SI Vault
 
19th HOLE: THE READERS TAKE OVER
October 17, 1955
THAT LOVELY INTERLUDE Sirs:It's all over. The tumult and the shouting have died, the heroes are preening themselves in home-town celebrations and the little men who write the record books are sharpening their quills to enthrall future generations.
Decrease font Decrease font
Enlarge font Enlarge font
October 17, 1955

19th Hole: The Readers Take Over

View CoverRead All Articles View This Issue
1 2 3 4 5 6

Allow me to take this opportunity of congratulating you on your excellent publication and the fine article on Cecil Smith (SI, Sept. 5).
CYRIL R. HARRISON
Camden, S.C.

?Cyril Harrison, who has been rated as high as seven goals, played with a handicap of five on the 1952 national twelve-goal championship Blind Brook team.—ED.

SMART ENOUGH TO BE DUMB
Sirs:
Jimmy Jemail didn't ask me but I'd like to venture an opinion about his question: Do race horses have intelligence? (SI, Oct. 3). Sure they have intelligence, equine intelligence, and, just like humans, some horses are smarter than others. From man's standpoint, the ideal horse is one smart enough to know what you want him to do and at the same time dumb enough to do it. As a trainer I know once put it, "May the good Lord deliver me from a horse that thinks!"
JOHN E. O'BRIEN
Litchfield, Conn.

AN OLYMPIC SCORING SYSTEM
Sirs:
Regardless of all the deathless prose written about the Olympic Games and the fact that they are not scored, they will be scored, as we all know. The newspapers, magazines, spectators, fans and political parties will score the games in their own fashion and to their own satisfaction.

To put a stop to all this foolishness, why don't the powers that be establish an official scoring system? Why don't they face up to the fact that you can't have a game in which there is no winner and establish a scoring system that would meet the Olympic ideal and eliminate all the phony claimants to the championship?

For what it's worth, here is my suggestion for such a system:

Each event would be scored on a 10 points for first, 9 points for second, etc. basis. However, from the points so earned a deduction of .01 point would be made for each million population of the country represented by the contestant. Thus, the United States would receive about 8.35 points for each first place scored, while a country like Turkey would be credited approximately 9.7 points for a first. The large countries would not receive any points for finishes that counted less than their "handicap" (no minus scores would result), while the smaller countries could pick up two or three points by finishing toward the end of the first ten.

It would seem to me that this system would eliminate the unfairness of the games to some degree. As things now stand, the small countries have about the same chance that Slippery Rock Teachers College would have if entered in the Big Ten conference.

Maybe this system would work to give the small fellows a chance to get some of the recognition they work for!
CHESTER L. GARNER
Tech. Sergeant, USAF
New York

? SI has heard from many readers proposing or rejecting a national scoring system for the Olympics and would be interested to have the opinions of other readers.—ED.

Continue Story
1 2 3 4 5 6