GREAT ATHLETES

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23272, 15 February 1939, Page 20

GREAT ATHLETES

MILE RUNNERS BREAKERS OF RECORDS LOVELOCK AND WOODERSON DISCUSSION ON SUPERIORITY INTERESTING COMPARISONS £from our own correspondent] / LONDON. Jan. 23 Mr. H. M. Abrahams, barrister, once the well-known athlete, who represented Great Britain at the Olympic Games in 1920 and 1924, and who often contributes articles to London newspapers, writes in the Sunday Times yesterday:— The other afternoon I was walking through/ Leicester Square thinking about something very far removed from athletics, when I heard a Cockney voice exclaim: "Nah, I tell you Lovelock was the ,one." I turned round to see a couple of workmen standing on the edge of the pavement. I wish now I had had the initiative to go up and discuss the problem with them, for I feel sure I should have heard some interesting/, matter, particularly had they remained ignorant of my identity.

Doubtless they were comparing Lovelock and Wooderson—a comparison which thousands of others have made. Which was the better runner? I do not know that there is a solution, and certainly there is not, nor can ever be, any solution that will meet with universal approval. I do not know that I care to answer the question, but at least I can set out the facts.

While Sydney Wooderson was still at school, and indeed, before he had won the public schools' one mile championship, Jack Lovelock had reached the front rank of milers. In 1932, while still a freshman at Oxford, and without any kind of warning that he was really anything of a super-athlete, Lovelock - suddenly ran a mile in 4m 12s, which was about 10s faster than any previous time he had shown in this country. TIMING QUESTIONED WHOLE WORLD ASTOUNDED Unfortunately, I did not see that •record run of Lovelock's—it was a new British record —but I confess openly that 1 first of all wondered if the timekeeping was reliable, and, having been assured' on this point, I regarded the effort as a flash in the pan performance, which would probably not be repeated. Lovelock, however, ran sufficiently well in the championships that year (1932) to finish second to J. F. Cornes, who won in 4m 14.25, and he was only a yard behind. Later Lovelock competed for New Zealand in the Olympic Games at Los Angeles and finished seventh. In 1933 Wooderson, at the age of 18 years and months, won the public schools' title in a new record time.

That same year, Lovelock, having won the Oxford v. Cambridge title in the spring in 4m 18s, went to America to compete for Oxford and Cambridge against the American universities. Against Harvard and Yale he won in 4m 12.65, and a week later he astounded the whole athletic: world with a new and almost unbelievable mile world's record of 4m 7.65. So far Lovelock and Wooderson had not met —the one was now placed in the position of a world's record-holder, the other was nothing more than a very promising schoolboy miler—and many might have thought, "just one more infant phenomenon." CHALLENGE TO GREATNESS A DISAPPOINTING RACE When, therefore, they met at the Southern championships at Guildford on June 30, 1934, there was not much reason to suppose that Wooderson •would already issue a challenge to Lovelock's greatness. Indeed, it would be very little exaggeration to say that no one thought of Wooderson as a possible winner. Lovelock, Cornes, or even Reeve—yes, but not 19-year-old Wooderson. _ • Reeve won in 4m 14.85, and Wooderson, with that characteristic dash ■which was soon to become so familiar, beat Lovelock for second 'place by inches, having gained innumerable yards in the home straight. We looked forward to the championship mile in 1934 with the keenest anticipation. Already the WoodersonLovelock controversy had begun. The race was one of the most disappointing I have ever seen. Lovelock won in 4m 26.65, and we learned nothing except that everyone was afraid of everyone , else in the race, and that .Wooderson still lacked experience. At the Empire Games in August Lovelock again beat Wooderson, this time by 6yds. in 4m 12.85, and that occasion was, in fact, the last on which Lovelock-did beat him. In 1935 the pair, only met on one occasion—namely, at the championships. Prior to that, Wooderson had won the Southern title iii 4m ] 8.65, Lovelock tli° Kinnaird in 4in 13.85. In the championships, Wooderson proved best, in the home stretch, winning by a; second in 4m 17.85.

WOODERSON IMPROVES PROFITING BY EXPERIENCE The year 1936 was, of course, the year of- the Berlin Olympic Games. Wooderson had been improving by leaps and bounds. Lovelock, since his ■world's record in 1933, had been touring the world and suffered a number of defeats, but was gaining great experience. Early in the year he ran against Cunningham in America and beat him, while Wooderson set up a new British record of 4ih 10.8s at the Southern championships at Chelmsford. They met for the first time that year, and for what was to be the last time, at the English Amateur Athletic Association's championships. It was their fifth ' encounter, and the score was two all. Wooclerson won by a yard in 4m 15s. The stage was now set i'or the 1500 metres at BerHn. I. was among those who favoured Lovelock's chances, in' Bpito qf his defeat at the championships.. Supporters of the two men argued until they were blue in the face, and the time clrew nearer when thß jac© of the century—the 1500

metres Olympic final—would be fought out. But unfortunately Wooderson never readied that final. In his heat he was dearly suffering from some injury, and !!ie failed to qualify. Opposed by perhaps the finest field of middle-distance runners that has ever been collected together in one race, Lovelock, running with superb judgment and great tactical skill, won by a whole second in 3m 37.85, a new world's record. After that, Lovelock ran two more races only, a three miles ten days later, and a mile in America, in which iae was defeated by Sac Romani.

AN UNBEATEN CAREER PREFERENCE FOR LOVELOCK In 1937. and 1938 Wooderson pursued an unbeaten career, _ and in two specially arranged handicaps he set up new records for the mile (4m 6.45), 800 metres (,1m 48.45), and 880 yds. (lm 49.25). Well now, which is the better runner? We must dismiss from our minds the true fact that Lovelock is the much more attractive runner. Wooderson never looksj a world-beater, but there is no gainsaying his amazing reserve of power. I give Lovelock pride of place as a tactician. Wooderson is singularly devoid of tactical skill on the track. He almost invariably involves himself in difficulties, bad positions from which only his superb reserve power can extricate him. Wooderson has yet to prove himself a world-beater among a really class field. When he has done that, 1 think even Lovelock's most ardent admirers will award Wooderson pride of place. But for the moment it is fair to say that, while Wooderson has shown himself capable of better times over a mile than Lovelock, and capable of much better times over 880vds., he has yet to demonstrate his ability to produce these performances against class opponents, and not merely against the watch. Helsinki, 1940, should give him his opportunity.