News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Without Links golf where would we be today?
« on: February 25, 2003, 09:45:50 AM »
We have been given an essay question about soil conditions and it's relationship to golf and it's beginings.

Here is the quote and how many of you believe it or don't and why?  I am not looking for the answer to the question but would like opinions to help me.

“It is quite certain that, had the ground on which ordinary inland golf is played today been the only available ground for the purpose, the game would never have been invented at all.”

Garden G. Smith, The World of Golf, 1898

Cheers

Brian Phillips
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:02 PM by -1 »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2003, 10:05:24 AM »
This is something like, what came first, chicken or egg.  Could it have been played on less than the sandy, alluvial grassy windswept linksland? I think the game could have developed, so long as the basic requirement of groomable turf was present.  Therefore, the answer is not dependent so much on the linksland soil as it is on the viability of maintainable turf.  Man has always enjoyed ball and stick games, and playing and hunting on the grassy plains. I think man would probably have eventually invented golf on the grassy prairies.

If you subscribe to the Dutch Kolvin theory, it could have evolved on frozen lakes or rivers. ;)   But, then I am thinking that way because our team is in the midst of a hot winning streak in curling here on the frozen tundra. ;D
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:02 PM by -1 »
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2003, 10:49:33 AM »
Brian,

Maybe this will help.

I think what the quote captures is the sense of adventure that is integral to "links" golf.  

How much adventure is involved in playing a flat, straight tree-lined golf hole, of which we have a million here in Oregon?

Penal vs strategic

Captain Thomas said

'the strategy of golf is the soul of the game'
and
'the spirit of golf is to dare a hazard and reap a reward.'

I'm inclined to think that what is so imporant about "links" golf is that it captures this spirit that Thomas is referring to.  

Our flat, straight tree-lined golf holes offer little adventure.  

Whack it as far as you can.  
Well.....I can do this at the range, why do I need to go play 18?

I can't say I agree with the quote 100%, adventure could be added to the equation the moment the first guy puts a bunker in the middle of my straight, flat tree-lined golf hole.

But then again, that guy would have been a crazy revolutionary.  

Perhaps, it would have taken 300 years before some damn fool did this, but the natural characteristics of "linksland" made it a model for the golf courses of the future.

Golf courses have bunkers.  They have rolling hills and undulations.  Rough grass, fairway grass and putting greens.  

Who's to argue with this model?  It is sure a lot more fun than straight, flat and tree-lined.


  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2003, 10:52:06 AM »
I now realize my post has little to do with soil and turfgrass.

My feelings are...without good turf, the hole should be bigger.

Cheers mate!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2003, 12:20:59 PM »
Brian,
I second RJ's remarks with an addittion. It was probably easier for golf to have taken hold due to more contiguous and treeless public access lands, milder climate, good drainage and bovine mowers down at links side.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Andy Levett (Guest)

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2003, 12:21:53 PM »
I think the date of the quote - 1898 - is interesting.
Here's a quote from Cornish and Whitten ( The Golf Course, Ch 3 The Heathland Era): "Dozens of sorry inland courses built on impervious clay soils convinced most golf purists that only the ancient links could provide excellent golf."
I've no idea who Garden G.Smith was but perhaps he was one of those purists and if he had been writing 10 or 20 years later his view would have been different. By then it was clear there was inland soil ideally suited to the game - heathland - because "fools" had built great courses there.
I don't know what the heathlands were used for in previous centuries but perhaps history could have been different if  English shepherds had started whacking rocks into rabbit holes with their crooks?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2003, 02:48:04 PM »
Brian:

Wonderful essay question and quote. Gotta smoke that one for a while.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

JohnH

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #7 on: February 25, 2003, 03:08:38 PM »
Brian,

I find the statement vague.  Was Smith talking soil types, or topography?  I think it's important to note that in 1898 there were not the resources we have today to do tissue testing, soil testing, fancy machinery, etc.  There was probably a sense of narrow-mindedness in that time regarding the way soils could be manipulated to harbor inland golf courses, but it's only one opinion.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jim_Kennedy

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #8 on: February 25, 2003, 03:09:20 PM »
For an excellent website on heathlands go to:
http://www.countryside-management.org.uk/heathland/basics.htm
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
"I never beat a well man in my life" - Harry Vardon

Michael Dugger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #9 on: February 25, 2003, 04:05:18 PM »
Brian,

I"ve been stewing over this all day.  Or, as Tom Paul said, I've been "smoking" it.  Or is it "smoking out an answer?"  

I tend to agree with the fellow who said that the question is sort of vague.

The quote goes...

“It is quite certain that, had the ground on which ordinary inland golf is played today been the only available ground for the purpose, the game would never have been invented at all.”

For starters, I'm quite leery of anyone saying that something is quite certain.  Just like it is quite certain that such and such golf course is great because I saw a picture of it and read an article saying it was.  

But, anyways, getting back on track, I can only assume that the point is...quality turf was something inachievable for an inland course of that time.  Put another way, they didn't know how to get quality turf on poor soil.  

Flushing out this notion fully.  Is it fair to say that provided poor turf conditions, would golf have flourished and become the game it has today?  Certainly all of us have played a goat ranch or two.  How often do we return?  Not often.  How frustrating and unsatsifying is it to putt on greens that are bumpy?  Very much so unsatisfying.  It removes skill from the equation and replaces it with luck.  

Thus, I can only conclude that because the linksland allowed for quality turf, the game as we know it today was realized.  A game in which quality turf allows for consistent roll on the putting surface.  A game in which quality turf allows for demarcation between fairway and rough.  

Without this turf, a result of linksland soil conditions, golf would not have been found to be the intriguing and challenging game that it it.  

But still, now whether or not this could be achieved inland is still a point I would debate.  However, I will concede that it would have taken a great deal longer to achieve optimal turf conditions inland considering the lack on knowledge in working with turfgrasses.  I.E. drainage considerations, science, different strains, soil composition, etc.

Was Mackenzie involved with bringing these matters to light or was the USGA greens committee a trailblazer in this respect?  I'm not sure.

Cheers  
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
What does it matter if the poor player can putt all the way from tee to green, provided that he has to zigzag so frequently that he takes six or seven putts to reach it?     --Alistair Mackenzie--

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #10 on: February 25, 2003, 09:29:22 PM »
I think the game would have been invented, but of course with a different set of priorities. Whether you subscribe to the theory or not, it is quite interesting to consider very early "golfe" and how it both lived at the edge of the sea -- but also well inside the walls of the towns.

http://www.jurekputter.freeserve.co.uk/

Juerk Putter, a friend and excellent historical artist, offers some excellent engravings he's created. Click on the "GENESIS OF GOLF" and you will get his take on very early St. Andrews golfers -- bands of villagers swinging wildly -- not on the links -- but well inside the confines of the streets, narrow passageways and toward -- not penants -- but doors.

It might be pointed out that Juerk, a dutchman, also has some odd take on the origins of golf before St. Andrews and Scotland, but we shall not hold that against him! His drawings are historically accurate to the clothes and implements. Do I believe golfe was played on the Streets of St. Andrews? Yes. As it was also enjoyed in the open spaces along the shore. This was part of its origins and evolution.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Mark_Huxford

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #11 on: February 26, 2003, 02:10:25 AM »
I think that quote refers to the greater variety of natural elements and hazards on the links Brian, not just a superior agronomic environment. Here's some Bernard Darwin for you; I know you have Robert Hunter's book.









« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

ForkaB

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2003, 02:47:03 AM »
My gut feeling is that Smith is correct.  For one thing, anybody with a name like "Garden" has to be able to back up what he says!  More seriously.........

Scottish links had a unique combination of characteristics in the time when golf was born, namely:

1.  Land which was owned by the public and open to them for games and other activities

2.  Land which was physically open (i.e. no trees, "stupid" or otherwise)

3.  Land which had turf and subsoil which were conducive to hitting balls a long way and finding them at the end of each stroke

4.  Land which existed in large clumps (i.e. 100 acres+)

5.  Land which could be maintained naturally by non-human animals, burrowing and otherwise

Of these, the concept of "common good" land (#1 above) is the real key for the establishment of the game.  Wihtout it, there would never have been the critical mass to make it anything other than just a plaything of the upper classes.  Very interesting, however, how it was the upper classes that adopted (hijacked?) the game when it came to England and then America, creating some amazing venues in the process in places that Scotsmen would and did consider to be unsuitable for "proper" golf courses.........
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:02 PM by -1 »

Paul Turner

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #13 on: February 26, 2003, 06:26:26 AM »
The great attraction of golf over other earlier sports like kolven was the fact that you could make the ball soar- well, to a degree!  And I think the only way that was really possible in such a wet country was to have a sandy site which kept the ball dry(ish).

Although there was/is plenty of common land in Scotland that's not links and could have been suitable in other respects.

And so it surprises me that golf took so long to move inland, with any popularity.  But it was natural that it started in the lowland heaths, because this land had many of the same characteristics as links:  

Cheap common land that wasn't suitable for farming.  

No trees.  

Maintained easily by grazing of livestock.

Good drainage.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

ForkaB

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #14 on: February 26, 2003, 06:37:08 AM »
Paul

The problem with heathland is that it is covered with heather (hence the name).  Even the most self-flaggelating Presbyterian Scotsman would not be so daft as to try to play golf over a field of heather.  Leave it to the (Mad Dog's and) Englishmen to try that trick......

BTW--love the latin name for heather "Calluna Vulgaris."
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Paul Turner

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #15 on: February 26, 2003, 06:57:51 AM »
Rich

Insane dutchmen at one particular course still do it!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #16 on: February 26, 2003, 07:25:01 AM »
Interesting thread.

The profound importance of soil types on gca is rarely mentioned on this site.

Those who play golf primarily in California or in the northeast or in GB&I - where almost all courses are built on sandy soils - have an undernourished appreciation for the challenges of designing courses in other soil types.

I've come to think that soil type may be the single most important variable when trying to decide what you can do architecturally with a piece of land. It circumscribes the architectural possibilities. And in the case of clay type soils, the architectural possibilities can be circumscribed pretty narrowly.

For a fairly simple reason. Water will percolate through sand. It will not percolate through clay. It puddles on the surface if your drainage schemes aren't right. Swales and humps that make sense on TOC or N Berwick or Dornoch, don't make sense in other soils.  

There are remarkably few great courses built on clay. ANGC is one of them. I've wondered if one of the reasons so many changes have been made to ANGC is that MacK did not fully appreciate the differences between clay soils and sandy soils. ANGC was, afterall, the only course he designed on clay. We know that there were drainage problems with no. 10 and other holes...

So yes, if all golf were inland/clay golf, the game would have a very different look. Who knows whether that impediment would have been enough to kill it at birth.

Bob  





« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

ForkaB

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #17 on: February 26, 2003, 07:48:27 AM »
Bob, Brian, et.al.

This may be a VERY dumb question, but.......

Given what was done at Kingsbarns (i.e. scooping up the "topsoil" (possibly/probably clay) and mixing it with sand to create a "linksy" percolating material which was then re-laid on the ground, could this sort of thing not be done in areas like Georgia?  I'm sure it would cost a lot to bring in the sand, and maybe there is so much clay in ghte geoloogy that a little bit of percolation wouldn't do a lot of good.  But, maybe it might work.  Yes?  No?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #18 on: February 26, 2003, 07:56:31 AM »
"“It is quite certain that, had the ground on which ordinary inland golf is played today been the only available ground for the purpose, the game would never have been invented at all.”
Garden G. Smith, The World of Golf, 1898

Again, a most fascinating question. I love this type of speculation because it gets not just into the entire evolution of golf but into attempting to understand it's very beginnings. As such, I for one, would prefer to take this question out of just the question of soil conditions and sandy soil and look at Garden Smith's remark as a question;

"Would golf have been invented at all?"

I think it's important to note that Garden Smith did not say the game COULD not have been invented elsewhere as it's come to us from the very earliest Scottish linksland, he said only it WOULD not have been invented (as it's come to us) if the only available ground was somewhere other than the Scottish linksland.

And I for one, very much subscribe to the theory of such as Garden Smith, C. B. Macdonald, and particulaly a current writer by the name of Malcolm Campbell, who in his recent book "The Scottish Golf Book" does track the beginnings of the game of golf itself.

(Brian Phillip's gave me this book for Xmas of 2002 and I've been a rude pig to not have thanked him before this but he has been a dumb pig for having the wrong email address on Golfclubatlas until recently. But now his email address is correct, so I'll email him my everlasting thanks for this book and I also thank him publicly for it on here now! This is one beautifully written book on Scottish golf, it's evolution and a very logical section on what the game of golf's very beginnings may have been).

As to why some of the very early games in other countries can not be considered the forerunners of golf or early influences on it are most interesting and notable. Games such as the Dutch Kolven, Roman Pagancia, or the French jeu de mail, he feels, as does Macdonald and others, are not connected to golf in anyway as they were just too different. All of them were played with sticks and balls of one form or another but other than jeu de mail the ball itself was a common competition ball and not the single player ball that golf is and has been (other than foursome (Scottish alternate shot) of which there's no known similar arrangement, and never has been to a game like golf).

But Malcolm Campbell identifies the one single distinct difference between golf and other games that came before it or co-existed somewhere else with it and may have influenced it that proves to him (and me too) that golf as it began and evolved, and likely began in the Scotish linksland was thoroughly unique unto itself and not influenced by any other game.

That one distinct difference with other games remotely similar to it was the hole itself!! The hole--golf's destination and final target makes golf unique from anything remotely similar to it that could have come before it!

Those other games may have used sticks and balls and many players vying for that ball but those games, particularly Kolven on ice would more closely resemble hockey than golf. And even other stick and ball games used other forms of play and competition and also other things and other structures as targets, such as door or polls or sticks or whatnot. Clearly different than golf even if you don't consider that none of them other than jeu de mail were games where a single player retained his own ball. That's all differences enough for me and should be for all of us if attempting to identify and attribute any other game as the forerunner of golf or even an influence on it.

So then it seemingly began as wholly unique on the linksland of Scotland in a form very similar to the game we know today--remarkably similar really! And it's sort of mindboggling to realize that in that very similar form it was played on those linkslands for possibly four hundred years or more BEFORE even the very first vestiges of what we know now as golf architecture! That's twice as long or more than it is from the very beginnings of golf architecture as we know it to today!!

But what did the linksland itself have to do with golf as we know it and also golf architecture as we know it today exclusive of what golf might have been had it never been invented on the linkslands but had been invented elsewhere as Garden Smith's quotation alludes to?

Sandy soil clearly probably has a lot to do with it fundamentally but there're many other things that come to us today in the game of golf and most particularly its architecture that owe their existence to the Scottish linksland exclusively--many things.

What are all those other things that come to us today exclusively from the Scottish linksland?




« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:02 PM by -1 »

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #19 on: February 26, 2003, 09:25:48 AM »
Rich -

I'll defer to the architects, but more often than not, the soil for greens in Georgia is remixed to permit percolation. Where USGA spec greens are used, remixing is required in any event.

As for the fairway/rough areas, it is my understanding that removing and remixing the clay topsoil to the extent necessary to get real percolation is prohibitively expensive.

Anyone heard otherwise?

Bob

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #20 on: February 26, 2003, 09:40:32 AM »
Bob,

In Georgia, the red clay soils are fine for growing bermuda fairways.  In fact, I remember when designing Brookstone, that the superintendent took our specification for sand capped tee mixes, noting bermuda could dessicate in cold winter winds in sand, versus red "soil."  In fact, soil tests indicated that, on our site, at least, removing the top six inches of slightly more organic topsoil wasn't worth it, economically.

We have imported sand for topsoil on rocky courses up in Minnesota, and on one in Las Vegas, where there were salts in the existing topsoil.  The cost is about $5-7,000/acre, over 100 acres, so it is expensive when necessary.  In Georgia, you can buy necessary soil ammendments for half that, or less.

It can be dangerous to randomly mix soil and sand to "lighten the mix."  As often as not, the varying particle sizes allow the soil to pack tightly, and you end up with a soil hard and as impermeable as concrete.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Paul Turner

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #21 on: February 26, 2003, 09:40:39 AM »
Tom P

I've got that book too and I think Campbell goes too far, he's getting tied up in patriotism.  Doesn't he completely dismiss Kolven as having no influence?  I think that's daft, golf in Scotland didn't spring out of a vacuum and there was a great amount of trade between Holland and Scotland.

Sure the HOLE makes a difference, but it's not everything.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #22 on: February 26, 2003, 09:57:42 AM »
Golf is just so good a game, that if the Scots didn't invent it, someone would have!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

ForkaB

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #23 on: February 26, 2003, 10:04:09 AM »
Paul

You are right re: Malcom.  He's just trying to stir up the pot, make a bob or two and is full of himself--not unlike most golf writers.  He's not a bad player, however, for a geezer--beat me at the inaugural Fife over 40's at Lundin Links 5 years ago, alas....
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Without Links golf where would we be today?
« Reply #24 on: February 26, 2003, 12:03:47 PM »
Rich and Paul:

You all can believe what you like, of course, particularly since the answer has obviously been lost in time as Campbell acknowledges; but I believe Campbell's and Macdonald's thoughts and explanations are the most logical.

That's nice that Holland and Scotland traded with each other but trading is a two way affair and given how far back golf in Scotland apparently did go I think it's far more reasonable to believe that Scottish golf was probably the more likely reason that Dutch Kolven was born.

I think the hole is a very important and significant distinction in golf that proves it's unique to the Scottish linksland and was invented there and if Scottish golf was the reason Dutch Kolven was born one could logically wonder and ask why Dutch Kolven then did not utilize the uniquely Scottish golf hole.

The reason is completely obvious to me. If the Dutch had dug Kolven holes in that country, the country doubtless would have flooded once again and probably just sunk once and for all! Actually, it's known that when the Dutch first dug a hole for Kolven shortly after the game arrived in Holland from Scotland it sprung a mini geyser of water. That's actually the etymology of the term "casual water" in golf. But ironically, as history can be, the incident was anything but casual.

It's known that hole cutting incident was a wholly perilous affair but luckily the country was spared. It's not quite so well documented but it's believed a young Dutch lad with the unusual Dutch name of Paatrig Mucci was standing nearby spouting his beliefs on the architecture of Kolven and he had become so annoying to those present they grabbed him and stuck his head in that perilous Kolven hole. He drowned, of course, and actually that story morphed at some point into the little Dutch boy who stuck his finger in the dyke and saved the country because at least that morphed story did not involve the death penalty crime of maanslautteren!

In any case, I believe that Kolven, particularly as it appears to have been played occasionally on ice is probably the forerunner of hockey as we know it.

Of course that would mean that Scottish golf, is, in fact, the reason hockey was born. But that's not surprising at all since everyone knows that almost everything in this world was actually invented in Scotland--or at the very least the Scots think so.

They're wrong of course, but for the exception of golf. All indications in my mind point to Scotland as where it uniquely and originally came from and was invented and not just Scotland but the linksland.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:02 PM by -1 »