[Bob_Huntley]

In recent months, I have heard much gnashing of teeth about the ruination of the ancient game by the use of all sorts of gadgets that make the game simpler. A great deal of it has come from our friend in Fife, Melvyn Morrow.

Yet when one comes to think of it, his consanguinity to Old Tom Morris should, quite possibly, put him in the other camp. His great-great uncle, surely made the greatest stride in modernizing and making the game easier to play by breaking with his partner and championing the use of the gutta percha ball.

I could go on, but all in all, I think Old Tom was a futurist at heart.

Bob

[Jim_Kennedy]

Bob,
Interesting take.
I suspect Melvyn never gave a thought to this, ideologues never acknowledge ideas that challenge their way of thinking.

[PCCraig]

Blasphemy!!!!

From what I heard from a friend was that Old Tom actually commissioned the gutta percha so that he could install some new elevated back tees at the Old Course.

[Marty Bonnar]

Dearest Sir Robert de Huntley (nice ring!)
firstly, two minor factual errors:
great, great grandfather
and
Melvyn not in Fife, but rather more Home Counties-ish?!

Notwithstanding, what a brilliant thought. OTM - Arch enemy of the traditional, secret (not much!) user of the new-fangled implement, industrial espionage in his employers house. What a Revolutionary.

Old Fidel Morris. I like it...

best,
FBD.

[Jeff_Brauer]

When you think about it, there is a hell of a lot more future in the...well, future, than there is in the past!

[Bob_Huntley]

Dearest Sir Robert de Huntley (nice ring!)
firstly, two minor factual errors:
great, great grandfather
and
Melvyn not in Fife, but rather more Home Counties-ish?!

Notwithstanding, what a brilliant thought. OTM - Arch enemy of the traditional, secret (not much!) user of the new-fangled implement, industrial espionage in his employers house. What a Revolutionary.

Old Fidel Morris. I like it...

best,
FBD.

Martin,

Thanks for correcting me, great-great- grandfather it is. My apologies to Melvyn.

Bob

[Melvyn Morrow]

Thank you Bob for your informative opinion.

However there a few points I would just like to confirm:-

I am not guilty of ‘gnashing of teeth about the ruination of the ancient game by using all sorts of gadgets’. If you had bothered to read my words I have always said golfers do not need artificial gadgets to play the game. Each golfer has it within himself to judge distances and play accordingly. Distance aids diminish that eye/brain co-ordination, so it will take a few rounds without them to acclimatise again. Some months ago one of GCA Members deliberately went out without his gadget and his game suffered.  As for making it easy, I would prefer to say that gadgets focus the mind in the wrong direction and not on the course where it should be. Old Tom, my great grandfather James, T.G. my father James and I have never used distance aids. I suspect at times neither do you. I see nothing in the above that requires ‘garnishing of teeth’.

As for technology I am all for it albeit in a controlled manner to enable the continuation of the game, but not at the expense of having to keep modifying and lengthening our courses. If architects are not allowed to designs courses to combat the long drive which I believe would not only resolve most of the problems but IMHO would also make them more challenging. But our governing bodies slowly take minimal action allowing confusion to reign.

As for Old Tom, he was happy to see his game grow but not at the expense of the golfer. I most sincerely believe that he would be horrified to see how dependent the majority of golfers have become on distance information. That instinctive ability we human have to coordinate our mind and bodies is part of the secrets of a good golfer – I believe your gadgets as you call them takes a chunk out of that natural harmony.   

The Feathery vs. the Gutta Percha golf ball is actually much deeper than perhaps you believe. The feathery was a very expensive ball that had the ability to change its form during play. The gutta in comparison was much cheaper and more reliable although it could shatter from time to time. Old Tom involvement was initially by accident in that he had no more feathery balls on a round having lost them, so was offered a gutta to finish his round. Although this lead to a major disagreement between Old Tom and Allan, it never stopped Allan from playing high profile money matches with Old Tom as his partner – it is reported they never lost a money match.

As for my connection to Old Tom, Martin I believe set you straight, as for where I live, you would not have known unless you had read my posts.

I think that you have proved the point I was making about some of the R&A Members. Had you been a little more informed or kept abreast of the subject you decided to mention then I doubt if you would have made these errors.

In closing I would say that I have never posted with the initial point of causing a problem just submitting my opinions and observations. Perhaps it’s my way of writing which at times gets me into trouble on GCA.com – the problem when responding to what I believe to be a discussion/debating group is that the written word cannot express the tone of ones voice which conveys so much unsaid information. Being a weak human being I certainly do respond to what I consider unfair attacks.

I wise you a pleasant week-end of golf

Melvyn


PS Pat Craig. 
In my last topic you mentioned “What doesn't help the matter is when our token Scotsman sends 3 e-mails trying to flex his GCA muscles from 3000 miles away”.  First I don’t remember 3 e-mails and please be my guest and post my e-mails so other members can judge if I am “flex his GCA Muscles”. I believe they are what they are trying to pour oil on trouble waters and not flex anything, yet you last reply was very informative it reads as follows

“Melvyn-
I don't give a rat's ass about Old Tom Morris. Give it a fucking break and stop e-mailing me.”

The only spirit I can ever see Pat getting will be out of a bottle. As he matures I trust he will calm down.

My, Pat thanks for the hand of fellowship at GCA.com – if this is what this site now represents then I for one just do not want to know.

[TEPaul]

BobH:

You ask if Old Tom would've been a standard Bearer for Range Finders?

I don't know about that specifically but obviously he was a proponent of the ultra-distance NXT Titleist. Haven't you seen those fairly recent ads where they actually caught him using them on video tape? That's irrefutable evidence that should hold up in any court of law even though I'm not sure how he vanished so quickly when John Cleese tried to admonish him but I'm quite sure a good lawyer like OJ Simpson's Johnny Cochran could very easily explain that.

As for Old Tom being a futurist or a proponent of technologies, here's a little tidbit that might put the lie to that, at least in one sense.

He was once asked what he thought of the idea of actually using mowers on a golf course and he said something like this:

"Oh God no, where would you ever stop?"


Quite an interesting thought, don't you think?

[PCCraig]

PS Pat Craig. 
In my last topic you mentioned “What doesn't help the matter is when our token Scotsman sends 3 e-mails trying to flex his GCA muscles from 3000 miles away”.  First I don’t remember 3 e-mails and please be my guest and post my e-mails so other members can judge if I am “flex his GCA Muscles”. I believe they are what they are trying to pour oil on trouble waters and not flex anything, yet you last reply was very informative it reads as follows

“Melvyn-
I don't give a rat's ass about Old Tom Morris. Give it a fucking break and stop e-mailing me.”

The only spirit I can ever see Pat getting will be out of a bottle. As he matures I trust he will calm down.

My, Pat thanks for the hand of fellowship at GCA.com – if this is what this site now represents then I for one just do not want to know.

Great great grandson of Old Tom Morris-

That is exactly what I said in response to your totally unprovoked personal e-mails to me. Maturity is far more than age, perhaps the older you get and the more times you toot your own horn you may understand that.

[Charlie Goerges]

Melvyn,

You remind me of Frank Klausz (that’s a compliment). He's a famous (for a woodworker anyway) cabinetmaker and woodworking teacher who advocates the use of hand tools for fast, accurate work. What’s more, he eschews lots of measuring and marking in favor of trusting the eye. And he’s absolutely 100% sure that his way is the right way. Woodworking, and especially hand-tool woodworking, is undergoing a renaissance right now and he is one of the responsible parties. I personally like his way of doing it, not because it’s faster or better or more pure, but because it’s more fun.

Perhaps golf could undergo a similar renaissance in the simpler version of the game. Not because it’s faster or better or more pure, but because it’s more fun.

Charlie

P.S. I say this as a fairly regular cart-rider and user of yardage markers on the course. The game is played many ways, but rethinking some of our choices may lead to more fun.

[Tom Huckaby]

Charlie:

I've always agreed with that sentiment, and stated such in conversations with Melvyn.  That is, that rethinking some of our choices can indeed lead to more fun - well phrased.

HOWEVER... do you really think the genie of course marking and need for distance information is going back into the bottle?

That's the part I can't get past.

TH

[Bob_Huntley]

The Feathery vs. the Gutta Percha golf ball is actually much deeper than perhaps you believe. The feathery was a very expensive ball that had the ability to change its form during play. The gutta in comparison was much cheaper and more reliable although it could shatter from time to time. Old Tom involvement was initially by accident in that he had no more feathery balls on a round having lost them, so was offered a gutta to finish his round. Although this lead to a major disagreement between Old Tom and Allan, it never stopped Allan from playing high profile money matches with Old Tom as his partner – it is reported they never lost a money match.

As for my connection to Old Tom, Martin I believe set you straight, as for where I live, you would not have known unless you had read my posts.

I think that you have proved the point I was making about some of the R&A Members. Had you been a little more informed or kept abreast of the subject you decided to mention then I doubt if you would have made these errors.

Melvyn,

I am well aware of the cost and fragility of the feathery and made mention of it in my post, but thank you for pointing out that although Old Tom disappointed Allan with his use of the guttie, that they continued to play as a team in money matches. I thought the move to Prestwick ended that partnership.

I shall be polite about this, unlike you, with your snide remark ,"Had you been a little more informed or kept abreast of the subject you decided to mention then I doubt if you would have made these errors."  The bit  about  R&A Members puzzles me; I made no reference to the subject. I think you may be confusing me with Mike Benham.

As a conservative and keeper of the flame, you must admit that the introduction of the gutta percha ball required that golf courses became longer, not much different for what has gone on for these past few decades. Change is everywhere, not always for the best.

Bob

[Anthony Gray]

  DRINKS ARE ON ME!!!!

   Anthony

[Melvyn Morrow]

Charlie

My way is the way I was taught, to many it may not be better, that’s down to them to decide.

I play in the time honoured way and yes I do believe it is fun.

There are times when you have to put in the effort to achieve the objective – for me that is the fun and enjoyment of golf.

Its ones body against the elements, I feel a failure if I have to resort to electronic aids or wheels to get me round a course. Others have a different opinion and all these things are not against the rules.

My way is not necessary the better way for others but it is for me as well as being the original way. If its not broke, don’t need to mend it, but again others must think it is broken and have decided to play using these aids.

Is it progress – not for me.

Melvyn

[Charlie Goerges]

Charlie:

I've always agreed with that sentiment, and stated such in conversations with Melvyn.  That is, that rethinking some of our choices can indeed lead to more fun - well phrased.

HOWEVER... do you really think the genie of course marking and need for distance information is going back into the bottle?

That's the part I can't get past.

TH

Tom,

I don't want to put the Genie back in the bottle. Mostly because it would cost more money to do so, but also because I use the markers. It's more about player attitudes. For me, when I'm walking, I won't go out of my way to go find distance markers because it is more work, especially when I'm tired. If I try to walk more often, I'll use distance markers less, and my ability to eye the distance will improve. If my golf experience mirrors my woodworking experience, I'll be in for more fun. That is a big IF which will only be proven/disproven by trying it. BTW, I have to give it a try if I'm going to be in sufficient physical condition to handle a trip to Ballyneal this summer.



Melvyn,

Both you and Frank do your chosen activities the way you do because that is the way you were taught (in fact, most/all of us do). I admire your convictions (and Frank's), but your convictions aren't what convinced me to try your way on a more regular basis. I'm convinced because it is/will be a greater source of fun, exercise, joy for ME. If you want someone to try your way of doing something (doesn't matter what the activity is), don't say something like "I feel a failure if I have to resort to electronic aids or wheels to get me round a course". Even if it is true for you. Keep the negative feelings out of it, make it about the positives.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Melvyn,
You almost get it when you say:  "My way is not necessary the better way for others, but it is for me as well as being the original way"
 
....but then you blow it by adding:  "If its not broke, don’t need to mend it, but again others must think it is broken and have decided to play using these aids".

What you fail to take into consideration is that the 'others' want no say in how you approach the game, and they expect the same treatment in kind.

 

[Tom Huckaby]

Charlie:

I have no issues with trying to change attitudes; places like Bandon are great for that, and great for the golfing soul.  May they long thrive and prosper.

My issue remains with those who think that complete removal of all distance information is the ONLY WAY TO GO... and that those who use it are somehow playing an inferior game, or missing the spirit of it.

I have to believe the vast majority of golfers - here, there, everywhere - have always used distance information to play the game.  To me, electronic aids are just a simpler (and dare I say faster - as you allude to) means to achieve the same end.  Thus while I don't personally use them, I'll take the information from those who do... and in the end more importantly continue to see no reason why they ought to be utterly cryit downe.

But we've danced this dance with Melvyn way too many times before.  My feeling is Jim Kennedy's words are wise and he ought to take them to heart.

However, I also believe we are each somewhat interfering with what could be a classic discussion between some master wordsmiths, namely Melvyn and Bob.  So I feel sheeping posting this.... but it's my own fault, I started it in replying to you.

TH

[Craig Sweet]

I could care less how anyone else plays the game...so long as they respect the course...don't slow me down...respect other that are on the course...and keep their shirts on....unless they are female.     

Golf is an individual sport , and thus, I do not see any one way to "honor" the sport nor the "spirit" of the game...it is what each of us makes it...and hopefully everyone has fun!

Me:  I ride in a cart sometimes...mostly walk.

        No range finder...and little use for yardage makers.

        I love modern equipment for playing, and old equipment for viewing.

       

       

[Tom Huckaby]

Craig:  exceedingly well said.  I tend to look at this pretty darn close to how you do....

Thus my difficulty understanding Melvyn.  But maybe this time we get closer....

TH

[TEPaul]

Guys:

When it comes to this dynamic or whatever it's been on here between Melyvn and TomH or whomever else why don't you just embrace the essence of my "Big World Theory"----ie "Golf and golf course architecture is a great big thing and there really is room in it for everyone."

The message is there are a lot of different tastes in this world and golf and golf course architecture can accommodate them all----although certainly not on the same golf course! 

[Tom Huckaby]

Guys:

When it comes to this dynamic or whatever it's been on here between Melyvn and TomH or whomever else why don't you just embrace the essence of my "Big World Theory"----ie "Golf and golf course architecture is a great big thing and there really is room in it for everyone."

The message is there are a lot of different tastes in this world and golf and golf course architecture can accommodate them all----although certainly not on the same golf course! 

Tom - appreciate the thought, but "big world" was tried almost immediately... and it failed miserably.

 

[Mike Benham]

I think you may be confusing me with Mike Benham.

Bob - I am honored to be mistaken for you, you on the other hand, may not be so ...

[RJ_Daley]

The message is there are a lot of different tastes in this world and golf and golf course architecture can accommodate them all----although certainly not on the same golf course!

TEP, I'd add to that, 'and not in the same match.'  I mean that there is something unpleasant and at its core 'not in the spirit of the game' in my opinion when you are actually in the midst of a golf competition, be it amatuer, pro, or amatuer with a bet going.   Let's just say you are somewhere in your middle years or older, have played the game all your life, have hung on or even improved your game over the years, and can play it traditionally, walking, using just the 'on course' yardages plates provided, and can even play to a skill level that you are pleased with if no yardage aids and other gadgets are available.   Now, you are in your club 3rd flight championship, you are competitive, you play the game by the rules (which sometimes do and don't allow carts and aids depending on venue, governing body, tournament organizers etc) and you are playing with a perfectly healthy young competitor, with a similar handicap skill as you, and you are playing on a walkable course, but perhaps a warmer day. 

Now, that kid -maybe 20-30 years younger than you, rides in a cart, uses rangefinders or skycaddies, biggest most advanced headed drivers, long putters, hottest balls, etc, etc.   

Whether he is entitled to under the rules of that competition or not;
DOESN'T IT IRK YOU as inherently unfair or somehow skews the enjoyment you should get out of a presumably fair competition based on skill and handicap golf competition VS a competition of the most high tech equipment advances and aids?  I'd have to say that while it may be increased enjoyment if you beat the fellow competitor with all the aids, it still in my mind puts a stink on the match to that extent.   

[RSLivingston_III]

I have a problem with the transition from feather ball to gutty being portrayed as Hi-teching the game. Everything I have come across in my study of that era is the gutty gained popularity because of it's durability. The info out there suggests there was a negligable difference in distance between the balls for the following decade or two. The full transition to gutty took a number of years as many players still prefered how the feather ball played. The two balls had entirely different playing characteristics. The feather ball was played on the ground with run, where as the gutty was an airborne game with considerably less run. I can't find any references until the 1870's/80's for attempts at long driving, assuming that's what everyone here is using as a standard for teching the equipment.
Morris didn't even design and patent a club until around 1890. I have examples of both of his patents and they are hardly revolution compared to some of the new designs that had been developed in previous years. All the clubs I know of that he made were very traditional in design up until about 1890.
I think that characterization of him being a proponent of tech is grossly inaccurate.
The only exception might be with regards to putters, but thats another story...

[John Burzynski]

I'll bet that everyone here would have a hell of a good time playing a few rounds of golf, no matter their opinions.  There might be a bit of good nature razzing like all good golf groups and gathering, but you'd be surprised how everyone would ultimately accept the other, distance measuring, whatever,  or whatnot.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()