The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1907-11-29
The Amateur Athlete.

sCsoh 10 ~ NAk1o P|AgCA@8O ~ fANN
emit, and in this vagueness lies tho poasi-
bility Of serious international disputes
Il appears that the stewards Of the row.
ing section OF next years Olympic tcsti-
val have excluded 90 per cent. Of Ameri-
can 0arsmen not Rt college by their
Interpretation Of the term. They are
reported to have adopted ~the Henley
rule which stipulates that mechanics,
artisans. laborers or those engaged in
manual positions will be ineligible"
This adoption wa indeed a forsgone
conclusion. The rowing section Of the
Olympic festival In London vas placed
from the first under control Of the British
Amateur Rowing Association and the
definition Of an amateur alluded to
above Is the Henley rule" IL really
that OF the Amateur Rowing Association.
and the only definition which obtains in
Great Britain. How far we shall suffer
through IL ID another question. One Of
the regulations appended TO the modern
Olympic programme runs:
The games arc exclusively confined to ana
tours"
Whether We could send over any crew
better than our best college crews, which
could claim amateur status under any
conceivable Interpretation Of the term.
IL doubtful. Nevertheless it must be
held that the British definition is unsat-
isfactOry. This Is admitted by British
authorities themselves. The Badminton
volume on Boating" saws:
Tho Amateur Rowing Associations rule that
regulates the matter ID In many rcspecia unsatis-
factory and does not always draw tho line justly
such a thing is perhaps scarcely pOsSIole-Ostween
an amateur and a Dou amateur"
The Badminton volume pleads that
the rule serves pretty well in the cir
cumstanoes, NO more. Speaking of the
Henley regatta it says:
with regard to the entry of foreign crews great
dlnnculty has been experienced owing 10 the necos-
aty Of lnsuTing the amateur status Of foreign com
petltOss and so preserving the amateur status OF
the regatta. 10 must DO that unlike
other sports rowing in England has 20 far pre-
served intact It's amateur character. IL has held
itself sternly aloof nom the halfway class OF com
potleors who are amateurs only that they may
make capital ultimately cut Of successes gained
In that character. In the main the Amateur Row
ng AssocistIonS rule fuInIs Ito purpose well. and
les sfSct has been to Keep rowlng Durer and cleaner
than probably any other sport"
It may be worth while stating exactly
what the Amateur Rowing Association
rule is 1t runs as follows:
N person shall be considered an amateur
-. Who has ever rowed or steered In any race
for . stake.
"a. Who has ever knowingly rowed or steered
with or against a professional for any prize.
"a. Who has ever taught. pursued or assisted In
the practice Of athletic exercises Of any kind for
pront.
"a VINO has ever been employed IN or about
boats or In manual labor for money or wages.
-. Who is or sver has been by trade or employ
ment for wages a mechanic. artisan or laOor,r or
engaged In any mental duty.
%. VINO Is disqualified as an amateur In any other
branch OF sport"
The sections OF this rule likely TO be
resented in this country are the fourth
and fifth.
II would seem indeed that the fifth
is superiuous. The words in Section 4,
cor in manual labor for money or wages
cover the same ground to all intents
and purposes. An American will natu-
rally ask at least why the fact that a
man has ever been employed in manual
labor for money or wages" should impair
his amateur status subsequently. He
may have become a Rockefeller or a
Carnegie since those days.
Beyond question there is a weak spot
here in the British definition, IL we try
to translate it into international condi-
tons. Social progress is slower on the
other side. Of course. But it Is eminently
desirable that the definition should rise
above any local peculiarities and be uni
versally applicable in these days Of fire.
quent international athletic meetings,
which are destined it is hoped, to replace
bloody war.
The fact Is the whole conception Of
athletic amateurism is Illogical and
bizarre. What do we understand ex-
actly by Il? And what is the purpose Of
the distinction?
It is a very recent distinction, for one
thing. So far as rowing goes IL is not
yet thirty years old. In 1873 the -ama-
teur" was not defined at Henley. In
that year the American scullers, the
two LEES, entered at the regatta and
were beaten, but grave doubts existed
about their amateur s%tatUs,' which
prompted the Henley stewards to pro-
pound a definition not much different
from the Amateur Associations quoted
above. The LEES afterward came u
as undisgui ed professionals-acoordin9
to the new definition, and probably
according 10 any possible definition
So far the Henley stewards were justified.
Yet it cannot be doubted that their deHni-
ton was tinged by a class feeling.
which In our opinion is unequivocally
to be rejected.
The separation between the amateur
and the professional in athletic sports
Of any kind is Of British origin. Up 70
1860 al; sOrLs anG conditions in the Brit
ish Isles exercised their bodies together.
All prizes were her In monev and 10