JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT ON LOCATION FOR NEW USGA RULES FILM Director Jack Tobin, right, of National Educational Films, Inc., instructs his cameramen to focus on John Dillon, of the Somerset Hills Country Club, Bernardsville, N. J., while filming "On the Green," the latest addition to the "Golf House" Film Library, which was previewed at the Annual Meeting. Location, the Mid-Ocean Club, Bermuda. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT Published by the United States Golf Association Permission to reprint articles herein is freely granted {-unless specifically noted otherwise) provided credit is given to the USGA Journal VOL. X, No. 7 FEBRUARY, 1958 Through the Green ............................................................................................................... Ladies Make the News at the Annual Meeting ...................... ..........................by John P. English The Golf Ball Problem—An Interim Report............................................by Dr. W. E. Gordon New Handicap System for Men and Women.......................... by Joseph C. Dey, Jr. Leland Collection Now in “Golf House”.. ........................................................................................... Moves to Lighten Tax on Club Dues............................................................by Wm. Ward Foshay New Movie Shows Rules on Green..........................................,........................................................... The Referee ............................................................................. ................................. ........................ Turf Management: USGA Green Section Turf Management Calculations..............................................................by James B. Moncrief Keeping Pace with Increasing Golf Activity.............................................by James E. Thomas Golf Course Maintenance Costs.................................................................................................... Annual Index ......................................................................................................................................... It’s Your Honor ..................................................................................................................................... 1 4 7 13 15 16 21 22 24 29 30 31 33 Published seven times a year in February, April, June, July, August, September and November by the UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION 40 EAST 38th ST., NEW YORK 16, N. Y. Subscription: $2 a year. Single copies: 30c. Subscriptions, articles, photographs, and correspondence should be sent to the above address. Entered as Second-class Matter March 3, 1950, at the Post Office at New York, N. Y., under the Act of March 8, 1879. Additional entry at Post office in Sea Cliff, L. I., N. Y. Edited by Joseph C. Dey, Jr., and John P. English. Managing Editor: Miss Nancy Jupp. All articles voluntarily contributed. USGA COMPETITIONS FOR 1958 Championships Championship or Team Match Open Entries Close May 15 Sectional Qualifying Rounds June 2 Women's Open June 13 None Dates of Event________ June 12-13-14 June 26-27-28 Amateur Public Links *May 29 tJune 16-21 July 7-12 Junior Amateur June 27 July 15 July 30-Aug. 2 (a) Curtis Cup Match ------ ------ Girls' Junior Women's Amateur July 25 Aug. 1 None None (b) Americas Cup Match ------ Amateur Senior Amateur Aug. 7 Aug. 29 Aug. 26 Sept. 16 August 8-9 August 11-15 August 18-23 September 5-6 September 8-13 Location Southern Hills C. C. r}?uls& Forest Lake C. C. Bloomfield Hills, Mich. Silver Lake G. C. Orland Park, Ill. University of Minnesota Golf Course, St. Paul, Minn. Brae Burn C. C. West Newton, Mass. Greenwich C. C. Greenwich, Conn. Wee Burn C. C. Darien, Conn. Olympic C. C. San Francisco, Cal. Olympic C. C. San Francisco, Cal. Country Club, Pebble Beach, Cal. Dates entries close mean last dates for applications the Amateur Public Links Championship. For possible Rounds, see entry forms. Re Amateur Public Links Championship: ♦Entries close with Sectional Qualifying Chairmen. tExact date in each Section to be fixed by Sectional Chairmen. (a) Curtis Cup Match—Women’s amateur teams: British Isles vs. United States. (b) Americas Cup Match—Men’s amateur teams: Canada vs. Mexico vs. United States. Sept. 29-Oct. 4 Monterey Peninsula to reach USGA office, except in the case, of exceptions in dates of Sectional Qualifying Neighborly Gesture The hand of golfing friendship has been extended by the Army Navy Country Club, Arlington, Va., to its neighbor, the Washington Golf and Country Club. Washington is in the throes of demolish­ ing and rebuilding its clubhouse, and rather than see the members temporarily homeless, the Board of Governors of the service club has extended the full courtesy of its club­ house facilities to the Washington players. Amputee Honored Dale S. Bourisseau, of Solon, Ohio, re­ ceived the Ben Hogan Trophy at the Metropolitan Golf Writers’ Dinner in New York last month. Mr. Bourisseau, who lost a leg during the Italian campaign in World War II, was honored not only for his ability to overcome his own physical handicap and continue playing golf, but for his help to other amputees. Mr. Bourisseau is secretary of the National Amputee Golf Association and one of the organizers of Possibilities Unlimited Inc., a movement dedicated to the rehabilitation of the handicapped. A Tribute to Charles Coe The members of the victorious 1957 US Walker Cup Team have presented a handsome silver salver, suitably inscribed with the players’ signatures, to their cap­ tain, Charles R. Coe, of Oklahoma City, Okla., in recognition of his leadership at The Minikahda Club, Minneapolis, Minn. British Curtis Cup Squad The Ladies’ Golf Union has named a 10-woman squad from which the British Curtis Cup Team will be selected to de­ fend the trophy at the Brae Burn Country Club, West Newton, Mass., August 8-9. They are: Miss Philomena Garvey, Ireland, the British Ladies’ Champion; Mrs. Nigel Howard, Mrs. Frances Smith, Mrs. Marley Spearman, Mrs. Michael Bonallack (Angela Ward), Misses Elizabeth Price, Bridget Jackson, England, and Mrs. George Valen­ tine and Misses Janette Robertson, Doro­ thea Sommerville, Scotland. All but three have played in previous matches. The newcomers are Mrs. Spear­ man, Miss Jackson and Miss Sommerville. Miss Jeanne Bisgood, the English Cham­ pion, declined to accept nomination. False Impression on TV In a recent nationwide telecast from a PGA sponsored tournament in California, the commentator incorrectly stated that Lloyd Mangrum could wait five minutes to see if his ball, on the lip of the cup, would drop. This started a flood of letters to this office from viewers throughout the country. We would like to emphasise that Rule 35-if entitles the player to only a momen­ tary delay to determine whether or not his ball is at rest. There is no specified time other than momentary. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 1 Date Fixed for 1959 Annual Meeting The 65 th Annual Meeting of the United States Golf Association will be held Saturday, January 31, 1959 in New York City. It will be preceded on Friday, Jan­ uary 30, by the USGA Green Section’s mid-winter Educational Program. If he plays while the ball is in motion he incurs a penalty under Rule 25-1. How­ ever, he must not delay in contravention of Rule 37-7. Five Posts with One Club It is doubtful if anyone has had as versa­ tile a golfing career as Walter Whiting, who retired on December 31 after serving the Pelham Country Club, Pelham Manor, N. Y., in five different capacities over 36 years. Whiting, a British veteran of the first World War, joined the staff in 1921 as assistant to Jim Barnes. Three years later he succeeded Barnes as professional. In 1939 Whiting increased his scope when he added the greenkeeping responsi­ bilities to his other duties. During World War II he served in three capacities when he became club manager. He relinquished these posts when he was made general manager in 1950, the position he held until his retirement. Jack Ryerson9 s Total Climbs John B. Ryerson, of Springfield Center, N. Y., has upped his total of different courses played to 1,112 as of December 31, I957- Although he has no thoughts of besting Ralph A. Kennedy’s total of 3,165, the cards of which now form part of the "Golf House” Museum, he looks upon adding to his own collection as a most en­ joyable hobby. Ryerson, who has been swinging a club for 41 years, was a leading amateur in the twenties and thirties. Now in the senior bracket, he confines his tournament golf to a few of their meetings. Consumed with a genuine love for the game in all its aspects, he has donated many articles to the USGA Museum and has served on the USGA Museum Com­ mittee for several years. Artist’s Parody on Shakespeare The late John Hassall, a well-known English painter and illustrator of the late EARLY LESSONS 19th and early 20th centuries, made a signi­ ficant contribution to golf literature with his book "The Seven Ages of Golf,” pub­ lished by the Fine Art Society in London, in 1899. 2 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 Using the famous speech from Act II, Scene VII, of Shakespeare’s play, "As You Like It,” Hassall has ingeniously produced seven humorous illustrations or caricatures that characterize the seven ages some golfers pass through. A parody on the speech, the illustrations are subtitled: i. The Infant, 2. The School­ boy—with his satchel and shining morn­ ing face, 3. The Lover—sighing like a fur­ nace, 4. The Soldier—full of strange oaths, seeking a bubble reputation even in a bunker’s mouth, 5. The Justice—full of wise saws and modern instances, 6. The Lean Pantaloon—his youthful hose well saved, a world too wide for his shrunk shank, 7. The Caddie—sans teeth, sans eyes, sans everything, and on the cover— Early lessons. The late Horace Hutchinson, one of golf’s most prolific writers and renowned players, wrote the introduction. 200 signed copies were published in the large 13V2 x 19 inch folio edition. A smaller edition was issued around 1904. The book in the large edition is con­ sidered a collectors’ item today. The USGA Museum was grateful to receive a copy of the large signed edition from Charles C. Auchincloss, of New York. It is now on display with a collection of rare golf volumes in "Golf House”. Terms and Colors for Tees Clubs throughout the United States have been at variance with one another in the past as regards terms and colors for tee markers. A color which might determine championship tees on one course might indicate the women’s markers on another. In an effort to promote standardization of these terms and colors, the USGA recom­ mends the following code: Term Blue Course Red Course White Course Yellow Course Tees Back Middle Front Women’s A single set of markers used on any hole to designate two courses should be painted with both colors, half and half. Appropriations for Turf Research and Education The USGA Green Section Research and Education Fund, Inc., has announced the following appropriations for turf work: $ 500. Kansas State College Georgia Coastal Plain Experiment Station, Tifton, Ga. $1,000. Western Washington Experiment Station, Puyallup, Wash. $1,000. $1,500. Purdue University Pennsylvania State University $2,000. University of Rhode Island $1,350. Rutgers University $1,750. $9,100. This follows a $7,000 grant for turf re­ search and education from National Golf Day receipts on the recommendation of the USGA Green Section. Necrology It is with deep regret that we record the deaths of: D. SCOTT CHISHOLM, Ocean Park, Cal., well known golf writer, photographer, starter, announcer and sports personality. Scottish born, he came to the States in 1899 where he lived out his colorful and versatile life. He was a member of the USGA Museum Committee. HARRY PACKHAM, Los Angeles, Cal., champion of the cause of the public links- men and a member of the USGA Public Links Committee since 1934. J. BERND ROSE, Sewickley Heights, Pa., a member of the USGA Green Section Committee since 1940. As a member of the Allegheny Country Club he gave valu­ able cooperation during the 1954 Women’s Amateur Championship. JAMES C. MAIDEN, Scottish born pro­ fessional and brother of the late Stewart Maiden. He was pro at the Inverness Club, Toledo, Ohio, and at the East Lake Club, Atlanta, Ga., before going to the Nassau Country Club, Long Island, N. Y. where he served for forty years. ROY G. ELLIOTT, Cincinnati, Ohio, xnember of the USGA Senior Champion­ ship Committee. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 3 LADIES MAKE THE NEWS AT THE ANNUAL MEETING BY JOHN P. ENGLISH USGA Assistant Executive Director United States Golf Association is directed primarily by men, but the ladies made much of the news during the 64th Annual Meeting last month at the Drake Hotel, Chicago. First, the Women’s Committee an­ nounced adoption of the new USGA men’s Handicap System. It is based ideally upon the 10 best of the player’s last 25 scores, with minor alterations appropriate to women’s golf; however, a handicap may be obtained if the player has returned at least five scores. Heretofore the Women’s Committee has recommended a system based upon the five best scores within the current and the last previous playing seasons or calen­ dar years. The new formula has been incorporated into a revised edition of the booklet "The Conduct of Women’s Golf” and is being distributed to member clubs, women’s golf associations and interested individuals. The ladies’ recommendations on course rating will continue unchanged in substance. Second, Miss Margaret Curtis, of Bos­ ton, was announced as the fourth winner of the Bob Jones Award for distinguished sportsmanship in golf. Miss Curtis, who is 73 and has been playing golf 64 years, was not honored simply because she has won three USGA Women’s Amateur Championships and been a co-donor of the Curtis Cup. She was selected because, as was said by Totton P. Heffelfinger, of Minneapolis, Chairman of the Award Committee, in making the pre­ sentation, she is "... a great lady, a great golfer, who has down through the years in every move she has made in golf shown that she is one of the greatest sportswomen of all time. Her contributions to sports­ manship in golf have been legion. She has Miss Margaret Curtis, 1957 winner of the Bob Jones Award, starts her 65th season of golf this spring. worked for years instilling into our youth her love of golf and golf’s sportsmanship. She and her sister donated a great trophy for international competition. She is loved, admired and respected by all golfers, old and young.” Mrs. Henri F. Prunaret, of Natick, Mass., accepted the Award for Miss Curtis, who was unable to make the trip to Chicago, and read a graceful letter of acceptance in which Miss Curtis said: "I am very, very grateful. "Bob Jones has certainly earned his unique position in the world of golf and sport. His form, his skill, his courage were magnificent, but his sportsmanship has made him an inspiration for us all. "The episode when a partisan gallery wouldn’t keep quiet when his opponent had a very missable putt to make for a 4 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 half and Bob gave him the putt was a supreme example. I believe the gallery realized what it had done and behaved better thereafter, but it was too late. Bob lost the match, i down. "That there should be an award for sportsmanship named for him seems very fitting. "I shall be starting my sixty-fifth year of golf this spring (I began at 9), and shall try to live up to this honor.” During the Annual Meeting John D. Ames, of Chicago, was elected to the Presi­ dency of the Association, succeeding Rich­ ard S. Tufts, of Pinehurst, N. C. Mr. Ames has been a member of the Executive Committee since 1946 and more recently has been a Vice-President. His father, the late Knowlton L. Ames, was an Executive Committeeman in 1913 and 1914. Other officers are John G. Clock, of Long Beach, Cal., re-elected a Vice-President; Charles L. Peirson, of Boston, elected a Vice-President to succeed Mr. Ames; John M. Winters, Jr., of Tulsa, Okla., elected Secretary to succeed Mr. Peirson; and J. Frederic Byers, Jr., of Pittsburgh, re-elected Treasurer. Hord W. Hardin, of St. Louis, and Ber­ nard H. Ridder, Jr., of Duluth, Minn., were elected new members of the Executive Committee. They succeed Mr. Tufts and John W. Fischer, of Cincinnati, who had requested that he not be considered for re-election. Mr. Tufts retires after twelve years as a member of the Executive Committee and two years as President. During his tenure he served as Chairman of seven different committees: the Rules of Golf, Champion­ ship, Implements and Ball, Handicap, Green Section, Junior Championship and Senior Championship Committees. Mr. Tufts played an important role in development and maintenance of the first uniform code of Rules as a member of the negotiating committees which met with the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews, Scotland, in 1951 and again in 1954. He successfully laid the groundwork of the Handicap, the Junior Champion­ ship and the Senior Championship Com­ mittees as first Chairman of each. During his tenure as Chairman of the Green Sec­ tion Committee, the Regional Turf Service program was instituted. Chicago was the site of the Annual Meeting for the first time since 1926, and it attracted approximately 100 delegates and committeemen. The Annual Meeting had been held continuously in New York since 1927, when it was in Pittsburgh. As a matter of history, Annual Meetings were in New York from 1895 through 1906, in Chicago in 1907 and thereafter in New York, Chicago and occasionally Philadelphia and Pittsburgh through 1927. The next Annual Meeting will again be held in New York, on Saturday, January 31. In his opening remarks Mr. Tufts ex­ pressed the hope that by holding the meet­ ing occasionally in cities other than New York, the Association could come more closely into contact with more golfers in­ terested in administration of the game. The Association also took the occasion to make contact with Green Committee Chairmen and golf course superintendents in the Mid-Western area by holding its annual Green Section Educational Program on the day before the Annual Meeting. This attracted approximately 125 persons who heard panels of experts discuss two topics: "Technical Advances which May Counteract Increasing Maintenance Costs” and "Administrative and Management Pro­ cedures which May Counteract Increasing Maintenance Costs.” The Annual Meeting was preceded by three days of Executive Committee meet­ ings and by a meeting of the Women’s Committee. During these meetings it was decided to increase prize money for professionals in the 1958 Open Championship to a new record high of approximately $35,000. First prize will be $8,000. Last year the total prize money was approximately $30,000. The Open Championship will be held at the Southern Hills Country Club, Tulsa, Okla., in June. Prize money for professionals in the Women’s Open Championship will be con- USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 5 USGA officials for 1958 at the Annual Meeting are, from left to right, seated: Mrs. Charles Dennehy, Chairman of the Women's Committee; John D. Ames, President; John G. Clock, Vice-President. Standing, left to right: John M. Winters, Jr., Secretary; Charles L. Peirson, Vice-President. Absent: J. Frederic Byers, Jr., Treasurer. tinued at $7,200, the same as last year, but there will be 15 money prizes instead of 12. First prize will be $1,800. The Women’s Open Championship will be played at Forest Lake Country Club, Bloomfield Hills, Mich., also in June. The Executive Committee decided to establish a new condition of entry into the Open and the Women’s Open Cham­ pionships under which professionals will be required to certify that they have not entered into and will not enter into any ar­ rangement whereby any competitor could have a financial interest in any other com­ petitor’s prize money, as through prize­ money "insurance” agreements or prize­ splitting agreements. In his remarks to the delegates Mr. Tufts took occasion to re-affirm the As­ sociation’s well-established position of op­ position to organized gambling in connec­ tion with tournaments and to slow play. The Annual Report revealed that the Association had completed another active and prosperous year. Membership reached another new high of 2,166 member clubs and courses, a net gain of 90 over the previous year. It was the twelfth successive year in which the As­ sociation enjoyed increased support. Mem­ bership is the highest it has ever been. Net income for the year was $38,232 and surplus is $341,177, not including "Golf House”, which is separately held. Mr. Ames, as a recent Chairman of the Championship Committee, alluded to the fact that apparently large excess income from Championships resulted in part be­ cause the Association charged only a few direct expenses to individual Champion­ ships although perhaps a quarter or more of the New York staff’s entire effort was devoted to the over-all Championship pro­ gram. If indirect expenses of Champion­ ships were so charged, the Championships would not appear so profitable. The Green Section’s Regional Turf Ser­ vice, which showed an excess of expenses over income of approximately $50,000, expanded from 539 to 640 subscribing courses. A new District Office was opened in Chicago and the number of agronomists visiting member clubs increased to eight, working from five Regional Offices. These agronomists made 1,283 visits to the courses of member clubs during the year. 6 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 THE GOLF BALL PROBLEM BY - AN INTERIM REPORT DR. W. E. GORDON Arthur D. Little, Inc. "OERHAPS the golfer’s most gratifying sensation is the crisp reaction he gets from a well-hit ball. The drive is a big part of the game. Its importance and much of the game’s popularity have followed the development of a really good ball. The modern golf ball is a gem of mass- produced perfection, far removed from the old gutty and the ancient feather ball. For the last 20 years or more, however, the ball has remained substantially unchanged. The Rules of the United States Golf Association are one deterrent to a livelier ball. The USGA opposes, and quite natur­ ally, chaotic and irresponsible merchan­ dising and technical changes that would tend to spoil the game. Its Rules represent an effort to standardize the golf ball in the best long-term interests of the game. If drives should become much longer, courses would begin to lose their challenge to the player and the game would suffer immensely. Obsolescence has indeed already overtaken some of the older courses. Many clubs are so fenced in by real-estate de- elopments that they cannot expand their courses without exorbitant expense. Manufacturers certainly would not bene­ fit from a radical change in the ball. One of the improvements in recent years that has benefited golfers and generally im­ proved the game is the standardization of the ball through mass production. The spirit of industrial enterprise being what it is, however, the ball manufacturer is constantly improving his product and trying to outdistance his competition. USGA Control The USGA therefore has the difficult problem of framing rules that allow genu­ ine improvements in golf implements on the one hand and prevent undesirable changes on the other. In 1940 the USGA engaged the Armour Research Foundation to assist it in fram­ ing a rule that would put an upper limit on the liveliness of the golf ball. The Foundation developed a machine that drives the ball and measures its velocity in a reproducible and accurate way. Rule 2-3 in The Rules of Golf specifies that the bail shall not travel faster than 250 feet per second when tested on this machine. A reasonable tolerance of 2 per cent is al­ lowed. The machine is set up in "Golf House,” in New York. Balls of all makes are tested by the USGA at regular intervals; the balls usu­ ally are obtained through normal retail sources. Over the years since the Rule was put into effect, the velocity has changed very little. Within each brand the uni­ formity is amazingly good, and the total spread between brands is not large. The velocity of many brands does crowd the prescribed limit. The USGA would like, however, a port­ able and more convenient apparatus than its present one. With a portable apparatus, tests could be made at Championships to ensure that balls used complied with the Rules. And, of course, it is interested in a scientific reappraisal of its procedures. In December, 1957, the Implements and Ball Committee submitted this problem as part of an assignment to Arthur D. Little, Inc., of Cambridge, Mass. A portable test machine can be made from any one of several present designs; the problem is one of accuracy. The job has not been simple. An idea of the problem’s complexity can be ob­ tained from the following questions that bring out various phases: Does the present USGA velocity rule sufficiently define or restrict USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 7 the distance that the ball may travel when struck by a modern long driver? Can a long driver gain extra yards by using a certain type of ball that would not give a corresponding or proportional extra yardage to an average driver? The belief is fairly common that a hard, tightly wound, or high compression, ball does indeed give the long driver this ad­ vantage. We can therefore phrase another question: What is the relationship between the compression, or hardness, of the ball and its performance when struck by the long driver and by the average driver? These questions seem to be based on the assumption that the length of the drive is more or less proportional to the velocity of the ball when it leaves the club. Lord Brabazon, of Great Britain, has questioned this assumption by making a rather start­ ling suggestion, implied in the following question: Does a long driver gain a dispro­ portionate advantage because of a natural phenomenon having to do with a so-called critical Reynold’s Number?* 'Distance Bonus for the Long Hitter? This idea of a critical Reynold’s Num­ ber has been supported by some theoreti­ cal scientists in Great Britain. It can be simply described as a disproportionately small air resistance encountered by a ball when it travels above a certain critical speed. According to this idea, a driver whose ball can reach this magic velocity gets a * The Reynold’s Number is a physicists’ term which describes properties of the relative motion of solid objects and fluids. One can arrive at this number in a particular case by multiplying the velo­ city of the object by its diameter and by the density of the medium through which it is moving and then by dividing this product by the viscosity of the medium. bonus not available to his less gifted brother. Another important question brings the club into the picture: Does the long driver obtain a high velocity by using a heavier than average club? Although it may seem obvious that a long driver strikes the ball with more force than the average golfer, it may not be al­ together foolish to ask this question: Does the long driver by virtue only of superior skill obtain a more effi­ cient impact with the ball or per­ haps a better trajectory, thus getting a longer drive without a signifi­ cantly harder stroke? (Surely if this were so, no one should wish to reduce his relative advantage!) There are questions pertaining not to the ball, but to the club. For example: Does the improved shaft in the modern golf club bring about longer drives? Or one can worry about the future by asking such questions as these: Could there be developed from new synthetic materials a ball that would differ markedly in behavior from the present ball and make the present velocity rule inade­ quate? Could wood, plastic and bone be re­ placed with a clubhead material that would give a more efficient impact with the ball? Many scientists would say offhand that most of these questions could be answered very simply if the elementary physics of Newton’s Laws were applied. Unfortunate­ ly, this is not the case. Newton’s Laws do indeed provide the basic framework for the theory of impact and flight of the ball, but the theory is by no means so simple. Ultimately a good working theory, or model, as the scientists call it, would have to be derived if all of these questions were to be answered satisfactorily. Coefficient of Restitution The attempt to develop this theory was the point of departure for our study. From 8 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 our own work and the published works of others, we have derived a mathematical theory for the behavior of a golf ball dur­ ing impact. In order to describe other phases of our attack on the golf-ball problem, we must introduce here an important scientific con­ cept. This is the so-called coefficient of restitution. This quantity with the imposing name we shall call "e.” It is defined simply as the ratio of the relative velocity of the ball and the club after impact to their relative velocity before impact. Suppose, for example, that the club strikes the ball with a velocity of 200 feet per second. This number is the relative velocity before impact, because the ball is standing still (zero velocity). Suppose that the ball leaves the club after impact at a velocity of 250 feet per second, and that the club is slowed down to 120 feet per second. The relative velocity after impact is there­ fore (250-120, or) 130 feet per second; this is the velocity with which the ball travels away from the club. Therefore, "e” has the value 130/200 or 0.65. (These are typical figures.) The ideal value of "e” is 1; it can never be greater than this. It is sometimes thought (and this idea is common in elementary physics textbooks) that a perfect or ideal ball would have this ideal value of "e”. According to our present thinking, how­ ever, this idea is erroneous; no golf ball could possibly be developed with e=i. This, then, is one line of progress on the golf ball problem: We now know that the yardstick for measuring "e” does not have a top reading of 1; it has something less. Actually a good golf ball—and it is hard to find a poor one nowadays—has an "e” value of 0.75 to 0.80 for a very light im­ pact (for example, when dropped on a concrete floor). For the hard-hit ball, the "e” value drops to about 0.65. The big question is: How close are these values to the top of the yardstick? Here is one place where a theory is needed, only theory can tell us whether the present ball is close to ideal. Theory or no, there is no substitute for facts. Several of the questions can be ans­ wered only by actual measurements of the speed of the ball and the club, the carry of the drive and so on. Many of these measure­ ments should be made in the laboratory, where wind and rain and muscles and nerves can be eliminated. For preliminary orientation, however, ADL in cooperation with USGA made a series of measurements on real flesh-and-blood golfers during the 57 th Amateur Championship at The Country Club, Brookline, Mass., last Sept­ ember. Drum Camera in Action The high-speed stroboscope used at Brookline is a fairly recent development of Professor Edgerton of Massachusetts Insti­ tute of Technology, and his associates at Edgerton, Germeshausen and Grier, Inc. Combination of this high-speed strobe with a simple drum camera is a departure from common practice. Unlike a movie camera, this drum camera has no framing mechan­ ism; it relies on the stroboscope to stop the motion and on the rapid uniform motion of the drum to separate the indi­ vidual shots on the film. The strobe was operated at a speed of 9,000 flashes per second. At this strobe speed, the golf ball travels only about ^4 inch between flashes. For comparison, an automobile traveling 60 mph would move about 1/io inch between flashes, and a high-speed rifle bullet would go about 4 inches in the same period of time. The strobe operation was synchronized with the golfer’s stroke through use of an elec­ tric-eye device. In addition to being turned on at the proper time, the strobe had to be turned off before the second revolution of the camera drum, so that the film would not be exposed twice. The operating period of the strobe had also to be reduced to a minimum, so that the unit could operate above its rated maximum speed of 6,000 flashes per second. With the total operating time cut to about 1/100 second, or 90 flashes at 9,000 per second, both of these objectives were accomplished. Through the use of the high-speed photo­ USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 S graphs, several measurements were made. Club and ball velocities were computed from the movement in successive frames, and the loft angle of the ball was deter­ mined. Careful observation of the twist of the clubhead after impact indicated whether the ball had been hit squarely on center or on the heel or toe of the club face. A major improvement could be made in the experi­ mental setup if a well defined marker were located on the clubhead close to the cen­ ter of gravity. The balls were taken from the produc­ tion of a single manufacturer, so that com­ parisons could be made between balls that differed in hardness, or compression. In­ dividual balls having PGA compression ratings close to 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90 were selected at the factory. These numbers give an indication of ball hardness, a 50 rating being about as soft as any ball in common use and a 90 rating being near the top of the scale. The 70, 80 and 90 balls were constructed similarly and differed only in the tightness of the thread winding. The 5 c and 60 balls were constructed differently from the others and from each other. A strict comparison on the basis of compres­ sion can therefore be made only between the 70, 80 and 90 balls. Willie Turnesa, Dave Smith, Billy Joe Patton, Joe Carr, Bob Kuntz and Tim Hol­ land and several others very kindly parti­ cipated in the test under conditions in which no golfer could be at his best. One must be cautious in interpreting the results, because there were many uncon­ trolled variables. Great meaning, therefore, should not be attached to a single measure­ ment. For exact answers from tests of this kind, many times the number of trials at Brookline would have to be performed, and the results would have to be analyzed on a statistical basis. Some of the best data, from the stand­ point of the consistency of the player and the clarity of the photographs, is given in the accompanying table for Bob Kuntz and Tim Holland. The first five columns in the table give, successively, the ball com­ pression, the club velocity before impact, the ball velocity, the carry of the drive (distance in the air, not including the roll) and the angle of loft. The next col­ umn gives the approximate time (measured in frames or flashes of the stroboscope) during which the ball remained in contact with the club face. The next to last col­ umn gives the point of the club face that struck the ball, as inferred from the twist of the clubhead after impact. The last col­ umn indicates where the ball landed. The terms "right” and "left” mean simply that the ball landed in the rough on the right or left. Some tentative generalizations can be drawn from the data although, as previous­ ly pointed out, they should be used with caution: Consistency: The most consistent thing Player Kuntz Holland Club Velocity Before Impact (ft./sec.) Ball Compression Ball Velocity (ft./sec.) Carry (yards) Loft (degrees) Contact Time (frames) 50 60 70 80 80 90 50 60 70 80 90 199 206 203 217 213 200 212 212 217 212 207 253 247 255 250 228 * 227 247 250 275 272 188 221 230 232 227 233 200 197 251 258 248 5 8 11 8 12 9 2 6 11 11 12 5 4 4 3.5 3.5 3.5 5 5 4 3.5 3 Point Struck heel si. heel si. heel center si. toe center heel heel si. heel center si. heel Location fairway fairway right fairway fairway right left left fairway fairway right Probable measurement error. 10 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 BOB KUNTZ Club Velocity (B) 217 ft/sec. Ball Comp. 80 Carry 232 yds. Club Velocity (A) 106 ft/sec. Drive 257 yds. Loft 8° 15' 37.5 rps. Spin Ball Velocity 250 ft/sec. TIM HOLLAND Ball Comp. 80 Club Velocity (B) 212 ft/sec. Carry 258 yds. Club Velocity (A) 143 ft/sec. Drive 283 yds. Loft 11° 19' 62 rps. Spin Ball Velocity 275 ft/sec. Coeff. of Restitution 0.66 Coeff. of Restitution 0.63 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1953 11 about a golfer is his swing. An individual’s clubhead velocity at the bottom of the stroke does not vary very much, as the table shows. When the possible errors in these measurements and the very adverse conditions under which these golfers were working are considered, the uniformity of these numbers is amazing. The ball velocity varies over a much wider range and seems to depend more on how squarely the ball is hit than on how fast the clubhead is traveling. Distance: The most important factor for distance appears to be not so much speed as loft. The best loft angle appears from the table to be around n or 12 degrees. The table shows that whenever the angle of ascent was low, the distance was also low even though the ball velocity in some cases was high. The photographs showed that in Holland’s first two shots, his club was still descending when it struck the ball; only a small degree of loft was there­ fore given to the ball, and although his. club speed was normal and the ball speed ■was relatively good, the distance was short. Holland’s best shot, with a carry of 258 yards and a total distance including roll of 283 yards, was obtained with only his average clubhead speed of 212 feet per second. Of course, to say that loft is important is only to say that the ball should be hit squarely, with the club precisely at the bottom of the stroke. Unfortunately, the amount of data from the Brookline tests is not nearly great enough to give a quantitative relationship between speed and distance for an other­ wise perfectly hit ball. For a well-hit ball, the data show that there is a fairly close one-to-one corre­ spondence between total length of the. drive including roll as measured in yards and ball velocity leaving the club as measured in feet per second. This is a convenient rule. From it, one may conclude that the USGA velocity limit, being 250 feet per second, corresponds to a 250-yard drive; this is probably a well-chosen value to represent the performance of a better- than-average golfer. Compression: If attention is confined to balls with compression numbers 70, 80 and 90 that are otherwise similar in construc­ tion, the tests seem to show that there is little significant difference in the driving distance, other factors being equal. The over-all average carry for all the drives at Brookline with each type of ball was as follows: 50:204; 60:205; 70:232; 80:227; and 90:234. The last three values are sub­ stantially the same if allowance is made for variable factors and the relatively small number of shots. The two softer grades, 50 and 60, are significantly less lively than the higher- compression grades. The data in the table should not be taken as evidence for this statement, since from the standpoint of loft both Kuntz and Holland had relatively poor shots on the 50 and 60 balls. The over-all average figures just listed can be given considerable weight, however, and they definitely seem to show a poorer per­ formance for these low-compression balls. The poorer performance of these balls should not, however, be entirely attributed to their softness, because their construction is also quite different, especially in the cote. To say that compression, within limits has little effect on driving distance is not to say that compression makes no differ­ ence to the behavior of the ball. The photo­ graphs clearly show large differences: the softer ball is flattened more by impact with the club than is the harder ball. Even more apparent in the photographs is the fact that the softer ball stays in contact with the club for a longer time; the time of contact varied five frames for the 50-compression ball to three frames for the 90-compression ball. The golfer notices this effect in what he describes as the "feel” of the ball; the high-compression ball gives him a sharper reaction. The effect of compression is probably much more important for control than for distance. It seems likely that better control can be obtained with a soft ball than with a hard one. Because it flattens out more and covers a larger area of the club face at impact, the soft ball requires less criti­ cal accuracy at impact than the hard ball. 12 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 NEW HANDICAP SYSTEM BY FOR MEN AND WOMEN JOSEPH C. DEY, JR. USGA Executive Director TTSGA-type handicaps for both men and women this year will be computed under a single formula for the first time in the modern history of golf handicapping. The new Handicap System is based ideally upon the io best of the player’s last 25 scores. However, a handicap may be obtained if the player has returned at least five scores. The system aims to serve week-end golfers as well as players of championship calibre. Before this year there were three differ­ ent USGA handicap methods—two for men and one for women. The old alterna­ tive methods for men produced what were known as "current” and "basic” handicaps. The USGA Women’s Committee’s former system was distinguished from the others in basing handicaps upon the five best scores within the current and the last previous playing seasons or calendar years. All this is now changed. Henceforth there is only one USGA Handicap System. It is a combination of the best features of the two optional types formerly recom­ mended for men. It became effective for men’s golf at the start of 1958. Shortly thereafter the USGA Women’s Committee adopted it. Thus, long strides have been taken coward national uniformity in handicap­ ping. A strong preference for a single­ type system had been expressed by USGA Member Clubs in replying to a question­ naire in late 1956: nearly 90 per cent of 348 club answers favored a single standard. The new system was produced by the USGA Handicap Procedure Committee, the Chairman of which is William O. Blaney, of Boston. Chairman of the USGA Handicap Committee is Richmond Gray, of Richmond, Va. USGA Handicaps will be required of amateurs, both men and women, for en- ® try into USGA Championships in 1958. The USGA system says in part: "Handicapping is the great equalizer among golfers of differing abilities. A national system of handicapping must meet two main requirements: "a. It must be simple enough for operation by the small, modest­ ly-equipped club as well as the large club. "b. It must be thorough enough to produce fair, uniform handi­ capping the country over.” Course rating is an essential part of the new system, as it was of the old. This is a method of evaluating the playing difficulty of a course in comparison with other courses by rating each hole down to frac­ tions of a stroke where necessary, rather than in whole figures (as is done in com­ puting par). For example, a difficult par 4 hole might be rated 4.3, whereas an easy par 4 might be rated 3.7. This method gives more meaningful ratings than does par and has been part of the USGA system since 1948. Course rating is done not by individual clubs but by sectional and district golf associations. There are no fundamental changes in the USGA Course Rating Sys­ tem for 1958. Among the purposes of the new system are to: Provide fair handicaps for as many golfers as possible even though their abilities vary widely. Reflect the player’s potential ability as well as his recent scoring trends. Disregard freak high scores that bear little relation to the player’s normal ability. Make it difficult for the player to ob­ tain an unfairly large handicap increase at any revision period. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 13 Make a handicap continuous from one playing season to the next without need of adjustment. Encourage the player to keep his game near its peak. Make handicap work as easy as possible for the handi­ capper. Since publication of the new system, questions have arisen which prompted the following remarks by John D. Ames. USGA President, in a recent letter to USGA Member Clubs and men’s golf as­ sociations: "i. A first principle of handicapping has always been that, in order to win, a golfer should play well in comparison with his normal ability. The new USGA system expresses this; ideally it used the best 40% of the player’s latest scores (10 of 25). "One reason why the USGA aban­ doned a current’ system is that it uses the best 66%% of scores (10 of the last 15); thus, an appreciable percentage of poorer scores is used. "The new system appeals to sports­ manship in calling upon players to try to do their best if they would win. "2. A USGA Handicap may be ob­ tained on as few as five posted scores, al­ though the ultimate goal is the best 10 of the last 25 scores. The system is designed for week-end golfers as well as championship players. "3. Although the USGA System is new in form to the country at large, it is founded on much experience with related methods. "4. Checks and balances built into the USGA system automatically offset abnormal scoring. The USGA has never adopted artificial adjustments such as reducing very high hole scores to a com­ mon level; such 'stroke controls’ are regarded as unrealistic, complicated, sub­ ject to possible abuse, and tending to reduce unduly the handicaps of poorer players. The USGA believes them un­ necessary in a sound handicap system. "5. One reason why the USGA abandoned the 'current’ system is that Thanks to Sports Illustrated for Slide Rule Handicapper Idea A useful tool in computing handicaps under the new USGA system is a little device called the USGA Slide Rule Handicapper. Credit for adapting the slide rule principle to golf handicapping belongs to the magazine Sports Illustrated, which produced a somewhat similar device last year before the new USGA Handicap System was adopted. The USGA hereby expresses its gratitude to Sports Illustrated for the idea. it produced handicap fluctuations which seemed too wide. ''When a player’s scoring trend is up­ wards, he is usually under-handicapped; when his trend is downwards, he is usu­ ally over-handicapped. The degree of under and over-handicapping depends on the range of fluctuation allowed by the system used. "No system is really current’ (this is a relative term), as any handicap based on past scores is always apt to lag be­ hind the player’s immediate ability and can never anticipate how he will play in future. Therefore, a sound system should tend to limit wide fluctuations and possible over-handicapping. "6. Late in 1956 the USGA polled its 2,076 Member Clubs. There were 348 replies. Of these, 305 (nearly 90%) preferred a single handicap standard to the dual system then in use. 216 were using 'current’; of these, 146 preferred 'current’ and the remaining 70 (about 32%) preferred other systems. "There is much good in a number of different handicap theories. From some of them the USGA Executive Commit­ tee has sought to produce a system use­ ful and fair for as many clubs as possi­ ble, large and small, and to bring about uniformity and understanding from a somewhat confused situation. "The USGA’s guiding policy is to try to do what is best for golf.” 14 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1953 LELAND COLLECTION NOW IN "GOLF HOUSE” Entire Library md Memorabilia Given to USGA UTVHE USGA Golf Museum and Library, which sprang from the mind of for­ mer USGA President George W. Blossom, Jr., of Chicago, in 1936, has received a coming-of-age gift of unprecedented pro­ portions. The Museum and Library are housed in "Golf House” in New York. O. M. Leland, of Minneapolis, Minn., a member of the USGA Museum Committee, who has spent over 20 years assembling one of the world’s finest golf libraries and other golf memorabilia, has donated his entire collection to be perpetuated for all time in the home of American golf. In combination with our present "Golf House” Library this may well prove to be the most comprehensive collection in the world. The donor, now Dean Emeritus, has been associated with the University of Minnea­ polis since 1920, first as Dean of the Col­ lege of Engineering and Architecture and the School of Chemistry, and later as Dean of Administration. The gift embraces more than 3,000 vol­ umes, old and curious golf clubs, several hundred different brands of golf balls in­ cluding wooden, feather and gutta types, pictures, paintings and photographs. The library is all-embracing, ranging from ancient Scottish histories and books in German, French, Dutch and Swedish to music and psychology. The books are divided into the follow­ ing subject-groups: Sports—with references to golf. Related sports, kolven, chole, mail, shin­ ty, cricket, curling. Non-sports—with references to golf. History, biography, reminiscence. Fiction, essays, humor, poetry, drama, music, anthologies. Instruction, rules, forms, equipment, psy­ chology, etiquette, handicapping, caddies. Courses, clubs, societies. Annuals, yearbooks, periodicals. Architecture, construction, clubhouses, turf management. Pictures, prints, cartoons, maps. Personalia and correspondence. One of the rarest items in the collection is a 1566 compilation (the first printed) of the Acts of the Scottish Parliament which includes the following famous decree of James H’s XIII Parliament, issued in March, 1457: "It is decreed and ordained, that the fute-bal and golfe be utterly cryed downe, and not to be used.” Another priceless trio are the three edi­ tions dated 1743, 1763 and 1793 °f Mathi­ son’s The Goff, a poem of 358 lines describ­ ing a match between Pygmalion (the author) and Castalio. This is the first print­ ed book on golf and this is probably the only such set in existence. It is interesting to note that the third edition is dedicated "To All The Lovers of Goff in Europe Asia Africa and America”. The first American book devoted en­ tirely to golf, Spalding’s Golf, 1893, 15 already a rarity. In fact, Dean Leland’s copy is thought to be the only complete copy in existence. The section devoted to related sports is extensive and should provide more fuel for the fire for those who decry the oft- repeated assertion that golf was derived from the French jeu de mail or the Dutch kolven. Such an immense and generous gift cannot be gauged by its intrinsic value, which in itself is considerable. It is the product of years of research and eager plan­ ning, of international bargaining and care­ ful custody. Cataloguing of this vast collection will, of necessity, take time, but it is hoped to have it on display in the comparatively near future. It is intended to retain a sub­ stantial part of this library in toto and present it under the heading of the O. M. Leland Library. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 15 MOVES TO LIGHTEN TAX ON CLUB DUES BY WM. WARD FOSHAY General Counsel T1URING the past year there were a U number of developments relating to the Federal club dues tax which are of interest to the member clubs of the United States Golf Association. LEGISLATION available for the construction or re­ construction of buildings as well as various outdoor facilities, such as ten­ nis courts, swimming pools, and golf courses. Mere upkeep and repairs do not constitute construction or recon­ struction.” EXCISE TAX TECHNICAL CHANGES ACT OF 1957 These further limitations should also be borne in mind. This Bill (H.R. 7125) was passed by the House of Representatives on June 20, 1957, and is now before the Senate Com­ mittee on Finance for consideration at this session of Congress. The Bill includes a number of technical changes which would be desirable from the point of view of the member clubs. Assessments for Capital Construction— One of the changes would exempt from the club dues tax all assessments for the construction or reconstruction of any social, athletic or sporting facility (or for the construction or reconstruction of any capital addition to or capital improvement of any such facility). It should be noted, however, that only assessments paid after the effective date of the law for construc­ tion or reconstruction begun after that date would be exempt. This might be taken into consideration by those having in mind the possibility of adding to or improving their club facilities. The House report on the Bill also con­ tained the following: "Since the exemption is applicable only to assessments for construction, or reconstruction, of a facility, amounts used for the purchase of land will not be exempt from tax. Similarly, the use of funds for the purchase of existing facilities will not be tax exempt. Exemption will be Life Memberships—Under the present law, life members are required to pay annually a tax equal to the tax on the amounts paid by active resident annual members for dues or membership fees, but no tax is due on the amount paid for the life membership as such. If the Bill is enacted, the life members would have the alternative of paying a tax based on the tax paid by members having privileges most nearly comparable to those held by the particular life member or paying a one­ time tax based upon the amount actually paid for the life membership. The election would have to be made at such time not later than the first payment for the life membership as would be prescribed by regulation. Honorary Memberships—Under a 1955 ruling (Rev. Rul. 55-198), an honorary member of a club who is entitled to the use of the facilities of the club for a per­ iod of indefinite duration is considered to be a life member for the purposes of the tax. On the other hand, honorary member­ ships which are granted for a definite period of time and are in fact terminated at the expiration of that period, and not renewed, are not considered life member­ ships and are not subject to tax provided no dues or membership fees are paid. This will be changed if the Bill is enacted, as is made clear in the House report where 16 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 it is said: "If no payment is made for the life membership, as in the case of an honorary membership, no tax will be due.” Admissions—In Exmoor Country Club v. U. S., 119 F. 2nd 961 (7th Cir. 1941), it was held that a private country club which charged members and their guests for the use of the club’s swimming pool and skating rink, and for the privilege of dining and dancing, was liable for the ad­ missions tax on such charges, even though the club’s premises and activities were not open to the public or operated for profit. The Bill would repeal the admissions tax on privately operated swimming pools, skating rinks, and other places providing participations in sports, except dancing. OTHER LEGISLATIVE DEVELOPMENTS Optional Facilities and Services—It will be recalled that in another 1955 ruling (Rev. Rul. 55-318), charges for the use of lockers and bathhouses for a period of more than six days were held to be subject to the tax on dues. It was later made clear in another ruling (Rev. Rul. 56-620) that payments for the service of cleaning and storage of golf clubs are not subject to the tax when made by the members to the golf professional as an independent contractor or concessionnaire, even though collected for him by the club as a matter of convenience. It is understood that the earlier ruling has now been extended by some agents to apply to the rental or storage of golf carts, berthing or wharf areas for private boats and other facilities and services. In his letter to the House Committee endorsing the Excise Tax Technical Changes Act of 1957, the President of the USGA registered strong objection to the application of the club dues tax to charges for golf lockers and other club facilities and services, the use of which is entirely with­ in the discretion of the members. He char­ acterized the tax as being in this respect more a nuisance than a revenue measure and suggested that the additional taxes collected could not be sufficient to justify the additional accounting burden to the clubs, annoyance to members and work for the auditing staff of the Internal Revenue Service. He submitted that this application of the tax should be either eliminated or limited so that the tax would be applied to these charges only to the extent they exceed some percentage, such as 25%, of the dues. In the current session of the Congress, two Bills (H.R. 9876 and H.R. 9877) have been introduced which, if enacted, would have the effect of eliminating the tax in this area. They would provide that the term "dues” does not include charges for privileges or facilities if the members have the option to decide whether they will avail themselves of such privileges or faci­ lities. Tax Rate—The President of the USGA has also recommended the reduction in the 20% tax rate. Under present circumstances, action in this regard appears unlikely. OTHER DEVELOPMENTS There have been several administrative rulings and court decisions which may also be of interest to member clubs. Minimum Charges—In this era of rising costs, many clubs have been faced with the problem of maintaining their customary standards without failing to make ends meet. To meet the problem, the thinking is usually directed first toward an increase in dues, but there lies a further problem. Those in charge of the club’s finances find that there is a certain level of the use of the club’s facilities and services which has to be maintained if a deficit is to be avoid­ ed. At the same time they note substantial variations in the degree of use by the mem­ bers. Some use the club regularly and con­ tribute more than the average, while others use the club only occasionally or not at all. Therefore, an increase in dues has not appeared to provide a fair answer to the problem inasmuch as it would apply to all members equally and accordingly place additional burdens on the regular users in order to make up for the deficiencies of the occasional users. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 17 Some clubs have sought a solution in the so-called minimum charge. Under this arrangement, there is imposed a specified charge against which members may eat or drink and to the extent they do not use up the charge be billed for the difference. The Internal Revenue Service has taken the position informally that the entire amount of the minimum charge is subject to the club dues tax even though the member more than uses up the charge. This has been objected to by a number of clubs, and some have requested rulings. At this writ­ ing, word has not been received of the is­ suance of a ruling in response to any of these requests. One club has approached the problem in a somewhat different manner, and has received a favorable ruling of the Internal Revenue Service. This club’s proposed ar­ rangement and the views of the Internal Revenue Service itself with respect to it can best be described by quoting the rul­ ing in full, as follows: T:R:ExA SC Gentlemen: September 27, 1957 We are in receipt of a letter dated . . . , requesting a ruling relative to your liability for collection of the tax on dues imposed under the provisions of section 4241 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, in connection with certain pay­ ments made by members of your club. The information submitted indicates that the (club) ... is in the business of conducting and operating a club for the pleasure, recreation, and entertainment of its members. In addition to the prin­ cipal membership category of resident member, the classes of memberships in the organization consist of resident in­ active, social, non-resident, and junior, members. A resident member has voting privileges in the organization, is entitled to use all of the club’s facilities, and also has an ownership interest in the property of the club. The other classes of mem­ bers are subject to special qualification provisions and certain restrictions in voting and use of facilities. Under the present bylaws of the club, resident members pay annual dues of $260.00, payable in monthly installments in ad­ vance, Members in other categories are subject to different dues requirements. At a meeting to be held in November, the Board of Governors proposes to offer an amendment to the bylaws of your or­ ganization. Such amendment would authorize the Board of Governors at jhe beginning of each fiscal year, to divide the resident members into two classifi­ cations, namely, resident members and resident members-sustaining. The annual dues of resident members under the pro­ posed amendment would continue to be $260.00, payable in monthly installments in advance, and the dues of resident members-sustaining would be fixed by the Board of Governors at not less than $300.00 nor more than $420.00, to be paid in advance in monthly installments. Under the proposed amendment to the bylaws the Board of Governors would determine the amount needed to make up the club’s operating deficit for the preceding fiscal year, and would use such amount as the basis for determining the amount of dues to be paid by resident members-sustaining for the succeeding year. The proposed amendment would prohibit the classification of any resident member as a resident member-sustain­ ing, who had been billed by the club for all purposes, except special assessments, in a total amount of $800.00 or more, such amount to include membership dues, charges for the use of facilities, and charges made by the club for food, liquor and similar items. If the total expenditures of resident members for such items as above enumerated fall be­ low $800.00 for the preceding year, the Board of Governors would be authorized to classify such members as resident members-sustaining, and raise the an­ nual dues on a graduated scale. No change would be made in the proposed amendment to the bylaws with respect to the dues of the other categories of membership. 18 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 The information also indicates that resident members and resident members- sustaining will have equal rights and privileges in regard to property owner­ ship, voting privileges and use of facili­ ties, the only difference being in the amount of yearly dues required to be paid. The information further discloses that while the payment for such items as food, liquor, etc., may reduce the mem­ bership dues of a particular member for the next succeeding year, such payments are not required as a condition to the continued enjoyment of the privileges and facilities of the club. The question presented is whether the dues tax would apply to such charges for food, liquor, and similar items, merely because they serve as a basis for determining the amount of dues to be paid by a member ir the next succeeding year. Section 4242(a) of the Code defines the term "dues”, as used in section 4241 of the Code, to include any assessment, irrespective of the purpose for which made, and any charges for social privi­ leges or facilities, or for golf, tennis, polo, swimming, or other athletic or sporting privileges or facilities, for any period of more than six days. It is our position that any amount required to be paid and/or spent by a member of a social, athletic, or sporting club or or­ ganization as a requisite to continued membership, or to continued member­ ship in a particular membership class, constitutes a payment of dues within the meaning of section 4242(a) of the Code, and if the total dues paid by the active resident annual members are in excess of $10.00 a year, the total dues paid by all classes of members are subject to the tax imposed by section 4241(a)- (1) of the Code. On the other hand, we have consistently held that amounts paid for food and drink in a social, athletic, or sporting club or organization are not subject to the dues tax unless a manda­ tory minimum expenditure for such items has been previously set by such club or organization. It appears from the information fur­ nished that the total amount paid by members of the (club), for food and drink is not a required minimum ex­ penditure for such items, nor is it re­ quired as a condition to the continued enjoyment of the privileges and facili­ ties of the club. On the basis of such in­ formation, we have concluded that the dues tax imposed by section 4241(a) (1) of the Code will not apply to any charges for food, liquor and similar items made against the members of the club. Very truly yours, (Signed) H. T. Swartz Director, Tax Rulings Division Particular attention is called to the last sentence of the next to last paragraph of the ruling. The reference there to "a man­ datory minimum expenditure * * * * pre­ viously set” would seem to indicate that the Internal Revenue Service’s informal position with respect to minimum charges will be confirmed. Voluntary Contributions versus Assess­ ments— In years past, there was a good deal of controversy over the question whe­ ther voluntary contributions for a cl.tb’s capital or operating purposes should be regarded as assessments subject to the club dues tax. As far as the Internal Revenue Service is concerned, most of the disputes were laid to rest by two other rulings is­ sued in 1955. In one of these (Rev. Rul. 55-576) it was held that loans made by members voluntarily to finance a club’s building program are not subject to the dues tax where the individual members’ rights and privileges in the club do not depend on whether or not they make the loan and the club guarantees the repay­ ment. The same ruling, however, added that where such loans are required of new members or of members electing to acquire a new or different membership, the amounts are taxable as initiation fees. One of the arguments that was advanced in opposition to the treatment of volun­ tary contributions as assessments was that they could not be regarded as such where USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 19 the club was not lawfully authorized by its charter to make legally enforcible assess­ ments. Following a court decision reject­ ing this argument, the Internal Revenue Service ruled (Rev. Rul. 55-533) that where a club’s members are subjected to assessments or are requested to contribute amounts fixed in prorated or uniform allo­ cations on the basis of membership privi­ leges or the class of membership held, any amounts so paid are taxable as dues whe­ ther or not the club has authority to en­ force collection. This position was further confirmed in the recent case of City Athletic Club v. U. S., 242 F. 2d 43 (2d Cir. 1957). In that case the court said that the question is entirely a matter of Federal law and that the deciding factor is not enforceable under State law. The Court added that it is the effective call for a definite contribu­ tion or payment from the members which should be held to characterize an assess­ ment, as distinguished from a voluntary contribution or gift. The reasoning was that such a call always carries with it some degree of compulsion, even if it be social or moral rather than legal. Taxwise, said the court, no distinction need be made be­ tween payment under such sanctions and payment under legal sanctions. Life Memberships— In 1957 there was an interesting ruling (Rev. Rul. 57-239) on a life membership question. A golf course had two classes of members, regu­ lar and senior, and each class had full club rights and privileges. A person was eligi­ ble for senior membership if he were more than 60 years of age and had been a regu­ lar member for more than 25 years. The annual dues for regular members was $600. while for senior members it was $300. The club also has life members, who were not required to pay annual dues, and some of them were more than 60 years of age and had been regular members for more than 25 years. As indicated above, the present law is that life members are re­ quired to pay annually a tax equivalent to the tax upon the amount paid by "active resident annual members” for dues or membership fees. In this case both the resident and senior members were within this definition, and the question was whether the life members’ tax was to be based on the regular or the senior mem­ bers’ dues. The ruling was to the effect that where there is more than one class of ac­ tive resident members, the club dues tax of a life member is equivalent to the tax upon the amount paid as dues by an active resident annual member of the class in which the member qualifies. Thus, in this case, the life members who would qualify as senior members would pay taxes based on the $300 rate and the others on the $600 rate. In McIntyre v. U. S., 151 F. Supp. 388 (D. Md. 1957), the question presented was whether a particular initial fee of $125 was a non-taxable payment for life mem­ bership or a taxable initiation fee. A group of civic leaders unable to persuade public authorities to construct a swimming pool at taxpayers’ expense organized a club to erect and operate the pool. Membership was limited to 600 families owning resi­ dential property within a designated por­ tion of the city. Each member paid the ini­ tial fee of $125 and annual dues of $10. The persons paying the fee were entitled co a life membership certificate but not to use the pool except on payment of the $10 dues. The court held that the dues tax was not applicable to either amount, since the club was more a community enterprise than a civic or social club. The court went on to consider, however, what would have been the tax status had the decision been otherwise. It concluded that the $125 pay­ ment would be taxable as an initiation fee. CONCLUSION These developments serve to illustrate the numerous, varied and recurring com­ plexities of the present Federal excise tax in this area. They emphasize strongly the need for technical changes in the law such as those which have been proposed or recommended. 20 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 NEW MOVIE SHOWS RULES ON GREEN Latest Addition to “Golf House” Film Library The "Golf House” Film Library, started in 1954, has now grown to five productions. The latest addition, "On the Green,” was premiered at the Drake Hotel, Chicago, during the Annual Meeting, and received an enthusiastic reception. This is the third film in an educational series on the Rules of Golf and is devoted to illustrating correct procedures governing situations which arise on the putting green. Filmed in full color against an Atlantic Ocean background at the Mid-Ocean Club, in Bermuda, the film runs for 17 minutes. The characters are all amateur golfers who contributed their services. The two princi­ pal roles are played by John Dillon, of the Somerset Hills Country Club, Bernards­ ville, N. J., and Neil Hutchings, of the Mid-Ocean Club. The camera follows the fortunes of an American visitor and a local player who straight away run into difficulties, despite the fact that the Rules are the same the world over. On the first green the problem of attend­ ing the flagstick and its infringement penal­ ties are demonstrated and explained. On the second the viewer is brought face to face with the question: When is a ball holed? Every conceivable contingency, from casual water to the removal of loose im­ pediments, has been introduced to provide a meaningful message for any golfer from scratch to infinity. The film was produced for the USGA by National Educational Films, Inc., and directed by Jack Tobin. Off screen narra­ tion is by Lindsey Nelson, Assistant Sports Director of National Broadcasting Com­ pany. Its predecessors in the Rules of Golf series are "Play Them As They Lie,” a THE MECHANICS OF GOLF The game is not so easy as it seems. In the first place, the terrible INERTIA of the ball must be overcome. Lord Wellwood full color film made at the Baltusrol Golf Club, Springfield, N. J., and demonstrating the Rules which govern play through the green, and "Rules of Golf—Etiquette,” where a family group proceeds to break every known item in golf’s code of eti­ quette. This film is introduced by Robert T. Jones, Jr., and Ben Hogan appears in several scenes. The Film Library is completed by "In­ side Golf House” and "Golf’s Longest Hour.” The former takes the viewer on a conducted tour of "Golf House” with its extensive library and historical exhibits, and introduces such outstanding golf per­ sonalities as Margaret Curtis, Findlay S. Douglas, Francis Ouimet, Chick Evans, Robert T. Jones, Jr., Mrs. Glenna Collett Vare, Gene Sarazen and Ben Hogan. "Golf’s Longest Hour,” filmed at the Oak Hill Country Club, Rochester, N. Y., during the 1956 Open Championship, depicts the closing stages as Cary Middlecoff, the even­ tual winner, sets a target which Ben Hogan. Julius Boros and Ted Kroll strive in vain to beat. Clubs and associations desirous of rent­ ing these films, either singly or in com­ bination, should contact National Educa­ tion Films, Inc., 165 West 46th Street, New York 36, N. Y. The rental is $20 per film; $35 for two; $50 for three; $60 for four and $75 for five, in combination at the same time including the cost of shipping prints to the renter. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 21 THE REFEREE Decisions by the Rules of Golf Committees Example of symbols: “USGA" indicates decision by the United States Golf Association. “R & A" indicates decision by the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews, Scotland. "58-1" means the first decision issued in 1958. "D" means definition. "R. 37-7" refers to Section 7 of Rule 37 in the 1958 Rules of Golf. Water Behind Island Green A Lateral Hazard USGA 58-1 D. 14c; R. 33-2; 33-3; L.R. Q: The ninth hole of the Ponte Vedra Club course is about 148 yards long and the green is on an island completely sur­ rounded by water. If a player should play a ball directly for the hole but it does not clear the water hazard, he should play 3 either from the teeing ground or from the front part of the tee in accordance with Rule 33-2a. If a player should hit a ball to right or left and it should land on the island and bounce into the water, he should play 3 in accordance with Rule 33-2b or Rule 3 3-3b because the water at the sides de­ finitely comes under the definition of a lateral hazard (Definition 14c). Now the question is: if a ball is played directly over the green into the water on the far side, would the player have any relief under the lateral hazard definition? Although it is not practical to play the next shot in accordance with Rule 33-2a, it seems an excessive penalty for a player making a better shot to have to play his next shot from the teeing ground, 148 yards away, when a player who has played a much poorer shot (a hook or a slice) is permitted to play his next shot from 30 or 40 yards from the hole with no water in between. Question by: Shepard Barnes Ponte Vedra Beach, Fla A: From the description, the committee would seem justified in defining the water hazard behind the green as a lateral water hazard. It is suggested that large, distinctive stakes indicate where the regular water hazard begins and ends. In order for Rule 33-3b to operate, the ball must cross the margin of a lateral water hazard. The committee might consider establish­ ing special areas on which a ball may be dropped in lieu of classifying certain sec­ tions of the water hazard as lateral. Local Rule Required For Relief From Underground Pipe USGA 58-2 R. 31-2; L.R. Q: If a water-pipe is just underground in some places and above ground in other places, but the covered parts raise the 22 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 ground to a point where it would make a very uncomfortable stance, and if the player spread his feet a little further apart he would be standing on exposed pipe, can this covered part be treated as an im­ movable obstruction? Question by: Leon Kaplan Waltham, Mass. A: In the absence of a local rule, the Rules of Golf provide no relief from turf raised to cover an underground water pipe. Two avenues of relief appear to be open to the club. The first would be to level the terrain surrounding the pipe. The second would be to draft a local rule to provide free relief, based upon the principles of Rule 31-2. Where the pipe is exposed, Rule 31-2 would, of course, apply. Provisional Ball In Play When Original Ball Abandoned USGA 58-3 R. 30 Q.l: If provisional ball from the teeing area is found to be in ground under repair and player elects to drop it without penalty and then decides to play the provisional ball, will he be shooting four? That, of course, is a misquote. The Rule 30-4 states if player deem his first ball un­ playable he must continue play with pro­ visional ball. Q.2: Am I correct in assuming that in abandoning his first ball it is mandatory for player to deem it unplayable in order to have the right to play the provisional ball? Q.3: Does this not all add up to the fact that regardless of the rule covering the particular case the stroke and distance penalty will apply to all abandonment of original ball, if water hazard is not ex­ cepted? Questions by: Thomas G. McMahon Los Angeles, Cal. A.l: Yes. A.2: No. The first ball might be lost, out of bounds or in a water hazard, and in any such case the provisional ball would become the ball in play. See Rule 30. A.3: Yes. STATEMENT REQUIRED BY THE ACT OF AUGUST 24, 1912, AS AMENDED BY THE ACTS OF MARCH 3, 1933, AND JULY 2, 1946 (TITLE 39, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 233) SHOWING THE OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT, AND CIRCULATION OF USGA Journal and Turf Management, pub­ lished seven times a year at New York, N. Y., for October 1, 1957. 1. The names and addresses of the publisher, editor, managing editor, and business managers are: Publisher, United States Golf Association, 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y.; Editors, Joseph C. Dey, Jr. and John P. English, 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y.; Managing Editor, Miss Nancy Jupp, 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y.; Business Manager, none. 2. The owner is: (If owned by a corporation, its name and address must be stated and also im­ mediately thereunder the names and addresses of stockholders owning or holding 1 percent or more of total amount of stock. If not owned by a corporation, the names and addresses of the indi­ vidual owners must be given. If owned by a part­ nership or other unincorporated firm, its name and address, as well as that of each individual mem­ ber, must be given.) United States Golf Association, 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y. President, Richard S. Tufts, 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y. Vice President, John D. Ames, 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y. Vice President, John G. Clock, 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y. Secretary, Charles L. Peirson, 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y. Treasurer, J. Frederic Byers, Jr., 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y. 3. The known bondholders, mortgagees, and other security holders owning or holding 1 percent or more of total amount of bonds, mortgages, or other securities are: (If there are none, so state.) None. 4. Paragraphs 2 and 3 include, in cases where the stockholder or security holder appears upon the books of the company as trustee or in any other fiduciary relation, the name of the person or corporation for whom such trustee is acting; also the statements in the two paragraphs show the affiant's full knowledge and belief as to the cir­ cumstances and conditions under which stock­ holders and security holders who do not appear upon the books of the company as trustees, hold stock and securities in a capacity other than that of a bona fide owner. 5. The average number of copies of each issue of this publication sold or distributed, through the mails or otherwise, to paid subscribers during the 12 months preceding the date shown above was: (This information is required from daily, weekly, semiweekly, and triweekly newspapers only.) John P. English, Editor Sworn to and subscribed before me this 14th day of October, 1957. (signed) Charles H. Ward, Notary Public, State of New York (My commission expires March 30, 1959). USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 23 TURF MANAGEMENT CALCULATIONS BY JAMES B. MONCRIEF Southwestern Agronomist, USGA Green Section THE golf course superintendent is a man who can do many things. He is a plant growth practitioner, an accountant and he serves as a personnel and public relations man. He may also be a construction man and a chemist. Besides these things the superintendent still has to rely upon some mathematics to perform his duties to the best effect. Figures must be used in express­ ing golf course measurements, in calculating the application of fertilizer and pest com trol materials, and in reporting expendi­ tures. This is not to say that a superinten­ dent must be a mathematical wizard, but there are a few fundamental calculations that must be made. Golf course measurements are import­ ant to the superintendent. He is not so much interested in the length of golf holes but he must know the areas involved in the various golf course parts. It is essential that his knowledge of areas be accurate. Otherwise he may make some rather seri­ ous errors in the application of materials. As an example, superintendent "A” has a green 70 feet in diameter and he intends to apply 2 ounces of fungicide to 1000 square feet. He knows that to find the area of a circular green he uses the formula: area=pi (3.1416) x radius squared. Sub­ stituting, he finds that 3.1416 x 352=3847 square feet. Therefore, 8 ounces of fungi­ cide will provide just a little more than the amount required to treat at the 2 ounce rate. Superintendent "A” also be­ lieves that he should treat the collar of his green to a width of about 10 feet all the way around. To provide for this he decides to add a little extra fungicide, so- he puts in 2 more ounces making a total of 10 ounces. If he distributes this evenly, how much has he really applied to each 1000 square feet? Let’s see. His circle is now 90 feet in diameter, so the radius is 45 feet. Using the same formula, the area= 3.1416 x 45^-6359 square feet. He has applied 10 ounces of fungicide to 6359 square feet or 1.57 ounces to 1000 square feet. Therefore superintendent "A” has applied only % as much material as he intended even though he has "allowed” for the additional area. Guess work such as this has, at times, been responsible for a fungicide’s failure to give the desired results. This little ex­ ample is not an exaggeration. It has hap­ pened. It does serve to indicate a need for accurate measurements. Some golf course superintendents have provided themselves with a chart on which each hole is listed together with the areas involved in teeing grounds, fairways, 24 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 greens, collars, and bunkers. Such a chart provides a source of information for ready reference and it helps to insure accuracy. Calibration of Equipment The calibration of distribution equip­ ment to apply any given material at a prescribed rate is a necessary operation and one that can, at times, be quite difficult. The difficulty may arise from several sources. Among them are clogged, or parti­ ally clogged, nozzles on spray equipment; slipping of adjustments after they are fixed in the case of distributors of dry materials; and human error. Human error can be reduced to some extent by making sure that the equipment operator is well-informed about the job he is expected to do. If the operator of a fertilizer distributor does not understand the importance of checking his output of fertilizer at frequent intervals, he may neglect to do so. He is also likely to gacss at his output rather than to -measure and calibrate carefully. The operator should be acquainted with the material he is to apply; he should know what the results of a properly applied treatment will be; he should know the consequences of improper application; and he should know whether or not there is an element of danger in the material he is handling. With a knowledge of these mat­ ters, an operator may proceed with con­ fidence to do his job. Distribution machinery or spray equip­ ment should be kept in good condition. All parts should be clean, well-lubricated, and working properly. When these things have been checked, then the machinery must be adjusted to spread the right amount of fertilizer, lime, or other material. With spray equipment the correct amount of solution per unit of area must be ap­ plied. Mechanics of Calibration Let us examine the mechanics of cali­ brating a fertilizer spreader. Determination of the output must be done while the dis­ tribution machinery is moving over an area at the same speed that is maintained during actual application. This is necessary because rate of output is affected by the roughness of the ground surface and the speed of forward movement. Usually the speed of application will be that of a tractor in second gear. As an example a Ford tractor in second gear with the tachometer registering 1500 r.p.m. moves at a speed suitable for fertilizer distribution. A tray or pan must be carried below the fertilizer outlets to catch the material be­ ing discharged. This tray may be a piece of metal "eaves trough” or "rain gutter,” or it may be a piece of sheet metal crimped to a "V” shape. It is better to use two trays and to fasten one beneath each side of the spreader. The circumference of the wheels of a distributor should be determined and a string or other marker should be fastened to a point on the wheel to enable the operator to count the turns made by the wheel. The hopper should be filled about half full of fertilizer. You are now ready for the actual cali­ bration test run. The operator can turn the control lever on and off but it is advisable to have an extra person to operate the lever. Regardless of who may operate the lever, be sure an accurate count is made as the wheel turns. At the end of ten turns of the wheel cut the lever off as close as possible to the position of the marker on the wheel when you pulled or pushed the lever to "on” position. Take the trays off and weigh the material in each tray sepa­ rately. This will permit the synchronization of both sides of the distributor. Usually a scale graduate in ounces will be accurate enough for the determination of fertilizer rates. The wheel circumference will have to be known as well as the width of the distri­ butor hopper. These figures permit the determination of the area covered. Ex­ ample: the wheel is 7 feet, 2 inches in circumference and the hopper is 8 feet wide. The 7-foot, 2-inch wheel will have covered in ten turns of the wheel 70 feet plus 20 inches, or 71 feet, 8 inches. Con­ vert 71 feet 8 inches into 71-2/3 feet. The distance of travel, 71-2/3 feet, multiplied by the width, 8 feet, gives 573-1/3 square USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 25 SUBSCRIBERS TO USGA GREEN SECTION RESEARCH & EDUCATION FUND Augusta National Golf Club Catto & Putty Cooperative Seed & Farm Supply Service Dorado Beach Development Bob Dunning-Jones, Inc. E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. Floyd Farley Georgia-Florida Turf Assoc. Lynde & Rowsey Lawn Grass Nurseries Augusta, Ga. San Antonio, Tex. Richmond, Va. Dorado, P. R. Tulsa, Okla. Wilmington, Del. Oklahoma City, Okla. Winter Park, Fla. Musagee, Okla. Boston, Mass. New England Golf Assoc. Maine Golf Association Massachusetts Golf Association New England Golf Association New Hampshire Golf Association Rhode Island State Golf Association Vermont Golf Association In this procedure, let Q (or any other symbol) represent the unknown quantity. Then 132 pounds is to 43,560 square feet as Q pounds is to 573-1/3 square feet (573-33) The proportion may be written like this, 132 : 43,560 : : Q : 573.33 To solve this proportion and find the value of Q, one rule must be remembered. Multiply the two middle figures and the two on the extremes. The products will be equal. 43,560 x 0=573.33 x 132 43,560 x 0=75,678.56 Continuing to solve for Q, we may divide 75,678.56 by 43,560 0=75,678.56 43,560 Q=i-73 Watson Distributing Co. Houston, Texas Western Pennsylvania Golf Assn. Pittsburgh, Pa. feet. This is the number of square feet covered when you count ten turns of the wheel marked. If the amount of fertilizer to be applied per acre is compared with that applied to this part of an acre, in ratio, we can arrive at the amount needed to be caught in the trays. For example, if you wish to apply one pound of nitrogen per 1000 square feet, then you would have to apply 43.56 pounds of nitrogen per acre. There are 43.56 one thousand square feet units in one acre. (43,560 square feet equals one acre.) If your nitrogen is derived from ammonium nitrate you should apply 132 pounds per acre provided the material is 33% nitrogen. (43.56 divided by .33 equals 132 pounds.) Since we want 132 pounds of fertilizer per acre we can set up our ratio and determine the amount of fertilizer that should have been spread on the area covered in our calibration run. We want to apply 132 pounds to 43,560 square feet. At this rate, how much would be applied to the 573-1/3 feet in our cali­ bration run? A rather simple mathematical procedure will give us the proportionate amount needed. Therefore, 1.73 pounds of fertilizer should be caught in the pans. This amounts to about 14 ounces in each of the two pans. After the correct amount is obtained on the trial run, it is advisable that the procedure be repeated at least three times to insure consistent accuracy. After your accuracy has been checked, tighten the adjusting devices so no slippage will be experienced. It is amazing how often these adjusting devices will come loose and cause a variation in your distribution. Because of the fact that adjustments sometimes slip or work loose, it is advis­ able to check fertilizer output at frequent intervals. It is fairly simple to do this and very little time is lost in making the check. On a humid day, output may change fol­ lowing the exposure of fertilizer to the air. Nitrogenous materials have a tendency to absorb moisture and this causes the flow characteristics of the fertilizer to be changed appreciably. Calibrating Spray Equipment Since World War II spray equipment has been improved remarkably and is far superior to that of pre-war days. Most herbicides and other pest control materials are applied to turf in liquid form. There­ fore calculations involving liquid solutions are important. 26 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 Water is the most commonly used liquid solvent used for spraying herbicides or other types of chemicals. Unless the addi­ tion of the spray chemical changes the viscosity of the water solution, one may use plain water during calibration. The factors involved in application of solutions with a boom sprayer are: i. Amount of chemical applied per acre or per 1,000 square feet. 2. Amount of solution applied per acre or per 1,000 square feet, us- ally in terms of gallons. 3. Concentration of solution. 4. Output of sprayer, usually in gal­ lons per minute. 5. Width of boom. 6. Rate of travel of sprayer. Most companies that handle spray equip­ ment have tables that give the nozzle num­ ber, recommended liquid pressure in pounds per square inch, capacity of noz­ zle in gallons per minute at given pressures, and the gallons per acre applied when traveling at a given rate of speed, whether it be two, three, or four miles per hour. Calculating the output of a sprayer in­ volves a procedure similar to that in cali­ brating a fertilizer distributor. The differ­ ence is that the output of a given nozzle is rather difficult to change with any de­ gree of accuracy. Therefore, adjustments must be made in the speed of travel or in the amount of liquid used in dilution of the active material. As an example let us suppose that we wish to apply 10 pounds per acre of diso­ dium methyl arsonate. We plan to use 100 gallons of solution per acre. Our sprayer has a boom that covers a ten foot swath. 100 gallons will cover 43,560 square feet 10 gallons will cover 4,356 square feet Because the sprayer boom is 10 feet wide, 435.6 linear feet will have to be covered to put out 10 gallons. It is not difficult to calculate the time required to drive 435.6 feet at 4 miles per hour, but it is simpler to drive the tractor at any given speed 435.6 linear feet, a distance which will have been measured previously, and to measure the time required. If the trac­ tor moves at 4 miles per hour, we find that the 435.6 feet is covered in one minute and 14 seconds. Now, turn on the sprayer and catch the solution sprayed in one minute and 14 seconds. Again a piece of "eaves trough” or guttering may be used to lead the solu­ tion into a suitable container. The equip­ ment may sit still while the spraying is being done. Unlike a fertilizer distributor, the spray output rate is not affected by movement. If 4 miles per hour is the cor­ rect speed, 10 gallons of solution should have been sprayed. If a smaller output is measured, speed should be reduced accord­ ingly. If a larger amount is distributed, drive the tractor faster. Of course, where the amount of dilution is unimportant, one may keep the tractor speed constant and alter the amount of water (or other dilu­ ent) added. Another point to be considered in spray­ er operation is whether nozzles are dis­ charging solution uniformly. This may be checked rather easily by placing the spray boom over a piece of corrugated metal roofing, spraying a small amount of solu­ tion, and catching the run-off from each valley of the corrugation in a separate container. Active Ingredients in Commercial Formulations How many times have you heard pest control authorities say "Follow the direc­ tions on the package”? This is good advice because manufacturers of such materials package them in various formulations and concentrations. The manufacturers have good reasons for doing this. We need not examine their reasons but it is recognized that such practice does lead to confusion when one tries to figure rates of applica­ tion. Chlordane is an example. It is packaged as a 5% dust, a 10% dust, a 25% wettable powder, a 50% wettable powder, a 48% emulsifiable concentrate, and a 75% emul­ sifiable concentrate. There may be even more formulations of this material. One of the standard recommendations for chlor­ dane is 10 pounds of "actual” per acre. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 27 COMING EVENTS March 3-4-5 Midwest Regional Turf Conference Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind. Dr. Wm. H. Daniel March 5-6-7 Minnesota Turf Conference Leamington Hotel, Minneapolis, Minn. Minneapolis, Minn. Roy Nelson, Supt. Ravisloe Country Club— Homewood, III. March 6-7 The University of Massachusetts Annual Fine Turf Conference University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass. Dr. Eliot C. Roberts March 10-12 Iowa Turfgrass Short Course Iowa State College Ames, Iowa Prof. Harvey L. Lantz March 13-14 Michigan Turfgrass Conference Michigan State College, East Lansing, Mich. Prof. James Tyson Two hundred pounds of a 5% dust are required for this amount. But only 13.3 pounds of a 75% emulsifiable concentrate are needed. Usually calculations such as those in the foregoing paragraph may be done "in the head” without resorting to formula. However, some more complicated ratios may be a little difficult. For example let us suppose that we want to apply 10 pounds of "actual” chlordane per acre. How much 5% dust do we need? Let Q=quantity needed. Since 5% actually7 means 5 parts to 100, we can set up this proportion, 5 is to 100 as 10 is to Q, expressed as follows, 5 : 100 :: 10 : Q Then the product of the end figures, multiplied together, is equal to the product of the two middle figures, multiplied together. Therefore, 5 x Q=io x 100 5 Q=iooo Q=iooo 5 Q=2OO Two hundred pounds of 5% dust delivers 10 pounds of actual chlordane. Now let’s apply this formula to our other example, in which we have a 75% emulsifiable con­ centrate. In that case 75 is to 100 as 10 is to Q 75 : 100 : : 10 : Q 75 Q=iooo Q=iooo 75 O=*3-33 Therefore 13.33 pounds of concen­ trate are needed. Fertilizer rates may be calculated in the same way. One may wish to apply 120 pounds of nitrogen per acre, using a 12-6-6 fertilizer. The proportion is as follows, Let Q equal the quantity of fertilizer needed. Then, 12: 100 : : 120 : Q 12 Q=I2OOO Q=iooo Therefore 1000 pounds of fertilizer will be required. Another calculation that must be made frequently is that of interpreting acre rates in terms of 1,000 square foot units and vice versa. This is a fairly easy conversion. There are 43,560 square feet in an acre or 43.56 one thousand square foot units. Therefore, if rates are given in pounds per 1000 square feet, one may convert by mul­ tiplying the figure by 43.56. Example: 5 pounds per 1000 square feet is equivalent to 217.8 pounds per acre. (5 x 43.56= 217.8) For rapid calculations, round off the 43.56 and use 40 as a conversion fac­ tor. (5 x 40=200) This is not a precise conversion factor but it is useful for rapid mental calculations. Conversely, one may convert acre rates to 1000 square feet rates by dividing the rate by 43.56 or by 40 in the case of rapid approximations. To use arithmetic efficiently requires practice. If you are a little "rusty” along these lines, why not try brushing up a little bit by working out a few extra problems during the season when you aren’t too busy. It may save you some time when you need it most. Calibrations and the figuring of rates will come much easier. 28 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 KEEPING PACE WITH INCREASING GOLF ACTIVITY BY JAMES E. THOMAS Superintendent, Army Navy Country Club, Arlington, Virginia AS one travels over the country and plays on the many fine golf courses, both old and new, that exist today, one finds them, with very few exceptions, well groom­ ed. Moreover, most have clubhouses that are decorated and furnished with all the modern conveniences necessary for present day operations. However, one is often sur­ prised to find that adequate maintenance buildings are not provided. No thought has been given, or provision made, for the suitable storage of equipment and mater­ ials. In many cases they are left to the mercy of the elements. Where such a condition exists it should be corrected and not neglected, as the maintenance yard is the starting point and focus of all golf course upkeep. The constant increase in the number of rounds played per year, especially by women and juniors, results in the game being played from early morning until late evening. Tees, fairways and greens are in constant use and get very little rest. This creates a serious and growing prob­ lem for the golf course superintendent. He is confronted with the question of how to get his routine work accomplished, and not interfere too much with play. Players are sometimes unreasonably critical when workmen get in their way, yet, mowing, watering, and the raking of sand traps, along with the constant upkeep of all playing areas, must be performed if the course is to be kept in a satisfactory playing condition. This all means that the successful super­ intendent must be a diplomat, a good or­ ganizer, and a first class manager of the operations he supervises. The more effi­ ciently he and his staff operate, the more enjoyable the game will be for his mem­ bers; the faster players can get round, and the more golfers the course can accommo­ date in peak playing hours. Constant increase in play means more wear and tear on golf turf, and consequent­ ly greater maintenance requirements and costs, plus the need for additional labor and equipment. To meet this ever-changing picture it is necessary that we be able to retire to "off-the-course” jobs on the side lines during periods of heavy play. If we are to get our maintenance work out of the way sooner and faster, so that we do not interfere with play to any great extent, more operating equipment will be needed, an extra tractor or so, along with additional mowing units for tees, rough, fairways, and greens. As automotive equipment is added, addi­ tional housing facilities will be required. No ordinary shed or farm barn will suffice; a sizable enclosed maintenance yard is needed. It must be paved with a hard sur­ face and have sufficient buildings to house and store all needed equipment and sup­ plies. The principal building should be a large heated and lighted workshop for the repairing and overhauling of machinery and equipment. This repair shop should contain a work bench, storage cabinets with bins for repair parts, a lathe and grinder for sharpening mowers and tools, an air compressor, a spray tank and gun for paint­ ing. Besides this there should be all neces­ sary tools such as a drill press, electric drill, etc. Other necessary facilities include a small room for the storage of chemicals, herbi­ cides and fungicides, an office for the golf course superintendent, toilet facilities, wash TURF MANAGEMENT The book "Turf Management," sponsored by the United States Golf Association and edited by Prof. H. B. Musser, is a complete and authoritative guide in the practical de­ velopment of golf-course turfs. This 354-page volume is available through the USGA, 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y., the USGA Green Section Regional Offices, the McGraw-Hill Book Co., 350 West 42nd Street, New York 36, N. Y., or local bookstores. The cost is $7. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 29 room, and locker space for all employees. Other needed buildings are: (i) a large shed enclosed on three sides for the storage of dry topsoil; (2) a similar structure for the accommodation of power equipment, tractors and trucks, when not in use. One of these two buildings should also contain a room for the storage of hose, shovels, picks, etc. The Army Navy Country Club, Arling­ ton, Virginia has followed the above men­ tioned program the last few years to good advantage. The plan has paid dividends. The club’s officials have cooperated with Rear Admiral John S. Phillips. Retired, (Chairman of the Army Navy Golf Com­ mittee), in bringing the various planned projects to fulfillment. All new construction has been done with the thought of eliminating manual labor as far as possible and replacing it with power operated machines. GOLF COURSE MAINTENANCE COSTS According to Clubs in Town & Country, 1956-57, published by Harris, Kerr, For­ ster & Co., golf course maintenance costs for 50 clubs having a total of 1,017 holes, ex­ ceeded the 1955-56 costs by 3.9%, golf fees and admissions improved by 6.1%, and net golf expenses increased by 3.0%. On a per-hole basis, the current year’s maintenance costs averaged $2,474 and net golf expenses, $1,904. Since 1951-52 golf course mainte­ nance costs per hole have risen without interruption and the 1956-57 average exceeded 1951-52 by 33%. Average Cost Per Hole—1956-57: Salaries and Wages ........................ Course Supplies and Contracts....... Repairs to Equipment, Course Buildings, Etc..................................... All Other Expenses ........................ Total Golf Course Maintenance.. Add Golf Shop, Caddy and Com- mittee Expenses .......................... n Geographical Divisions Average East South Mid-West Far West $1,649 374 $1,700 376 $i,475 381 $1,508 393 $2,105 305 211 240 231 180 211 246 207 238 140 477 $2,474 $2,487 $2,313 $2,346 $3,027 158 220 Total Golf Expenses .................. Less Golf Fees and Admissions....... $2,632 728 $2,707 848 Net Golf Expense ...................... $1,904 $1,859 45 $2,358 504 $1,854 158 $2,504 472 $2,032 99 $3,126 1,290 $1,836 Percentage Variations—1956-57 Based on 1955-56: Salaries and Wages.......................... + 3-5% 4- 2.6% 4- 6.7% 4- 2.6% + 3-8% Course Supplies and Contracts....... -f- 4.2 + 4-7 Repairs to Equipment, Course 4- 1.6 4- 5.1 + 3-7 Buildings, Etc................................. 4- 6.0 + 3-6 All Other Expenses ........................ + 5-3 + 1.7 4-11.6 + 7.3 0 4-144 4~ 6.1 4~ 4-8 Total Golf Course Maintenance.. + 3-9% 4- 2.9% + 5-5% 4- 4-5% 4- 4-i% Golf Shop, Caddy and Committee Expenses ....................................... 4- 2.6 + 2.3 0 4~ 4.6 4- 4-2 Total Golf Expenses .................. + 3-9% 4- 2.9% 4" 54% 4- 4-5% 4- 4-1% Golf Fees and Admissions.............. 4- 6.1 + 5-7 4- 2.4 4-10.3 4- 5-1 Net Golf Expense........................ 4~ 3-o% 4- 1.6% 4- 6.2% 4- 3.3% 4- 3-3% 30 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 ANNUAL INDEX TO USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT Volume X—April, 1957, Through February, 1958 AMATEUR STATUS AND CONDUCT INTERNATIONAL Issue Page Issue Page Letter And Spirit Of The Amateur Code..July 5 Manley Loses Amateur Status ................... Sept. 4 Value Of Being A True Amateur.............. Apr. 5 BOOKS Golf And Be Damned .........................................Apr. Modern Fundamentals Of Golf ..................... Aug. Oh, No! ...................................................................Apr. Timing Your Golf Swing ................................ Nov. Tips From The Top ...........................................Apr. To H--------- With Golf ........................................ Nov. You’ve Got Me In A Hole ............................Apr. CADDIES Calling All Caddies ...........................................June Caring For Your Caddies .......................... Apr. Evans Scholars House Dedicated ................... July Fund Is Born ......................................................Sept. 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 CHAMPIONSHIPS Age In The Open ............................................... June 1 Amateur Returns To A New Brookline....Sept. 18 Essig Captures Public Fancy And Title....Sept. 20 Hershey—Its History And Amenities........July 22 Inverness Pioneered USGA Green Section-June 8 JoAnne Gunderson A Joyous Champion....Sept. 13 Miss Rawls’ Third Win Tn A Strange Open ...... July PGA Liaison Officer .........................................June Record Entries ................................ July Return To The Golden Years ............. Nov. Scaling The Heights With Mayer in 13 The Open ........................................... July Sectional Qualifying Sites ...................... June Winged Foot And Its Gclf Family ..............June CLUB OPERATIONS Club Dues Tax ............. Apr. Club Managers Elect President ..................Apr. Country Club Operations In 1956 .............. Aug. Move to Lighten Tax On Club Dues .......... Feb. COURSES Break With Tradition .................................... June Bumper Year For New Golf Courses.......... Nov. Demand For Courses Exceeds The Supply ................................................. Apr. Hill Of Fame ....................................... July New Course For Old Club ..............................Aug. Ramps Of Coal Ash ...................................... July Services Commemorated At Saucon Valley .............................................................. Nov. "GOLF HOUSE” AND GOLF COLLECTING All-Time Record Comes To “Golf House”..Apr. 6 Ancient And Modern In “Golf House” Library .......................................................... June Clubs Of The Elite For All To See ............ Apr. Leland Collection Now In “Golf House”....Feb. 1] 10 15 HANDICAPPING New Handicap System For Men And Women .........................................Feb. 13 HISTORICAL Goif On Canvas Frrm Early Times ........June Gunning For The Captain! ....................... Nov. Sixteen Times Champion ..............................Nov. Thirteen Times Champion ......................... Sept. Wedding Bells v. Golf .................................... Aug. IMPLEMENTS AND BALL Golf Ball Problem—An Interim Report........Feb. New Putter and Grip ....................................Apr. Objectives of the Golf Ball Study ............ Nov. 6 1 2 3 2 7 2 16 4 1 5 9 18 14 11 2 18 16 2 18 15 2 1 2 ] 1 Amateur Souvenir Of 1936 Returns To Scotland ...................................... Sept. John B. Beck To Take The Chair .......... June Britain Also Presents New Faces ............ July Britain Takes Ryder Cup ......................... Nov. British Cup Plan ................................................. July Championship Form .........................................Apr. Drastic Step By British PGA ...................Nov. Locke Emulates Hagen In British Open....Aug. Minikahda Will Welcome A Young British Team .............................................................. Aug. Muirfleld To Host Walker Cup ................ Sept. New Faces In Walker Cup Play .............. July Post War Revival In Japanese Golf ..........June R. And A. Goes Sectional ............................Apr. Rees’ Ryder Cup Record ..............................Sept. Rival For Eisenhower ............................ July St. Andrews Prepares .................................... Apr. Strong US Finish Retains Walker Cup....Sept. JUNIOR Hospitable Club And A Fine Young Player .......................................................Aug. Judy Eller Sets The Girls An Example....Sept. Oklahoma’s Girls ................................................. Aug. Rare Junior ............................................................ July 5 MISCELLANEOUS Ames Nominated For Presidency.................Nov. Amputee Honored ............................................. Feb. Annual Meeting A Big Draw ....................... Sept. Are You A Litterbug? .......................................Apr. Artist’s Parody On Shakespeare .................Feb. Birthday Honors For Oldest Open Champion ......................................................June Cosmopolitan Golfing Terms ....................... Nov. Cleaning Out Your Locker? ..........................Sept. Dickson, A Many-Sided Golfer ................... Nov. Douglas—A Record In Service ................... Sept. Do You Know Your Golf? ..........................Apr. Do You Know Your Golf? ......................... June Do You Know Your Golf? ............................Nov. False Impression On TV ..............................Feb. Family No Hindrance To Golf Titles ....Nov. Fishy Story ............................................................ July Five Posts With One Club ................................ Feb. Great Scottish Import .................................... Aug. Happy Subject For The Artist .................June Industrial Golf—A Growing Concern........Aug. Ladies Make The News At The Annual Meeting ............................................................ Feb. Mayer Voted Tops By PGA ..........................Nov. Memorial To Dr. Lawsen .............................. Apr. National Golf Day ............................................. June National Golf Show Makes Its Start ..........Apr. Neighborly Gesture ............................................. Feb. Not The Half Of It .................................... June Ray—Golfer And Man .................................... June Real Hogan Fan ................................................. Apr. Jack Ryerson’s Total Climbs ....................... Feb. 2,250 Rounds—Same 4-Ball ....................... Nov. Terms And Colors For Tees............................Feb. Tribute To Charles Coe ................................ Feb. Two Titles In The Family ..............................Nov. USGA Committee Changes ......................... Aug. USGA Insignia ................................................... June Worthy Manual ....................................................July NECROLOGY D. Scott Chisholm .............................................Feb. Roy G. Elliott ........................................................Feb. Mrs. J. H. Faulk ............................................... Apr Clifton W. Inslee ............................................. Aug. James C. Maiden ................................................. Feb. Harry Packham ................................................... Feb. J. Bernd Rose ......................................................Feb. Mrs. Anna Antonia Turnesa ....................... June Earle F. Tilley ................................................... Apr. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 1 21 2 1 4 3 2 8 4 17 12 4 4 2 3 9 16 1 3 14 1 2 2 2 20 1 4 8 5 18 19 10 1 3 1 2 4 5 13 4 3 4 4 14 1 1 16 1 2 4 3 1 2 <> 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 31 Issue Page Issue Page PLAY OF THE GAME Golf Etiquette and the Careless Breed........Apr. Golf In Swing Time .......................................Sept. Golfing Tortoises ............................................... Aug. Golf’s Newest Trap ...................... Apr. Lightning Precautions For Electric Carts ...................................................... Sept. Those Darn Stakes! .........................................Aug. RULES OF GOLF New Movie Shows Rules On Green.............Feb. Rules Are There To Help You ................... Aug. What’s Your Rules Handicap? ................... Sept. RULES OF GOLF DECISIONS Attending Flagstick ...........................................June Ball Dropped, Then Lifted ...........................July Ball Enters Water From Back Of Green .....................................................Apr. Ball Holed With Flagstick Attended........July Ball Inside Orange Must Be Played Or Deemed Unplayable .................................. Sept. Ball Lifted By Opponent ............... Apr Ball Moved Off Tea By Stroke And Re-Teed .......................................................... Apr. Ball Played From Out Of Bounds ............ June Ball Rolled On Green Incurs Penalty.........Sept. Ball Struck on Backward Swing Incurs Penalty Stroke .......... Nov. Bases For Fencing Posts Are Not Obstructions ..................................................Sept. Caddie May Demonstrate If Play Not Delayed ............................................................ Apr. Casual Water May Not Be Brushed ......June Chalk on Clubface Violates Rule ............Nov. Checking Distance Is Seeking Advice........ Aug. Committee Responsible for Scoring Procedure in Team Match .................Nov. Enforcing Local Rule .......................................Aug. “Equipment” Does Not Include Ball ..... Apr. Five Minutes Search Is Optional ............ Aug. Flag Is Attended At Putter’s Risk ............ Sept. Flagstick Attended Without Consent.......... Aug. Gate In Boundry Fence May Be Closed....July Gross And Net Prizes ...................................... Aug. Holes Must Be Played in Correct Sequence ........................................................Nov. “Information” Defined ................................. June Knocking Ball Away Tantamount to Lifting ........................................ Nov. Local Rule Required For Relief From Underground Pipe .................................... Feb. Location of Ball Not Advice ......................... June No Playable Place On Beach ...................June Outside Agency Moves Ball After Address .................................... June "Outside” As Used In Obstruction Rule....Apr. Partner’s Divot Interferes In Bunker ........July Purpose Of Obstruction Rule .................July Played Wrong Ball After Holing Out........Aug. Player Must Accept Dropped-Ball Lie ....June Provisional Ball In Play When Original Ball Abandoned ...........................................Feb. Recall Does Not Affect Order Of Play....Apr. Recalling Caldie To Lift Flagstick ....... Apr. Referee Handling Pall And Placing Before Dropping ...................................... Apr. Retrieving Club Causes Undue Delay........ Aug. Retrying Putt On Nine-Hole Course ........June Slow Play ............................................................ June Teeing Ground Precisely Defined ............ Apr. Testing Brake with Putter Contrary to Rules ...............................................................Nov. g Time Limits For Applying Stroke Play Penalties ......................................................Sept. 1 3 Touching Sand In Bunker ...............................Apr. 12 Unplayable Ball Must Be Found ............. June Water Behind Island Green, A Lateral 2 Hazard ............................................................ Feb. 1 Water Hazards Not “Through The Green” .......................................... June Water May Be Scopped From Hole 21 Without Penalty ..............................Sept. 22 21 Weighted Head Cover Does Not Violate 16 Rules ..............................................................Apr. 3 SENIORS Family Of Seniors ...........................................Sept. 24 Freshmen In The Seniors ............................... Sept. os Seniors Appeal For Speedier Golf ...............Nov. SPORTSMAN’S CORNER 22 Leslie McClue ....................................................... July 25 Miss Bunny Zale ...................................................Aug. 22 TOURNAMENTS 19 Amputees Gather At Toledo ........................ Aug. Dark Horse Takes Western Title .............. Sept. 21 Over The Years .................................................. Sept. 24 22 WOMEN British Curtis Cup Squad ..............................Feb. 22 Champion Runner-Up ......................................Nov. Champions Were Spring Brides ............ June Completing The Circle .......................................July Del Paso Agog For Women’s Amateur....Aug. 22 How To Organize Women’s Golf ............. June 2” New Record For Women ...............................Apr. "1 Patty Likes Winged Foot ...............................June 29 Skirts For Women’s Open ........................ June Mrs. Vare’s Portrait In “Golf House”....June 22 23 TURF MANAGEMENT 23 Analysis and Planning of Green 22 25 Appropriations For Turf Research And 22 Committee Work ..........................................Apr. Education ................................................ Feb. Art Of Improvisation ...................................... July 23 Beautification By Means Of Trees And 23 Shrubs ............................................................ Aug. Dalligrass Cutter ................................................. July 24 21 Effects of Compaction on Golf Green Mixtures ....................................Nov. 22 Golf Course Maintenance Costs .................. Feb. Installing Watering Systems ...........................July 23 22 Keeping Pace With Increasing Golf Activity ...................................... Feb. 23 Potassium Glass For Putting Greens ..........June 21 Relationship Between Green Committee And 24 24 Relationship Between Green Committee and 23 22 Superintendent ........................................... Apr. Safety With Pesticides ..................................... Aug. Snowmold Control ...........................................Nov. Soil Sterilization Practices In Turf.............June 23 22 Turf Management Calculations ..................Feb. 22 Turfgrass Course At Penn State Club Administration ................................ Apr. 29 University ............................... Aug. 32 State University ......................................... Nov. 20 Turfgrass Scholarship Allotted to Penn 24 24 Turfgrass—Its Development and Progress ......................................................... Sept. 23 20 Weed Control ................................................... Sept. 23 23 19 22 22 20 1 1 11 3 4 3 3 2 1 2 3 2 12 10 3 4 2 3 24 3 32 25 30 30 26 30 2? 30 29 27 25 24 4 28 24 32 USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 IT’S YOUR HONOR New USGA. Handicap System To the USGA: Please permit me to commend the USGA Handicap Committee on its decision to urge the adoption of the new handicap system recently intro­ duced to its member clubs. I have fol­ lowed with a great deal of interest the written communications which have reached us in the past few months and having served as handicap chairman for the Virginia State Golf Association I am in a position to appreciate fully the amount of time and effort spent in the drafting of such a plan. Your compensation for this is derived from the realization that at long last we find ourselves in possession of a program which will be best suited to the major­ ity of golfers throughout the country. Golf handicapping is a difficult prob­ lem to have to face even under the most favorable conditions, and yet it is something which means so much to so many that we cannot afford to compromise with mediocrity where its application and development is con­ cerned. In this section of the country we are confronted with various difficulties. Players are at times apathetic about turning in their scores as often as is desirable. Handicaps are not computed as regularly during the golf season as they should be. Member clubs do not have sufficiently interested volunteer workers to keep up with the changes in the golfers’ handicaps. Similar in­ stances are too numerous to mention here. We are of the opinion that these failures are a direct result of our hav­ ing to depend on handicap systems which are too complicated and de­ manding. The "basic” system which has been in operation here requires just too many rounds of golf before the average week-end player can feel that he has accumulated enough scores from which to be issued a handicap with any de­ gree of accuracy. We have instances where the player has needed two full golf seasons in order to gather the fifty scores prescribed by the "basic” system. And you can certainly imag­ ine how much variation can take place in a player’s game in the span of two years! The "current” system which we have also used is too demanding in its re­ quirements of constant revisions neces­ sary to insure its accuracy. We just do not have the personnel willing to de­ vote this much time to computation of the scores of several hundred members every two weeks nor the funds neces­ sary to employ someone to do it for us. It is not my intention to ignore the merits in the above mentioned systems. I am merely trying to point out the circumstances with which we are con­ fronted in this area. These put us in a position which, however, is not singu­ lar. Rather, we are one of a vast number of clubs with similar problems. Now the USGA Handicap Commit­ tee has provided us with a good com­ promise, which I feel sure will do much to cure many of our handicap ills. It is our hope that more of the country dubs and golf associations in our roster of members will consider it as efficient as we do and vote for its adoption. Virginia State Golf Association Jose R. Davila, President I’d like to say that this USGA Handicap System is a wonderfully pro­ gressive step. Horton Smith Detroit Golf Club Detroit, Mich. USGA JOURNAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT: FEBRUARY, 1958 33 USGA OFFICERS, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND COMMITTEE CHAIRMEN PRESIDENT John D. Ames, Chicago, III. VICE-PRESIDENTS John G. Clock, Long Beach, Cal. Charles L. Peirson, Boston, Mass. SECRETARY John M. Winters, Jr., Tulsa, Okla. TREASURER J. Frederic Byers, Jr., Pittsburgh, Pa. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE The above officers and: C. W. Benedict, White Plains, N. Y. Emerson Carey, Jr., Denver, Colo. William C. Chapin, Rochester, N. Y. Richmond Gray, Richmond, Va. Hord W. Hardin, St. Louis, Mo. Stuart A. Heatley, San Francisco, Cal. Gordon E. Kummer, Milwaukee, Wis. William McWane, Birmingham, Ala. F. Warren Munro, Portland, Ore. Bernard H. Ridder, Jr., Duluth, Minn. GENERAL COUNSEL Wm. Ward Foshay, New York, N. Y. COMMITTEE CHAIRMEN RULES OF GOLF: John M. Winters, Jr., Tulsa, Okla. CHAMPIONSHIP: Charles L. Peirson, Boston, Mass. AMATEUR STATUS AND CONDUCT: John G. Clock, Long Beach, Cal. IMPLEMENTS AND BALL: C. W. Benedict, White Plains, N. Y. MEMBERSHIP: Gordon E. Kummer, Milwaukee, Wis. GREEN SECTION: William C. Chapin, Rochester, N. Y. WOMEN'S: Mrs. Charles Dennehy, Lake Forest, III. SECTIONAL AFFAIRS: F. Warren Munro, Portland, Ore. PUBLIC LINKS: Emerson Carey, Jr., Denver, Colo. HANDICAP: Richmond Gray, Richmond, Va. Handicap Procedure: William O. Blaney, Boston, Mass. JUNIOR CHAMPIONSHIP: J. Frederic Byers, Jr., Pittsburgh, Pa. SENIOR CHAMPIONSHIP: William McWane, Birmingham, Ala. GIRLS' JUNIOR: Mrs. John Pennington, Buffalo, N. Y. MUSEUM: C. W. Benedict, White Plains, N. Y. BOB JONES AWARD: Wm. Ward Foshay, New York, N. Y. FINANCE: Charles L. Peirson, Boston, Mass. USGA HEADQUARTERS "Golf House7', 40 East 38th Street, New York 16, N. Y. Joseph C. Dey, Jr., Executive Director John P. English, Assistant Executive Director USGA GREEN SECTION EASTERN REGION Northeastern Office: Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N. J. Alexander M. Radko, Director, Eastern Region T. T. Taylor, Northeastern Agronomist Mid-Atiantic Office: South Building, Plant Industry Station, Beltsville, Md. Charles K. Hallowell, Mid-At!antic Director Southeastern Office: South Building, Plant Industry Station, Beltsville, Md. James M. Latham, Jr., Southeastern Agronomist MID-CONTINENT REGION Southwestern Office: Texas A. and M. College, College Station, Texas Dr. Marvin H. Ferguson, Director, Mid-Continent Region and National Research Coordinator James B. Moncrief, Southwestern Agronomist Mid-Western Office: Room 241, LaSalle Hotel, Chicago 2, III. James L. Holmes, Mid-Western Agronomist WESTERN REGION Western Office: P.O. Box 567, Garden Grove, Cal. William H. Bengeyfield, Director, Western Region