N.Z. CYCLIST’S SUCCESS

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21858, 11 August 1936, Page 17

N.Z. CYCLIST’S SUCCESS

GILES PROMINENT AT BERLIN BRITISH CRITICS IMPRESSED

REASON FOR ATHLETES* FAILURE The New Zealand Olympic team’s visit to Berlin has supplied the answer to many questions. Not the least of these was the right of the cycling sport to be represented at this year’s games. The success of G. R. Giles, the Canterbury and New Zealand sprint rider, in England and at Berlin has been much greater than was generally expected, and the contrast with the athletes’ disappointing form calls lor comment

Giles, instead of finding himself out of his depth in the international competition, has proved that he is a cyclist of international standard. His performance in finishing eighth in the 1000 metres time trial contest was the best recorded by the New Zealand track team, apart from Lovelock’s great run. The athletes, V. P. Boot and C. H. Matthews, were distinctly disappointing. This was no doubt due to the trials and handicaps of the journey and the cinder tracks. With practically no knowledge of the requirements of international competition, and racing as a newcomer to board tracks, Giles has made a fine impression with the British critics. He broke upon the British cyclists 11 days after his arrival there, and at an important meeting created a minor sensation by racing in neck-and-neck finishes with England’s best riders and representatives of France and Holland. All the critics had their eyes upon his form, and it is interesting to quote one, who said that Giles could be expected to do big things at. Berlin. Eighth Place Gained At the Olympic Games, Giles recorded 75 seconds for the 1000 metres time trial, and was placed eighth among riders from all nations. This and the 1000 metres sprint, in which he reached the quarter-finals, are two races which are as exacting as any athletic event at the games, and with his first outing on board tracks Giles proved himself quite equal to the task his supporters set him in sending him away. It is significant that he did decidedly better than the vaunted Australian champions, Duncan Gray and T. Johnson. This alone is proof of his merit, and bears out the claims of those who were insistent on his right to inclusion in the team. Duncan Gray’s perform- ’ ance was by no means as good as that of Giles, and Johnson was also well beaten by the New Zealander. The only other British Empire chanmion figuring in the results was Roy Hicks (Great Britain), Giles will therefore come back as an international cyclist, but the same cannot be said of Matthews and Boot. Their reputations will have been considerably damaged with an unsympathetic public in New Zealand, and they will suffer unjustly. Their failure to-reach form and measure up to the standard required can be attributed principally to the trials and hardships of the journey and change of climate. A’though no official advice has been received it is understood that Matthews had to scratch from both the events in which he was entered, because of the trouble he had with his feet on the cinder tracks. Boot did well enough to go further than his first heat. Athletes are always seriously handicapped, and it is time the authorities realised the fact. Athletes’ Failure In years of competition overseas the large percentage of athletes have failed. Only a select few have been able to reproduce their true 'form, this number of course not including Lovelock, whose case is entirely different. The consistent failure of the athletes rru-t at last bring home to the authorities that in this department of thfe Olympic Games, New Zealand’s chances are most slender, and instead of being the first consideration, the athletes should be considered for selection only when they have done really exceptional performances, even better than those of Boot and Matthews. Either this restriction must be made or the teams must have specially extended preparation on the other side of the y/orld before competing. On the other hand it has been proved time and again, though not before in Olympic competition, that New Zealand cyclists can hold their own. Similarly New Zealand boxers .and New Zealand rowers have done consistently better than the athletes, with the exception always of Lovelock, who is a permanent resident in the northern hemisphere. New Zealand as a Specialist There seems to be a clear case for specialising. Finland specialises in the long distances and does not waste time entering for sprints. Similarly the Japanese have their special events —the jumps and the swimming. The same applies to other nations. New Zealand should not send away the men whose representatives have the greatest power in official circles, but should concentrate on the fact teat the Dominion can produce cyclists, boxers, and rowers of world standard and get them safely to the games in fair form. This could be done without denying players in other sports their just rights, but it would serve to build up a better reputation for New Zealrnd sport and save the Olympic Games teams from becoming the laughing-stock of sportsmen throughout the country. It is no use continuing to argue that the conditions have defeated the athletes. Everyone knew they would. With a cyclist the journey has not been so trying, nor has it with the boxers, and this is almost invariably the case. To send a good athlete from New Zealand to Europe is as hazardous an undertaking as sending a consignment of fresh grapes to Scotland. The chances of their arrival in good condition are slender.