[John Kavanaugh]

Melvyn,

I don't think you realize that many of us choose to play in a manner that makes our friends happy over demanding that they conform to our wants.  I have many friends who can not afford caddies, do not wish to walk and carry or can only afford to play the finest courses once or twice a year.  Isn't it far less important for me to attempt to change my friends than change the game.  I recently played in a tournament representing the town where I live and grew up and my wife asked the same type of questions you seem to ask.  I attempted to explain to her that social and ethical responsibilities far outweigh who or where you play even if I could enjoy myself playing a finer course on that same day.  She like you didn't understand.

I believe that every man and golfer should strive to put the comfort of those he is with over his own desires. 

[Kirk Gill]

I for one have seen a lot more decency and good will and cameraderie on the golf course than in any other gaming/sports venue. I've seen that people want to know and want to learn and are willing to change if the reasons are explained to them.

In the same way that news programs focus on "bad" news, I think we all tend to focus on what is wrong with things, and take for granted all the things that are right. I don't want to come off all pollyanna, but as a person who has played the overwhelming majority of his golf on public/municipal courses, I have to say that characterizing those who play these courses as a bunch of drunken louts who have no respect for the game is unfair and to a degree innacurate.

The haskell ball was supposed to be the ruin of golf, and it did change things, but the game continued, and was the game, Melvyn, that you learned to play. These things you decry may very well not be good for golf, or contribute to the spirit of the game, but don't be so quick to sound the death knell or proclaim a dark age. You're doing the best thing you can do, which is to embody and advocate what you see as the best way for golf to be. The rest of us will either come around, or not, or do something entirely different that none of us can currently anticipate.

[Rory Connaughton]

Melvyn:

  Thank you for the reply.  Please rest assured that I have had the opportunity to read many of your posts.  I'm delighted to read of all that you are doing for the game.  As for what I am doing, I would be happy to share with you offline. Feel free to contact me.

Frankly, I admire your passion and share many of your ideals.  I also appreciate that you may, from time to time, employee a certain level of hyperbole in an effort to enhance the position that you wish to advocate.  I am afraid, however, that many of the excellent points you make are lost in the hyperbole.  The circumstances you describe in your initial post do exist and are regrettable and should not be tolerated.  They are not commonplace nor do they reflect the overall state of the game or those playing it.

        All the best.

[Andy Troeger]

Boorish and otherwise poor behavior is a human problem. Certainly it affects golf as it does any other activity, but I'm not sure that makes it golf's fault. It can be difficult to control. There are segments of the golf market that cater to this "crowd," but I think its pretty minimized overall. Its also pretty easy to avoid generally. Its unfortunate that it exists at all, but unfortunately I don't see a lot that's going to change.

Melvyn, you see the problems with golf as being more severe than I do--perhaps because you have something to base them against. Or perhaps I'm just an optimist. There are trends I don't care for--but if golfers dislike them they don't survive. If the majority of golfers do like them then I'm not sure its my right to stop them--like it or not. The governing bodies have that responsibility, whether or not they actively control anything.

[TEPaul]

Melvyn:

I can't figure out if you're complaining about just the courses you're familiar with over there or all of golf.

If you're just talking about courses over there you know and perhaps play maybe you might have some chance of doing something about it but if you're talking about all golf everywhere, forget it---golf is way too big and international a game, at this point, to try to turn it back into just one thing or just something like it once was over there.

[Bill_McBride]

How things are to be done, if at all, is why I posted this topic.

Melvyn

It has been quite some time since landed gentry golfed over common ground, prepared by your ancestors, with tradesman carrying their clubs and I'm sure bottles, under their armpits. I doubt many involved were in it solely for the love of the game; namely participating to secure a livelyhood for their families. How exactly have things changed in these days? I had no problem paying 25 pounds to play your beloved Old Course on my honeymoon in 1986; I do however, balk at the 175 pound green fee that is now the norm. Feel free to make lowering the non-resident green fee at the Home of Golf your personal crusade to better the game! I wish you luck in your endevour.

Pete, I think TOC today is actually "only" 125 pounds..

[Brian_Ewen]

Pete, I think TOC today is actually "only" 125 pounds..

No Bill , "today" it is £64 .

[Anthony Gray]

  I would say that those of us that have golfed GB & I and the US agree that the approach to the game is different.

  Not all courses are the same, but Melvyn's observations are correct with many US course. I personally belong to one.

  Many golfres in the US use golf to escape the stresses of life. The course is a place where you go to unwind. Unwinding at times is more important than the gentelmans game of golf. This unwinding includes consumption of large amounts of alcohol and driving carts like a bat uot of hell.

  No absolutes. The GB & I approach is more of enjoyment of nature and the game. This does exsist in the US in many places but I am sure we all have seen a lack of respect for the gentelmenly game increase over the past several years.

   I have personally had to deal with ungentelmanly golfers at Pinehurst and Bandon. Even on this site at times there can be a lack of tolerance for others that have differing opinions. The golfing faternity on this site should have a stronger bond than it does.

  Anthony

 


 

[Bill_McBride]

Pete, I think TOC today is actually "only" 125 pounds..

No Bill , "today" it is £64 .

But in June it was 125.........ouch.  As I recall we paid 65 for the other courses - New and Jubilee.

[John Burzynski]

All:

Remember...it is only a game.   Sometimes I think we take ourselves too seriously.  

The beauty of golf is that it has rules, structure and etiquette, but also that a golfer can pick and choose how they play the game under the rules and convention of play.  You can choose a persimmon club or a metal driver; both conform to the rules, and although one may give a golfer more advantage, you still have the choice.   You can walk or ride at 90%+ of all courses; the 'all ride' courses really are few and far between, and most of them are out of necessity due to length between holes or terrain.  Again though, I have the choice not to play the course if I don't like their policies.

I am not a big fan of carts, but they are here to stay at most courses.  The money that courses make off of them, the demand for them by most golfers, casual and serious, dictates that carts will be around for a long, long time.  The minority of us who are not big fans of golf carts can yell, scream and stamp our feet all we want, but the carts will still be there most places.  

The only time I take a cart is if the group I am playing with dictates that it be so...normally the odd scramble or business golf usually dictates a cart.   Maybe I don't like it, but I am not the ONLY PERSON on the course, and I try to squelch the selfishness that I feel by wanting to walk all of the time.  Usually, a few beers and 18 in a cart turns out to be enjoyable, maybe not the same enjoyment as walking, but enjoyable nonetheless.

Many sports have these equipment issues.  Baseball has wood v. aluminum bats, and even ash v. maple bats.  Tennis isn't seriously played with wooden rackets anymore, and everything from hockey sticks to football equipment have evolved over the years (when was the last time the game was played with leather helmets, as my 82 year old ex-NFL playing great uncle still semi-seriously laments?).  

Things change, debatable sometimes for the good or bad, but they change.  Golf at its core still is player vs. the course, player vs. player, a couple of hours spent competitively and at the same time playing a game and enjoying the company of others or of nature.  Sure, there are a few louts, drunks and loudmouths who don't respect the game of golf or others, but no more than in the softball league I used to play in,  and probably far fewer in golf than in other sports.  

I would love to go back to persimmon clubs (with hopefully a little more forgiveness!), steel spikes, no range finders, and walking all courses with very few carts (at 40, I can't remember a time without carts), but it simply ain't happening.   I always have the choice to use persimmon clubs, no range finders and walk, but am not selfish enough to force that on others, or deny them what is usable under common convention and the rules of golf.    

Dark Ages?  Nah.  Different?  Sure.  Still enjoyable by all....YES!

[Anthony Gray]

  John,

  Great points. But it is more than just a game. It is a gentelmens game. I have even promised myself to keep my pants on from now on.

  Anthony

[Rob Rigg]

Golf has clearly split into two different games.

On a previous post I suggested they were Golf and Cart Golf but that is probably not granular enough.

There is traditional golf and modern golf.

Traditional golf may be based on "selective hindsight" but it would seem to encapsulate much of what Melvyn discusses in terms of adherence to the rules and the "essence of the game". Walking, potentially using persimmon or hickory clubs, match play, no boozing on the course, a strict adherence to the rules of the game and playing in the "spirit" of the games founded are all traits of this type of golf.

Modern golf is an excuse to get out of the house and relieve stress (as has been mentioned already). It is probably played with a cart, the latest equipment, range finders, cigars and an ample supply of beer. The etiquette is for shit and people speak about 20 decibels higher than they need to. The rules apply as long as no one catches you cheating and GCA is an after thought. It is a 4 (to 6) hour break from reality.

Some on this site probably wish that there was only traditionlal golf but that is not realistic.

Modern golf is the foundation of the industry, certainly in America, and is here to stay. It puts food on the table for thousands of people and will probably continue to digress farther and farther from the roots of the game.

For those of us who would like to live in the traditional golfing world, we can be thankful that places like St Andrews, Lahinch, Bandon and Ballyneal, etc. survive to allow us to partake in that version of the game. If we cannot afford those courses then we have to suck it up and deal with the modern golfing universe.

At least some golfers live in the middle . . .

[Rich Goodale]

Somebody has to step up to argue for the rights of the boozers!

Cart Riding + Booze= possibly BAD
Walking/Trolling + Booze = probably NOT BAD

That being said, some my best playing companions were and are inclined to imbibe during a round, whether riding or otherwise.  In that regard, "no harm, no foul" is the golden rule.  I must admit, however, that those who seem to prefer Old Daw Anderson and his ginger beer to a modern Cart Babe serving a properly constructed and chilled Gibson, I say, VIVE LA DIFFERENCE!"

[Melvyn Morrow]

Thanks for the comments. Many ignored the topic or did not read clearly thus responded accordingly - which IMO helps to diminish the quality of this site. But some very good honest opinions and feelings (exactly what I was after) which is why this site can be so good at times.

There is a problem with golf IMHO, but perhaps many do not want to acknowledge it or are keen on a directional change.

I realise that carts are here to stay, but we need to control their use – by control we can minimise the cart tracks and perhaps dissuade the beer carts from venturing on to a packed course with youngsters and the over 60’s.

If there is a will there is a way, as the saying goes (Sexy Beast film). But again its down to Will, he seemed to be alive and kicking in the late 1770’s. Expect he is having a rest in one of the cart parks.

My intention is to try and awaking the reasons why you started playing golf in the first place. But looking at the response I have failed, the only will I see is that of making the game easy, of enjoying the booze and carting. Any comment, constructive or with the best intention is dismissed as a ranting of an anti American. Again for the record I am not anti American.

One thing that puzzles me is if you are so content with your game why bother to travel over to GB and play our courses. Please do not misunderstand me, I openly welcome anyone who wants to play our courses and in fact I would encourage more to visit. Not just TOC, Fife, Dornoch, Cruden Bay but Bridge of Allan, Tain, Brora, Luffness New, Strathpeffer Spa, Cullen, Nairn, Askernish and many, many more. There are a great number of smaller clubs with very low Green Fees.

I am happy in general with the courses I have access to. But I am concerned with the future of the game. I would love to keep it a walking game (with facilities for those who need carts to have carts), ban No Walking and allow walking as an option. Technology needs to be totally involved as I believe that consistency is required in clubs/balls. Yes introduce new designs but the underlining factor the club nor ball will allow constant increase in ball travel. Will (he’s here again) we ever actually know if we have improved or it’s down to the equipment. If it’s the equipment then am I not cheating myself? As for distance aids, we have just got into a comfort zone with them, and we all know that we don’t need them, yes it may take sometime to regain that eye brain distance co-ordination, but it will return.

Money is why the game is suffering and will continue to suffer in the harder times ahead in part due to the current financial market and the global environmental problems rapidly building. Money fuelled the game and the lets make golf easy so we can make more money fraternity have added their slow working poison to the overall mix.

Will those who like it easy stay with the game in hard times, will they be there when their clubs/courses need them to survive? I simply do not know but would hazard a guess and say No.

I do not want to see people unemployed. I do not want to see courses closed So why not look at the game today and ask for the opinions and thoughts of the people who say they care and love the game for constructive ideas and an open discussion. Our game to a major part rest in the hands or minds of the designers, who I am certain, have many interesting ideas and thoughts. Without letting out trade secrets are they willing to participate in this topic, looking at the response I would say No. 

Out of all those that read my topic just a hand full of real responses has been generated that might get a debate going, perhaps I should have called my topic “The Dark Ages of GCA.com”.

I shall bow out of this topic and debate in the hope that apathy does not win.

Melvyn     

[Mike Sweeney]

Melvyn,

It is Thanksgiving morning and the high school football game is approaching, so this is a quick response. I honestly don't understand what you are asking or want us to do.

I will give you one story of why golf can be many things to many people. I played a round of golf in September with a Member of THE Royal St Georges Golf Club and a couple that really don't play much golf. It was an outing run by a bunch of Irish guys in Yonkers (real Irish guys, not some ancestral thing like me) who have basically adopted my son's school for Autism because they are salt of the earth guys. None of them have any connection to the school, they just got involved. It was played at the architecturally lacking Sprain Lake GC in Westchester. There were carts, there was drinking, there were probably a few scores posted from fiction and the dinner back at the Irish Pub in Yonkers was really the point.

Now if two golf snobs (Royal St Georges member and me) can find a place in our golfing lives for this type of event, I would suggest that you should be more open to modern golf. I do not want to do it everyday, but if I can't do it once in a while, then the problem is with me and not golf.

15,000+ courses and clubs over here in the USA, you can pretty much find what you want and need.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Melvyn,

One of the things I think we get into here is an statistically invalid assumption as to what golf costs the majority of Americans to play, because this site focuses on the best of the best typically.

If I drove down around Dallas this morning, I assure you that the vast majority of courses are public and the vast majority of those are in the moderate price range.  Rack rate is from $15-$35, which even at the high end, is less than the $4-8 I paid as a kid when I started playing golf in 1967.  Many seniors, kids, and residents of the cities that own these courses play for far less on annual passes that cost them as little as a few bucks per round.

And, Dallas was home to Robert Dedman and still hosts Club Corp, the inventor of the everyman's country club.  There must be a few dozen clubs that cost about $1000 to join and about $3-400 per month for unlimited golf.

As I think about it, while distance finders are available, I have played less than five times with someone who uses them. I doubt most seniors who play the courses above do.  Guys who play a lot of different courses infrequently and/or who play relatively infrequently and can't hone their judging skills use them more, so it makes their style of golf a bit more enjoyable.  Ditto for the on cart GPS, I can only think of a few courses that have them.

I could drive by the first course in the south that voluntarily allowed blacks to play in a segregation era, and then drive by a park that had originally been laid out as a black only, and quite substandard course.  I can also marvel that men of color (Tiger and Vijay) now top the world golf rankings, not to mention Sergio, since golf is so international at the top (and bottom) of the spectrum.

As Mike says above, you can find golf at almost any price and quality level.  Its different in America, but that started happening from the very beginning as we as a country had a need to take and adapt things and make them uniquely American.  Yeah, carts are here to stay.  So are beer carts.  And golf is a lot easier than it used to be in some ways, but the average handicap never seems to drop, so getting the ball in the hole hasn't gotten any easier.
As I said, American favors a culture of convenience.

[Mike_Young]

Melvyn,
Happy Thanksgiving.
I try to break it in to two groups, golfers and those who play golf.  Basically if the business of golf relied on just the "golfers" it would be a much smaller industry.  If they add the "those who play golf" guys then they have a market that is a much easier sell than just the "golfers" and that is where we are today.  In the US the golf course is used for so many things other than golf and thus the "those who play golf" group.....it is a mainstay for doing business and many learn the game just well enough to be able to join a few clubs and conduct business.....many of these people are members at elite private golf clubs and could care less about the golf...it is the exclusivity that they desired so that they could attract that client to one place where possibly their competition could not....  and because it became the game of the "captains of industry" American business saw a chance to market much more than in the past..... golf courses were built not as profit centers but as amenities to sell home lots in upscale communities yet the developer did not allocate a portion of the sales price back toward the cost of the golf course.....leaving it to be absorbed by the "members",  The developer would sell 90% of the development and surprise the membership by informing them that the golf club was now theirs and he was finished supporting it.     This was possible because of the group we call "those who play golf".   Since so many of "those who play golf" enjoyed the atmosphere of the golf course and of course the clubhouse , American ingenuity created the over the top clubhouse and they developed methodology and machinery that would maintain these grounds at almost surreal conditions.  Then we have the  aloofness of the different organizations in golf whereby we have increased the cost of building/maintaining a course to unacceptable levels because these organizations have convinced the "those who play golf " that it has to be at a particular level or it is wrong.   Be cause of "those who play golf" the marketing ability of the PGA Tour became huge and purses , retirement plans made it one of the most, if not the most lucrative professional sport.  The CEO's of many Fortune 500 companies that sponsored these events fall under "those who play golf" category.   
The problem I see in many of our clubs is that they are run by "those who play golf" and not by golfers.  Yet it was golfers who began many of these clubs. And thus the game is seen thru the eyes of "those who play golf".  For instance at our club it is basically run by a few old frat boys who feel they are doing most of the membership a favor by allowing them to subsidize their wants.  And many places are the same.  There is not another place I can think of where a CEO of a profitable company can be made to see and make decisions the way he will make them while on the board of a country club. 
The game of golf is there and can be played at the most basic level on the most basic course and will be enjoyed by the golfer yet "those who play golf" cannot enjoy the game unless it is under conditions that are not affordable unless subsidized by housing or resort businesses.   HOWEVER, "those who play golf" have seen these housing developments with these conditions and they have visited the resorts with the over the top conditions and they bring them back to the home course as the new standards....it's all a "weiner measuring" contest made to compete with the clubs of their business competitors.   They hear that they should "restore" the old place so they head off to the "Old Dead Guy annual meeting" and come back and tell everyone that they have been taught things about golf that we will never see or understand.  Then they find someone that will fix things as they wish (only fixing what they agree with) in the name of the Old Dead Guy only to end up with a 5 million to 10 million cost for a 10 to 15 percent improvement.   The most pleasure you will ever see from many "those who play golf" guys is , after a few drinks,  showing his guest the new locker room or the grill .the speed of the putting green or the new Old Dead Guy" bunker that they wisely brought back to the club....then having that guest "psuedo envy"  "the club" .  All the while the "those who play golf" guy could care about the strategy of his course or the club itself.  They have successfully  integrated resort golf amenities and expectations into our local clubs in a way that cannot be sustained by local memberships.  They are the problem....but if we are to continue with golf in this country the way it has been....it will be them that do it....
And since the great marketing arm of the golf industry knows that and has to have that they will do all that is possible to continue such.

Why did we get here?   I have one thought that always seems to rear it head when I try to analyze this subject.  The Club Manager was not a golfer.... he has been hired for food and beverage expertise.. And has managed to convince so many clubs that golf is not the most important thing at these clubs.  The PGA allowed such to happen by not pursuing GM positions and by so many of the young members entering the profession of golf professional after not being able to make it a professional golfer.  The PGA knows this and I hope they get these clubs and this industry back.  Right now it looks to me like the CMAA and the GCSAA have ganged up on them.   
As for us architects....I don't know where we go from here.....even after having done it for 25 years I often wonder if it should be considered a profession because it is such a limited field and the barriers to entry just a business card, as is often proven on this site.   
As for supts....these guys have made a ton of advancement over the last 30 years.  It is much more ego driven today than 30 years ago.  The knowledge of the last 30 years needs to be used in an economically  efficient manner instead of all out all the time.
The builders......we now have "signature" builders also incase you did not know and they are the best I have seen at convincing a club or owner to spend.....of course they have his ear much more than anyone else on a project because they are there constantly.
We all have egos and when they get mixed we get some projects that just have no chance......
The basics are dirt and grass with ground driven mowers and a clubhouse with white paint and metal lockers....OH  and buick roadmasters and crown vics in the parking lots......we are not going back there in this business....so we have to figure a way......I think the industry is open for suggestions.

[Anthony Gray]

Golf has clearly split into two different games.

On a previous post I suggested they were Golf and Cart Golf but that is probably not granular enough.

There is traditional golf and modern golf.

Traditional golf may be based on "selective hindsight" but it would seem to encapsulate much of what Melvyn discusses in terms of adherence to the rules and the "essence of the game". Walking, potentially using persimmon or hickory clubs, match play, no boozing on the course, a strict adherence to the rules of the game and playing in the "spirit" of the games founded are all traits of this type of golf.

Modern golf is an excuse to get out of the house and relieve stress (as has been mentioned already). It is probably played with a cart, the latest equipment, range finders, cigars and an ample supply of beer. The etiquette is for shit and people speak about 20 decibels higher than they need to. The rules apply as long as no one catches you cheating and GCA is an after thought. It is a 4 (to 6) hour break from reality.

Some on this site probably wish that there was only traditionlal golf but that is not realistic.

Modern golf is the foundation of the industry, certainly in America, and is here to stay. It puts food on the table for thousands of people and will probably continue to digress farther and farther from the roots of the game.

For those of us who would like to live in the traditional golfing world, we can be thankful that places like St Andrews, Lahinch, Bandon and Ballyneal, etc. survive to allow us to partake in that version of the game. If we cannot afford those courses then we have to suck it up and deal with the modern golfing universe.

At least some golfers live in the middle . . .

  Rob,

  Once again you have hit the nail on the head with your observations. Well done.

  Anthony

[Andy Troeger]

Rob,
I think you've identified the two more extreme positions well, but I think most golfers fall somewhere in the middle. Very few value the traditions of the game to the extent that Melvyn does, but the percentage of golfers racing carts with a beer in one hand and a GPS device in the other are just as few (oops--what about the steering wheel!). Obviously I'm exaggerating--but I think people will get the point.

Melvyn,
I think I've said this before, but I don't think golf is in nearly as bad of shape as you do. Perhaps there's a gigantic problem that I just don't see--or perhaps you're making a mountain out of a molehill. I can see two sides to this pretty clearly--those who love the traditions of the game and want to limit the game only to those that value tradition or at the very least are willing to learn and abide by it; and those that would rather welcome anything and everything into the game including some elements that most people would rather leave out. I can see some strengths and weaknesses to both ways of thinking. The ideal solution to me is somewhere in the middle--but that compromise leaves everyone a little annoyed.

I still don't think golf in America or just the modern game in general is in nearly as bad of shape as you think it is--I don't see many of these "no walking" courses around, the majority of golfers aren't drinking on the course, and they don't have GPS devices. Sure there are some idiots out there with poor etiquette that don't understand the game, but I'll take my chances believing there were a fair share of golfing idiots roaming the links in the 1800's as well. That's part of the human condition!

Happy Thanksgiving--lets be grateful for the good aspects of the game, at least for one day!

[Anthony Gray]

  Mike Young,

  Golfers and those who play golf. Well said.

  Anthony

[BCrosby]

Mike -

Good stuff.

There are some people who play golf for the golf. 

And there are some people who play golf mostly for other reasons such that, if those other reasons aren't present, they wouldn't play golf.

Or something like that.

Happy T-day to you and the family.

Bob

[Eric Smith]

Golf has clearly split into two different games.

There is traditional golf and modern golf.

We can always assume many things, but I don't subscribe to the notion of any clear definition amongst those who enjoy playing golf.  It cannot be that simple.  Yes of course there can be two extremes, and using the defining terms you posed will work fine, traditional golf and modern golf.  But so many, I suspect a majority of golfers would fit somewhere in the middle, depending on what specifically defines the two extremes.

In reading many of the views expressed on this site, over many different threads relating to this topic, one could not begin to define traditional golf and/or modern golf without terrific debate on what specific elements would 'make the cut' to be included in defining the two factions.

It is subjective I think.

[Rob Rigg]

Gents,

Totally agreed,

I should have written "Most golfers live in the middle" instead of "At least some golfers live in the middle" - let's be serious here.

Golf, unlike any other game I can think of, has changed drastically over time in almost every area - equipment, course design, carts, the need for yardage information, elaborate club houses, expensive instruction, golf resorts, and so on.

In many way, it is incredible that any semblance of tradition remains, that some people still golf with hickories or persimmons and blades, that many people walk whenever possible and study the original links courses that were created without modern machinery, etc.

Some aspects of golf will continue to get "darker" as they drift farther and farther away from "tradition", but I would argue that sites such as this, the creation of courses in a more minimalistic manner, evans scholarships, the existence of companies like louisville golf and mackenzie golf bags, Bandon  Dunes and other walking only courses/resorts, etc. are positive rays of light in the golfing world that firmly support the fact that "tradition" is alive and well.

At the end of the day every individual has to decide how they want to play the game, and what it means to them. As long as some choose to play "traditional" golf, the spirit of the game will continue to survive in its purest form. And we can be thankful for that.

[Bob_Huntley]

Rob wrote:

"Traditional golf may be based on "selective hindsight" but it would seem to encapsulate much of what Melvyn discusses in terms of adherence to the rules and the "essence of the game". Walking, potentially using persimmon or hickory clubs, match play, no boozing on the course, a strict adherence to the rules of the game and playing in the "spirit" of the games founded are all traits of this type of golf."

When it comes to not using the implements of the game currently available, I must disagree.

Perhaps Melvyn could opine on Old Tom's thoughts of the introduction of the rut iron a hundred or so years ago.

Bob 

[Rob Rigg]

Bob,

I used the term "selective hindsight" because I don't think anyone would ever head out to the local muni with a wood cane and a rock as they did several hundred years ago.

I agree, it would be interesting to get Melvyn's opinion on how the "traditional" game should be played in terms of equipment.

One of the reasons that the majority of the golfing population would land between "traditional" and "modern" is because they have no interest in using hickories, mashies, blades, or even persimmons because it makes the game much more challenging and frustrating.

Of course, if match play, not handicap improvement, was the focus of a round, you could have a blast going head to head with your mates using older equipment! 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()