These foursomes are even better than those in a club meeting, because they are played on level terms. The ideal foursome is so played, and there should be no difficulty in making up a level match. Disparity of skill is a disadvantage in a four-ball match. It is not so in a foursome. Some of the very best foursomes are those in which there is on either side one really good player and one much humbler partner. A good and a weak player against two moderately strong also make an interesting match in which, by the way, the shrewd onlooker will generally bet on the former couple. If the weak partner does not try to be too strong, but confines himself to the pedestrian virtue of keeping out of bunkers, it is often wonderful how his partner can help him along and what a score the two will do between them. It is good fun for both of them. The weaker has the pleasure of helping to produce a joint result quite beyond his own individual powers, and yet is entitled to feel that he is doing his share. The better partner has to play all manner of shots that do not ordinarily come in his way, and that from unfamiliar distances. If he is of the right temperament, the greater his difficulties the greater pleasure will he take in being 'jolly'-like Mark Tapley-and 'coming out strong.'

There is a great deal that is skilful and to some extent subtle in the art of foursome play, but if we do not underrate it, neither let us make too much of it. There are some people who are spoken of, almost with bated breath, as wonderful foursome players. Sometimes we discover that all that is really meant is that they are more formidable with a partner than they are by themselves. They are even-tempered and pleasant creatures, whom it is easy to get on with, and they are clever enough to adapt their demeanour to their various partners.

Four-Ball Match and the Foursome 161

These are all good qualities very much to their credit, but there is nothing very mysterious about it. As regards their actual play, they are as a rule straight and accurate hitters rather than long ones, with a gift for avoiding the grosser forms of golfing sin and achieving a non-committal type of shot when playing the one off two ; and they are sound putters. The inference, and I think a correct one, is that steadiness is of more value in a foursome than a single. Perhaps because people do not practise enough in foursomes, they do not often play brilliantly in them, and a dogged reliable sort of golf is generally good enough to win. The completely destructive shot, which loses the hole past all hope, seems to be more shattering in a foursome. It may not shake the confidence of the man that plays it, because he knows that he is liable to do it now and again and accepts it as all in the day's work. The other partner may not be quite so philosophical over it, nor so certain that it will not occur again ; his uneasiness may react on the player and give him a feeling of guilt, from which he would not otherwise have suffered. 'The great thing in a foursome is to keep the ball in play,'as a cheerful partner once remarked to me as he slashed our common ball away into the deepest rough in all Sunningdale.

I suppose it is also because steadiness is proportionately more valuable in a foursome that the good putter is so valuable a partner. On the face of it he only gets half his usual amount of putting to do and the worth of this single talent of his should therefore be diminished. But I believe it is in fact increased. Its value is not confined to his own shots. It enables him to 'nurse 'a timid partner round, first by leaving him nothing to do in the holing out, secondly by inspiring him to play his approach shots boldly.

It is, then, a mistake to make too esoteric a mystery of foursome play. 'The ball maun be hit '(this can hardly be quoted too frequently), and nothing else will do. Moreover we shall generally flourish or fail in a foursome according as we do or do not practise obvious and inconsiderable virtues. But this is not easy. It is not easy in a single and, though there are some who always do best in double harness, it is for most people still less easy in a foursome. Nobody will ever be a good foursome player who is always reflecting that he has got a partner and wondering what that partner is thinking of him. He must study and consider his partner; he may properly allow his judgment on the kind of shot to play to be affected by the partner's existence: but when he comes to the playing of it there must be no thought but of the ball. In fact, to feel sane and normal is the object to be arrived at. For the highly strung and imaginative a good deal of practice may be wanted, but practice will do wonders in the end.

This is not a text-book of Machiavellian behaviour. A simple-minded and impetuous person, I have not the smallest claim to write one. It may be permissible, however, to say a word or two on general conduct towards a partner. As many as there are partners in the world, so many little shades of difference are there in the best manner of treating them.

Four-Ball Match and the Foursome 163

There are some who like butter laid on with a trowel and apologise to the tearful point, but on the whole not many. An honest 'Well played 'or 'sorry 'is at intervals as welcome and soothing as an honest 'Damn,' but a parrot cry of 'Hard luck, partner,' is hard indeed to bear. Some golfers are very ingenious in conveying the impression that their partners are doing all the work and making all the hole-winning shots. If delicately carried out this is a most effective artifice. I knew one good fellow, good golfer and good foursome player, who had this amiable weakness that he played best when he fancied that he was 'carrying his partner round on his back.' If his partner could play up to him, appearing to shelter himself under his wing and rely on his strength, he would perform prodigies of valour, and no matter who the opponents, down they went like corn before the sickle. Nor is this really an uncommon case. There are always partners with whom it does not pay to play too obviously well, though the exact degree of unobtrusive efficiency is, I admit, very difficult to attain. Such players are much better partners in a foursome than a four-ball match. In the one they try to help their partner along, but in the other they try to beat him as well as the two opponents.