GOLF.

Otago Witness, Issue 2811, 29 January 1908, Page 37

GOLF.

JN'OTIS BY BULGEP.

I The long-talked-of meeting between I Braid and Massy took place on the links of the Cinque Ports Club at Deal on the 20th of last month. The match was over ■ 36 holes, and resulted in a win for the Frenchman by 2 up and 1 to play. The Daily News on the match says: — " It must j be confessed that few golfers on this sidei of the Channel expected that Massy would I gain the day. It was generally supposed [ that Braid would prove the better match I player. The question of supremacy, how- ! ever, has now been definitely "settled, and | for the year 1907 at least Massy is in- ! disputably the champion golfer. Whatever advantage there was in the matter of links was with Braid, for it would be hard to imagine a course on which the ex-champion would be likely to better I show his best form than Deal. And it i must be stated that the Walton Heath 1 man played anything but indifferent golf. I He made a brilliant start by winning the I first hole and becoming 2 up at the third. He increased this advantage to 3 up at the fifth, and he still held that lead at the ninth, which he reached in 36 strokes to his opponent's 40. The ex-champion became 4 up at the eleventh, and at this point everyone was confident of his success. Meanwhile Massy never showed the least sign of losing heart. He stuck to his man with tenacity, and at the end of the round had decreased hie deficit to 1 down. Owing mainly to weakness in the short game Braid took 6 for the last two holes and lost them, both. "In the afternoon Massy speedily drew level. At the first hole he lofted hie approach, put over a hillock on the green, and holed his 20-yard shot for a 3. Braid took 4, and for the first time in the match the players were all square. Massy's brilliant -approaching, which was, perhaps, the outstanding feature of the day's golf, enabled him to take the lead at the third, where he laid his mashie 6hot within a foot of the^pin, and got down in 4 to 5. Braid drew level at the fourth hole, but the Frenchman went ahead at the . fifth, and from this point Braid never again succeeded in getting on terms with his opponent. He was generally struggling I for halves, and in thie he was not always i successful, for Massy became dormy at the fifteenth. The Scotchman got back a hole at the sixteenth, but he could only halve the seventeenth, and was thus beaten by 2 and 1." The match was followed by a large number of spectators. Dull weather prevailed, and a strong eouth-westorlv wind made the ! golf more than ordinarily difficult. It was a magnificent day's golf. The match was nominally an exhibition affair, but neither man could have tried harder. With the proposed contest for £100 aside I hanging fire, Braid was intent upon showi ing the justifiablenesa of issuing that chalI lenge, and Massy was equally intent on. showing that he . could beat the Scotchman under match as well as medal play .'rules. ; For fourteen holes Braid completely out- 1 played his opponent. During this period Braid showed, really brillient-form. -Massy -was also- playing a good long game; but he oouULflpt get coiite the same length as the Scotchman. • "The manner in which he turned a heavy adverse balance into a victory wa«, however; highly creditable. Braid was not at his best after the first 14 holes. His shots lacked the sting which had previously characterised them, and he lo6t several chances on the greens. The scores ■were : — —First Round.— Braid— Out . . 44334455*— 36 Home 453445666—42 Total 78 Massy— Out .. 645363565—40 'Home 462644555—41 Total 81 — Second Hound. — Massy— Out . . 844444544—36 Home 55853464 —35 71 for 17 holes Braid— Out .. 445354554—39 Home 55358564 —35 74 for 17 holes It is to be hoped the Rules of .Golf Committee will not listen to the ill-in-foxmed golf critics who are urging them to pass a specific rule to meet the case of a ball which oscillate* in water when the player has the hardihood to wade in and play it. The controversy which has arisen over this subject of a ball moving in water arose out of an incident which occurred recently on the Barry links in the course of play for the Scottish championship. The ball of. one of the professionals was found to be floating in water, and although the professional knew verjr well that he had the option either of lifting it and counting one, or of playing it as it lay in the water, he. chose the latter alternative, and waded in to play it. The incident has been seized upon by critics of little knowledge and of very limited experience of the game to call in question the action of the player. Their view is apparently that the professional should have been penalised because he played a moving ball, due to the fact that he had waded into the water. Technically, of course, it would be much more correct to cay that a ball floating in water merely oscillates, and that it aoes not really move, in the true golfing sense, by rolling round its axis. While that small detail of -difference is conveniently cb s

soured, the Rules Committee are being urged to define by a special rule the procedure which should be followed in playing a ball floating in water. It is to be sincerely hoped that the Rules Committee will turn a deaf ear to this plaintive cry of golfing ignorance. Those critics who are blaming the Rules Committee for not having provided a special rule for the case of a ball floating in water seem entirely to leave out of view the important fact that water is a. hazard. Is 'is not obligatory on any player in a scoring competition to play a ball out of a hazard, if he believes it to be to his eventual benefit to sacrifice the penalty of two strokes. In a match he must, however, play the ball out of all the recognised hazards' on the course, which are not specially guarded by some local rule of exemption, and here the ball may be lifted and dropped with the loss of a stroke. Now, nothing is clearer than that water, whether running or stationary, is one of the best established hazards wherever the game is played. But owing to the nature of this hazard the rules have, with undeniable justice, provided that no player need, unless he likes to incur the personal discomfort and possible danger to health of being compelled to wade into a stream, or a lake, play his • ball. The present . rule, however, is .perfectly fair in this respect, that while it does "not impose a mandatory obligation upon a player to enter the water and to pl«.y the ball it allows him a complete freedom of choice between wading in or of lifting hie ball and dropping it behind the hazard with the loss of a stroke. It should be carefully noted that rule 14 is permissive in its phraseology,for it states that "if a ball lie or be lost in water, or in casual water, in a. hazard, a ball may be dropped" behind the hazard under the penalty of one-stroke. , The wording of the rule clearly shows that the Rules Committee had in their minds the need of differentiating water from all other kinds of golfing hazards. It is indeed a piece of hyper-criticism verging on the ridiculous to attempt to sustain the proposition that a ball which is floating in water is either a moved or a moving ball in the real golfing acceptation of the word. Instead of being an advantage to the player, the inevitable oscillation of the ball makes the ehot for him a hundred times more difficult.. In addition to this, the player nine times out of ten closes hie eyes at the moment the blow is struck in order to prevent the water from injuring them, and in nine cases out of ten actual experience shows that the attempts to dislodge a floating ball are rewarded more with wet elothee and failure than with the success which attended the late Lieutenant Tait's ehot at Prp«twiok. Water is a hazard s'.ii generis, and as such it has been already adequately legislated lor. What happens to the ball in water when the player waides into it is beyond his control, and, indeed, his great anxiety to plaiy -it out without losing a stroke only serves to increase the difficulties of his subsequent play. Not even the acutest golfing critic or referee could define with any hope of bringing universal conviction to hie side the extent to which ft ball floating in water left its original position in thf least decree and stopped in another. Such critics, indeed, would seem to _be compelled to take refuge in the judicial dictum of an old golfer who was asked to decide the case of a moved ball in An important money match played at Muaselburßh lone ago. Old Willie Park was carrying clubs for one of the partners in this foursome. On the nutting preen one of the opponents caused his ball to oscillate, and Willie Pai-k, vigilant for the interests of his side, claimed a stroke. The point whether thi* was a moved ball o-r not was referred to an old and experienced member of the Honourable Company, and he appeared to satisfy all doubte by delivering the following illuminating judgment: — "If a ball moved, it moved; if it didn't move, it didn't move; that was the end of it." After the same fashion- thus eeems to be the judgment of the critics who are clamouring for a new rul« which shall (govern the procedure of an oscillating ball in a water hazard.