LAWN TENNIS.

Waikato Times, Volume 106, Issue 17804, 31 August 1929, Page 21 (Supplement)

LAWN TENNIS.

RANKING WORLD’S BEST. LACOSTE HEADS LIST. After the Davis Cup, which, save for the American championships, ends the world’s tennis season, one can take stock to estimate who are the greatest players of the world. In no other sport could one really decide any such question, for even golf has not the same world-wide vogue as tennis. Clearly the first- four are La-,-oste Cochet, Tilden' and Borotra, n I hat order. Who next—is a delicate question: I give my opinion based on the actual results of the championships of the leading nations, writes “Austral” in the Referee. For the first four one’s task of ranking the world’s players is quite simple. It is Lacoste, Cochet, Tilden, and Borotra, in that order. After that, it is far from easy. Now, 'as to the first four, even here one must give the reasons. Lacoste did not compete in the English championships, leaving the honour of upholding the French flag to his fellow musqueteers, Cochet and Borotra. Lacoste did, however, play through the French championships, and won, beating Borotra in the final, but only after a close tussle, in which the Basque led at 4—3 in the fifth set. Borotra had , beaten

i Cochet in the semi-final and Lacoste j had beaten Tilden in most decisive fashion. j Borotra had, in fact, beaten Cochet j before that in Holland in four sets, j so that up to that stage Borotra really j had the better record as against i Cochet. As to Tilden’s defeat by Lacoste, one has to realise that. Tilden had the day before had a most exhausting contest against dc Morpurgo, , being seized with cramps in the arm j in the last set, and he only won it on sheer grit, and by such skill as enabled hiun to avoid straining his aim more than was absolutely necessary.

He took the fifth set B—G. That illustrates once again the clear fact that Tilden cannot now stand the strain of a long tournament. At the end of it his lack of resiliency through age tells. That does not, however, pi event him from taking his full rank. After all, the task set tennis champions is greater than is set the leaders of any other game. Fancy a crack footballer being asked to play lull st'ength matches every day for ten days 1

Form Retained. Notwithstanding, therefore, his absence from flic Davis Cup and the English championship, Lacoste must go first, as there is no sign of ids having fallen off from last year s form, which put him first. Cochet’s claim for second place is only din/med by his defeats by Borotra." While it is no excuse in a ranking list, there is no doubt those defeats were largely due lo overplay in the Riviera season, and throughout Europe. Cochet would, under the American system, probably be ranked first, as Lacoste has not played in enough tournaments, and would not be ranked at all, but my method is to try to discover who would to-day probably come out first. On actual performances, then, Cochet is only second to Lacoste by the barest margin. Now one hesitates for a moment 10-day between Tilden and Borotra. H re again, on actual performances, Borotra ought perhaps to go first. He won the covered court title of the U.S.A., and, though results on such courts ought not to rank too high, they help. Again, Borotra has a few vicotries as mentioned against Cochet, and a very important one in the French semi-final. He did better against Cochet at Wimbledon, than Tilden did. Still, in the Davis Cup, which is to Tilden and Borotra of far more importance, Tilden won soundly, though not overwhelmingly. The margin is again close, but on previous years’ records and to-day’s probabilities. Tilden gets third and Borotra fourth.

Now for the next places we have many: Hunter, Lott, Hennessey, de Morpurgo, Boussus, Gregory, Austin, Prenn, Moldenhauer, Crawford, Schlesinger, Hopman, Kalins, Moon. The list Is at random at this stage.

What of Crawford. Much as one would like to do so, one cannot place our best man, Crawford, in for some time. One has first to consider Hunter, Lott, and dc Morpurgo. At first sight one would place Hunter below Lott, for the latter was chosen by the U.S.A. ahead of Hunter. Their reasons may have been tactical. I cannot find any definite reason yet for ranking Lott ahead of Hunter. Last year Hunter was placed fourth in front of Borotra, and, though I never agreed with that, I certainly could not see why he should be any lower than fifth. This year, however, Hunter has not done as well. lie went down early in the Wimbledon tournament.

His best performance in the twelve months under consideration was the defeat of Borotra last year in the American championships. I cannot see, despite his early defeat at Wimbledon, any falling off in form yet. I am inclined to yield to the evident view of the American Association, and rank Lott ahead of him. Yet, again, Lott did nothing very great at Wimbledon.

His best performance was to extend Cochet and Borotra in the challenge round of the Davis Cup. On the whole, I cannot sec anybody to rank in front of him, save possibly Hunter, and yet last year our colts, Crawford and Hopman, had the better of Lott, and may have improved just as much as he clearly has. The ranking is difficult, hut Lott should, perhaps, go fifth, and Hunter sixth.

De Morpurgo Seventh. Now for seventh place. I still stick to de Morpurgo. ( Admittedly, he went down to Moldenhauer, of Germany, in the Davis Cup contests, but that was shortly after he had extended Tilden to five sets —winning the first two and the fifth set, ran to C—B. In that match, the French journal says the

Italian champion tore a tendon, and lie j was very probably still suffering from I that injury when he met Molden- , hauer. Hard luck is no excuse in . athletics, but when one takes Hie ; year’s play, one has to consider such j mishaps. The Italian’s record for the : last three years is too good for me j to hold him off any longer. i Now we are in trouble. Shall the splendid performances of Austin justify his going in next. Gregory did well also in the English championship. But so he did in Australia, and so did Schlesinger, by beating Crawford and Hopman. The Australian titles rank as high in the world as those of France, England, and the U.S.A. Crawford beat Borotra twice out of six matches, and extended him each time when he lost. There is every reason to believe that Cra.wford has improved very greatly indeed In the last six months. His play at Dubbo convinced me of that. He has a mastery of touch and tactics that stamps him as already a great player. I say this, though I never thought he would go as far as he has done. I have been more out in my judgment of Crawford than of any player for the last 30 years. I was the very first to greet Norman Brookes, and was right as to him, but I was wrong as to Crawford, though, really, I have nothing to take back from anything I ever wrote. Some instinct kept me from underrating his future. Open confession is good for the sou!, and 1 am making amends now. Well as Austin has done, I cannot see why that is more than opportunity. Yet I freely admit that, as a stylist, he has no superior. His whole technique is a poem. The tennis he played to take the first set to love from Crawford in' Sydney was nothing short of perfection. Yet his physique is against him. Athletics, I repeat, admit no excuses, save for occasional mishaps, such as de Morpurgo’s injury to a tendon. Even then, if he were always straining tendons, such a mishap would he no excuse. I rank Crawford after de Morpurgo, as Tilden did last year, and I rank Austin next on account of his splendid play at Wimbledon.

I do this in spite of my belief that Gregory, by reason of his fine physique and ideal temperament, will go higher than Austin, if his profession does not get in the way. Those Remaining,

Now we have Gregory, Moldenhauer and Hennessey to consider. Seeing the results in the final of the European zone, when Gregory beat Prenn and Moldenliauer, I must place Gregory before either. Yet I cannot piece Gregory ahead of Hennessey, in view of the American’s fine performances for years. 1 think that to-day, or within the next few weeks, Hennessey would do hotter against all comers than Gregory would. Hennessey, therefore, goes ahead after Austin, and Moldenliauer comes after Gregory. That gives us Lacoste, Cochet, Tilden, Borotra, Lott, Hunter, Crawford, Austin, Gregory, Moldenliauer for the first ten. Schlesinger should, I think, come next, ahead of Moon or Kalms, yet Kahns would heat Schlesinger as often as he would lose. That is individual. Schlesinger would do belter against all comers. Moon, on his day, would defeat almost any player in Australia, and, therefore, might go ahead of dc Morpurgo, but he is ton erratic. He has to be in the mood. I can’t place Boussus yet in the first ten and it is impossible to say he is ahead of any of the others mentloneii.