LAWN TENNIS C. W. Pritchard Wins Men’s Singles Final

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28728, 28 October 1958, Page 18

LAWN TENNIS C. W. Pritchard Wins Men’s Singles Final

C. W. Pritchard, top ranked player in Canterbury, won the men’s singles at the Canterbury Lawn Tennis Association’s Labour weekend tournament when he beat a very promising junior, G. Moss, in a grand final at Wilding Park yesterday. Pritchard won 7-5, 7-5 after an enthralling struggle and Moss was far from disgraced in defeat.

Pritchard, runner-up in this tournament last year when he was beaten by the then New Zealand junior champion, R. Welsh, was seeded first but Moss was unseeded. Aged 18 and a pupil at the Linwood High School, Moss has been a member of the provincial Slazenger Shield junior team for the last two years and has had some successes in junior tournaments but this was his greatest success to date. But Pritchard by his steadiness proved a difficult opponent. Since he came to Christchurch from Dunedin two seasons ago he has seldom played a bad game. Last season he won the men’s singles at the Show week-end and Easter tournaments. The women’s singles was won by the former New Zealand junior champion, Miss J. Davidson, who beat Miss C. Smith, of Rangiora, 4- 6-0, 6-3. Miss Davidson is at present doing a third year in physical education at the Dunedin Training College, and although she appeared a little out of practice she still has a very fine basic game. Play yesterday was marred by the strong easterly and players had great difficulty in keeping the balls in court. The men, especially, gave a fine display in the conditions. Different Games The men’s finalists produced games of a different nature with Moss attacking all the time but not as consistent as his opponent. He took the net at every opportunity and brought off some brilliant volleys and recoveries. Too often after fighting hard for a point he let himself down, with a simple error. Moss was full of determination and energy and his coverage of the court was fine. His backhand recoveries were outstanding features of his game. Some of his* volleys to the open court left Pritchard standing. Pritchard, on the other hand, was as cool as usual and he did far less running. He hit cleanly with good control and made the fewer errors. Pritchard was not as spectacular as Moss but he was surer, his stroking was very clean and he made fewer errors. Generally in matches between leading men players service breaks decide the issue but in this match, perhaps because of the wind, it was the other way round. In the first set neither won his service until the eighth game and then it was Moss who went to a 5- lead. However, Pritchard then won four games in succession although Moss survived three set points in the last. Pritchard, therefore held his service twice to Moss’s once and that was decisive. In the second set Pritchard held service first in the fifth game for a 3-2 lead and they both then held service until Pritchard won

Moss’s in the twelfth for a 7-5 win.

Women’s Final In the final of the women’s singles Miss Davidson, essentially an attacking player with a lot of power in her shots showed admirable restraint in slowing down her game in the strong wind when she found that hard shots were drifting out in the first set. She began the match with purpose and won the first two games in quick time but then lost touch when her hard hitting brought many errors. At the same time Miss Smith was coolly returning shot after shot from the baseline. Miss Davidson then changed the nature of her play and concentrated on keeping the ball in and scoring with placement rather than pace. After losing the first set, 4-6 she went through the second set without the loss of a game. At times she even served underarm to avoid double faults from the wind catching her usually brilliant overarm service. Miss Smith did not have the same ability to cope with the wind and her anticipation was lacking. She did not move to the ball quickly enough and several of Miss Davidson’s returns of service were well out of her opponent’s reach. Miss Smith, however, played some good drives and was successful with several sorties to the net. Miss Davidson drew steadily ahead again in the third set to lead 5-2 and she held three match points before she lost the game on Miss Smith’s service. Miss Smith at that stage showed determination to avoid defeat and kept trying desperately in the next to keep the match alive. But Miss Davidson finished on a high note to win ttye set 6-3. Misses Smith and Davidson, seeded first for the doubles, went on for the doubles final almost immediately after they had completed their singles. They were beaten comfortably by Misses B. Blackburn and K. Williams, 6-1, 6- The winners played very competently, making fewer errors and hitting more winners by forcing their opponents out of position. Some of their recoveries were outstanding. Thom’s good service and Moss’s net play gave them a win in the final of the men’s doubles against Pritchard and Burton. The two junior players made a good combination of hard hitting and placement. Results:— Men’s Singles Semi-final.—G. Moss beat M. C. Healey, 6-4, 6-3. Final.—C. W. Pritchard beat Moss, 7- 7-5. Women’s Singles Final. —Miss J. Davidson beat Miss C. Smith, 4-6, 6-0, 6-3. Men’s Doubles Second Round.—G. Moss and W. Thom beat B. Judge and L. Walpole, 5-7, 6-3, 7-5. Semi-final. —Moss and Thom beat M. C. Healey and P. Alexander, 6-4, 2-6. 7-5. Final.—Moss and Thom beat C. Pritchard and G. A. Burton, 6-4, 6-4. Women’s Doubles First Round.—Misses P. Andrews and N. Behrnes beat Misses J. Hatch and S. Mackay, 3-6, 6-4, 6-3; Misses B. Blackburn and K. Williams beat Misses B. Mollison and J. Mollison, 5-7, 7-5, 6-4. Semi-finals.—Misses J. Davidson and C. Smith beat Misses Andrews and Behrnes. 6-3, 6-4; Misses Blackburn and Williams beat Misses L. Mardon and K. Brander, 6-3, 13-11. Final.—Misses Blackburn and Williams heat Misses Davidson and Smith, 6-1, 6-3.