LAWN TENNIS New Professionals Make Good Start

Press, Volume C, Issue 29402, 3 January 1961, Page 7

LAWN TENNIS New Professionals Make Good Start

This season 5 , visit by a troupe of Kramer’s professional tennis players to Christchurch was notable not °nly for about six hours of good-quality tennis but also for several interesting sidelights and some little surprises.

There was some discussion last week as to which of the three singles could be termed the “feature” match of the afternoon. It was thought by some that the clash between Richard Gonzales and Alex Olmedo would be the one deserving of this label. In the event this turned out to be the least interesting of the three as a match and the meeting between Lewis Hoad, a lion in professional reputation, and the 20-year-old Earl Buchholz, a comparative lamb, was quite the most enthralling.

At the end of the day's work, Gonzales, Hoad, and Barry Mackay had made moves towards the main incentive bonuses of 35,000, 35,000 and 20.000 dollars. In the first singles, Mackay beat Andres Gimeno. 8-6, 10-8, then Gonzales beat Olmedo, 6-4. 5-1, and Hoad beat Buchholz, 1-6, 11-0, 7-5. The matches at Wilding Park on Saturday were the first in a series that will take the players around the world until March. Christchurch may consider itself honoured that it was singled out for the beginning of a tour but the marches also possibly suffered a little from being the first ones. Professional tennis players, because their stroke production and court strategy are getting so near to perfect, have a quest for cutting errors to a minimum and they emphasise this in their interviews. They call it "percentage error” tennis. But the percentages on Saturday were in some cases

quite high. Hoad, especially, was more prone to mistakes than he was in either of his previous appearances in Christchurch and it was not surprising later to hear him say ,in reply to a question as to what he was going to do on Sunday, that he was going to practise. Place For Ground Shot Also, their matches proved that although their tennis is essentially of the serve-volley type—the service by far the most important stroke —there is also a place for the ground shot. Thss was brought out most by Gonzales who, although he did not serve an ace and who actually won fewer points with volley placements than Olmedo did, had 14 ground shot placements to Olmedo's two. Admitedly several of these ground shot winners were on return of service and so did not lead to a rally in the old-fashioned sense of the term.

However, when Gonzales and Mackay played two games as a demonstration of the three-bounce rule—after the service the ball must land in court and be hit three times before it can be volleyed—it was obviously completely foreign to their instincts and play usually broke down before it got to the volleying Stage anyway. Although two games was hardly a fair test, it was also doubtful if it was as good to watch as their natural game.

For Christchurch enthusiasts the Slayers could have been divided ite three classes—Gonzales and Hoad, who are experienced professionals and who have appeared here twice each before; Gimeno and Olmedo, who are comparatively new professionals and who were here for the first time; and Mackay and Buchholz, who were playing their first professional matches. World's Best

Gonzales undoubtedly gave evidence that he is still the world’s best tennis player: Hoad was not at his brilliant best but he showed patches of that brilliance and no doubt will still be chasing Gonzales for the world title. Olmedo, who has had rather a hard time as a professional, was rather erratic; Gimeno perhaps has not the power of some of the others but he had a fine touch and subtleties in his game which make up for it. The last group was the most impressive. Mackay and Buchholz had nothing to be ashamed of and a lot to be proud of in their professional debuts and although they were not even considered the world’s top amateurs. they did not look outclassed in Saturday's company. This series will tell The centre court at Wilding Park was in good order but the rain of the previous two days had taken the sting out of it considerably. It was a pity that the professionals were not able to play on a court in the magnificent condition that the two on either side of it were for the first three days of the Canterbury championships last week. The crowd was about 1600 and the gate takings were £1023. Of this the Canterbury Lawn Tennis Association expects to get between £2OO and £3OO. Hoad v. Buchholz The tell, determined young player from St. Louie. Buchholz, went very close to beating the meet redoubtable player he hag met in his career at his first professional appearance Once or twice in the geeond set he was only a point away from getting the service break which would have required him to held his own service to win the match- • Hoad took the first game of the first set on Buchholz’s service but from then on the American romped through the set against a player who was a pale shadow of the usual Hoad. Buchholz won his own three services after the first and took three of Hoad’s. With a very wide stance against Hoad's powerful deliveries. he returned service beautifully and he made few errors for • 8-1 set. in about IS minutes. At the beginning of the second set it was obvious that Hoad was

going to tighten up and start to battle. In the first game two terrific serves down the centre-line had Buchholz flummoxed and the Australian showed that he could produce extra power to win when he was down. But Buchholz held on tenaciously and he got the first break in the fifth game to lead, 3-2. whereupon Hoad immediately broke back again for 3-3. Hoad was down on his service at 4-4, 6-6 and 7-7 but produced real power to recover each time and he served six aces to Buchholz's none in this set. In the end it was the younger player who cracked when he played a couple of loose shots at 9-10 for Hoad to take the set, 11-9. However, Buchholz's concentration had lapsed only momentarily and at the beginning of the third set he was again matching Hoad serve for serve. He had an advantage again in this set when he broke Hoad's service to lead, 4-3, but Hoad recovered to break service and even at, 5-5, with some sizzling returns of service. Hoad again got the deciding break for 7-5. Buchholz served competently, placed intelligently, hit more ground

shot winners than Hoad and was well ahead on smashes, some beautifully produced while running back. For two games in the second set he did not serve a fault.

But the stocky, powerful Hoad gradually raised his game and showed he could produce the extra brilliance when it was needed. Statistics of the match show that after hitting twice as many errors as Buchholz in the first set, Hoad hit fewer into the net and a few more out than Buchholz in the second set, and hit about the same number out but only half as many to net as Buchholz in the third. At times he was well up to his known standard, with an unhittable service, a whipped topspun forehand, a punched backhand return of service, but it was touch and go for him in this struggle of about an hour and 40 minutes. Mr. A. B. McCallum was umpire. Gonzales v. Olmedo Although he began in rather desultory fashion, Gonzales was eventually much too good for the Peruvian. Olmedo, and was almost the complete master of his trade. With close-cropped black hair and slightly-pidgeon-toned walk. Olmedo was very springy on his feet and he covered the court fairly well. He served with a lot of body twist and the deliveries curved severely in the air; he had a deceptive volley which went in the unexpected direction. But he did not have enough with which to back serve and volley.

It was in the return of Olmedo’s service that Gonzales showed that he has no peer. Even the best of them appeared to trouble him little as he returned them to awkward positions. Sometimes he scored a winner in the obvious opening; at others he scored in openings that few would have realised were there and he made the whole process look so effortless.

An example of this ease of play was in smash. He only used the stroke once in each set. There was no body effort in the shot at all; it was just a movement of the arm which put the ball away to exactly the right place and well out of reach. His anticipation was uncanny for he seemed to know before it was hit where the shot was going to go. Gonzales actually lost his service in the first set to be 2-4 down and this was annoying enough to make him hit the ball away and immediately to speed up his play. From then Olmedo won only one more game—the third in the second set on his own service. Gonzales played hard and dourly and more than any of the others he has the unfailing concentration which shuts out everything else and leads him to thousands of dollars. The brilliance of his game was not typified better than in the last point when a backhand return of a good service just cleared the net and dipped to Olmedo’s feet as he moved in. Olmedo had no chance. Mr B. R. McCallum was umpire. Mackay v. Gimeno The match between Mackay, from Salt Lake City, and the Spaniard. Gimeno, from Barcelona, was very much a contest between a power player and a touch player and the latter was not quite well enough in touch to win. The American made the more errors but he also hit the more winners and he finished the match on a very high note. In the whole match, Mackay netted 41 times to Gimeno’s 25 and he hit out 18 times to Gimeno’s 15; but he hit 24 ground shot placements to Gimeno’s seven and 20 volley placements to Gimeno’s 10, and Mackay's winners came when he needed them. He was well down In both sets but won powerfully. He was at his best with a hard first service to the corner and a quick follow in to cut off the return with an angled volley. He won several service games to love doing this. In the first set Gimeno got the first break to lead 3-2 and when he still had this lead at 5-4 he hed a set point on his own service but Mackay took the game and then broke Gimeno’s service again on the last game to win. 8-8. Mackay lost his service In the first game of the second set but he evened with a break for 4-4 before losing his service again with a double fault. t Then Mackay made the third service break in successive games to be 5-5 and the last one at 9-8 gave him the match, 8-8, 10-8. Mackay’s play over the second part of the second set was magnificent. In his last four service games he won the first two to love and lost only one point in each of the others. He served three aces in the latter two. In the last game Gimeno did not put in a first service and he served a double fault on the last point. Urged on by his “Barry! Barrv?” Mackay showed that he has the ability to work up from a down position and this surely will stand him in good stead in the months to

come. Gimeno has some careless and loose shots and unfortunately for him they came on Saturday at crucial times. If they had not he could have been the victory. Mr D. Radford (West Coast) was umpire. Doubles In the doubles match, which was played in a much lighter vein. Gimeno and Gonzales showed good combination to beat Olmedo and Mackay, 13-11. 6-2. Features of the match were the strong serving by all four players, the volleying of Mackay, and the courtcraft of Gonzales. Mackay was quite deadly at the net. and the speed at which he hit his volleys frequently left Gonzales and Gimeno standing. After a serve or strong ground-shot had put Mackay and Olmedo in a good position at the net, Mackay was able to put away some fine winners. Olmedo showed bursts of good form, but Gonzales and Gimeno made a formidable combination.