LAWN TENNIS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 15063, 9 February 1911, Page 10

LAWN TENNIS.

■> By Smash.

The First Grade banner competition gives every, promise of a close finish being provided between tho Kaituna and Port Chalmers teams—each of which have so far an unbeaten record. Threo games have boon played, but it will bo remembered that the Kaituna-Port match, which was to have been played off at the beginning of the 6cason, was postnoned till the ond of the round. Port Chalmers last Saturday defeated Balmacowen by a narrow margin. Tho idea in tennis circles is that Kaituna is the club most likely to hold the sonior banner. Certainly there ore many fine men players there, and the probability is indeed that', if full strength is available, success will) go its way. Matters aro now being got- in train for the Easter tournament of the Otago Association. With tho facilities now obtaining every effort should be; put forth to make, this a decided success.

A lesson to selection committees mav well be drawn from an incident in the B Grade match—Anderson's Bay v. Roslyn— on Saturday last. The latter team won by 10 games, because the Bay team played one man short.* This is a thing which should never happen, and Tcflccts no credit on those responsible for the Bay team. The names of that team wore not published on Friday, and presumably wore also not sent to the secretary of the association. As a matter of fact, I understand, tho player who was absent was injured in a previous match, and in addition had been laid aside by sickness. In tho absence of a man'_ from tho courts for over a fortnight, it seems peculiar that no incmirv should bo made by the Selection Committee as to whether ho was able to plav in the match This incident and the result —the loss of tho match—conveys its own lesson.

A Tennis Club has been, recently formed at Wakari, and members are diligently engaging in practice. It is said that the club's best foyr nlayors are Mrs Kerr, Mies Hurley, C. French.-A. Wright, and these arc showing fair form. The membership of &a club is not yet complete, so that there should be an opening for the formation of a strong club in the district. The Taranaki championships were concluded recently. In the Men's Championship Singles L. Bonnington, of Christchurch, proved his worth by beating C. J. Dickie, 7-f5, 4—6, 6—3, after a real sterling contest. Bonnington, however, met his Waterloo at the hands of A'. G. Wallace, the latter wining, 6-r3, B—6. L. S. Jennings had displayed fine form in tho initial stages of the championship event, and was reckoned on as the likely champion, but when ho met A. G. Wallace, the holder, in the final he appeared to be nervous from the start. Wallace romped away with a lovo' sot, but Jennings with a fine display of tennis took tho next at 6—3. Wallaco again took the lead by capturing the third set, 6—3, and led, 4—l, in the fourth set, when Jennings, who was. palpably distressed, retired, A. 6. Wallaco lias now won the Taranaki championship four times. The Men's Championship Doublos foil to Dickie and Wallace, who boat Jennings and Nicholson iii the final, 6—l, 6—4.' Jennings (owe 20) won the. A Grade Handicap Singles; beating Bonnington (owe 20) in the semi-final, 60—44; and Wybonrno (scr), 60—58. Wybpurno led, 56— 49, and looked all over a winner, but Jennings scored 9. points' in rapid succession out of tho next service, and led.' 58—57. Wyibotirnc equalised the score, and then had two easyohanocs to win outright, but friled, and Jennings won as above. Bonninffton and Jennings (owe 15) boat Powdrcll Bros, (scr), 60—45, in the final of the Handicap Singles. Tho winners put Dickie and Wallaco (champions) (owe 25) out, 60—40, in one of the earlier rounds.

The Canterbury-Wellington match, decided on Saturday week last, has proved a little disappointing to the Wellington players. Practically all the press comment from that quarter .goes to indicate that Wellington should have won—if the best team were available. Putting it mildly, "Huka" says this (other writers complain more bitterly): "Wellington was without the services of Fisher and Brown, and C. C. Cox could not represent the provinco, as he is now located in Hawkc's Bay. Swainston and Aitken, who would have strengthened the team, could not make the trip to town. On paper the team was not a weak one, although it could have been improved possibly by one or two players. [Other players suggested by other writers were Laishley and Hawkins.] Canterbury's team was without the services of Quill, Jennings, and Ilairman—the last-named would havo played third man had ho been available. Bonnington was absent also, and ho was wet! worth a place."

Answering the question "Why?" concerning the defeat, tho Evening Post writer gives this praising word to Canterbury: "simply that the Canterbury players are keener. Down south they havo 11 lino grass courts, and all are as eager a 6 possible for good practice, whilst up here the only grass courts available for play in tho city are the four at Thorndon. The players havo little or no chance for singles, and it is a well-known fact that some of the pairs had never met' in a single practice. Consequently,, combination was an unknown quantity, and for tho above reasons alone Canterbury deserved its win."

The chief interest naturally centred on the Ollivier-Peacock match (says the Dominion). It is certainly a feather in the Canterbury player's cap that ho should have so completely demolished tho New Zealand champion by 6—3, 6—4; and, this being tho second win in two yoars over tho samo playor, it shows that, all tilings being equal, thoro is fair ground for supposing that ho is somowhat tho better player; by how much it is cortainly difficult to rightly appreciate. It is safe to say that, hardly once, did Poacoock drop into his game. That this was partly due to QUivier's stylo is undoubtedly true—his anticipating boi'ng very clow and his pacing at times effective ;—but it was . probably more due to the fact that he had Tittle varied piaotioo

since tho Now Zealand meeting. Ollivier has been in continuous touch with players of all styles aiid tactics for a. month, and has an according advantage. On the day he was the better man, his service seldom going out or " netting," while Poacock (more than iisu.il) sent in a host of double faults. . . . Peacock in each of the two sets led 30—love—in the eighth game—games which probably made a difference to tho winning of the sets. In the first he should have equalised the score at 4 all (Ollivier leading 5—3 _ instead), while, peculiarly enough, ho missed his opportunity of leading 5—3 in the .second set, Ollivier winning the eighth game and making the score 4 all; Peacock, as a matter of fact, failing to win another game in the match. Tho Gosj-Swanston game was the best worth watching of all tho singles, if only for the spirit of bustle that was woven into the game. Goes got going from tho jump—real ring tactics,—and, despite a rather weak service, practically slammed his opponent off the court. Swanston was compelled to keep to defensive play the whole of tho first set, and often during the suececding two. Swanston's steadiness and staying power won tho match, Goss showing tho effects of his hard game before eventhe end of the first set. It may bo said that steadinees won Wellington's threo singles; Salmond wearing Borrows down, after the latter had put up a heady and plucky light; and Smythe killing Kiver'3 brilliance by solid driving. The other matches may thus be summed up:—"Smythe and Kiver had their usual three-set go. In 1909 Kiver beat Smvthe,. 6—4, 4—6, 6-4, but tho "Wellington player reversed matters this time, and won, 3--6, 6—l, 6—3. Salmond and Borrows, both old Otago representatives, very fittingly met. Last year Borrows beat Salmond, 4—6, 6—5, 6-2, but,, although Borrows tried hard to make it a three-set go, this time Salmond was determined to end it in two sets straight, and won, 6-4, 10—8.' White-Par-sons won easily from Didsbury. Pearse was just too strong for Young, although the latter played steadily—too steadilv if anything. Several times in the doubles Wellington was wjthin an ace of winning the match—but Kiver and Borrows fought most pluckily, and saved the situation by winning from Smythe and Salmond, 4—6, B—6, 9—7. Pearse and White-Parsons won easily from Young and Didsbury. The double between Peacock-Swanston and Ollfvier-Gfoss was a good exhibition. The first-named pair worked well together, and although not at all safe with their ground shots, more than held_ their own with 'overhead work, and that is what counts in a double at alt. times; Canterbury took the first set, 6—4, Wellington evened with tho next at 6—2. and then a hard struggle was seen for tho final. Five all called. Swanston and Peacock worked finely together, and won. out at 7-5.

The Wellington ladies wan their matches fairly easily from the Canterbury players. Miss Cotter put up the best fight for Canterbury, and took tho first set from Miss Wiliams, 7—5, but failed to extend her opponent in tho remaining sets. Mesdames Berry and Lord pressed Misses Travers and Williams after lesing the first sot of tho doubles to We, and evened with the second set at 6—l. The Wellington pair had to play all they knew to win the final at 6-4.