THE GAMES DESCRIBED

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 24, 28 July 1923, Page 7

THE GAMES DESCRIBED

ANDERSON'S SUPERIOR PLACING

AND DRIVING.

.(Received 28th July, 11.30 a.m.)

SOUTH ORANGE, 27th July. The first day's play in the Australia v. Hawaii preliminary for the Davis Cup resulted in J. 0. Anderson (Australia) defeating Detrick (Hawaii), 6-1, 6-3, 6-3, and J. B. Hawkes (Australia) defeating Ecklund (Hawaii), 6-2, 6-1, 6-4. The court was extremely soft, the playerß frequently slipping. Anderson won the first game 4-2. He lost two points as a result of one double fault, and netting one return. Anderson won the second game 5-3, taking the last point for a well-placed shot along the line. ' Anderson won the third set, 6-4, both men making errors due to the slow court. Detrick won the fourth set, 4-2, Anderson driving out three in an effort to make placements. The Australian won ithe, fifth set, taking the last two points for service aces. Anderson, changed his shoes for those with spikes, as he was slipping about the court. He appeared to be trying the metal of his opponent by working carefully and making well-placed returns.. On the other hand Detrick appeared to be unable to clear the net and was racing over the court to meet his opponent's placements. Anderson won the sixth game, 10-8, both men making beautiful shots, but following them" up with errors. ■ Anderson won the seventh set, 4-2, thus winning the 6et, 6-1-

In the second set Anderson won the first game, 4-2, Detrick being clearly nei--vous and unaccustomed to meet the strategy and experience of a player of Anderson's calibre, and it did not appear at this point that Detrick was giving Anderson much trouble. Anderson won the second game, 4-1, Detrick occasionally flashing into brilliance with a calculated return, but without Anderson's reach. This was, however, so rave that Anderson had nothing to fear. Anderson won the third game, 7-5, the fourth, 4-1 arid Detrick won the fifth, 4-1, !by three wellplaced returns, which it was impossible for Anderson to reach. Nevertheless, Anderson was playing with great confidence, and was apparently not anticipating any trouble. Detrick won the sixth, .6-4, on Anderson's drives out of the court. Detrick won the. seventh, 12-10, the game fluctuating precariously because of the sharp veering of the wind, which carried the ball out of the court. Anderson won the eighth game, 4-1, with cross-cut shots, calculated to confuse his opponent. Detrick, who had hitherto been playing without great force behind his shots, was now beginning his service more speedily, and was making returns with force, but paying for this with inaccuracy. Anderson won the ninth, 5-3, partly on his opponent's errors and his own accurate returns, thus winning the second set, 6-3.

When the third set started Detrick's backhand proved very weak, Anderson taking advantage of this with Detrick making desperate efforts to employ his forehand, Anderson won the first game, 6-4, and Detrick won the second game to love, scoring by well-aimed placements just outside Anderson's reach. Anderson won the third game, 6-4. Detrick's service improved immeasurably, and he ■ivon the fourth game, 4-1, as the result of aces that Anderson drove ' out' of bounds in his efforts to return. Anderson won the fifth, 4-1, chiefly on his own service, which was too speedy for the Hawaiian. Anderson won the sixth game to love on hard returns that Detrick could barely reach or drove out of the court.. Tie Australian, won the seventh, 5-3, mostly on his opponent's errors. Derrick saved the match for a time when in the eighth game. When the points stood at 3-1, he served two' aces and brought the game to deuce, where it wavered and finally went to him 7-5. Anderson, however, finished quickly, winning the ninth game to love in a spurt of speed. Following is the scoring in the match: Anderson (Australia): 7 service aces 43 placements, 31 outs, 31 nets, 5 double" faults.

I Detrick (Hawaii): 3 service aces, 16 ivrtnnements, 26 outs, 36 nets, 1 double I fault..