[Melvyn Morrow]

What do you regard as the special merits of golf? (Part 1 of 2)

This is a question asked by an old Blackheath golfer, who goes on to remark. I said a few days ago to Mr James Tweedie, formerly Secretary of the Royal Liverpool Golf Club, and who for some years has been a resident at Chicago. Being a Scotsman, of course he is accurate. ‘It is essentially’, he said, ‘an open-air game, and, except during a hard frost, may be played all the year round. It is a game for men and women, old and young, and calls into play valuable faculties of mind as well as all the nerves and muscles of the body.  Golf furnishes all the generous excitement of good sport without the necessity of killing any living thing, except, perhaps, petty worries, and  ennui – which frequently are sufficiently alive to remind us that they are as real as a toothache. It is easily get-at-able for busy city men, and demands just enough concentration to divert one’s mind from the life struggle.

To those wise head at GCA.com you may well have realised that the above was from an old article that appeared in April 1890 (and has already been downloaded on to this site) – To assist those who use Rangefinders that’s 120 years ago yet seems to describe a game that I know well, do you?

A second question again taken from said article will follow under another heading

Melvyn

[JESII]

Melvyn,

Two questions:

How do those that use rangefinders ruin the game for you? Now or ever?

Who do you suppose were the first to use caddies?

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jim

Those who use rangefinder do not ruin my game

That is presuming that I use Caddies - which Jim I do not - they are as bad as Rangefinder IMHO by taking away the pleasure of working it out for myself. Like a back seat driver.

My comment re those that use Rangefinder being that they are so use to others or machines doing the work for them it might take them sometime to work out the time scale.

Melvyn

[Michael Dugger]

Melvyn,

I don't understand why you continue to start threads of this sort on a website about GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTURE

So you are related to Old Tom Morris.  That's great.  Bringing more information to the table regarding Old Tom and his GOLF COURSE ARCHITECTURE is a valued contribution. 

However, your sermons about the soul of golf, how golf ought to be played, the essence of the game, the nature of golf in the beginning, golf 200 years ago, etc etc etc are something we are all quite familiar with.

BUT DON'T REALLY CARE TO DISCUSS HERE!!!  Not the place for it.....sorry.

At least I don't give a damn.  I peak in on your threads like I slow down to observe a car wreck... 

[Michael Blake]

yawn

[Melvyn Morrow]

Michael, as always with you it helps if you read the question first which is " What do you regard as the special merits of golf?"

Did I reject your love somewhere in the past, did I say you had a small prick, get off my back and if you do not want to comment or add something useful, don't.

What has OTM to do with this topic?

Get a life Michael, you will live longer.

You keep starting this every time I post but I will not leave, not over you - Again I hold my hand out in friendship hoping for at least some courtesy on this site between the two of us. But I will not hold my breath.

Melvyn     

[Garland Bayley]

It made suitable use of land that was of little use for other things. That land happened to be such that it defined an interesting set of variations on the playing field for the game, thereby enhancing the game as the game enhanced the land.

Dugger

1. This is a global website read by many a passer by.
2. You are perfectly welcome to ignore Melvyn's threads since
3. Your responses are getting redundant and boring.
4. It would be much appreciated if you would start some architecture threads of your own as you have in the past.
5. I am sure the "many a passer by" would prefer such contributions far more than those you seem only to make on Melvyn's threads.

[George Pazin]

I don't really see where a question on the special merits of golf DOESN'T belong on here - seems like said merits have many implications for architecture.

I tend to fall in the "game is about the walk" camp, ala Golf In The Kingdom, which is ironic, as I did not care for the book. For that reason, I place a lot more value on the routing than a lot of others, I suppose.

[Bob_Huntley]

I am at odds with Melvyn here. He seeks the purity of the game from a distant time and way of life that seems pleasing in the tales of old, but was brutally degrading. The working class man in the early nineteenth century was more likely a servant carrying clubs than wielding them.

Melvyn also bemoans the influx of money into the game. It has always been about money. The newspapers of the time would no more print a report of a Challenge Match and its result without mention of the purse than have an inch of wasted space on the page.

I agree with him on walking where able, but this touches on a very personal note. At the moment I can no longer do so but my love for the game and traditions are no less sincere than his.

Golf is a game for all men and all seasons, let the transgressors of purity enjoy that which they do without censor from those with a higher perspective.

After all it is a pastime.


Bob

[Michael Dugger]

Dugger

1. This is a global website read by many a passer by.
2. You are perfectly welcome to ignore Melvyn's threads since
3. Your responses are getting redundant and boring.
4. It would be much appreciated if you would start some architecture threads of your own as you have in the past.
5. I am sure the "many a passer by" would prefer such contributions far more than those you seem only to make on Melvyn's threads.

Way to be a politically correct suck up, Garland.  Frankness is apparently not in your vocabulary.

Okay....I'll play along....be a good little follower rather than a smart-mouthed punk.

Melvyn, just what the hell are you trying to say here, because most of the time I cannot for the life of me understand your ramblings.

Golf is a tremendous game.....a fabulous game that means a lot of things to different people.

The moment you strictly define how it ought to be played is the very moment you castrate it.  

Some enjoy the walk in the park, sucking in fresh air while feeling the heat from the sun on their face.  Maybe they don't keep score, maybe they even improve their lie by kicking their ball out from the long grass from time to time.  They might use a cart because their feet have been giving them trouble and using a skycaddie makes acquiring yardage a much quicker exercise, thus keeping the pace of play brisk.

460cc drivers allow them to keep more balls in play, and means less torque on their body since their swing speed has decreased over time.

I'll tell ya what else is good for petty worries and ennui, it's a tall stiff cocktail at the turn.

I was playing the other day and one of my playing partners launched his drive right into a large flock of birds.  It was a low sizzler...and the bird didn't stand a chance.  We got up there and the bird was dead.  Stone cold killer this guy I was playing with.

So your quote is sort of misleading.  Golf doesn't furnish all the generous excitement of good sport without the necessity of killing any living thing.

I saw a dead snake on a golf course once too.  Just sayin'      

[George Pazin]

I agree with him on walking where able, but this touches on a very personal note. At the moment I can no longer do so but my love for the game and traditions are no less sincere than his.

Golf is a game for all men and all seasons, let the transgressors of purity enjoy that which they do without censor from those with a higher perspective.

After all it is a pass-time.


Bob

These wise words strike home for me, I should clarify my position a bit. For me, the walk is a metaphor for the journey, the challenge. It also happens to fit in a literal sense for me personally, as I greatly prefer a good walk to a great ride, but I certainly would never begrudge anyone who chooses to avail himself of a cart.

 

[Mike Demetriou]

Bob, I simply cannot craft a response that would equal yours. But I concur entirely.

Melvyn's frequent diatribes about the old days completely ignore the blatant hypocrisy they represent.  You need not travel back to the pre-Edison era to find dramatic evidence that one critical component of Mr. Tweedie's missive is complete horse-%#!@. It is absurd to quote a passage stating that "[golf] is a game for men and women, old and young . . .", when we all know that historically this just wasn't true. Even RECENTLY that wasn't true. It is only now, in our modern era, that young children and women are treated as closer to equal to the white men who first played golf.  I wonder when Tweedie's very own Liverpool Golf Club starting admitting women as members? When did the Honourable Company of Edinburg Golfers first allow those who weren't wealthy white MEN to play their cherished course? Why would you open the door to such criticism?

Melvyn, before you rant, AGAIN, about your right to speak your mind freely, please examine the concept - that you have the right to, does not mean you are REQUIRED to speak your mind at every turn.  Please consider that although you attempt (some times) to act politely, you are most certainly NOT.  Most GCA participants ignore what you say, but some take great offense at being repeatedly chastised by you for failing to play the game the way you perceive it should still be played.  I realize you can no longer walk the way you used to on the course - and it sounds like you're unwilling to play golf with assistance in any way - fine, good for you. But please stop your passive-aggressive condemnation of those who choose to, or are required to use assistance in order to enjoy their favorite form of recreation.

It is absurd to even have to bring this up, and yet I will anyway, but how can you rationalize using the internet to advocate a wholesale return to a bygone (and good riddance) era.  Isn't that the least bit ironic to you? It is an affront to the great history and tradition of social commentary that you refuse to write with a quill on a sheaf of parchment. NOT! 

Please stop masquerading as relevant. The charade is over.

[Dan Herrmann]

Melvyn,  The lowly rangefinder has become your Moby Dick.

[Andrew Summerell]

What do I regard as the special merits of golf? The wonderful variety that allows people of all interests to participate, whether they are interested in the design of the course, what’s happening on one of the pro circuits, what their card & pencil told them last round, how to swing the club better & yes, even people who wish to use rangefinders. It can mean all things to all people & for me, that is golf’s ‘special merit’.

Melvyn, you haven’t answered the question yourself. What are your special merits?

[Carl Rogers]

Well people, you are all correct... but Golfers should only take themselves seriously only within the narrow confines of our own sub-cult.

I know all kinds of wonderful people that are not golfers and do not 'get' the game.  They are not anti-golf.

Wife has learned to understand my golf habit and I have learned to understand her orchid habit.

[David_Tepper]

I don't think the comments are terribly unique to golf. While golf does have special merits, the ones mentioned could certainly be applied to tennis as well.

[Matthew Petersen]

I think golf has many special merits. It is a competition that does not necessarily require others. Your competition is with yourself, or the course. This is true even when competing in an event in which others are playing. And to this extent golf does reveal character, much more so in my opinion than many games we play to pass the time.

However, while not all innovation is necessary or desirable in life, neither should the past always be romanticized. To yearn for a golf free of caddies and yardage books and rangefinders is fine ... but it is akin to yearning for basketball played to peach baskets.

[Mark Pearce]

Can I just point out to all those responders to this thread who are ranting against Melvyn (and his often tedious anti-cart stance) that he didn't raise walking, or carts, in this thread.  You guys did.  The lot of you are like a bunch of nasty schoolboys, looking to pick a fight with the boy that doesn't fit in.  When he says something that you disagree with, feel free to express yourselves but I cannot see the point of bringing an argument to a thread that didn't merit it.

To those who have responded in the spirit of the thread, thanks.

To me the special merits of golf lie in it being a sport I can play competitively when my body won't let me play other sports the way I used to.  It's a way I can spend time outside, in sometimes beautiful surroundings, competing.  It's about the cameraderie and the honesty (though other sports have these, despite what some think) and the social apsects.  It's also a rare sport that I can play with my children now and, hopefully, in 30 years time.

[Mac Plumart]

Due to the fact that each person plays their own ball, the game has many unique and special merits.

You can play it in an extremely competitive set of circumstances, like a tournament, and it is interesting and fun.

You can play it in a casual setting and have fun.  Like when I played the other day with my hickories and my playing partner used (semi) modern equipment.      It was a very fun and interesting game/adventure.

You can play it when you are 70, 30, or 10 years old.  You can play it with your father, son, wife, or daughter.

Play your own ball and have fun.  I find that a unique/special aspect of the game.

[Carl Rogers]

I would prefer not to use the "special merits" phrase.

I would prefer to use a phrase such as "unusual and unique characteristics".  

For me, an unusual characteristic of golf is what I would call the "threshold of fun".  It is my observation that in golf, the "threshold of fun" is much higher than in other games because there is no real opponent (except yourself that proves to be the most difficult) and just hitting the "small ball with the small club to a highly specific target" is a fairly difficult task when you think about it.

[David_Tepper]

Kelly B.M. -

Having played both sports extensively (and run 4 marathons as well), I am well aware of the aesthetic differences between golf & tennis. My comments were simply directed at the statement of Mr. Tweedie quoted in the opening post. Mr. Tweedie's comments are appropriate to golf, but not exclusive to it.

DT

[Jim_Coleman]

     The most common character flaw on this web cite is probably pomposity.  (One of our former posters is one of the most pompous people I've ever come across.)  But, like the slow player, no one considers himself pompous.  Yet pretty much everyone else recognizes him for what he is.  So, boys, take a good, hard look in the mirror.  Unfortunately, many of you won't see much.

[George Pazin]

I don't think the comments are terribly unique to golf. While golf does have special merits, the ones mentioned could certainly be applied to tennis as well.

Where is the long adventurous walk in tennis? The varying journey? Don't get me wrong, I enjoy tennis, only stopped playing due to physical problems, but tennis is a game much more analogous to basketball or hockey or soccer than it is to golf.

I'd see more similarities to things like hunting or horseback riding or hiking or mountain climbing, or even cycling (the Lance kind, not the Harley kind).

[David_Tepper]

"Where is the long adventurous walk in tennis? The varying journey?"

George Pazin -

Please re-read my initial post. While I did acknowledge that golf has special merits (such as the ones you mention), the merits of golf the Mr. Tweedie refers to in his quoted comments in the initial post (1. Can be played outdoors most of the year, 2. Can be played by men, women & children, 3. Provides a nice diversion from work, etc.) were not especially unique to golf.

Your comments provide a better description of the special merits of golf than Mr. Tweedie's!

DT  

[George Pazin]

Sorry, David, I didn't see your follow up to Kelly till after I posted!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()