serve, us all very well.
The great hope is that the R&A will form a separate organization for rules making, and get its members off the liability hook which has influenced its ability to take a stand on certain issues- like COR. A recent article suggested a move in this direction.
FINALLY (sorry for this stream of consciousness stuff), just so you know, the USGA I+B program consists of some very talented people from places like research universities, NASA, and the military, in addition to the USGA technical staff. These people are volunteers- no pay, no expenses. USGA test procedures are not made in a vacuum.
Sorry again for the length of this post.