Omaha daily bee., 1910-09-04
LARNEO IS TENNIS PROBLEM
Enthusiasts Downcast Because He
May Not Lead Fray.
FATHER REFUSES TO SPARE HIM
Players Fear They Cannot
Put Team in Australian Tourney
IL Larned's Father Doesn't
Let Him Take Part.

IL Larned's Father Doesn't
Let Him Take Part.
NEW YORK, Sept. 3.-The cable of the
Lawn Tennis association OF England to the
United States Lawn Tennis association
and the Australian Tennis association, ask
ing IL IT would be agreeable to play the
English American Davis Cup preliminaries
In this country centers attention upon
William A. Larned, the six-times holder Of
the singles championship. Will Larned lead
the American team in it's matches here and
in Australia? That is the question that
agitates the followers of the sport as it
becomes evident that Larned is the pivotal
point in the situation that has caused much
deliberation and discussion this season.
During the early rounds Of the champion
ship at Newport there was no secret but
that Larned stood ready and willing to
make the sacrifices necessary for the long
journey to Australia for the matches for
the Davis cup. Then, from an entirely un-
expected quarter came an objection The
aged father OF the veteran champion, past
his four score and ten years, signified his
unwillingness TO part from his son for the
five or six months necessary for the
journey rE
Those in close touch with lawn tennis
affairs know that without Larned on 1t
there is no chance 90 team contesting
here or in Australia for the cup this sea-
son. He Is the key to the situation. AS
captain and directing the otheps-say,
Maurice e. Mclaughlin, in whom Larned
processes great confidence and Thomas
c, Bundy and Melville L. Long-there is
thought to be bright prospects of the
Americans returning With the cup. There
is the possibility of overcoming the parental
objection, and Of this DR.. James Dwight
president of the national association, was
sanguine, pinning his faith upon the return
OF young Edward p. Larned from Mexico
where he has been for some time.
Some Doubt LaFned Supremacy.
Whether or not Larned stands far su-
pertor to many of the other players in this
country at this time is regarded by some
as problen1aucal. Those who question his
position. while ready to admit his years
of devotion to the game and wide exper-
fences, refer to his record that, he has
never actually won the title in a match as
challenger TO the champion. He stands as
the sole survivor of the old guard of lawn
tennis through having defended the cham
pionship against others who have worked
through long and fatiguing tournaments.
Undoubtedly Larned is regarded as the
most uasterful player on the courts of this
country" said competitor, who has bat
tied through the all-comers. "He Is a great
player and has ably sustained an enviable
reputation. StiI, 1t must be remembered
that he first took the title in 1901 by the
retirement of the peerless Malcolm d. Whit
man. He successfully defended IT the next
] at II "a M
the two famous brothers, in as sensational
a match as the Casino courts have ever
known.
but in 1903 he was beaten by Hugh Law
renee Doherty with comparative ease. The
following year Holcombe Ward took the
championship, as Doherty did not cross the
ocean to defend Beals c. Wright in 1906
won the title from Ward, and in this tourn.
ament Larned was defeated by Karl II
Behr in the third round. as he played
through. William j. Clothier in turn sup
planted Wright, hut he was unable to de-
fend, owing to an injury, so that as win
ner OF the tournament in 1907 Larned agalr
} became champion. In 1908 he defended sue
cessfully against Wright and last yea
} against his old rival Clothier. 1t was thu
same year ago as a week ago Thursday
Clothier and Thomas C. Bundy. respective
winners Of their tournaments. met thu
champion defender after hard and gruelllnl
matches, and each was unable to sustain
) the top flight of HIS game
Hard Row for Challenger.
Anyone VINO scans the records of tn
recent tournament may judge for himsei
as to whether or not the challenger 1
handicapped by his work through the tour
nament rounds before he faces the standin
out champion. II matters little whethe
= Wright or Bundy had gained the position
OF challenger. Had Wright become chal
+ lenger he would have played total O
(. eight matches, with twenty-five sets wo
II and seven lost, and a tally OF l69 games
. his credit, while his opponents would hay
+ won from him ll6 games, That means
long and fatiguing road to travel befor
2 the champion Is faced.
/ THE record for Bundy is better tina
; that OF Wright Insomuch It always show
4, him TO be the superior player. Bundy,
Al receiving a bye for the first round onl
3 played seven matches in the tournamei
< proper lie played total OF twenty-fo'
le sets. winning twenty-one OF them,
e these sets he won LAG games and lost eight,
d altogether better percentage than n
b, former champion, Wright
Considering that each year the cha
IT lenger is called upon TO pass through Il
n same order OF things, il Is not TO be Woi
Il dered at that the defending champion
Al usually successful The history OF the cha
$ lenge matches proves that 1t is rarely 20
n, sible for his opponent 10 display his re
n form.
1t is added by those who favor the chs