Ultimate golf journal Please register.
A springtime effect
The USGA and Royal and Ancient Golf Club restored a worldwide set of equipment rules May 9 when they announced an agreement on coefficient of restitution. But the greater fruit of their resolution of a42-month difference in the interpretation of scientific findings is aunified position on rulemaMng designed to prevent future disagreements.
The USGA and R&A reached agreement on COR, or spring like effect, in drivers with a compromise: temporary use of two standards that will become one unified code at the start of 2008.
The divergence opened in November 1998 when the USGA, after studies by its Research and Test Center, implemented a COR limit of .822 plus a test tolerance of .008 (see COR Explained). That limit, encompassing all clubs on the market at the time, cited wording added to Appendix II of The Rules of Golf in 1984 stating
COR EXPLAINED
Coefficient of restitution, sometimes called “springlike effect,” is the rate at which a ball rebounds off a clubface. It is expressed as a three-digit decimal. If a ball fired at the face of a clubhead at lOOmph rebounds at 75 mph, the COR is .750. The COR of a persimmon headed wood is about .780; it’s believed thin-faced, metal-headed clubs could be made to have a COR as high as .900.
that a “clubhead shall not have the effect at impact of a spring.” The R&A, after examining the USGA data and its own studies, said in September 2000 that it saw no need for a COR limit to restrici increases in distance.
In last month’s compromise, the bodies designated a dual COR for a phase-in period that begins Jan. 1,2003: one of .830 for “highly skilled players — included, for example, as a condition of competition for the U.S. and British Opens and professional tours—and one at .860 for everyone else. The latter is higher than the pre-existing USGA limit but also imposes a limit in areas governed by the R&A. The rules will merge on the first day of 2008 to make .830 the sole standard.
In the joint release, Peter Dawson, R&A secretary, noted the global nature of the game “particularly at the elite level” and the need for “a uniform set of equipment rules. A return to uniformity which this ’spring-like’ effect proposal seeks to achieve, is in golfs best interests.”
The agreement evolved gradually as the two bodies conducted periodic discussions that opened with a session in January 2001. In addition to COR, the bodies considered all aspects of rule-making, from philosophy to technique. The agreement was formulated in April in Augusta, Ga., during the Masters and finalized in ensuing conference calls and correspondence. Although the COR pact was cited by many as the main news, a more important product of the discussions is a 700-word Joint Statement of Principles also released May 9 (see Reading the Line).
The Principles gives a clear map of how the bodies intend “to ensure that skill is the dominant element of successthroughout the game.” [The text of the Principles is available in the Equipment section of www.usga.org.]
“The COR [situation] is what engendered the Principles,” says Dick Rugge, the USGA’s senior technical director. “We recognized we had to establish that so we could get ourselves into the same place [on COR]. The Principles have more to say about all equipment rules, whereas COR is one specific issue.”
Among the Principles:
- The game needs a single set of rules.
- Golf balls used by “the vast majority” of top players have reached performance limits and more distance is “undesirable.”
- The rulemaking process will continue to include Notice and Comment periods soliciting input, with the “achievement and maintenance of worldwide uniformity… a clear priority.” That includes comments on COR, which must be submitted to the USGA by July 15.
The announcement noted the organizations continue to study proposals made earlier this year concerning golf ball test procedures and limits on club-head size and club length. — Brett Avery

