Vardon and Ray have lately come over from America, where the game is developing at a great rate and, according to Vardon, they have a few amateurs who are quite capable of winning our Amateur Championship. Both he and Ray have a great opinion of Mr. Bobby Jones, and they also have naturally something to say about Mr. Chick Evans, the present amateur champion of America. When I was in the States in 1911 I had the pleasure of playing half a dozen rounds with Mr. Evans, and there never could have been any doubt that he was a great player. Perhaps the weakest part of his game in those days was his play on the green, and of course he also suffered to some extent from inexperience. From what I can gather he is now just as good a putter as a man who plays the rest of the game well can expect to be, and he has now the experience. Of Mr. Jones I know nothing except what I hear and read. Ray tells me Mr. Jones does not take his iron clubs back as far as Mr. Evans does. This is all in his favour, as with his shorter up-swing he can afford to hit the ball harder than Mr. Evans, and firmness goes towards accuracy. Therefore, as far as one can venture on an opinion without seeing both, I should think Mr. Jones a better iron player than Mr. Evans.

If they both come to Hoylake and there is the usual windy Hoylake weather, Mr. Jones should do best in this department of the game.

Now that the American courses are constructed on more modern lines than they were, and so demand greater skill, the golfers from that country are not handicapped in that respect as they used to be. They are in some degree handicapped by having only eight golfing months in the twelve, whereas we play right through the year. Certainly we play little serious golf in some months, but we are always having a knock and thus keeping our hand in, which is a great help. Even if we only experiment, this is better than leaving off altogether.

This four months' idleness is not the American golfers' greatest handicap. They are all more or less inland products, and never yet has a golfer bred on an inland course won the Open Championship on this side. An inland golfer has won the amateur event on one or two occasions ; but, generally speaking, though we have more inland than seaside bred golfers, those who are products of the genuine links have had our championships all to themselves. And so it must be, nine times out of ten, as the championships are always held on seaside courses, and the golf there is different from that on inland courses. Take two players, one who has learned his art on the links, the other inland. The latter cannot have so many shots in his bag as the other fellow who is always battling against a wind. He has never been asked to play the shots that the linksman has, and this is where I think America is handicapped.

On the other hand, the American who looks like making a champion not only plays the game at which he makes good: he also works at it, and sometimes he slaves at it, to quote Mr. Dooley. In other words, the American golfers are specialising at the game, and with their up-to-date courses they are becoming most efficient players. But the best of them have not had sufficient practice on a course where a strong wind has to be combated day after day and so calls for shots that are never thoroughly known or learned on an inland course. Training on a seaside course helps to develop a better poise at the top of swing. When there is a wind in which one can hardly stand up, one has to retain the balance in hitting the ball. This must tend to make it easy to swing when one comes to an inland course, where the wind never amounts to much. The ball is also much easier to steer on an inland course. Again, on account of the sharp undulations on a seaside course the lies are more difficult. One gets shots to play in which one is standing a foot above or below the ball with a cross-wind blowing and the hole still two hundred and fifty yards away. Now, all other things being equal, the player who can balance himself best at the top of the swing has the best chance of making that shot. As an instance of what I mean, let us compare the performances of Walter Hagen and Jim Barnes in the Open Championship at Deal last year, when we had just a fair wind blowing. I took Barnes to finish better than Hagen, for a modest half-crown with two of my friends who should be good judges. Barnes'early training on a seaside course helped me to win my bet. Now, had Barnes accompanied Hagen, Mitchell, and myself over to France, my half-crown would have been on Hagen against Barnes, for the reason that the French Championship was played at La Boulie, an inland course, where it blew very little but rained a great deal. My firm belief is that Barnes will finish ahead of Hagen on a seaside course until the latter gets more experience of this type of golf. I reckon Hagen to be the best golfer America has yet produced, at least as far as I have seen, as he has the best methods. I believe in his square stance and fairly upright swings and his open club-face.

The older school of 'home bred 'American golfers copied the school imported from St. Andrews, with a long flattish swing and a tendency to make all the shots come in from the right. One can get round St. Andrews with a bit of hook, and equally well without it. But it is a good thing to err on the left-hand side there. In the last few years America has imported half a dozen first-class players and, better still, coaches whom England could ill afford to lose. Most of them are converts to new and better methods than those they had originally, and this makes it all the easier for them to impart their knowledge.