MORE SURPRISES

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 110, 3 February 1938, Page 13

MORE SURPRISES

New Zealand Tennis Championships DEFEAT OF BEDFORD Pattinson Eliminates Angas (By Telegraph.—From Forehand.) Auckland, February 2. It is many years since there was such a series of surprises as have been in evidence throughout the present New Zealand Lawn Tennis Championships. To-day, in fine weather that was more pleasing from the tennis players’ point of view because of a cooling breeze, the surprises continued. J. May son, Auckland, beat N. Bedford, Wellington, and the youthful Canterbury left- ■ hander, R. G. Pattinson, beat his colleague, C. Angas, the fifth set being -0. Stedman had n 0 diflflculty with D. G. France, and A. D. Brown was too good for J. W. Gunn. Another surprise, in the women’s singles, was the defeat of Miss Irene Poole, Canterbury, by Miss Elizabeth Plummer. The other women’s singles went as expected. Stedman v. France. Stedman did not start quite so well against France as he had done against Renfold yesterday. Whereas yesterday his forehand drive functioned faultlessly, to-day he drove many balls into the net. France, too, was playing well, so that, taking advantage of Stedman’s errors, he seemed to have a prospect of making things interesting. He employed a sliced forehand more than his usual topped one and his backhand was reliable. He made few mistakes with it, playing to the sidelines to keep Stedman moving. He was successful in winning points by steering the ball past Stedman as the Davis Cup player came to the net. Stedman also smashed several of France’s lobs out. But fjom 3-4 down,'Stedman found his game, and from then on there was really only one player in it. Stedman opened his shoulders and, with his powerful forehand, drove the ball unerringly into the corners or sharply angled it to France’s backhand sideline, so that even if he got •to it, France was able to make only a weak return. Stedman at the net killed it. Lobs, too, that would have cleared most other players, Stedman smashed with impunity. The only mistake he was making was volleying too sharply across court from the forehand court to out over the sideline. These were lucky let offs for France. France throughout the match did his best to keep the ball on Stedman’s backhand. He failed in his object, as the other pl.ayers before him had failed. At every opportunity Stedman ran round his backhand and punched the ball at angles or straight down the line. It was a treat to watch the way Stedman got his feet into position and fijpnly set'to give his forehand every chance to develop the maximum power. - Mayson Superior to Bedford. Right from the start of their match, J. Mayson had an ascendancy over N. Bedford. He found openings in Bedford's court tim,e after time, especially with a cross-court forehand drive to Bedford’s backhand. He usually played it with Bedford somewhere about the service line. It did not matter what Bedford did, whether he was playing from the backline or attacking from the net, Mayson nearly always had an effective answer. His volleying, too, was superior to Bedford's. He seldom had to play difficult shots because his position was so good and his movement about the court was so quick. Also, he did not hurry his strokes. He was always cool and his timing was accurate. Bedford did not play badly, and that made Mayson’s win all the more meritorious. Bedford was seldom given a chance to ggt properly set to play his strokes. In his efforts to keep Mayson back from the net he many times over-hit.-Downfall of Angas. Pattinson, Canterbury, a young lefthander, who even before this tournament had proved himself a heady player, was shrewd and cool, with a fine equipment of strokes. His volleying is first-rate and his ground strokes very reliable. Nevertheless, it was not generally expected that he would beat O. Angas, the Canterbury ranking number one player. But he did so, and he won on sheer merit without any qualifications. He quite outplayed Angas his deep, well-placed drives eriablinghim to take the net, from where he brilliantly angled his volleys, often well disguising the direction. His whole game was directed to keeping Angas running about .so that, before the fifth set opened, Angas was a very tired player. The net-rushing tactics of Pattinson also proved disconcerting to Angas, who showed the effects by loss of accuracy. In trying to pass Pattinson he often outed over the sidelines, or, when he lobbed, he was short. His own volleying was usually made from too far back from the net. These shots carried neither speed tior length, and were not difficult for Pattinson to deal with. Most of Pattinson's ■shots carried work on the ball, necessitating careful handling. But whatever the cause, Angas was inaccurate on his forehand, mainly hitting well over the backline. He was forced to take these risks in order to keep Pattinson back. Pattinson showed rare cleverness in the manner in which he varied his length and ,his pace. At no stage of the match was he bustled and at no stage of the match, not even when he led two sets to one,

was Angas really confident. That and the old sureness of touch, especially in the delicate shots, were lacking. Brown’s Fine Driving. There was a sameness about the BrownGunn match. From first to last it was almost entirely a game of hard driving, both forehand and backhand. There was occasional volleying, mainly by Gunn, but far from accurate or effective even when the ball was kept in court. Whenever Gunn took the net, Brown tried to get past him with drives down the sidelines, specially when Gunn had placed the ball to his backhand. Gunn’s method when Brown was at the net was usually to lob. In the opening set Brown’s smashing and driving were very iu and out. But he did not worry nor cease from hitting himself into form. When that stage was reached he was completely Gunn’s master. Next to Stedman he gave the finest exhibition of pure driving in the tournament. Gunn was never given any respite. He was clearly shown not to be in Brown’s class. Miss Plummer’s Tenacity. Miss Elizabeth Plummer showed a tenacity and lighting spirit second to nobody in the tournament in her match against Miss Irene Poole. But she displayed more than that. She adopted tactics that made Miss Poole run, not only about the baseline, but dragged her in close with skilful changes of length and then sent her back with deep drives or beat her with passing shots or lobs. Miss Poole was also every inch a trier, as well as a fast mover about the court. She is noted for the strength of her backhand and was given plenty of opportunity to exercise it, as Miss Plummer played most of her backhand shots to it and many of her forehand ones to the backhand corner. Miss Plummer’s backhand proved even more reliable than Miss Poole’s um’^' pressure and her forehand still more so 1 . The return of service of both was consistently good and the rallies nearly always interesting and keenly fought. On the whole, Miss Plummer showed the better control and greater ability in extricating herself from difficult positions. She got well behind the ball to play her shots and was nearly always firm-footed when playing them. Miss Poole had often to scratch for the ball. Miss Plummer had a 3-1 and 5-3 lead in the first set, but, losing the advantage to 5-5 did not cause her to falter in her forcing tactics. Miss M. Beverley Extended. Miss Pam Cooke and Miss Margaret Beverley had another of their hard tussles, with the result, as usual, in Miss Beverley’s favour. The game was nearly all baseline driving, with an occasional attempt from the net, nearly always unprofitable, by Miss Cooke. Mito Cooke tried to concentrate on Miss Beverley’s backhand, but not with anywhere near the consistent effects she hoped for. Miss Beverley is a difficult player to compel to play on the backhand, safe though the backhand is, when she decides to run round it to play the ball on the forehand. Also, she has a forceful forehand with which she can place within inches of the corners. Addeel to these virtues, she is endowed with remarkable stamina. The longer the match goes, the better she becomes. In the third set she had Miss Cooke playing entirely on will power. She ran her from corner to corner, brought her in with short ones, and passed her with accurate drives down the lines or cross court. She was down 0-2 in the third set, and won the next six games. Miss Cooke never ceased to try, and while she was fresh showed herself quite the equal of Miss Beverley. .She swung the ball to the side lines with pace, and wag very unlucky to have many of them just go ouftide. Miss'Cooke puts all her heart and soul into her driving, not sparing herself, and this tells in a long match. In the end she became erratic from exhaustion. Miss N. Beverley Wins. Miss Nessie Beverley, the ouly really all-court woman player in the tournament, and with probably the finest strokes of any woman player in the tournament, but not the best temperament, was taken to a hard third set by Miss Bishop after having a lead of 5-2 and 40-15. She followed to the net her drives to the corners, and had the misfortune with the court open to net or out over the sidelines many of her volleys and smashes. Miss Bishop played with courage and stroked freely and easily from the baseline, placing to the sidelines. She also used the lob with paying consequences. She tired in the third set, however, more than did Miss Beverley. All the forcing was done by Miss Beverley, who never ceased from taking risks to place the ball out of Miss Bishop’s reach. It was a difficult thing to do and keep it in court, for Miss Bishop gets about/the court very fast. -04 c. I Miss Miller’s Steadiness. The match between Miss Marjorie Macfarlane and Miss Dora Miller was a hard-fought base-line, one of long rallies, with Miss Miller by far the steadier player of the .two. Some of the rallies were of 20, 30 and 40 strokes, with Miss Macfarlane doing the bulk of the running. Mist? Miller was altogether too solid for her and has strong claims to the championship. Men’s Doubles. - Roussell and Ferkins beat Dyer and Charters in three sets simply because the losers had not mastered the art of smashing decisively. Time and again they had Roussell and Ferkins on the defensive and were given sitters to smash. They merely poked the ball back defensively. Charters showed cleverness, too. in frequently beating his opponents with sharply angled short shots that were unreturnable, even if reached. Dyer was steady and straightforward in his play. Much of the lobbing of the losers was short, and Roussell and Ferkins killed them with few mistakes. Their greater decisiveness was the outstanding feature. Stedman and Coonibe and France and Sturt had no difficulty! in winning their matches. Women’s Doubles. The Misses Poole were altogether too good for Mrs. France and Miss Bubb, finding big holes in the one up one back for-

mation and smashing and volleying with such pace as to make it impossible for Mrs. France on the baseline to get to the ball or make a good return if she did. The Misses Poole were superior in all departments. Misses Cooke and Bishop fought back from 2-5 down to beat Misses Plummer and Glenny in straight sets. The winners were more aggressive from the net and Miss Glenny was not accurate. Nor was Miss Plummer’s driving game as accurate as it might have been. There was little doubt she was still feeling the effects of her strenuous match with Miss Irene. Poole. The combined net play of the Misses Beverley was too strong for the more conservative and stereotyped game of Misses Taylor and Macfarlane, although Miss Macfarlane did her best to keep the opponents from the net by good lobbing. It would have been better if Miss Taylor had also used the lob instead of trying to drive past two such good volleyers. The steadiness of Miss Miller in making openings for Miss Gould at the net gave her side the victory over Misses Dickey and Armstrong. Brilliant Exhibition. t One of the most brilliant exhibitions of the whole tournament was given by Miss E. Stewart who, with Wilson, beat Stedman and Miss Stedman in straight sets. She stood up to Stedman’s fiercest drives and smashes, returning them with interest to the openings. She seldom missed returning his service, too. Wilson, who foot-faulted badly but was not penalised, also played devastatingly from the net. - Miss Stedman, who tried hard, was shown to be out of her class . The two opposing players were too good for Stedman to be able to play them on his own. He tried hard and did greatly but he failed. France and Mrs. France and Sturt and Miss Macfarlane were definitely superior to. their respective opponents. Dyer and Miss Beverley also had an easy win, as did E. A. Pearce and Miss Plummer. Results, players being from Auckland unless otherwise mentioned, are reported by Press Association as follows:— Men’s Singles. Quarter-finals: A. C. Stedman (England) beat D. G. France (Wellington), 6-4, 6-0, 6-2; It. G. Pattinson (Canterbury) beat C. Angas (Canterbury), 6-4, 3-6. 4-6, 6-2, 6-0; A. D. Brown beat J. W. Gunn, 2-6, 6-4, 6-1, 7-5; J. T. Mayson beat N. Bedford (Wellington), 6-1, 7-5, 8-6 Women’s Singles. Quarter-linals: Miss D Miller (North Otago) beat Miss Macfarlane, 6-3, 6-1: Miss N. Beverley (Matamata) beat Mies Bishop, 6-1, 1-6, 10-8; Miss E. Plummer (Wellington) beat Miss I. Poole (Canterbury), 9-7, 6-3; Miss M. Beverley J (Matamata) beat Miss P. Cooke, 6-3, 7-9, 6-2. Men’s Doubles. Second round: Stedman and Coombe (Wellington) beat Richardson and Stevens (Poverty Bay), 6-0, 6-2, 6-2; Livingstone and J. Roach (Waikato) beat Broun and Butler, 6-2, 4-6, 9-7, 6-2; Pattinson and Penfold (Canterbury) beat O’Connor and Renouf (Wellington), 6-3, 6-0, 6-3; Bedford and N. V. Edwards (Wellington) beat M. L. Lampe (Wanganui) and Sharpe (Hawke’s Bay), 6-3, 6-4, 8-6; R. Ferkins and E. A. Roussell (Wellington) beat J. C. Charters and K. W. Dyer (Wellington), 7-5. 9-7, 6-4. Third round: D. G. France (Wellington) and N. Sturt beat M. Ferkins and G Pearce (Wellington), 6-0, 6-3, 6-4. Women’s Doubles. Quarter-finals: Misses T. and 1. Poole (Canterbury) beat Mrs. France (Wellington) and Miss Bubb (Australia), 6-2, 6-2; Misses Bishop and Cooke beat Misses Plummer (Wellington) and Glenny (Hawke’s Bay), 6-4, 9-7; Misses N. and M. Beverley (Matamata) beat Misses Macfarlane and Taylor, 7-5, 6-2. Combined Doubles. Second round: France and Mrs. France (Wellington) beat Turner and Mrs. Shroff, 6-4, 6-1; Bold (Wellington) and Miss Miller (North Otago) beat Dickie and Miss Dickie (Taranaki). 6-3, 8-6; Penfold and Miss D. Dickey (Canterbury) beat Knott nn-d Miss Bubb (Australia), 6-4, 4-6, 2-5: the latter pair having to default because of Knott’s departure for home to-day. Third round: R. W. Smith and Miss Cooke beat E Dickie (Taranaki) and Miss Griffiths, 6-4, 6-3: Dyer (Wellington) and Miss N. Beverley (Matamata) beat. Falconer (Otago) and Mrs. Cotterill (Hawke’s Bay), 6-2, 6-3; Sturt and Miss M. Macfarlane beat Lowrv and Mrs. Milburn (Hawke’s Bay). 6-1, 6-1; Pearce .and Miss Plummer (Wellington) beat Pattiftson and Miss Armstrong (Canterbury), 6-2, 6-3; Wilson and Miss Stewart beat Stedman and Miss Stedman. 6-4, 7-5.