GOLF.

Otago Witness, Issue 2914, 19 January 1910, Page 69

GOLF.

NOTES BY BULGER. |iuch discussion is'af present taking place .abb#, the need for applying .the principle of VfatKiardisation to the, golf club and the ball, ; : It has been thp outcome of the reciint remark of the ..Rules Committee hbWt the. mallet or oroijuet-headed putter, as; well as the need of, all golfers to conform as much as possible to the established playing condition, of the. game, sanctioned by long experience and tradition. A" useful purpose might bo served to see whether there is really any effective claim to be established for a wider system of standardisation than the simple prohibition of monstrous clubs, whose use is alleged to be conducive to the making of illegitimate golfing strokes. The object of the game is to strike a, ball from a given spot into a. hole in as few strokes as possible. The distance from the tee to the hole varies from 100 to 500 yards; it might be less or more. The number of holes is fixed- only by custom. Nothing is standardised in all the apparatus of the game except the hole, which must bo round, 44in in diameter, and 4in deep. The ball must be struck into a hole of these dimensions.

What is a golf ball? It is not defined in the rules, bufc surely it is any ball of any 7 material that can be struck into the hole of the regulation size. Presumably a cricket ball would not be illegal, though it would be useless for a hole of the prescribed size ; neither would a tennis bali be illegal. But the important fact to remember is that the process of evolution has produced the golf ball—first feather, then gutta, lastly rubber core, and the exhaustive process of evolution, therefore, has produced something for the golfer to use in his game which will serve his purpose a good deal better than any novelties borrowed from other pastimes. The golf ball, then, is not standardised, but has been evolved by the one and only dominant and legal condition —namely, the size, of the hole. All this applies also to the evolution of the. various clubs, the nature of which is governed by the necessary nature of the ball. As regards clubs, it is primarily necessary to forbid mechanical contrivances for propelling the ball. It is possible that a man might drive fairly well with a cricket bat, but, however his fancy leads him, he soon recognises that he can drive further with the evolved golf club. Some disputants will hold, therefore, that a. golf club can only be defined as the implement whether wood or iron, with which they can best drive the golf ball towards or into the hole, and the golf ball itself, indeed, no matter of what size or material, is simply 7 the object which can be most easily driven towards or into the hole. Not any rules, but evolution and experience have given us the existing clubs and balls, and these articles of Die game have been found to be the most ''uitable for the purpose of play from the tee to the 44in hole an indefinite distance away. Evolution and experience having settled for golfers beyond all doubt what is the best form of club and ball, so in like manner they have settled the best way in which the golfer should handle the clube with skill, ease, grace, and fair play. Clubs which, are a departure from the form sanctioned by the evolution principle entail a new, and many think an, illegitimate, method of handling and it is on being confronted with this danger of ignoring both evolution and experience in playing the game as hitherto held to be traditional that St. Andrews has sounded its warning note of possible action being taken. We are told by the dramatist that “age is as a lusty winter, frosty, but kindly,” and confirmation of the fact is provided by the golfing feat of Mr T. E. Lewis, a veteran of 80 years, who holed the eleventh hole on, the Mid Surrey course the other day in one stroke, a distance of 138 yards. This holing out in one stroke is always something of 3 mystery. It has been mathematically proved that the chances against arc millions to one, and yet there are golfers who have taken up the game at a time which may not ha irreverently called yesterday who succeed several times in a short experience of play in holing out in one stroke. When nearing his, seventieth year old Tom Morris, when, questioned on; this subject, told the writer that he had played “gowff” all his days, and he had never succeeded in getting a hole in one. A similar absence of good luck —if it can be so described—has dogged the footsteps of very many veteran golfers over more thar half a century of constant play, and yet here is a veteran who has not probably played' so long noi so- constantly as Tom Morris obtaining success when, at his age, scarcely anything of the kind may be hoped for. How interesting it is to, note, moreover, that the old golfers are much more enthusiastic about th© value and the charms of the gam© than the younger men. A short time ago a Prestwick golfer died at the age of 80. He played his game of golf up to the last, and he always celebrated his birthday with a foursome. This, too, was the habit of old Tom Morris, who played his birthday matches after he wa6 80 with the late Mr Everard. One occasionally hears the dictum uttered by the young men that golf is an old man’s game. Tbs implied reproach against golf her© is that for youth and manhood other games are to be preferred, for youth can well afford to put off taking up golf until the .coming of old age. Yes, but the Roman satirist has told us. that the hours pass by and are put to our account, so that when the expected time comes it is always inevitably too late. In his homely, graphic way Torn Morris, when over 80, was always fond of giving proof that golf and long life “gang thegither,” as Burns said of freedom and whisky, for, added the old St. Andrews golfer, “an’ it hadna’ been for gowffi I am no’ sure that at this day I wild hae been a leevin’ sinner.” —Field.