What I would do if I were the King of Golf for a day? (Posted in no particular order)
1. Reduce the set of clubs to 9, perhaps 10.
At the elite level, this would help return the art of shot making. The Corey Pavin, Lee Trevino and Brian Harman types would benefit from such a change.
Golf has become a highly militaristic sport with yardage guides, distance, launch angle and spin knowledge.
With 14-clubs, the game has become robotic, and has allowed experts to put up to four wedges in the bag. Golf at this level has lost its shot makers... unless the wind comes up and the course is hard and fast.
With 9 clubs, there would be larger gaps between them, demanding players vary the speed with which they hit the ball, either by altering their swing speed, or by shortening the length they hold the club. They would also have to plan from the tee more. Especially considering point 6 below.
This would return the artistic element to the game by demanding creative shot making. It would help identify the talented golfers and those who can plan their way around the golf course.
The average golfer would get along just fine with 9-clubs, as most cannot hit long irons. The makeup of sets is endless, but a standard set could be Driver, 2 fairway woods or fairway wood and hybrid combination, 5, 7, 9, PW, Sand Iron, and putter.
Instead of selling fewer clubs, manufacturers would sell more clubs as golfers would want to have a variety to choose from depending on the course and conditions they’re playing in.
2. Balls stop from light rough due to the grooves on the club. It wasn't always so, or at least so predictable until the USGA created rules allowing “square grooves”.
In this King’s world, irons would have no grooves, and the roughness of the club’s face would be restricted.
The 1958 edition of the book In Search of the Perfect Golf Swing studied how shots with and without grooves behaved. What they discovered is the ball spun just as much with grooves from the fairway as without grooves. Of course, the grooves then were not optimized as they are today. When the ball was in light rough, it spun less, making it more challenging to control. Nobody was expecting a ball to stop on the green from the rough. Shouldn’t the ball be more difficult to control, more, or highly unpredictable when hit into the rough? Of course.
By removing grooves, an advantage is gained by the golfer who keeps his ball in play. So, the ball striker, short or long, who is more in control of the ball is rewarded for their sure play. Fairways could be widened to account for this challenge, and a return of angles... strategy too. The era of bomb and gouge would end immediately.
One thing is for certain, expert golfers wouldn't be changing wedges every few weeks for fresh grooves.
3. Driver head size. Drivers used to be the most difficult club to hit. Today they're the easiest. If all the above and below were implemented, I would leave driver head size at the current maximum.
4. This item has been talked about for too long. Meaningful changes to the ball specifications is the first step towards restoring integrity to the game. Back to the early 1980's we would go. The benefit would be a return to sanity so formerly world-class golf courses would become so once again... over night.
Even a decently designed 6,300-yard course would provide interesting golf for the better players. If difficulty is a problem for the masses, move up a tee, and if there aren't any of sufficient length, additional forward tees could be constructed.
This is certainly the most cost-effective answer and wouldn’t be setting a precedent as The Royal and Ancient Golf Club terminated the small 1.62 inch ball in the 1970s. That initiative was for the betterment of the game, and is the precise effect rolling back the ball fifteen to seventeen per cent would have for golf today.
5. It is not enough to reduce the distance the ball flies, but also put limits on the amount of spin it can achieve. Grooveless clubs will certainly help return strategy to the game, but get NASA engineers on the problem, and they will find a way for a club made from mud to spin a rock. Better to set limits now than later, as we have learned diligent scientists are capable of achieving the most amazing things.
These changes would return golf to a game of skill, just as the USGA claimed it should be not too many decades ago. It would also restore thousands of golf courses to providing interest for elite golfers without clubs having to spend a penny.
But what about the masses?
Well, their distance losses would not be so great, and it is my belief that few would notice (especially if they weren't told) as they rarely hit the ball solidly enough, consistently enough. For them, the manufacturers could develop balls that suit their games. A ball the professionals would likely never use.
So, what is required to accomplish this and defend the essence of the game? It’s simple, as the problems have been brutally obvious for decades. It demands will, resolve, and backbone from the governing bodies to address these issues. Nothing more, nothing less.
One can always dream...