The overnight announcement of a proposed rule change for the game, a Model Local Rule on golf balls to reign in distance at the elite level, is a clear bifurcation for elite and recreational golf.

That ‘B’ word is one we in the industry have become so used to in the distance debate that it is dealt with in something of a blasé way. But that is certainly not the manner in which the equipment manufacturers are treating this, some publicly speaking out to on the decision to limit distance and require a different product for Tour and weekend player as a bad trend for the industry.

Those views are shared by some commentators – notably Golf Channel’s Brandel Chamblee – and ardently argued against by others, like our own Mike Clayton.

All of those with strong views will be sharing them as the proposed rule is now in a discussion period with a view to bring it into existence from January 2026.

Given its status as an MLR, that is when it would be up to Tours and tournaments to decide whether it was implemented.

And that’s where, personally, there appears opportunity for golf’s previous primary “disruptor” to stand out from the crowd.

“Can you imagine a Tour that allows the longest drivers, like Bryson DeChambeau, the chance to push beyond the limit that one expects the PGA Tour will enforce? Golf. But longer.” - Jimmy Emanuel.

This is of course all long term hypothetical and given the time frame of the new rule we could see an (albeit at this time unlikely) cooling of the tension between the established Tours and LIV. Or even a departure from the landscape for the newest circuit if roadblocks continued to be put in front of its development. Again, though, unlikely.

Where LIV’s potential success lies is as a contrarian outlier in the world of sameness that is professional golf.

The 54-hole tournaments, shotgun starts, teams etc. are all attempts to do this. Yet can you imagine a Tour that allows the longest drivers, like Bryson DeChambeau, the chance to push beyond the limit that one expects the PGA Tour will enforce?

Golf. But longer.

The golf fan who wants to see “bomb and gouge” golf is already revealing itself to be more inclined to give LIV Golf their attention and rejecting the new local rule would create the biggest point of difference imaginable for the Saudi financed circuit.

Those same equipment companies that will now be looking at innovative ways to market products that are available at retail but different to those used by your favourite player on Tour might look kindly on such a move.

And those players with strong opinions against the newly proposed rule, like Bryson, also might be more inclined to look kindly on playing events that currently get them banned elsewhere.

Players will be the likely roadblock however, with the likes of Cam Smith wanting to be playing the same golf ball model and clubs optimised, week-in and week-out to be prepared to best challenge for the majors that will surely enact the new regulations.

There is also the small matter of CEO Greg Norman’s own publicly stated opinions in support of a rollback, as ‘Golf Twitter’ was reminded of by Golf Australia Magazine Top-100 panellist Matt Mollica in response to Norman’s own son deriding a potential roll back.

Mollica tweeted: “the institutions have got to step up & maybe wind the ball back to the 1996 specifications, that completely change the direction of technology and distance in the game" - @SharkGregNorman - proponent of a ball #Rollback since 1997, on an Oct 2020 @BunkeredOnline podcast”.

Whether the new intentional division in golf comes to fruition or not is the current focus, but if there are long term strategic discussions going on at LIV HQ, you would have to believe they would be best served investigating a contrarian position to their rivals at the PGA Tour.

Something akin to a bifurcation of bifurcation. There’s that word again.