I’m really grateful for all your thoughts. Let me try to answer the questions posed to me. But first let me say that at the time I was watching the progress at the 6th hole there was very little wind blowing, so it wasn’t helping the players to any great extent. I know that things may have been different at other times.
I’m asked about Vijay’s remarks. Well, it’s always been the case I venture to say that the pros have preferred conditions to be such as to limit as much as possible the element of luck in the game. I suppose I can understand that to a great extent. So the they tend to like flat fairways (no “humps and hollows” as on British links) and dart board type greens which are basically receptive. But, the tradition has always been that the bad breaks, awkward bounces are part of the game, they add to its character and to the character of the players. They also, together with fast conditions encourage players to make up shots, rather than just consult the yardage chart.
On Pete’s question as to what should be done to resolve the dilemma, well I know there have always been long hitters and they have been an exciting part of the game. To refer to my father again, he often mentioned such as Chick Harbert in the States and Harry Weetman over in Britain (he was reminiscing about the 40s and 50s). But, the length now of almost all of the players has become simply colossal through the different clubs – witness the PGA figures and how they have changed over the years. I remember such as Geoff Shackelford writing about this. And this is where the ruling authorities, who have a duty of maintaining the integrity and essence of the game, come in. Let’s take a hypothetical case, deliberately somewhat extreme, but such are often the best hypotheticals. Suppose someone invented a baseball bat made of a substance that meant that when a relatively weak hit was made the ball rocketed 300 yards. Well, I don’t think it would take more than a few days for the baseball authorities to ban this bat. It would presumably be the same with other sports and games (eg new soccer ball that only has to be touched to fly out of the stadium!). In fact, the bat example applies well to the game of cricket, where different types of bats have been banned, including a metal one. But, I’d better not mention cricket to a mainly American audience!
The key then is nothing original. It involves legislation regarding the main factors here, namely clubs and balls. The technology is so advanced today that it should be possible to lay down very accurately the necessary criteria for reining ball speed in and reducing the power of clubs. Another point here relates to spinning the ball. I saw several shots at Carnoustie hit from position way off line in the rough that sat down on landing in a remarkable way even allowing for the rain.
I’ve heard that the authorities may be frightened of the reaction of the club and ball manufacturers, but are we really saying that the game’s integrity can be held to ransom by such people? Surely not. Besides, in the history of the game, lots of clubs have been banned.
I’d go back to my statement in the previous post regarding courses being rendered out of date. Some great courses are confined and lengthening cannot be carried out. I mentioned a couple then. Let’s add to that Royal Lytham St. Annes, which is surrounded by houses. I know it’s impossible to replicate entirely the past situation, but it is possible to rein things in. How I would love to see the pros tackle the architect’s exam paper as originally set at Liphook, Prestwick, Westward Ho!, Southport and Ainsdale, to name just a few. Besides, what a nuisance it is (and for the authorities too!) for players to be walking back about 200 yards to get to the next tee, as regularly happens in Open Championships.
I’ve written far too much. Sorry. But thanks for your interest.