That I cannot believe is true, for although I am not going to say that the golf played in the present day is on the average in any marked degree better than it was twelve to fourteen years ago, still I cannot think there has been any retrograde movement, and at the present moment there are certainly many more really first-class players than there were in the days when Vardon was at his prime.

The great development in the playing of the game occurred in relation to amateur golf between the years 1887 and 1897. For professional golf it lasted from 1893 to 1900. The standards set up by Mr. Ball for amateur golf and by Vardon for professional golf have never been improved upon.

It is possible to give many reasons to account for the improvement in the standard of play. Some will tell you that it is mainly due to the more utilitarian species of clubs that we use nowadays, and there can be but little doubt that the present day model of club with its comparatively short, compact head is a much more serviceable weapon than was its long, narrow-headed predecessor. As I have said in a previous chapter, the main improvement in the modeling of clubs was, to my way of thinking, due to the introduction of the "bulger," which is the forefather of the present day wooden club. It was just about at the same time that the general standard of the playing of the game began to evidence a marked improvement.

However, I cannot think that the improvement in the make and shape of clubs has in any great degree been responsible for the manifest improvement in the art of playing the game. I am distinctly more inclined to accord the credit to the players themselves, and in doing so I am not going to imply that the men of the present day were in any way gifted with greater natural genius than, say, young Tommy Morris.

The player of the present day has worked out his own salvation by following the precepts and principles set up from time to time by certain individual players, who by the aid of great natural genius (which genius has been unhindered and untrammeled by traditional principles) have served to produce a class of game which was superior to the finest standard exhibited in the past and by degrees other players have worked their game up to this standard. In their case the latent talent was present, but did not come to light until they were supplied with an incentive, and such men as Mr. Ball among the amateurs and J. H. Taylor among the professionals, both of whom can be classed as "natural geniuses "in playing the game, served at different periods to supply this necessary incentive.

I am not sufficiently intimate with the early days of American amateur golf to compare correctly the form of fifteen years ago with that of the present day, but from what I know of the British players who were a power in the land in the early days of the game in the States I can only arrive at one conclusion, and that is that the standard of golf as played by amateurs in the United States at present must be immeasurably superior to that played twelve to fifteen years ago.

One cannot get away from the fact that the improvement in the standard must in a very great degree have been due to Mr. Walter Travis. It is a little difficult to compare Mr. Travis with the men who were responsible for the improvement in the standard on this side of the Atlantic, as Mr. Travis is essentially what is termed a "made player," in that he studiously and carefully worked out the theories and principles of the game until after some years' hard and persistent application he evolved a game which was superior to that previously played in America.

On the other hand Mr. Ball and Taylor made their debut in first class golf fully equipped for the battle, and were probably at that time just as fine players as they have ever been in their long careers, in truth, it is said that Mr. Ball has himself expressed the view that he was as good a player at fourteen years of age as he has ever been in his life, and it is on record that at that age he finished in fifth position in the Open Championship at Prestwick, a wonderful testimony to his natural genius for the game.

However, because Mr. Travis had of necessity to evolve his game by assiduous practise, it does not in any way alter the fact that he has been of wonderful service to the game in America, as he set up a standard which had never previously been approached by amateur talent and the effect is now to be seen in the numerous young players who have either equalled or nearly approached that standard. But, and this is a big "but," I have never yet seen an American amateur display form which for continued scientific accuracy excelled that which Mr. Walter Travis displayed at Sandwich in 1904.

In what particular respect the standard of play has improved is a somewhat discussed subject, and one on which authorities are inclined to differ. Personally I hold the opinion that the leading players of the present day are more accurate exponents of the game in every department thereof, except that which applies to the play near the holeside, and in that extremely important phase of the game I do not consider that the general standard of play is as accurate or convincing as it was in the days of old. This is all the more remarkable in that the art of putting should be so much more simple than it used to be, as the putting greens of the present day, with the care and attention bestowed upon them, are much less difficult problems, than the natural putting greens one had to roll the ball over in the old days.

With the improvement of putting greens the true art of putting seems to be gradually disappearing and the more true does the surface of the ground and the texture of the grass become, the more inaccurate the standard of putting appears to be. Indeed, among our very first-class players on this side there is not a single one who can be termed a brilliant and reliable holer out, and certainly none as good as Messrs. Travers and Travis.

Why the general standard of the art of putting should have degenerated is a little difficult to understand. The only explanation would seem to be that nowadays, with the beautiful greens we have to play over, there is no necessity to practise and seriously think out the problem of finding the way into the hole, and there can be no shadow of doubt that putting is not practised in the same degree as it was, say, twenty to thirty years ago.

The young player of the present day views this phase of learning the rudiments of the game as quite an unnecessary and, moreover, a somewhat tiresome procedure.

The player of the present day is a longer driver than the player of the past generation, for he has found out that it is quite possible to hit the ball very hard and still cause it to fly comparatively straight. When I first commenced to take a serious interest in the game I was led to believe that hard hitting and accuracy were two incompatible phenomena, and this was quite an accepted theory at that time; but the present generation of players has proved this to be a complete myth, as the first-class professional not only hits his tee shots infernally hard, but, moreover, extremely accurately.

No doubt in this task he is materially helped by the present shape of wooden club head, for the old form of weapon was a somewhat impossible instrument with which to "let go." But it took years before the "don't press" theory died out altogether, and although the cult of hard hitting may nowadays have been carried somewhat to excess by the younger generation of players who are inclined to sacrifice everything for length, still it is not a bad thing to learn how to hit the ball really hard, as then one can always leaven down the amount of force to be applied; while on the other hand the player who has initially learned merely to pat the ball along with his wooden clubs invariably finds it a difficult task to learn how to hit really hard.

He has modeled his style on what are termed "pat ball" methods, and such a modeling seldom stands the strain of the application of greater force. In the game of golf it is a much simpler task to dilute the gift of power than to strengthen up the natural or acquired lack of it.

In the art of iron play, the golfer of the present day is more accurate than his predecessor, and it is the improvement in this accuracy which is probably the main reason for the raising of the general standard in the playing of the game. But I have already dealt with this question in another chapter.

Why golfers play more accurately than they used to is to my way of thinking due to the fact that they have studied the principles of the swing of the club and the question of the con-tiol of the club. In the days of old, it was considered the correct procedure to swing the club away round the back of the neck until the head was plainly visible to the left eye. The majority, however, could not swing it thus far without either breaking the swing on the way back and thus losing the true rhythm of the swing, or else employing a gymnastic effort termed "ducking at the knees." During recent years the majority of players have curtailed the length of their swing, particularly in connection with their play with iron clubs, and this has resulted in a greater degree of accuracy with no loss of power whatever.