Athletics of To-Day 1929

The Low Hurdles 1 55 In the first heat of the 400 metres Low Hurdles final at Amsterdam, F. M. Taylor, U.S.A., who three months earlier had set the world's record at 52 secs., came home first in 53i secs., followed by F. J. Cuhel, much fancied by the Americans, and Lord Burghley, all three qualifying for the final. Living– stone-Learmonth, in his heat, drew Johnny Gibson, R. Maxwell, another good American, E. Vilen, Finland (znd 1924), Sten Pettersson, Sweden, former world's record holder, and L. Facelli, Italy, who had beaten him in London. In that heat of the semi-final the tall, strongly built Cambridge Blue made every fence a winning-post. I have seen him run many races, but never one like that. He beat the Americans, Swede, and Italian (two of them world's r cord holders) out of the race, and Vilen, second, and Pettersson, third, were well conquered in 54 secs. Perhaps in the final, run the next day, an inferiority complex told, for Burghley had always beaten him. When the finalists came out we knew that we were to witness the race of a life-time. At the crack of the starter's pistol Cuhel, in the inside berth, hung fire inexplicably, but the rest of the field got away well together. At the second flight the Englishmen, in the outside lanes, were hurdling together first at each flight. Livingstone-L armonth stuck the terrific pace for six flights, and then Burghley strode on alone. Enter– ing the straight, he had all the Britishers on their feet and cheering frantically. The Americans were up too, for both uhel and Taylor were coming on fast. At the la t f ne Burghl y faltered, and our hearts seemed to stop beating. Then he bucked over the last fence with Cuh 1beside him and Taylor just behind, but once he was on the ground again, neither man could hold the fastest finisher in the world in this v nt. Lord Burghley's time of 53t secs. was a new Olympic record and something much better than the figures suggest, for the track at Amsterdam was horribly loose in parts. The continued beating of Livingstone-Learmonth by Lord Burghley is, I fancy, fully explained by the superiority of the latter's form over low hurdles. It was stated in the last chap-