Tennis Upheaval: Who Will Wear Perry’s Crown?

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 45, 17 November 1936, Page 14

Tennis Upheaval: Who Will Wear Perry’s Crown?

rpHE cabled report that Fred Perry has J- turned professional leaves amateur tennis radically weaker (writes H. A. de Lacv in “The Sporting Globe. ) Who will succeed to his crown? Can Britain retain the Davis Cup ? Definitely more far-reaching is the resultant effect on tennis. . I believe that pre-eminence in the amateur ranks will soon become the natural basis of barter for transfer to the professional. With amateur tennis prestige such a fleeting glory, and big premiums available in the professional ranks, slowly but surely, the citadel of amateurism is being undermined. No more serious blow has been dealt to an. amateur sport than tennis has suffered by Perry’s transfer. . If a greater tennis player exists than Perrv he is H. Ellsworth Vines, and, as is well known, he also is in the professional ranks. ' Thousands would press to see Perry clash with Vines. Think along- these lines and it will be realised what the amateur authorities have lost by not arranging an open tournament or a match between the two when Perry was an amateur. There can be only one champion m a sport. Be he professional, or amateur the sporting community waits to acclaim him. Will Follow Perry. The promotion of such a bout, has been handed to private interests. The longer the amateur associations refuse to recognise the open tournaments, the greater will be the loss of prestige to the amateur game. New blood will follow Perrys lead as onportunity offers. The box office attractions will only be required, leaving the amateur promoters to scratch along with the less spectacular offerings. The natural successor to Perry’s No. 1 position is not the world’s No. 2 amateur, G. von Cramm. I think be is Donald Budge, the 20-year-old red-headed United States player. Perry, outstanding us he was in the amateur world, must have felt the increasing pressure of Budge’s challenges, and must have wondered after his narrow escape in the United States singles final just how longlie could continue to answer them. Budge therefore seems logically to be the next Wimbledon and world’s amateur champion. Von Cramm approaches 30. He seems just to have missed his opportunity of being world champion. Perhaps he will not rise again to the heights he attained this year, when he was an equal favourite with Perry for the Wimbledon final. An injury in the second game robbed him of his chance then. Von Cramm is reaching a stage in his tennis when he can improve only his experience, and experience will be his greatest asset in any meeting with the younger men who are pressing forward. Quist Natural Successor. Adrian Quist, the Australian champion, is not to be overlooked as a candidate for the title. He and not Budge or von Cramm is the natural successor to Perry.

Cramm and Budge are something more than baseliners, but they are baseliners, nevertheless. Quist is the natural infighter. His pace on the amateur court is now unrivalled and he is undoubtedly the greatest volleyer. . _ . , Three things stack up against Quist. He lacks singles experience. . Despite his many years abroad he has just come to the front as an international singles player. Acknowledged the greatest doubles player in the world, this same accomplishment is his second disability. And his third is the lack, or rather, say the temporary loss, of a stinging forehand, such as Perry possessed. Perry could hit his forehand from any position and win off it. Quist suffers temporary lapses off his forehand, and from some court positions he pushes rather than cracks the ball. If he is to win the next world title, Quist must drop doubles, especially if he is to continue playing in the back-hand court.

For vears he has played in the lefthand court at the expense of bis crosscourt forehand. His backhand is strong, but at times he opens his stance on the forehand, the natural result of seeking the outswinging cross-court forehand from the left court. The trouble is that the error has become more pronounced at times in singles.

To stand a chance against a baseliner of the Budge-Cramm type, Quist must be hitting his ground shots accurately and with a racket full of sting. His ground shots must keep his opponent away from the net while paving the way to his own successful sorties. Quist is said to be temperamental. He is, but the player without temperament is a false alarm in world top ratings. The ice-blooded player who never turns a hair, etc., is either an accomplished bluff or is too dull-witted ever to reach the top. Far top often competitive instinct with its attendant nervousness is misnamed temperament. Nervousness before the big occasion points to the keenly competitive instinct—the clear brain alive to all the possibilities of the contest. Cup Loss Likely. But Perry’s transfer does still another thing. It sounds the knell of Great Britain’s tenure of the Davis Cup. A great dominating singles player can almost retain the cup by his own efforts. In Perry Britain had just such a player, but now’no other remains. Austin never has been dominant. He has been consistent, and more often a winner, but he alone cannot hold two single points for Britain. Austin will more likely have difficulty in holding one point, for the opposition against him is increasingly strong. Australia, runner-up last year, seems to have the more even team. Next in order are Germany and United States, with either sufficiently strong to turn the tables against us. We will challenge in the American zone and there should meet United States in the zone final. A win should pit us against Germany in the inter-zone final and the winner should take the cup from Great Britain.