TENNIS FORM.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXIV, Issue 955, 27 December 1933, Page 11

TENNIS FORM.

Bartleet is Not the Bartleet of Old. FERKINS IMPRESSES. (By FT. TILLMAN.) The opening matches for the Wilding Shield and Nunneley Casket drew only a thin gallery. Whether Auckland or Wellington played Canterbury in the ' final for the shield was of no concern to the general public, and nobody doubted that the Canterbury ladies would defeat the southern provinces in the casket match. The finals will be | better patronised. Just as the results of the matches lacked interest, so the play did not give ; any line to championship form. Malfroy did net play particularly | well. He treated his match with Sturt as a trial gallop. It is the great gift ’ of a champion to be able to gather a point when it is wanted, and Malfroy j held Sturt in the hollow of his hand. . Sturt has been a possibility for championship honours for some years, and . there .are few prettier players to watch, but he lacks the stamina to even get past the semi-finals in the singles. The Bartleet-Ferkins match was a game in which a great stylist past his best played an improving player. Had the net been a foot lower, Bartleet would have won. The shots he used to delight us with did not go over, and the magnificent service lacked the devil . it once had. Still, though he lost, he . was as full of grace as ever. ! Ferkins Has Crait. | Ferkins is improving in court craft. L It will be remembered that in the last championships he took Angas to four . sets. He is probably a product of I coaching by a one-time New Zealand , champion, J. C. Peacock. Peacock always taught that a drive to an opponent’s forehand was the shot to go in on. The advances to the net between Bartleet and Ferkins illustrated the two styles. Bartleet came in on a . strong drive to the backhand. In most cases when Ferkins put back a weak return, Bartleet’s volley, which was to the open forehand court, was returned i by Ferkins for a winner. Bartleet’s volley was of necessity to Perkins’s strength. On the other hand, Ferkins came in on a strong, deep drive to the forehand, and though Bartleet was stronger on that side than on the other, yet the subsequent volley was to Bartlcet's (or any other player’s) weaker corner. This stroke made the difference in the scores. None of the other players in the Wilding Shield match were at all outstanding. Rowlands has a style all his own and gets out of his game all there is in it. R. Howe was a promising junior of a few years ago, going out to Barnett in one New Zealand junior final. He does a lot of things nicely, especially in doubles. Canterbury does not gain anything from having a bye. Malfroy and Ferkins are building up a doubles combination, and Malfroy cbuld have dominated the play a lot more if he had been in the mood. He is a dangerous man to have on the other side, and if he can win both singles and play in the doubles as he did against the Englishmen, it will eat into Canterbury’s chances. Howe and Roussell combine well. They play an attacking game that -may, upset Dymond and Robinson. The Canterbury team should win, but they will be short of match practice. The Casket Match. The Canterbury women did all that was asked of them. They won all their matches. Of the southern team. Miss Miller is the one real tennis player. She never does a foolish thing and does many wise ones. She has a good backhand and forehand and is always cool and in position. Miss Miller has had many victories over Miss Wake on asphalt to her credit, but against Miss Thelma Poole she was up against a different type of player. Miss Poole has never played better. She followed up deep drives to the corners with a net attack that could not be forced back. Miss Miller does not feed a net player, and all Miss Poole’s shots at the net were well earned. She smashed balls from behind the service line. Miss Wake had more pace in her drives than usual, but her doubles j game was weak. Her smash is wrongly j made. She would be a good doubles player if she had one, and a good coach could give her one in an hour or two. Without proper coaching, Canterbury teams will not do themselves justice. The success of the Misses Poole comes from the fact that they are continually being coached. Angas owes a lot of his skill to coaching. Few players can see their own faults. Yesterday’s Results. WILDING SHIELD. Singles. C. E. Malfroy (Wellington) beat N. G. Sturt (Auckland), 7-5, 6-4. H. C. Rowlands (Auckland) beat R. Howe (Wellington), 6-4, 7-9, 6-3. Id. A. Roussell (Wellington) beat M. M. Morrison, 6-1, 8-6. R. M’L. Ferkins (Wellington) beat E. L. Bartleet (Auckland), 8-6, 6-2. Doubles. I Roussell and Howe (Wellington) lost to Bartleet and Sturt (Auckland), 5-7, J 3-6. Malfroy and Ferkins (Wellington) beat Rowland and Morrison, 3-6. 6-2, 6-2. NUNNELEY CASKET MATCHES. Singles. Miss T. Poole (Canterbury) beat Miss D. Miller (North Otago), 6-3, 6-2. Miss E. Rudkin (Canterbury) beat Miss B. Fraser (South Canterbury), 6-2, 6-1. Miss M. Wake (Canterbury) beat\ Miss P. Guest (Southland), 6-2, 6-4. Miss I. Poole (Canterbury) beat Miss R. Barton (Southern Provinces), 6-2, 6-2. Doubles. Misses Wake and Rudkin (Canterbury) beat Misses Miller and Fraser (Southern Provinces), 6-0. 6-4. Misses L and T. Poole (Canterbury) beat Misses Barton and Guest, 7-5, 4-6,