Gents
I think we should reframe this in terms of practical width or effective width
We are comparing fairway widths of courses established and played with a feathery ball and those made with a pro v1 era ball...the ball is traveling roughly twice as far
Reading the Mackenzie and other period writing and Knowing the cost of golf balls in at the time and the pace of play (under 2.5 hours) I just don't believe lack of width, searching for balls was an impediment to the enjoyment or speed of the game
I have an intuition as the courses became longer with back tees and newer course designs, the width did not keep up until the modern renaissance of design
I think the need for width has gone up dramatically with length and the proportion of time in the air...and I think architecture is just starting to capture to make the game pleasant for the long handicap man, as Mackenzie would say