LAWN TENNIS.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 19813, 28 December 1929, Page 9

LAWN TENNIS.

PROVINCIAL TOURNEY, j ] I RHODES-WILLIAMS BEATS SEAY. ! i 1 Yesterday proved an evf-'fu! day in the ", Canterbury L-'.-n Tenuis Association's pro- : vincial ch.tmijion = h:p £nd handicap tournament at WiMine Park, the results of several games ec.nf ound.ng the critics. Good pro- < trres = wa- mado in ail events, the majority j Cf which have been pushed out to the semi-rir-.ali and tins's. These will be decided this j afternoon j ; Conditions ye>terday were varied, and for j , mo>i of the time very trying for competitors | and spectators alike. Courts asain played fas; and true, but except for a brief period C3riy in the morning, a Btrong nor'-west wind tended to lower the standard of play. A fairly heavy shower of about half an hour's duration interrupted play before 3 o'clock bu; the rain over, a welcome sun soon dried the courts and allowed piay to be resumed. It was just after this that the best weather during the day prevailed, and the most important game/ were favoured by ideal conditions A change to the south-west toward the close of the afternoon gave little promise of fine weather for the final day. It W2= a field day for T. Rhodes-Williams. He upset all calculations in the singles by defeating Ivan Seay, picked as a finalist, m straight sets. 8-6, 8-6. after soundly trouncin» Patterson, another seeded player, in the fourth round. In the doubles, too, he and H Dvmond plaved inspired tennis to defeat the holders of "the title, C. Angas and E. 0. Boddy, by the decisive score of 6-4, 6-4. Prettier tennis has seldom been seen in Canterbury than that produced by Rhodes-Wil-liams, and ha scintillated right throughout a hard day's play, in which he W3S seldom of? the court. The ex-Wellington player is at the top of his form, and he should extend Angas to the limit when they meet in the final. , _ _ , Angas has vet to meet J. R. Johnston to reach the final of the singles, but although Johnston, cot ranked in the first twelve m Canterburv, has been playing far above his usual standard, the result must be a foregone conclusion. The position in the doubles event is that Rhodes-Williams and Dvmond. in the final, meet the winners ot \V. S. Somervillo and R. H. Tait and T. \\. Patterson and J. R. Johnston. The women's singles and doubles events were advanced to the final rounds. Miss M. Wake and Miss M. Andrew are finalists for the singles, while those two, on the same side of the net. meet the winners of Mrs Crawshaw and Miss N. Smithson and Miss M. Sowden and Miss 1. Morrison. The combined event is not so far out, but an effort will be made to push things on this morning, so that the final may be played in the afternoon. The bovs' and girls' junior events h3vp only the finals to be decided, and good games these should be. While not of outstanding qualitv. the tennis in these competitions has been of a standard sufficiently high to prove that there is any amount of promising talent among the juniors of the province. . . . Spectators are assured of witnessing Ingflclass tennis when the finals are played this afternoon. The singles events will be commenced on the Stadium courts at 2.30. and the doubles and junior events will be decided immediately after. The handicap games are well advanced, and it is hoped to complete the programme by this evening. Results of yesterday's play were as folChampionahip Events. MEN'S SINGLES. (Best of three advantage sets. Holder, C. Angas.) Third Round. T W. Patterson beat D. Purves 6-3, 6-3. J R. Johnston beat A. G. Mallett 6-4. 6-2. J. IL W. Sheppard beat E. H. Orhell 6-3, N. Anderson beat W. Goss, jun., 6-3, 4-6, 7-5. Fourth Round. T. Rhodes-Williams beat T. W. Patterson '6-4, 6-1. , „ . I A Seay beat W. R. Robinson l-o, 6-4. J. R. Johnston beat J. H. W. Sheppard 8-6. 4-6, 4-3, retired. C. Angas beat N. Anderson 6-0, 6-1. Semi-final. T. Rhodes-Williams beat I. A. Seay 8-6, 8-6. MEN'S DOUBLES. (Best of three advantage sets. Holders: C. Angas and K. G. Boddy.) Second Round. S. W. Field and H. S. P. Andrews beat B. B. Longhnan and W. R. Robinson 6-1, 1-6, Third Round. W. S. Somerville and R. H. Tait beat W. G. Morrison and H. W. Ogier 6-3, 6-2. C. Angas and E. G. Boddy beat J. K. Crawshaw and N. G. Munns 6-2, 6-2. T. Rhodes-Williams and H. Dymond beat W. Goss and R. Browning 6-4, 6-4. T. W. Patterson and J. R. Johnston beat S. W. Field and H. S. P. Andrews 6-2, 6-4. Semi-finals. T. Rhodes-Williams and H. Dytnond beat C. Angas and E. G. Boddy 6-4, 6-4. WOMEN'S SINGLES (Best of three advantage sel3. Holder: Miss M. Speirs.) Third Round. Miss O. Rankin beat Miss R. Dallas 6-1, 7-5. Miss M. Sowden beat Miss D. Scott 6-3, Miss if. Andrew beat Miss M. Sherris 6-3, 6-1. Semi-final. Miss M. Wake beat Miss G. Rankin 6-2, 6-2. Miss M. Andrew beat Miss M. Sowden ' ' WOMEN'S DOUBLES. (Best of three advantage sets. Holders: Mrs Y. Pritchett and Miss M. Speirs.) Second Round. Mrs E L G. Crawshaw and Mies N. Smithson beat Misses E. E. Rudkin and S. Goss Misses' M. Wake and M. Andrew beat Misses R. Dallas and H. G. Jones 6-1. 6-1. Misses M. Sowden and I. Morrison beat Misses N. Reed and M. Sherris 8-10, 6-3, 8-6. Semi-finals. Misses M. Wake and M Andrew beat Mrs E. L. G. Crawshaw and Miss N. Smithson 61 ' 60 ' COMBINED DOUBLES. (Best of three advantage sets. Holders: Miss M. Andrew and I. A. Seay.) First Round. Miss D. Scott and R. Browning beat Miss I Fulton and A. G. Mallett 6-4. 6-4. Miss E. Borrows and A. Borrows beat Mrs Wilding and F. S. Wilding 7-5, 11-9. Mrs McEwan and H. T. Richards, vr.o. Second Round. Miss R. Dallas and S. W. Field beat Miss B. Macdonald and B. B. Lougbnan 7-o, 6-4. Mrs E. L. G. Crawshaw and J. R. Crawshaw beat Miss G. Rankin and W. S. SomerMrs Laurenson and T. Laurenson beat Mrs McEwan and H. T. Richards 6-3. 6-0. Miss D. Scott and R. Browning beat Miss Borrows and A. Borrows 6-2, 7-5. BOYS' SINGLES. (Best of three sets, third advantage. Holder: H. A. Barnett.) Semi-final. A. A. Mac Gibbon beat F. W. Walls 6-4, 6-3. GIRLS' SINGLES. (Best of three sets, third advautage. Holder: Miss M. Sherris.) Semi-final. Miss I. Morrison beat Miss B. Tipping 6-5, Handicap Events. MEN'S SINGLES. Second Round —G. Morris (rec. 15J) beat L. Armstrong (owe 2-6 15) 9-7: L. P. Harker (owe 2-6 15) beat J. R. Johnston w.o. Third Round —R. H. Tait (owe 152) beat B. B. Longhnan (owe 30J) 9-7; I. Watson (scr) beat J. A. Shand (rec. 2-6 15) 9 6; T P. Laurenson (owe J 15) beat A. R. Cant (owe 15) 9-7; H. W. Ojder (owe 4-6 lo) beat L. P. Harker (owe 2-6 15) 9-5: W. Goss, jun. (owe I 15) beat H. S. V. Andrews (owe 4-6 15) 9-6; A. G. Mallett (owe 2-6 15) wo.: G. Morris (rec. 151) beat H, B. Smith (scr) 9-8; E. L. Prebble (owe 15 26) beat X. Anderson (owe 15) 9-3. Fourth Round —R. H. Tait (owe 15?. > beat A. G. Mallett 9-4; E. L. Prebble beat G. Morris, w.0.: T. P. Laurenson beat 1. Wat-s-on 9 5; W. Goss, jun., beat H. W. Ogier (owe 4-6 15) 9-7. Semi-finals —R. H. Tait beat E. L. Prebble 9-5; W. Goss, jun., beat T. P. Laurenson 9-4. MEN'S DOUBLES. First Round—S. W. Field and H. T. Richards (owe 8-6 15) beat E. 1). and L. J. Brougliton (rec. J 15) 9-6; R. Browning and T. Laurenson (ow-e 15 1-6) beat Dymond and Bnliivant (owe 4-6 15) 9-7; R. Cracroft Wilson and C. Dickenson (scr) w.0.: W. and R. Pearse (owe 4-6 15) w.0.: W. S. Somerville and R. H. Tait (owe 30). w.0.: E. H. Orbell and E. L. Prebble (owe 15*) beat H. S. P. Andrews and A. R. Cant (owe 56 15) 9-7: N. Anderson arid H. G. Searle (owe 15) beat A. G. Mallett and L. P. Harker (owe 1-6 15) 9-6. Second Round —J. R. Crawshaw and N. G. Munns (owe 15 1-6) beat F. W. Pennefather and J. W. Allan (rec. 15) 9-4: R. Cracroft Wilson and C. Dickenson, w.0.; W. S. Somerviile and R. S. Tait beat L. Armstrong and N. Daly (owe 1-6 15) 9-6; N. Anderson and H. G. Searle beat E. H. Orbell and E. L. Prebble 9-7. WOMEN'S SINGLES. Second Round—Mrs McEwan (owe h 15) beat Miss K. Dixon (scr) 9 3: Miss X.Reed (owe 4-6 15) beat Mrs Forgie (owe 1-6 15) 9-6; Miss V. Fiood (scr) beat Miss D. Maginness (rec. 1-6 15) 9-7: Miss J. Maginness (scr) beat Mrs R. Cracioft Wilson (rec. 15) 9-3: Miss I). Fleetwood (owe 1-6 15) beat Miss E. Edmonds (rec. J 15) 9-5; Miss M. Saunders (owe 15) beat Miss D. Scott (owe 151 9-4. Third Round—Miss S. Goss beat Mrs McEwan 9-6: Mi*s M. Saunders beat Miss J. Maginness (scr) 9-2. WOMEN'S DOUBLES. Second Round—Mrs E. L. G. Crawshaw and Miss N. Smithson (o-,»» To) boat M~isso« 1. Wright and M. Pym- (roc. 4-6 151 9-4~ Misses A. and K. Dixor. free. 3-6 15 beat Mesdames C. Holland and AcEwan (owe 1 6 15) 9-6; Misses R. Dallas anil H. Jones (owe 5-6 15) beat Misses E. RudVin and S. Gojs (owe 4-6 lo) 9-2; Misses Q and D. Flfßt-

wood (ree. 1-6 1?) beat Misses D- »=<* J - | Third Round—Mi-es B. Macd-natd and 1.. Qui:; !.-.ve 13 1-6 > Leaf Mr? L. J. *V,iKe ar.a ; Mi- N. Re-:d <r.we 4-0 IV $-* : ' Misses A and K. Dixon 9-6. , COMBINKD DOUBLES. \ Fir*: Round—Miss K. Borrow' and A. : Borrows (o-ve 151) beat Mrs Laurenson ana T. P. Laurenson (owe 15 Mi' 54: Miss b. ; Tiooing and C. A. Rattray ..rec. "<3 I-?' pe -' I Miss N. Swithson and W. '6. Clayton <° A - | 4-.i 15. 9-0: Miss O. Kankin and W - f- | Somerville ("•« :;0> bear Mr. K. <-/»"% Wilson arid H. Cracrof: Wilson (.rec. 4-b l->, j Second Round—Miss G. Rankin and V . *•■ , Somerville beat Miss E. Tipping and C. A. Rattray 9-5; Mrs Holland and Webb <.°* e 1-6 15) M; = s B. Mnrdonald and t>. a. , Louzhnan (owe :;0) 9-S; Miss M. Shern* and i X. <f. Mumis ro-ve 15 2-Cj beat Mrs Mclsvan j 3nd H. T. Richard'? (rfc. 3 6 15> 9-.- j NOTES ON THE PLA*. | I MEN'S SINGLES. { Flavin? his best game of the tournament. T. W. Patterson accounted for D. Purves | earlv in the morning. The latter's chances ] were considered very good, as tiere is no j more stubborn or tenacious tighter in Can- j terburv than Purves. Patterson, however, was hitting strongly and accurately to corners, and made his opponent do all tne run ning. Long rallies, with Patterson nearly alwavs on the attack, usually ended with a decisive placement or volley in his favour. He won in straight sets. Patterson met more than his match, however, in the fourth round, when he was defeated br Rhodes-Williams in straight sets, I 6-4 6-1. Superior generalship gave KnodesWilliams the victory, and he always had the upper hand. The wind, which was at this time gaining a strength that was somewhat troublesome to the players, seemed to worry Patterson more than his opponent xne latter worked the side-lines skilfully, and his well-varied game continually kept raiterson guessing. Patterson fought hard—a* Patterson invariably does—but he could not cope with the other's skilfui and accurate attack. i,-—, Angas was far too good ioi Anderson, »Som he met in the fourth round, and although i the latter brought off some good shots, ne could score only one game in the sequence ! Se j.' R, Johnston continued in his Fusing winning form when he met J. H. W. k&ePpard a plaver who from the respective ranking list piacings might reasonably be expected to prove too strong. Johnston s driving was powerful and accurate, and ne was not afraid to come to the net when he had an opening. In this position he invariably volleyed decisively. Unfortunately Sheppard's leg. which had been troubling him during the latter part of the gave out leaving Johnston to reach the semi-final 8-C 4-6 4-3. Shreopard had previously accounted for Orbell in a rather colourless match, G-2, 6-3. ,„♦;„,, W R Robinson, who surprised by beating Boddy on the first day, gave I. A. Seaya varv good game in the quarter-fmal. iie handled Seay's none too easy stuff in quite masterly fashion, scoring with some line corner shots on both hands. _ Seay appeared, however, to be playing with the object of getting his strokes in workng order, and invariably took the point when it was particularly needed. . Tennis that would not disgrace a Dominion championship anal was produced by RhodesWilliams and Seay when they met in the semi-final round toward the latter part of the afternoon. Seldom do two such superb stylists meet in Canterbury tourneys, and a ""'y large gallerv was fully appreciative of the beautiful tennis. Rhodes-Williams, although trailing several times, always appeared to hi-ve the upper hand, being much surer in his shots than Seay. The latter has, at his best, plaved better tennis, but very little, ana the ex-Wellington man's win lifts him to the verv first flight of players in Canterbury His strokes are produced with the utmost grace and ease, and he has a splendid temperament for big tennis. Hitting acurately to the side-lines and keeping Seay on the move in some beautiful rallies. Rhodes-Williams quickly led 5-1. Seay appeared to find touch at this stage, and speeding up, he i° u e ht back to equalise at 5-all. Seay took the odd game at 6-5, but was unable to maintain, his advantage, dropping the set at 8-6. The second set opened in favour of Rhodes-Williams, who ran to a lead of 3-1. The pace was telling on both players at this stage, and Seay profited by errors on the part of his opponent, taking four games in succession to lead at 5-3. Rhodes-Williams was fighting for every point, and brought off some great recoveries. He drew level at 5-all. Seay again had the odd game, but Rhodes-Williams cracked on the pace, and scoring with beautiful placements, took the Bet and match 8-6, 8-6. Seay suffered towards the end of the match from his own tactical errors. In the lead, he made several unprofitable excursions to the net, while he obtained no advantage from continual play to Rhodes-WilUams's backhand, Seay attempted to rattle his opponent with drop shots. Rhodes-Wil-liams showed himself a master in the art of dealing with such balls in the short court. MEN'S DOUBLES. A very meritorious win was that of S. W. Field and H. S. P. Andrews against B. B. Loughnan and W. R. Robinson. Field volleyed cleverly, but although it was to his generalship that the win was largely due, the greatest credit must go to the young Lin wood plaver, Andrews, for his fine all-round display of driving and volleying. Time and again he passed his opponents with splendid drives. The score was 6-1, 1-6, 6-3, and on the day it was a fair indication of the winners' superiority. The veteran, Goss, and Browning, played vigorous tennis „to extend Rhodes-Williams and Dymond in the quarter-final, going down G-4, 6-4. The winners were just a little too sure, and always had a little in hand. Sound tennis, with a minimum of errors, led Patterson and Johnston through to the semi-final in successive games against Anderson and Searle, whom they defeated 6-2, 7-5, and Field and Andrews, 6-2, 6-4. In the latter game it was Field this time who played tennis that was often brilliant, although he was well supported by Andrews. Patterson and Johnston, however, did not impress as likely to extend the leaders in the other half. Somerville and Tait, whom they meet in the semi-final, are a seasoned doubles pair, who have often accounted for doubles combinations of reputation. Somerville and Tait were little troubled by W. O. Morrison and H. W. Ogier in the quarter-final. Ansa3 and Boddy may. individually, be superior doubles players to Rhodes-Williams and Dymond, but they have not the understanding, bom of considerable practice together, that the latter pair have. That combination would prevail was apparent to the discerning eye almost from the start of the semi-final doubles match, the result of which was a surprise to mo3t followers of the «ame. Rhodes-Williams was brilliant and continually found gaps in the opposite court but he was quite content to leave Dymond his fair share of centre shots. This was where Anitas erred. He far too frequently intercepted balls that Boddy could have dealt with more effectively. Angas and Boddy opened out well in tne first set and took the score to 3-1, their opponents however, making the task difficult. Khodes-Williams, playing carefully and confidently, with his partner ably seconding him. equalised at 3-all. Some exciting volleyinff made the match an interesting one to watch and the net piay of the four was fast and well controlled. Anga3 and Boddy were not combining too well and several points were lost to them through this fault. At 4-all Rhodes-Williams and Dymond took charge of the set, winning the next two games in quick succession with beautifully placed strokes. Dymond at the net made a difficult man to pass, and the combination of the pair left little to be desired. The first two oaru<=3 in the second set were annexed bv Angas and Boddy, but the third game was lost, partlv due to poaching tactics on the part of the former player. RhodesWilliams and Dymond were a little inconsistent at this stage, but their volleying and smashing were a treat to match. Angas ana Boddy "had the advantage of the exchanges in forcing a lead of 4-2. But Rhodes Williams and Dymond came back to take" four games in a row and the match. In the iast stages Boddy was erratic, while the opposing pair thrust with deadly certainty to every opening. Ihay thoroughly deserved their win. Angas and Boddy, the holders of the title, were°a little too strong a pair for the colts, 1 Crawsnaw and lfunn.«, in the semi-final, winning 6-2, 6-2. WOMEN'S SINGLES. Miss Wake advanced to the final oi the singles event witfi little trouDle. Driving in her old consistent style, and varying her plav and tactics to advantage, she disposed oi "iliss G. Kankin with the loss of two games in each set. Mia3 Kankin was steady but lacked enterprise and was content to let Miss Wake play her irom the back hne. On the other side of the draw, Miss M. Andrew was not so impressive. The youn;; piayer, Miss M. Shems gave her ail she wanted as far as driving was concerned, but she had not the accuracy necessary to clinch matters when openings presented themselves. Miss Sherris showed, however, that she has tne, strokes of a champion, and with more practice in good company should soon press the best, in the province. In the semi-final, .Miss Sowden played a valiant game against Misa Andrew and gave a3 good aa she got in long, deep driving rallies.' Realising, however, that Miss Andrew was just a iitle too severe in this department of the game, Mies Sowden made the net ber objective in the second set and had fair success for a time. She was forced into errors, however, and was unable to sustain the advantage these tactics had given her. Mis 3 Andrew won 6-2. 6-3 WOMEN'S DOUBLES Misses Wake and Andrew r roved a good combination in defeating in turn Misses Dallas and Jones and Mrs Crawshaw and Miss N. Smithson, losing only thre-e games in ths two matches. Misa Wake's solid

driving attack made things easy for her partner, who was deadly with anything short at the net. The Dair should not have »nv Qithcuity ia the final. There was plenty of vigour in the game of Misses Sowden and Morrison in defeating Mi3Sea Reed and Sherris in the quarterfinal round Miss Sowden, who excels at the aH-court game, has found a very solid partner in the junior, Miss Morrison, who ery good performance to in her first essay at senior championship tennis.