THE MASTER STROKE
In his chapter on "Special Strokes with Wooden Clubs" Vardon discusses
the question of the master stroke in golf. At page 86 of _The Complete
Golfer_ he says:
Which, then, is the master stroke? I say that it is the ball
struck by any club to which a big pull or slice is
intentionally applied for the accomplishment of a specific
purpose which could not be achieved in any other way, and
nothing more exemplifies the curious waywardness of this game
of ours than the fact that the stroke which is the
confounding and torture of the beginner who does it
constantly, he knows not why, but always to his detriment,
should later on at times be the most coveted shot of all and
should then be the most difficult of accomplishment. I call
it the master shot, because to accomplish it with any
certainty and perfection, it is so difficult, even to the
experienced golfer, because it calls for the most absolute
command over the club and every nerve and sinew of the body,
and the courageous heart of the true sportsman whom no
difficulty may daunt, and because, when properly done, it is
a splendid thing to see, and for a certainty results in
material gain to the man who played it.
Here we have a very definite statement by one of the greatest stroke
players in the world, that the master stroke at golf is "the ball
struck by any club to which a big pull or slice is intentionally
applied for the accomplishment of a specific purpose which could not
be achieved in any other way."
It is to me a most extraordinary thing to find a golfer of the ability
of Harry Vardon classing the pull and the slice as practically equal
in order of merit. Anyone who is acquainted with golf must know that
the pull is an infinitely more difficult stroke to play correctly than
the slice. The slice is a stroke which is comparatively easy, but no
one can truthfully say the same thing of the pull.
Before we proceed to a consideration of the question of the master
stroke, it will be interesting to quote what Taylor has to say on the
subject. At page 88 of _Taylor on Golf_ he says:
Still it is not advisable, neither do I look upon it as being
golf in the truest sense of the word, for the knack of
pulling or slicing to be cultivated, as I am afraid it is by
a great many players. No compromise should be made with a
fault.
Here we see that what Harry Vardon regards as the master strokes of
the game, are looked upon by Taylor as faults.
I may say at the outset that I am not inclined to agree with Vardon at
all in this matter of the master stroke in golf. If there is one
stroke which stands out above and beyond all others in its demand for
accuracy, and a perfect knowledge of the method of applying spin, also
a supreme ability perfectly to apply that knowledge, it is the stroke
which is commonly called a "wind-cheater"; that is to say a long low
ball which flies very close to the earth for the greater portion of
its journey, and rises towards the end of its flight to its greatest
height.
Although this ball is called the wind-cheater, it is just as effective
and just as useful on a perfectly still day as it is against a
howling gale, for this stroke is, in my opinion, without any doubt
whatever, the master stroke in golf, and if a man has this stroke he
should be very willing to allow anybody else to have all the pulls and
slices in golf. The supreme importance of this stroke is so pronounced
that I have always wondered at the comparatively unimportant position
which has been given to it in every book on golf, with the exception
of my own works. Pulling and slicing, as golfing shots, may be said to
be practically unnecessary if a man has full command of the plain
drive without back-spin and the wind-cheater.
Very frequently when a man is called upon to pull or to slice, it is
to remedy a previous error, and there can be no doubt that with the
pull and the slice it is an utter impossibility to keep on the line in
the same manner as can one who uses back-spin in the drive. The secret
of the greatest golf of the future lies, in my opinion, in the proper
application of back-spin in the drive.
I do not intend here to go fully into the effect of spin on the flight
of the ball, as I shall do that at length in my chapter on "The Flight
of the Golf Ball." Suffice it to say that the tremendous advantage of
the ball with back-spin is, that being hit as the club is descending,
and the hands at the time of impact with the ball being a little in
front of the ball, the loft of the club is, to a certain extent,
minimised, so that the ball is, in effect, struck with a club which
has much less loft than would be the case if it were driven in the
ordinary manner. This means that for the first part of the carry, the
flight of the ball is very low, and as the club was not at the lowest
portion of the swing when it struck the ball, the wind-cheater
acquires a large amount of back-spin which asserts itself later on,
and causes the ball to reach the highest point in its trajectory
towards the end of its flight.
One of the greatest of the many merits of this ball is that the method
of producing it almost commands a follow-through down the intended
line of flight. This in itself tends to give better direction than any
of the ordinary golf strokes. The pull and the slice, as is well
known, curve very much in their flight, and especially in a wind. It
is utterly impossible for the best golfer in the world to say within
twenty yards as regards direction, and that, of course, means much
more than twenty yards--in fact, practically double that--where the
ball will come to rest; but this is not so with the wind-cheater, for
although the ball has been sent on its way with a very heavy
back-spin, so much of it has been exhausted in lifting the ball at the
end of its flight, that by the time the ball strikes the earth there
is little, if any, retarding power in the back-spin, so that the ball
is frequently a very good runner. I must, however, devote a little
attention here to the method of production of the pull and the slice.
There is a wonderful amount of misconception about these strokes, even
in the minds of the greatest golfers. Let me, before I proceed to
examine what Harry Vardon has to say about the production of the pull,
state the general principles upon which the production of all spin is
produced. Spin is imparted to a golf ball, as we shall see more
clearly later on, merely by the fact that the face of the club,
instead of following through after the ball in the intended line of
flight, crosses the line of flight at a more or less acute angle; for
the slice the club head comes from the far side of the line of flight
across towards the player's side of the line of flight; for the pull
the process is reversed, and the club head, coming from the player's
side, swings right out across the line of flight; in the wind-cheater
the club passes downwards along the intended line of flight. There is,
of course, no such thing in practical golf as top-spin, so we need not
consider that.
There is one other important point which I must mention here. At the
moment of impact the face of the club must be, to all intents and
purposes, at a right angle to the intended line of flight. For
instance, in a slice, any attempt to produce the slice by laying back
the toe of the club, or any tricks of this nature, must result in
disaster. It is impossible for the person playing the stroke _to time_
anything to be done by him _during impact_, and it stands to reason
that nothing will affect the ball except what takes place during
impact. This, then, resolves the stroke into the fact that the contact
between the ball and the club is, as I have frequently insisted, and,
as we have seen, James Braid declares, merely an incident in the
travel of the club's head in the arc which it is describing.
Although I have said that the face of the club must be at a right
angle to the line of flight of the ball, this is not exactly correct,
although it is so for all purposes of practical golf. The reason I say
that it is not correct, is that practically every well played slice
starts off on the line to the hole a little to the left of the true
line of flight, so that it is probable that at the moment of impact
the face of the club is not at a dead right angle to the initial
portion of the flight of the ball. However, it is unquestionably
necessary that the face of the club should be as nearly as possible at
a right angle to the intended line of flight at the moment that the
impact takes place. If this point is not attended to as carefully in
the pull and the slice as it is in other strokes, the result must be
inaccuracy of direction, and very pronounced inaccuracy too.
Let us now turn to Harry Vardon's directions as to how to play the
pull. He says:
Now there is the pulled ball to consider, for surely there
are times when the making of such a shot is eminently
desirable. Resort to a slice may be unsatisfactory, or it may
be entirely impossible, and one important factor in this
question is that the pulled ball is always much longer than
the other--in fact, it has always so much length in it that
many players in driving in the ordinary way from the tee, and
desiring only to go straight down the course, systematically
play for a pull and make allowances for it in their
direction.
He then gives instructions for the stance, and proceeds:
The obvious result of this stance is that the handle of the
club is in front of the ball, and this circumstance must be
accentuated by the hands being held even slightly more
forward than for an ordinary drive. Now they are held forward
in front of the head of the club. In the grip there is
another point of difference. It is necessary that in the
making of this stroke the right hand should do more work than
the left, and therefore the club should be held rather more
loosely by the left hand than by its partner.
We may pause for a moment here to remark that this is another one of
those very noticeable instances wherein Vardon infers that it is usual
for the left to do more work than the right, and we may also note that
he here gives advice which he has in other portions of his book
condemned--that is, attempting to hold more loosely with one hand than
with the other, for it is obvious that if, as he has told us will be
the case, we attempt to give the right hand a watching brief over the
left, the right will come in too suddenly at some portion of the
swing, and it is also equally obvious that if we follow out Vardon's
advice here and allow the left to hold the watching brief, it will
similarly misconduct itself.
I must emphasise again, before I pass on, the very pronounced
inference which Vardon here makes that, generally speaking, the left
is the dominant partner. Vardon then continues: "The latter," that is
the right hand, "will duly take advantage of this slackness," that is
the slackness of the left hand, "and will get in just the little extra
work that is wanted of it. In the upward swing carry the club head
just along the line which it would take for an ordinary drive."
This, I may say, is remarkable advice, for it is well known that in
playing the pull the club head begins to move away from the ball,
inwards, the moment it is lifted from the ground. This, of course, is
natural, for generally speaking, the club goes back to the ball in the
way in which it comes up, and as the ball is played by an outward
glancing blow, it stands to reason that it will not be taken back
straight from the ball as Vardon states here. That, however, is by the
way.
Let us now continue with what Vardon has to say:
The result of all this arrangement, and particularly of the
slackness of the left hand and comparative tightness of the
right, is that there is a tendency in the downward swing for
the face of the club to turn over to some extent, that is,
for the top edge of it to be overlapping the bottom edge.
This is exactly what is wanted, for, in fact, it is quite
necessary that at the moment of impact the right hand should
be beginning to turn over in this manner, and if the stroke
is to be a success the golfer must see that it does so, but
the movement must be made quite smoothly and naturally, for
anything in the nature of a jab, such as is common when too
desperate efforts are made to turn over an unwilling club,
would certainly prove fatal.
We have here Vardon's description of how to obtain a pulled ball which
he regards as one of the master strokes of the game, but his
conception of this stroke is absolutely erroneous. We are told by
Vardon that in making this stroke "in the upward swing" we are to
carry the club head just along the line which it would take for an
ordinary drive. Now, at page 88, Vardon refers to "the inflexible rule
that as the club head goes up so will it come down."
It is now established beyond any doubt whatever that the pull is
played by an outwardly glancing blow, the converse of the inwardly
glancing blow of the slice, but if to obtain a pull we are to follow
Vardon's advice and take the club straight back away from the ball,
how are we going to come back by the same track as we went up, which
is straight down the line of flight, and at the same time to obtain an
outwardly glancing blow? The thing is a manifest impossibility, and,
as a matter of fact, is not practical golf. This idea of turning over
the wrists at the moment of impact is an utterly erroneous notion
which I must deal with somewhat more fully. I shall show that James
Braid originally had this idea himself, but that he has now, in all
probability, abandoned it.
It is evident that Vardon has but a hazy idea of the correct method of
production of the pull, although, as we well know, he is a master of
the art of producing this stroke. At page 92 of _The Complete Golfer_
he gives his description of the manner in which he thinks one of the
master strokes of the game is produced. I must quote him again fully,
for it is necessary to do this in order that my readers may follow the
trend of his mind:
It is necessary that in the making of this stroke the right
hand should do more work than the left, and therefore the
club should be held rather more loosely by the left hand than
by its partner. The latter will duly take advantage of this
slackness, and will get in just the little extra work that is
wanted of it. In the upward swing carry the club head just
along the line which it would take for an ordinary drive. The
result of all this arrangement, and particularly the
slackness of the left hand and comparative tightness of the
right is, that there is a tendency in the downward swing for
the face of the club to turn over to some extent, that is for
the top edge of it to be overlapping the bottom edge. This is
exactly what is wanted, for, in fact, it is quite necessary
that at the moment of impact the right hand should be
beginning to turn over in this manner, and if the stroke is
to be a success the golfer must see that it does so.
It will be seen from this quotation that Vardon is under the
impression that in playing the pull the club goes straight back from
the ball in the same manner as it would be taken were one playing an
ordinary drive. We notice, too, that he commits himself to the
statement, that it is necessary that the top edge of the face of the
club should be practically overlapping the bottom at the moment of
impact. This, in effect, means that the club is actually deprived of
its loft at the moment of impact.
It will be apparent to anyone who understands very little about the
ordinary principles of mechanics that it would be an impossibility to
play an effective shot in this manner. Indeed it would be impossible
to raise the ball from the ground, and any attempt whatever to give
this turn over of the wrists at the moment of impact would inevitably
result in a very large proportion of foundered balls.
It must be remembered that Vardon is advising the player to
consciously attempt to regulate the loft of his club during an impact
which lasts for no more than the ten-thousandth of a second. Golf is
at all times a game calling for a remarkable degree of mechanical
accuracy, but it is obviously asking, even of the most perfect player,
far too much when we request that he shall, by the action of his hands
and wrists, regulate the loft of his club in an impact which lasts for
such an extremely short time. We must remember that if the shot were
played as Vardon describes it, the loft of the club face is
continually changing during, let us say, the foot before it gets to
the ball and the foot after it has passed it.
The whole idea of the stroke in golf, in so far as regards loft, ought
to be that at the moment of impact the player has nothing whatever to
do with the loft, his duty being confined to hitting the ball in a
certain way and allowing the loft to do its own work, and to take the
angle at which it will naturally come down, but any attempt
consciously to regulate the loft of the club during impact, especially
on the lines laid down by Vardon, must inevitably result in disaster.
Vardon tells us that at the moment of impact it is necessary that the
club face should be turning so that it will be practically overlapping
at least the moment after the ball is struck.
His error is by no means an uncommon one. The same thing exists in
lawn-tennis in the lifting drive, where about ninety per cent of the
players who try the lifting drive under the impression that it is got
by a turn over of the wrist, do the turn too soon and founder the
ball--in other words, put it into the net. If the pull were to be
played in the way Vardon describes it, the result would be exactly the
same. The ball would simply be topped or absolutely foundered.
I cannot emphasise too strongly the fact that this turn over of the
wrists in the pull has nothing whatever to do with the production of
the stroke, although Vardon says that it has. This turn over of the
wrists will, if it precedes the moment of impact, ruin the stroke. It
must come naturally long after the ball has gone on its way, and it
must come not by any voluntary or conscious effort on the part of the
player, but as the natural result of the correctly played first
portion of the stroke.
In my chapter on "The Flight of the Ball," I shall go more fully into
the mechanical principles of the production of the pull. It will be
sufficient for me to say here that the pull is produced by an upward,
outward, glancing blow, but there must be no attempt whatever to alter
the loft of the club at the moment of impact.
In so flatly contradicting such a master of stroke play as Harry
Vardon, it may be as well for me to fortify myself by evidence taken
from the work and photographs of another famous golfer who was himself
originally under the impression that the pull was obtained in this
manner, but who has apparently since abandoned this idea. I feel sure
that for the great majority of players who know anything whatever of
elementary mechanics, it will be unnecessary for me to do this, but
there is a vast number of players who are not well acquainted with
even simple mechanical problems, and it is for these that I take the
trouble to bring forward James Braid to give evidence against this
idea of turning over the wrist at the moment of impact.
We must remember that Braid himself has stated in _How to Play Golf_
that the striking of the ball is merely an incident in the travel of
the club's head, and we must remember that this book _How to Play
Golf_ was written long after the quotation which I am now about to
give from _Great Golfers_ at page 175. There James Braid tells us
that "in playing for a _pulled ball_ the right wrist turns over at the
moment of impact." This is emphatic enough, and Braid here commits
himself to the same statement as Vardon does, that is to say, that the
right wrist turns over _at the moment of impact_. This is what I
absolutely deny.
It is natural to suppose that Braid's book, _Advanced Golf_, contains
the author's last word with regard to the science of playing the
pulled ball, one of the balls, let us remember, which Harry Vardon
considers the master stroke in the game. Let us therefore turn to
Braid's illustration of playing for a pull in the four photographs
following page 78. Braid here fortunately illustrates the actual
moment of impact in the pull, and it will be seen on examining his
club that it is apparently perfectly soled, that is to say that the
club is lying as truly and flatly as it is at the moment of address.
This is very important and quite incontrovertible as being Braid's
considered opinion, because this stroke is a posed photograph for the
purpose of illustrating the impact in the pull. We see quite clearly
from this photograph that there is absolutely no turning over of the
wrists, but that on the contrary, the right hand is, if anything, well
back on the shaft, and showing no sign whatever, as I have already
said--not even a symptom--of beginning to turn over. Nor, as a matter
of fact, should it do so. The club does not begin to turn over in the
manner described until it has reached practically the full extent of
its outward swing on the far side of the line of flight.
This photograph is, in itself, quite sufficient evidence to show us
that Braid has abandoned his idea with regard to the necessity for
turning over the right wrist at the moment of impact in the pull, but
it is instructive to note that there is in the whole of _Advanced
Golf_ not one word about turning over the wrists at the moment, of
impact in the pull, so that we may take it as definitely settled that
James Braid has, since the publication of _Great Golfers_, found out
his error in this matter, for, against his one sentence in _Great
Golfers_ that "in playing for a _pulled ball_ the right wrist turns
over at the moment of impact," we have not only his statement in _How
to Play Golf_ that the impact is a mere incident in the travel of the
club head, but the still more eloquent fact that in _Advanced Golf_ he
says no word whatever in support of this theory, and that he most
expressly and emphatically by his own photographs contradicts the
idea.
We need not consider what Taylor has to say in connection with the
production of the pull, for we see clearly that his idea of both the
slice and the pull is that they are merely errors in golf and not to
be encouraged.
Let us turn now to a consideration of the slice. The same
misconception which is so prominently shown by nearly every writer
about golf with regard to the pull obtains also in connection with the
slice. This is clearly shown by James Braid in _Great Golfers_, for
following the quotation which I have already given with regard to the
pulled ball, he says: "But for a sliced ball I cut a little across the
ball, the wrist action being the reverse of that for a pull, viz., the
right hand is rather under than over."
[Illustration: PLATE IX. JAMES BRAID
Here, in spite of what Braid says, it will be seen that his
weight at the finish goes almost entirely on to the left
foot.]
Braid tells us that for a pulled ball he turns his right wrist over
_at the moment of impact_. Well, as the wrist action for the slice is
the reverse of this, it follows that _at the moment of impact_ he
turns his right wrist under. This is a very common misconception. It
is one which is held by an astonishing number of practical players.
Mr. Walter J. Travis in his book on _Practical Golf_ repeatedly makes
the error of thinking that this turn under of the wrist has any
effect whatever on the stroke, but it is just as great an error to
think that this turn under of the wrist has anything to do with the
production of the slice, as it is to think that the turning over of
the wrist has anything whatever to do with the pull. Both of these
actions quite naturally _follow_ the correct production of the strokes
referred to.
The slice is an inwardly glancing blow, if anything, with a suspicion
of downward action, whereas, as I have already explained, the pull is
an outward, upward, glancing blow. There must be no attempt whatever
to turn the right wrist under or downward at the moment of playing the
slice, as Braid says he does in _Great Golfers_, although I have not
been able to find the same statement in _Advanced Golf_, where we
should naturally expect to see it if Braid still has this idea. The
curious thing is that in James Braid's illustrations in _Advanced
Golf_ for playing a slice the right hand is much further forward on
the club than it is in those showing the grip for the pull; in fact
were it not that the stance shows clearly that the photographs are
correctly marked, one would be much inclined to think that they had
been wrongly entitled. In playing for the slice, Braid's hand is well
over the club, whereas in the pull it is almost underneath it. In
_Advanced Golf_ this grip for a slice is extremely pronounced, in fact
very much more so than in his illustrations of the stance and address
for this stroke which he gives in his book _How to Play Golf_.
The popular misconception about the slice is well instanced by what
Harry Vardon has to say in connection with the cut mashie approach. He
says at page 129 of _The Complete Golfer_:
It is also most important that at the instant when ball and
club come into contact the blade should be drawn quickly
towards the left foot. To do this properly requires not only
much dexterity, but most accurate timing, and first attempts
are likely to be very clumsy and disappointing, but many of
the difficulties will disappear with practice, and when at
last some kind of proficiency has been obtained, it will be
found that the ball answers in the most obedient manner to
the call that is made upon it. It will come down so dead upon
the green that it may be chipped up in the air until it is
almost directly over the spot at which it is desired to place
it.
I have no hesitation whatever in saying that this is absolutely bad
golf. In all cases where cut is applied to the golf ball there must be
no attempt whatever to introduce anything into the stroke during the
period of contact between the ball and the club. I am here dealing
with Vardon's statement with regard to the mashie approach, but it is
apparent that all cut shots are, in effect, slices, and if one gets
the idea into one's mind that the slice is obtained by anything which
is done consciously during impact and timed by the player to be done
in that space of time, it must militate severely against one's chance
of producing a successful shot.
A little farther down on the same page Vardon says:
At the moment of impact the arms should be nearly full length
and stiff, and the wrists as stiff as it is possible to make
them. I said that the drawing of the blade towards the left
foot would have to be done quickly because obviously there is
very little time to lose; but it must be done smoothly and
evenly, without a jerk, which would upset the whole swing,
and if it is begun the smallest fraction of a second too soon
the ball will be taken by the toe of the club, and the
consequences will not be satisfactory. I have returned to
make this the last word about the cut, because it is the
essence of the stroke and it calls for what a young player
might well regard as an almost hopeless nicety of perfection.
Here it is quite evident that Vardon thinks that the cut on a mashie
approach is played by something imported into the stroke _during
impact_, whereas the truth is that the club in a good shot properly
played never alters from the line of the arc mapped out by the mind
from the very beginning of the stroke. Vardon says that the cut "must
be applied smoothly and evenly without a jerk, which would upset the
whole swing." It is obvious that if the head of the club has travelled
in a certain line down to within a fraction of an inch of the ball,
and is then suddenly pulled across the ball, _there must be a jerk_.
This, however, is not what happens when the stroke is well played. The
club face simply passes across the intended line of flight of the ball
with the front edge of the sole approximately at a right angle to such
intended line of flight, but the club head proceeds across the line in
an uninterrupted arc. If what Vardon, Mr. Travis, and many other
people lay down, were correct, a drawing of the stroke would show the
club head proceeding to the ball in a curve, then a sudden jump
inwards towards the player with a continuation approximating to the
follow-through of the first half of the stroke, but it is almost
needless to say that nothing of this kind takes place either in this
modified slice or the true slice at golf, which we shall have to deal
with more particularly later on.
Speaking of this shot--the cut mashie stroke--Vardon says: "It will
come so dead upon the green that it may be chipped up into the air
until it is almost perfectly over the spot at which it is desired to
place it."
This may be so. I have played the shot myself repeatedly, and I have
repeatedly seen perhaps the greatest master in the world of the cut
mashie approach, to wit J. H. Taylor, playing this shot, and there
cannot be any doubt whatever that this particular class of mashie
approach nearly always gives the ball a considerable run from left to
right. This, indeed, is perfectly natural, for one goes right in
underneath the ball and gives it a tremendous side roll tending to
make it swerve in the air from left to right, and when it strikes the
green, to run in the same direction. So pronounced indeed is the
swerve and run of this ball that I have seen J. H. Taylor playing at
Mid-Surrey when the green was practically completely obstructed by a
large tree, play this shot so that it curved round the tree on to the
edge of the green and then ran in almost to the pin.
The shot which stops so dead at the hole, as Harry Vardon mentions,
must of necessity have much more in the nature of back cut which
produces back-spin than has the ball played by the stroke which he
describes.
Vardon refers to the pull and the slice as being the master strokes in
golf. I have already said that if I had to pick any one stroke which
could be called the master stroke in golf, it would be the
wind-cheater, and it is open to question if the long plain drive is
not entitled to greater respect than either the pull or the slice. Be
that as it may, there is in my mind very little doubt about the
respective merits of the wind-cheater and the other strokes referred
to. The wind-cheater is the ball which is produced with a large amount
of back-spin. Harry Vardon describes it at page 105, and he explains
that in order to make the push shot perfectly "the sight should be
directed to the centre of the ball, and the club should be brought
directly on to it (exactly on the spot marked on the diagram, page
170)." I may remark here that the spot shown on the ball at page 170
of _The Complete Golfer_ for a push shot is absolutely above the
centre of mass of the ball, and that at page 106 Harry Vardon gives a
diagram of "The push shot with the cleek." In this diagram he shows
that the face of the cleek at the moment of impact is perpendicular.
It is quite certain that even if one could hit the ball above the
centre of its mass with a perpendicular face, it would be impossible
to get the ball off the ground in this manner. The push shot with the
cleek must be played with loft on the club, and indeed it does not
matter what club is used for this shot, there must be _loft_ on the
face of the club _at the moment of impact_ if one is to obtain a
satisfactory result, and not only must there be loft on the face of
the club, but it is a certainty that the impact of the club with the
ball must be _below_ the centre of the ball's mass, and not as Vardon
shows it at page 170 of _The Complete Golfer_, above it.
Vardon, for playing this push shot, uses a cleek with a shorter handle
and with more loft than his ordinary cleek. This, indeed, is quite
natural, for the shot is, in the nature of it, a very straight up and
down shot in the line to the hole, and also as it is desirable that
the ball shall be hit by the club before the club head has reached the
lowest point in its swing, Vardon naturally has his hands forward of
the ball at the moment of impact. This, of course, to a certain
extent, counteracts the loft of the cleek, but in no case does it
counteract it to the extent shown by Vardon in the diagram at page 106
of _The Complete Golfer_, for were the blow made as shown by these
diagrams, it would be a mechanical impossibility to obtain the result
described by Vardon.
The reason for keeping the hands forward of the ball is, as I have
indicated, that the club head may make impact with the ball before it
has reached the bottom of its swing, and Vardon's reason for playing
with a club of greater loft than is usually employed is that this
greater loft helps to make up for the fact that his hands are forward
of the ball at the moment of impact. Playing this stroke with an
ordinary cleek would rob the cleek of so much of its loft that the
probability is that the flight of the ball would in its initial stages
be too low to give a satisfactory result.
Vardon says at page 106: "The diagram on this page shows the passage
of the club through the ball as it were, exactly," but the trouble is
that it does not show the passage of the club through the ball "as it
were, exactly," because at the moment of impact with the ball the club
must have sufficient loft on its face to lift the ball, and, moreover,
the face of the club must make its first contact at a point at most as
high as the centre of the ball, but preferably much lower, so that the
force of the blow has an opportunity of exerting itself upwardly
through the centre of the ball's mass. Vardon plays this shot
perfectly, but he does not describe it as well as he plays it. He says
at page 106 of _The Complete Golfer_:
I may remark that personally I play not only my half cleek
stroke, but all my cleek strokes in this way, so much am I
devoted to the qualities of flight which are thereby imparted
to the ball, and though I do not insist that others should do
likewise in all cases, I am certainly of opinion that they
are missing something when they do not learn to play the half
shot in this manner. The greatest danger they have to fear is
that in their too conscious efforts to keep the club clear of
the ground until after impact, they will overdo it and simply
top the ball, when, of course, there will be no flight at
all.
There can be no doubt that this stroke is an extremely valuable one,
particularly with the cleek, and it is a stroke which will well repay
anyone for the time spent in practising it. There is, indeed, as
Vardon says, a great danger of the player topping the ball if he tries
to keep too far away from the ground until after the impact, but he
must at all costs get out of his mind the idea of hitting the ball
where Vardon says it should be hit, viz. above the centre of the
ball's mass. This never was golf. It is not golf now, and it never
will be golf.
It is almost incredible, but is a fact, that a golf journalist who
presumed to say that he knew what was "at the back of his (Harry
Vardon's) head" stated in an article in a sporting magazine in London,
that this push shot, one of Vardon's most beautiful and accurate
strokes, is obtained by thumping the ball on to the earth--in fact
that the stroke is almost what one might term a "bump ball," to use
the cricket term. Any idea more abhorrent to the true golfer than the
notion of producing his finest cleek shots and approach shots by
banging the ball on to the earth can hardly be imagined, nor anything
more incorrect.
The wind-cheater is an invaluable stroke, but there can be no doubt
that it is a stroke calling for a very considerable degree of skill in
order to play it perfectly, or indeed very well, and in connection
with this matter there was a very peculiar but entirely mistaken idea
that for the production of this stroke it was necessary at the moment
of impact to turn over both wrists. This idea obtained for years, and
notwithstanding my repeated explanations, the deeply rooted notion was
persevered in and used in such a manner by many players that it
seriously interfered with their game.
Some of the criticism which I had to put up with at the time that I
was instructing golfers in these matters was very remarkable. I must
give one instance which seems almost incredible. I had explained in
the pages of _Golf Illustrated_, the leading golfing journal of
London, how the pull is produced, and I had therein indicated as
clearly and decidedly as I now do that it was impossible to produce
the pull by the method indicated by Harry Vardon. Mr. A. C. M. Croome,
the well-known international player, solemnly asserted in the _Morning
Post_ that he had himself seen Harry Vardon produce the shot in the
manner which I said was an impossibility, and that in effect an ounce
of practice was worth a pound of theory.
I took the trouble to explain that a cinematograph with about 400
pictures, or perhaps a good many less per second, was sufficient to
deceive an ordinary man into thinking that he saw a continuous picture.
I explained that the camera which took the photographs for my purpose
was timed to give an exposure of one twelve-hundred-and-fiftieth of a
second, and that this was, therefore, at least three times as rapid as
the machine which deceives an ordinary man into thinking that he sees a
single picture, but notwithstanding that the camera was so tremendously
rapid in its exposure, the golf club beats it to such an extent that at
the moment of impact the club is represented by a swish of light or
movement on the plate, and the ball immediately after impact is
represented by something resembling a section of a sperm candle. So
extremely rapid is its flight that it is impossible to obtain even by so
short an exposure anything resembling clear definition.
I showed clearly that an implement which was moving so fast as to
absolutely beat the machine which was three times as fast as the
machine which deceived the human being, was not likely to be able to
be followed accurately by the human eye unaided in any way whatever.
Still, that was the kind of criticism which I had to undergo.
I was told exactly the same thing when I explained that in the push
shot there must be no attempt whatever to turn over the wrists at the
moment of impact, that in this shot as in all other strokes at golf,
there must be no attempt whatever made to interfere with, or alter,
during impact, the angle of the loft taken at the time of address, for
any such attempt as this must end in trouble.
It was some years after this controversy that Mr. A. C. M. Croome
produced a column in the _Morning Post_ entitled "Justice," in which
he referred to the matter as follows:
MR. VAILE RIGHT
It is common talk that Sherlock has improved a great deal
since he migrated from Oxford to Stoke Poges, and for once
common talk is right. His driving, at least when the ground
is hard, is distinctly longer than it used to be, but the
increased length has not been purchased at the expense of
steadiness. The ball still flies from his wooden clubs along
a line ruled straight to the hole. Even more valuable to him
than the gain in length is the acquisition of all that range
of shots which, if correctly played, leave the striker posed
with his arms straight out and the back of his right hand
uppermost.
A few years ago I, in common with many other misguided
golfers, believed that the movement of the right hand was the
cause, not the consequence, of correct execution.
Consequently a large percentage of the shots attempted to be
played in this way went anywhere but to the desired place. We
turned the key in the lock too soon. So far as I know Mr. P.
A. Vaile was the first publicist to set forth the truth. I
have differed from him on many points and found myself unable
to follow the more abstruse of his treatises. It is a
pleasure to acknowledge a debt to him, and it is a heavy
debt, for a misconception of the work done by the right hand
in holding the ball up against a left hand wind is fraught
with disastrous consequences. Sherlock was performing this
feat most exactly on Tuesday and hitting the ball monstrous
far with his irons forbye.
I was very pleased to see this statement by Mr. Croome, for several
reasons. It was a sportsmanlike acknowledgment of error, and a fine
instance of what I call "the detached mind," which is extremely rare
in England. The majority of controversialists are too much taken up
with the personal aspect of the controversy, to remember that the
controversy if it is worth entering upon, must always be of more
importance than the controversialists, but beyond this, it is always
of importance, especially for one who is in the habit of writing golf,
to know the game to the core, for such an one can do much to spread a
correct knowledge of the game, and this misconception of the action of
the wrists has been responsible for millions of foundered shots.
I cannot help thinking, however, that in Mr. Croome's generous
acknowledgment of error, he was, to a certain extent, committing
another error, for when he spoke of "all that range of shots, which if
correctly played, leave the striker posed with his arms right out and
the back of his right hand uppermost" he referred naturally to balls
which have been played in the main with back-spin, but a little later
on he proceeded to say:
It is a pleasure to acknowledge a debt to him, and it is a
heavy debt, for a misconception of the work done by the right
hand in holding the ball up against a left hand wind is
fraught with disastrous consequences.
Here it will be evident that Mr. Croome is referring to a pulled ball,
but at no time when one has obtained a pulled ball by a stroke
properly played, will the finish be such as that described by Mr.
Croome. The finish described by him is the characteristic finish of
the wind-cheater type of ball, but, notwithstanding this, the point is
that Mr. Croome has acknowledged the error with regard to the turn
over of the wrists; as he very well puts it, "we turned the key in the
lock too soon." That very succinctly summarises the matter, and it
will be sufficient for our purpose in this chapter.
I must quote again a passage in Mr. Croome's article. He says: "Even
more valuable to him than the gain in length is the acquisition of all
that range of shots which, if correctly played, leave the striker
posed with his arms straight out and the back of the right hand
uppermost." This is a somewhat curious sentence. As a matter of fact,
anyone who acquires this range of shots will acquire with it extra
distance, for the finish, as I have already stated, but cannot state
too often or too emphatically, is the characteristic finish of the
wind-cheater--a ball which carries the beneficial back-spin of golf,
the secret at once of length and direction.