Dishonorable Trick

Charles Paddock, joint holder of the world's record for the 100-yard dash, recently made a speech over the radio telling of an incident at the Olympic Games in 1924. Said he:

"It was suggested that the American who drew the inside lane that day, the moment that he was set, should start running. The rest of us would know what to expect and could save ourselves. But Abrahams, the Englishman, in order to protect himself would have to go, too, expending his energy. Of course if the first American was not called back he would undoubtedly win. But if he did not get away with it, then the next American would try, and the next, until each American would have started twice, while Abrahams would have had to start hard eight times. In that many chances it was very probable that one American would get away. But if no one did, it would not make any difference, because Abrahams would be so worn out from his eight trials that an American would win anyway.

"It was a grand idea. It could hardly fail. The four of us left our tent and went to the starting line, confident that Abrahams would be beaten. ... I drew the inside lane. The moment I looked at the number I knew that the scheme was off. And my teammates seemed to sense it too. For the training that we had had in American athletics prevented us from seizing that kind of an opportunity. . . .

"We were called to our mark. We were set. The gun was fired. We were off together the first time. Slowly Abrahams pulled away, and he broke the tape well ahead. He deserved to win, because he was the best man that day. . . ."

That beautiful magazine, The Sportsman, which is impeccable in taste and sportsmanship, printed Runner Paddock's remarks in its June issue. Editor Richard E. Danielson made the following comment:

"That four members of the American team should conspire to a trick quite as dishonorable as tripping or knocking down a superior opponent, that they should go to the mark prepared to carry out their miserable plot, that, when at the last moment some shred and tatter of decency stopped them, they should glory in their sportsmanship--all this reads like a bad dream, like something impossible and unreal. It is as if they said, 'We planned to win by sticking a rake handle between Abraham's legs at the fifty-yard mark. It was a good scheme and it seemed sure to succeed. But at the crucial moment we didn't do it. This is real sportsmanship.' No, all this seems frankly incredible. Heretofore we have naively believed that the protests of the English in 1908 and of other foreign teams in later Olympics against the morals and manners of the American delegation were inspired by nothing more than the chagrin of defeat, but now--now our faith begins to falter.

"One need not be particularly incensed with Mr. Paddock. He is probably no better and no worse than the system which produced and exploits him. He is unfit to represent the sportsmen of the United States, and he should not go to Amsterdam ; but obviously he will--if fast enough in his trials.

"That there is something unhealthy in the organization of amateur athletics in America today we are profoundly convinced. There is too much zeal for winning, too much record breaking, too much top-heavy, permanent, overhead organization, too obvious an emphasis on the technical minutiae of strictly defined amateurism, and too little feeling for the inward meaning of sport."