ONLOOKER'S VIEWPOINT.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 22, 27 January 1936, Page 11

ONLOOKER'S VIEWPOINT.

TENNIS GRADINGS. A correspondent, Mr. J. Nigel Wilson, writes:— " 'Local Player,' whose interesting criticism of the seeding and ranking of players in the Auckland Lawu Tennis Association's championships was printed in Thursday's 'Star' immediately after 'Half-volley's' notes, must be both young and enthusiastic, for he has fallen into the usual mistake of youth and enthusiasm—failure to ensure the correctness of his alleged facts. In the first place, inquiry at the proper quarter reveals that the seeding and grading were left to a sub-committee consisting of two Auckland A grade selectors and one B grade selector. All of them are active players and there are certainly not three players in Auckland whose combined playing experience equals that of these three gentlemen. They are anything but a 'nonplaying committee.' This seems to be the main point in 'Local Player's' criticism. Ho has, however, rather rashly ventured his opinion against that of the committee in several concrete instances, apparently on the strength of his playing experience as against the supposed inexperience in this quarter of the committee. Space will not permit me to analyse 'Local Player's' results upon which he bases his criticism. Perhaps it will -be sufficient to point out that ladder and inter-club matches are three-set only and the results can be applied only with considerable reservation to a five-set event, where the question of stamina assumes. much greater importance. 'Local Player' is somewhat headlong in his denunciation of the B grading of Miss Whitelaw. The actual facts are that Miss Whitelaw, who is primarily a doubles player and has had very little singles practice this year, herself entered in the B grade event. I do not wish it thought that I am in totai agreement with the seedings and gradings of the committee. I am not. But I have sufficient faith in the experience and judgment of the members of that committee to know that, although possibiy mistakes were made, any other committee would have made the same or others just as bad. If 'Local Player' is sufficiently interested I shall be pleased to carry this discussion further with him and, supplying chapter and verse, perhaps persuade him that the committee still deserves and holds the confidence of most Auckland players. To that end I s«becribe my own name."