THREE TITLES WON

Taranaki Daily News, 14 January 1935, Page 2

THREE TITLES WON

STROMBOM; MISS WYLDS TARANAKI TENNIS EVENT A. AND E. DICKIE BEATEN PLAY’S LOWER STANDARD The Ttu-anaki tennis championship tournament which concluded at the Now Plymouth Club courts on Saturday, proved a triumph for C. Strombom, New Plymouth, and Miss P. Wylds, New Plymouth, who each won three titles. Strombom disposed of L. Udy, Wanganui, in fine style in the men’s singles and partnered with J. Leggat, the top Waiwaka player, won the men’s doubles from A. and E. Dickie, Waverley, the holders. Miss Wylds, New Plymouth, won the singles title and with Strombom won the combined doubles. Misses Hicks, Hawera, and Wylds won the women’s doubles. As far as championship tennis Was concerned the finals were decidedly disappointing, and only occasionally did any game reach the standard of play Seen at previous tournaments. In fact many of the earlier rounds and semi-finals provided keener and more exhilarating play. A contributing feature to the poor standard was the disappointing condition of the courts. From the side the courts looked quite well but in the men’s singles final it quickly became apparent that the four days’ play had caused many faulty patches. The championship winners, with last year’s title-holders in parentheses, were: Men’s singles: C. Strombom, New Plymouth (C. E. Malfroy, Wellington). Men’s doubles: C. Strombom and J. Leggat, New Plymouth (A. Dickie and E* Dickie, Waverley). Women’s singles: Miss P. Wylds, New Plymouth (Mrs. R. P. Adams, Wellington). Women’s doubles: Misses P. Wylds, New Plymouth, and A. Hicks, Hawera (Misses D. Simpson and O. J. Tayldr, New 1 Plymouth). Combined doubles: C. Strombom and Miss P. Wylds, New Plymouth (C. E. Malfroy and Mrs. R. P. Adams, Wellington). Boys’ singles: C. Nodder, New Plymouth (H. J. Shields, Patea). Girls’ singles: Miss M. Lawrence, New Plymouth (not contested). The handicap winners wetO: Men’s singles: R. Therkleson (15). Men’s doubles: C. Ambury and F. Quin (15 4 (jj. Women’s singles: Miss Hallett (15 3—6). Combined doubles: Hunter and Mrs, Webster (4 —6). PREVIOUS WINNERS. Previous winners of the singles title have been: 1902, J. C* Nicholson; 1903, Cliff Dickie; 1904, H. A. Parker; 1905, H. A. Parked; 1906, A. G. Wallace; 1907, A. G. Wallace; 1908, H. A. Parker; 1909, A. F. Wilding; 1910, Cliff Dickie; 1911, A. G. Wallace; 1912, A. G. Wallace; 1913, G. Ollivier; 1915, J. C. Nicholson; 1921, A. W* Sims; 1922, A. G. Wallace; 1923, E. D. Andrews; 1924, E. D. Andrews; 1925, E. B. W. Smyth; 1926, E. L. Bartleet; 1927, Paul Haege; 1928, E. L. Bartleet; 1929, 'A. L. France; 1930, J. C. Charters; 1931, N. R. C. Wilson; 1932, C. H. Strombom; 1933, C. E. Malfroy; 1934, C. E. Malfroy. The men's singles, reduced to a threeset match compared with five sets previously, failed to produce any flrewofks. Both Strombom and Udy had shown better form earlier in the tournament. Udy failed to reproduce the dash and vigour which had impressed the gallery earlier in the week. His service was weak while many of his drives from simple shots want astray for no apparent reason. His overhead work was always sound but his attack was most unenterprising. Strombom, on the other hand, played a more solid game, succeeding with a more reliable service. His drives down the side were well placed and he made some remarkable recoveries with flashes of brilliancy. Udy found the comers on occasions with well-concealed shots, but Strombom playing well-directed backhands managed to keep the account even. Strombom led 3—l in the first set. He was showing a decided improvement and his stroking was more in keeping with championship form. Udy took a point frdrn a volley at the net. However, he dropped the next few balls into the net to lose the game. Producing fine overhead shots Udy pulled up to 3—4. Udy was playing a good length and Strombom was having to cover the court from corner to comer to make his returns. Overdriving cost Udy the next game. Strombom ran to 40 love and set point with good shots from the net cutting past Udy. He netted the next ball but settled the issue from a weak return from Udy.

UDY IMPROVES. Udy played much better in the second set and scored with smashes and crosscourt shots. Long rallies became more frequent and generally the standard was better, with Strombom having a little the best of things all through. Udy was volleying well, but Strombom scored with short cut shots from close up at the net. Udy led at 3—l. Half-Court shots were his downfall in the next game and the score stood at 3—2 in his favour. Udy became patchy. Strombom evened at 3 all with well placed shots. Each won their own service for 4 all, the games being very short and lacking dash. Strombom took the next game from 40—15 after Udy electrified the crowd with a brilliant display of driving down the line. He appeared to lose confidence and lacked control in the next game, Strombom capturing his. service. Strombom took the first point and Udy evened with a lob td the baseline. Strombom forged ahead and, with match point against him, Udy failed to return a hot drive. The most spectacular tennis of the day was provided by the men’s doubles when Strombom and Leggat defeated last year’s winners, A. Dickie and E. Dickie, in five sets. A remarkable change after the third set on the part of Leggat, who played as if inspired during the final stages, was the principal reason for the success of the winners. In the opening set Strombom had little support from Leggat, who failed to return easy Shots and netted time after time from Arthur Dickie’s comparatively weak service. However, as the game progressed he reached a standard of proficiency, which he had not previously displayed at the tournament. His spin drives became accurate and contained plenty of sting. He excelled at the net and combined well with his partner. Strombom was always at the top of his form. He drove beautifully and from the net cut through ahy weakness in his opponents’ combination. His service was well maintained and both he and his partner lobbed with unerring accuracy. The Dickie brothers lack the sting and combination of a year or so ago. At the net they crowded and left the opposition many openings which it did not fail to take. Eric was serving well but Arthur lacked sting in this department. The brothers smashed with greater vigour than has been their practice in the past. Occasionally Eric found Leggat out of place and slammed in a cross-court drive that left the Opposition no chance. The Dickies were offered no opposition in the first set, Leggat being the weakness. They ran to a 3—love lead and won 6—2. Eric’s service won points. Going to the net, the Dickies found the

opposition’s lobs gaining points and they had to retifi to the baseline. The next set found the brothers faced with great combination. Leggat was Improving and Strombom’s coverage was excellent. They broke through Eric’s service and went to 2—o. The Dickies took the next game after a bright bout of halfvolleys and volleys in which all four participated. The next three games were characterised by fine half-court rallies, in which the Dick!'-- held the advantage evening at 3 all. Strombom then forged ahead to i.’n 6—u. well-judged lobs and pretty net shots upsetting the combination of the opposition. The third set found all four netting badly and poor tennis followed. The Dickies were finishing off movement, better and ran out at 6—3. Leggat commenced the fourth Set in splendid style and working well at the net smashed through the opposition. Strombom played fine tennis and scored with well-selected shots. Bright play was the order ot the final Set. Greater determination, vigour and combination WOh the day. Both of the Waverley player; drove hard from the service, but Strombom cut in at the net and disorganised the pair. ' eggat smashed fiercely and the ffrst game was won to love. The pair continued unchecked until 4—o, when they lost two games, the Dickies momentarily having the best of net play. The Dickies lost the next, but won the next off Strombom after Leggat had netted and lost the advantage, Eric clipping the line with a smash. Eric’s service was won to 15, angular shots beating Leggat in the comer. Strombom overlobbed in the next game and Arthur punwhed Leggftt’s short lob for 5 all. Tho Dickies rmhod the net during the next game but Leggat and Strombom outplayed the opposition and won to 30. The next game saw the finish. Eric netted a difficult angular return and overdrove the next off Strombom s ser** vice. The nCxt service Was an easy one but Arthur netted it. Strombom failed to return a hot full-length drive from Arthur, but after a long rally trapped Arthur with a half-court ball. WINNERS’ FINE RECOVERY. The final of the combined doubles in which Strombom and Miss Wylds defeated A. Dickie and Miss A. Hicks was notable for the fine recovery of the winners after being down I—4 in the first set. By winning six games in a row they took the first set and led I—o in the second. The match opened with both pairs erratic but Dickie settled down and taking advantage of Strombom’S mistakes and soft shots to the net quickly ran to a 4—l lead. Strombom then began to out-manoeuvre Dickie and Miss Hicks, receiving excellent support from Miss Wylds, who was safe and alive to any opportunities for winning shots. Strombom was at his best at this stage and after drawing level at 4 all drove to the comers and across court for winners. He took Dickie’s service and his own to deuce to win the first set 6—4. After the first game of the second set had gone to deuce a sharply angled net shot clinched it for Strombom and Miss Wylds. Off Strombom’s service, Dickie dfeW level at one all but Miss Hicks lost her service. Strombom and Miss Wylds, both playing to Miss Hicks backhand, increased the lead to 3—l when Dickie won his service. Strombom and Miss Wylds drew ahead to 5—2 despite mistakes. In the next game deeply angled volleys took them to match point at 40— 30. However, Dickie evened at deuce, lost the next point and then after deuce volleyed for a winner and then with a perfect stop volley took the. game. Dickie aced Miss Wylds and played Strombom out of position, taking the score to 5—4 in Strombom’s favour, after Dickie had been down 2—5. Two weak shots by Dickie let the New Plymouth pair lead at 30—0. Strombom netting and serving a double fault made the points even but at 40—30 he aced Miss Hicks. The women’s singles final between Miss Wylds and Miss Hicks produced lethargic if accurate tennis. The New Plymouth player came to light with impenetrable stonewall tactics in the second and third Sets and won on her opponent’s errors 4-6, 6—5, 6—3. More tournament play would have prompted the Hawera girl to persist earlier in coming to net • and probably striking a length in the critical stages of the match. Rigidly avoiding volleying wherever possible, Miss Wylds stayed on the baseline and the match developed into a duel of slow,, driving relieved only by flashes in enterprise and some nice passing shots from the return Of short drives. Steadiness, and a refusal to play,her opponent’s game won the match for Miss Wylds. FAIR INDEX OF MATCH.

The first two games of the first set were a fair index of the match. The first went to two and the second to four deuces and Miss Wylds won both. Miss Hicks won the set mainly because she was still fresh and her opponent playing listless drives. In the Second set Miss Hicks ran away to 4—l but the New Plymouth girl steadied and fought back like a machine. The third set opened more brightly with Miss Wylds sparkling occasionally to take a 4_l load and the set. Misses P. Wylds and A. Hicks gave an indifferent display when they defeated Misses M. Webster and J. Mddley by two sets to one in the final of the women’s doubles championship. Miss Hicks worked hard but carelessly throughout the match, while Miss Wylds completely failed to find form until the third set. Both, players appeared over-confident and it was only their greater experience in tournament play that enabled them to escape defeat at the end of the second set. Miss Medley found her length early and worried Miss Hicks with slow lobbing tactics. She was easily the most consistent of the four. Miss Webster at the net was not spectacular but by skilful placing made almost every shot a winning one. The weakness in her backhand play was not exploited by her opponents who displayed astonishingly little courtcraft for players of their record. In the first set Miss Wylds and Miss Hicks held the younger players to 3 all, after which Miss Hicks became erratic. She was the only player putting any punch into her strokes, but lobbing did not suit her and forced her into overdriving. Miss Wylds lent little support while Misses Webster and Medley, settling down to a sound, unimaginative game, took the set 6—3. Miss Hicks and Miss Wylds opened the second set by taking three games in a row. Miss Hii/ks was now cutting heavily and many of her balls were not clearing the net. Misses Webster and Medley drew level at 5 all. The strain of the deciding game affected Miss Webster, however, who after holding three match points netted a wood shot and lost the set 6—5. In the third set Misses Hicks and Wylds asserted themselves and with hard driving play captured the match and set 6—2. The semi-final of the combined doubles championship between A. Dickie and Miss A. Hicks and Macfarlane and Miss D. Simpson produced an uninspiring contest, the play seldom reaching a high standard. Dickie and Miss Hicks took the first set rather easily, Macfarlane’s forehand shots being very uncertain. The second set, however, was sternly con-tested.-Dickie and Miss Hicks set off in good style and soon led 4—2 but Macfarlane then came On to his game and Miss Simpson did some fine lobbing. Three times they evened the score, but Dickie and Miss Hicks finally broke through Miss Simpson’s service and took the set 9—7. Udy and Miss Buist outclassed Strombom and Miss Wylds in the first set of their semi-final. Playing with a newlystrung racquet Strombom was unable to control the ball and netted easy balls on numerous occasions. Miss Buist overshadowed Miss Wylds, whose returns were weak during the earlier stages. Udy was consistently steady and playing a i heady game did not fail to make tire .best of any opportunity offering. One set*

’ down, Strombom settled down to solid tennis and netting less frequently rah I to 5 all. Miss Buist failed with her ser- ■ vice and Strombom clinched matters off ; Miss Wylds’ service. Miss Wylds played • greatly improved tennis in the final set : while on the other hand Miss Buist ■ deteriorated and failed to retain hei • length when lobbing. Udy was always ; impressive with his well calculated shots. At 5—2 Miss Wylds lost her service from s 15 all, Udy clipping the corner with fast [ drives that beat the opposition coml pletely. He won his service in the next • game but Strombom took the next. ; The Dickie brothers had a stern strug- ■ gle with Marshall and Dennes, both sets going to the advantage stage. They soon ; led 3—l in the opening set, but then fell i into, errors and Marshall and Dennes, : combining well, obtained a 5—4 load. , The Dickies then broke through Marshall’s service and, winning the nextffwo ■ games, took the set. Marshall and Den- ■ nes opened in good style in the second . set taking the first three games. The . Dickies then rallied but the Wanganui , pair still led 4—2. They then suffered a ■ relapse and the Dickies soon ran through ■ to a 6—5 lead. Marshall and Dennes car- ■ ried off the next two games. They again , led B—7, but the Dickies combining > splendidly carried off the next three , games. ; GOOD COMBINATION. Playing a second round match, Misses ■ Medley and Webster combined well to ; beat Misses Pownall and Smith 6—o, 6—3. ■ Miss Smith was vhry weak in the open- ■ ing sets, lobbing easy balls for her opi ponents to smash at the net. Miss Pown- ; all drove nicely and at times scored with ■ deep lobs. However, Misses Medley and Webster covered the court excellently : and let very little pass them. Miss Pownl all won the first two games in the second ■ but lost the next five in a’row. i Playing with three strange racquets in 1 the first set of the boys’ championship, i M. Donnelly could not settle down to his [ usual steady play and Nodder with fine placements took the set comfortably at 6—2. Nodder forced the pace and smashed Donnelly’s short lobs with vigour. His overhead work was on the whole i :good, although the over-eagerness to ■ clinch matters in the second set cost him ; points. Donnelly was content to resort • to defensive tactics and allowed Nodder ; to do all the attacking. Striking a bet- ' ter length and encouraged by a series of ■ fine services, Donnelly took the second i get 6—3 by dislodging Nodder from the i net. However, in the final set after gain- ; ing a -5—4 lead, he allowed Nodder to - return to the net, where playing with i greater care he scored freely rto win , 7—5i Slightly better in all departments of ■ the game and showing a keener appre- . ciation of tactics, Miss M. Lawrence ac- : counted for Miss J. Pearce in the girls’ i singles championship 6—3, 6—4. Miss • Lawrence was placing with greater pre- ; cision and forced Miss Pearce into mis- . takes. A love game off her own service [ enabled Miss Lawrence to finish the set. ; The second set found Miss Pearce work- , ing better and the first game went td ’ three deuces before Miss Lawrence won. ■ Although Miss Lawrence was getting bet- : ter results from her service and led 4—3 Miss Pearce evened with a deuce game i off Miss Lawrence’s service. However, i she lost her own service and Miss Lawrence won the match with the next game from deuce. Details are:— CHAMPIONSHIP EVENTS. Men’s Singles. Final: C. Strombom beat L. Udy, 6—3, 6—4. Men’s Doubles. Semi-finals: E. Dickie and A. Dickie beat J. E. Marshall and R. Dennes, 7—5, 10—8. Final: C. Strombom and J. Leggat beat A. Dickie and E. Dickie, 2—6, 6 —3, 3—6, 6-1, 7—5. Women’s Singles. Final: MisS P. Wylds beat Miss A. Hicks, 4—6, 6—4, 6—3. Women’s Doubles,. ... f . ■ Semi-final: Misses Medley and Webster beat Misses Pownall and Smith, 6—o. 6—3; Misses Wylds and Hicks beat Misses Redman and Thompson, 6—2, 6—2. Final: Misses A. Hicks and P. Wylds beat Misses W. Webster and J. Medley, 3—6, 6-5, 6-2. ■ > Combined Doubles. Semi-final: A. Dickie and Miss :A. Hicks beat K. Macfarlane and Miss D. Simpson, 6—2, 9—7. Final: Strombom and Miss P. Wylds beat A. Dickie and Miss Hides, 6—4, 6 j —4. Boys’ Singles. Final: C. Nodder beat M. P. Donnelly, 6-2, 3-6, 7-5. Girls’ Singles. Final: Miss M. Lawrence beat Miss J. Pearce, 6—3, 6—4. HANDICAP EVENTS. Men’s Singles. Third round: Faris (30) beat Quin (30), 9-6. Semi-final: Therkleson (scr) beat Blundell (4—6), 9-7; Gilbert (30) beat Faris (30), 9—7. Final: R. Therkleson (15) beat R. A. Gilbert (30), 9-1. Men’s Doubles. Third round: Gilbert and Knapman (30) beat R. S. Jones and L. K. Thompson (owe 15), 9—6. Semi-final: Gilbert and Knapman (30) beat Donnelly and Nodder (owe 4—6), 9—7; Ambury and Quin (15 4—6) beat Leggat and Tompkins (owe 30), 9—5. Final: Ambury and Quin (15 4—6) beat Gilbert and Knapman (30), 9—4. Women’s Singles. Semi-final: Mrs. Webster (15) beat Miss Pearce (5-6), 9—2; Miss Hallett (15 3—6) beat Mrs. Lovell (scr), 9—5. Final: Miss Hallett (15 3—6) beat Mrs. Webster (15), 9-6. Women's Doubles. Second round: Misses Firth and Smith (owe 15) beat Misses Medley and Webster (owe 15), 9—l. Third rOund: Misses Firth and Smith (owe 15) beat Misses Richardson and Thomas (15 4—6), 9—B. Semi-final: Mrs. Webster and Miss M. Sole (15) beat Misses Broome and Lawrence (scr), 9—7. Final: Mrs. Webster and Miss Sole to play the winner of Misses Redman and Thompson (4-6) v.' Misses Firth and Smith (owe 15). Time to be arranged. Combined Doubles. Second round: Leggat and Miss Redman (owe 15) beat L. Tippins and Mrs. Lovell (scr), 9—7; Handley and Miss ’ Webster (owe 15) beat A. Dickie and Miss Hicks (Owe 40), 9—4. Third round: Leggat and Miss Redman (owe 15) beat Sandston and Miss , Moyes (15 4—6), 9-4; Handley and Miss Webster (owe 15) beat Tompkins and Miss Firth (owe 15 4—6), 9—5. Semi-final: 1 Hunter and Mrs.' Webster (4—6) beat Handley and Miss Webster , (owe 15), 9—5; Tippins and Miss Sole (15) beat Leggat and Miss Redman (owe 15), 11—9. Final: Hunter and Mrs. Webster (4—6) ! beat Tippins and Miss Sole (15), 10—8. Mr. Rod Syme, president of the Taranaki Lawn .Tennis. Association, expressed appreciation of the number of entries j received. The association was indebted to the strong support given by the Wanganui 'players. Their presence had added interest and made a success of the tournament. But for the Wanganui contingent the tournament would have savoured too much of Taranaki. He appreciated the action of the New Plymouth club in placing its courts at the disposal of th; association and congratulated the tournament secretary, Mr. K. P. Tompkins, and the recorders, Messrs. A. Little i and J. Leggat, on the efficient way the t

tournament was conducted. Thanks were also due to the umpires. ' Dr. G/ Home, president of the New Plymouth club, p sented the prizes. He extended a welcome to all present and expressed gratitude at the action of the players; from Wanganui and Hawera in travelling long distances to attend. He also expressed pleasure at the presence •of Miss J; Redman, Christchurch, who for ; several years •; was a keen member of the club. They- were indebted to Mrs. D. Le C, Morgan and her .assistants for conducting the Refreshment booth.