LAWN TENNIS

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 21050, 29 December 1933, Page 10

LAWN TENNIS

* THE WILDING SHIELD WELLINGTON LEADS ANGAS BEATEN BY FERKINS Canterbury's prospects of success in the Wilding Shield competition received a severe set-back yesterday afternoon at Wilding Park, Wellingfon, holders of the trophy, winning three of the five completed matches of the first day's play and assuming a commanding lead in a doubles match which was interrupted by rain. The defeat of C. Angas. Canterbury champion, by R. McL. Ferkins, second player for Wellington, turned the scale in favour of the holders. In a very close contest Wellington defeatca Auckland m the semi-final of the Nunneley Casket competition, gaining a lead of six matches 14 sets to five matcnes 12 sots, with the third set of one doubles match to be completed. It was a day of disappointment for Canterbury supporters, but the young Wellington team must be given full credit for rising to the occasion and producing their very best tennis—which is certainly not what the Canterbury men did. E. A. Roussell, Wellington's third man. who has been playing very impressive tennis in the shield series, laiu the foundation of his side's success by decisively beating the fourth Canterbury man. W. R. Robinson, who failed completely to reproduce the form, wnich gained him his place in the team. Ferkins's Fighting Game. H. Dymond, third player for Canterbury, was expected to beat R. Howe, another Wellington youngster, fairly easily, but he lost the first set rfter having two set points, and had to play very steadily to win the second and third. The greatest blow to canterbury's chances, however, was tne failure of Angas to beat Fer.dns, in spite of his having four match points in the second set. When he apparently had the match in hand Angas seemed to become a little careless, and lost his chances on errors rather than on Ferkins's good play. The Wellington man is net one with whom liberties can be taken; he is too sure and persistent in his play for that. Ferkins seems to have spent most ol his time since coming to Christchurch in winning sets from 2-5, and he has snown himself to be one of the most determined fighters in New Zealand tennis. Angas should have realised the dangerous potentialities in the Wellington man's play when he had to v.-ork hard to win the first set at 8-6 after leading 5-2. At a similar score in the second set Angas led 40-15, but he twice came to the net behind easy balls and missed the volleys. Shortly afterwards he netted a forehand return of service at match point when trying to hit a winner down the sideline. Once Ferkins had saved the game he appeared to lake a new lease of life. Angas was hitting accurately from, corner to corner, but Ferkins retrieved brilliantly time and again, and he not only got the ball back but returned it with added speed and with admirable control. Ho took five successive games to win the second set, and had the odd game—curious enough, against service—all through the third, until finally he won his service and the match in the tenth game, lie was given an ovation for his plucky recovery and resolute play by iri'_ large c < jv/d tnat watched the .match. Baractt Misses Chances. The other Wilding Shield matches went according to expectations. C. E. ivialiroy, Wellington's first man, beat 11. i\. Barnett in straight sets, although the latter had three set points hi' b.c'jnu. .oariictt troubled lviailroy for a period with slow, sliced shots to the corners, and as usual prayed an excellent deiensive game. He had a gooa chance to win the seconu set at a-3 ana 40-30, but he hit a smasii half-heartedly into an open court ana lvtauroy caught him at nis icet wmi the return, /uigas and Barnett were too last for xioussell and Howe in the douoits, which tney won witn the loss oj: only tour games, but iviaiiroy ana ii erkins were well on' the way to victory against Dymonu anu jtiooinson wneti ram interrupted play, •jine Wellington men had won tne lirsc get 6-2 anu tne score was one-all in me seconu. An Exciting Finish. There was an exciting finish to the Nunneley uasKCt inatcn between Wellington and AucKiand. When the seconu doubles mai.cn between Misses M. Whyte and C. *'. Whisker (.Wellington) arid Mrs E. Napier and Miss j. ji. Ramsay (Auckland) was commenced the position was that Wellington required one set to ensure victory. A straight-set win for Auckland wouid have necessitated a decision .on games. The Wellington players lost the lirst set, but played very steadily in ihe second to secure the necessary set. Mrs H. M. Dykes, Wellington's first piayer, had the lmisn tnat ivnss D. Nicholls lacked in her game against the tenacious Miss Macfarlane on the first day, and u)d not permit tne Aucklander to prolong the rallies as she i had done in that marathon match. Mrs Dykes hit hard and powerfully throughout, and although she was down 3-5 in the first sec she had little difficulty in saving the position and winning. 7-5, 6-4. She sv/ept the corners with drives of perfect length, j and lost no opportunity of following j into the net to end the rallies witn i powerful smashes or angled volleys, j Miss Nicholls was stroking too j evenly for Miss D. Newton and lost i only two games, but, as on the first j day, the third and lourth Auckland ! players, Miss J. E. Ramsay and Mrs E. 1 Napier, equalised by winning their j singles, this time against Misses M. j Whyle and C. I l '. Whisker respectively. | Mrs Dykes and Miss Nicholls were j much the more polished doubles pair j in their match against Misses Maefar- j lane and Newton, dominating the play from the net. To-day the match between Canterbury and Wellington for the Wilding Shield will be continued, and the home team must win four of the six matches to have a chance of success. The final of the Nunneley Casket competition between Wellington and Canterbury will also be commenced, concluding tomorrow, when the New Zealand championship tournament will open. The Scores. The results of yesterday's play were as follows; WILDING SHIELD. Wellington v. Canterbury. Singles. C. E. Malfroy (Wellington beat 11. A. Barnett (Canterbury), 6-1. 7-5. R. McL. Ferkins (Wellington) beat C. Angas (Canterbury), 6-8, 7-5, 6-4. E. A. Roussell (Wellington) beat W. R. Robinson (Canterbury). 6-3, 6-3. I-I. Dymond (Canterbury) beat 11. Howe i,Wellington), 6-<i, 6-3, 6-1. Doubles. Angas and Barnett. (Canterbury) beat Roussell and Howe (Wellington), 6-1. 6-3. Malfroy and Ferkins (Wellington) v. Dymond and Robinson (Canterbury), 6-2, 1-1 (unfinished). Totals—Wellington, 3 matches, 8 sets; Canterbury. 2 matches, 5 sets.

| NUNNELEY CASKET. | Wellington v. Auckland. j Singles. I Mrs H. M. Dykes (Wellington) bent j Miss M. Macfarlane (Auckland), 7-5, 6-4. Miss D. Nicholls (Wellington) beat Miss D. Newton (Auckland), 0-2, G-0. Miss J. E. Ramsay (Auckland) beat Miss M. Whyte (Wellington), 1-6, 7-5, 6-2. Mrs E. Napier (Auckland) beat Miss C. F. Whisker (Wellington), 6-3, 6-3. Doubles. Mrs Dykes and Mis:; Nicholls (Wellington) beat Misses Macfarlane and Newton (Auckland*, '5-3, 6-4. Misses Whyle and Whisker (Wellington) v. Mrs Napier and Miss .Ramsay (Auckland), 4-6, 6-4, 2-1 (unfinished). Totals—Wellington, 6 matches, 14 sets; Auckland, 5 matches, 12 sets. NOTES ON THE PLAY Ferkins's Fine Performance. Because so much of his success is due to his ability to keep the ball in play and consistently return difficult balls, R. McL. Ferkins has generally been an under-rated player. He is, however, much more than a stonewaller. His well-controlled ground strokes are fairly severe, particularly when he is pressed, and he is an extremcly eiliciont vollcyer. He fully extended Angas in the New Zealand championships last year, and he has evidently improved since. His performances in Hie present series of matches certainly entitled him to a New Zealand ranking. Against Angas hj" won because he was able continually to return the Canterbury's man's severe corncr-to-corner driving, and because ho chose unerringly the opportunity to turn defence into attack. Whenever Angas's driving became at all short Ferkins hit hard to the corners and followed to the net. Again if Angas advanced to the net on anything but a ball of immaculate length he found Ferkins's passing shots so low and close to the lines that he was unable to volley effectively. Ferkins also used the lob with skill, and as Angas was not at all certain overhead, the Wellington man frequently escaped from trouble in this manner. An Untiring Retriever. Ferkins was untiring in the zeal with which he chased from sideline to sideline or from the net to the back of the court. Angas's tactics in hitting to alternate corners we're of doubtful value, for Ferkins did not seem to tire in spite of all his running, and he generally knew in advance the direction of his opponent's shots. A return to the corner from which Ferkins was running would probably have been more effective. Angas did not seem as decisive in his ,'lav as he has been recently, but this is accounted for in some measure by the agility of his opponent. But the fact remains that the Canterbury man missed innumerable scoring chances, including several "sitters" at the net. Ferkins made a great fight of the first set after ';eing down' 2-5. He was helped by one or two careless shots on the part of Angas, who managed to take the set 8-6. The match seemed as good as over when Angas led 5-2 and 40-15 in the second set. He failed to clinch the opportunity, however, and Ferkins saved four match points before winning the set 7-5. In the third set neither player won his service until Ferkins lor] 5-4. There were many long and hard rallies, but the Wellington man ;jvas the steadier at the crucial points. Malfroy Beats Harnett. C. E. Malfroy's speed was too much for H. A. Barnett in the first set ot their singles match, but the Canterbury man succeeded in slowing down the play in the second set, and thereafter the match, was contested on even terms. Malfroy was hard pressed when Barnett, leading 5-3, had set point, and several times had to fall back on lobbing to save the game. On one occasion Barnett had only to smash a fairly short ball into Malfroy's open forehand court to take the set. but he played the shot semidefensively and Malfroy sent the return to an impossible position at Barnett's feet. Up to this point Barnett had played excellent tennis in this set. He returned the best of Malfroy's services and drives, and opened up the court with good cross-court forehands and a sliced backhand shot down the sideline. Malfroy found that he could not take liberties in his approaches to the net, for Barnett's passing shots were a model of accuracy. After Malfroy had saved the three set points at 3-5 he again speeded up his game and took the match with a series of per-fectly-executel volleys and smashes, many of them off exceedingly difficult returns. Robinson Disappoints. W. R. Robinson's display against E. A. Roussell was very disappointing. The Wellington youth is invariably a quick starter, his flat-hit shots being most effective when the balls arc new. Robinson, coming to the net on shots that did not carry enough speed, found himself passed on either hand with perfectly-placed drives, and this appeared to sap his confidence. Roussell quickly went to a five-love lead, and although Robinson, speeding up his driving a little, took three games and should have won a fourth, the Wellington man took the set, 6-3. Again in the second set Roussell held the big lead of 5-1, Robinson gaining! two more games before the Wellington player took the set and match. Roussell served, drove, and when on the defensive lobbed, very well, and his occasional excursions to the net were always well-timed and profitable. A Canterbury Success. The game between 11. Dymond (Canterbury) and R. Howe (Wellington) was a good exhibition of two players who made the act their objective throughout and provided Canterbury with its sole success in the singles. Dymond won (i-.'J, 6-1. Dymond Jo.st many points in the first set through j over-anxiety to attack. He had two set i points, but Howe saved and took I he ' set 8-6. Thereafter. Dymond settled 1 down to a waiting game, com in;; to j the net only when an opportunity : offered tnd relying on Howe to break i down in the long rallies. He took the j second and third sets comfortably. j Dymond was much the steadier j player of the two when lie settled j down, although both were about equal i oji their stroke production. Dymond ; took full advantage of a weakness in I Howe's backhand. A feature of the ! game was Howe's smashing, his kills j l.rom well back in the court (re- j qucntly earning applause. | The Doubles. ; It was a foregone.' conclusion Ibnl i the doubles matches on I he first day ■ would be shared, as the first pair ol j one team met the second pair of its I opponents. Angas and Barnett were ( much too severe in all departments of the game for Roussell and Howe, | and lost only four games. Angas's i hard serving and driving opened up the court for the Canterbury players to volley and smash for winners at the net. Malfroy and Ferkins had a rather harder task against Dymond and Robinson, and although they won the first J set 6-2, practically every game was hard fought. The first three games | alone took nearly 20 minutes to play, j Dymond hit hard all the time, bo.ii.g j into the net, where he frequently outvolleyed Malfroy. Robinson was hardly as good in the short court, but his returns frequently had the Wellington men in difficulty, causing them to make defensive' returns which Dymond cut off at the net. The score was 1-all in the second set, when rain caused an adjournment. Mrs Dykes in Form. Mrs H. M. Dykes (Wellington) and Miss Marjorie Macfarlane (Auckland)

have had so many hard fights in championship tennis that there is always a groat deal of interest in their periodical matches. The former undoubtedly has the must complete i range of strokes possessed by any I woman player in New Zealand, and is I easily the most brilliant exponent of i the all-court game. Mis,; Macfarlane, | on the other hand, relies on an extremely accurate forehand, a safe de- | tensive backhand, and the ability to keep on returning difiieuit shots. Her I persistence has won for her in the past the New Zealand championship, I and she is always an opponent whom | the best oL' players cannot take lightly. Yesterday Mrs Dykes won comfortably from the Auckland player owing I to the severity of her ground shots and the accuracy of her net play. Mis;; Macfarlane is extremely hard to beat from the back line, but Mrs Dykes, hitting good-length balls into either corner, followed to the net, smashing or volleying the Aucklander's defensive returns for clean winners. The latter again retrieved energetically, but found Mrs Dykes's stroking too even and too severe. An Easy Win. Miss D. Nicholls (Wellington) had very little difficulty in her game against Miss D. Newton (Auckland), which she won 6-2, 6-0. Miss Newton was no match for the New Zealand champion, but played well enough to make Miss Nicholls produce some very good tennis. Miss Nicholls impressed throughout the game with the evenness of her placings, and she kept her opponent continually on the defensive. ! Sound Tennis. | Sound although not brilliant tennis i was produced m the game in which Mrs E. Napier (Auckland) beat Miss iC. F. Whisker (Wellington), 6-3, 0-3. • Mrs Napier was very steady all I through, and her placing with crossI court forehand drives was frequently ! a means of winning a point. Miss ' Whisker, who was the harder hitter of the two, was rather more erratic, but her forehand drive was frequently a winner, The rallies were often long, with each player making good recoveries. Mrs Napier's steadiness won her the verdict, her waiting tactics generally producing a breakdown in her opponent. Miss .T. E. Ramsay (Auckland) and Miss M. Whyte (Wellington) also played sound tennis throughout a long and hard match. Miss Whyte took the first set with the loss of only one game, but thereafter Miss Ramsay's chopped and sliced drives became more accurate and severe, and after saving the second set 7-5, the Aucklander went on to take the third 6-2. In the second and third sets Miss Ramsay was steadiness personified, and she very cleverly worked her opponent out of position to score with good shots to the openings. The Decisive Doubles. The decisive game between Misses Whyte and Whisker (Wellington) and Mrs Napier and Miss Ramsay (Auckland) was verv keenly fought, and the Wellington pair gained the set necessary to ensure victory for thenside before rain interfered with play. The games were 2-1 in the third set in favour of Wellington, when play was stopped. Miss Whyte played very steadily, but her partner's decisive net play was the means of gaining them I most points. Miss Whisker's smashing and volleying were excellent. Mrs Napier also put in some effective work at the net, but in the second set judicious lobbing caught the Auckland pair out of position. Mrs Dykes and Miss Nicholis (Wellington) were too good a volleying combination for Misses Newton and Macfarlane (Auckland), against whom they won in straight sets, 6-3, 6-4. Miss Macfarlane played her usual steady game, but lacked sting, and her combination with Miss Newton was not a match for the skill of the Wellington pair, who gave the impression that they could have won more comfortably. Draw for To-day. The following is the draw for today's matches in the Wilding Shield j and Nunncley Casket competitions:— 1.30 p.m.—Completion of unfinished match between Misses Whyte and Whisker (Wellington) and Mrs Napier and Miss Ramsay (Auckland); Miss Nicholls (Wellington) v. Miss Wake (Canterbury); E. A. Roussell (Wellington) v. H. Dymond (Canterbury); R. Howe (Wellington) v. W. R. Robinson (Canterbury). 2.30 p.m.—C. E. Malfroy (Wellington) v. C. Angas (Canterbury); R. McL. Ferkins (Wellington) v. H. A. Barnett] (Canterbury); Mrs Dykes (Wellington) j v. Miss T. Poole (Canterbury). ■ 3.15 p.m.—Other singles and doubles. I

SOUTH CANTERBURY TOURNAMENT

Play in the South Canterbury Lawn Tennis Association's tournament was continued yesterday. The courts were in fair condition when play commenced, but later heavy rain interlered. Results were as follows: CHAMPIONSHIPS MEN'S SINGLES. Third Round. C. H. Minifie beat J. L. Mackay, 10-8, 2-6, (i-4. T. Rhodes-Williams beat W. R. Fea, 6-2, 1-6, 6-3. MEN'S DOUBLES. Third Round. T. Rhodes-Williams and E. A. Pearee beat N. Satterthwaite and T. Morrison, 6-0, 6-3. WOMEN'S SINGLES. Semi-final. Miss N. Sullivan beat Miss R. Rolleston, 6-3, (i-.'i. MIXED DOUBLES. Firs 4 . Round. H. Price and Miss M. Campbell beat O. A. Hignet and Mis.s Boyle by default. L. McKinnon rind Miss M. Ilolleston beat J. Satterlhwai'ic and Miss R. Rolleston. 0-4, 6-4. IJ. I!. Loughnan and Miss Bridges beat K. P. Drew and Miss D. Smythc, 6-2, :j-(i. 6-2. HANDICAPS MEN'S SINGLES. Second Round. J. Miilikui (rev. 2 0) beat L. J. Broughton (owe i;> 2/0). 9-7: F. G. Lewis ' rec. :»■«>_ beat Uicldle (scr), !)-,!; C. il. Mimiie (owe 15) beat E. D. lirou.'.,! ii iHi i owe 15 2 u). 0-2; K. S. Dixon free. 2. 6) bent D. ilighct (.owe i:> 6). 9-5. Third Round. N. Palcheli (scr) beat C. Shenkcn iowe !.')>. !M>; L. Edginton (rcc 15 3/6) beat A. S. Ross (owe 15 2/6). 0-6; R. J. Taylor beat D. Martin by default; F. G. Lewis (rec. 2/6') beat C. McGregor (owe 1/6), 9-1; J. C. McFarlr.nc (rec. 3/6) beat C. 11. Minifie (owe 15), 9-3. MEN'S DOUBLES. Third Round. 1,. J. and E. D. Bioughton 'owe 15) beat R. A. Hoidgate and E. S. Dixon <reC. 2/6), 9-6: L. Kissel and E. McKeague (owe 1/6) beat K. Stewart and R. Pattinson (owe 1/6), 9-6; W. R. Fea and N. S. Cramond (owe 15 4/6) beat D. A. Higher and E. P. Drew (owe 15 4/6), 9-2; E. Biddle and V. Clemens (scr) beat C. McGregor and R. Burdon (owe 2/6), 9-6; G. F. Bridges and N. Patchett beat A. C. Felton and G. H. Hoiford by default. Fourth Round. L. Kissel and E. McKeague (owe 1/6) beat L. J. and E. D. Broughton (owe 15), 9-2. WOMEN'S SINGLES. Second Round. Miss I. Marriott (owe 1/6) beat Miss M. Rolleston (owe 4/6), 9-4; Miss M. Tait (rec. 4/6) beat Miss M. Morrison (owe 15), 9-3.

MIXED DOUBLES. First Round. J. Satterthwaite and Miss R. Rollest.on (owe 30) beat V. Clemens and Miss E. O'Leary (scr), 9-5; J. Milliken and Miss M. Elliot (owe 2/6) beat E. P. Drew and Miss D. Smythe (owe 5/6), 9-7; C. R. Hedges and Miss Torlesse (rec. 3/6; beat F. <T. Green and Miss E. Green (owe 1/6), 9-5. Second Round. R. Lane and Miss L. Dowker (rec. 2/6) beat R. Burdon and Miss M. ' Rolleston (owe 2/6), 9-4; N. S. Cramon d and Mrs Cramond (owe 15 3/6) beat C. R. Hedges and Miss Torlesse free. 3/6), 9-5; P. V. Mangos and Miss H. Thomson (rec. 4/6) beat L. McKin--non and Miss V. O'Leary (owe 2/6), 9-5; L. J. Broughton and Miss IVf Morrison (owe 15) beat R. Wilson and Miss Sutherland (o>ve 3/6), 9-8; E. D. Broughton and Miss J. Brewer (owe 15) beat A. Provan and Miss Brace- . field (rec. 1/6), 9-4.