"You know Tom, I have always loved the idealism in that thought by Max Behr about "true sportsman", but it's never quite sat right with me...I think I know why...in fishing, you know when you have been successful (you caught the fish). When you feel your skills have advanced to the point that you might need to downgrade your equipment, you can...same sort of scenario with hunting...
But the golf analogy struggles for the simple reason that noone ever conquers golf. What would dictate me, a scratch handicap ex-pro, downgrading my equipment to not "overwhelm" the course?"
Sully:
I don't disagree with you at all there and you make valid points. I don't even know that Behr would disagree with you. He may've known perfectly well that what he said in those analogies was idealistic.
On the other hand, he was citing something that had certainly been part of golf but it was a long time ago, even quite a long while before him.
I believe his underlying purpose in using those analogoies was simply to make the point that the element of "nature" in golf should never be overlooked or forgotten. His point about a "sportsman's" mentality in golf like that was also a time when all golfers essentially accepted the randomness, luck and vagaries of natural sites pretty much as they were. Obviously one reason for that is way back then they didn't have much ability to change it, so the thought of even attempting to overwhelm it with equipment or of materially alterating its landscape didn't much even occur to them, and certainly not to the degree it does to us today.
However, Behr's analogy with hunting and fishing to golf in that way was a bit more interesting.
For instance, in competition he did not believe that kind of "sportsman's" choice to limit or manage his equipment down to the point of just sustaining his skill against the course would work, and for the same obvious reasons we would give today---eg it would essentially defeat a golfer's chances in competition. Behr actually advocated for "standardization" in competition and it's interesting to note that his recommendation was with the golf ball that was a "floater". In fact he advocated for legislation of a standardized "competition" ball.
For the rest, for non-formal competition and certainly for non-competition against human opponents he did not advocate for equipment and ball "standardization". He essentially advocated that in a competition just against a golf course (nature) only a golfer both could and perhaps should use that "sportsman's" inclination to limit his equipment down to the point of what he felt could just sustain his skill against his opponent---in this case a golf course and its hazards just like the weight of a fish or or the size of a bird.
That would probably be something like a golfer of your skill playing with persimmon, old irons and old performance golf balls just to see how they stacked up strategically against the architectural arrangment of the course.
Behr's opinions on this may not make much sense to golfers today but I think it's hard for anyone to deny that it really does show a remarkable appreciation for the ramifications of nature in the context of golf as a golfer simply playing against a natural golf course.