INTERNATIONAL TENNIS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20311, 20 January 1928, Page 8

INTERNATIONAL TENNIS

GENIUS OF THE FRENCHMEN. SUPERIOR IN ALL MATCHES THE NEW ZEALANDERS OVERWHELMED. (Special to Dailx Times.) WELLINGTON, January 19. Tlie weather was> again ideal to-day for the concluding day of the international lawn tennis matches —France v. New Zealand—on the Wellington Provincial Lawn Tennis Association’s grounds at Miramar The Frenchmen again won all their matches, establishing this time an even more definite superiority over the New Zealanders than they dia on th e first day. Borotra and Brugnon played_ a much better game than they did on Wednesday, as also did Ollivier'. Bartleet, perhaps, was not allowed by Brugnon to be quite so brilliant as he was 'on the first day against Borotra. Th© doubles match between Borotra and Boussus and Knott and Sturt was full of interest, with Borotra and Sturt being the outstanding players of the respective combinations. The detailed scores were as follows : J. Borotra (France) beat G. Ollivier (New Zealand). 6—2, 6—4, 6—3. J. Brugnon (France) beat E. L. Bartleet (New Zealand), 7—5, 6—2, 6—l. J. Borotra and C. Boussus (France) beat N G. Sturt and L. G. Knott (New Zealand), 9—7, 7—5, 6—l. BOROTRA BEATS OLLIVIER. Both Ollivier and Borotra, the latter especially, played a much better game than their performances on Wednesday, Borotra went much more to the net, and he was altogether free from the volleying and half-volleying mistakes of the first day against Bartleet, while his smashing and cross-court driving was much more accurate. Indeed, overhead he was deadly. At the net he was impassable either by drives down the lines, cross-court shots, or lobs. The latter he smashed to the opposite corner and for cross-court shots he would speed along the net and volley parallel with the side-line, leaving Ollivier no chance. OHivier’s short cross-court shots, which have proved such prolific point gatherers against New Zealand’s best, were probably the worst shots he could have employed against Borotra. for the reason that th e Frenchman would run into them, play them, and then continue on to the net. When that happened the point was definitely lost to Ollivier. borotra, in all departments of his game, showed himself something of the marvellous player he is when at his best. He “ punched ” his drives cross-court right to the corners, back-hand and fore-hand and straight down th e line. He smashed with unerring accuracy from all parts of the court. He served with great precision, always taking Ollivier out of court. But it was in his volleying that he was supreme. High, low, and half-volleys were the same. H e was bounding along the net to intercept Ollivier’s drive almost before Ollivier’s shot was made. Many of his volleys were mad e with both feet off the ground, as were many of his smashes. Ollivier played a harder game than is his wont, and edneentrated upon backhand shots to Borotra’s backhand for a period. Because that did not pay he switched over to cross-court driving on his forehand to Borotra’s forehand, iiorotra accepted both with equal cheerfulness and replied to both with equal soundness. So long as Ollivier drove deep Borotra was quite prepared to play him at that game, but the moment Ollivier sacrificed depth for his short cross court shots Borotra was to the net like a flash. His placing was brilliant, and nearly always Ollivier was compelled to play the shot on the run, and to run very fast, too, if he would get to the ball. It seemed impossible that anyone could keep up the pace Borotra set himself, but it was Ollivier who was quickly tiring when the end came. Because of this he made many errors on comparatively easy balls. Borotra was spectacular to a degree. It was noticeable also that although he foot-faulted frequently, and was not pulled up, he did make an honest effort to curb this unfortunate propensity. The ground behind the line where he stood was well torn by the scraping of the toe of hia right shoe. BRUGNON BEATS BARTLEET. Those who thought that Bartleet on hi s performance on .Wednesday against Borotra would beat Brugnon were doomed to disappointment. Brugnon played an infinitely better game than he did against Ollivier, He was better in every respect, serving, smashing, and driving. His backhand slice drive was more accurate. He himself was much mdre active; indeed, h© was amazingly so. He was scarcely less speedy than Borotra, and certainly not so spectacular. His sliced backhand drive seldom let him down, and those shots and his sliced volleys just cleared the net, and were always beautifully placed to the lines, either straight down the court or cross court. Bartleet drove well, but he could not keep Brugnon from the net. When Brugnon was at the net Bartleet did nearly all that was humanly possible to pass him, but aways did Bru"non dart across the net or leap into the air to get his racket on the ball. Like Borotra h© punched Bartleet’s cross court shots straight down- the lines, making Bartleet run on a hopeless chase. Shot lobs on his forehand line Brugnon smashed for untouchable winners straight across court to the opposite side line. Lobs on his backhand side line he hit straight down that line. Frequently he ran round his backhand a s Bartleef played cross court to it, and hit the ball hard straight down the side line, but usually he played his forehand drive out from his body' to Bartleet’s backhand, and varied it only occasionally cross court to Bartleet’s forehand corner.

The hard racing took away from Bartleet much of his accuracy, even causing him to fall into numerous errors on what were _ comparatively easy shots—shots, that is, which he did not have to move for. He mishit Brugnon’s service quite a lot sometimes, but the times were rare. Bartleot got Brugnon with fine passing shots backhand and forehand, principally the former, and he even fought on even terms with Brugnon at the net, but generally his volleying lacked Bnignon’s intensity. More often than not Bragnon's volley from low down was a sliced drive. The cut which Brugnon so skilfully puts on most of his shots troubled Bartleet a lot, as did the wonderful length Brugnon was keeping and Ids placements-. Brugnon used all the court, taking the greatest risks with the greatest confidence. He was not afraid to dare, and he very seldom missed the vital point. "artleet put up a gallant fight. He did not lose heart, and died fighting gamely, but there can be no real comparison between the standard of the two players. Only Bartleet's real determination prevented Brugnon getting the third set, 6 —o. THE DOUBLEI; MATCH. The doubles match between Borotra and Boussus (who was substituted for Brugnon) and Knott and Sturt had phases of spectacular volleying and smashing and good cross-court di ing, as well os bad errors in which the chipf offenders were Knott and Boussus. Knott at times was brilliant, with severe cross-court drives and splemiid smashes after Sturt's skill had made the opening, but he made numerous bad errors at critical stages in games and sets. His principal errors were in his driving. Boussus, the left-hander, who, strange to say, was «nt in the right-hand court,

played very badly. Indeed, hi« patches of brilliance wore even more rare than Knott's, but when lie did strike them it was to make superlative winning shots. Sturt played fine tennis almost throughout, vicing at times with Borotra in short-range volleying duels or driving effectively cross court, or putting up some good lobs. Generally, however, lobs were fatal, as Borotra would lean in the air and smash across court for a winner. Bonssus played some clover cross-eourt, drives with his backhand in returning service, but billow volleying—such a feature in his match against Malfroy—was very weak indeed. When he did get his racket on to a ball fairly and squarely there was no reply to it. Borotra was full of life at the net, and jumped in front of stiff drives, halfvolleyed and volleyed smashes, and himself drove in brilliant and dazzling fashion. Both he and Sturt served well.