Even in these systematic times tennis continues to be scored in the most illogical way: 15-love, 30-love, 40-love. Why not 1, 2, 3? As a matter of fact this question was asked some years ago in the Middle West, according to "Placement's" column in the "New York Evening Post", and a plea made for the recognition of a simpler method of scoring in order not to hinder the popularity of the game. But the ancient system continues, and the popularity of tennis was never greater. Apparently there is nothing left for the curious but to discover how this 15, 30, 40 combination came into existence.

The answer comes from A. E. Crawley, an English authority. Tennis, it seems, was invented about 1200 when the usual arithmetical unit was sixty, because it was so conveniently divisible--this was before the use of decimals. It was always played for a stake, usually a crown (60 sous) per game of four strokes. Thus the winner of the first stroke was the recipient of 15 sous from his opponent. If he was a good player he won 30, then 45 (this number is still used in France to some extent) and finally sixty (our game"). The "set" was not a part of the original scoring system, the players arranging themselves to play the best of a certain number of games. The tennis of today is a far cry from the ancient game, but it is destined to retain at least the scoring of centuries ago.

What is even more interesting to us we are accustomed to accept with a shrug of the shoulders what "has always been that way" is the fact that tennis was a gambling game and was played extensively about the Mediterranean. (A direct offspring is still played in Cuba and Mexico as Jaialai). None of the modern equipment was necessary. The players knocked a ball with their hands over a mound of earth, or some such obstacle, and settled their debts on the spot. It is barely possible that desperate matches are played on the Jarvis courts for sodas at the corner drug store, but nothing so huge as the 15 sous game is ever heard of. These systematic days, if they have left the old scoring system untouched, have at least spread the theory of simple arithmetic among tennis players. Few can be found who would not shy at a game that might be scored as "two bits--O", "a half--two bits", "dollar for Mr. Jones", "he leads four dollars to one".