2015 Distance Report
A Review of Driving Distance - 2015
Introduction
The purpose of the Joint Statement of Principles (issued in May 2002) was to set out the joint viewsof the R&A and the USGA, together with the framework of key principles and policies to guide theiractions in relation to equipment and equipment regulation. Since that time, The R&A and the USGA
have continued to monitor closely the effects of advancing equipment technology on the playing of
the game and new equipment Rules have been introduced throughout this period, when appropriate.
This report notes that changes in scoring average have been steady and includes a review of dataassociated with driving distance on the world’s major golf tours compiled at the conclusion of theirrespective 2015 seasons.
This report examines driving distance on the major professional golf tours. The data contained
herein is from the PGA TOUR, European Tour, Japan Golf Tour, Web.com Tour, PGA TOUR
Champions Tour, LPGA Tour and Ladies European Tour going back as far as data are available. A
more focused picture is subsequently given of distance since 2003 1 with particular attention to the
PGA TOUR (where Shotlink data provides additional insight), and the European Tour.
The average driving distance is typically measured on two holes at each tournament and can result innearly 40,000 shots being measured over the course of a season on some tours. The vast majority ofplayers on the PGA TOUR (94%) and European Tour (97%) use driver on the holes used formeasuring driving distance regardless of their driving distance rank.
A comparison of these major professional tours, both men’s and women’s, indicates that for the
PGA, European, Web.com and Champions tours, the average driving distance has increased byapproximately 1% since 2003 until the end of the 2015 season. This increase is characterised by aslow “creep” in drive distance over this period of around 0.2 yards per year. The average driving
distances on the Japan Golf Tour, LPGA Tour and Ladies European Tour decreased by a similar
amount (~1%) over the same time period.
Since 2003, variability in season to season driving distance of 4 or more yards is not uncommon.
The largest overall increase in driving distance has taken place on the Web.com Tour which was 5
yards longer in 2015 than it was in 2003.
The average driving distance of the longest (and shortest) players on the European and PGA tours
closely tracks the respective tour average driving distances, including the season-to-season
fluctuations. When viewed as percentages, there is good consistency both between tours andseasons. The longest 10 players tend to be about 7% longer than the tour average whereas theshortest 10 players tend to be about 6% shorter than the tour average.
In 2015, the average clubhead speed was 113.2 mph, with an average launch angle of 10.8° andaverage spin of 2599 rpm. The 90th percentile for clubhead speed was 119.2 mph. These values arevery close to the test conditions for the Overall Distance Standard (launch angle of 10°, backspin of2520 rpm and a clubhead speed of 120mph) which regulates ball distance.

1 The USGA/R&A Joint Statement of Principles was adopted in May, 2002.

The PGA TOUR issued their Position on
Equipment in July, 2003 and committed to partner with the USGA and R&A on equipment matters. Both the Joint
Statement and PGA TOUR Summary Position on Equipment are attached for reference. As a result of the adoption ofthese positions by mid-2003, the 2003 season was chosen as the benchmark season for drive distance at the highest level.

Version 1.0

1/18

2015 Distance Report
Background
In May 2002 the USGA/R&A adopted a Joint Statement of Principles. The purpose of this statement
was to set out the joint views of the R&A and the USGA, together with the framework of key
principles and policies which guide their actions pertaining to equipment.
History has proven that it is impossible to foresee the developments in golf equipment which
advancing technology will deliver. It is of the greatest importance to golf’s continuing appeal thatsuch advances are judged against a clear and broadly accepted series of principles. While generally
welcoming this progress, with the adoption of the Joint Statement of Principles, the R&A and the
USGA committed to remaining vigilant when considering equipment Rules to protect golf’s best
traditions, to prevent an over-reliance on technological advances rather than skill, and to ensure thatskill is the dominant element of success throughout the game. The PGA TOUR issued its Position on
Equipment in July, 2003 and committed to partner with the USGA and R&A on equipment matters.
Both the Joint Statement and PGA TOUR Summary Position on Equipment are attached forreference
As the governing authorities for the Rules of Golf including equipment Rules, R&A Rules Ltd (the
“R&A”) and the United States Golf Association (the “USGA”) have continued to monitor closely theeffects of advancing equipment technology on the playing of the game. Furthermore, new equipment
Rules have been introduced throughout this period, when appropriate, including restrictions on theperformance and dimensions of clubs and refinement of the testing methodology utilized for testing
golf balls to ensure that it is representative of the equipment used by and performance of elite
golfers, Figures 1 and 2.

Version 1.0

2/18

2015 Distance Report

Figure 1. Average driving distance on the major tours with significant innovation milestones overlaid

Figure 2. Average driving distance on the major tours with significant Rule change milestones overlaid

Version 1.0

3/18

2015 Distance Report
The R&A and the USGA are also aware that this subject has attracted wide-ranging comment and anumber of conflicting views, even though changes in scoring average have been steady, characterisedby a slow “creep” downward over this period of around 0.04 strokes per year across all of the tours
over the timescale for which data have been available, Figure 3.
PGA TOUR - Champions
LPGA TourJapan Golf TourWeb.com TourEuropean TourPGA TOUR
74

Scoring Average

73

72

14

12

20

10

20

08

20

06

20

04

20

02

20

00

20

98

20

96

19

94

19

92

19

90

19

88

19

86

19

84

19

82

19

19

19

80

71

Figure 3. Scoring average on all tours. Note: the data utilized for the PGA TOUR and Japan Golf Tour are theactual scoring average values which are not normalized by the performance of the field.
This report includes a review of data associated with driving distance on the world’s major golf tours
compiled at the conclusion of their respective 2015 seasons. This is compared to historical values
where they are available. A more focused picture is subsequently given of distance since 2003 withparticular attention on the PGA TOUR, where Shotlink data provides additional insight, and theEuropean Tour.

Version 1.0

4/18

2015 Distance Report
Definition of Driving Distance and Methodology of Data Collection
It is important to define the data which form the basis of this report. The driving distance is the total
distance measured from the teeing ground to the point where ball comes to rest – regardless of thelocation (fairway, rough, bunker, putting green etc.) These data are collected on the major tours
using one of two methods:
1. Tournament officials will measure incremental distances from the teeing ground which arethen marked on both edges of the fairway of the hole(s) being used for the collection ofdata. These distance marks are then used by the player, caddie or volunteer collecting thedata to determine the distance for a given drive.
2. A combination of GPS and laser measuring equipment is used to directly measure thedistance of each drive on a hole.
Driving distance data are typically collected on two holes (“measured” drive holes), which are
selected taking into account three criteria:
1. The holes should be oriented in opposing directions (to minimise the impact of the wind on
the average distance).
2. The holes should preferably both be selected such that the landing area for the drives is flat.
Where this is not feasible, the holes would preferably have opposing topography to minimise
the effect of slopes on the average driving distance.
3. The holes should be selected to maximise the potential that the golfers will choose to hit
their driver (ensuring that the data most closely reflects the distance hit by players using
drivers).
The PGA TOUR introduced the Shotlink system in 2003 which is used at most of its tournaments.
This system measures every shot during a tournament which means that, in addition to the
traditional “measured” driving distance on two holes, data are also available for all other par 4 andpar 5 holes.
The PGA TOUR, Web.com Tour and PGA TOUR Champions Tour calculate the average driving
distance based on all available shots by all players competing in their events. However, only theplayers who have played a predefined number of qualifying rounds are included for presentation in
the end of season summary statistics. In recent years a player would typically need to play 50 rounds
on the PGA TOUR, 35 rounds on the Web.com Tour or between 35 and 40 rounds on the PGA
TOUR Champions Tour for inclusion in the end of season summary statistics.
The European Tour only collect data for full members of the tour and subsequently only players
who have played 10 or more rounds will be included for presentation in the end of season summary
statistics.
The Ladies European Tour typically collects data for only full members of the tour, although the data
for non-members who fill in a stats card may be included within the raw data.
The LPGA reports data only for players who over the course of a season have participated in aminimum of 10 events or 1/3 of the total number of official events, whichever is fewer.

Version 1.0

5/18

2015 Distance Report
Driving Distance – All Years
The average driving distance for each year that data have been collected on the major tours forwhich data are available are shown in Figure 4. The average driving distance from all measured Par 4
and Par 5 holes for the PGA TOUR and is also included for comparison.
European TourPGA TOUR - Measured HolesPGA TOUR - All Drives

Japan Golf TourWeb.com TourPGA TOUR - Champions

LET
LPGA Tour

300
295
290
285
Driving Distance (Y)

280
275
270
265
260
255
250
245
240
235
230
14

12

20

10

20

08

20

06

20

04

20

02

20

00

20

98

20

96

19

94

19

92

19

90

19

88

19

86

19

84

19

82

19

80

19

19

19

68

225

Figure 4. Average driving distance on the major tours
The USGA/R&A Joint Statement of Principles was adopted in May, 2002. The PGA TOUR issued its
Position on Equipment in July, 2003 and committed to partner with the USGA and R&A on
equipment matters. Both the Joint Statement and PGA TOUR Summary Position on Equipment are
attached for reference. As a result of the adoption of these positions by mid-2003, the 2003 season
was chosen as the benchmark season for driving distance at the highest level.

Version 1.0

6/18

2015 Distance Report
Driving Distance – Since 2003
The average driving distances measured on the major tours for all complete seasons since 2003 isshown in Figure 5.
European TourPGA TOUR - Measured HolesPGA TOUR - All Drives

Japan Golf TourWeb.com TourPGA TOUR - Champions

LET
LPGA Tour

300
295
290

Driving Distance (Y)

285
280
275
270
265
260
255
250
245
240
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Figure 5. Average driving distance on the major tours since the first full season after the publication of the
Joint Statement of Principles.
A comparison of the end of season distance averages for 2015 to those from the 2003 season arepresented in Table 1 (Note: the 2004 season is used for the Ladies European Tour as the firstseason for which data are presented by the tour). The data indicates that there have been increases
in driving distance on four of the monitored tours and decreases in the other three. It should be
noted that the data do exhibit season-to-season fluctuation and the range of average driving
distances observed since 2003 is greater on all tours than the difference between the 2003 and 2015
average distances.
Table 1. Comparing the 2015 driving average data to the 2003 season. Note: The 2004 season is used as
the comparison point for the Ladies European Tour. Where raw data are available, the standard error in themean has been calculated and included.

European TourPGA TOUR (Measured
Holes)PGA TOUR (All Holes)
Japan Golf TourWeb.com TourPGA TOUR - Champions
LET (2004)
LPGA Tour

2003
286.3 ±0.15

2015288.4 ±0.15

Change Change(Yards)
(%)
+2.1
+0.7

285.9 ±0.12277.9 ±0.06
279.0
292.3
269.9
245.3
249.6

289.7 ±0.13
281.5 ±0.06
276.2
297.7 ±0.19
273.3 ±0.23
243.5
248.4

+3.8
+3.6
-2.8
+5.4
+3.4
-1.8
-1.2

Version 1.0

+1.3
+1.3
-1.0
+1.8
+1.3
-0.7
-0.5

Range (Yards
since 2003)
282.2 – 288.4
285.9 – 290.9

Magnitude ofrange (Yards)
6.2
5.0

277.9 – 282.2
276.2 – 281.7
287.8 – 297.7
268.7 – 273.5
242.8 – 252.9
245.6 – 250.6

4.3
5.6
9.9
4.8
10.1
5.0
7/18

2015 Distance Report
Driving Distance – Distance of the Longest & Shortest 10, 20, & 50 relative to the
Average Driving Distance on the PGA TOURThe average driving distances of the 10, 20 and 50 longest and shortest players who qualify forinclusion in the end of season statistics on the European and PGA tours are plotted in Figure 6 alongwith the average driving distance for each tour. The data for each of these groups of players tracks
the trends and annual fluctuations observed for the average on each tour.
European TourPGA TOUR

310

Distance (Y)

300

290

280

270

2004

2006

Top 102008
Top 2020102012
Top 502014
Average

2004

2006
Bottom 50

2008

2010
Bottom 20

2012

2014
Bottom 10

Figure 6. The average driving distance of the 10, 20, 50 and 100 longest players on the European and PGA
tours along with the respective average driving distance on each tour.
The distance changes as the percentage increase over the average are presented in Figure 7. Onceagain the data demonstrate consistency both between seasons and tours; the longest 10 players tend
to be around 7% longer than the tour average while the shortest 10 players are generally around 6%
shorter than the tour average.

Version 1.0

8/18

2015 Distance Report
European Tour8

PGA TOUR

7
6
5
4

2

% Longer than average% Longer than Average

3

1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
2004

2006

Top 102008
Top 2020102012
Top 502014
Average

2004

2006
Bottom 50

2008

2010
Bottom 20

2012

2014
Bottom 10

Figure 7. The percentage difference in the average driving distance of the longest and shortest 10, 20 and
50 players on the European and PGA tours relative to the respective tour averages.

Version 1.0

9/18

2015 Distance Report
Driving Distance – Distribution of driving distances on the European and PGA tours
The distribution of the length of drives on the “measured” driving holes on the European and PGA
Tours in 2003 and 2015 are presented in Figure 8 and Figure 9 respectively. These data from bothtours during both seasons show very similar, normal distributions.

10

V ariab leE u rop ean T ou r 2 0 0 3
P GA T OUR 2 0 0 3

9M ean St Dev
N
2 8 6 .2 2 3 .9 0 2 5 3 9 0
2 8 6 .2 2 4 .0 4 3 8 0 2 1

8Percent

7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

0
0
0
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0
0
16 18 2 0 22 24 2 6 28 30 3 2 34 36 38 40 42 44

Distance (Y)Figure 8. The distribution of distances on “measured” driving holes on the European and PGA TOUR in
2003.

10

V ariab leE u rop ean T ou r 2 0 1 5
P GA T OUR 2 0 1 5

9M ean St DevN
2 8 8 .3 2 4 .5 0 2 7 7 4 4
2 8 9 .7 2 2 .9 9 3 4 8 3 9

8Percent

7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

0
0
0
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0
0
16 18 2 0 22 24 2 6 28 30 3 2 34 36 38 40 42 44

Distance (Y)Figure 9. The distribution of distances of “measured” driving holes on the European and PGA TOUR in 2015.
Version 1.0

10/18

2015 Distance Report
The lengths of drives on the “measured” driving holes since 2003 on the European and PGA tours
have been placed in 20 yard distance bands between 240 and 320 yards (with additional bands
representing all drives over 320 yards and all drives shorter than 240 yards) These data arepresented in Figure 10 and Table 2 & Table 3 (for the European and PGA tours respectively). The
percentage of shots in each band have remained generally similar for the European Tour whereas
the PGA TOUR has seen a small decrease (approximately 3%) in the percentage of shots in the 240260 and 260-280 bands and an increase of 5% in the 280-300 yard band.
European TourPGA Tour100

80% of Drives

60

40

20

0
2004

2006

2008

2010
>320Y

2012

2014

300-320Y

2004
280-300Y

2006
260-280Y2008
240-260Y

2010

2012

2014

<240Y

Figure 10. The distribution of drives on “measured” driving holes on the European and PGA tours 20032015.

Version 1.0

11/18

2015 Distance Report
Table 2. The distribution of drives on “measured” driving holes on the European Tour 2003-2015.
≤240Y

240-260Y

260-280Y

280-300Y

300-320Y

≥320Y

2003

1.38%

9.06%

29.64%

33.44%

17.07%

9.07%

2004

1.62%

8.67%

28.26%

34.13%

17.59%

9.08%

2005

1.99%

9.46%

30.35%

33.41%

16.44%

7.81%

2006

2.39%

11.47%

31.26%

31.72%

14.56%

8.16%

2007

2.3%

11.44%

33.68%

33.02%

13.66%

5.45%

2008

1.43%

9.37%

31.93%

34.94%

15.88%

5.96%

2009

2.15%

8.5%

29.81%

35.08%

15.53%

8.48%

2010

1.56%

9%

30.67%

34.6%

16.48%

7.36%

2011

1.18%

8.8%

30.29%

34.24%

16.62%

8.43%

2012

1.46%

9.4%

28.51%

34.12%

17.93%

7.91%

2013

1.64%

9.69%

27.5%

34.01%

18.54%

8.17%

2014

1.99%

10.26%

27.67%

33.67%

17.57%

8.28%

2015

1.48%

7.87%

26.91%

34.86%

18.8%

9.62%

Table 3. The distribution of measured drives on driving holes on the PGA TOUR 2003-2015.
≤240Y

240-260Y

260-280Y

280-300Y

300-320Y

≥320Y

2003

2.24%

9.76%

27.53%

32.52%

18.79%

7.77%

2004

2.48%

9.44%

28.07%

33.70%

18.91%

7.36%

2005

1.82%

9.06%

26.98%

33.92%

19.73%

8.47%

2006

1.52%

7.53%

26.63%

35.20%

20.50%

8.61%

2007

1.93%

8.75%

26.08%

33.07%

20.39%

9.78%

2008

2.23%

9.07%

27.24%

33.40%

19.81%

8.26%

2009

1.95%

9.21%

24.90%

33.77%

21.17%

8.99%

2010

1.81%

8.86%

27.49%

35.01%

19.55%

7.27%

2011

1.59%

6.18%

23.44%

36.23%

23.29%

9.28%

2012

1.41%

6.89%

24.86%

36.12%

21.83%

8.89%

2013

1.93%

7.24%

26.04%

37.08%

20.64%

7.08%

2014

1.64%

6.60%

24.31%

37.25%

22.65%

7.54%

2015

1.60%

6.83%

24.41%

37.41%

21.31%

7.63%

Version 1.0

12/18

2015 Distance Report
Driving Distance - Driver Usage
Driver usage statistics have been collected by the PGA TOUR as part of the Shotlink system since2012. These data are recorded at all tournaments which collect full Shotlink data. Positive
identification of the club used from the teeing ground (as driver or not driver) was made for 85% of
the 35,000 shots which make up the “measured” driving distance statistic on the PGA TOUR in
2015. When considering the average driver usage for “all” drives (par 3s excluded), positive
identification of the club used from the tee was achieved for over 90% of the 210,000 shots in 2015.
Similar driver usage statistics have been collected by the European Tour on driving holes. These datafrom both tours are presented in Table 4.
It can be seen that on the PGA TOUR in 2015, over 94% of drives on “measured” driving holes(where the club has been positively identified) were with driver while the equivalent value for theEuropean Tour is nearly 98%. These very high values indicate that the average drive distancespresented by the tours are a good indicator of the average distance achieved by the players whenusing driver. When considering “all” drives on the PGA TOUR, nearly 72% of tee shots were withdriver (where the club used was positively identified). It is interesting to note that the average
driving distance when considering only shots hit using a driver is similar whether considering driving
holes or non-driving holes.
Table 4. Club usage on the European and PGA tours.

PGA TOUR“Measured” Driving
Holes
PGA TOUR
Non-Driving Holes

2012

2013

2014

2015

% Driver Usage

93.3

93.6

94.2

94.2

Distance - All drives (Y)

290.2

288.1

289.3

289.8

Distance - Drivers (Y)

290.9

289.2

290.0

290.6

% Driver Usage

67.8

67.0

67.0

67.9

Distance - All drives (Y)

280.9

278.9

280.2

280.3

Distance - Drivers (Y)

289.5

287.5

288.8

288.8

PGA TOUR“All” Holes% Driver Usage

71.7

71.0

71.2

71.9

Distance - All drives (Y)

282.3

280.3

281.6

281.8

Distance - Drivers (Y)

289.7

287.8

289.1

289.2

European Tour
Driving Holes% Driver Usage

96.2

96.7

96.0

97.7

Version 1.0

13/18

2015 Distance Report
Driving Distance - Driver Usage by distance rank on the PGA TOURThe percentage driver usage (both for driving holes and for all Par 4s and 5s) for the individual
players who qualify for inclusion in the 2015 driving distance rankings on the PGA TOUR ispresented in Figure 11. The majority of players use driver more than 90% of the time on the“measured” driving holes. In 2015, 26 players (approximately 14%) used a driver on these holes lessthan 90% of the time, and only 7 players (4% of the population) used driver less than 80% of the timeon driving holes.
Not surprisingly there is a fairly strong correlation between percentage driver usage and driving
distance rank when considering the percentage driver usage on all par 4s and 5s.

100% Driver Use

80

60

40

20
Driving HolesAll Par 4s and 5s
0
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Distance Rank
Figure 2. Percentage Driving distance vs distance rank on the PGA TOUR in 2015.

Version 1.0

14/18

2015 Distance Report
Driving Distance – Launch Conditions on the PGA TOURThe PGA TOUR has used a TrackMan RADAR system to measure launch data at tournaments aspart of the Shotlink system since 2007. Data are typically collected on one or two par 4 or par 5
holes at each tournament, although these holes are not always the “measured” driving holes (only 19
out of 55 holes on which RADAR data were reported in 2015 were “measured” driving holes). Since
the introduction of logging club selection for tee shots in 2012, these launch data are only reported
for shots hit with driver. In practical terms this results in the exclusion of approximately 500-600
shots each year (from a population of 12,000-16,000) and as such has only a very minor effect on thevalue of the average launch conditions.
The average launch conditions by year are shown in Table 5. It can be seen that average clubhead
speed has increased by 0.8 mph from 2007 to 2015 and ball speed by 2.3 mph. Launch angle in 2015is the same as the 2007 value, while spin is 215 rpm lower in 2015. It is also noteworthy that thelaunch condition set-up for the Overall Distance Standard is 10° and 2520 rpm at a clubhead speedof 120 mph.
Table 5. Launch Conditions measured on the PGA TOUR.

Clubhead Speed(mph)
90th Percentile
Clubhead Speed(mph)
Ball Speed(mph)
Launch Angle(°)
Spin (RPM)

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

112.4

112.3

111.7

112.6

112.8

113.0

113.2

113.0

113.2

118.5

118.3

117.4

118.5

118.6

118.8

119.1

118.8

119.2

165.4

165.2

165.2

166.2

166.8

167.2

167.4

167.2

167.7

10.8

11.3

11.3

10.7

10.8

10.9

10.9

11.0

10.8

2814

2670

2670

2714

2667

2686

2639

2619

2599

Version 1.0

15/18

2015 Distance Report

Appendix
USGA/R&A JOINT STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLESAs the governing authorities for the Rules of Golf including equipment Rules, The Royal and Ancient
Golf Club of St Andrews (the “R&A”) and the United States Golf Association (the “USGA”) havecontinued to monitor closely the effects of advancing equipment technology on the playing of thegame. The R&A and the USGA are also aware that this subject has attracted wide-ranging commentand a number of conflicting views. History has proved that it is impossible to foresee thedevelopments in golf equipment which advancing technology will deliver. It is of the greatest
importance to golf’s continuing appeal that such advances are judged against a clear and broadly
accepted series of principles.
The purpose of this statement is to set out the joint views of the R&A and the USGA, together withthe framework of key principles and policies which guides their actions.
In an historical context, the game has seen progressive developments in the clubs and balls available
to golfers who, through almost six centuries, have sought to improve their playing performance andenjoyment.
While generally welcoming this progress, the R&A and the USGA will remain vigilant when
considering equipment Rules. The purpose of the Rules is to protect golf’s best traditions, toprevent an over-reliance on technological advances rather than skill, and to ensure that skill is thedominant element of success throughout the game.
The R&A and USGA continue to believe that the retention of a single set of rules for all players of
the game, irrespective of ability, is one of golf’s greatest strengths. The R&A and USGA regard theprospect of having permanent separate rules for elite competition as undesirable and have nocurrent plans to create separate equipment rules for highly skilled players.
Golf balls used by the vast majority of highly skilled players today have largely reached theperformance limits for initial velocity and overall distance which have been part of the Rules since1976. The governing bodies believe that golf balls, when hit by highly skilled golfers, should not ofthemselves fly significantly further than they do today. In the current circumstances, the R&A and the
USGA are not advocating that the Rules relating to golf ball specifications be changed other than tomodernise test methods.
The R&A and the USGA believe, however, that any further significant increases in hitting distances at
the highest level are undesirable. Whether these increases in distance emanate from advancing
equipment technology, greater athleticism of players, improved player coaching, golf course
conditioning or a combination of these or other factors, they will have the impact of seriously
reducing the challenge of the game. The consequential lengthening or toughening of courses would
be costly or impossible and would have a negative effect on increasingly important environmental
and ecological issues. Pace of play would be slowed and playing costs would increase.
The R&A and the USGA will consider all of these factors contributing to distance on a regular basis.
Should such a situation of meaningful increases in distances arise, the R&A and the USGA would feel
it immediately necessary to seek ways of protecting the game.
In determining any future amendments to the Rules, or to associated procedures which may fromtime to time prove necessary, the R&A and the USGA will continue their respective policies ofconsultation with interested parties, including the use of notice and comment procedures, and willtake account of the views expressed. The achievement and maintenance of worldwide uniformity inequipment rules through close co-ordination between the R&A and the USGA is a clear priority.
The R&A and the USGA are concerned that, on an increasing number of occasions, new products
are being developed and marketed which potentially run counter to the principles expressed in thisstatement. These product launches, without prior consultation with the governing bodies, can lead
Version 1.0

16/18

2015 Distance Reportto considerable difficulties in formulating appropriate equipment rules and to undesirable conflicts
between manufacturers and rule makers. The R&A and the USGA intend to bring forward proposals
designed to improve procedures for the approval of new products.
The R&A and the USGA believe that the principles stated in this document will, when carefully
applied, serve the best interests of the game of golf.

Version 1.0

17/18

2015 Distance Report
Summary of the PGA TOUR's position on equipment July 1, 2003
General Philosophy
Appropriate limitations on technology are essential to preserve the inherent value and popularity of
the game of golf at the professional level.
PGA TOUR is committed to partner with the USGA and the R&A to:
•
•
•
•
•

Conduct necessary research in the technology area;
Develop appropriate equipment rules;
Communicate to the media and the public the actions taken and results achieved;
Monitor whether the equipment rules have achieved our intended purposes; andModify the equipment rules and/or develop new rules, as appropriate

Proposed Rules Relating to Spring-Like Effect•••

The TOUR supports the new Characteristic Time (CT) measurement method and Pendulum
Tester
Implementation of the Pendulum Tester on the PGA TOUR should occur by Jan. 1, 2004
If the USGA fails to implement the Pendulum Tester by Jan. 1, 2004, the TOUR will consider
adopting the CT measurement method and the Pendulum Tester for PGA TOUR competitions

Proposed Rules Relating to the Golf Ball••

The TOUR supports the Indoor Test Range (ITR) Phase II as currently proposed by the USGAThe TOUR strongly urges the implementation of the ITR Phase II by no later than June 1, 2004

Monitoring, Communications and Research
I.
•
•
II.
•

III.
•

Data Collection and Opinion Monitoring:
The TOUR will partner with the USGA and R&A to collect relevant data, including but notlimited to, golf ball distance, club selection, and swing speeds
The TOUR will partner with the USGA and R&A to gauge media and public opinion relative tothe effect of technology on professional golf
Communication:
The TOUR will partner with the USGA and R&A to develop a variety of methods tocommunicate with the media and fans relative to equipment testing, equipment rules, and theimpact of those rules on players' performance.
Further Rule Modifications:
The TOUR will partner with the USGA and R&A relative to further rule modifications if golf balldistances continue to significantly increase or if general views of the game are negatively affectedby technology (i.e., technology is more a factor in excellent performance than skill andathleticism).

Version 1.0

18/18