CROQUET

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23082, 7 January 1937, Page 4

CROQUET

By Clips

LClub secretaries and captains arc invited to send in items of interest for insertion in this column Inquiries relating to rules will be answered as far as possible All correspondence must reach this office not later than Tuesday oi each week. Correspondence must bear the writer’s name and address as well as nom de plume.l COMING TOURNAMENTS January 14.—South Island Championships, Christchurch. January 19.—New Zealand Championships. Christchurch. January 28.—English Gold and Silver Medals, Timaru. January 29.—West Coast Tournament. Greymouth. February I.—South Auckland Championships. Hamilton. February B.—Southland Association Tournament, Gore. February 9.—Wellington Championships. Hutt and Petone, February 18.—Otago Championships Dunedin. February 22.—Wanganui Championships Wanganui. February 22.—Southern H.B Tournament. Dannevirke. March 2.—South Canterbury Association Tournament. Timaru. March 4.—Auckland Croquet Association Tournament Auckland. March 4.—Taranaki Chamnionships, New Plymouth. CANTERBURY TOURNEY COMPLETED WOMEN’S CHAMPIONSHIP TO MRS A. E. SMITH The Canterbury tourney commenced on Boxing Day and was concluded un Saturday last. Rain interrupted play on several days, but only on Wednesday at mid-day was it necessary to discontinue play altogether. On Thursday the greens were soft and heavy, making play difficult for competitors, but the finals of the Izard Memorial Doubles were played off. and other events were well advanced, six of them being finalised on New Year’s Day, when the weather was sunny and warm. The play in most of these matches was good, and there were some spectacular and interesting recoveries and finishes. Amongst the players who worked through the early rounds were Mrs Palmer, who competed in the South Island tourney played in Dunedin two years ago, and was prominent in all championship events, and who won the S.I. Open Championship. Mrs Were is another player who competed here two years ago at the Otago tourney, winning the Briggs Cup for the Junior Championship. Another supporter of Otago tourneys is Mrs Lee, who, partnered by Mrs Suckling, was just beaten in the final of the Handicap Doubles. H. Neutze, another well-known player locally, was a member of the Leith Club for a few seasons. Mrs Were has evidently made good progress in the game, as in the tourney just completed she won (with H. Neutze) the Handicap Doubles, and was runner-up in “A” Level Singles, as well as being runner-up in the Handicap Singles. _ , The trophies are well distributed personally, Mrs Kellaway being the only one whose name appears twice in the list of winners, though Mrs J. Palmer was second in the Open and Women's Championships. With the exception of J. Thomson, winner of the Handicap Singles, all other winners are members of the United Club, Christchurch. The following are details of the concluding rounds in the various events;— IZARD MEMORIAL CHAMPIONSHIP DOUBLES Winners: H. A. Penn and Mrs Palmer (United). First round: Mrs Maddren and A. Murray 26 beat E. J. Ross and Mrs Scandrett 8. Semi-final: Mrs Maddren and A. Murray 26 beat A. G. Ross and Mrs Lowery 20; H. A. Penn and Mrs Palmer 26 beat Mrs E. A. Smith and Miss Maze 18. Final: H. A. Penn and Mrs Palmer 26 beat Mrs Maddren and A. Murray 20. OPEN CHAMPIONSHIP

Winner: A. G. F. Ross (United). Mrs Palmer beat H. A. Penn 2 games to 1, Mrs Palmer beat Miss Bell 2 games to 1. Final: A. G. F. Ross beat Mrs Palmer 2 games to 1. “A” LEVEL SINGLES

Winner: Mrs Kellaway (United). Mrs Kellaway 26 beat Miss M’Millan 19, Mrs S. Jones 26 beat Mrs Beanland 25, F. Blunt 26 beat Mrs Tisch 3. Semifinal: Mrs Kellaway 26 beat F. Blunt nil. .Final: Mrs Kellaway 26 beat Mrs Were 21. HANDICAP SINGLES

Winner: J. Thomson (Ashburton). J. Thomson beat Mrs Scandrett 26—4, H.' A. Penn beat Miss Bell 26 —19. Semi-finals: J. Thomson boat Mrs Norton by default, Mrs Were 26 beat H. A. Penn 22. Final: J. Thomson 26 beat Mrs Were 17. HANDICAP DOUBLES I

Winners: Mrs Were and H. Neutze (United). Mrs Were and H. Neutze 26 beat Mrs Jones and Miss M'Millan 19. Final: Mrs Were and H. Neutze 26 beat Mesdames Wilson and Meikle 22 HANDICAP DOUBLES II Winners: Mesdames Jones and Kellaway. Mesdames Jones and Kellaway 26 beat E. J. Ross and Mrs Meikle 23, Mrs Tisch and H. Neutze 26 beat Miss Maze and Mrs Bonar 26—24. Semifinal: Mesdames Jones and Kellaway 26 beat Mrs Tisch and H. Neutze. Final: Mesdames Jones and Kellaway 26 beat Mesdames Lee and Suckling 16. WOMEN’S CHAMPIONSHIP First life: Winner, Mrs E. A. Smith. Semi-final: Mrs Palmer beat Mrs Lowery 26—17, Mrs Smith beat Mrs Kellaway 26—8. Final. Mrs Smith beat Mrs Palmer 26 —18. Second life. —Semi-final: Mrs Scandrelt beat Mrs Jones 26—8, Mrs Palmer beat Mrs Lowery 26—17. Final: Mrs Palmer beat Mrs Scandrett 26—8. Winner first v. winner second life; Mrs A. E. Smith beat Mrs J. Palmer 26—8 and 26—0. A third game was unnecessary. The trophies were presented on Saturday afternoon by Mr A. G. F. Ross, president of the United Club, who expressed saisfaction at the success of the tournament.

INTERRUPTION OF ADVERSARY Under the “Etiquette,” and in “Hints Worth Remembering.” in the New Zealand Annual, players are advised that it is a breach of etiquette to inform an opponent that she is about to make a wrong hoop, or make any other error in play, as interference of this sort leads to trouble. This question, especially making for the wrong hoop, is often discussed—and “ should one tell? ” still remains unsolved as far as the sportsmanship side of the question is concerned. Of course, it is known that it is only among the “ rabbits ” that making for the wrong hoop would occur; allrounders and short bisquers seldom stop long enough in a turn to do other than automatically make the hoops in order. Unfortunately, the proportion of “rabbits” in the game is large, and one wonders :f one would be more diverted from her usual play if her opponent called out, “ You’re making the wrong hoop,” or if, after she had made it, her opponent says, “That’s your last shot. You’d made that hoop before.” There has been quite a controversy in England on the point during the season just concluded, and there has been a good deal of correspondence in the English Croquet Gazette. The editor of that journal writes: —“ Many technical irregularities known formerly as ‘ fouls' have since been labelled ‘ inadvertencies,’ and their transfer to the unpunishable category has had admittedly a refreshing effect. But the case involves no technical irregularity, where, say. Blue approaches Black’s hoop in error and has clearly the intention of running it. This sort’ of thing is, unfortunately, still liable to happen, for such is human frailty, and the risk seems scarcely diminished under the stress of tournament play. It is the stress that may even quite often prove the cause! So a troublesome question again comes before us this week, and it may be that no amount of discussion of it will ever succeed in reconciling two opposing schools of thought. Each school has a right to its tenets, and neither, in our opinion, need be labelled as lacking in good sportsmanship.” ’ “Clips” would be pleased to receive from local players their views, which should be interesting to all readers.