ON THE TENNIS COURTS

Dominion, Volume 16, Issue 171, 7 April 1923, Page 18

ON THE TENNIS COURTS

MATCHES AND PLAYERS

x’Ry

“Fore-Hand.”)

HARD COURT CHAMPION-~-I~ SHIP TOURNEY. It was unfortunate that rain prevented play in the Wellington hard court championship last Saturday and on Monday morning. Had the weather remained fino it is safe to say that etra • tournament would have been completed , ~uu the afternoon of Easter Monday. .Aa it was, the progress mado must be considered very satisfactory, Ihat it was so was duo both to an energetic and untiring committee, and to tho - desire on the part of most of the players to'aid in every way possible the prompt playing of their games, flow much such conduct is appreciated can » bo understood only by those who havo had to deal with players who make every and any excuse to delay the gan j es to suit their own convenience. ■(hedit is duo to Messrs- F. W. Reed -? and H. Graves for their management of the Newtown and Wellington Club - courts respectively. But there are two T7I gentlemen upon whose shoulders fell ' by far the most important of the work, ' and to whom is duo the success of the " whole tournament. I refer to Mr. “. .’“"W. H. Stainton and Mr. J. A. B. Howe. The spade work was Mr. Stdinton’s. Only those who have fyad actual ■experience in the drawing of players ■' and the absolute necessity for scruputons accuracy in the making up of **• "'the sheets, with the great amount of ■■■ ■ -labour and attention to detail such • ••“ work involves, can realise the import- - ant part he played in the resultant , -t success of the tournament. The actual ..working of the tournament devolved -..upon Mr. J. A. B. Howe,and this was by far the hardest part. How well it was done will be understood when it is known that with one and a half —days upon which' it was impossible to -- play the tournament w r as complete 4 to all but 10 or 12 games. It was f-Jj-the- benefit of many years of touma.uh.- ment control, a fact to be appreciate*! at its full worth by players who com- ■ petod in tournaments where delays -,.k ■ have been the rule and progression affairs the exception. It cannot be said that the ment has discovered any new player® of great promise, but it has demonstrated that some players who rank high in Wellington tennis possess qualities which it was littlo thought they did possess. Goldie played with great consistency throughout- tho tournament in all his events, and his win in the final of the men’s singles championship was well deserved. Ho is a player who • has greatly improved, and in this tour nament maintained a firm grip of himself. His defeat of Barkman was the result of grim determination and re- j fusal to give in when he could hardly bo blamed for doing so. Barkman is a player of the solid type, whose main idea is to tire the opponent with his steadiness. There were many who thought that he would havd won thg final of the singles championship. He was never too comfortable when brought in close to the net. A rapidly .improving young player is Noel Wilson. This player swings freely and easily from the shoulder for his shots, especially overhead. Ho has a tendency to come very close to foot-faulting on occasion, although his service is accurate and well placed. Monday’s play was memorable for the long-drawn-out struggle between Ward and Wright. These two players are somewhat similar in style, but Wright showed himself the ’more finished player. It is worthy of mention that in the match which ended in favour of Ward 11 —13, 6—4, 7—5, there was but one point difference —Ward 148 points, Wright 147 points, and not a single double fault was served Wright is an excellent volleyer, and though not a hard driver, can get plenty of pace on his balls, which have the great merit of being well placed. All his shots are cleanly executed. He never ' slackens in his concentration, even L'.W if he should do so in his pace. Ward is very steady, and does not give up until the last point is won. Collins did well to give up his diagonal-sliced shot, which was anything but a paying proposition. His play is most unequal, with undoubted brilliancy in • ••■parts. Bundle, who always gives the appearance of thoroughly enjoying his games, has a sound back--»,d»hand, but is weak on the forehand. He is a left-handed player with a .»• - very disconcerting service. Lees extended Barkman to three sets in the « ■- second round, having accounted for - Laughton in the first round, 14 —12, 6—o. A. Gibson is an improved player, whose tendency to indiscriminate driving is liable to cost him many matches. He plays' well from the net in patches. Ho frequently perpntrates some very glaring footfaults, for which, in one match, he was penalised time and time again. X Mansfield is a player who can make 5 good use -of the court, and i» not J slow to take advantage of openings. A He was seen at Ids best on the open'll ing day of the tournament. R. Fer- “ kins, the secondary schools’ cham- " piui, displayed form to the extent of taking a set from C. F. Williams, j . This last-mentioned player, whoso ; ;long suit is driving, was put out by " Goldie. H. V. Howe proved himself “ ;ono of the few who made the utmost £ -use of net play and tho cross court g ■ shot. Armstrong’s battle with Bark- ~ man was a good one in the first set, 1 when he showed himself every inch v a fighter. He was distinctly iinforJ innate in that he did not win the first set hfter having established, a '? decided lead: He did not play up to - 1 tho same form in the second set. 1 The form displayed by the ladies was not nearly so varied as that of the ; men. The tendency to remain on the back lino was clearly observable. The ? only lady to take the net was Miss - Tracy, who is easily the headiest of all the ladies. She has richly deserved all the games she has won, and many confidently anticipate that she will add t some of the Wellington championships •* to her already numerous honours She t has an excellent tennis temperament, I and showed herself ready to play J wherever and whenever asked, if by so » doing the progress of tho tournament ; could be furthered. She has not yet ," been fully extended in the championship singles, and her defeat of Mrs Cooke, to whom she was giving 12 points, was most decisive. This lastmentioned lady is very active on the court, and plays some very good shots. ” Miss Warren ‘is a determined player, who makes her shots with a fair amount of effort. Occasionally she produces a stinging backhand. She delights in a base line game. Mrs. Norris has a disconcerting cut stroke, but Jn her endeavour to/ keep the ball low finds tho net far oftener than she need do- Mrs. Witcombe played very well, and showed herself the possessor of a variety of shots and an ability

(to play with' length. Miss Williams, with steadiness to aid her, chose rather to win on her .opponent s mistakes than to force the issue herself. Like the great majority of the lady players she keeps to the Back line. Mrs- Evison, who is to be Miss Tracy s opponent in the final of the ladies’ championship singles, is. a determined player with plenty of stmg behind her shots. It will remain to bo proved whetliei she will be able to keep Miss Tracy jammed on the back line, and so prevent her from playing her usual attacking game. The tussle will largely be one of difference in .styles. Whoever wins will be mads fully to deserve the honour. Miss Macassey. is capable ot executing some reallv good drives ot splendid length, well placed, but m endeavouring to keep them too low, ngts more than she ought. There are few ladies who make greater attempts to retrieve balls, and not a fey tennis players could not be better advised than to emulate her example. She does not wait but runs as soon as the was to be expected most of the doubles, whether they were mens, ladles’ or combined showed only too plainly the absence of team work, and inability to understand the partner s style of play. In some few instances, where club mates we o wont to play with eiich other frequently, this of course, was not so noticeable. Many of the matches provided excellent exhibitions of volleying from close quarters, aa well as examples of_ the rapidly disappearing help in time of the high lob. Credit must be given to the various players for their willingness to umpire whenever asked to do so, and a most thankless task was done in all fairness. There were very few complaints from players at bad decisions, a,nd then in the majority of cases the player complaining was, in the opinion of spectators, frequently wrong ' N.S.W. V N.Z.

Australian papers to hand make it possible to understand wherein it is that New Zealand falls short of that country in the world of tennis. Tho constant references that the New Zealanders would do better if taken properly in hand are not without their significance. It points a fault in this country which must be corrected if we are to make any advance at ail. In America, 'and to a lesser degree in Australia, young players who give distinct promise are at once taken in hand by men competent to do so, and they thus attain a standard of tennis at least two seasons ahead of ours, or perhaps ahead of, us altogether. Young players in New Zealand, because of the almost total absence of definite coaching, merely perpetuate certain bad faults, reach / a standard of play beyond which they cannot go, shine a little while, and then are hoard of no more. The front-rank players of to-day do not last very long, and it speaks volumes for veteran players like Peacock and Wallace, that they are considered worthy to represent New Zealand. Such a fact, too, carries with it a grave indictment of the standard of play ampng the younger players. What is the reason that the honours must still be maintained by men who were in their prime 10 or 15 years ' ago, while in Australia and America the fronLrankers lire comparatively young men, at least this side of 30 years of age? Climate partly, but not altogether. It seems that each of the New Zealand representatives at present away in Australia .has some one outstanding feature about his game, but does nob possess a combination of two, three, or more effective strokes, as do the Australians. Their play is, not only harder, far harder, than we in New ’'Zealand are in the' habit of witnessing but marked by more all-round nInV. Those who had seen L. G. France in action wondered what his chances would be in Australia.. What impression he made in that country may be gathered from the following ouotation from the Sydney “Referee” : "In A. L. Franco we have a player of somewhat unorthodox methods- but of tremendous energy and staying power, and an uncanny faculty of getting the ball back somehow or other, and mostly to the right spot. He saved numberless rallies by this refusal to be beaten. He relies too much on the chop to go to the highest plane, and will need to develop a bet- ' ter backhand grip before he will give., his undoubted genius for the game full scope. With the grip ho uses he will never bo able to bit a ball witb tho full power of bis body on his backhand.” „ , ' Those who know France know full well that he has received no more than : justice. On one occasion, pldying with I Sims in tho doubles, against Anderson ■ and Peach, he coolly volleyed a terrific smash of Anderson’s for a clear winner, demonstrating that not only did he havo a most wonderful eye, but a wrist of about the same material as his steel racket. But it is the pace that kills, and when our men meet opponents who combine accuracy with | their speed they begin to realise their limitations. In A. W. Sims New Zealand seems to have tho makings of an international champion, and it only requires practice for the consummation of the desired wish. Oh, the pity of it, Iago! Where in this country can he be pitted against men who can make him play for his life as Anderson compelled him to Let New Zealanders think for a moment what it must mean when it is stated that there were times when Sims was driving harder than Anderson ; that ho deigned to seek his backhand, but went for his winners at all hazards; that every game except tho first went to at least six points, one of them resulting in 10 deuces, a battle in itself, and ask themselves what it all means and what steps can be best taken to bring about an improvement in their play generally. Sims was further described as belting at everything, and that when ho smashed there was little answer left. Nor was his game confined simply to those fireworks. It was most varied. Anderson found Sims’s chops hard to pick up. But tho supreme effort it cost him to win tho second set made itself felt, and ho lost the third and deciding set, 6—-1. Sims proved, as experience has taught the Australians, as the New Zealanders must learn, to win it is necessary to play haid, and that can only come from continued confidence in one’s abilities, backed up by sound physical training and an alert mind. Compared with

the Australian type of play, New Zealanders wait for the opponent to make the mistakes, whilst the Australians seek always to force the pace. To show that his form against Anderson was no flash in the pan, Sims defeated Norman Peach “by dint of sheer grit and fine strokes,” 4 —6, 6 —4, 7 5. The style of play he used was similar to that employed against Anderson, and was in effect the playing of the Australians at their own game. How necessary it is to be absolutely physically fit was shown by the manner in which Ollivier, an older player, crumpled up against Anderson. One of the best men overhead in New Zealand is J. C. Peacock, but he seems to have found his favourite shot of littlo avail in Australia, due, possibly, to the fact that hie opponents are striving to pass him down the lines, and when they do lob, lob high and deep. < Whereas the New Zealand players are looking for openings, the Australians are constantly making them. The Australians also aro tho first to take the* initiative, and because of their superior pace, not infrequently pass our men clean down the side lines. Where tho Australians excel, also, and in this department Sims is perhaps the best of tho New Zealand team, is in the matter of anticipationThere should not be any reason against New Zealanders improving their standard of play generally ir they will but understand that those young players giving promise must be taken in hand and taught to play hard and accurately, as well as cultivate a variety of strokes and obtain sufficient confidence in themselves to launch the attack for themselves.

FOOTFAULT RULE No rule has been the centre of more discussion than tho one governing footfaults. . When thfi rule was first drawn up it was neyer thought that the service would ever assume the alarmingly formidable proportions it now does as the basis of attack. Service at thp outset was merely the setting of the game in motion. The recent attempt to havo one-ball service instead of two as at present, is an admission of that fact. However, the present service has come to stay, and all amendments of tho rule can only be along linos that will prevent a distinctly unfair advantage being obtained by tho server. It was once the common practice to soo a man servo a terrific ball and hurl himself into the court, and reach the net almost before tho receiver had finished playing his stroke. It was to obviate this that tho present rules wore framed. Their aim primarily is to keep a man clearly behind the line until the ball has been served, and in such a way that he cannot start for tho net without some delay, no matter how slight. 5 The rule as laid down by the Lawn Tennis Association reads: “The server shall, before commencing to serve, start with both feet at rest on the ground behind (i.e., further from the net than) the base-line, and within the limits of the imaginary continuation of tho centre mark and tho side lines, and thereafter the server shall not run, walk, hop, or jump before tho service has bden delivered, 'but the server may raise one foot from (and if desired replace it on) tho ground, provided that both feet are kept behind the base line until the service has been delivered. And later on: “The service shall be deemed to have been delivered at the moment of' tho impact of tho racket and the ball.”

In tho three questions asked by “Umpire” it was assumed that the players were behind the line in each instance. Without going any further it is clearly evident that in the first question no foot-fault has been committed. “H.N.W.” admits the correctness of the stand, but submits that tho word “slightly” cannot be construed to mean “off the ground” as required, a contention that cannot be supported. Question 2 was a littlo more difficult. As there was no indication that the server was walking or taking a step, it is but fair to conclude that his feet were at rest before one of them was raised as he commenced his backward swing preparatory to delivering the service. That being so, he had fulfilled one part of the rule. And as the rule allowed him to place his foot again on the ground, no footefault could be said to have been committed. In the third question there is no disagreement with “H.N.W.” SOUTH FEATHERSTON CLUB The newly-formed Tennis Club at South Featherston has had a most successful season which came to a close on March 28, when the finals in tho ladies’ and men’s tournaments were played. The winner of the' ladies’ tournament. Miss Rose Goodrick, received a silver cup, donated by Mrs. D. H. S. Riddiford (to be won three times before coming the property of the winner). The runner-up, Miss Marjorie Wakelin, received a silver rose bowl donated bv Mrs. C. Jack«on (won outright). Mrs. W. Wakeley donated a trophy for the most improved players amongst the beginners, and this was won by Miss Goodrich. The men’s singles' was ivon by D. H. S. Riddiford. the winner receiving a gold medal. The courts are situated in the South Featherston school grounds, where the bead teacher, Air. J. H. Fieldhouse, takes a keen interest in encouraging and promoting good tennis and also in fostering a goo*! sporting spirit. ' The conference of representatives of Davis Cup nations held in Lopdon in December last revised the list of nations eligible to compete, ,and named the following 19 nations as approved competitions, says an English writer: Australia, Argentine. Belgium. British Isles, Canada, Ozecho-Slovakia, Denmark France. Hawaii. Holland, India, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Philippines, Rumania. South Africa, Spain, and the United States of America. The nations of Germany, Austria, Bulgaria, and Turkey are still in the index cxpurgatorious and barred from competing in Davis Cup matches. With tho exception of Spain and the Philippines all of tho nations eligible to compete havo this year challenged the United States of America—the champion nation and present bolder of the Davm Cup. A cable message Irom New York, published on March 4, announced that Switzerland had also lodged a challenge. though this nation is not included in tho list? ot approved Davis Cup nat'ona. No fewer than 18 nations will there!ore bo engaged in tb’o year’s competition. 1 Tho new zone sytem, which provide for dividing the competing nations into two geographical sections, one to lie called the European group, ana the other the American group, will be adopted in the draw for the preliminary ties. Australia, Japan, Canada, and Hawaii have elected to compete in the Pacific, and the remainder of the challenging nations have nominated 111 the European zone.