LAWN TENNIS

Evening Star, Issue 21007, 22 January 1932, Page 6

LAWN TENNIS

WILDING SHIELD .• AUCKLAND V. CANTERBURY [Per United Press Association.] AUCKLAND, January 21. At the Stanley Street Courts to-day, the Auckland and Canterbury representatives met in the semi-final of the Wilding Shield contest. The weather was fine, and there was a good attendance of the public. The courts were fast after a long spell of fine weather. The sensation of the day was the defeat in two straight sets of Stedman (Auckland), the holder of the New Zealand singles championship, by Barnett, the young Canterbury player. Angas was expected to give Bartleet a much closer match than actually resulted, but Bartleet was right on his game, and after the opening set Angas never looked like winning. Glanville atoned for this defeat, accounting for Morrison, after the last-named had won the first set to love. Sturt proved much too strong for Patterson, and so honours were even so far as the singles matches -were concerned. Angas and Barnett were much too steady for Bartleet and Morrison. The Canterbury pair never really appeared to be in danger of losing. Stedman and Sturt outclassed Glanville and Patterson, and thus one of the doubles went to each province. The position at the end of the first day, therefore, was that each team had won three matches, and so the interest in to-morrow’s play will be well sustained. A close result is anticipated. The contest between Stedman and Barnett was expected to produce some high-grade tennis, but it resolved itself into a rather colourless driving duel in which the Canterbury > player was the essence of steadiness, his placing being very much more accurate, if little less powerful, than that of the New Zealand champion. Barnett forced his opponent into errors by cleverly varying -the length and paee of his drives. This frequently caused Stedman to over-drive. Stedman’s net play was shocking. His _ Australian trip seems to have deteriorated his game in this respect, at least. However, the young Canterbury player is to be congratulated upon his meritorious victory. The game between Bartleet and Angas showed the Aucklander up in a favourable light so far as tactics are concerned. In the first set each strove, to work the other put of position and then finish the rally with beautifullyplaced cross-court shots on either hand. In this, Angas was more successful, being assisted by Bartleet’s over-driv-ing. Bartleet was complete master of the situation in the second and third sots. His serve proved troublesome and his volleying and driving were very accurate.

There were few brilliant patches in the game between Glanvido and Morrison. The Canterbury man was the stronger of the two, and lasted better.

Patterson was unable to extend Sturt at any stage. Results:— SINGLES. Barnett (Canterbury) beat Stedman (Auckland), 6-3, 6-3. Bartleet (Auckland) beat Angas (Canterbury), 2-6, 6-0, 6-2. Glanvilk (Canterbury), beat Morrison (Auckland), 0-6, 10-8, 6-4. Sturt (Auckland) beat Patterson (Canterbury), 6-2, 6-0. DQIJBLES. Angas and Barnett (Canterbury) beat Bartleet and Morrison (Auckland), 6-4, 6-3. Stedman and Sturt (Auckland) beat Glanville and Patterson (Canterbury), 6-2, 6-2.