New-York tribune., 1921-01-23
Nate Salisbury Sides With
Cuiterman and Adams
as to Point Throwing
BY Fred Hawthorne

umns few days ago, and had appar-
emily simmered ont, am going to print
letter receivsd yesterday touching
or the subject of lawn tennis players
deliberately throwing away points when
they believed the inesmen or umpire
had decided wrongly in their favor.
80 TAR as am concerned, have moth
ing pucn to add to the remarks l made
at the time in aswer to the criticism
OF Messrs. Arthur Guiterman and Frank
Adams. who argued against this prac-
tice. 1T seems to me that the line of
reasoning between the two factions is
so totally at variance, and based upon
such directly opposing views of what
constitutes real craftsmanship, that
they can never be brought together.
However, so that each side may have
US day IN court, l am going to let
Nate Salisbury, of Chicago. speak his
mind. | am moved to do this more
easily tor two specific reasons. to wit:
A number of years ago Dust how
many l will leave it to Mr.. Salisbury
to disc!ose), 1. have reason to believe
that Nate and myself attended the
same school together in this city. AS
an OLD schoo Innate, and also because
always felt certain amount of awe
and admiration for Mates histrionic
and declamatory ability in recitinr
'Old lronsides" at commencement day
exercises, resign the floor to him now.
satisfied he will maintain his high ora
torical average.
MY second reason lies in the fact
enat l believe Mr.. Salisbury to be
Iriend OF Mr.. Guiterman and of Mr..
ADAMS, quite aside from the tenor of
ms ms, remarks in the letter, which
.,, January 10, 1921.
Mr.. Fred Hawthorne,
New York, N. Y.
Dear Sir: AS one who has WINGED
under the groans of an infuriated pop
ulace who disagreed with his decisions.
somewhat rashly, perhaps. take up
the rackets on behalf of Messrs. Gui-
terman and Adams.
my experience was limited to a
couple of seasons, but in that time
had occasion to act in a few i'm
portant matches and others not SO i'm
I portant
Better Opportunity in Judging
The net result is this: | believe that
the llnesman has a much better op-
portunity to judge the exact point
or impact at which the ball touches
the ground than either of the players
".
having made on the previous day a
decision which riled one of the con-
testants, asked this player to make
a few deliberate shots at the baseline
| during warm-up for practice match.
AS luck would have it, the very first
drive he made from his own base
line hit the chalk mark good two inches
from the outside edge. The chalk
was wet, SO there was no telltalc cloud
of white dust. He called the ball two
inches out. When he saw the mark
nc admitted his error. Now, believe,
he is willing to give the linesman
little credit now and again. He is,
by the way, we'll known player in
this district.
II agree with Mr.. Guiterman that
throwing away a point is an unneces-
sary slur on linesman's ability. The
linesman's job is a thankless one--it
requires so much of concentration that,
so far as my experience goes, he gets
little or none of the pleasure TO be de-
rived from watching good match.
Why should the players add discom-
fort to his burden? What's a linesman
for, anyway? Isn't he put on the job
for the very good reason that the play
ers cannot properly judge out balls in
close case? Why, if the ultimate
decision is to rest with the player,
have a linesman at all?
"Another thing throwing away the
point does not have the effect of re-
versing the linesmans decision. 1t
merely restores the status quo before
the point affected by the decision was
played, and it becomes a let. SO that
the point in question gives no advan-
tage one way or the other-whereas
assuming the decision was wrong, the
point would have gone to the adversely
affected player. Properly to adjust
the score, the player benefited would
have to throw away the succeeding two
points.
Have Competent Linesman
"Of course, you may ask how about
the incompetent linesman p That's
easy An incompetent linesman should
not be put on the job. Yes, but is
your comeback, 'it's often impossible
swer, "a real sportsman ought to be
willing to make small sacrifice for
the fun he gets out of the game. Why
not have players who have already
been put out oficiate in important
matches? Or else put a professional
on the job?'
"The only way to get competent Off
cials is to give inexperienced men the
opportunity to become experienced.
But who is going to accept the oppor-
tunty when he knows his decisions
may be nullifed, and in a most un-
pleasant and public manner, at that?
Does any one wonder why good many
people initiate the Arab of the poem
when a club official approaches them
for the purpose Of asking them to take
a line? have sat alongside Sam Hardy
while he called footfaults on George
O'Connell a young Chicago player, for
the express purpose of curing the lat
ter of his tendency to bring the right
foot over the line too soon, of which
purpose the player was perfectly
aware, and listened to a seif-consti-
tuted critic express his opinion of Mr..
able manner. Needless to say, he
didn't know who Hardy was
mo one questions the sportsman
ship Of Brookes or Johnston or Tilden.
or any of the leaders in the sport. But
l think the effort should be made, as
the National Umpires' Association is
making it, l think, to impress club
officials with the Importance of having
none but competent men on the lines.
and then let the players abide by their
decisions. Either their decisions
should be respected or linesmen should
be abolished. After all, both players
are affected by the same risk. Yours
very truly, NATE SALISBURY.
"4418 Magnolia Avenue, Chicago, ILL.,"
No New Points In Controversy
1t does not strike me that Mr. Sails