“The objective of this change is to limit the effectiveness of grooves on shots from the rough to the effect of a traditional V-groove design.”

Bowl and Grass flesh out the notion that Bomb and Gouge golf might not be impacted by the groove rule change because most irons already had conforming grooves and their well-paid brat handlers haven't had U-groove on their mind before looking at a 22-yard wide fairway and saying "screw it, let's hit driver."

Not exactly a newsflash from the city, but the next part of the post is.

In a self-admitted lede-bury, Bowl reveals that some newly submitted clubs appeared to be technically conforming but were rejected because they still produced too much spin for the USGA's taste buds. However, because of broad language focusing on the reduction of spin, the clubs were ruled non-conforming.

He drops this, gulp, bombshell along with the incorrectly dated USGA memo that could mean "World War III."

I'll admit we're burying the lead here but the news just came across my desk as I was typing this, a notice sent to manufacturers today (click thumbnail to read the notice) makes it pretty clear that any enhancements not covered by the new rule but affecting spin will not be tolerated. Indeed, in its haste to get the word out, the USGA couldn’t get the month right on the official announcement. Nevertheless, the new language, attached here, reiterates the idea of the intent of the rule, namely: “The objective of this change is to limit the effectiveness of grooves on shots from the rough to the effect of a traditional V-groove design.” That very easily could mean there won’t be any meaningful innovation in grooves or face pattern that might enhance spin production ever again.

(Let me just note for the millionth time how sad it is that the USGA is fixated on producing an effect from rough, which has historically been almost always an artificial tool introduced to offset unregulated distance advances.)

Either way, as Bowl notes, the memo is tidying up what appears to be a loop-hole in the original "Notice to Manufacturers" and is sure to fuel claims that the USGA is reserving the right to make it up as they go. And while I didn't agree with the tour policy board members who wanted to delay the implementation of the rule, you have to figure this latest development could make their "rush-job" claims more credible.