BADMINTON

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22354, 30 August 1934, Page 4

BADMINTON

By Shuttle. The completion of the South Island Badminton championships on Saturday evening concluded one ot the most interesting contests seen in Dunedin since the game first gained a firm hold in this city* and the Otago Badminton Association is to be complimented on the capable manner ,in which it organised and ■ conducted-the fixture. The Tournament Committtee—Messrs I, Penrose, -R'. Frapwell, and T;. Grimsdale—worked unflag■gingly throughout the championships, and •were fortunate in.having the services of Mr. D; Duthie, whose Jong experience in -handling tournaments of a similar character' proved absolutely invaluable in the expeditious disposal of the large number of matches ..played each evening. The defeat of G. Peafpe, the : Otagb champion, by P. Hatyksworth in the- final of the Men’s -‘Championship Singles did not come as a great surprise, as Hawks:worth' had been playing a particularly fine-game throughout the series.- Inthc second round he defeated F. Kerr 15 —11, 15 —4, his opponent giving him a good game in the first set, and extending-him fully, and in the third round he accounted for that promising young player, R. Craik, 15—8, 15—10, after a solid match. Craik played a very steady game, and did not give Hawksworth many openings for his finishing smash, while he used a neat drop to advantage. Hawksworth, however, had the advantage m courtcraft, and worked his opponent out of position to catch him with ; well-placed angle shots. Hawksworth’s hardest game of the series, however, was against G E. Dickinson, who played up to his best form throughout the tournament. Dickinson has developedinto one of the most tricky players in the city during the past season or so* and his speed on the court, combined with, the accuracy -of his shots and his ability to returfi oven the fiercest smashes, compelled Hawksworth to exert himself' to the . utmost. As it waa, Dickinson canie very close to taking the first set, and it was only his failure to hold the service near the end of the set that enabled Hawksworth to win 15—12. The second 6et_ was almost a-replica of the first, with Dickinson . using soma sharply-angled net shots and accurate smashes for the back corners that kept Hawksworth very busy. The younger player, however, had an unerring eye for an opening, and he eventually took the second set 15—10. Pearce’s progress to the other semi-final - was not hindered •to any great degree, for he beat W. Abbott 15—8, 15 —3 in the second round, and J- D. C. Edgar 15—4, 15—8 in the third round, while he gave A. Anderson little chance in the semi-final, which he won 15—2, 15—4, despite determined opposition. In this match Anderson did not display the same form that characterised his earlier matches, for although he showed a few brief patches of accuracy in placing and smashing, he made many mistakes and- allowed his doughty opponent opportunities of which he made considerable capital. The final between Pearce and Hawksworth did not produce the brilliant display that was anticipated, for Pearce did not seem to be able to deal effectively with his opponent’s attacks, while he made an unusual number of mistakes, whereas Hawksworth played with deadly accuracy and gave Pearce very few chance*. Hawksworth fully deserved his win, for he had played consistently sound badminton throughout the series. Anderson .and T. Walker, another young player who has shown up during the past few months, had a strenuout tussle in the third round, but Anderson’s experience stood him in good stead and he counteracted his opponent’s speed on the court by good tactical shots, taking the match 17 —14, 15—11. Dickinson was too crafty for W. Elliott in the same round, and although the .latter held his own in some good rallies, he was too prone to make mistakes | and was frequently caught out of position. Dickinson won 15 —5, 15—3. The final of the Ladies’ Singles Championship was fought out between Miss Bolwell -and Miss. Ronald, the former securing a well deserved victory; by 14— 10, 11 —1. ' Miss Ronald showed her mettle in the third round, when she defeated Miss Woods 11 —2, 11—1, the Invercargill player having a greater variety of strokes than, her opponent, and/being the possessor of a devastating smash. In the same round Miss Bolwell had a runaway victory over Miss Archer in straight seta, the latter player failing to Score a point in either set. In the semi-finals Miss Ronald overcame Mrs> Lorimer without a great deal of difficluty by 11—1, 11—7, her accurate smashing again proving very troublesome; to her opponent. In the other- semi-final Miss Bolwell accounted for Miss Wright 11—10, 11 —0, Miss Wright going completely to pieces in the second sdt after making, an excellent showing in the first! The final waa a test of steadiness, and court-craft egainst brilliance of attack, and Miss Bolwell, after a narrow victory by 14 —-10 in the first set, wore her opponent down in the second and allowed, her to take only one point. . 1 ' The Men’s Doubles Championship was One of the hardest fought sections of the tournament, and provided - a number of extremely interesting games,' culminating in an exhilarating .exhibition of fast, scientific badminton in the final game between Hawkswprth and Pearce and Dickinson and Laidlaw, which wa s easily one of the niost spectacular games of the tournament. In the first, round three of the matches went to three sets, while the majority of the others provided close contests. In the second round Dickinson and Laidlaw defeated Moodie and Ferguson -15—4,- 15—7 by playing a very good combination* while Edgar and Porteous, who had only beaten Buchler and Galbraith in the third set in the first round, had a hard struggle to beat Elliott and Wright by 15 —11, 15 —10 in the second, Porteous being rathqr inclined to back away from the net, where his great reach should have eflabled him to kill a good many low shots. He played a strong defensive game, however, and Edgar, who was handicapped by a strained foot, played with excellent dash. Both Elliott and Wright were prone to make mistakes, but they found their opponents’ weak points and hammered away at them incessantly, being father unlucky to lose in the long run. Anderson and Moloney, who had . put up a good showing against Hart ’and Kerr in the first round to win a hard fight 18 —15, 15—6, went down in the third set of their match

with Walker and Craik in the. second round. The two young United players have made remarkable strides in .their combined play this season, and their defeat of Anderson and Moloney, who can always be relieved upon to play a sound, aggressive game, was particularly, meritorious. The first set went-, to 18 —13 in the Twenty .players’. , favour, but Walker- and ■ Craik got their opponents’ measure and gave them few opportunities to, score fn the next two sets, which they won To —11,'. 15—6. In the semi-finals Hawksworth and Pearce, who bad taken their match in the, second ■ round by default, defeated -Edgar and'Porteous. -The ■Dunedin players held, their opponents well in the first set, Pearce arid Hawksworth .winning! eventually 15—10, but The latter were not to be-’denied in : the second set, in which their opponents scored only two points. •-J'he. other semi-final; match sawthe elimination of Walker and Craik by Dickinson and Laidlaw. The Dunedin players took the . first, set; easily 15—1, but in : the', second set the-, young United. men;, extended them' to the, full,- arid it was only Dickinson’s clever tactics -. allied to Laidlaw’s hearty smashing that eventually, gave thetn the set, 15—11. The final between Dickinson and Laidlaw and Hawksw'oHh and Pearce was a fitting conclusion to an exceptionally interesting series. In the first set the later could not get the gauge of their opponents, who outgenerallcd them on many occasions, frequently driving them out of position, and' winning the set, 15—9. A slight reversal of form was shown in the second set, in which Dickinson and Laidlaw made several mistakes and let their opponents secure the lead to win 15—3, but excitement was intense in the deciding set" when the Dunedin men, combining splendidly, and using effective tactics, rapidly assumed the lead to stand B—-2. Then, for; some unaccountable reason, they appeared, to lose, their grip, and, although they rallied occasionally, they were unable to stem the conquering march of Hawksworth and Pearce, .'who amassed points every time they secured the service, and won 15—9. It was a brilliant exhibition of the game, some of the rallies being breathtaking in their speed, while the tactical , side ’of the match was one of its most attractive features. ’ . ' ;

The two , Invercargill players, Misses Melvin and Ronald, put up an excellent performance to win the Ladies’ Doubles championship, defeating all their opponents in convincing style. In the semifinals they eliminated Mrs Dickinson and Miss Kerr, who had also played well during the earlier rounds,, by 11—4, 11—1, while in the other semi-final Miss Wright and Mrs Lorimer succeeded in overcoming Mrs Edgar and Miss J. Hay, 11—6, ,11—5. The final between Misses Melvin and Ronald and Miss Wright and Miss Lorimer saw . the Invercargill players take the first set very easily, 11—1, but their opponents put up a stiff opposition in the second set, which eventually finished 11 —8 in Misses Melvin and Ronald's favour. The Mixed Doubles ebampionsnp was a long section, and produced some hard and interesting. games, a good many of the matches going to three sets. In the semi-final Hawksworth and Miss Bolwell, who in their earlier games had not been seriously troubled by the players pitted against them, had a hard struggle to wrest victory from Laidlaw and Mrs Edgar, who played a determined and aggressive game to be beaten by 18—16 in the gruelling first set._ The latter were rather less successful in the 'second set, in which Hawksv,-orth’s fiery - smashing frequently broke . through the - defence: The other semi-final was won by Pearce and Miss Wright, who beat Abbott and Miss Kerr rather easily l 15 —2, 15—4. The. final was another hard game for Hawksworth and Mias, Bolwell, and Pearce and Miss Wright were worthy foemen, and came within an ,ace of winning the first set, going down 15—18. In the second set, however, Hawksworth and hi« partner prevailed by 15 —7, and secured the Championship. The Men’s Singles Handicap was keenly contested, but the climax was more than a little .disappointing. In the semi-finals Pearce, who was. owing 20, had a . grim struggle With Dickinson (owe 10). just scraping home 21—18, while - Hawksworth, also owing 20, easily eliminated Kerr (owe 4) 21—2. When the time came for the playing of the final, however, Hawksworth and Pearce elected to settle the issue by the spin of a coin, which caused more than a little astonishment amongst a section of the officials and onlookers. Although it was argued that the two had to meet in the final of the Men’s Singles Championship also, they should have played the final out-in fairness to the other competitors in the series, as well as to the spectators, and, in this respect, the remarks of «*the president of the Otago Badminton Association with reference to the probable future ineligibility of seeded players in championship events to enter for handicaps has a special significance. Hawksworth and Pearce, who had had their early, handicap of owe 30 increased to owe 40 after their:first game in the Men’s Handicap Doubles, also won this event from Dickinson and Laidlaw', who owed 20, by 21—10. , The Ladies’ Singles Handicap was won by Miss M. Kerr, whose handicap of plus 6 w r as obviously too generous, as she. defeated a number of experienced players with ridiculous ease. In the third round she beat Miss Ronald (owe 8) by 15— minus 4, and in the semi-final she accounted for Miss Wright, who was ow-ing 6, by the same margin. Miss J. Hay, who bad played an excellent game throughout the series, with a handicap of owe 4, was beaten by Miss Kerr in the final by 21—2, indicating that even if the winner bad been playing from scratch she carried too many guns for her opponent. The Ladies’ Double Handicap was annexed by Misses Wright and Ronald, who combined well - throughout the event and ultimately defeated Misses Rothwell and Falconer 21—10, while Dickinson and Mrs Dickinson accounted for Edgar and Miss E. Hay in the final of the Mixed Doubles Handicap by 21—8 after a consistently good exhibition.