SHOULD GOLF CADDIES ADVISE?

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 19214, 21 January 1928, Page 16

SHOULD GOLF CADDIES ADVISE?

A QUESTION ON WHICH THE SEXES DIFFER.

(By Harry Vardou, Six Times Open Champion.)

Mr John L. Low, than whom there is nobody better qualified to interpret the traditions and spirit of golf, has been taking the ladies gently to task for their efforts to place the question of caddies on what they regard as an equitable basis. Beterring to the old condition of comradeship between player and caddie he says: —•'! hear rather sadly that there is likely to be a change, and that the English ladies wish for no particular caddies, but rather that they should be allocated to them by lot." In case the caddies bo too few, no blood relations may be helpful to their own kin; the brother may not carry for the sister but will bo handed over" to succour the sister's most bitter foe!"

It was in this year's ladies' championships that a rule camo into force stipulating that no competitor should be allowed to havo any club profesiunal, relation, or friend to carry for her, nor bo permitted to bring her own caddie. 'By the majority of mere males it was regarded as a budden ami rather shocking revolution against ono of the historic privileges of the game—-the privilege by which _ the golfer may sally forth in tho spirit of the feudal system of tho Middle Ages, accompanied by a favourite henchman ready to stand by him till the last ditch or bunker, in point of fact, it was not, I think, nearly so sudden a movement as most people imagined. Whatever tho affront to sentiment or tradition, the Ladies' Golf Union has long been working in a practical way against the maintenance of the principle- that one player is entitled to enjoy, an advantage over another by reason of tho possession of the better caddie. Many years ago, it resolved, in connexion with tho ladies' open championship (which was then tho only classic ovcut for tho sex) that no competitor should employ her club professional and coach as caddie. For some time, relatives and fvionds wore permitted to act in this capacity in tlie first round, but only when, owing to tho largo number of players, there might Iks a shortage of local caddies. The Shrewd Choice. Consequently, tho ban complete is the logical conclusion of an ideal that, formed itself early in tho feminino mind.

T am quite sure that, if the question of preventing a player from engaging bis own particular .caddio were brought before the Royal and Ancient Club, it would be dismissed immediately. In men's golf, it in accepted that the player who commands the better caddio has tho right to benefit by his shrewdness or whatever quality it is that enables him to secure the treasure. It is a survival of the feudal spirit. If the caddio would rather serve a certain employer than any other, and the employer would sooner have that caddio than any other of his fellows, there is established an implacable human circumstance that argument cannot alter. The first thing that many a man does when he visits his favourite seaside course is to ask for his usual caddie, if he has not written m advance and settled the matter. It -is very much as ho wants somebody iii the house who knows his ways and where to find, things for him. In that respect, man has not changed, either in golf or in the household, since the earliest days of golf and households.

It may be that woman is more independent of help than man in matters which, after all, demand only services of a menial character. Man needs and expects the best kind of servant, and, haying secured what he regards as* a prize, makes a friend of him. Woman, having a far wider range of experience in the quest, comes to the conclusion that the best is located somewhere else, which is probably true. It must be such a sentiment as this which has dictated the policy that players in the open and English ladies' championships are to take their chance as to the caddies allotted to thorn, and not bring their own friends or hirelings. Prom a purely practical point of view, there is a great deal to be said for this decision. Lieutenant-Colonel Sir F. S. Jackson has remarked that "golf is the only game at which you are allowed to take out your coach," which is completely true, and an indication of the way in which one player may enjoy an advantage . over another by engaging the better attendant. Fundamentally, the ladies are right, because there surely can be no doubt that everybody ought to succeed or fail solely on individual merit. Degrees of Help. In men's golf, this coldly logical attitude has never gained much ground. When a youthful amateur beat several of the stars in the amateur championship, liis way aided by a sagacious middle-aged professional as caddie, who nominated the shots and told his charge how to swing for them, people rather enjoyed this liaison of forces. It was typical of the way in which the golfers of ancient times played their games—those timos when even kings had their special foursome partners and mentors who acted as caddies when circumstances demanded that the head of the confederacy should contest a single. Por a long while it has been considered incorrect, although not illegal, to employ an acknowledged professional and instructor as caddie. But that has not deterred man from securing the most helpful caddie obtainable.

When golf was a very small game (hundreds of years ago), and everybody knew everybody Jlse on the links, the scheme of the favourite caddie had its perfect justification. He was in the nature of a retainer, wholly concerned abo»t his employer's fortunes. Nowadays, caddies vaTy bo much in quality that the system of allowing them to advise and otherwise affect the player has loss justification. A few eddies there are who have inherited the qualities of being guides, philosophers, friends, and moral supports. Others have much the same soullessness as small boys who offer to carry your bag from the railway station. That the principle will continue to flourish in men's golf is, however, certain.