[Jim_Kennedy]

1926 was a year of change in the world of golf. Bobby Jones was on his way to winning his second US Open at Scioto, becoming the first player to win "The Double" by dint of his Open win earlier in the season.

It was also the first year that our Open was played over three days, one round on Thursday and Friday, and 36 holes on Saturday. The change was needed to accommodate the large field.

Stadium golf was introduced at Scioto, well not exactly stadium, but grandstand seating for 800 was erected giving spectators a view of the 9th and 18th greens plus a look at the 1st tee. This prompted Ralph Trost to write a satirical column titled "The National Open of the Future" 

The new lighter (1.55 vs. 1.62) and larger (1.68 vs. 1.62) ball was introduced for what appears to be something like a trial run that summer. John Vander Borght wrote an IMO piece on it: http://www.golfclubatlas.com/in-my-opinion/john-vander-borght-the-balloon-ball/

All of the above can be read here:

http://tinyurl.com/mbeznzo


And in what seems (to me at least) to be a misguided policy, the USGA decided to ban itinerant caddies at Scioto, and from all future competitions. A player could no longer employ the caddie of his choice, he was forced to use one of the local bag toters.

http://tinyurl.com/ndz47t4


Bobby Jones wrote about the change in a 1927 article for the Miami Daily News in which he gave a nod to the USGA, but it's seems clear that he wasn't too happy about it.   

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=nUAuAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ZtgFAAAAIBAJ&pg=4040%2C1611167 


Big doings for one year in the history of golf.   

[JC Jones]

The pro jock has ruined the craft.  They should reinstitute this rule.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Frank Beard wasn't a fan of the Tour caddy, they cost too much for him. 

http://tinyurl.com/l6lsv7g

[Jim_Kennedy]

The pro jock has ruined the craft.  They should reinstitute this rule.

I think the rule was created to protect amateur players in the US Open. The thought at the time was that a pro would have an unfair  advantage by hiring a professional caddie, but even amateurs like Jones employed them, if only for the 'comfort' of familiarity. That, in itself, could be seen as an advantage, but one that could be shared equally by the pro and the amateur.

The image of Ouimet and Lowery is a powerful one, but I don't believe that the 'pro jock' ruined the craft. Even in 1926 there were purses of 10k in events such as the Los Angeles Open. Prize money for the pro who wins doesn't become lucre when shared by his professional caddie, and it's a conscious decision on the pro's part to hire someone who knows what's what.

Bobby Jones knew that too.

[JC Jones]

Jim,

My point is that the notion of the professional caddie has turned caddying from a job for local kids looking to make a few bucks (and also learning the game) to a career with grown men needing to support themselves.  Because of this, the price has risen to unsustainable levels and now there are fewer caddy programs because people would rather take a cart at $25/round than a caddie at $100.

If we get rid of the notion that caddying is a career do these grown men go and do something else instead if hoping to be picked up by a tour pro (see Spieth and his caddie), we'd have more kids caddying and probably more kids playing the game.

[John Kavanaugh]

The lack of minority caddies on the PGA Tour is a stain on our evolution as a society.  As the money grew the minorities were discarded. For this reason alone they should be banned until reform is instituted.

[Jim_Kennedy]

The lack of minority caddies on the PGA Tour is a stain on our evolution as a society.  As the money grew the minorities were discarded. For this reason alone they should be banned until reform is instituted.

"...be the Player"
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/sports/golf/from-a-symbol-of-segregation-to-a-victim-of-golfs-success.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jim,

My point is that the notion of the professional caddie has turned caddying from a job for local kids looking to make a few bucks (and also learning the game) to a career with grown men needing to support themselves.  Because of this, the price has risen to unsustainable levels and now there are fewer caddy programs because people would rather take a cart at $25/round than a caddie at $100.

If we get rid of the notion that caddying is a career do these grown men go and do something else instead if hoping to be picked up by a tour pro (see Spieth and his caddie), we'd have more kids caddying and probably more kids playing the game.

Some enterprising golf club should start a caddie/babysitting program for youngsters that charges parent/s $100.00 per day to send their kid to the golf course where he/she can earn back money from the player whose bag he/she carries.

Win/win -  the club earns, the kid earns, the parents 'earn', and the player gets a bag-toter for a realistic price.  
  

[Jeff Taylor]

"My point is that the notion of the professional caddie has turned caddying from a job for local kids looking to make a few bucks (and also learning the game) to a career with grown men needing to support themselves.  Because of this, the price has risen to unsustainable levels and now there are fewer caddy programs because people would rather take a cart at $25/round than a caddie at $100.

If we get rid of the notion that caddying is a career do these grown men go and do something else instead if hoping to be picked up by a tour pro (see Spieth and his caddie), we'd have more kids caddying and probably more kids playing the game."

Wow. If only these folks that are trying to make a living would realize the harm they have done. Makes me want to give up the internet in the hopes that paper boys will return. Oh that's right, my WSJ is delivered by someone driving a car. Never mind.

[JC Jones]

Lots of people who earn a living doing something are causing harm. 

Your analogy would be more apt if part of the future of the newspaper business was based on paper boys growing up to be subscribers.

[Jeff Taylor]

Or readers.

[jeffwarne]

Jim,

My point is that the notion of the professional caddie has turned caddying from a job for local kids looking to make a few bucks (and also learning the game) to a career with grown men needing to support themselves.  Because of this, the price has risen to unsustainable levels and now there are fewer caddy programs because people would rather take a cart at $25/round than a caddie at $100.

If we get rid of the notion that caddying is a career do these grown men go and do something else instead if hoping to be picked up by a tour pro (see Spieth and his caddie), we'd have more kids caddying and probably more kids playing the game.

+1
perhaps not that simple,but the spirit is right

[V. Kmetz]

This thread started as a really interesting take on a pivotal year in Golf...and devolved into another of these multi-screeds about how regular adult, professional caddies have ruined something wonderful about the sport...and their own trade.

I'll start another thread so Jim's can get the fuller airing it deserved, if there's any oxygen left.

cheers

vk

[Jim_Kennedy]

Old Tom, Allan Robertson, Jamie Anderson -  with their caddies - 1850  




The 'notion' that professional caddies or other grown men have ruined caddying for kids is just that, a notion.

I can think of several other factors, like the advent of carts; labor (in CT. you must be at least 14 and can only caddie at private or municipal courses); legal (you can't contract with a minor); insurance ( including the liability of the player, especially with youngsters); pool (how many youngsters want to caddie, or for that matter, learn the game); etc..

....and until remote walking-only courses build dormitories and hire den mothers you'll be stuck paying adults to carry your bag.


...and the Brits started charging admission to the Open in 1926.      








    

 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()