Or maybe a better question is - why don’t they merge?
I am a golfer but I still wonder (especially at this time year) why we don’t have one organization under the umbrella of “Promote and Manage Golf”.
I realize the USGA does many things like “First Tee” and manage the rules (together with the R&H) and that the (US) PGA if anything is a sort of resource for teaching pro’s (more so than playing pro’s actually) but still it seems like they could all be one big family.
We’d risk losing one of the 4 majors, but I’m sure there could be some solution for that.
The PGA is an association for people who make their living specifically related to golf. They are typically players, club pros, teachers and so on.
The USGA is open to anyone regardless of their profession.
While they are both related to golf, the PGA has a much more specialized membership, and has an agenda that is occasionally quite different from the USGA. Witness the recent brouhaha over the anchored stroke rule…
We wouldn’t “lose” a major, by the way. I’m sure those would continue as they are now. The US Open and the PGA have different mechanisms for entry, and that’s as principal a difference as is the sponsor name.
BTW, there are similar situations in a lot of other sports - one governing body for the sport in general, and another for the professional side. In bowling, I believe that’s the USBC and PBA.
The USGA is fundamentally a governing body for the rules of golf, with extension into the goodwill of golf.
The PGA (of America) is fundamentally an association promoting the interests of folks who make their primary living off of the sport (and now the PGA Tour is an even more narrowly-targeted association).
On reflection, though, I guess a better answer to my original one to the OP is that historic associations tend not to aggregate because the folks who make them up have their own niches and power structures. Unless there is an advantage that accrues to those who control the organizations, they aren’t likely to merge even if many of the common interests of the participants align.
I don’t know all the historical nuances, but it’s interesting to note that the PGA of America, and the PGA Tour (at least) has usually accepted USGA standards for the rules of golf (with some minor exceptions). I believe this is markedly different from other professional sports in the US (Football, e.g.) where the NFL has its own professional set of rules governed internally. When differences of opinion arise, the various organizations are driven even further apart. As I mentioned earlier, there was a lot of friction between the PGA of America (and the Tour) and the USGA over the anchored stroke rule. The Tour even threatened to no longer accept the governance of the USGA for the Rules. Gasp.
Except that those interests that are not common may be very important. I know bowling better than golf , so I’ll use that. Bowling has the PBA, the BPAA ( bowling proprietors), the USBC ( which was itself formed within the past 10 years by a merger of the ABC, WIBC and YABA and USA Bowling). All of those organizations have some interest in promoting bowling, but their focus is different. The PBA’s focus is on professional bowlers, and it runs a variety of tournaments - not just the ones you see on TV. The BPAA focuses on the business of bowling - how to increase revenues, group buying discounts etc. The USBC focuses on the game- what the rules are, which rules a league can modify and how, equipment, certifying leagues, bowling centers, tournaments etc.
As Chief Pedant alluded to the PGA Tour itself split off from the PGA back in 1968 so there are actually 3 organizations in the US.
I know it’s about to sound like I’m rambling but this is actually relevant to the OP. I ran across an interesting note recently that said Nicklaus would have won more scoring titles (The Vardon Trophy) early in his career but even though he was the scoring leader he was ineligible for the title since he hadn’t completed his required PGA apprenticeship. At the time to win the trophy for having the lowest average score on the tour you had to prove you could do the accounting and stock the pro-shop for a golf course.
I think this really points out how the various groups with different goals were best off having their own organizations rather than try to fit everyone into a single catch-all group.
The U.S. Open is open to anyone (professional or amateur) who can qualify for it. Amateurs can attempt to qualify if their USGA Handicap is 1.4 or lower.
For amateurs, there are a series of local and regional qualifying tournaments.
The USGA also runs a series of amateur championships:
The U.S. Mid-Amateur and Women’s Mid-Amateur are specifically for people not pursuing a professional golf career. Technically, you just have to be at least 25 years old, but practically, that eliminates the college golfers who are planning to turn pro. The handicap restrictions are also looser than for the tournaments in which pros and future pros play.
The USGA also have a Senior Amateurs for Men and Women. I think the minimum age is 55 and I know both men and women who have competed in it.
Usually the amateurs that compete in the Mid and Senior Am are very good players that were not quite good enough to turn pro but practice and play a lot more than the typical weekend warrior who works a full time job.