GOLF

Taranaki Daily News, 5 February 1930, Page 4

GOLF

TWO CLASSES OF GOLFERS. THE AMATEUR DEFINITION. (By Harry Vardon.—Special to News.) The championship committee of the Royal and Ancient Club has been at work again upon the definition of an amateur golfer. It has decided that, in future, a person may carry clubs for hire up to the age of 18, instead of IG, without sacrificing his' amateur status. In my youncr days the limit was 15, at which period in life the average boy docs not bother his head in the least degree on the question of making himself a professional by acting as caddie. In point of fact, no amateur definition existed in golf until just after I had turned 15, so that when a regulation came into force, 1 had to be a professional. And I have no regrets. Perhaps the extension of the agelimit will result in some caddies reflecting long enough to make up their minds°to’seek careers as amateurs. In any case, it is difficult to see that the act of carrying clubs for hire helps anybody to improve at the gam<?. At the most, it may give him more time on the course than otherwise he would, obtain, but even then he probably secures less actual play than thousands of amateurs. This problem of the definition is eternal. The one thing certain is that the harder people try to produce refinements of it which will be applicable with equal justice to all classes, the greater will become the inconsistencies. It seems to me that the best and siniplest thing to. do would be to define a professional aa one who had received payment for playing or teaching the game. That Ja the sum total of what most people regard as professionalism. Anybody who had not qualified under these’heada might very , well be regard*, ed as an amateur, especially as the artful dodger (assuming that he existed) could be controlled by means of that salutary clause in which the Royal and Ancient Clubxeservea the right of “declaring ineligible to compete in the open tournaments under its jurisdiction anyone who, in its opinion, has acted in a manner detrimental to the best interests or to the spirit of the game.” That is a sufficiently comprehensive safeguard against any deliberate form of abuse. To make fine differences by means of a lone series of written laws is to court .difficult situations. An amateur who is famous on the links is bound to benefit in business from the circumstance, however much he may desire not to do so. He meets the kind of people who have the resources and the hero-worship which impel them to force business upon him in the ordinary course of his profession.

He does not ask; for orders; they come to him because he is renowned among golfers who want what he has to sell. In point of fact, some of these celebrities are, I am certain, positively embarrassed by the knowledge that they do possibly benefit in this way; but they cannot be expected to go out of bu'sincss—or even out of golf—on account of it. I have in mind one who is said to have declined invitations of various 'kinds in his endeavour not to profit by his golf and who, when his club insisted on electing him to honorary life membership . in celebration of his great performances, insisted, in return, that he should continue to pay his annual subscription to the club. Wealthy men may play four-ball matches for “motor-car comers,” the victors receiving cheques as big as a .first-class professional secures for winning a great tournament. If anybody liked to declare that, by doing this, they had made themselves professionals (with handicaps averaging about 16!), the rest of the world would merely 7 smile. It is possible that the Americans, as a moneyed and more or less democratic, people, have problems under this head which do not arise in Britain. So far as I have been able to judge, their authorities adopt a more stringent official attitude than exists here. The United States Golf Association said frankly in a recent report which I read it has a good deal of work to do in guarding the amateur statue, and many enquiries are received with respect to the payment of expenses of amateur golfers. Contributions of this kind are allowed only in three instance—namely, to Walker Cup teams, to players in the Public Links Championship, .and to regularly organised college teams. I do not profess to have first-hand knowledge of any infractions of these regulations, but I do know "that an American, who ought to be able to speak with authority, told me not long ago that infringements are easy. “For example,” he said, “if it is only possible to secure the presence of a player by paying his expenses, somebody bets him 250 dollars that he will not go round the course in 95 strokes. He is bound to win that bet.” The story may be all nonsense, but it is at any rate the plain, unvarnished tale of an American who travels his country far and wide as a golfer. In Britain, it would be better in many ways if there were no amateur definition, and. if everybody were regarded simply as a player. He would, be known by his own actions, and would drift naturally into the coterie that suited him. It is solely for the purpose of championships that there hae to be a definition. In that case, it ought to be

enough to proclaim that a professional is one who accepts. payment for playing or teaching the game, and that an amateur may have hie expenses defrayed only when he is appearing as a member of a team.