Thursday Threads

With no live action, we go deep today....

True That - The Guardian is typically the last place one goes for insights, but this Andrew Anthony piece is actually quite good...  Here's the table-setter:

It’s one of the quirks of the English language that, if you didn’t know any better, you could imagine that the words sportsmanship and gamesmanship were synonyms. But, of

course, they mean almost the complete opposite. Gamesmanship is the art of winning by underhand or devious means. It places victory above any code of gracious behaviour.

Whereas sportsmanship entails an attitude that transcends winning and losing and instead places an emphasis on mutual respect and appreciation. In the pursuit of glory it refuses to compromise with the principles of fair play and a magnanimous spirit.

I don'y know why he finds that quirky, as gamesmanship has long been understood, particularly in our little game sport, as cheating by other means.  But still, bear with him.

He could have started his familiar antics at that stage, snapping at his caddie, grumbling at the crowd, chucking clubs, remonstrating with the heavens, demonstrating that he was, as Padraig Harrington has said, “a very sore loser”. 

But instead he accepted the possibility of defeat, made his peace with it, and realised life would go happily on if his Ryder Cup mate Rose emerged the winner. Suddenly the lavishly talented man who wilted against the iron character of Tiger Woods, and twice cracked as the grittier Harrington snatched major victories from his grasp, looked comfortable with – even happy for – his opponent. And finally García won. 

Gamesmanship stems from a desire to avoid defeat at any cost. The secret of sportsmanship is that learning how to lose can also teach you how to win.

I've excerpted the golf bits, but he takes a typically-English approach to sportsmanship in the world of sports, so give him a click.  I might have occasionally been critical of Sergio at times, say for instance the loogie in the cup, but he was nothing compared to the gamesmanship played on Stan Wawrinka....

Of All The GHIN Joints... - This has been in the works for a while:

The USGA and R&A will be working with golf's world handicapping bodies to develop

a singular handicapping system that will be applied to players worldwide, the organizations announced Wednesday. 

Currently, golfers who employ a handicap do so via one of six available systems, which can vary depending on where the game is being played and what format is most popular in that part of the world. A joint committee led by the USGA and R&A, including representatives from from each authority, plus ones from the Japan Golf Association and Golf Canada, will announce a proposal later this year.

If you're looking for something to simplify in the world of golf, this might be a good place to start.

Not to go too deep into the long grass, but there's two major differences between the U.S. and the system administered by the Council of National Golf Unions in Great Britain and Ireland.  First, the USGA system is far more complicated, involving two separate measures of course difficulty.  The rating, which is a number carried to one decimal place that typically begins with a "7", is the assessed strength of a course for a scratch golfer, whereas the slope does the same for the bogey golfer.  There's only one course rating in the UK and Ireland...

The second difference is the scores that are counted.  In the U.S. every round should be posted, whereas the islanders post only competition scores.  The trade-off should be obvious, quality vs. sample size....

Honourable Women - There has been much speculation as to how The Honourable Company would handle the process of admitting women, given the no doubt raw wounds this issue has provoke.  John Huggan takes a deep dive on the subject:

As things stand, there are 600 members of the HCEG, but as a result of a recent resolution put to the club board, that number will rise to 625. All 25 will be women, with 

none being either the wife or partner of a current member. And the hope is that all 25 will be in place within five years—before the Open Championship makes its likely return to Muirfield in either 2022 or 2023—having been given preferential (although not unprecedented) treatment once they arrive in the pool. After that five-year period is up and the quota filled, any female candidate will be treated in exactly the same way as any man wishing to join. 

How all of the above pans out remains to be seen. But, while their past record in the field of gender discrimination is hardly above criticism, the HCEG do seem to trying to figure out a more liberal future.

It seems like a reasonable straddle that will not needlessly offend any of the varied constituencies in the club.  

The Alternate View - Mike Bamberger applies his talented and experienced self to the subject of Tommy's Honour, with curious results.  Not only do I like Mike's review, though that's somehow not quite the right word, but I like the movie much more after reading his take.

Bear in mind that Mike is a movie buff, as well as his own expert on links golf,.  I wrote this post after reading Mike's, To The Linksland two years ago, and in the second half of the book Mike falls hard for Old Tom's gem Machrahanish.  Just reminding folks that Mike has chops when it comes the golf of a linksy sort... So, lets' get to his take:

It's a handsome movie. In the opening credits you see that it was produced by an outfit

called Gutta Percha Productions, and in the closing acknowledgments you see Jordan Spieth's name alongside that of his father, Shawn. For the two hours in between, you're transported to the wet-wool, warm-whiskey world where the professional game as we know it was starting to take root. Christine compared the film to the PBS series Downton Abbey because it captures its period so well and addresses the various know-your-place class questions the British do so well. I left the theater feeling like I knew Young Tom. Not just the facts-of-life stuff. The actual man. (A tip of the tam here to Jack Lowden, the actor who portrays him.) The Bamberger threesome is giving Tommy's Honour a collective six thumbs-ups. 

I don't want to oversell the movie. I wouldn't call it gripping or even surprising. But it's beautifully made and beautifully acted. In one scene, you see the shadows of the St. Andrews Cathedral on the cold, clear waters of St. Andrews Bay. It's a magnificent moment in a film that has genuine majesty.

I don't disagree with much there, except perhaps with his assessment of the acting, some of which didn't impress me as much as it did Mike.  A minor quibble for sure....

Mike then posts this mini-blurb from a local friend:

Neil Oxman, my friend and fellow Philadelphian, who has caddied for Tom Watson since Bruce Edwards's death in 2004, is a fellow movie buff who in a slow year will see a couple hundred movies (all new releases, in theaters). Each December he goes on a public radio station and discusses the high points and low points of his movie-going year. He knows golf in Scotland like you know your home course. He saw Tommy's Honour the night after we did. When Neil and I compare movie notes, they are, may I say, to the point. (A random example: "It's good, despite the boring parts.") Here is Neil's review of Tommy's Honour: 

"Make no mistake, Caddyshack it ain't. But if you want to see an unusual recreation of golf in the 1870s, Tommy's Honour is worth it. Who knows what the real family dynamic was between Old and Young Tom Morris, but it's neat to see Jason Connery's depiction of the Morris clan. And when was the last time you saw Willie and Mungo Park in a movie? Bet it's been a while for that. This is probably not a movie for a non-golfer. But if you're a golfer—or a golf fan—go see it."

That has me chuckling, because walking back to our car, I noted to the bride that one of the positives was to see Mungo Park depicted in a movie....  It's always been one of my favorite golf names.

Read the whole thing, which includes thoughts from the author and some of Mike's own experiences in St. Andrews.  I'm actually quite excited about Kevin Cook's next project, as like Mark Frost he appears to love baseball as well, but I'll differ with the author on this point:

I asked if a person were going to have only one Tommy's Honour experience, which should it be, the movie or the book? 

"They should see the movie," Cook replied. 

Why, I asked. 

"It's out now."

I think that viewers unfamiliar with the story, even those that are golfers, will fail to understand the import of these events.  The book is a wonderful overview of a terribly important period in golf, the origins of the professional game and the like.  If the reader wants to see the movie, which is visually spectacular, that's for the better, but one can also wait to catch it in its inevitable endless loop on The Golf Channel.

Golf Reading - I took some time to visit some golf sites to which I've not been in recent times, with mixed results.  I felt remorse in not visiting John Garrity's droll Top Fifty, but my guilt was assuaged when I realized that John hasn't been there either, his last post dated June 2016.

 Links Magazine was more rewarding, specifically this item on shapers:

Today’s shaper is very different to his predecessor, notes Krahenbuhl. “There used to be a clear-cut line between him and the designer,” he adds. “The designer would visit the

site, draw up plans in his office, then hand off those plans to the shaper whose job it was to implement the architect’s vision to the letter. There really wasn’t much room for artistic freedom. The architect would then show up to inspect the work of the shaper who was usually employed by the construction company, and thus not really answerable to the architect.” 

At the turn of the century, as courses gradually became more artistic and less cookie-cutter, the architect began choosing the identity of the shaper more carefully. Now, in many of today’s design/build firms, the shaper is a key component, almost as vital to the success of a project as the designer himself. “That’s especially true of our team,” says Krahenbuhl. “We are the designer and contractor, and our shapers are hugely important members of the process from the first day of construction. Our two top guys are Ernie Polverari and Luis Varela who are instrumental to the success of everything we do.”

The larger story is how little time the Golden Age architects actually spent on site.  Mackenzie famously never saw his final product in many cases, and I've always thought that Tillie's untimely death resulted in the curiously uninteresting green complexes at the Black.

Elsewhere, David Owen is back to leisurely blogging at his old place, and posts a multi-part series titled, "Who was Clifford Roberts?"  I know, not exactly timely, as it was a Masters preview, but it's an interesting subject. as Roberts is probably the most misunderstood personality in golf history.  Here's David's lede:

Herbert Warren Wind wrote in Sports Illustrated and The New Yorker that Clifford 

The Roberts family in 1907, Clifford is second from the left.

Roberts was born in Chicago. (He wasn’t.) Ross Goodner wrote in Golf World that his real name was Charles D. Clifford Roberts. (Not true, although Goodner was close.) Frank Christian—a photographer and the co-author, with Cal Brown, of Augusta National & The Masters—wrote that Roberts as a child spent time in an orphanage. (He never did.) Charles Price, in A Golf Story, wrote that Roberts graduated from high school. (He didn’t finish ninth grade.) Curt Sampson, in The Masters, wrote that Roberts made $50,000 in 1923 and used the money to buy a one-sixth partnership in an investment firm called the Reynolds Company. (Roberts made $2,441.63 in 1923; Reynolds & Co.—the correct name—didn’t exist until 1931; Roberts went to work there in the mid-thirties; he became the firm’s ninth general partner on May 1, 1941.) 

All these errors, and many others, are understandable. Roberts was stingy with biographical detail, and he almost never talked about his early years, even among friends. Jack Stephens, who was the club’s chairman between 1991 and 1998 and was close to Roberts during the last fifteen years of his life, told me, “I just figured Cliff had never been a child.”

Robert's early years are necessary to understand his stewardship of the club and that little get-together every April.  If you're interested, I recommend his book, but if that's more of a commitment then click o the link above and scroll down until you get to Part One.

On our way out, anyone know why the Masters is the first full week in April?  Anyone?  Bueller?

It was timed specifically to be convenient for sportswriters to attend on their way North at the conclusion of Spring Training.  Clifford Roberts was many things, but stupid was not among them....