__‘—--‘—.—- 09—- -__ »-. ._ AN INVESTIGATION TO ESTABLISH RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY IN A BATTERY CF GOLF TESTS. By ROBERT ROCKWELL STOPPERT ‘l'hmd-I‘i 9“ III-Li A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State college of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of NmSTER OF ARTS Department of Physical Education, Health, and Recreation for men. 1950 Tz‘lES'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to take this opportunity to sincerely thank the many people who contributed a great deal toward making this investigation possible. First, Dr. Randolph Webster, his advisor at Michigan State College, whose advice and encouragement kept this study going over the rough spots. Keith Carey and James Barclay, fellow staff members at Midland High School, who assisted with the testing. Hal Whittington, Midland professional, offered valuable technical advice, while the entire Midland golf squad spent many afternoons and evenings helping to perfect some of the finer points of the tests. And, other members of his committee, Mr. Russell Daubert, Dr. Henry Montoye, and Dr. Morton Malter, all of whom gave freely of their time and advice. Again, many thanks to each and all for his most helpful assistance. R.R.S. Z37f7/ CHAPTER I. II- III. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . . . . . Need for the study , , Purposes of the study , Limitations , , , , , Definition of terms used Procedure Summary REVIEW OF LIiERATURE . . Clevett . . . . . . University of Wisconsin theses . Golf instructor's tests . Mechanical tests . . . Knowledge tests . . . Research in other aspects Summary . . . . . . THE DRIVING TEST . . . . Developing the test . . Results of the experiment The target . . . . Other details of the test Procedure used for testing Summary . . . . . golf PAG QQQQUQGNNH g... N 16 17 17 18 19 19 21 24 25 27 28 CHAPTER IV. Summary V. Summary VI. Summary VII. SUIT ‘ARY . BIBLIOGRAPHY . APPENDIX . . . THE SHORT APPROACH TEST Development of the test Procedure used for testing THE LONG APPROACH TEST Development of the test Procedure used for testing ESTABLISHING THE VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY FOR THE BATTERY The driving test Reliability of the driving test The validity of the short approach test The reliability of the short approach test The validity of the long approach test The reliability of the long approach Results of the investigation. Conclusions of the investigation Recommendations test 1v PAGE 29 29 32 32 34 34 37 38 39 39 42 44 44 44 44 45 46 46 49 5O 53 55 TABLES I. LIST OF TABLES PAGE A LIST OF ALL OF THE SCORES MADE BY A SELECT GROUP FROM THE ONE HUNDRED FIFTY WHO WERE TESTED TO SHOW COMPARISON BETWEEN TEST SCORES AND ACTUAL GOLF SCORES . . . . . 51 7. 8. 9. IO. 11. LIST OF FIGURES CLEVETT’S DRIVING TARGET . . .. . . . CEVETT'S APIDRCLACI‘I TloiRGET. o o o o o AUTREY'S DRI‘V’IING TARGET o o o o o o AUTREY'S APPROACH TARGET . . . . . . GRID OP STRINGS.ACROSS GOAL POSTS TO LOCATE AREAS THRIUGH WHICH THE BETTER DRIWS PASSED 0 o o o o o o o o 0 THE APPROXIEATE TRAJECTORY OF A WELL DRIVEN GOLF BALL AS IT PASSED THROUGH THE TARGET AREA FROM TEES 20', 30', and 45' FRCM THE TARGE . . . . . . THE DRIVING TEST TARGET . . . . . . THE SHORT APPROACH TARGET . . . . . DIAGRAM DRAWN ON GROUND TO MEASURE DIS- TANCE OF DRIVES FROM 250 YARD POINT AFTER THEY WERE HIT THROUGH THE GOAL POST GRID THE TARGET AREAS SI-{OI‘III‘JG THE AVERAGE DISTANCE FROM THE 250 YARD POINT MADE THROUGH BACI'I o 0 o o o o o o 0 0 PAGE 10 13 14 20 23 26 31 36 43 Chapter I INTRODUCTICN The game of golf is an intriguing and enjoyable pastime. There are many aspects that make it so, and not the least of these is the fascinating fact that a player is never through with learning the game. There is no per- fection, though many attain a high degree of skill. There are few sports indeed which can claim golf's great number of disciples, of whom many will never be anything but "dubs". Golfers are constantly attempting to improve their score, drop their strokes for 18 holes below 100, 90, 80, or even 70, depending upon in which group their ability happens to place them. The search for that "one good round" is an endless, but tireless, fairway over which many thousands of men and women unceasingly trod. There are many who have written books, articles, and pamphlets on how to improve one's game of golf, but few have sought out methods of testing for the skills of the sport. It was a chance discovery of this hitherto un- explored field that led the author to accept the challenge so many have ignored in the past, to attempt to develop a battery of tests that would be of use to America's army of golfers. 2 Need For The Study. Golf as a unit of instruction in physical education is rapidly gaining stature and popularity throughout the country. This is only natural in view of the game's tremendous following, coupled with the fact that one of physical education's most important objectives is the teaching and developing of sport skills which can be used in later life. Almost every other sport now being played has had tests of some sort developed for use in conjunction with instruction, except the game of golf}. Probably no other sport claiming so many partici- pants has been so completely ignored by researchers. This attitude is best summed up by the common statement of many writers that "golf makes its own tests". Evidently accepting that theory few people have investigated any further. Purposes 2£_The Study. Why develop these tests? What can be done with them after they are created? Perhaps these questions have stymied others who might have experi- mented with this phase of golf. It is the author's hope that this battery will be of value to the 9011‘ coach, physical education instructor, and the player himself for the following reasons: 1. Help improve a player's game through practicing on the tests. 2. Measure progress and improvement. 3. Present an opportunity for diagnosis of an individual's play. 4. Help to improve the golf instruction unit. 5. Aid in classifying students. It is the specific purpose of this paper to (l) devise a battery of golf tests that can be used by any and all golfers in as small an area as possible to measure an individual's ability to use the driver, the long iron, and the short iron; and (2) to establish the validity and reliability of these tests. Limitations. The author believes that it might be possible to predict the potential ability of a golfer through the use of these tests. However, he makes no such claims at this time. It could well be the subject for another study in this field. Definition of Terms Used. Some of the terms common to golf used in this paper which may be strange to the "uninitiated" reader are as follows: Drive - a ball hit by a golf club known as a Driver or #1 wood. It is usually the first shot of each hole, and the ball is teed up, the only time this practice is permitted on the course. Dub - a beginner or an unaccomplished player. Some players never do escape this classification. Pitch or Loft - a ball which is lifted high into the air to prevent it from rolling after it lands. This type of shot is usually played by the short irons. Short Irons - those iron clubs which have open faces of varying degrees so that the ball when hit will rise up quite high. clubs included in this category are numbers 6, 7, 8, and 9. Long Irons - those clubs whose faces are closer to being perpendicular to the ground than the short irons. They are used for longer approach shots and, to obtain more roll after landing, they are constructed so that the ball does not rise too high. Long irons are numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and possibly 6. Slice - the name given to any shot which curves sharply to the right. It is caused by improperly swing- ing from the inside out, making the ball spin to the right. Hook - the name given to any shot which curves sharply to the left. It is caused by improperly swinging from the outside in, making the ball spin to the left. Stance 4 the position a player takes when he is going to hit the ball. This position may change with the use of different clubs. Source of material. Since very little has been done in regard to establishing golf skill tests in the past this paper is for the most part an original study. 5 The tests were developed through experimenting by the author and his associates. Related studies, those few in existence, have been used for comparison only. Procedure. It is usually an accepted fact that the fundamental strokes in the game of golf are driving, long approach, short approach, and putting. Each must be mastered before a player can hope to combat that ever elusive "par". To construct a battery of tests that would serve to measure the ability to use the clubs for each of these strokes a series of experiments were made to determine what could be devised that would best fulfill all of the necessary requirements. Some of the main factors considered during the construction of the tests were: space, cost of equipment, scoring accuracy, simpli- city, time involved, and, most important of all, similarigy to actual game conditions. After considerable experimenting and a thorough study of related materials tests for driVing, long approach, and short approach were constructed. A large group of men and boys were then tested to determine the validity and reliability of the tests. Hope of constructing a satisfactory putting test was abandoned when it was found that no method simulated playing conditions closely enough. This was largely due to the lack of a suitable playing surface since regulation putting greens are built of such luxuriant and smooth grasses. Summary. It is the purpose of this study to devise a method of testing a golfer's ability to use a driver, long iron,-and short iron. The need and value of such a study is established. Following a review of related studies the pro- cedures used to devise each test will be found in the succeeding chapters. A chapter also explains the results of testing a large group of men and boys. Conclusions and recommendations appear in the final chapter. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE As is so often the case when one is investigating or experimenting with a new problem the available material previously written on golf tests was negligible. Although several people have done some work with golf tests of one sort or another, few have written of their results, and fewer yet have attempted to check for validity or relia- bility. Clevett. In 1931 Clevett wrote of tests he had set up to aid him in comparing different methods of presenting golf instructionl. However, as he himself pointed out, they were empirical and no norms were developed. Clevett developed three tests for use indoors, the brassie-midiron, the mashie, and the putter. They were as follows:2 1. Brassie-midiron- these tests were given in a cage. The target was 10' square, marked off into twenty five areas each of which was 24" square. Players took l melvin Clevett, "An Experiment in Teaching Methods of Golf", Research Quarterly, 1, (December, 1931), 104. 2 Ibid.,p.105. 8 ten shots each with a brassie and mid—iron from 21' away. Point values of the areas were as shown in Figure 1. Balls striking to the left side of the target were scored higher than those striking the right side since Clevett maintained that a ball which struck the right side was slicing. No practice shots were allowed. 2. Mashie test- the mashie test was designed for indoor use to determine an individual's ability to make a short approach shot to the green. The approach was from 15' from the nearest edge of the target, which was constructed of gymnasium mats marked off into twenty four areas. The overall size of the target was ZZ'XZZ'. Point values for the various areas were as shown in Figure 2. Ten shots were permitted a player, and they were scored according to where they landed rather than where they stopped rolling. No trial shots were allowed. 3. Putting test- the putting was done on smooth carpets 27" wide and 20' long securely fastened to the floor. Players stood 15' from the "hole", which was in the farthest third of the target. Forty eight areas, each 9" square were marked off on the carpet. No practice shots were allowed. university'gf Wisconsin Theses. According to 4 é 6 .2 g: ./0 if ‘z 9 /0 9 ‘2’ s \ I 7 /0 7 / of of Of / -—-—/o ’——- 609/: %:‘$/’ FIGURE 1 CIRVETT'S DRIVING TARGET 10 4%, \j’ 9/ / 7 7 7 / ‘1 7 /" 7 J 3 I 7 Y f 3 4 4 4 .2 -—.L¢/—- «424/%)%1542{' FIGURE 2 CLEVETT'S APPROACH TARGET ll Glassow and Broers, two students of the University of Wisconsin wrote unpublished theses concerning golf tests. In 1933 Isabel Woods set up tests to measure the ability of a player to control the brassie and mid-iron. She also tested the value of a driving cage. As a result she found that an expert player tended to send his shots to a concentrated area on the target, and that this concen- tration was higher up on the target for the mid-iron than it was for the brassie. Miss Woods did not find a sound method of measuring putting, nor did she attempt to estab- lish the validity or reliability of her tests.4 Elizabeth Autrey made use of Miss Woods' tests and some of her own to measure the ability of a group of college women golferss. Miss Autrey set up the following tests: 1. The brassie- the target was four concentric circles, the center of which was 3' above the floor. The center circle had a radius of 2', and each of the others 3 Ruth Glassow and Marion Broer, Measurin Achieve- ment in Physical Education (Philadelphia: W.B.§aunders, T§3§)IT89. 4 Isabel Woods, "A Study For The Purpose of Setting Up The Specifications of A Golf Driving Cage Target and Test For The Mid-Iron and Brassie Clubs", (unpublished thesis,University of Wisconsin, Madison,1933),6. 5 Elizabeth Autrey,"A Battery of Tests for Measuring Playing Ability in Golf,"(unpublished Masters thesis,Uni- versity of Wisconsin,l957),lO. 12 were 1' larger. Players stood 20' from the target and hit thirty balls into scoring areas as shown in Figure 3. Norms were established, as was a reliability score of .68£.15. for forty three cases. 2. Approach- five concentic circles of 18' to 50' radius composed the target. Students hit thirty balls from 50 yards away after four practice shots. Balls were scored where they stopped, and were given points as shown in Figure 4. Reliability score for this test was .44£.08 for forty three cases. Golf Instructor's Tests. Along with her group instruction drills, Helen Schleman mentioned a few tests that might be used6. The first of these was a pitching test, the second putting on a rug, the third for long and short approaches, and the fourth was a driving test. Her tests were as follows: 1. Short pitch test-tilted a busheL.basket to a 45° angle and propped it there. Shots were taken from varying distances in an attempt to land in the basket. No scoring system was offered. 2. Longer approach- shots were taken from a distance 1 25 to 100 yards at a flag planted in the center of five 6 Helen Schleman, Group Golf dnstruction(New York: A.S.Barnes and Company,l934),49. 13 -—-zflg’_. M’ ' ~fc4/efl.’:./" RIGURE 3 AUTRP'Y'S DRIVING TARGET 564/e X, ”c /0’ FIGURE 4 AUTREY' S APPROACH TARGET 14 15 concentric circles. The inner circle had a radius of 10', and each of the others was 10' larger. Points scored were 5,4,3,2,l from the center out. This was identical to Autrey's target except for the distance from tee to target. 3. Putting- very little was said about this test except that the putting was done on a rug covered with sand. Balls were hit toward a spot in the center which represented the hole. 4. The drive- an area 300 yards long and 60 yards wide was laid out with lines crossing at the 100 and 200 yard marks. Players hit the ball to see how far and accurately they could drive. Three shots were taken and the total yardage of all three represented the score. None of the above tests were established with a definite purpose in mind, but rather as some games that "could be used along with golf instruction."7 An anonymous writer constructed a test of pitch shots toward a hole cut in a slanted canvas.8 Those balls which did not go through the hole rolled back down the canvas and returned to the player. This test might have 7 Autrey, 22. Cit., p. 120 8 ( ), "A High School Golf Program", Scholastic Coach,XI_and XII,(November,l94l), 31. 16 been fairly successful, had a scoring system been worked 0111;. Mechanical Tests. Two mechanical methods of measuring golf ability were developed and placed on the market. The first of these was the Golf Registerg. An aluminum trough, it was fitted with a length of heavy rubber to which a golf ball was attached. The amount of rubber that was pulled out when the ball was hit indicated the distance the ball would have gone, marked in yards. The ball was also centered on a spindle which indicated the direction the ball spun, if any, when hit. The entire apparatus, anchored at the end where the ball was placed, swung with the direction of the drive, right or left. Thus, the direction of spin, distance and deviation from a straight line were all measured. Though a very popular and interesting mechanism, Glassow and Broer did not feel that it was a valid and reliable test.10 The second commercial golf mechanism was the Bobbie Meter, which measured the distance of the drive only.11 A fake ball was attached to the end of an arm. When the 9 The Golf Register C2,,10 East 42nd Street, New York lO Glassow and Broer, op. cit., p.190. 11 The Georgell Company, P.O. Box 1275, New Britain, Conn. 17 ball was hit the arm revolved around and indicated the distance that might have been made had the ball been a real one. Miss Autrey experimented with this test and found that it had a reliability score of .62 for forty three cases.12 Both of these commercial tests have since been removed from the market and the companies have ceased operations. Knowledge Tests. Several people have written golf knowledge tests that were very valuable, but not as an aid to measure the skills of the game. Two of these best known for their knowledge tests were Mary Murphy13 and Catherine Snell.14 Research In_0ther Aspects gf_921£3 At least two authors have delved into the game of golf from a research standpoint, with no attempt to seek a method of measurement. In 1937 Adams wrote of his investigation to determine what relation there was between the length of a hole and the number of strokes it required to play that hole.15 12 Autrey, op. cit., p.12 13 Mary Murphy,"Criteria For Judging A Golf Knowledge Test",Research Quarterly,III (September,1933),81. , 14 Catherine Snell,"Golf,Riding,Tennis,and Baseball Knowledge Tests",Research Quarterly,VI(May,1936),77. 15 HenryyAdams,"A Statistical Analysis of Golf", Journal Ef_App11ed Psychology,XXl (August,1937),384. 18 Schudel approached the game from still another aspect by studying the respiration processes of a golfer as he drove and putted.16 Neither study contributed anything to testing the skills of the sport. Recently, a method was devised to compare the results of approach tests which used a regular golf ball and a cot- ton ball. It was found that the cotton ball could be used for practice with good results in predicting possible range.17 Summary. Only a very few people have taken an inter- est in developing skill tests for the game of golf, and even fewer have carried out experiments to establish validity and reliability for their tests. As far as has been ascer- tained no one has developed a satisfactory driving test and established its validity. Both Misses Woods and Autrey developed and used tests which have proved to be of value to the author when making the extensive experiments which preceded the construction of his battery. In the ensuing chapters each test of the battery was described and explained in detail, as was the establishment of the validity and reliability of the tests. 16 Helen Schudel, "A Study of the Respiration of Golfers during The Drive and The Putt", Research Quarterly 1v (May, 1934 ) ,62 . 17 Mary Ellen McKee, "A Test for the Full Swinging Shot In Golf", Research Quarterly XXI (March,l950),46. Chapter III THE DRIVING TEST under actual playing conditions most golf courses provide fairways 100 to 500 yards long and 50 to 100 yards wide. Since very few schools or colleges can afford to make that much land available, it was obvious that some type of backstop or target which could stop a driven golf ball was needed if a test of this phase of a golfer's ability was to be devised. If this same target could be used indoors as well as outside, it would be doubly valuable. Developing The Test. In searching for a suitable test those of other writers, namely Clevett, Wood, and Autrey, were first tried out. However, none of their targets proved entirely satisfactory to the author, so he investigated various methods of setting up a new type. The first step taken was to find some method of checking the distance, direction, and flight of a driven golf ball in relation to where it passed through a possible target area. Because of its size and convenience (almost all schools have them), a football goal post was selected as a possible target frame. Strong cord was then strung across the posts forming a grid of two foot squares, as shown in Figure 5. QmwmHmD Kubhmm m5. 52s,, moaomze wHmQ mxh N. 850; II" V\N\ II w, \ \Gk 36 \kc 39 \\<\ “V“. \ NV\ ,2? Nb Nu.» ll \xxw hwy NS \vw \Qw \Nv xx.» A...» 27 tee so that regulation tees could be used under the balls, while the regular turf served out of doors. It was determined that balls which struck a painted line dividing two areas were scored the same as that area adjacent to the line which gave the greatest number of points. No special provision for hooks or slices was made in the scoring formula. The failure of other writers to find a satisfactory method of scoring these driving defects, coupled with the author's own inability to find an adequate solution, led to the abandonment of any such plan. However, only those balls which started out through the center and then curved right or left were not taken care of in the adopted scoring system, and these were found by the grid to be in the minority. Procedure Used For Testing. A group of 129 boys from the Midland High School physical education classes, two professionals, one assistant professional, sixteen members of the varsity team, and two Midland coaches were given the test twice. Each person hit thirty balls, after three practice shots, and a week later repeated the procedure. Shots were made consecutively in approxi- mately fifteen minutes' time. Only one individual could be tested at one time. His scorer stood behind him.and recorded on a replica 28 sheet of the target the exact spot the ball struck the canvas (Sample score sheet found in the Appendix). Balls, clubs, and tees were provided, while players could use their own clubs if they so desired. Summary. After considerable experimenting with other established tests, a grid of strings was constructed across a football goal post, and approximately one thou- sand golf balls were driven through this area from distances of 20', 30', and 45' to determine where they ended their flight in relation to the areas they passed through the grid. Several conclusive results were obtained of which the most important was the fact that it was entirely possible to construct a target whkh could indicate the approximate distance and direction of a driven golf ball. A group of one hundred fifty men and bpys hit thirty balls apiece into the target, and then repeated the procedure one week later. In subsequent chapters other tests were devised, and the validity and reliability of each was established. Chapter IV THE SHORT APPROACH TEST The second fundamental shot in the game of golf selected for study was the short approach, a term which usually applies to balls which are played from one to fifty yards away from the green. As a rule golfers attempt to loft their ball high when making the short approach in an effort to land as close as possible to the hole with very little, if any, roll. To accomplish this feat clubs 7, 8, and 9 are most commonly used. As was mentioned in Chapter 11, several fine approach tests have been set up and used by others, and, in construct- ing this test, the author drew considerably from their findings. However, certain basic fundamentals of golf seemed to be missing, and so an effort was made to incor- porate something new into this test. Development gf_The Test. First of all, the objective was to develop a test that would simulate actual playing conditions and still adhere to the idea of conserv- ing space. Since golf greens usually contain anywhere from 2000 to 4500 square feet, it was decided that the target should approximate the larger figure. Drawing a circle of lime with a radius of 45' at one end of the football field created an area of approximately 4200 30 square feet. Two concentric circles were then drawn inside of the first with radii of 30' and 15' respectively. Thus, the target was formed. The second fundamental factor which appeared to be important to the success of a short approach test was a scoring system that would give more credit to the ball which landed in the target area than those which rolled in. As was previously mentioned a well played shot should be lofted high so that the ball stops dead on the green. This is also done to overcome the sand traps that usually surround the greens, though it is possible to roll the ball on from at least one side. With these facts in mind the following scoring formula was established: Balls which landed inside of the target area were scored ten, eight, and six points according to the circle in which they stopped, as shown in Figure 8. No balls were scored if they rolled or bounced out of the target area. Any ball that stopped on a line was given the larger number of points of the two areas that line divided. A distance of thirty five yards was selected as being ideal for the average person to use a #8 iron, the club decided upon for use in this test. The tee was located off to the side of the football field so that the turf would not be dug up on the gridiron. As many as four players were able to approach to the target at one Circle 1 10 2 9 5 v FIGURF 8 WEE SHOQT APDDO A. an Land In R01] In CflCJ'IQ mwsm duamal/fihfii, 31 32 time. Procedure used For Testing. One hundred twenty nine Midland High School boys from physical education classes, sixteen varsity team players, two professionals, one assistant professional, and two Midland coaches were tested twice. Each hit thirty balls, after three practice shots, and repeated the procedure one week later. The thirty shots were taken consecutively, averaging about ten minutes per player. One scorer for each player, four could hit at one time, stood off to the side of the target and recorded the balls as they came to a stop by marking either an "x" or an "0" on the score sheet, which was a replica of the target area. The "x" indicated a ball that landed in_the target, while "0" was for those which rolled in (sample score sheet found in Appendix). Balls and clubs were provided for the use of the players, or they could use their own club. Summarv. A short approach test was constructed, consisting of three concentric circles with radii of 15', 30' and 45', and one hundred fifty men and boys hit thirty balls apiece from a distance of thirty five yards from the "hole". The target was placed at one end of the football field. In the following chapters a long approach test was 33 devised and the validity and reliability of each test was established. The results, conclusions, and recommendations of the study were listed. Chapter V THE LONG.APPROACH TEST The third fundamental shot in the game of golf selected for study was the long approach, a term usually applied to balls which lie from 50 to 175 yards from the green. To make this shot golfers choose irons #2, #3, #4, #5, or #6, depending upon the distance involved. The longer the distance the smaller the club number. Chapter II mentioned a few approach tests but as most were tests designed for indoor use, it was difficult to simulate actual playing conditions while using them. It was, therefore, the objective of this study to construct a long approach test that would closely parallel actual playing cuuditions, and at the same time be contained in the limited Space available to most schools. Development 2£.The Test. In the game of golf the green and hole are the ultimate goal of the player. To construct a suitable long approach test it was decided that a green must first be established. Since one had already been created for use in the Short Approach Test ways and means of making use of the same target were sought. Results of investigation determined that it would be possible to hit long approach shots down the length of the football field toward the Short Approach 35 target if the tee selected could be within the confines of the quarter mile track circling the field. From the "green", the center of which lay in the middle of one of the 20 yard lines, back to the farther goal line measured eighty yards. The end zone made ten more yards, and there was still room enough to go back another thirty yards and remain inside of the track. Thus, the tee was placed on a line 120 yards from the "hole". The "green" area, already divided by three concen- tric circles, must naturally contain the largest number of points in a long approach test. However, with the tee 120 yards away, it would have been difficult for inexper- ienced players to score many points if the "green" had been the only scoring area. Another factor which had to be considered was the width of the average fairway. Since most of them are long and not too wide, a target area that gave credit to balls stopping in areas short and beyond the green would be closer to actual game conditions than one which considered the green only. It was therefore determined that the 10 yard stripes on the football field should be utilized, thereby creating several more possible scoring areas. Of these a total of eleven were chosen and a scoring formula could then be applied. The scoring formula adopted for the Long Approach Test, as shown in Figure 9, awarded ten points to the two 'qybéquzz._. ——-—- 36 [Ma/11"" ../0 1i 5 :3 t t z. t ’2 a” 1} “A bi 7’ \ J. .1 J ‘6 u‘: 4’— o A. k / O / ‘1'” £1636 re e. —»qfi32€746.- PIGVRE 9 THE LONG APPROACH TEST Ju/g Z; /o’d’. 37 center circles, and nine to the third. All balls not on the "green" which remained within the confines of the football field and between the end zone and 40 yard lines were credited with seven points. The other areas and points were: 40 to 50 yard lines ' six, 50 to 40 yard lines a five, 40 to 30 yard lines I four, and 30 to 20 yard lines = three, 20 to 10 yard lines a two, and 10 to end zone line 8 one. Thus, any ball which remained inside of the boundary lines could earn at least one point if it traveled 30 yards or more. Balls which stopped on a line were given the larger number of points as was awarded to the two areas that line divided. Procedure Used for Testing. The same group of one hundred fifty tested by the other two tests was used for this test. Each person hit thirty balls consecutively, after three practice shots, and then repeated the pro- cedure one week later. Three players were able to hit at one time, and there was a scorer for each stationed at the side of the target area, somewhere near the middle, with a replica score sheet. He marked the exact spot the ball came to a stop, including those which went outside of the boundaries. A #5 iron was selected as being ideal for an approach shot of 120 yards. Clubs and balls were provided .\ _. DC. 38 the players, or they could use their own clubs. Summary. A long approach test was constructed on the football field which required the players to hit thirty balls 120 yards with a #5 iron. The test was given twice to a group of one hundred fifty, with one week separating the two dates. The remaining chapters discussed the validity and reliability of the three tests, plus the results and conclusions found. Chapter‘VI ESTABLISHING THE VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY FOR THE BATTERY The Driving Test. In order to establish the validity of the driving test it was necessary to compare the test scores with the average distance made on actual drives; also to prove that balls which struck Area J, that area which gave the largest number of points, would travel farther and straighter than those hitting another area of the target. This check was accomplished by turning back to the grid where the development of the target first began. Cords were again strung across the goal posts. This time, however, they were located in the same positions as the lines painted on the canvas, thereby creating the same target, but one which the balls could pass through. To measure the distance of the drive a point 250 yards from the tee was located. This particular point was chosen because it was felt that only a few of those being tested could drive beyond 250 yards, and it would simplify measuring the drives if they were measured in a negative fashion, so many yards from the established point. To make things even simpler, a diagram of twelve concentric half circles was drawn from the point, the circles having radii of 10 to 120 yards as shown in 40 Figure 10. A group of forty five was chosen from the one hundred fifty originally tested. It contained the sixteen varsity team members, two professionals, one assistant professional, two Midland coaches, and twenty four boys from the gym classes. Each hit thirty balls at the string target, while a scorer marked on replica sheets the number of each drive in the exact Spot the ball passed through the strings. Two more scorers marked on replica sheets of the distance diagram the number of the drive in the exact spot the ball came to a stop. When the target and distance figures were tabulated two numerical scores resulted which could be compared for correlation, if any. The string score was of course figured in the same manner as the canvas target, while the average distance from the 250 point was found by adding up the total yardage and dividing by thirty. Balls which stopped within the 10 yard circle or went beyond the point were scored as zero. The others were measured in tens of yards, i.e. 10,20,30 etc., to simplify scoring. The resulting average distance from the 250 point became a negative range score. Using the Pearson product-moment method22 it was 22 Warren R. Good, The Elements of Statistics (Ann Arbor: The Ann Arbor Press,_1933), 20423. 41 0.9//J sitar-ed I}? 7444: we: 74»o’:./7///904/ acid ’4’: «Cor-9.! ,9; ‘0" l “(4’ 5h717’ Jag/c 7y ; /dy0’c. I W F“! GURF} 10 DIAGRAM DRAWN 0'" GROUND "‘0 T'FFJASURE' DISTANCE? OF‘ I‘IRIVES P'RON 250 YARD POINT AWFTR THEY WERE HI”1 THROUGH THE GOAT POS‘T‘ GRID. 42 determined that the coefficient correlation between the test score and the range score was -.860, and that The Driving Test was therefore valid. A check on the scoring areas of the test was made using the same information gained by the method explained on the previous page. As a result of keeping track of £322 drive as to where it ended its flight in relation to where it passed through the target area, it was possible to add up the total yardage scored through each area on the target. These averages were listed in their areas in Figure 11. They indicated that the point values for the various areas were correctly established in relation to one another. Reliability g: The Driving Test. To determine the reliability of the Driving Test the first and second sets of scores made by the group of one hundred fifty were compared. Since the time lapse between the two dates the group was tested was only one week, it was felt that there was little opportunity for any of the group to practice enough to effect their score. Using the Pearsen Product-moment method23 of computing one score against another, a coefficient of correlation of r n./ .990 was established between the two sets of scores, indicating 23 600d, 22. Cite, pOZO-ZSO 43 .M\0$ \ “N.\ \\v ~\ ~\\09 § 30x5 EODOKIH MQ/fim ESQ... 0818.2 OmN NEH 20mm moveeewaQ m0<¢m>¢ BE. 9.230le ~H ””3:on .fixfik \‘u‘\ gamma. Hmomda. mmb when w .un\\ «pink... N\\ .onK as\ .on \o§\ ...\§\ “.19\\ use \3 x 3.9 \s\ ..... a as stave“ {3.00 sex vein. «is \ms 19.5 62“ axis {its .m.\\ . .uvtxn .v\\ \s _ \st \ st a .C 9c in t 53 at xht De. ....\.\. so\ at“ \ .hw 60s a .uxt posh \ 6k «maxi. mm DVD «A» n v» New QC 3th \ .m..\ \ $3 44 that the Driving Test could be considered as being reliable. 'Validity g: The Short Approach Test. The Short Approach Test was constructed so that it simulated actual playing conditions, and the results of testing proved that it was a test of a player's ability to approach to the target. It was concluded, therefore, that the test was valid. Reliabilitngf The Short Approach Test. The Pearson product-moment method24 was used to compute the coefficient of correlation between the two sets of test scores. The result was r =‘/.988, indicating that the test was reliable. validity gf The Long Approach Test. The Long Approach Test was constructed to measure the ability of a player to use a #5 iron to approach to the established target. Results of testing demonstrated that the test accomplished what it was designed to do, thereby indi- cating that the test was valid. Reliability 2: The Long_Approach Test. Computing the two sets of Long Approach Test scores with the Pearson product-moment method25 it was determined that a coefficient correlation of r a [.962 was established, indicating that 24 Good, 23. cit., p. 20-23 25 LOCO Cit. ’45 the test was reliable. Summary. The entire battery of tests proved to be both valid and reliable. The Pearson product-moment method26 was used to find the coefficient of correlation in reliability checks for all of the battery, as well as the validity check for the Driving Test. Scatter grams for all checks were included in the Appendix. . O 26 Good, Loc. i . Chapter VII SUMMARY Results g£_The Investigation. It was the purpose of this investigation to (1) devise a battery of golf tests which could be used by any and all golfers, in as small an area as possible to measure an individual's ' ability to use the driver, the long iron, and the Short iron; and (2) to establish the validity and reliability of these tests. Also, in the construction of the tests, such factors as space, cost of equipment, scoring accuracy, simplicity, time involved, and, most important of all, similarity to actual game conditions were to be considered. After considerable study and investigation the fol- lowing results were obtained: 1. A Driving Test was constructed which made use of an upright canvas target 10'x18'6". Designed for either in or out of doors use, the test proved to be both valid and reliable as a method of measuring a player's ability to use a Driver or #1 wood. (a) Only a space 20'x30' with a 10' ceiling was necessary for the test. (b) Cost of the target varied from twenty to thirty dollars, depending upon the materials used. The canvas used in this study was reclaimed and the pieces 47 sewed together. (c) The scoring system was simple to apply. Scorers had little difficulty noting where the ball struck the target. (d) The test was simple to handle and easy to con- duct. The target itself was not complicated to construct, once the principle had been worked out. (e) Approximately fifteen minutes- time was necessary for each player to hit thirty balls. Only one person could be tested at once. (f) The target definitely simulated actual game conditions in predicting the approximate distance and accuracy of a drive. A Driver or #1 wood was used by the players, as would be the case for the same shot on a golf course. 2. A Short Approach Test was constructed for use out of doors which proved to be both valid and reliable as a method of measuring a player's ability to use a #8 iron. (a) An area 80'x50 yards was more than adequate to conduct the test. one end of the football field was used in this case. (b) There was no cost other than the lime to mark the target on the grass. (0) Scoring was accurate and easy to apply. Scorers used replica score sheets and merely indicated where the 48 ball came to a stop, and in what manner it entered the target, in the air or rolling. (d) The test was simple to construct and to operate. (e) Approximately ten minutes time was required for each player to be tested hitting thirty balls. Four persons could be tested at one time. (f) The test definitely simulated actual playing conditions in that the target area was approximately the size of the average green. Players used a #8 iron to play the 35 yards, as would usually be done on a golf course. 3. A Long Approach Test was constructed for use out of doors, which proved to be both valid and reliable in measuring a player's ability to use a #5 iron. (a) An area 180 yards x 70 yards, the approxi- mate space normally found within a quarter mile track, was more than adequate to conduct this test. (b) There was no cost for equipment other than for the lime used to mark the lines on the grass. (c) Scorers used replica scoring sheets and merely indicated the spot the ball came to a stop. The scoring formula was simple to apply. (d) The test was simple to construct and conduct. (e) Approximately ten minutes time was required for one person to hit thirty balls. As many as three 49 could be tested at once. (f) The test definitely simulated actual playing conditions, since a regulation size green and the area in front and beyond the green were included in the scor- ing system. Players used a #5 iron, the club usually used by the average player for a distance of 120 yards. 4. The tests were established in such a way that any and all golfers, regardless of ability, could use them. 5. Less than 3% of balls hit at the driving target became misses, and most of these hit the floor in front. This indicated the target size was adequate for thirty feet. Conclusions 3: The Investigation. After viewing the tests while in use and studying the results the fol- lowing conclusions were noted: 1. A great deal of interest was created by the tests, especially the Driving Test, and many requests were made by various people wanting to try their skill on them. 2. It was very apparent that a professional or qualified golf coach could study the concentration of shots made on the Driving target and diagnose errors in swing and stance. 3. The Driving Target gave an opportunity to golfers to practice driving throughout the winter. The golf coach was thus able to give each squad member more individual instruction, and the players were far ahead of 50 other schools in their conditioning when the regular season got under way. 4. Progress and improvement in the use of all three clubs was noted in those boys who were playing golf for the first time, especially after a year of instruction in gym Classes. 5. The tests proved to be a definite addition to the golf unit in physical education classes. Besides creating interest, the tests gave students something to shoot for, a method of comparing themselves with others of their own ability. 6. The tests proved to be an aid to classification of students in gym class instruction units. 7. Both the golf team and the physical education program benefitted greatly from the tests. Recommendations. The tremendous interest shown by all of those who came in contact with this battery, and the satisfactory results obtained indicated there was both a need and a demand for research in golf testing. Only a small contribution was made by this study, leaving a great deal to be done through further investigation. One such study could well be made to determine what, if any, correlation could be found between these or other test scores and actual golf scores. Merely as an illustration of what might be done, Table I was set up to show how a 51 TABLE I A LIST OF.ALL OF THE SCORES MADE BY A SELECT GROUP FROM THE ONE HUNDRED FIFTY WHO WERE TESTED TO SHOW COMPARISON BETWEEN TEST SCORES AND ACTUAL GOLF SCORES Drive Drive Dist. Long App. Short App. Av.Score Name Score Score Av. 1 2 l 2 180 Holes (Target) (Grid) Dorsey 280 279 5.6 285 282 280 282 76 Whittington 272 279 8.3 287 284 286 287 75 Sovereen 271 276 9.0 277 273 270 260 77 Davenport 283 277 11.3 278 280 262 266 78.7 Morris 273 272 13.3 270 279 257 262 78.2 Stanford 271 278 13.6 266 261 267 276 80.0 Barclay 251 262 15.3 267 271 258 265 85.0 Cummins 252 251 20.0 275 267 266 261 86.2 Campbell 269 271 30.0 266 267 255 254 x8804 Bakeman,J. 247 240 38.3 238 241 256 268 91.7 Jernigan 232 233 41.0 243 237 220 191 101.3 Harrison 235 230 42.0 234 242 206 214 91.1 Badder 230 224 45.4 241 239 209 199 92.7 Stoppert 217 214 50.0 234 237 228 248 95 Brown 204 212 51.0 236 229 203 192 93.3 Powers 210 200 51.3 202 220 188 201 103.0 Lee 202 205 51.5 237 227 191 193 102.2 Harger 198 194 52.0 211 212 193 183 91.0 Bakeman,G. 190 196 _52.2 204 221 195 190 94.3 Wade 217 216 57.0 219 201 213 198 96.0 Marx 175 173 51.0 210 196 180 188 95.6 Note- Dorsey, Whittington and Sovereen are professionals and assistant professional. Barclay and Stoppert are coaches, while the others are members of the Midland High School team. 52 small, select group scored in this battery as compared with their average scores for 180 holes of golf. It is hoped that this investigation proves to be as interesting and useful to its readers as it has been to its author. BIBLIOGRAPHY 54 A. BOOKS Berg, Patty, Otis Dypwick, Golf. New York: A.S. Barnes Company, 1941. xiii ,4 B'f—pp. Bovard, J.F., and F.W. Cozens, Tests and Neasurements lg Ph sical Education. PhiladeIpHia: W.B. Saunders, 1938 (2nd EditioET. vii / 363 pp. Campbell, William Giles, A Form Book For Thesis Writin . Boston: Houghton MiffTin Company, 1939. Iv / pp. Good, warren R., The Elements gf Statistics. Ann Arbor: The Ann Arbor Press, 1933. Tvyf29 pp. Glassow, Ruth, and Marion Broer, Measuring Achievement In Phwsical Education. Philadelphia: W.B. SaundErs,‘T939. Iii 7 344 pp. Schleman, Helen, Group Golf Instruction. New York: A.S. Barnes and Company, 1934. V'f 316 pp. B. Periodical Articles Adams, Henry, "A Statistical Analysis of Golf", Journal Agf_Applied Psychology, XXI (August, 1937), 384-395. Clevett, Melvin, "An Experiment In Teaching Methods of Golf", Research Quarterly, 111 (December, 1933), 81. Murphy, Mary, "Criteria For Judging a Golf Knowledge Test", ResearCh Quarterly, 111 (December, 1933), 81. Schudel, Helen, "A Study of The Respiration of Golfers During The Drive and The Putt", Research Quarterly, 1v (May, 1934), 62. Snell, Catherine, "Golf, Riding, Tennis, and Baseball Knowledge Tests," Research Quarterly, VI (May, 1936), 106. ( ), "Mechanical Golf Professional Aids," Popular MechanTcs, cxxxv (April, 1946), 106. __._.____ ( ), "A High School Golf Program," Scholastic Coach, XI and X11 (November, 1941), 35. MCKee, Mary Ellen, "A Test for the Full Swinging Shot In Golf", Research anrterly, XXI (March,l950), 40-46 55 C. Unpublished Theses Autrey, Elizabeth, "A Battery of Golf Tests For Measur- ing Playing Ability." Unpublished Master's thesis, The University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1937. 34 pp. Woods, Isabel, "A Study For The Purpose of Setting Up The Specifications of A Golf Driving Cage Target and Test For The Mid-iron and Brassie clubs," Unpublished Master's thesis, The university of Wisconsin, Madison, 1933. 39pp. APPEND IX 57 .33.. K... \otsxkiflr .N Emma. 0.7,: >Hmm SHE.» 0mm: Hmmzw mmoow .\\\.l‘\ u.\\‘ \\“ \‘Kfla \V‘RU SR the \d\9\‘\‘ ® . \ .1 O X s \ ® 5. Q S i \ W s\ \. \v \ Ms M/ Qinnanv Vinsvfi .) \W\W\\“.\U \u“\< 58 \ \ [It/”é Tfl’ng JCOfC / '2/7 ”707-26 fl x: ,JV .r/ea/ 464/4 «,6; f; 6’57 We)”. '0‘ l' " a u . " " £.// 15;. SCORE SHEET Harp won super APPROACH mess 1L 1» (W é . \L + W i J i e 9’ .3 ,1 / / 59 Ted ACT/e W4 Me 2.3; J; of! I M44! ‘1'” 0746146)" J/ol‘ éo// 60076.: /a A J/o/a. 3. ”.7- A'e’ a, 4'4”". SCORE SHEET USED FOR. TONG APPROACH TEST “l.A/«ficxlm mus,_M ~———-<>--—— p- - . __ ___ ..... b 3 ’5' I 4 3 /i J,“ .z/J'. .237 ”firm “at ' 1* ‘ """ I __ T - L“"‘—‘1 — ————— +-----———1L — 1L. . -1 ‘0 _‘___“T____0‘___ 0___ 2-41-..“ w _V F 1; l0; ”6‘ 4 L I .2 /é 32. U at”- .14; f :7, 'M‘ I hm“- __- -| W 41‘- 1_ 1r---“ ‘ A I 7! J L l /;2. / A?— /.2 0 v I ”E— M“ It] ‘I ‘ ‘ (U’ - W ‘3/ I97 ’ l i :4 I l { .1! a o a 170—-/FV 1 j I .21 ' A ‘ i \ ,_ _____ _, __ 1 ~17 1-1:. 4 ' /¢ —/ J i «I I n 0 Tom" «y’m’ f - » a - » -—~ «—-«—- --—-~T--u—-— ~---- I» -- +-—--~-- « 3 155../67 ! I": k _i. __I___._J, l '30 4 -2_ i 20 -2. -V0 go IVO — ISY ."flh :m If 2’ 4 - — -ir-—- #- ——.+..._... k II ~IZ 1:5, -&-I P if -3 —iy g 25y ., .1 7.... "‘. " *_ -—- ;L -1 /:52a97 l :m' , 3) "7.91"“ '7 l/ - V rVi/.I/b \ .r m, 'f'; -— +4— -- \ l/a - /"Y I I . i 4‘” -2,ol ' 5 7 ,5 -5)" ,1;- 76’4/07 I ”I, ' r i I { -—.4.'—__.».;2‘/+-:‘ '-.., j 3 0’ ’4 '30 lid 0. 5’)" ' v v ._.,_....-a j—7 -7 I i ‘ .2 '7 411' 9st [:5— 77 I A 4 -7 / -J’ —f1 4y I {s l / 7 4» If /x 23 x? 19 /a Is 9 j y 5'3 Mo 16? M37 —.«.-4».........._ -.-._ _.._.... its __ _- t __,_., _________ ,1. ._ _ ____ _ ' v__. .1. din '7 ’6 ’5 ‘7/ -3 4.2. — / a I .2 J y [J’ 4 17 t w _ 4, ...... L. 1,. _ .4 _______ 1|. -- .x. .._ 1(xe '7 —6 ~36" My -60.“.94; -23 0 I9 2.. 34 13¢ 20 =30 la/ 9 5 " ' "' “*— "---4* a —— » ----1> .4..- ' - it t , , I ’;Yd‘ «7 .36 /70 90 I“ 72 23 0 {7 ya [cg I“?! /0¢‘ i/fa /¢‘/v l3"; 0’ v c ‘r -—- L-_ _ x d , .. .. - _- A '—" -" T.“ (If —-——~+-—- 1 -——-.w _._- 1.-....“ __ g I d“: ‘7d7m5-L 12.. .20] 120 (5'? no 5'2 0 -3 [y J'y /oo in“ a“, ”7 0:53 7,, SCATTER GRAM USED TO CONPUTE‘VTHW’COFF‘P‘TCTHNT OW CORRETATION BPTT".’ERN THE FIRST AND SECOND SE"S OF‘ IONG APPROACH TEST SCOR4S TO DETERMINE} THE RETTABTTTTY OR THE TEST. 63 J 0 c 0 IV 1/ I c o It ‘5'- 0 5 c \ Q \ Q \ \ Q \A 5 a o a 0 0 A i 1 Q a ' n N ‘4 K 0’ ‘4 O ‘7: ~ ‘ e g \ r: n :0 ~ N \9 '\ k a \ \ 1 ‘ ‘ I . . . \ ' . ' \ ' d ‘ ' . ‘ . \‘ \I t V x. VI I “0 \ 3 3 R, \ Q g Q \6 .. b 7‘. ‘\‘ fl 3 h h 0"\ ‘ \ ‘f \ ‘4“ n "' N n ("1 d1 "ydy‘P-ada 627,- 2;; «W I I ‘ .. . r 7 — v- - lb -__1__ .‘__._4 __ - .. I. -. 1,..- ‘I ‘- I f 3‘ I 6 y 5/2 R‘s-6 ‘ 2’0 S: ‘ L;" ‘I'mw .—s--..~ p- .. _ __.. I _ 7 7 3- 7 04‘ 9F c —- --~ -—---~— --- 1 —o-—1I -— ---- >-—--— num- dV/- 25'! " I ‘2‘ .. 10’: - -~ I". -—--r -—-— ’—-.-...~;.. 5 .___,_,_1___._ __,_. 4 I 5 tr 5 7 d" a: ’2; >- v— ~ - «I»- --- >---v- -Ih———-<~ >~.------ ----- ———-<>- -—-—--->~——-~’ I I . ”W ' I I -I>-——-‘L~_.... i\ . -.......__+.___.,. _.- I» ---.£.- ”I” ...-..... ____.__I -.’° 2. I 6 Z. 1?. 1y 3 [“493 S I I ; '. H" 'u ‘ " "“‘ “'“*- - ~——~— a” ..... I -_- ____q a} 9 I I h) 4 ‘ ; . v I 2.; 4 I 6 C I’qu; . I . ; w »~ .u i I I I : .i =3 I I \ ~— I T a I ; _: l . ‘ 11 O o d r.“ "~10 ‘ ’ ' , -"“' I: ' i I} + ¢____ w L 9 "2;. -I . I I L6 -/ v.‘ :4 I \ u 40 ”"1"": ‘ _ —"‘ —* ‘ I “A; _ (4." .131“ ; I g z: 3 I ; g ‘ I. > e 4 -...:....'.‘_..".Jo‘-9' '* . ' ' 3° ~2. ~60 an R l i " “N 'c I L 5 5 (06 4‘4 ‘ I -' I ‘ a K I 1 .‘7 ""' '3 1 ' r —J ax 7; ‘ 7 v- —-——---0--—~ ' -——-——- -1p——-——— —>- » ? v L . 9/— ’JJ’ ‘ I Il l 9 § T. \ I g ‘I ’Y -'/ I I I k f ‘1. " % ”_‘-‘ 1, A I z -y if '32, 7‘ ' ’0 I I t‘ I I I I _ -' , p ’ . f ' 1 i J‘ I i "—1 ——-— : ’ ‘3 '5 45’ ff 6"— IJ' I I I I E I ' i g._ _____ 3__ I .. 0-4 " 0 I I I ; "*- T— «>- I 914- 6 a i f . I -7 I I , I ; CV / I a ‘ 2, I I 7 {I ' l I ' : . 2” J 3 = .5 ‘r 4,— 1 '1: ’7 7 {I’31/I6H3 3 F/Ja ”I97 (7 4V “'7 3-4 J I_c/ -5 I; —/ a I I --..__-i I _ I——-Ié “J I ; I i ; ---__ 1w°j""' ~ , f 'd" 7 a I. I , Y ' ' -/0 ,- , I l l 1,19" -1) O 7 ’6 I3, 5!. JoI/f 1/ 6% /o‘ J I I I J i _ 1 I; I 'd‘ ‘9'? o I a" ijz. I 5 5N0 ’ I I I / . I :7 6 I‘ I, 0 7 31/17 Rog/{Oiloi 1y} 5):. ‘36 U" 4?!ny '7 n-O ~10 I~7 d, -" -gf ? ll 9‘ —- ; ' I _” V " J7 J‘éiu , 2/ e3 97 e - ' I “_ F, VI - . ; IV ’ dx( ‘7‘]; Y? ’ I J‘ Ii] /3( Z! 0 Y .30 It, i‘..i’ IV, 3" ‘lg 1’1 SCATTER GRAM USED TO COVPUTE WWE CCEPFI TENT OP CORPELATION mewwww mum v7??? pun swcnwn swms ow DRIVING WEFT SCORES TO FIND TH? rRELIABIIITv on WHE TEST. 64: HWMH mH-H mo .H/HHQHA< <> .5:- mzHéAMH-mm 0-H. .5200 Dad-Hr OMN mm:- 20mm @0249me mméH-sca mH HZ. CZQ mm (HVHu. Hmmb E..me mm“. HEM-2.9mm HHOHHHBV yaw-HO”. LO HHSHUHmm-mo- - Z. HBDLHHOU (OH 0mm: HHHHHQZO mMHHQUw mm H VR Tux- \o\u at} bw- m.\\ 3“ N... M\ Q a» q q x- n- u. we- a- \v- .3- xi. 9.5%.». 0 mu: \0\ \M. X- m.- \n.. 4- \I Q Q Q Q N. ~ .N‘ K _\\\ M.\ MN u\ ”quw . \\\ K um. an. N\ N . ,w 5 >3 .3. xx am a m 9 N % “H ax rwna Rik} 3m mxw 3.3.x a um... .“ RX. K V o\ V. M Q .N V .N . \w \ m. .. x; - ‘VHXN- \u. QT m4- an$ W N N W \- m: N \ o \s N.. M: \ (flux A- .- a v 3 9 Hm \ x \a H m m w ~90 um: \Q \ v .\ x N .~ \ m. d. M. In In. \ x N. \“w m. u“. NI xuo x? xxx-\- H) M- 2- H m i. \ s. H [a \ I U\\ \a\ . ;LII fl \Q “\ \n \a . kxyox . su \ q I I H ”I M m. m. \ H ~ . * \~\o«. w 3 w- - m .3 ‘ ..., H-quii- y :H ..H H r9:- 4, t \u T.- H..- - y N M. N; + ~ sum s _ KUIQ‘ 0 0 0 § o\ H § ~ \ o H w «h\ sh. \\ \\ \§ § r. m.) M. \ Mp . d. x r H H kuuqq ' a H RFIK-Hiz- X 1W. N. \ a 4 H I‘K H 4. [it-IL...- . H t .0, \ J _ :5 d. H m. M u H Fwa o/o .llill]! \ \ I Q\\ “N X. K x .2 b 3 kmxnt ». \ sss ‘ ~ / H QM< 0») \O Q M. \Q Ox \quu: \ \s~ \- Nk N\ Q N. Q ¢ K\\\‘\\ L K h n s y 0mm r \H h w a P. ? 2 z 2 r z A z / x / x xxx \- HH m w . u a H. n m M a a ,0. n u m m m u H. . . . . . H . . H . H H . . . ? 2 7. F f 7. r r / / l . I . . I 6 .a z 9 I t 1H / / / z x 4. I 4 a a u n J n a u 4 n u u, a n 4 1. WV an J5 \ 7.0 \ \i mto‘ IR 23' ‘5" V .w-. («Fania ’22:? f. ’11 1; U“._3£'-:§ 5‘1” ‘34-‘- “ih , My 12 ”$3 . - " r '3 Mv 2° 5 #1253 . 30 26 '53