New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1914-12-20
Williams, Behr and Muir
ray Follow in Order in
the Official Rating.
NATIONAL CHAMPION
IN SECOND PLACE
Committee Breaks Precedent in
placing California Comet" at
Top-LeadS Also in Doubles.
BY FRED HAWTHORNE.


committee of the United States Ma
tional Lawn Tennis Association.
Second to Mclaughlin Is Richard
Norris Williams, I'd, of Philadelphia,
who created the sensation of the year
bv defeating the California Comet" IN
the national championship tournament
AZ Newport last September.
In naming Mclaughlin as the first
player in the land the ranking commit
Frederick c. lnman, chairman;
Walter Merrill Hall and Walter Pate =
took the dilemma by the horns and
boldly broke all precedent in naming
other than the holder of the national
title for the premier position on the
courts.
The first ten players in the singles
ranking follow:
No. I, Maurice = Mclaughlin. Of Cali
F Th = No. 5, Karl IL Bebr, Of New
York: No. 4, Robert lindley Murray, OF
California: No. ). William }. Clothier, OF
Philadelphia; No. 6. William NJ, Johnston.
OF California; No. :, George Myers Church,
Of New York; No. 3, 4. IL. Alexander, OF
New York; No. .. Watson ~. Nashburn;
Of New York; No. 10, Ella +. fottrelt, OF
California.
II the committee has upset all trsdi-
tions Of the game by It's action in not
making the national champion first, 1t
has proved that its rating was an hon
est one and not 20 be affected by the
conservatism of other years and other
ranking bodies.
Plainly, MeLouChlin's position in the
list was awarded because the committee
believed that his work throughout the
season Of 1914 was superior TO that Of
Williams. despite the last crushing de-
feat for the championship.
Basis for the Rating.
As though 20 challenge the criticism
or its findings. the committee also gave
out the complete tournament records
Of Mclaughlin and Williams during the
season. and in connection with these
conparative tables Mr. lnmau made
the following statement;
"The committee deems IL necessary
70 comment on the comparison Of
these two records. The data tell their
own story. Ii admits Of no discus sion.
Il establishes without any doubts what
ever the superiority OF Mr.. McLOugh-
Inns record over that Of Mr. Williams,
and the former has therefore been
awarded first place"
Having thus stated their position in
the matter, Messrs. Inman, Hall and
Pate stand their ground, so to speak,
prepared 10 'let the chips fall where
they may"
Where there arc many thousands Of
lawn tennis players and followers or
the game there is bound TO be VIDE
divergence Of opinion as to the merits
of the awards made, but the sober ma
jority. who read and digest the season
records and who have watched the play
Of the two contenders for the No. l
position, must agree that TO McLough-
lin belongs the laurel wreath.
Meeting the foremost players OF the
world. Mclaughlin was defeated only
once in his long campaign on the courts;
and then by Williams at the Tar! END
Of the season. Brookes and Wildlng,
regarded as the greatest opponents OF
the game in the world, were among the
California Comets" victims. Williams
himself was defeated FIVE times by Nc
Loughlin, and others who fell before
his proves were Lindley Murray, Ella
Fottrell. W. J. Clothier, 7. c. Bundy
n. W. Niles ana ". VI. Johnston.
The Record of Williams.
Wnliams's record is longer than
McLoughlin's, but he also mad more de-
feats marked up against him. beSldes
losing 10 Mclaughlin, he went down
before Brookes and Wilding in the all
important Davis Cup matches, and also
tasted defeat at the hands of George
NJ Church in the intercollegiate cham,
piouship finals. Murray, had he not
collapsed from the terrific heat at Sea,
bright, undoubtedly would have scored
over Williams. ,.,,.
II must be conceded that Willam'
stoned for his defeats by Church anC
Mclaughlin by worsting them during
the season, but these do not take away
from the blots on his record
In defeating Mclaughlin tor NE ma
tional title at Newport Williams
sbowed the rare genius of his game
when it is at its greatest heights
greater than anything the Californian
ever showed. but many contend ina
Mclaughlin had an of day when VIII
ANS defeated him. This the wrltel
does not believe, but Notwithstanding
+bis was the one occasion when VIII
ANS found himself" in his most i'm
portant matches. Perhaps IN ahothe
YEAR he will have so steadled has gam
49, he will be able to take the meas
ure of the Californian IN majority o
their meetings.
More HonorS for Mclaughlin.
To Mclaughlin also goes the homo
81 being awarded the No. ] position II
the doubles. Paired with his old part
ner Thomas c. Bundy, MAC" Is place.
AZ the head of the list, with George NJ
Church and Dean Mathey, the runners
nm for the doubles title, at No. 2, ant
Karl Behr and T. X. Pell in third place
which, on the records, seems to be
lair enough rating.
AS regards the first four men nance
in the singles list, there can be hardl!
any fault found by those acquainted
with the facts, but when II comes I,
William j. Clothier, placed at No. .
there is sure TO be difference o
George Church, placed at No. z, de
feated Williams, the national cham
pion. and Robert Lindley Murray, and
although defeated by Clothier when h
was plainly not at his best had I'M
satisfaction of seeing Clothier twice
defeated by Williams and once by Nc
Lougnlin. He also played IN NOR
tournaments than Clothier, and agains
sitter opposition. Last year Clothle'
was No. 3 on the list.
Karl II. Behr and X. Lindley Muir
raw. ut No. 3 and No. a, respectively
seem fairly rated, the margin between
them being Of the slightest, each hav
ing scored against the other, bu
Rshr's greater experience might right
fully give him the edge.
William NJ. Johnston, at No. 9, hat
uothing TO complain of, taking int
account his record. All followers o.
he game must welcome the appear
ance of Frederick 3. Alexander baci
smpng the country's first ten. Th'
W UEtIlnt