N. Z. TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIPS

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 81, 30 December 1926, Page 10

N. Z. TENNIS CHAMPIONSHIPS

WEATHER STILL UNSETTLED

N. WILSON DEFEATS N. PEACH

WINNER PLAYS FLAWLESS GAME

(“Dominion” Special)

Auckland, December 29.

The second day of the New Zealand championship tennis tournament opened this morning in dull and threatening weather. A light shower about 10.30 caused a short adjournment. After that, the weather was fine, clear, and hot, with a slight breeze. The standard of tennis was much higher than on the first day.

N. Wilson played with sustained brilliance to beat. hl. Peach. Malfroy found McCausland \New South Wales) too much for him at the end of five sets, and D. G. France could not prevail against North (New South Wales). To-morrow, North v. Wallace, Haege v. McCausland, Sims v. Bartleet, Wilson v. Andrews, will be played.

Wilson’s Good Win.

The outstanding match of the day was that between Norman Peach (New South Wales) and N. R. C. Wilson (Wellington), which was won by Wilson in straight sets. Wilson was down 0— i in the third set. His performance was •brilliant, being characterised at all times by daring play from all parts of the court. He travelled through the first two sets at express speed, smashing unmercifully any short lobs, and passing Peach frequently as that player tried to take the net. A change of tune was called by Peach in the third set, when for four games, by terrific hitting, he made Wilson look almost a novice. Balls were hit down the side lines with Wilson unable to move a step in anticipation. Wilson did not flinch. He steadied magnificently, and countered from, the net, cutting off Peach’s drives and forcing him out of position. He evened at 5 all, led 6—5, and was about seven times match point before clinching matters with a short vollev from the net. Nearly throughout, Wilson played flawless tennis, and many of Peach’s errors were because he was forced into them. Wilson’s beautifully angled drives and volleys placed Peach well out of position, and the position .was not seldom placed beyond all doubt by a sharply-angled smash from the net. Wilson justified himself as the most dangerous man in New Zealand when inside the service line. His back court play to-day was correspondingly excellent. He played coolly, and with confidence, intercepting and anticipating with fine generalship. It was a notable victory, won on sheer merit.

North Defeats D. G. France. Long driving and careful play characterised the match between North (N.S.W.) and D. G. France (Wellington), varied in the fifth set by deep driving to France’s baek-hand by North and a rush to the net, in which he usually volleyed for the. winner. Often France would put the ball full on to North’s racket, and had to stand helplessly while it found a landing place in the opposite corner. Also, in trving to get between North at the net and the side line. France would push over too far and out. There were times when both were at the net together, volleying at close quarters. In these exchanges, the advantage nearly always rested with North. Although in the first four sets both did plenty of running along the back line the match was played in leisurely fashion, with generous lengths of rest in between sets. A great deal of the placing to the corners and side lines was very accurate.. Most of the errors were either in the net or over the back line. North , won because he showed greater versatility m the fifth set, and made France do the most chasing when he was least inclined to. It was a protracted struggle rather than a gruelling one.

Another Australian Victory.

The chief feature about the , Sturt (Auckland)-Haege (Victoria) match was the manner in which the latter cracked everv ball hard from whatsoever part of the court he was in. Sturt also drove hard, but he failed all too frequently in attempts to volley Haege s drives, or was passed clean when comin" in. For the weight he was putting behind his drives, Haege was placing with' delightful accuracy. Sturt fought hard but found the pace and rugged strength of Haege too mucn. The match gained in interest from the fact tnat both players are colts. Haege played like a whirlwind.

Andrews Defeats Lampe.

M. L. Lampe (Wanganui), whose physical fitness for strenuous match play is well known, tore about the backline for miles and miles as E. D. Andrews (Palmerston North) employed his noted corner to corner drive. Although Andrews was getting more into form, Lampe won many pointb and won a set on sheer merit. Andrews's placing to the lines was much more accurate than heretofore in the tournament, and there were many

shots he drove down the side-lines that left Lampe standing. Andrews played much the better tennis, and it was only Lampe’s indomitable pertinacity and fleetness of foot that enabled him to carry the match the distance it went.

New South Wales Men Defeated

The accurate serving and driving ot E. L. Bartleet (Auckland) were seen to full advantage in his match against Fitzgerald (N.S.W.). The New South Welshman was also, given plenty of chances to indulge hie penchant of playing his backhand. The solitary set he won he earned as the result of fine net play, from which place ho completely outshone Bartleet, who is purely a baseline player. Mainly, however, Bartleet nullified Fitzgerald’s efforts to gain the net by steady passing shots down the side lines.

Brewster (N.S.W.)t*iay be termed the midget of the tournament, and his match with the tall A. W. Sims (Auck. land) was the long and the short of it. Sims was altogether too'experienced and too strong for the youthful Brewster, who possesses a graceful style of play, and strokes that may yet take . him within striking distance of the heights. Experience Tells,

The years of experience and fine generalship of the veteran Wallace more than compensated for the bounding energy of the very much younger W. bmitli, and it was two very tired men who left the courts ,at the end of 2J hours after five gruelling sets. Smith was made to tear about the back-line in the first set after Wallace’s drives to the corner, while Wallace would advance to the net and cut off the returns it there were any. At times) however. Wallace’s drives would lose their accuracy and sting, and Smith would give Wallace a taste of his own medicine. Both hit hard throughout. The crack ing pace was proving hard for the veteran. They fought gamie for game to 9-all in the second set, when Smith took it at 11—9. Wallace took a new lease of life in the third set, and again asserting his mastery of the court, won it 6—3. The pace was considerably slower in the fourth set, which Smith won. Wallace, who was pursuing his policy of advancing to the net, netted because he hurried Iris drive. Wallace took the fifth set fairly easily, Smith being completely played out. ’ .

Malfroy’s Fine Effort. C. E. Malfroy went down in a blaze of glory to McCausland (New South Wales) in the fifth set- after leading 2 sets to love and losing the third 9—ll after a tense struggle. McCausland, making the mistake of trying to play Malfroy from the net, was compelled to see balls whiz past him down the side lines on either wing. He stayed back (except rarely) after losing the first two sets, and engaged in a longrange duel with both players placing very accurately and hitting hard. McCausland’s advances to the net were generally well timed, and a sharply angled volley or a stop volley nearly always gave him the point. Malfroy scored very often with a sharply angled cross-court shot. He found the pressure in the fifth set rather hard, and nad a slight attack of cramp during the progress of the match for a few minutes. Perhaps a little more experience would have given him the third set. the set point in the third set when it did come to McCausland came on a wrong decision, a ball out being given in. While McCausland was apparently fresh at tne end, Malfroy was showing signs of wear. Ladies’ Singles. The best ladies’ singles match of the dav was that in which Miss Areta Howe beat Miss W. Lloyd 6-y3, 6—4, by dint of concentrating on Miss Lloyds backhand and then if Miss Lloyd did not net. after three or four shots suddenly switching over to the forehand. Ihese tactics were pursued with persistency and . determination. Miss Lloyd could do nothing more thna hoy e to return the ball by reason of the inherent weakness in her backhand stroke.’ She plays the stroke with the grip as for the forehand. Miss Howe played without much pace’and a complete lack of fireworks, but she played with a coolness and confidence not to be denied. • She returned with ease Miss Lloyd’s stock whip action serve. Her own service was weak and she served occasional double faults. Miss Lloyd put up a stern fight, but with her forehand shots out of action by virture of the placing to her backhand she was robbed of the greatest part of her game. While the pressure to her backhand was maintained she wae palpably beaten. In the other ladies’ singles the winners generally outplayed opponents below New Zealand championship form. The Men’s Doubles, In the men’s doubles, A. W. Sims found the task of carrying his inaccurate partner, T. E. Clark, (in impossible proposition against the fine New South Wales combination. North and McCausland. The Auckland pair were lucky to get a set. The Australians punished short lobs severely which the local pair sent up to dislodge the visitors from the net. The occasions they succeeded in their intentions were very isolated. Haege and Malfroy cleaned up Griffiths and Brinsden by means , of a sustained net attack in which Haege was outstandingly brililant. He smashed splendidly and picked up everything. Malfroy gave good support, but lacked Haege’s vim. Knott and Sturt played finely to beat the New South Wales pair, Fitzgerald and Brewster. The winner’s steadier and harder driving outlasted the spasmodic brilliance of the New South Wales pair at the net. The winners employed the centre court theory to advantage. Wallace and Dickie and the Johns Brothers seemed to battle through the ages. They took the court early in the morning, played through the noon-day sun, and were going strong well into the afternoon. Courts on either side of them were played on, vacated, nlayed on again, and again vacated. The four were oblivions’ to their surroundings. The Johns combination were the more evenly balanced, the lion’s share falling on Wallace, owing to Dickie’s nncertaintv due to lack of practice. Wallace and Dickie, however, were predominant in the short range volleying, but Dickie nut un too many short lobs. Wallace’s volleying was superior, as also was his jnhnv sharnly-nngled smashes ■ Somerville and Tait played with brilliance in short patches against the Poach brothers, but were generally outclassed in position play. Ladies’ Doubles. There was very little outstanding in the ladies’ doubles, although Misses Lowry and Macfarlane made a good stand against Misses Knight and Colebrook, taking them to S—6 in the second .set.

DETAILED RESULTS By Telegraph.—Pbess association. MEN’S SINGLES THIRD ROUND. Dr. A. L. North (New South Wales) beat D. G. France (Wellington), 6—4, I—6, 4—6, 6—2, 6—l. P. Haege (Victoria) beat G. Sturt (Auckland), 6—l, 6—3, 6—2. J. McCausland (New South Wales) beat C. E. Malfroy (Wellington), 2—6, 3—6, 11—9, 6—2, 6—l. A. W. Sims (Auckland) beat C Brew. , ster (New South Wales), 6—2, 6—l, 6—2. E. L. Bartleet (Auckland) beat J. Fitz gerald (New South Wales), 6 —3, 6 —3, 3—6, 6—l. N. R. C. Wilson (Wellington) beat N. Peach (New South Wales), 6 —l, 7—5, 7— E. D. Andrews (Palmerston North) beat M. L. Lampe (Wanganui), 4—6, 6-2, 6-3, 6-4. A. G. Wallace (Waverley) beat N. Smith. (Rotorua), 6—l, 9 —ll, 6—3, 3 —6, 6—l. LADIES’ SINGLES SECOND ROUND. Miss B. Knight (Auckland) beat Miss M. Myers (Wanganui), 6—2, 6—4. Miss J. A Vat son (New South Wales) beat Miss M. Lowry (Hastings), 6—2, 8— 6. Airs. W. J. Melody (Wellington) beat Miss M. Stevens (Whangarei), 6—l, 6—l. Miss B. Witherow (Auckland) beat Miss N. Whitelaw (Auckland), 6—2, 6—2. THIRD ROUND. Miss M. Speirs (Christchurch) beat Miss J. E. Ramsay (Auckland), 6—l, 6—4. Miss A. Howe (Wellington) beat Miss’ N. Lloyd (New South Wales), 6 —3, 6— 4. MEN’S DOUBLES FIRST ROUND. F. R. Chisholm (Otago) - and J. Watson (Auckland) beat W. J. Melody (Wellington) and H. M. A. Major (Masterton), 6—3, 6—2, 6—2. Dr. A. L. North and J. McCausland (New South AVales) beat A. W. Sims and T. E. Clark (Auckland), 7—5, 6 —2, 4—6, 6— I. A. Seay (Canterbury) and E. D. Andrews (Palmerston North) beat S’. J. Robinson and C. C. Chalmers (Auckland), 6—2, B—6, 3—6, 6—3. P. Haege (Victoria) and C. E. Maifroy (Wellington) beat E. W. Griffiths and H. Brinsden (Auckland), 6 —2, 6—4, 7— W. H. Entwistle and W. G. Watkins (Auckland) beat W. Pearse (Temuka) and R. Ferkins (Wellington), 6—l, 3—6, 6—4, 6—3. L. G. Knott and N. G. Sturt (Auckland) beat C. Brewster and J. Fitzgerald (New South Wales), 6—3, 6—4, 3—G, 6—3. S. Lamb and A. K. Turner (Auckland) beat R. Browning and S. W. Field (Canterbury), 6—3, 6—4, 6—4. V. R. Johns and A. C. Johns (Auckland) won from A. E, B. Richardson (Auckland) and E. Bell (Pirongia) hy default. SECOND ROUND. - J. C. Peacock and N. B. C. Wilson (Wellington) won from A. E. McCracken and C. D. Warren (Hamilton), by default. ■F. Peach and N. Peach (New South Wales) beat W. S. Somerville and R. 11. Tait (Christchurch), 6—l, 6—2, 5— 4 (abandoned). . Johns and Johns beat A. G. Wallace and C. J. Dickie (Waverley), 7—9, 6—4, 8 — 6, 6—B, 6 —3. M. L. Lampe (Wanganui) and D. G. France (Wellington) beat L. T. Pickmere and J. :C; Charters (Whangarei), 6—l, 6—2, 6—2. Dr. North and McCausland beat Chisholm and Watson, 6—6, 6—3, 6—o. Knott and Sturt beat Entwistle and Watkins, 5—7, 7—5, 6—l, 6—2. - Bartleet and Robson beat Lamb and Turner, 6 —o, 6—B, 7—5, 6 —2. LADIES’ DOUBLES FIRST ROUND. Misses M. Myers (Wanganui) ami B. Witherow (Auckland) beat Mieses J. Maclndoe (Auckland) and M. Griffiths (Whangarata), G—3, 6—3. Misses N. Lloyd and J. Watson (New South Wales) beat Mrs. Scott Watson (Auckland) and Mrs. E. J. Arneil (Whangarei), 6—l, 6—3. Misses E. Hale and K. Hei (Taki timu) beat Misses M. Napier and N. Whitelaw (Auckland), 6—o, o—6,0 —6, 6—4. Misses B. Knight and M. Colebrook (Auckland) beat Misses W. McPherson (Taumarunui) and D. Nicholls (Auckland), 6—l, 6—4. Misses M. Lowry (Hastings) and M. Macfarlane (Auckland) beat Mrs. D. M. Robson (Auckland) and Miss M. Stevens (Whangarei), 6—3, 6—3. Mrs. W. J. Melody (Wellington) and Miss M. Speirs (Canterbury) beat Misses A. Francis and O. Maxwell (Auckland), 6—l, 6—2. SECOND ROUND. Misses Knight and Colebrook beat Misses Lowry and Macfarlane, 6—3. B—6. Mrs. Melody and Miss Speirs beat Misses E. Miller and J. Mueller (Auckland), 6—2. 6—l. Misses Lloyd and Watson beat Misses Hale and Hei, 6—2. 6— i. Misses A. Howe (Wellington) and J. Ramsay (Auckland) beat Misses Myers and Witherow, 6—4, 6—4. COMBINED DOUBLES FIRST ROUND. Miss A. Howe and R; McL. Ferkins (Wellington) beat' Miss W. McPherson (Taumarunui) and A. E. McCracken (Hamilton), 6—2, 6—3. ' . Mrs. Scott Watson and H. Brinsden (Auckland) beat Miss K. Hei (Takitimu) and F. Peach (New South Wales), 6—3, 6— 3. Miss N. Whitelaw and A. K. Turner (Auckland) beat Miss J. Mclndoe (Auckland) and R. H. Tait (Christchurch), 7— 6-3. Miss M. Stevens and J. C. Charters (Whangarei) beat Miss J. Mueller (Auckland) and R. V. Bundle (Wellington), 6 —4. 6—3. Miss E. Hale (Takitimu) and N. Peach (New South Wales) won from Miss N. Colbeck and N. M. Louisson (Auckland) by default. , Miss A. Francis (Auckland) and W. Pearse (Temuka) beat Mrs. D. M. Robson and E. M. Ohlson (Auckland), 6—4, 6 —9* Miss B. Knight and A. W. Sims (Auckland) beat Miss E. Miller (Auckland) and J Fitzgerald (New South Wales), 6-4, 6-1. , m , Mrs. A. Arneil and L. T. Pickmere (Whangarei) beat Miss J. Ramsay (Auckland) and S. W. Field (Canterbury), 6—2, 7—5. FIELDS NARROWING DOWN The men’s singles championship has been reduced to eight players, who are drawn to meet to-day as follow:— Dr. A. L. North (New South Wales) v. A. G. ’.Wallace (Taranaki). P. Haege (Victoria) v. J. McCausland (New South Males). A. W. Sims (Auckland) v. E. L. Bart--ISN. R UC C kI Wilson (Wellington) v. E. D. Andrews (Palmerston North). In the ladies’ singles championship. Miss M. Speirs (Canterbury), the title holder, and Miss A. Howe (Wellington) have worked their way to the fourth round. Four others remain in the event, and these are drawn to play as follow:— Miss B. Knight (Auckland) v. Miss J. Watson (New South Wales). Mrs. W. J. Melody (Wellington) v. Miss B. Witherow (Auckland). •• , Only four pairs remain in the ladies doubles:— ~ Misses Lloyd and Watson will play Misses Howe and Ramsay. Misses Knight and Colebrook will meet Mrs. Melody and Miss Speirs.