The Haskell

[Jeff Mingay]

When the rubber-cored Haskell ball gained wide acceptance about 1902, there were few great examples of golf architecture in America.

Looking at a timeline, it appears Oakmont was the first "major" golf course development post-Haskell. Was Oakmont indeed the first influencial American golf course design to be completed with the Haskell in mind?

And, which early American courses were significantly altered (lengthened) following the introduction of the Haskell?

Garden City and Myopia Hunt C. come immediately to mind as existing layouts that would have, presumably, lost some of their inherent challenge come the longer rubber-cored ball in 1902.

Ironically, golf finds itself in another "Haskell situation" today.

[Rick Shefchik]

Jeff,

That's an interesting perspective on the current discussion. Are you suggesting that, rather than entering a potentially disastrous time for golf, we are instead looking at a golden opportunity to build the next great generation of golf courses, designed for the longer ball?

If so, I'm not saying you're wrong. It does occur to me, however, that land was cheaper and more plentiful 100 years ago, and golfers as a class were more affluent. Regardless of the aesthetics of the longer, bigger course, I would think the biggest obstacle to a new Golden Age is the cost.

[TEPaul]

Aside from the Haskell I've never quite understood the evolution of Oakmont. The course was built very early--I believe it was William Fownes father who built it--and then William Fownes (a very good golfer--US Am Champ) who died in 1949 or 1950 spent many years perfecting it with its famous super Emil Loeffler.

It also seems that although the haskell was much longer it might have been harder to control in the beginning and many of the good players took a while to use it.

From a part of Max Behr's writing it seems at the time the Haskell came in there was no control on equipment at all and a golfer could use whatever he could find or come up with.

It seems that Behr was suggesting that the regulatory bodies needed to institute rules and regs to control the ball at that point that maximized a golfer's skill without dominating "nature". It appears Behr may have thought the haskell ball had already exceeded that delicate balance of skill vs nature.

[The Lido Shuffle]

"True, nearly all these coures were laid out before the advent of the Haskell ball, adding as it does about twenty yards to wood and iron. Now, while the Haskell ball has marred many excellent holes, it has made just as many indifferent ones excellent. The majority of greens committees have failed to realize this and have expended their energy in devising means to lengthen every hole. It would be much better if they would shorten some, lengthen some and leave the others alone."

--Charles Blair Macdonald, Scotland's Gift--Golf

[Tony Ristola]

Jeff:  Have to agree.  Bethpage, Riviera, Torrey and Augusta illustrate the future unless something is done.  

If color TV and Augusta could motivate historic links courses to overfeed and overwater in an attempt to Augustacize them, what chance do North American courses have against this latest plague?  

Rocket-ball is in its infancy...celebrated inland courses are obsolete...it's time to move forward one way or another, and every day wasted by USGA inaction moves courses closer to the scalpel.  Some may survive as championship tests with "improvements", but much will be relegated to the history books.  Just look at what the USGA is leaning towards.

  

[Dan King]

The Haskell was introduced in the U.S. in 1898 only ten years after the birth of American golf in Yonkers.  While I've read that there were 1,600 golf clubs in the U.S. by 1900 (Each golf club doesn't equate a golf course, but supposedly there were 1,000 courses in New York by 1900) most of these courses were rudimentary.

However, the U.K. had numerous established courses. I think it would be much more interesting to look closely at how these courses were affected by the introduction of the Haskell.

For the better players, initially the Haskell didn't give them much added length. There were complaints that the Haskell flew too high for the better players and they had to work on shots to keep the ball lower. The Haskell was a huge change for the beginning golfer, making it easier to get the ball air born.

In 1902, Golf Illustrated in the U.K. sent a questionnaire to leading amateurs and one of the questions was "In your opinion, does the rubber-filled ball spoil the present courses, and, if so, in what particulars, and what remedies do you propose?"

Charles Hutchins (Had won the amateur that year using the new ball):
"I do not think courses are ruined. What you gain in length from the tee you are liable to lose in control around the greens."

Horace Hutchinson:
"Present courses are quite long enough and difficult for me, even with rubber-filled balls.
N.B. Your queries, do not, in my opinion, touch the great point in which Haskells make the game easier -- that is, in the greater ease with which they are able to get up and away from indifferent lies..."

J.F. Laidlaw:
"Not much experience as yet...They certainly make the courses easier...next year  records will be lower all round the country."

Mure Ferguson:
"Present golf courses are spoilt by the new ball and, if further improvements are contemplated, it will ruin the game."

Robert Maxwell (Will go on to win the 1903 and 1909 Amateur Championship):
"The ball has spoiled some courses more than others.."
Maxwell thought that the ball should be standardized: "One would hate to see courses like St. Andrews, Hoylake and Prestwick altered out of recognition."

S.H. Fry (Runner-up at the 1902 Amateur using the new ball)
Does not think that it spoils courses.

H.H. Hilton:
"You can not spoil a really good links. The putting is more difficult. I think that it is a pity the rubber-filled ball was ever introduced."

L. Balfour Melville (Senior R&A member):
"The game is much equalized between the poor and good golfers: the ball is apt to spoil the present courses. The golf ball should be regulated."

Edward Blackwell (Senior R&A member):
Did not think it spoiled the courses.

John Low (Senior R&A member and member of the Rules of Golf Committee):
"The ball is evil to the game."

Golf Illustrated in 1903 said, "The rubber core presents Green Committees with a problem. At greens where Nature has not given adequate supply of properly placed bunkers around the green to stop the topped ball reaching it. Flat pot bunkers do not do this. The first duty of the bunker is to stop the topped ball and ensure the topper loses a stroke. A bunker with a raised bank would be effective, but ugly-looking, like rifle butts. Is there a middle way which will avoid the Irish bank type of bunker, so offensive to the eye."

This all comes from David Stirk's Golf: History and Tradition. Somewhere around here I have some books about the history of St. Andrews, with scores from various member tournaments and changes to the course. I'll look for those.

Dan King

"I found very little difference in the length of drive between the Haskell and gutta balls; perhaps they run further, but certainly don't carry as far. They are also more difficult to stop when approaching and on the putting green are very liable to jump out of the hole."
  --James Braid

[Dan King]

One thing I just found while looking for something else:

"The wound rubber ball was first used in the 1902 Open by only a few players, including the eventual winner Alex Herd; in 1903 almost every player was using it. The Open Champions’ scoring average in the ten years prior to 1902 was 78.5, for the period 1902-1926 it fell to 75.1."
http://www.ruleshistory.com/clubs.html

Dan King

"The [Haskell] ball is being steadily improved and the results on play are alarming. There is little doubt the R&A will have to legislate in the near future. They, undoubtedly do spoil holes that are perfect length for the gutty. The Haskell's ability to bound along and jump hazards serves to place the second-class player on a par with the crack player. The way to discunt this advantage would be to lengthen golf courses -- a very big undertaking and expensive, and which will be little use if the ball were to then further improve."
 --Golf Illustrated, 1903

[The Lido Shuffle]

"The architects have done many absurd things in order to get yardage, but the blame does not wholly rest upon them. That the par of a hole should depend upon its length is in part responsible, but the long flying ball now manufactured is the chief culprit. A hole of about 600 yards will occasionally be reached by two Mitchell's best shots, and these days there are hitters of almost equal power. Of course the ball has made such distances possible, and unless some regulation is devised, the ball will force us on and on in this mad race for yardage."

Robert Hunter, The Links, copyright 1926

[Dan King]

C.B. Macdonald, quoting Robert Hunter from 1926, writes:
"Of course the ball has made such distances possible, and unless some regulation is devised, the ball will force us on and on in this mad race for yardage."

And the regulations were put in place by the USGA in 1942.

Dan King

"The rubbercore balls are not calculated to test golf on our present courses to the same extent at gutta percha balls."
 --R&A Rules of Golf Committee in 1903 (recommending the rubbercore ball be outlawed. The R&A did not ratify the recommendation.)

[The Lido Shuffle]

  "The new standard golf ball has eliminated  from the top-notch ranks the mechanical golfer of the past and the skilled shotmaker will now reap his deserved reward. The game was becoming too stereotyped with the old ball. The former ball did not place enough of a premium on a well-hit shot. The sluggers were getting such distances off the tee that they had nothing but easy pitches for second shots. Once they perfected this one method of approach, the scored consistently well.
   With the present ball, the skilled shotmaker can play golfers who have the ability to hit long tee shots and then hit their next shot by merely judging the distance and using the required club. I have seen most of the top-ranked golfers at Pinehurst this winter, and the ones who are winning titles now are adjusting their game to fit the changed conditions. On the other hand, some of the amateurs who formerly played in the low 70's at Pinehurst were in the 80's this winter because they really were not top-notch golfers and the new ball showed up their deficiencies...
   ...The new ball will accomplish its purpose if the golfers will just give it a trial. At present, they are using it as an alibi. They are kidded into thinking that they were 75 shooters because the old ball did not penalize sufficiently their half-missed shots. These same golfers today cannot break 80 because they are mechanical golfers. Instead of trying to perfect their game, they blame the ball. It's easier...
   ...This ball is also affected more definitely by conditions. Against the wind, in a crosswind, or in a following wind, the ball will act differently, and it is necessary to use some judgement to play this ball...
    ...The new ball has raised the standard of the game, and those with the ability to become skillful will be rewarded for their efforts in the joy of their accomplishment.
   The golfer with one shot in his bag will get nowhere in the future."

Golf Has Never Failed Me, The Lost Commentaries of Legendary Golf Architect Donald J. Ross, exact date of quote not noted, although Ron Whitten notes in the introduction that a manuscript was written by Donald Ross before World War I and forms the basis of the book with supplemented Donald Ross commentaries added.