LAWN TENNIS.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XXV, Issue XXV, 22 December 1900, Page 1159

LAWN TENNIS.

(By

“Vantage.”)

The wretched weather pre raitmg on Kat unlay completely ruined all ehanee •f getting oft the first round of the rnter-elub matches, which had been fixed for that day. It will now be necessary to postpone the fixture till after the New Year holidays, as several members of the West End and Eden and Epsom teams leave this week for the New Zealand championships at Christchurch. As far aa I can gather the following players will represent Auckland at the championships: H. A. Parker, P. A. Vaile. J. Patterson, A. A. Davies, A. Goldie, S. Upton, J. Caidwell, C. H. Young. Of course, some others may decide to go at the eleventh hour, bnt as the entries have practically closed thia is hardly likely. The majority of those going are making their first appearance at a championship outside Auckland. Patterson will be a wellknown figure in the Cathedral city, owing to the plucky stand he made against the redoubtable Wilding in 1894. In the handicaps his abilities were a trifle over-rated by the handicappers, who crushed him under an overwhelming penalty. Under the present system in which the official handicapper is furnished with full information as to a player's powers by each local association, an error of this kind can scarcely occur. Goldie would be betu-r remembered In Wellington, where, at the 1895 meeting, in partnership with Miss Greenfield, of the Empire city, he won the Mixed Doubles, putting out Miss Nunneley and H. A. Parker in the final. Goldie is an active careful player, Who shines more in a double than in a single. Upton won the Handicap Doubles larit year in Palmerston North, but his game has suffered from want of practice this year, and I do not anticipate that he will do so well at Christchurch. His style is good, being modelled on that of Peacock, but he is hardly safe enough for single play. In doubles he comes into the net very quickly, and shows considerably more promise. Davies, who began lawn tensnis about three seasons ago, plays a very fair game, and the tournament will doubtless improve him in many respects. His backhand is a weak spot, and needs particular attention. Caldwell is an older player than either Upton or Davies, but is of about the same calibre in singles. In a double “Jo" is a good man at the net, and his “smashing" is quite a feature. Young, who is the only North Shore representative, is a player of genuine promise, and possesses a neat and graceful style. Vaile is in my opinion better in a single than a double. Constant practice in good fours is absolutely necessary before a player can make a telling volley, as he runs into the net, and this has' to be done continually in first class doubles. As Vaile runs in a fast drive often catches him out of position. In a single his easy swinging style of play is effective, and as a rule he runs to the net with judgment. With a good handicap his knowledge of the game would make him an awkward man to tackle. Parker, who has been in strict training for more than three weeks, should be in the pink of condition when called upon to play in Christchurch. After his performance last week against Hooper, I should A,ave .i;, >:wj. min bring the championship back to Auckland. but for the fact that the Australians are competing. As it is, I consider it most probable that A. W. Dunlop, the famous Victorian player, will prove too good for anything in NewZealand. As Peacock and Hooper find it inconvenient to make the trip, Parker will be the sole championship representative from Auckland, and as such will have no partner in either the Men’s or Combined Championship Doubles, as under rule 17 he is debarred from playing with anyone from another centre. Fisher, of Christchurch, and Laishley, of Wellington, are in the same position, and owing to this ridiculous rule all three will be compelled tb be spectators of the doubles, just at a time when New Zealand needs all her strength to make a stand against the Australians. New Zealand is the only place in the world possessing such an absurd rule, calculated as it is to restrict and not encourage competitors, and I hope that the forthcoming annual meeting will ■ee this restriction removed, as otherwise we shall become the laughing stock of all outside players.

The Canterbury Association intend giving a dance on Thursday evening, the 27th December. It is rather unfortunate that the toumanvent euds on a Saturday, as otherwise the danee might have been held on that evening. As it is those competitors who have any ehanee of securing places tn the finals of the varions events will probably not care to prejudice their chances by dancing into the small hours. Lawn tennis is an exacting mistress, and will not brook dalliance with the attractions of Terpsichore.

The Nelson Association intend to have a big try to secure the championship for Nelson next year. Notice of motion to this effect has already been sent ig, the claim being based on the fact that the Hawke's Bay Association, whose turn H is to conduct the meeting, has declined the honour. Although we shall al! be very glad to have another tournament at “Sleepy Hollow,” Aucklanders should not allow their claim to be ignored, and our Association should instruct its delegate to move strongly in the matter. If we allow our claim to be jumped this year, Taranaki or Hawke's Bay might demand a turn after Nelson, and we should have to wait another three or five years.

Probably the most prominent lawn tennis secretary in New Zealand at the present moment is Mr J. Paton, whose photograph we reproduce on another page. Few players realise how much of their comfort depends on the hard working and painstaking secretary, who gets scant praise when things are right, and well blamed if any trifle goes wrong. Mr Paton was one of the original members of the Eden and Epsom Club, and acted as its secretary for several years, only ceasing to hold office when he was transferred to Wellington. It is no disparagement to either his predecessors or successors in office to say that the club flourished better under his than it has under any other management. While secretary of the Eden and Epsom Club he ran two open tournaments, which proved a great success, and it is a pity they have not been kept up. In Wellington Mr Paton was on the match committee of the Thorndon Club, and on every committee in connection with the tar and sand courts situated near Willis-street. He has just concluded his third year of office as secretary of the New Zealand Lawn Tennis Association, which was in a very bad way when he took over the reins. Now it is a flourishing if not wealthy body, due almost entirely to Mr Paton’s energy and perseverance. It must not be concluded Mr Paton is not a player, for as a matter of faet although not an aspirant for championship honours he is quite good enough for the average player, and has represented every club he has belonged to in club matches.

The Mount Eden team was selected as I predicted. As a matter of fact the first five places in the men’s section were practically certainties. The sixth place about which there was some doubt has been filled by Turner. At the time I was more inclined to favour the inclusion of Bamford or Mair, but I am satisfied That Turner is at present playing in better form than either of these two players.

one stroke is a peculiarly deadly forehand drive, which bo- nses with great effect. His backhand is quite weak when he ean be forced to play it, but it takes a good player to do this.

Alon Brown, the hon. sec. of the club, is an improving player, and should have a good ehanee of figuring in one of the later matches if he practises hard. Brown has the best backhand of all the younger players, and some of these would do well to copy his stroke. His service is poor as also is his volleying, particularly overhead, but his forehand is very fair, and a little better length on hia drives will improve his game considerably.

Brabant’s new Tate racket seems to have put half fifteen on to his game as so far this season he has held his own fairly well with Hooper. Peacock and Parker in practice games, while in his championship match with the first-named it would have needed a very little to have turned the scale in his favour. Unless Peacock improves very much I shall not be surprised if Brabant turns the tables on him this year for the club championship. These players have met four times for this event, and each has two wins to his credit,

W. B. A. Morrison was practising at Mount Eden last week. Had he wished to secure a place in the team a little practice would have made him a certainty. At present he is not playing anything like so well as last year, when he had Peel at his mercy in the Auckland championship after a long five set match, the latter eventually winning owing to a bad mistake of the umpire when Morrison had the match in hand.

The final of the Auckland Championship Singles was played on Monday afternoon between Messrs Parker and Rice, the former winning in straight sets: 6—2, 9—-7, 6—l. Rice played a very plueky game against his well known adversary, particularly in the second set, when he held his own very well. Parker's volleying was completely off, and he failed to smash the simplest returns, but the placing of his off-the-ground strokes was good. Bice made several clever short volleys, which always ecored outright, showing that he might have come to the net oftener with advantage. Parker’s greater experience enabled him to run his opponent about a great deal, and condition told considerably in the last set. The total points scored were:— Parker 121, Rice 87. Mr T. S. Ruddock performed the duties of umpire satisfactorily. At the last moment Peacock has been able to leave to attend the N.Z. Championship. While Aucklanderw will be very glad to hear this, there is no need for any alteration in my remarks regarding Rule 17 in an earlier paragraph. The position is one which has occurred before and doubtless will again unless the restriction is removed. My Napier correspondent writes: The Waipawa scratch tournament was remarkable for a large number of entries. It was concluded last week. In the ladies’ open singles Miss Arrow beat Mrs. Eames, 30—10; Miss E.

Clark beat Miss M. Harding, 30—25; Miss L. Clark beat Miss D. Harding, 30—21; and Mrs. McLean beat Miss Flynn. 30—10. In the combined doubles Miss L. Clark and A. Clark beat Mrs. Eames and Rennell, 30—28; Miss Baker and Dr. Robertson beat Miss Harding and Norris, 30—35; Miss D. Harding and White, a bye; and Mrs. McLean and D. Clark beat Miss Arrow and Mr. Downes, 30—26. In the second round Miss Baker and Dr. Robertson beat Miss D. Harding and White, 30 —23; and Mrs. McLean and D. Clark beat Miss L. Clark and A. Clark, 30 25. Mrs. McLean and D. Clark were successful in the final It was a close and exciting game, and they only beat their opponents. Miss Baker and Dr. Robertson, by 30 to 29. Tn a ladies’ match on Wednesday the Misses Arrow and Rathbone beat Misses Harding and M. Harding; Misses Howard and White beat Misses Arrow and Rathbone; and Misses Howard and White also beat Misses Barker and Flynn. The annual club tournament will begin on Saturday, December 22. ® © ® FORCING PLAY V. BRILLIANT PLAY. (By Mr. J. Parmly Paret, in “Golf and Lawn Tennis.” (Continued from last week.) Still another principle, one developed by Wrenn for use against Larned, I understand, is involved in this play. It was the American ex-cham-pion who first showed (in America, at any rate) the centre plan of attack. Instead of driving into a far corner when he intended to follow the return up to the net, he used a deep fast, drive to the centre of the base-line when he was coming to the net, and the play met. with great success against ground stroke' players, who found it more difficult to pass him from the centre of the court than from one side. Particularly against one who uses a fast passing stroke is this useful, for the faster the ball flies the less it can be directed toward either side line without going out of court. The passing line of direction is never parallel with either side line when the ball is played from the centre of the court, and the full length of the court cannot be used.

Applying this theory then, it is doubly important that the forcing stroke should not be directed to either side of the court when a long run is necessary in order to reach the net position for the kill, for then the danger of being passed is greatest, and additional safety must be used. From a short return, when only half the court must be traversed in order to get to the net, the forcing stroke is often more effective if directed at a sharp angle, and the lesser distance will give ample time to stop and recover the balance before the return comes.

In the same way the service should be placed as near as possible to the centre, or half-court line, and delivered from as near as possible to the centre of the base-line, when it is intended to follow it up to the net. In fact, this theory may safely be followed still further, and the general rule laid down that whenever it is desired to be safe, the direction of any stroke should be parallel with the side-lines. Cross-court strokes are stronger for immediate attack, but never so safe preceding a net attack.

■or uisr for defence, ax when the danger Ilea on both sides as well as in the liulauee of the bods.

There is an excellent maxim •ui'.l down by one of the English authorities, who declares that a player's position is never tenable against a skilful opponent, if he comes to rest between the liase-line and the serviceline. He may run through this space, to run into it. make a stroke, but he should immediately return to the base-line for a ground stroke, or go forward inside of the service-line to volley- However, the English players themselves have a favourite method of attack that is oftentimes successful in follow ing a deep drive halfway up into this danger; zone, and making the next stroke with an underhand Volley Itefore making the second half of the move on the net for the killing position. E. L. Bali is the Only American player whom I ever saw volley underhand with any great success, and it is doubtful if this method would succeed now against the faster passing stroke of to-day. Some of the English players even go so far as to hover about the serviceline and continue to volley underhand until they are able to kill, but their most successful players now get in much closer (though never so close as the leading American net players) for the killing' strokes.

It is this forcing style of play that I have been trying to describe, which I am convinced will be the game of the future, and ten years from now we shall see all of our big championship matches won on that kind of play. Yet the few who have, succeeded at it are still among the pioneers, for the game is not yet generally understood or practised. Goodbody may be said to have had a hand in teaching the usefulness of this style to the American players by his remarkable successes at Newport in 1894, but to Wrenn belongs the credit of developing and improving the play, and lie earned his rewanl by a four years' tenancy of the championship title.

The chief fault of the American school has long lieen the reekless brilliancy of its leading players, in contradistinction to Wrenn's style, and the devotees of Campbell. Hovey, Hobart, Larned. Davis and others of this type are responsible for this reputation. The records of their matches were diligently kept, and their .scoring such heavy proportions of "earned points” against their opponents has constantly been used as an argument to show their superiority. Butdid.it? Why should not the other side of the picture be placed on view? Why is not the player who makes the fewest errors the better? When one of these brilliant players is beaten by a ‘‘safe” player or one using the forcing method, it is customary to say that the result was an “upset,” because he earned more strokes than his antagonist, yet lost. Instead of declaring that the brilliant man was “obviously out of form” because he made so many errors, should we not consider the strokes of the antagonist which forced him into the difficulties which made errors so difficult to avoid?

The tables of points scored on passes, outs, nets and double faults, which have been so often printed after the important matches, are too often used for comparisons of this kind between players, and such conclusions are the result of the rankest fallacies. The tallies are interesting, perhaps, to show how a match was won or lost, but never reliable to indicate the relative form of the players, and it is doubt fill if they would be very much better if an experienced scorer’s judgment was used in deciding what constituted an “earned point." instead of the present method of being guided by tlie hard and fast rule that if a player’s racket touches the ball and he fails to return it into the proper court, the point must be scon d on nn error, an earned point only being credited when the ball is placed entirely out of the reach of the antagonist.