Harper's Round Table, July 21, 1896

by Various

But, supposing a majority of this point-winners for the Hartford High-School on that day were members of the class of '96—as they probably were—have they any claim to the title of "Champion Class" of the State or of the association? Certainly not. The games at New Haven were not "class" games; they were "school" games, and nobody knew or cared to what class the winning athletes belonged. In the same way it was of no importance whatever, so far as the championship was concerned, to what school the point-winners in the National Games belonged. These games were held among associations, and the association that scored the greatest number of points became the champion association for the year.

In the case of the Connecticut Association it happened that the greatest number of point-winners were members of the Hartford High-School. This may justly be a source of pride for Hartford, and for all the members of the High-School, but it is not a matter to interest the National Association, nor is it a matter for the National Association to take any cognizance of.

The same correspondent whom I have quoted above goes on to say: "Therefore I think that Hartford has just as much claim to the national championship as she has to the Connecticut H.-S.A.A. championship, and as Yale has to the Intercollegiate championship." I feel perfectly confident that as soon as he, and others, who are of his opinion at present, make clear to themselves the difference between a contest among schools and a contest among associations, they will not think that Hartford has any claim whatever. I am very glad, too, that my correspondent cited Yale in his comparison, for it helps me to make my argument even clearer.

Yale is a university made up of Yale College, the Sheffield Scientific School, the Yale Law School, the Yale Medical School, the Yale Art School, the Yale Divinity School, etc. On every Yale team that goes to the Intercollegiate games there are College men, Sheff men, and frequently men who are in the Medical School or other departments of the University.

It is not necessary to look over the records to find out if a case such as the one I am about to cite as an example ever actually happened, for the illustration is just as strong whether it ever occurred in fact or not. But suppose that the majority of the point-winners of the Yale team of 1896 were Sheff men. Would the Sheffield Scientific School, for that reason, have any grounds to claim any kind of a championship? Of course not. The Sheff men went down to Manhattan Field as members of Yale University, just as the H.P.H.-S. athletes went to the Columbia Oval as members of the Connecticut H.-S.A.A., and neither body has any right to set up any kind of a claim for individual prowess. If I have not yet succeeded in making myself clear to all my Connecticut readers, I hope they will let me hear from them further, and I will try it again.

Another point over which there has been considerable misunderstanding is the difference between an "Interscholastic" record and a "National Interscholastic" record. The Constitution of the N.I.S.A.A., in its Laws of Athletics, section 18, says that a national interscholastic record is any record made at the annual meeting of the N.I.S.A.A. A.A. An interscholastic record, on the other hand, is a record made by a student in any annual field-meeting of any league, club, or association. [The National Association's Constitution puts it, "any leagues, clubs, or associations of this association," but we cannot accept this as correct, because there are several interscholastic records held by associations not members of the national body.]

To be brief, however, a national interscholastic record is one made at the national games; an interscholastic record is one made at any interscholastic meeting. As soon as space enough avails, this Department will print the tables of national and interscholastic records—for the comparison will be an interesting one.

Speaking of errors, it is well to refer to one which crept into almost all of the reports of the performances of the National games. In the high jump this Department credited Sturtevant of Connecticut with first place, and Flournoy of Iowa with second place. The facts of the case were these: Flournoy and Sturtevant, the only contestants in the event, tied for first place at 5 ft. 8 in. Therefore they divided the points, each man taking four.

Then they chose to jump over again for the medals, instead of tossing a coin, as is usual—although this athletic method of deciding the question is by far the more sportsmanlike. On the jump-off Flournoy was unable to repeat his performance of 5 ft. 8 in., and could only clear 5 ft. 7 in., whereas Sturtevant again got over the bar at the higher point. This gave Sturtevant the first-place medal and Flournoy the second prize. But this jumping-off business had no effect whatever on the two associations' scores, and consequently Connecticut's figures should be 24 instead of 25, and Iowa's should be 7 instead of 6.

While speaking of records, let me say a word in connection with the mile-walk figures of Eells, of the Hotchkiss School, at the Connecticut games last June. The performance as recorded was 7 min. 11 sec., and I believe these figures to be correct. When the time was announced on the field at New Haven some one raised a cry that it should be 8 min. 11 sec., and a report that the official time-keepers had made an error was assiduously circulated.