NATIONAL TENNIS TOURNEY

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22317, 3 February 1938, Page 6

NATIONAL TENNIS TOURNEY

♦ ANGAS BEATEN BY PATTINSON THREE AUCKLANDERS IN MEN’S SEMI-FINALS GOOD PROGRESS MADE IN DOUBLES (PRESS ASSOCIATION TELEUBAM.) AUCKLAND, February 2. Another surprise occurred in the men s singles during to-day’s play in the New. Zealand lawn tennis championships. This was the defeat of C. Angas, Canterbury’s No. 1 player, by R. G. Pattinson, who is ranked No, 8 on the same provincial list. Pattinson won in five sets. A. D. Brown was taken to four sets by J. W, Gunn, and A. C. Stedman and J. T. Mayson won m straight sets from the two Wellington representatives, D. G. France and N. F. Bedford, respectively. Pattinson will play Stedman in one semi-final to-morrow and Brown will play Mayson in the other. Miss M. Beverley, holder of the Auckland title, was taken to three sets by Miss Cooke, and her sister, Miss N. Beveilej, won a thrcc-set contest against Bishop. Miss Miller and Miss Plummci both won in straight sets. In to-niorrow s semi-finals Miss Miller will meet Miss NBeverley, and Miss Plummer will piay Miss M.' Beverley. , ~ ~ , Good progress was made in all sections of doubles and several matches were also decided in the men’s and women s plate competitions. The weather was again line and warm, with a strong north-easterly wind, which caused small clouds of dust to rise liom the worn service lines. Results (the names being those ot Aucklanders unless otherwise stated) MEN’S SINGLES QUARTER-FINALS Stedman beat France (Wellington), 6-4, Pattinson (Canterbury) beat Angas (Canterbury), 6-4, 3-6. 4-6. 6-2, 6-0. Brown beat Gunn, 2-6, 6-4, 6-1, 7-5. Mayson beat Bedford (Wellington), 6-1, 7-5, 8-6. WOMEN’S SINGLES QUARTER-FINALS Miss D. Miller (North Otago) beat Miss Macfarlanc. 6-3, 6-1. , , , ... c Miss N. Beverley (Matamata) beat Miss Bishop, 6-1, 1-6, 10-8. , T Miss Plummer (Wellington) beat Miss I. Poole (Canterbury), 9-7, 6-3. Miss M. Beverley (Matamata) beat Miss Cooke, 6-3, 7-9, 6-2. MEN’S DOUBLES SECOND ROUND Stedman and Coombe (Wellington) beat Richardson and Stevens (Poverty Bay), 6-0. 6-8, 6-2. Livingstone and J. Roach (Waikato) beat Brown and Butler, 6-2, 4-6. 0-7, 6-2. Pattinson and Penlold (Canterbury) beat O'Connor and Renouf (Wellington), 6-3. 6- 6-3. > Bedford and Edwards (Wellington) beat Lampe (Wanganui) and Sharpe (Hawke’s Bay), 6-3, 6-4, 8-G. R. Ferkins and Roussell (Wellington) beat Charters and Dyer (Wellington), 7- 9-7, 6-4. THIRD ROUND France (Wellington) and Sturt beat M. Ferkins and Pearce (Wellington), 6-C, 6-3, 6-4. WOMEN’S DOUBLES QUARTER-FINALS Misses Poole (Canterbury) beat Mrs France (Wellington) and Miss Butab (Australia), 6-2, 6-2. Misses Bishop and Cooke beat Misses Plummer (Wellington) and Glenny (Hawke’s Bay), 6-4, 9-7. Misses Beverley (Matamata) beat Misses Macfarlane and Taylor, 7-5, 6-2. MIXED DOUBLES * SECOND ROUND Prance and Mrs France (Wellington) beat 'Turner and Mrs Shroff, 6-4, 6-1. Bold (Wellington) and Miss Miller (North Otago) beat Dickie and Miss Dickie, 6-3, 8-6. Penfold and Miss D. Dickey (Canterbury) beat Knott and Miss Bubb (Australia), 6-4, 4-6, 2-5. Tire latter pair defaulted. THIRD ROUND R. W. Smith and Miss Cooke beat E. Dickie (Taranaki) and Miss Griffiths .6-4, 6-3. Dyer (Wellington) and Miss N. Beverley (Matamata) beat Falconer (Otago) and Mrs Cotterill (Hawke’s Bay), 6-2, 6-3. Sturt and Miss M. Macfarlane beat Lowry and Mrs Lilburn (Hawke’s Bay), 6-1, 6-1. Pearce and Miss Plummer (Wellington) beat Pattinson and Miss Armstrong (Canterbury). 6-2, 6-3. Wilson and Miss Stewart beat Stedman and Miss B. Stedman, 6-4, 7-5. NOTES ON THE PLAY (PHESS ASSOCIATION TELEGRAM.) AUCKLAND, February 2. In the men’s singles Stedman began poorly, and was erratic for four games against France, but settled down in the fifth and began a formidable attack, with fast, good-length drives to the back corners of the base-line. Stedman was down 0-40 on his own serve. He then scored two aces, but not the game. France kept an erratic length, but skilfully placed, and at four-all neither had much advantage in the rallies. Stedman, however, hit harder in the next two games and gave France little chance to place, taking the first set 6-4. The second set was in the nature of a procession, the Wellington veteran being unable to cope with Stedman's attack. The six games of the set were a series of fast placements, hit with a flick of the wrist and making speed off the court. In the third set France battled gamely, but could only take two games. The Auckland champion. Brown, the day before had strained his abdominal muscles by over-reaching on a smash, and for the first set against Gunn to-day was inconvenienced to some extent. However, Gunn hit out splendidly, winning three games in a row by the excellence of his overhead work. He continued the attack on Brown's backhand. Brown hit harder In the eighth game in an attempt to retrieve the set, but made two errors, and could not return a beautifully-directed lob. The second set was more evenly contested, both playing well, but with Brown steadily becoming more severe. The games alternated to 5-4. Gunn kept the ball admirably under control, but his weaker second service gave Brown many easy balls with which to hit winners. A close set ended in favour of Brown, 6-4. Brown Wins Final Set Brown hit hard in the third set, but although he took it at 6-1, jt was by no means one-sided. Gunn appeared to tire, and did not put the same vim into his shots as in the first two sets. After the interval Brown ran to a two-love lead, but, refreshed, Gunn then won two games to even. Some brilliant forehand placements gave Brown the next two games, but again Gunn fought well. The match went to five-gll, when Brown won the eleventh game to love on his own service, a splendidly retrieved lob from an apparent ace being the chief feature. Brown had match point at 6-5, and made no mistake with a passing shot down the side-line to win. Angas and Pattinson drew a good gallery, and the spectators were rewarded by spectacular tennis, the youthful lefthander being heartily applauded for winning the opening set after trailing, 1-4. Pattinson thereafter kept the 1929-1931 national champion on the defensive, and at that stage (the end of the first set) appeared to have Angas’s measure. But Angas is never beaten until the umpire leaves the chair, and in the second set he did not give his opponent a chance of recovery from another bad position. Again Angas made the pace in the third set, which he won to lead 2-1 at the interval. Pattinson was troubled by a cross-wind, missing many easy shots. Angas slumped badly when the match was resumed, and Pattinson showed marked Improvement. He struck a better length, and went into the net to make many spectacular winners. He overwhelmed Angas in the fifth set, in which Angas won only seven points.

Mayson Beals Bedford Mayson, driving hard and placing well, bustled Bedford, who seemed to lack confidence in his openers, and was faulty in judgment. Bedford brightened up to take the next game of the set, depending on net lobs to catch Mayson off his guard on two or three occasions. Mayson, however, had too many tricks in his bag, and look the next two games and the set, 6-1. In the second set Mayson look the opening game, but Bedford was playing bright tennis, and, placing tricky shots, equalised in the next, but could not hold Mayson, who adopted crafty tactics and set traps to catch Bedford happing. Though Bedford played brilliant tennis and took a new lease of life for the rest of play, the second set went to Mayson. 7-5. The third set was the hardest-fought of all, and at several stages Bedford looked like winning. At the first match point Bedford saved the situation with a magnificent back-hand drive, the finest stroke of the match, but the end was near, for Mayson, unperturbed, continued his attack, and the final rally caused Bedford to out in an attempt to retrieve a clever passing shot. Women’s Matches Special interest was taken in the match ] between Misses M. Beverley and P. Cooke ] in the quarter-finals of the women’s singles. Miss Cooke had given her opponent a hard match in the Auckland championships last week, and .repeated the performance to-day. Miss Cooke won the first two games of the deciding set. but she then lost her grip on the match by continuing to try for winners when a more careful policy would probably have paid her better. The contest between Misses Miller and Macfarlane was one of steady driving from the back lines, a succession of rallies, and long games almost entirely devoid of pace. Miss Miller made some strong drives on the forehand, and her variation of direction caused her opponent a great deal of running about. Miss N. Beverley scored a meritorious win over Miss Bishop, but it was only after a long struggle. Miss Beverley had two match points off her own service at 5-3 in the final set, but was foiled with her net attack by safe lobbing. Playing a fine uphill game. Miss Bishop drew to five-all. From then on the games were won alternately, with Miss Beverley always holding the lead in the odd game. She lost another match point at 8-7 on her own service, and two more at 9-8, before clinching the set and the match. Miss Plummer (Wellington) scoped a good win over Miss I. Poole (Canterbury) jn a spectacular game, in which both demonstrated cleverness in variation of direction and length. Nearly cvpry game was keenly contested, and although Miss Poole used every endeavour, she was unable to manoeuvre her opponent out of position to end most rallies. PATTIN SON’S WIN OVER ANGAS SKILFUL PLACEMENT AND CHANGE OF PACE DISPLAYS OF CANTERBURY PLAYERS ixne PRESS Special Serylcc.J AUCKLAND, February 2. As the national tennis tournament advances. Uis easier to judge how much Stedman has improved sine lie last, played in singles here, the most noticeable features being his ability to maintain such a good length at a high speed- He has yet to make full use of his height in service, but the placing of his service lias greatly improved, and the severity of his forehand cross-court is unequalled in this country. Pattinson created a mild sensation by beating C. Angas, ranked seven above him on the Canterbury ladder. The day before Pattinson had eliminated another seeded player—Edwards (Wellington)—in three sets, which in itself was no mean feat. The hard Auckland courts seem to suit Pattinson’s style, although he did not use pace to beat Angas, but rather accurate placements and change of pace. The first set opened quietly, with Angas forging ahead with general all-court play to lead 4-1. He slackened in his game at this stage and permitted his opponent to get to his drives and gradually strengthen his game till lie levelled at 4-all and could not be stopped, winning the next two games by placement which completely surprised Angas. Angas took no liberties in the second and third sets, but concentrated on the net. Pattinson stroked perfectly but made unpermissible errors when he had easy chances. Down 1-5. he won two games, but could not take the set. In the third set Angas pressed home his advantage, but Pattinson was unperturbed and won four games. After the interval Pattinson jumped quickly to a four-love lead, but then dropped two games. The temporary reverse did not upset him. In fact, his court presence throughout has been excellent, and he maintained a genial face at all times. Angas made two careless errors in the eighth game, and cared little about the next two points, losing the game to love, and the match was two sets all. The Final Set The fifth set was a triumph for the younger player, who was plainly more fit than Angas at this stage and set out by clever variation of length and pace of shot to make Angas run. He exploited the chop shot to advantage, and as Angas came in coolly passed him down the line or across the court at will. Angas was plainly worried and won two points only in the first three games. Pattinson continued to make all the play. Angas was not at all his old self, and was very tired. In the fourth game Angas was 0-40 on his own service and lost it to 15. The fifth game was marked by brilliant service placements, and Pattinson won this to love. He gave the crowd an excellent exhibition of variety jn the last game, and was again a winner to love. Angas could get only seven points in the Pattinson should gain great experience when he meets Stedman on Friday in one semi-final. There are many players who could profit to advantage by this player’s ability to forget immediately his past mistakes and not allow the loss of a "sitter” to lessen his control of the next point. Miss I. Poole was fortunate in not being scratched, as she was 40 minutes late in arriving at the courts. Some very good and heady play was seen in her meeting with Miss I. Plummer. Although both remained for the most part in the back of the court, they varied the direction of their driving on either hand. Shortangled shots scored many winners for Miss Plummer. Miss Plummer lost her service, but pulled up from 0-40 to take her opponent’s service. A Tense Struggle The second round of the men’s doubles was completed without surprise. Stedman and Coombe won without much opposition, and proved fan too good for Richardson and Stevens. Penfold and Pattinson combined well and played many crisp volleys. They will have a more difficult task to-morrow when they meet Wilson and Smith, The Canterbury pair gave an impressive performance in the Auckland championships last week, and may not be easily disposed of. The title-holders, Roussell and Ferkins, played accurately and with some overhead brilliance. The Mixed Doubles In the mixed doubles, play was quiet Knott and Miss Bubb were leading 5-2 in the third set from Penfold and Miss Dickey when they defaulted, Knott having to return to Australia to-morrow. Wilson and Miss Stewart were too good if or Stedman and Miss Stedman. The winners directed all their attack towards Miss Stedman, who did not play as well as she did in the previous round. Misses T. and I. Poole, holders of the New Zealand women’s doubles title, had little difficulty in winning in straight sets from Mrs France and Miss Bubb. The winners showed all-round superiority and general understanding. In their ground shots, volleying, and overhead work they were equally clean and effective. They will encounter more serious opposition tomorrow when they meet Misses Bishop and Cooke. Three. Canterbury players were in the match between Misses Gould and Miller and Armstrong and Dickey. Al! four are South Islanders, as Miss Miller comes from North Otago. After leading 4-1 in the first set, the younger players lost much of their accuracy and the set went against them. Displaying excellent combination, together with superior volleying and overhead work. Misses Armstrong and Dickey pulled up from 1-3 in the second set and ran to a 5-3 lead. Just at this critical stage, however, they began to make more errors than their experienced opponents. Both appeared over-anxious to finish off rallies and they drove out or netted some half-court lobs. They had set point at 5-4 on Miss Armstrong’s service, , but were then unable to press home their advantage. It was a dour struggle from then on. the younger girls delighting the onlookers with some brilliant shots. They lacked the steadiness and consistency of their opponents, however, and eventually lost an advantage in the second set and match. Miss Dickey played better tennis than at any previous stage of the tourney, and her partner again gave evidence of her ability.