I am on the Board of a match play event founded in 1935. We draw a field in four age divisions from a good portion of southwest Virginia. Our former champions are nearly all lifelong amateurs, some of whom have gone on to win our event in multiple age divisions. We visit a good rota of courses and will be celebrating our 75th year by contesting our championship at Ballyhack in July.
During a recent breakfast, a fellow Board member and I were discussing the virtues of amateurism and lifelong enjoyment of the game. He shared a statement by Richard Tufts, familiar to many of you I'm sure, which reads:
"The work that I have done has been for amateur sport, and I hope you won't mind if I leave you with my creed of amateurism. Amateurism, after all, must be the backbone of all sport-- golf or otherwise. In my mind an amateur is one who competes in a sport for the joy of playing, for the companionship that it affords, for health-giving exercise, and for relaxation from more serious matters. As part of this light-hearted approach to the game, he accepts cheerfully all adverse breaks, is considerate of his opponent, plays the game fairly and squarely in accordance with its rules, maintains self-control, and strives to do his best, not in order to win, but rather as a test of his own skill and ability. These are his only interests, and, in them material considerations have no part. The return which amateur sport will bring to those who play it in this spirit are greater than those any money can possibly buy.”
This spirit certainly applies to our event and to the gents with whom I choose to play. Clearly, the creed no longer applies across the world of professional golf, if it ever did.
If Mr. Tufts' Amateur Creed applied more universally, how would golf course architecture be affected? For one, we probably wouldn't worry about par or distances as much as we do.
The Honors Course uses Mr. Tufts' creed as a guidepost. What clubs or courses particularly espouse the Creed? How does such a philosophy manifest itself among players and the golf course itself?
It might be said that the attitude or outlook associated with playing golf for a living (which is likely not in accordance with the words above) has adversely affected the game overall, especially in the past twenty years. Note that I am not referring to the skill or ability gap between amateurs and professionals; I'm pointing to the difference in philosophy.
Are architects designing for players who abide by the creed? Are clients asking architects to? Does doing so even make a difference?
I look forward to reflections and responses.
WW