Fallacies of Golf.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLVIII, Issue 11, 11 September 1912, Page 54

Fallacies of Golf.

Bi)

P. A. VAILE.

—Author of “ Modern Golf.”

©NE is frequently asked to account for the remarkable difference in the quality of the game of the professional ami the amateur at golf. r l he answer which is usually given, namely, that the professional plays much more, is no doubt to a cert ain extent the correct y xpla na'l ion of the great ■difference, but inhere i- a much deeper cause than this. As a matter of indisputable fact, the Heading' professionals, and, indeed, Rome of the mod prominent amateur^'in their works, teach the game on Sines quite opposed to their own pracV" l '- Now. xxe may accept the statement »that the published works of'the greatest player- do all\ t the game of a (multitude of players. It stands to .reason, then, that if their tuition is wrong the game of the amateurs who follow their teaching must, suffer. I say unhesitatingly that the game of golf is suffering severely on account of the false teaching which is unfortu aiately associated with some of the bnost famous names in the history of ♦the game. It is easy to make general fitale'ments of this nature; so to be specific, let u- take three portions of the jjanfi* which are absolutely of 'fundamental 1 importai?.*?. and deal with them particularly. ,The three I shall select are: (I) The distribution of weight 'in the drive;* (2) >the power of the left hand and arm as {Compared with that of the right hand find arm; and (3) the study of putting, t r Jt is my intention to analyse th? teaching of I larry Vardoii, James Bra: I mid J. 11. Taylor. We mu.-t admit that these names stand for all that is sound hnd good in golf, and their published’ad • ■'Vice to player- should he of . the same fiatuie. No good golfer will believe that •lit it. l;e shown to he otherwise any one of the famous triumvirate would desire it to remain uncontradicted. I do not think that anyone deserving tin* name of golfer could imagine one of these giving fa Ke ion “ to ;• ipjipil whom ji ( u. was co (piling/? yet. if my i-riticism l»e just, that is what each on? <bf them i> doing in hi- publi.-’i.ed instruc ti<»ns. ■! We shall take first t iie matter of the ‘ifli-t ribut ion of weight in the drive. Var<lon. Braid and Tax lor all state emphatic , filly that at the top of the swing the ■ ‘(weight -hould l»c almost all on the right 3eg. Thi.-. I maintain, is utterly bad and not in avoftrdan-ce with their Woxii practice. I shall quote them. At page (»8 of •‘The Complete Golfer” llarry Vardon -ays: - While this i.s hapjpeh'ng, it follow - that the weight of. the J»odx : is being gradually thrown on to the right leg, which accordingly stiffens liintil at the top of the swing it is quite rigid, the left leg being at the same time dn A state of comparative freedom, plightly bent in towards the right, with Irmly ju.-t enough pressure on the toe to j<ee.p it in position.” \l page 56 of “ Advanced Golf,” James [Braid -ay-: “At the top of the swing, although nearly all the weight will be •on the right foot, t fie player must feel (a distinct pressure on the left one, that ds to .-ay. it must -t ill Im* doing a small share in the work of supporting the b-lx“ ’ ’ ’ > ' 'At page JO? of ' ’ Taylor on Golf,” -T. JI. Tax lor -ays: ‘‘Then, as the club come- ba<k in th? -wii’.g, the weight, should be shifted by degrees, quietly ami g: iduaih . until when tin* (dub has leached its topmost point the whole v eight of the body is .-lipport rd by the light leg. the left foot al this time being turned ami the loft knee bent in toward the right knee.” Now. t hc-e men have accounted for II Open < • • mp’oii-hip- between them; but 1 -ay. without any hesitation whatever, that In tin- statement they are spread ing tuition, which i- fit il to the rhythm of the -w ing aiil ul ter I y opposed to t heir (»wn pru' ticc. t ILirrx Vardon himself is the most. Mriking refutation of this false doctrine. J torn th? moment lus club leaves (he ball his a eight begins (o go forward, until at the lop of his -wing it is'.mostly on his left foot. 41 is this man sigement of hi- weight which to a great extent accounts for the wonderful rlivthm and accuracy of his stroke;* for in it Bes the great aeoret of the golf

drive, th? preservation of the ‘centre,*’ if one may use the word, of the golfswing. 'Che truth of this fundamental point will readily he seen on looking at plates xxiv. and xxv. of “Great Golfers.” Two things have led all writers astray in dealing with this matter. Firstly, the player pivots on the inside of the sole o'f the left toe. 'This make- bis contact with the earth look light, although it does not require much mechanical ‘knowledge «to know that that is no indication of the strain thrown upon it. ‘Secondly, the right leg is .stiffened and twisted l , ami this torsional -train is by many, not unnaturally, mistaken for 'weight. Vardon's adjustment of his weight at the top of his swing is very marked. Many years ago I saw a statuette of him at the top of his stroke, and speaking from the fulness of ignorance, F fcaid, “Look where his weight is, all on his left foot. Surely that is very •had form.” Il was not long before I found out that it is of the essence of sound driving to get the weight on to the left at the top of the drive. Vardon, Braid, and 'Caylor are unanimous in this mis-statement. They are also unanimous in saying that in the stance ami address the weight is practically evenly distributed. They are, of course, unanimous in saying one must not move the head by the fraction of an inch in the upward swing. We shall therefor? tie them down to this last 'Well-known golf axiom l»v stretching a wir? taut across tin* line to the hole, •at right angles to it, and within a quarter of an inch of their necks, or the side of their faces. This will not hamper them in driving, but as they must not sway away from the hole we shall require Hum to drive, putting their weight on the right feet ami without touching the wire, which is, <y; course, on,the side J'urther fivntr thv-*h<»le. *F<dlowing tlmir- in-t ructrom- it should • be feasible, but they would require to he contortiohi-ts, or suffering?,-from abdominal hyperbiophy, - - to execute* the manoeuvre. It seems thad in this matter-there/ is what the lawyers wi l ! call'a prima facie ca-e foi- the pro-ecut ion. It will be interesting to know wht’t the defence ron-si-ts ,(.f.. bcca.u-e Vardon, i- not alone in -how ing by hi- perfectly-executed strokes the- best condemnation 'of his 1 Un la mentally unsound teaching. \Ve now come to the old, old story of the power of the left, the father of more sli.ces than all the bread-knives in the golf clubs of the world. 'This wonderful delusion has received some very severe knocks during the la-t few years, ’bub with the assistance of such great names as Vardon, Braid, and Taylor it’is small wonder that it lingers on. Right throughout "'rhe Complete (iolfer,” llarry Vardon. by ; implication, supports this utterly unsound idea. At page 12G be says: “This is one of the few shots in golf in which the right hand is caljed upon to do most of the work. . . .” And again at page 92: “It is necessary that in the making of this stroke the right hand should do more work than the left, and therefore-<he <Tub shbiih! be held rather more loosely by the left hand than by its partner.” Now here.'doe- Vardon explicitly uphold the idea of the left hand and arm being the--dominating factor in the golf {stroke. Ft is merely by inferential references such as tho a e quoted that -we can gather that he gives his adherence to this t ime honoured fallacy: but it is interest ihg to notice that in tin* whole of “The Complete Golfer,” although there are “few shots in golf in which the right hand is called upon 'to do •most of the work,” the famous author does not specific rlly <l?-erihe any one stroke in which the left hand is called Upon to d<» most of the work. Neither, so far as J can remember, doe- either Braid or Taylor. - . We iiui-t, howeyer. -re what they have 4o Kay on I he ,-illqret, for il is of scarcely Jess importance Io the game’ than the all important matter of the distribution of weight, 'l'axlor qi.t ]»age 193 of ‘Taylor on Golf,” says: ‘My contention is simply this: that the grasp <4 the right hand upon the club must be sufficiently firm

in itself to hold it steady and true, but it must not 1h« allowed on any account to overpower the left. The idea is that the latter arm amist exercise the predominating influence iiy every stroke that may be played. As regards my own position in the matter, my grip with either hand is very firm, yet ( should liesitate before J told every golfer to go and do likewise. Well, if taking a very firm grip with both hands had won me four open championships, and innumerable other prizes, 1 should have faith enough in it to tell others to “Go and do likewise.” Even without these trilling incidents F have no hesitation in supplying what Taylor leaves, ami saying most emphatically. “Go thou and do likewise.” If it is good enough for Taylor it will be good enough for you. It is the only proper way, and you may observe, although he “plumps” plainly for the timehallowed fetich, it is evident that he does not carry it out in his own play. Speaking of the grip. Braid says: “F advise a very pronounced tapering of the grip—'thick at- it he top of the handle and thin at the bottom, for it is the left hand that has to grip hard ami tight, and the right which l.as to hold the club delicately to guide it.” The truth is that the grip, as in 'Caylor’s case, should be very firm with both hands, and, as a matter of the very best golf, should never relax until the ball has gone on its way. r i’he correct, apportionment of power w'ould never have entered into anyone's head but for the mischievous fetich of the left. Dame Nature in all other games and sports attends to that with unerring discretion. If we trust her, she will do the same in golf. Braid is much less pronounce I in his adherence to the fetich of the left than

many other writers. At page 55 of “How to. Play Golf” be -ays: “A word about the varying pressure of th? grip with each hand. In the address th? left hand should just In* squeezing the handle of the club, imt not so tightly as if on? were afraid of losing it. The right hand ishouhl hold , the dub a little mor? loosely. the left hand should hold firmly all the way through The right will open a little at the top of th? swing to allow the club to mov-i* easily, but it should automatically tighten itself in the downward swing.” Thisi is; in effect, subscribing to the fetich of .the left, and in. “Advanced Golf” in one place Braid almost does it again. Jn a matter of opinion such as this one hesitates a little io put one’s own ideas again-t Braid’s. It is quite different in a serious error such as our first, point an error which can be deimmstrated beyond the possibility of refutation; but if this really is Braid's method of .using his hands on his club, all 1 can say. is: “Give me Taylor’s, ami let me grip firmly, with botih hands.” 'This fetich of the left is really, when one considers it siuiously, quite an astonishing dehi-ion. Why. in golf alone should the infiTio,)- hand be promoted to the captaincy? .M’hut my-terious power ■does it po-ses- in golf which it lack* in cricket or hock<*y‘ or any other twohanded game? < ' • » As a matter of Lifd.. the left hand at the moment of impact is in a singularly ineffective position -w far as regards th * <|evelopin<*n*t of power. 'l’he back of tin* V list is towards the hob*. 'l’he, real power of t)ie left eomes in al tin* begin , uing of the’ doxynward swing when the Weight of (be .club is across the wrist ill the direction in which it bends h*a*t.

Thad, is where it does moat of its but the right is in almost the same position, and is always master of the stroke. 4 ! * Here is a question or two which one may ask disciples of the professors who preach the penver of the left: — “If the left hand is .the more important, why do the naturally left-handed not retain their advantage?” “Why do they get left-handed dubs and reduce themselves to a level with itheir right-handed brethren?” Of course, the mere idea, when it is analysed, is stupid, but it still obtains with countless golfers, and undoubtedly does much to injure the game of thouands of players. A famous professional one? tried th> relative power of the left and right by driving a number of balls with each hand separately, but in exactly the same manner as they fall to the impact in the ordinary drive, lie found that xvit'h tire left he was comparatively useless, both as to length ami direction, while with the right he could drive nearly as far and as straight as xvilli berth together. Any golfer xvho has been a slave to the fetich of the left will l»c xvelladvised to follow' Taylor’s -method - grip hard with both hands, and leave DameNature to apportion the xvorkWe have now to consider the question of putting, a matter of the most vital importance. Let me again quot-o the triumvirate. llarry Vardon says: “The fact is that there is more individuality in putting than in any other department of golf, and it is absolutely imperative that this individuality should be allowed to have its xvay. I believe seriously that every m-an has had a particular kind of putting ‘method awarded to him by nature, and when ‘he putts exactly in it his way

h? will do well, and xvhen he departs A’ioin his natural system lie will niisa the Jong ones—and the short ones, too.’* If A lardon holds this belief, we can readily understand that there is much individuality in the putting of his pupils. J. IL lay lor (page 83 in “Taylor on Golf”) says: “And here I may say at once it is an absolute impossibility to teach a man how to putt.” Again (page 243) “ln all other departnieinls of the game I am of (•pinion, as' I have previously stated, that the strikes may be taught, but in putting, never.” > Braid, in “How- to Play Golf,” at pago 119. says: “It happens, unfortunately, that concerning one department of Iho game that will cauae the golfer some anxiety from time to time, and more often when he is experienced than when he is not. neither I nor any other player can offer any words of instruc tion such as, if closely -acted upon, would give the same successful results as the advice tendered under other heads ought to do. This is in regard to putting.” Again, on the same page, he says: “It is impossible to ‘tell a man what do <l<> in order to putt the ball into the hole, lie must find out for himself, and mak? him-4*lf into as good a putter as he can by constant practice”; and “really great putters are probably born, and n f *t

If we allow two strokes on every green, and it is a good player who keeps that average or below it, it will be quite evident that putting is quite ‘half the game of golf—and it is •the’niopt important half. We are tlu*n,2 confronted by the* confession of the thre<J greatest players in the world that they

are quite, unable to 'teach half of the gamp which they play so well. Worse dhan this, indeed, is their statement. They say that putting, the very foundation of golf, and the half of it, cannot be taught. I am sorry to have to say it, but this, to put it quite shortly, is sheer nonsense. It is more than nonsense. It is very wrong to publish such discouraging and false doctrine. Putting is the easiest thing in golf to teach. I would take many a man or woman who never could play golf, let alone ordinary golf, ami convert them into deadly putters. It is so simple and so easy to teach. This is no mere effort of journalism. T am always jirepared to stand by what I say. I have had many cases, and shall have many more. Let me give an stancePeople who read my books somehow’ seem to, think they have a personal claim on me as well. I like the idea, although it means a considerable amount of lost time. Some time ago a member of the Hendon <>’ulf Club, Mr. Philip IL Thornton, came to me.. He had read "Modern Golf,” ami was in trouble about his putting. He told me that his professional, certainly sinning in the very best of company, had said: ’’Don’t come to me for putting. I can’t teach you how to putt.” 1 gave him a putter and a ball, and said: “Putt.” He putted, and I show him his faults and explained the utter simplicity of th a putt. He tells me that now when he lakes more than two he is seriously annoyed with himself, whereas formerly it was the usual thing. He also says that his proportion of "ones” has gone up very considerably.

Any good professional should be abb 1 to teach putting. There is no harm in allowing one’s pupil to assert his individuality. if he is any good he is bound to do tlhart, but it must be done through and in obedience to the fixed ami innumerable laws which govern such a simple .mechanical operation as rolling a ball over a green into a hole. I can assure golfers ami would-be goiters that the mystery and difficulty of putting has been, and is, most stupidly and unwarramt a bl y ex agg o rated. Braid himself .is the living refutation

of the silly fable. ’Hie first time I saw him putting he was trying a •“Vaile” putter for me at Waltoii-on-Heath, lie came right down on the ball, and finished on it he green well forward of where it lay—a veritable chop o.r “push” putt. Without a momenta thought, I said: “Do you always putt like that?” “Aye,” said Braid, in his deliberate way, “and it’s the best way.” By this time I had remembered about those open championships, so I said nothing, but put -in a lot of thinking instead. In those days Braid was, not unnaturally, a very bad putter for a man of his class. His methods were wrong. There is only one correct way to putt for all practical purposes and that is to roll them up. Braid has now found this out. Listen to what he says in “Adxaneed Golf,’’ page 146: “But it is also the fact that a man who was not a born putter, and whose putting all through his golfing youth was of the most moderate quality, may by study ami pra -tire make himself a putter who need fear nobody on any putting green. I may suggest that I have proved this in my own etwe”; and he has. lie has given up the utterly unsound delusion about putting with drag, and rolls them up sweetly and truly- 'That is'about all there is "to it,” as our American liiends say; but it represents a “whole heap of strokes.’* Braid taught himself how’ to putt. I for one refuse to believe that he cannot tenth others. So can X’ardon and Taylor, but in this idea, as in the u’ther important matters which 1 have referred to, they hav* bi their published work followed the thought expressed in othev works too closely instead of itaking care merely to express their own personal convictions. 'l'he result in any case is the same. These great playcis are commit led to many unsound statements, cah ulated to seriously retard the development of the game. I maintain that as a matter of duty to the game they love ami adorn so well, it is “on them'’ to justify their teaching or to withdraw it. 'This is not a matter of \ ardon, Braid, and Taylor \» rsus Vaile. None of them mattery a pin's point in comparison with the importance of the issue involved, which, simply put, is the truth as regards the

absolute fundamental principle* nf the game, and, after all, nothing matters but the truth.

» *N.B. Ihis <luh is now in company with the Schenectady, barred at St. Andrews.