LAWN TENNIS

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVI, Issue 25, 29 December 1925, Page 3

LAWN TENNIS

NEW ZEALAND . CHAMPIONSHIPS x THE. SECOND DAY’S PLAY. Per Press Association,^. CHRISTCHURCH, Dec. 28. The New Zealand -tennis championships were continued to-day, when the third round of tho men’s singles was concluded, leaving Ollivicr, Bartleet, Parker, Len France, Don France, Wallace, Peacock and Seay to play off in that order.

DEFEAT OF SMYTH. The most notable casualty of tho day was Smyth', who was simply worn down by J. B. Parker (brother of H. A. Parker), who owed liis win to absolute physical fitness and ability to return the ball from almost any position. This match lasted fivo sets and finished after 7.30 p.m. Smyth in the fourth set had a lead of 5—3, and was 30-15 in that game and the next, hut was never within an actual'point of winning. Of the other matches Peacock’s defeat of Mape was a fine exhibition, while Bartleet’s speed against Aitken was an eye-opener. Haege, tho Victorian, according to expectations, was a bit too young and easily disconcerted by the steady game of Len France, but nevertheless ho pulled off some brilliant recoveries. MEN’S DOUBLES. In tho men’s doubles there were no surprises, unless it was tho defeat of Lampo and Wheeler by an average Canterbury pair, Patterson and Tait. At the end of the third round Peacock and Wilson play Jackson and Turner, France and France play Griffiths and Johns, Ollivier and Seay play Patterson and Tait, and Page and Knott play Haege and Parker. Ollivier and Seay are almost certain finalists in the lower half, while a semifinal seems likely, between the F ranee brothers and Peacock and Wilson. LADIES’ SINGLES. The ladies singles were notablo for two recoveries made by Mrs Scott, who lost the first set against Miss Lloyd (New South Wales), while Miss Nnight did the same thing against Miss \\ akc. Miss Knight’s stroke production was far more correct than her opponent s, while Mrs Scott played lor safety against Miss Lloyd, and won on superior stamina. Mrs Scott, who is in the semi-final, plays the winner of tlvo Misses Marjorie Macfarlane—Ballantyno match, while Miss Knight, in the other semi-final, plays the winner of the Misses Speirs and Tracy match. DAY’S DISPLAY REVIEWED. Taking a brief review of the day’s play, Peacock had no difficulty in beating 'Lampe, who frequently drove out, being unable to deal successfully with an awkward service. There were several fine rallies, and both made excursions to the net, but generally leacock emerged the victor. Len France beat Haege on accuracy and placing. Haege’s smashing was wonderful at times, but lie went to pieces jigainst a persistently heavily chopped attack and a very active opponent. „ ~ , . Aitlcen’s length baffled Bartleet in the first set, in which he could not find the lines and often over-drove, but Bartleet’s service in subsequent sets was quite the most brilliant seen at tho tournament and, although his backhand was indifferent and Aitken exploited it as far as ho could, there was nothing in tho match after the first set. The most interesting doubles was. the meeting of Ollivier and Seay and Smyth and Fulton. ' In the first set Ollivier was playing beautifully. Although Ollivier, and Seay led 4—l, Smyth and Fulton drew ,up to 5 all. Then Ollivier and Seay won the next two games. The second set was closely contested. Ollivier and Seay went oft well again, but Smyth and Fulton took the lead 3—2. Ollivier and Seay took the next three games, but lost another before finishing 6—4. Ollivier was driving well in tho last set and another feature of this game was tho splendid work by Fulton at the net. When the score was 4—3 in his favour Ollivier went down on his service o—4o, but eventually won out. The last game was taken oif Smyth’s service fairly easily. In the later stages Ollivier brought off nice drives, and his lob volleys from the net were very disconcerting. There was a long struggle in the match, Wallace and Dickie v. Borrows and Field, which resulted in favour of Wallace and Dickie, 4—6, 4—6, 6—4, (i—2, B—6. When the sets were two all the games were s—l and 30—0 in favour of Borrows and Field, hut steady play pulled out Wallace and Dickie, in the two middle sets they played very agressivge tennis. It was | then old game, and they came up to the net. Wallace, especially was brilliant. Dickie was safe, but not nearly so good overhead. I

Griffiths and Johns beat Aitken and Wilding in straight sets, 6—4, 6—4, 6—2. The winners played the steadier. Their volleying and placing were superior. Aitken and Wilding gave a few flashes of brilliancy,, but Wilding was inclined to be weak overhead.

The Marathon effort of ihc morning was the match between Pear.se and Scott and A. B. and B. B. Loughnari, which occupied three and a quarter hours. The final scores in favour of Pearse and Scott were 13—11, 9—7, 3—B, 4—(3, 6—3. Pearse and Scott had the match point in tiie third set at. 7—5, but lost it after live sets. Lowry and Hill conquered Allison and Sheppard. It was a very good exhibition. Hill and Lowry had the advantage in the service. Allison and Sheppard lobbed beautifully, both for defence and attack, but volleying and ■serving overcame them. Goss and Greenwood went down to Page and Knott, whose score was 6—4, 6—6—2. The winner's were superior at the net. All round they played an excellent game. In the match in which France and France defeated Hubble and Lamb the play was of a straggling nature. A. L. France was off form, and Lamb served well and was good overhead. LADIES’ DOUBLES. In the ladies’ doubles Misses Travers and Tracy (Wellington) reached the semi-final with the loss of only two games against the Otago pair, Misses Ballantyne and Romans, whereas Misses Knight and Nicholls had to fight 'hard after the loss of the first set to beat Misses Cato and Cotterill, a stylish volleying pair, who would have won if they had not tired. In the lower half, the Misses Macfarlane (Auckland) had hard work to bcut' a moderate Canterbury pair in the second round, and they were not favourites when they took the field later in tlie day against Miss Spoirs and Mrs Scott, but they concentrated the at- 1 tack on Mrs Scott and actually re- J

covered from 2—4 to lead 5 —4. Miss Speirs got the next game on her service, and tho southern pair, lobbing judiciously, nosed out 7 —5. In the second set Miss Marjorie Macfarlane servod first and won the first game, but Miss Speirs and Mrs Scott got the next three. It was 3 all, but Miss Marion Macfdrlane lost on her servico after deuce had been called fivo times, and the next two games were won with the loss of only ono point. The combined doubles has not progressed very far, and a couple of first round matches are still to play..

In the boys’ singles the surprise of the day was the defeat of Max Ferkins by Browne, a Christchurch Boys High School youth, who recently won the inter-secondary schools handicap tournament.

Details of the play are as follow:

MEN’S SINGLES

Third round: J. C. Peacock beat M. Lampe, 6 —3, 6—2, 6 — r‘3 ;A. Seay beat W. Sheppard, 6—o, 6 —o, 6 —l; E- L. Bartleet beat G. G. Aitken, 5—7, B—l, 6 —o, 6 —4; G. Ollivier beat R. McL. Ferkins, G —3, 6 —3, 6—2; Wallace beat Wheeler 4—6, 9—7, 6—4, 6—l; L. France, beat Haege, 6 —4, 6 —o, 6 4; Don. France beat B. B. Louglinan, 6 —3, 2 —o, G —2, 6 —2; Parker- beat E. B. W. Smyth, 2—6, 6—4, B—lo, 7—5, 6—l. LADIES’ SINGLES. Second round: Miss M. Tracy beat Miss J. E. Ramsay, 6—l, 6—2; Miss Marjorie Macfarlane beat Miss M. Ward, 6—l, 6—4. Third round : Miss Knight beat Miss Wake, 3—6, 6—3, 7—5; Mrs Scott beat Miss Lloyd, 3—6, 6 —3, 6 —2. MEN’S DOUBLES. J. Lowry and L. J. Hill beat P. E. Allison and W. Sheppard, 6 —3, 4—6, 4—6, 6—3, 6—3; V. E. Page and L. G. Knott beat W. Goss and P. G. Greenwood, 6 —4, 6—4, 6—2; Marne Pears© and AV. A. Scott beat A. 13. Louglinan and B. B. Loughnan, 13—11, 9—6, 6—B, 4—6, 6—3. Second round: S. E. Jackson and A. K. Turner beat E. Goro and I*. Nixon, 6—3, 6—4, 6 — i ; P. Haege and J. B. Parker beat E. H. Orbell and G. lnnes Jones. 6 —l, 6—3, 6—4; Trance and France beat V. H. Hubble and S. Lamb, 6—l, 10—8, 9—7; Peacock and Wilson, beat Pcarse and Scott, 6 —2, 6—3, 6 —3; Griffiths and Johns beat Walker and Johnston, 6—4, 6 —4. 6—4; Ollivier and Seay beat Hill and Lowry, 6—o, 6—2, B—6; Patterson and Taile beat Lampe and Wheeler. 4—G, 6—l, 6—B, 6—3, 6—4; Page and Knott beat Wallace and Dickie, 6 —2, G—3, 6—3. LADIES’ DOUBLES. Second round: Misses B. Knight and D. Nicholls beat Misses M. Cato nnd B. Cotterill, 3 —6, 6 —l, 6 —3; Misses E. Travers and M. Tracy beat Misses E. Ballantyne and I. Romans, 6—l, 6—l. Semi-final: Miss Speirs and ,Mrs Scott beat Misses Macfarlane, 7—5 6—3. MINED DOUBLES. Miss M. Smeo and C. Angas beat Miss I. Romans and Fulton, 6 —o, 4—6, 6 —2-; Miss E. N. Ballantyne and E. 13. Smyth beat Mrs S. Sharpe and A. Borrows, 7—6, 6 —2; Miss E. Buchanan and W. Goss beat Miss M. Saunders and L. G. Knott, B—6,8 —6, 6 —4, 6—l; Mrs Reeves and A. 13. Loughnan beat Miss Cato and Aitken, 3 —6, 6 —l, B—6; Miss Marjorie Macfarlane and Lowry beat Miss AY aid and Ford, 6 —2. 6—4; Miss Marion Macfarlane and Hill beat Mrs Page and Browning, 6—4, 3—6, 6—2. Second round: Miss Saunders and Somerville beat Miss Smee and Angas, 3—6, 6—4, 6—o. BOYS’ SINGLES. V. R. Skellerup beat M. Mitchell by defnult; W. Haworth beat P. Manchester, 5 —6, 6—4, 6 —3; A. H. McDonald beat D. S. Smyth, 6 —l, 2—6, 6 —2; G. W. Browne beat M. Ferkins, 3—6, 6 —3, 7—5; C. E. Malfroy beat L. Saunders, 6 —o, 6 —l; C. A. Blazey beat C. Spraggo, 6—3, 6 —3; R. A. Lucas heat A. L. Kav, 6—3, 6—3; H. R. Tawhiri beat J. S. Lee, 6—l, 6 —3. GIRLS’ SINGLES.

Semi-final: Margaret Gibson beat Ruth Haggitt, 6—l, 6 —l.

“NO NEW STARS.”

AUSTRALIAN TENNIS IS UNDER REVIEW.

MELBOURNE, Dec. 9

Tennis experts, champions and former champions, are not perturbed because the Victorian championships which concluded on Saturday did not produce any new stars. 1J “You can’t expect new champions to bob tip every year,” said Mr Norman Brookes. “It would be just as feasible to expect a Melba.” The aftermath discussion centres, for the most part, around the surprises of the tournament—first the defeat of Cummings by Lurin, of Patterson by Wertheim, and of Wertheim by Fitchet’t, and then, on Saturday, the vanquishing of tho doubles “unbeatable*,” Patterson and Hawkcs, by Pat O’Hara Wood and I. D. M’lnnes. Played again—tho singles at any rate —tho results would probably bo reveled. “STANDARD FALLEN.”

Mr O’Hara Wood declared to-day that he was disappointed with the standard of play. In his opinion it was below that of previous years. “I do not think young players practice hard enough nowadays,” he said.

Leaving out the prominent men, Mr Wood considered that James (S.A.), Dickinson, who won the special singles Haege, runner-up, and Lum were worthy of notice. James, he said, had a nice style. Haege had some good performances to his credit, yet he was beaten by Dickinson, who showed promise two or three years ago, but had not fulfilled it.

“On the whole, however, Mr Wood added, “no one new stood out.” All that Mr Gerald Patterson would say was that he was not disappointed with the tournament from ( the point of view that it did not produce new talent. McINNES’S PROMISE. The new singles champion, Mr R. E. Schlesinger, supported him. He pointed out that Lum was about tho only new player to contest the championships and that it was very hard to come to any decision on one showing. Mr Brookes also stated that lie was not disappointed, simply becauso he did not .expect anything new. Ho was particularly pleased, he said, with the performances- of Schlesinger and MeInncs. Schlesinger was fulfilling all that had been predicted for him, and he would go further still, while Mclunes, in his play ou Saturday, showed

tremendous promise. Though defeated, Patterson, in Mr Brookes’s opinion, was stili Victoria’s champion. “Certainly,” he added, “no new future champions turned up; but we needn’t he downhearted at that. Our present champions and top-notchers are still young. In any case we have done surprisingly well in producing the men we have. Compare Australia with other tennis countries on thepopulation basis and you will see how really fine have been results from our point of view.” THE DAVIS CUP. The next topic of discussion in tennis circles will be Australia and the Davis Cup. Those quoted above agreed to-day that it was unlikely that we would be sending a team away next year. Patterson stated in America that he would not be available, but ho is not going to retire. He said this morning that he would give as much time to big tennis as his business would allow him.

It is not likely that J. 0. Anderson will bo available either, so that even if tho difficulty of finance did not crop up, no team would be available which would have any chance on the other side