CHAMPIONS IN ACTION AT WIMBLEDON ON MONDAY

Southland Times, Issue 23538, 18 June 1938, Page 15

CHAMPIONS IN ACTION AT WIMBLEDON ON MONDAY

(SPECIALLY WRITTEN FOR THE SOUTHLAND TIMES)

By

MERVYN WESTON

$ LONDON, May 23.

Wimbledon is four weeks away but the greatest galavy of lawn tennis players an individual championship has ever attracted is limbering up for the stern fortnight of strenuous competition, beginning on June 20 and ending on July 2. Mrs Helen Wills Moody and Donald Budge, both Californians, are my choices for the 1938 classic.

Budge, of course, is an automatic choice. Prophecy is much more difficult in the women’s realm, but after seeing Mrs Moody batter down such strong opposition in winning the Surrey championship at Berrylands, Surbiton Hill, last week, without once removing her cardigan, I unhesitatingly select Mrs Moody to win for the eight time, and so create a record of singles victories.

No competitor possesses the factors of driving ambition, relentless purpose, concentration, and determination, experience, and supreme control of sustained . downright hitting to a greater extent than Mrs Moody. She might have superiors in actual technique, but no one has her matchless temperament. It really was a magnificent feat to win the Surrey championship from a field which included Senorita Lizana, the four Australians, four South Africans, and the English players (Misses Scriven, Lumb, James, Scott, Nuttall, and Mrs King). Mrs Moody defeated Mrs J. B. Pittman 6-0, 6-1, Miss Margaret Morphew (South Africa) 6-3, 6-3, Mrs King 6-2, 7-5, Miss Scriven 6-2, 5-7, 6-3, and Miss Lumb 6-3, 6-4. Apart from the second-rate North London hardcourt tournament at Highbury the previous week, Mrs Moody had not played in competitive singles for almost three years. Mrs Moody showed greater matchwinning qualities last week than I have ever seen in any player. She has earned justly the appellations of “Queen of the Courts” and “Pokerface.” Her whole manner is reserved and studied. I am convinced that she secures a psychological advantage over her opponents from this manner. She never makes a gesture of either pleasure or disappointment. She never takes a single step after a ball which she knows she cannot reach, but she goes relentlessly after any ball that she can possibly return. This gives her a physical advantage also. During the whole of the week, the only time she smiled was when receiving the championship cup. This icy reticence and studied reserve—she never changes with the other players when preparing for her matches —together with her reputation, appear to strike fear into her opponents. I do not say that this manner is deliberate, but it is rather upsetting for her opponents. It is making a war of the game. Mrs Moody never concedes a point or a game unearned to even an absolute tyro.

Mrs Moody’s play last week was most impressive. She served and drove with great power, top-spining both backhand and forehand. Her volleying was efficent enough, but not thoroughly convincing. Never at any time did she temporise in a stroke. She appears to sum up the shot to play automatically, and goes firmly for it. In most of her matches, her opponents were “through” physically towards the end.

MISS WYNNE’S CHANCES The three players capable of defeating Mrs Moody at Wimbledon are Miss Nancye Wynne, the premier Australian player; Miss Alice Marble, the 1936 American champion and semi-final competitor at Wimbledon last year; and Panna Jadwiga Jedrzejowska, of Poland, runner-up for both the Wimbledon and American championships in 1937. There is a fourth—Senorita Anita Lizana, the Chilean, who won the American title last year without losing a set. Despite her disturbing lapses, I still rate Miss Wynne, technically and potentially, as the greatest player I have seen. Not even Mrs Moody can make the ball flow from q racket with such effortless rhythm. No player today has the power or the physique of the Australian. However, all the leading players have ’better tactics, and they are much better at actual match-win-ning. I am convinced that if Miss Wynne played at her top—did not miss those easy half-court returns when the whole court is open—even Mrs Moody would have to dance to her tune. The

Australian has devastating artillery if she can only use it. There are two factors which are making Miss Wynne such a “problem player” at the moment. The first is psychological. It is of the psychology which causes a player to remark,- “I’m not going to play tennis on these shocking courts,” or “I am not going to play in this wind.” Both remarks could.be finished by saying, “I don’t care if I am beaten, in fact I hope I lose.” This reaction or attitude might also result from other happenings. The second, factor is that Miss Wynne is not watching the ball, particularly on about the third shot in a rally which she is controlling with her forehand. In short, she is not taking sufficent care to achieve her object. It might be termed lack of sufficent concentration. Perhaps her game has come too easily. Her poise was affected many times by the bad bounces at Surbition. Of course there is the point that, because of her definite flowing style, she is a little more affected by such bad bounces than most players. Miss Wynne should be in her element at Wimbledon. The type of turf there and the general perfection of playing conditions should help both her game and temperament. If she were to meet Mrs Moody in the final, for instance, she might hit her “off the court,” to use tennis parlance. Miss Alice Marble is impressive. She is a replica of Miss Wynne, but she has not the Australian’s power or physique. Her shots do not flow in quite the same effortless brilliance. However, Miss Marble appears to have much better temperament, far greater variety in her stroking, and superior tactical, knowledge. She uses every shot with calculated purpose, whereas Miss Wynne often bangs a shot haphazardly anywhere. She will definitely be more menacing this year.

BRITISH CHAMPION IMPRESSES

During the week-end I had an opportunity of practising with Panna Jedrzejowska at Queen’s Club. This “bird’seye view” of the Polish champion left me with a profound impression of her ability. I wonder no longer why she reached the two major finals last year. In personality and build, she might be taken as the twin sister of Miss Dorothy Bundy. “Yaya” or “Yedra,” as she likes to be called, is dark brown of hair and complexion, whereas Miss Bundy is fair. Panna Jedrzejowska has a tremendous forehand drive. She hits it with terrific power, using slight topspin, and

seems able to place it at will. Her backhand and her volley are also good, although she appeared inclined to slice her backhand too often and too much. It is splendid to know that Australia will probably see this wonderful player late this year. She wants to come to Australia, and is prepared to continue the journey after playing at Forest Hills and California. Senorita Lizana has an amazing reputation in England. She is capable of •better lawn tennis than she revealed at Bournemouth or Surbiton. She has delightful strokes of almost infinite variety, and can . adapt her game to each opponent betfer perhaps than anyone else. But she is rather inclined to be impish and fawn-like —except that die is dark—and that is rather gambling with fate. j Miss Bundy is still shouting praises of her tour of Australia with Miss Workman, and is so enthusiastic about everything Australian, that Misses Helen Jacobs, Alice Marble, Gracyn Wheeler, and Mrs Fabyan are keen to visit Australia, and others are inquiring. Returning to the Australians at Surbiton, the tournament must be regarded with satisfaction. Miss Coyne was most impressive in a clever win over Miss Scott on a rain-soaked court, but disappointing against Miss Steven Son. However, her doubles play was wonderfully sound. This tournament brought the revival of Mrs Hopman and Miss Stevenson. Both had been unable to find form on hard-courts. Mrs Hopman was really unfortunate against Miss Scriven, while Miss Stevenson played beautifully against both Miss Coyne and Miss Scriven. All four are playing better than in the last Australian season, during which all the ranking players were “selector” conscious. The vision of selectors in the stands was always disturbing. It was a real Australian triumph to have an Australian final in the doubles. The Australians certainly shaped like a world-class combination—a pair with force and finesse.

Actually, the achievement of Mrs Hopman and Miss Stevenson in defeating the 1935 and 1936 Wimbledon champions, Misses Stammers _ and James, and Mrs King and Mrs Pitman, runners-up last year, was even more praiseworthy, and they almost defeated their team-mates in the final. Miss Stevenson volleyed superbly, but Mrs Hopman showed real genius and adaptability.- Her tactics, whether for drive, toss, or interception, were admirably conceived.