LAWN TENNIS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21544, 16 January 1932, Page 7

LAWN TENNIS

AUSTRALIAN LADIES’ TEAM > MATCHES IN DUNEDIN /'BRILLIANT DOUBLES PLAY In ideal lawn tennis conditions the Australian ladies’ team which is at present touring the Dominion commenced a match against Otago at the Logan Park courts yesterday afternoon. At the conclusion of the day’s play honours rested with the visitors, who had won two of the four singles and both the doubles matches. Although the Australian ladies were not familiar with hard courts, and were, therefore, playing at a disadvantage, the exhibition which they gave stamped them as players of the first class. Miss Valkenburg and Miss Hall never appeared to be fully extended at any part of the afternoon, winning their singles and doubles with comparative ease, while _in their exhibition doubles game with Mrs Scott and Miss Wake, they were much too severe for their opponents, who were defeated to the tune of 6 —2, 6 —2.- Miss lilbyd was beaten fairly decisively in her singles match by Miss White, whose steadiness and deep and well-placed driving gave her a well-deserved win, but the visitor played a much better game in the doubles, when, partnered by Miss Hartiean, she showed some very fine tennis. Xt would probably be conceded, however, that the “ star ” of the team is Miss Hartman. In the singles she met with defeat when opposed by Miss Calver, her play appearing to indicate that she louna it rather difficult to accustom' herself to the type of game demanded by the asphalt surface. It was not until the second set of the exhibition doubles match against Mrs Scott and Miss Wake that she really struck form, and from then on her play was the attraction of the afternoon. She gave a delightful exhibition, making all her shots with a swing and ease which it was a pleasure to watch. Her service was particularly effective, and would be coveted' by. many of the leading men in Otago, while her drives down the side lines frequently • left her opponents standing. Om yesterday s play, ef all the visitors, she gives the greatest promise of developing into a player of | International class. The matches were • watched by a large and keenly interested attendance. „• ' THE SINGLES

’■Miss Partridge opened her match with Miss Valkenburg in promising style, taking the fist game rather easily. Miss Valkenburg, however, who had opened rather nervously, quickly recovered, and took the score to 4r—2, driving confidently from both corners of the court. Each player captured a game, but Miss Valkenburg won the next with a beautiful shot to Miss Partidge’g backhand corner, which gave the latter no chance. The New South Wales player opened up a lead of 4r—l in the next set, showing some beautiful cross-court shots. The following game .was hotly* contested, and the final rally saw Miss Partridge make some brilliant recoveries, but once again Miss Valkenburg clinched matters with a hard drive to the backhand. Miss Partridge won the next game by splendid play, the score being 5 —2. With the stroke score at 40 —30 in the next game. Miss Valkenburg’s service took, the next point, giving her the game, set and match. • ■ Miss Hall and Miss Pattison fought a long drawn-out ( first set, Miss Hall, by steadier play and a greater variety of strokes, finally running out the winner,. 6—3. Playing well up to her best form in the next set and controlling the ball beautifuly, Miss Pattison captured the two opening games. Miss Hall recovered well,land showing a wonderfully fine backhand as yrell as great accuracy in her shots, she ■ won the next five games, the fourth being a love game. In the final game of the set Miss Pattison, driving well from the backline/ established an early advantage, but Miss Hall was too steady to be rattled, and she worked the score to deuce. She won the next strobe, and her driving of Miss Pattison’s return in the final rally to mid court saw the Otago player send out over the back line; Miss Hartigan was unable to settle down' to bard-court conditions in her match>-with Miss Calver. Her service lacked accuracy, and, generally speaking, although she showed wonderful speed in some of her shots, she was unable to control the ball.' Miss Calver also played m- forceful type of game, but her placing was better, and after a bard game she won the set 6—4. The next set Produced a particularly hard struggle. Miss Hartigan, took the first the next three being won by Miss Calver. The lead alternated between the pair, Mias Hartigan showing some nice shots, but after just failing to finish off the rally with a drive down the side t lines which just missed. Miss Calver took the next game, and with match point against her in the next. Miss Hartigan fought hard to stave off defeat. A splendid return by the New South Wales player appeared to have Miss . Calver beaten, tut the latter made a wonderful recovery and passed Miss Hartigan at the net to win the set B—6. , The game between Miss Lloyd and Miss White was decided by the steadiness and

accuracy of control of the Otago player. Miss Lloyd tried every type of stroke. She drove and sliced and volleyed, to midcourt, down either side, and to the back line, but moat of her shots came back. Gradually Miss Lloyd’s accuracy broke down, and after losing the first set 3—6, she was unable to stand up to Miss White in the second. Miss White lost the second game, but. from then on she held the, advantage, and had no difficulty in running out'the winner, 6—l. THE DOUBLES

Misses Valkenburg and Hall were much too good for Misses Pattison and White, who were beaten 6—2, 6—o. The Otago pair put up a stout resistance, but with both their opponents playing severe and accurate tennis, they had no chance. Miss Hall played a much better game than in her singles, her backhand strokes producing rounds of applause from the crowd, while both at the net or on the backhne Mi® Valkenburg treated everything with easy confidence. The other Doubles match between Misses Hartman and Lloyd and Misses Partridge and Calver closely resembled the exhibition match in which the former pair had appeared earlier in the afternoon. Miss Hartigan was inclined to be erratic in the first set, while Miss Lloyd was also playing below form. Miss Partridge, on. the other hand, was driving and volleying splendidly, catching her opponents out of position with shots down the centre of the court. She received good backing from Miss Calver, who was serving particularly well. Once again defeat had the effect of steadying Miss Hartigan, The second set was keenly contested, but the New South Wajes pair, having settled down, were not to be denied, and they ran out the winners, 6—3, The final set was a repetition of the second, Miss Hartigan’s brilliant driving generally finishing off the rallies. With the score at 4—-2 Otago won the next game on Miss Lloyd’s service, but this was the final effort.and the set and match went to the visitors with the score I—6, 6—3, 6—3. EXHIBITION DOUBLES

Perhaps the finest match in the Doubles was that between Mrs Scott and Miss Wake and Misses Hartigan and Lloyd. The opening, set gave no indication of the abilities of the New South Wales pair, who were completely outgeneralled and outplayed. Mrs Scott and Miss Wake won the first five games, with brilliant tennis which drew round after round of applause from the crowd. The Australian pair then began to recover and captured the following two, games, but lost the next' and the set. The second set saw a remarkable change come over the play of the Australian ladies. Miss Hartigan for the first time began to show her real tennis ability. Her driving gained in speed and accuracy, while her service was at times deadly. Miss Lloyd also improved, and by the time the score had reached 4 all the South Canterbury pair were pinned on the back-line, Miss Hartigan’s drives down the side-lines giving them no chance at the net. The next two games and the set went to the Australians, making the set score one all. The score had reached 2 all in the final set, when the Australians commenced to lose some of their pace and they were frequently being caught out of position. Mrs Scott and Miss Wake won the next two games. Miss' Hartigan, however, served splendidly in the next game, taking the score to 40-love and leaving Mrs Scott standing with her final serve which scarcely rose from the court. When the score had reached 5 all, the New Zealand players were again hemmed on the back line. Miss Hartigan more or less dominating the play, although Miss Lloyd was playing well at the net. The next game went to New South Wales. Mrs Scott served two double faults in the final, and with the stroke score at 30—40 Miss Hartigan smashed a ball from mid-court down the side line, to win the game,, set,, and match. The other Exhibition Doubles match in which Mrs Scott and Miss Wake opposed Misses Valkenburg and Hall was quickly over. Mrs Scott was by this time playing far below her form, and Miss Wake was quite, unable to resist the attack of the Australian pair. Miss Hall in particular was getting tremendous power into her drives, which were just skimming the net and were rarely going out. Her _ backhand also was even better than previously. The Australians won the first set without being extended. After losing the first game of the second set the New South Wales pair "also lost the fourth, but this was the beginning of the end. The next three games went to the Australians. With Miss Valkenburg serving, the stroke score ran to 40—30, when Miss Valkenburg’s final serve completely beat Mrs Scott, giving the visitors the set and the match.

THE RESULTS• The following are the detailed results of yesterday’s play:— SINGLES. Miss Yalkenburg beat Miss Partridge, 6 — 3, 6 — 2. Miss Hall beat' Miss Pattison, o—B. 6—2. Miss Hartigan lost to Miss Calver, 4 —6. 6—B. Miss Lloyd lost to Miss White, 3—6. I~6‘ 1 ~ 6 ‘ DOUBLES. Misses Yalkenburg and Hall beat Misses Pattison and White, 6—2, 6—o. Mieses Hartigan and Lloyd beat Misses Partridge and Calver, I—6, 6—3, 6 —3. EXHIBITION DOUBLES. Misses Hartigan and Lloyd beat Mrs Scott and Miss Wake, 2—6. 6—2, 7—5. Misses Yalkenburg and Hall beat Mrs Scott and Miss Wake, 6—2, 6—2. ’ MATCHES FOR TO-DAY. The following matches will be played to-lay:— Singles (at ,1.30 p.m.).—Miss Yalkenburg v. Mrs Scott, Miss Hall v. Miss Wake. Miss Hartigan v. Miss Partridge, Miss Lloyd v. Miss Pattison. Doubles (at 4 p.m.).—Misses Yalkenburg and Hall v. Misses Partridge and Calver, Misses Hartigan and Lloyd v. Misses Pattison and White. Exhibition Doubles (at 2.30 p.m.).— Misses Yalkenburg and Hall v. Misses Hartigan and Lloyd, Mrs Scott and Miss Wake v. Miesee Pattison and White. RECEPTION TO TEAM The members of the Australian team, on their arrival by the express from Invercargill, were entertained at a briei social function at the Savoy. The Deputy Mayor (Cr Mitchell) extended a welcome to them on behalf of the city, and expressed the hope that not only would they enjoy themselves but that their visit would have a beneficial effect on a game that was now one of the most popular in the world. Mr R. Phillipps (president of the Otago Lawn Tennis Association) also extended an official welcome to the team. Miss Lloyd (manager) briefly replied.

WILDING SHIELD MATCH OTAGO v. CANTERBURY (Peb United Press Association.) CHRISTCHURCH, January 15. Losing no matches and only one set of the 13 played, the Canterbury representative lawn tennis team overwhelmed the team representative of the combined southern associations (Otago, North Otago, and South Canterbury) on the first day of the elimination match between the South Island challengers for the Wilding Shield. The younger, members of the visiting team, who are without exception handicapped by lack ot play in good company; seemed a little overawed by the occasion. None ot the four southern players managed to win more than four games in . his Singles match. Much better form was displayed in the Doubles, however, when some ot the visitors gave glimpses of their real capabilities, the' Otago pair securing the only set that the visitors won during the afternooon. Results: — SINGLES. C. 1 Angas (Canterbury) beat G. A. Pearce (Otago), 6—3, 6—o. H. A. Barnett (Canterbury) beat W. G, Robertson (South Canterbury), 6—l. g 2 • D. F. Glanville (Canterbury) beat G. Sumpter (North Otago), 6—l, 6—2. T. W. Patterson (Canterbury) beat 8. G. M'Dougall (Otago), 6—l, 6—2. DOUBLES. Angas and Barnett beat Robertson and Sumpter, 6—3, 6—3. Glanville and Patterson beat Pearce and M'Dougall, 5 —7, 6 — i, 7 —5. TOTALS. Canterbury, six matches, 12 sets (78 ga 2fi ( so matches, 1 set (35 games).

NOTES ON THE PLAY PINE SMASHING BY PEARCE. (Special to Daily Times.) CHRISTCHURCH, January 15. G. A. Pearce, the comparatively young Otago champion, created an excellent impression, not so much by his" play in the Singles against Angas, but by his form in the Doubles with M'Donald against Glanville and Patterson. A hard-hitting player, he used his great height to advantage, particularly in his service and smashing. His forehand was under» excellent control, and he disguised the direction of his shots excellently on this hand. On his backhand, however, he presented a slight weakness that was bound to let him down against so keen an attacking player as Angas. He showed, too, a tendency to stand a foot or so inside the base line, with the result that he had to half-volley drives of good length. Robertson, the recent. winner of the South Island Singles Championship, and Barnett have met on a number of occasions during their lawn tennis careers, and the decision has gone to the latter in each case. Robertson, until to-day. had never failed to extend the tenacious Canterbury player, but on this occasion he was definitely out-classed. He appeared to be playing to a preconceived plan of hitting Barnett off the court, and although he sent over some magnificent shots Barnett usually sent them back with length and accuracy, and, in striving for still further speed, the Timaru player fell into errors. The third Singles match between Glanville and Sumpter was a story of missed opportunities for the North Otago man. Time and again he was presented with splendid openings for which he worked perseveringly, only to miss a volley or smash that would have given him an important point. .Shrewd and tenacious player as M'Dougall is, he was completely outplayed by Patterson in a quiet, but interesting, game, the Canterbury man losing only three games in the two sets. Patterson made hardly a mistake in his smashing and volleying, giving M'Dougall no second chance after the Otago man had once sent back a weak return. No better smashing and volleying has been seen in doubles play in Christchurch for a long time than that provided by Pearce in his doubles with M'Dougall against Glanville and Patterson.' The Otago pair were playing first for the southern team and meeting the second doubles string of the Canterbury four, but their performance in taking the first set was a very meritorious one. Pearce, using his great reach, smashed with terrific power and once he got his racket on to a ball in the air the rally was finished. The Canterbury pair did their best to keep the ball away from him, for M'Dougall, although playing steadily, had nothing like

the deadliness of Pearce’s overhead attack. Interest attached to the other Doubles game, for Angas' and Barnett, who have paired for the New Zealand championships, appeared in partnership for the first time in the last year or two. With two such “ retrievers ” together, there was bound to be a certain amount of misunderstanding, but on the whole they combined well and their net attack and resourceful defensive play was much too good for Robertson and Sumpter, to whom they lost three games in each set. Angas was the dominant player of the four. DOMINION CHAMPIONSHIPS THE DRAW ANNOUNCED. The following is the draw for the New Zealand lawn tennis championships, to be' held at Auckland, commencing on January 25. The players marked with an asterisk have been seeded. MEN’S DOUBLES. Byes in top half—*A. C. Stedman v. N. Smith. D. I. Robertson v. E. W. Griffiths. *H. A. Barnett v. E. W. Martin. L. T. Pickmere v. S. Lamb. *N; R. C. Wilson v. C. Partridge. First Round. S. J. Robinson v. C. A. K. Deaker. R. E. Taylor v. A. W. Christmas. *A. L. France v. J. B. Macpherson. K. Hayr v. A, K. Turner. R. A. Court v. V, R. Johns. P. H. Jones v. *T. Patterson. *E. L. Bartleet v. D. G. Glanville. W. J. Melody v. J. C. Charters. G. L. Brown v. C. F. Schadick. A’. J. Dickie v. E. AV. Wright. J. T. Laurenson v. A. C. Notmau. Byes in bottom half.—R. R. Lees v. winner of J. T. Laurenson and A. C. Notmau. W. Johns v. E. F. Page. *D. G. France v. C. 11. Bowen. E. A. Roussell v. M. L. Lampe. *N. G. Sturt v. R. Carter. N. Davys v. *C. Aligns. WOMEN’S SINGLES. Bye in top half.—Miss D. Nichols. First Round. Miss I. C'. Needham v. Miss E. AV. Johnston. . *Mrs AA r . J. Melody v. Miss N. Beverley. Miss R. Taylor v. *Miss J. Hartigan. *Miss Marjorie Maefarlane v. Miss M. Potter. Miss B. Griffiths v. Mrs D. G. France. Miss V. M. .Ecclos v. Miss M. Humphreys. Miss J. Ramsay v. *Miss U. ALalkenburg. *Mrs H. M. Dykes v. Miss M. Hootou. Miss L. Robertson v. Miss D. Howe.

*Miss N. Lloyd v. Miss P. Miller. Mrs N. M'Nair Thomson v. *Miss N. Hall. *Miss B. M. Knight v. Miss N. Howell. Miss Marion Maefarlane v. Miss T. D, Newton. Byes in bottom half. —Mrs E. Napier v. *Mrs M. Molesworth. MEN’S DOUBLES. Byes in top half. —*N. R. C. Wilson and A. C. Stedman v. A. K. Turner and E. H. K. Turner., . First Round J. G. P. Tapper and A. D. Thomson v. D. G. Glanville and T. Patterson. E. W- Griffiths and J. Harrison v. N, Davys and A. J. Dickie. *C. Angas and H. A. Barnett v. M. T. Wilson and J. S. Wilson. N. G. Sturt and T. Rhodes-Williams v. K. Hayr and E. W. Wright. A. E. MlCeown and P. Potter v. J. 8.. Macpherson and C. F. Schadick. E. P. Spencer and J. R. M'Crystal v. D. I. Robertson and C. A. K. Deaker. *E. L. Bartleet and J. F. Laurenson v. S. Lamb and W. Smith. C. H. Bowen and R. E. Taylor v. C. Partridge and I. H. MacArthur. R. A. Court and M. L. Lampe v. AV. J. Melody and F. W. Martin. A. C. Johns and H. C Rowlands v. E. M. D. Ohlson and R. Carter. *D. G. France and A. L, France v. P. H. Jones and R. R. Lees. Byes in bottom half: — V. R. Johns and W. Johns v. winner of France brothers v. Jones and Lees. J. C. Charters and S. J. Robinson v. L. T. Pickmere and A. G. Wallace. WOMEN’S DOUBLES. First Round. *Mrs H. M. Dykes and Miss B. Knight v. Misses M. Humphreys and N. Howell. Mrs E. Napier and Miss J. E. Ramsay v. Mrs D. G. France and Miss D. Howe. *Mrs M. Molesworth and Mrs N. M'Nair Thomson v. Misses L. Robertson and R. Taylor. *Misses R. Miller arid N. Beverley v. Misses N. Lloyd and J. Hartigan. *Mrs W. J. Melody and Miss D. Nicholls v. Misses Remiger and D. Remiger. Mrs M. Shroff and Miss N. Whitelaw v. Mrs Wren and Mrs D. Russell. "Misses M. and M. Maefarlane v. Misses B. Stedman and P. Savin. Mrs H. L. Robson and Miss B. Griffiths v. "Misses U. Valkenburg and N. Hall. MIXED DOUBLES. Byes in Top Half. "Miss Marjorie Maefarlane and N. G. Sturt v. Miss E. M. Johnston and H. A. Barnett. First Round, "Miss N. Hall and A. C. Johns v. Miss R. Taylor and J. C. Charters. Miss A. Graham and A. J. Dickie v. Miss V. Eccles and L. T. Pickmere. "Miss D. Nicholls and A. L. France v. Mrs E. Napier and I, H. Macarthur.,

Miss M. Humphreys and N. Davys v. Mrs H. L. Robson and E. M. D. Ohlson. *Miss‘N. Lloyd and J. Harrison v. Miss N. Howell and R. A’Court. Miss P. Miller and E. W. Wright v. Mrs W. J. Melody and W. J. Melody. "Mrs N. M'Nain Thomson and N. R. C. Wilson v. Mrs. Russell and S. J. Robinson. Miss N. Beverley and M. L. Lampe v. Miss B. M. Knight and V. R. Johns. Miss J. Hartigan and A. C. Stedman v. Miss J. E. Ramsay and D. I. Robertson, Mrs D. G. France and D. G. France v. Miss N. Whitelaw and A. K. Turner. "Mrs M. Molesworth and E. W. Griffiths v. Miss Marion Maefarlane and C. Partridge. Byes in the Bottom Half. Miss D. Howe and E. A. Roussell v. winner of Mrs Molesworth and E. W. Griffiths v. Miss Maefarlane and C. Part- " Miss U, Valkenburg and M. M. Morrison v. Miss L. Robertson and S. Lamb. INTERMEDIATE SINGLES. Byes in Top Half. J. L. B. Stevens v. G. AV. Kirkbridge. A. 6. Clow v. J. S. Wilson. R. A. AVharfe v. D. A. Peak. First Round. W. A. Reid v. R. G. Park. S. S. Handyside v. A. J. Dickie. W. G. Gray v. E. F. Page. E. A. Roussell v. D. Livingstone. Byes in Bottom Half. R. R. Lees v. L. H. Wilson. C. H. Bowen v. S. R. Walton, N. Davys v. D. G. Gumming. The Australian ladies’ tennis team playing against the South Island on the new courts at Logan Park are all using Alexander Rackets exclusively. No other rackets can compare with Alexander for the wonderful design, balance, finish, and general attractiveness of appearance, coupled with sturdy strength, lasting qualities, and flexibility in play. There are models to suit every type of player at a price available to all. They are stocked by all the leading sports dealers throughout the Dominion. Ask to see them. Sole New Zealand distributors, Brape, Windle, Blyth, and Co., Ltd., Dunedin.—Advt.