The text-books on golf all devote considerable space to the subject of stance. Most of them give a dissertation on the rival types of stance, the "square" and the "open," and adjudicate on their merits and defects; they describe the stance which is considered best adapted for each of the various shots of the game; the straight shot, the slice, the pull, the low ball, the high ball, and so on; and they proceed to give measurements whereby, they allege, the correct stance for any shot in particular may be acquired.

The basic principle underlying the bulk of this literature is that the swing is determined by the stance; witness the following dicta:

"The stance being carefully chosen and analyzed, all that is left is to hold the club correctly. . . ." - Massy.

" To gain this result . . . place your left foot more in line with the ball. . . ." - Massy.

"The swing is, from the position I have assumed, naturally a more upright one." - J. H. Taylor.

"[The diagram] may serve a most useful purpose in helping him (the reader) to grasp quickly the principle that the swing must adjust itself to the stance. . . . I prefer to stand open, and my swing has, in consequence, adjusted itself in the manner described." - J. H. Taylor.

The italicizing is the writer's, but the quotations are taken almost at random, and they fairly represent the doctrine which is to be found, explicit or implicit, in almost everything that is written on the subject - the doctrine that the natural order of events is first stance, then swing; that the stance is a set position consciously taken up by the player in order to produce a certain type of shot. But is this doctrine sound?

After all, what is the player's object when he stands up to the ball? His object is simply to get into that position which will best give him (a) the direction he requires, and (6) the distance he requires.

As regards direction, it is axiomatic that the ball will follow the direction in which the club-head is moving as it meets and "goes through" the ball. The player's position, then, must be such that when he makes his normal swing the club-head will meet the ball and "go through" it in the line of intended direction.

How is the player to arrive at that position? Should he take up his stance by placing his teet and shoulders, according to some method of measurement, in a certain relationship with the ball, and then make his swing, or should he allow his stance to adjust itself to the swing?

According to the authorities, he should adopt the former course; witness the following quotations, which are typical:

"The true position the ball should occupy relatively to the feet, or, in other words, that which the feet should occupy in relation to the ball, is that in which the ball lies on an imaginary line drawn six or seven inches or so to the right of the left heel. . . . The toes should be turned slightly outwards." - Massy.

"If you look at the photograph . . . you will observe that the toe of the left foot is on line b, that is level with the ball, while the right foot is (say) twenty-five inches from the same line, whereas in an ordinary shot it is only nineteen inches." - Massy.

"Refer to the diagram, and you will observe that the ball should lie exactly between your feet, each of which is at twelve inches from the line b, and something less than an inch nearer the ball than in the ordinary drive." - Massy.

"The right foot should be moved in a parallel direction with the line of flight until it is just touching the next white line. In other words, the foot should be just over six inches behind the ball." - J. H. Taylor.

"Place the feet so that the ball is in a line about six inches to the right of the left heel." - Braid.

The reader is asked to consider whether this sort of thing seems right; whether, on the face of it, it is likely that the fine, free, slashing movement known as the golf swing can be arrived at in this way; whether the professionals who preach this doctrine practise it; whether an analysis of their play suggests that they have anything of the kind in view when they stand up to the ball. . . .

Let the reader now examine the alternative method, the method of deriving stance from swing. It has been seen that the player's position must be such that when he makes his normal swing the club-head will meet and "go through" the ball in the line of desired direction. If he is not to take up a position in the manner laid down by the pundits, how is he to proceed?

It is suggested that he should make trial swings over the ball until he finds the position in which the club-head is moving along the line of desired direction as it passes over the ball. That position is his stance. As he advances in experience he will be able to dispense with the trial swing over the ball; he will be able to make the necessary adjustments of his feet and shoulders as he waggles the club; and in time he will take up the appropriate position instinctively.

What is true, moreover, for the normal straight shot is equally true of the "advanced" shots, the intentional slice and pull, the low ball against the wind, the high ball down wind, and so on. In setting out to make any kind of shot, the first thing to do is to visualize the shot required, and the path which the club-head must take if the shot is to be achieved; the second thing to do is to find the position which allows the club-head to take that path.

If a slice is required, then the golfer knows that as the club-head comes on to the ball it must be crossing the line of direction, that is to say, it must be coming in toward the player. He must therefore stand so that in making his ordinary* swing the club-head passes naturally in that direction.

If a pull is required, then the golfer knows that, as the club-head "goes through" the ball, it must be crossing slightly the line of direction in an outward sense - that is, away from the player. He must stand therefore so that in making his ordinary swing the club-head passes naturally in that direction.