Why? The Science of Athletics

154 WHY?-THE SCIENCE OF ATHLETICS York by C. H. McCloy, Research Professor of Anthropo– metry and Physical Education, State University of Iowa, and Richard E. Elliffe,Jr., Chairman ofHealth Education, George Washington High School, New York, and it is upon their observations that the present treatment of the subject will be largely based. The Measurement of Athletic Power, by C. H. McCloy (A. S. Barnes & Co., New York, U.S.A.) should be studied by all coaches and games masters. Percentages of Ability According to Professor McCloy, the general range of athletic ability taken in the mas§ yields about 5 or 6% of very good material of the best university athlete type ; - 24 or 25% who are just on the border-line of being very-good and may, or may not, mature in their second or third season ; 38 to 40% who are merely middle class ; and about 25% who are well below the average, but are not yet so bad as the lowest group, who constitute the despa:ir of all physical instructors and athletic coaches. I think, although the eyes of the world are ever fixed upon genius, it is the lower grades that benefit most from the new systems of measuring athletic potentiality that are gradually coming into vogue. It· may be said, with certain reservations, that a good coach can always improve the_performances of a genius, how much or how little is a matter of circumstance, provided he is' taken in hand sufficiently early. Available genius, however, represents at the most probably no more than 5% of the mass. As regards the boys in the lower classifications, who show any signs at all of potential athletic ability, it is fair to say that one can improve them a little by teaching them various physical skills, but you cannot make a Sievert, a Bausch or a Tisdall out of a lad who lacks the essential potentiality in the first place. Nor can you, on general grounds, make, say, a high jumper out of a boy whose athletic tendency is towards long distance runnmg. Early ath!etic -ability measurements give a good