OUR FRIEND THE SLACKER.

The loss of Saturday's track meet to Yale can be attributed to deplorable weakness of the University in the field events. Whereas, in spite of the injuries to several of the best runners, the University track men scored thirty-two points to an equal number registered by Yale, only eight and two-thirds points out of a possible forty were scored in the field events. Last year the same defect all but lost the meet, and the defeat of the Freshmen at the hands of Yale on Saturday was glaringly due to total inadequacy in the same five events. It is evident that this same situation will continue unameliorated next year unless some radical steps are taken to meet the issue.

The question of bringing this branch of the sport up to at least a level of mediocrity, if not of excellence, presents no inherent difficulty. Natural ability in the jumps and weights is not nearly so important a factor as in the running events. Honest effort on the part of reasonably well-conformed men under the direction of efficient coaching is all that is essential.

The present situation is due not to a lack of effort on the part of those who do come out for the field events, but rather to the singularly large number who lack the spirit to come out. Perhaps also a coach less hampered by other duties than Mr. Clark would assist the men more in their development, but the question of coaching can only be judged adequately when the coach is given a reasonable amount of material to work with. The chief fault lies, as usual, with public opinion, which should, and must in the future, make life as unpleasant for the armchair-athlete as it is today for the able-bodied "slacker" in Europe.