LAWN TENNIS.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XXVI, Issue XV, 13 April 1901, Page 683

LAWN TENNIS.

(By

“Vantage.”)

As the season is now fast drawing to a close, a few remarks on the form of the most prominent players may prove not uninteresting ts my readers. The position of J. R. Hooper, thrice single champion of New Zealand, is so wellknown and acknowledged that there is little that my readers do not already know of hie play. He has played comparatively little tennis this year, and in ray opinion was “short of a few gallops” when he took on his important engagements early in the season.

It will be remembered that on tt»e strength of Hooper’s want of form and condition against Brabant, many fancied that Peacock -would give him a good game. Hooper, however, has a splendid eye, and comes back to form in a remarkably short space of time. During the week he improved so much that when he met Peacock, the West End champion went down three seta straight, and indeed, only won three games, the scores being 6—2, 6—l, 6—o. Hooper was afterwards put out by Parker. Both played a fine game, running into five sets, but Parker’s superior condition told in the last set. Hooper played golf all the winter, and I am inclined to think, left taking up the racket until rather late. His placing and judgment are almost as good as ever, but the great fault in his play is the lenient manner in which he tieato his volleys. Time and again I have seen short lobs, which should have been promptly buried, sent easily back, and picked up, and the rest afterwards won by his opponent. This was especially noticeable in his matches against Diddnwrs. who, however, is a remarkably active player. Taking his play all round, I think there was less sting in it during this season than formerly, but this might fairly be described to want -ef -practice. It was a great pity that Hooper could net attend last New Zealand Championship Meeting, but I shall look forward to seeing him in great form at next year's tournament, when the man who puts him out will have ta be a good one. H. A. Parker's position in doubles is as undoubted as is Hooper’s in singles. Thrice one of the double champions, and once champion, is a geod record, and there can be little doubt that on his championship -performances, Parker most rank as the best double player wow in New Zealand. This New Zealand championship record is not so good as Hooper’s at the single game, yet so far as actual mMches are concerned, the players have met six times in Club and New Zealand Championships, and honours are easy. Parker’s brilliant shots are as well known as Hooper’s more deliberate and accurate strokes. Lately he bus taken to playing almost entirely from the base-line, and this in my opinion is a mistake on his part. He -is a splendid volleyrr, and if he would only mix his game and avail himself of his openings by going up, he would indeed be a “tough nut to crack.” I expect that he will use the volley considerably against the English players. He has sobered down wonderfully in his game, and now does not throw away his chances by -reckless hitting. His forehand drive is undoubtedly superior to anything in New Zealand, and if we may accept the testimony of our Victorian visitors in Australia.

Peacock’s claim to be mentioned in the same class as Hooper and Parker rests so far as regards this season on his brilliant performance in the doubles againt Diddatns and Dunlop, and principally on the first act of this memorable match, when be fairly excelled himself. In all single matches of importance in which he has figured, his form has quite disappointed me. His match against Hooper I have referred to above. At the Championship Meeting he met C. Oore. Gore took the first two sets B—6, 6—3, and was 4—l in the third. Peacock gamely battled up until Gore was 5—4 and 30— 15, and then won the set and match, the complete scores reading 6—B. 3—6, 7—5, 6—2, 6—6. Except in Fisher’s sensational match with Dunlop there was no ‘‘doser shave” at the meeting.

yet Gore would not be seriously considered to have a great chance of aw uering tbe single championship of tha colony.

The next match Peacock played was against Collins, who is undoubtedly • fine player. Collins took the first set, 6—l, and also the next, after Peacock wan s—l, winning six games in succession. Peacock then won the next three se.ts after a very hard battle in tbe third. In the last two sets Collins* condition failed him. The oomplete scores were I—6, 5—7. B—6. 6-3. 6—3. Peacock’s match against Dualop, tn which he was rather easily beaten by 3 sets to one. I do not attach much importance to, as be was not in a fit condition to de himself justice, the big double of the morning having told its tale upon him. His last match of this season was with Brabant, and he woo after a hard fight. 6—3, B—6, 12— I*. 6—o. Ou this form Peacock’s chturoeß for tbe championship singles of tbe colour next year are none too rosy. My opinion is that Peacock makes too many mistakes in attempting to win outright off « stroke when be should be content with playing for a strake or two ahead. In other words ho frequently tries to force the game from a disadvantageous position, instead ef plAyiuK for a more suitable and n(iable opening. This is the branch «f the game in which Hooper excels, and the resuK of the different methods is emphasised by the scores put up when these players last met. Peacock’s strokes are all good, and his easy atyH, I am sometimes inclined to think, makes one believe he has much more “up his sleeve" than is really the case. His pronounced weakness is his service. Not only is it not particularly telling, but he frequently serves double faults. This is a most expensivo and ‘aggravating luxury, especially «■ a double. I have for some years pad* had a high opinion of Peacock’s play, and have expected him to figure evtat more prominently than he has. but I am becoming convinced that he requires considerably more experience, and a greater knowledge of tactics, before he can hope to prevail against sneh players as Hooper and Parker. Collins next claims attention. He is a very fine player, and while his condition lasts is no mean antagonist for any player in the colony. He runs in with great judgment and success, his reach and accurate timing enabling him to smother his opponent's returns in an astonishing manner. The way he ran in on his service to Diddams, when he beat him as the second set, 6—l. was a revelation. for Diddams’ low. fast returns are not the easiest to pick up and return on the volley. CoUins is almost as good with low valleys as he is with his overhead work, and the latter is a lesson to most of our “top notchers.” He generally, in fact, almost isrrariatdy, gets the ball without any cut or screw on it. and simply buries it. rarely or never making the coss mon error of etnbryoHc smashes, vix.. smiting the ball straight back to the base line, but placing across the court with great judgment. I hope that he will come to Auckland for next meeting. His volleying would be a lesson to oar players. Fisher’s claim to special mention rests on his sensational first three sets against Dunlop. He did not seem to know how to do anything wrong until he had won two sets, and stood at 5—4, and 40—30 in the third. Then he fell to’ pieces. Up to this, however, his driving was splendid, his volleying overhead and low. almost faultless, his placing everything one could desire. Some of his smashes from baseline to baseline were simply perfect. Fisher, if he got regular practice, would. I believe, make a very fine player. As it is he is as brilliant as he is erratic.

Miss Nicholson, our lady champion, is playing in good form now. She has not attended many New Zealand championship meetings, but as tbo next one is to be held in Auckland, she will have a good opportunity of trying conclusions with the Southern cracks. I have heard it stated that Miss Nicholson intends to return to her old love, Eden and Epsom. With

a good partner she should have a great chance of annexing the mixed doubles championship next year. Like Miss Nunnely, she lacks one important stroke—she cannot lob well. Miss Stewart and Miss Annie Stewart have made great strides in their ganx* during the last season owing to their constant practice. Miss Stewart is playing a very steady game, while her sister, although not too strong on the forehand, is always good, and frequently really brilliant on the back hand. 1 am told that there is some misunderstanding about the competition for the Grimshaw memorial shield, which I stated in last week’s notes went with the prize in the ladies' handicap singles. 1 have since heard that it is probable that a separate match will be played to decide who will be entitled to hold the shield during the year. My information as to the winning of the shield was derived from a most authentic source, and 1 shall await with interest- the explanation of the misunderstanding, if any. One of Eden and Epsom’s most improving lady players is Miss Bramwell. With Mrs. Chapman she won the ladies' handicap doubles, and in that match quite excelled herself, playing a good all-round game. Lately she has been playing a little at the net. and with considerable success. T should like to see some of our lady players following her example; only they must remember that for the second service they mitst stand back from the net a little further than for the first, as in all probability the return will be more severe off the second service.

A very great amount of interest is being taken throughout the colony in the novel event for the best lady volleyer, which is to lie placed on the card for next New Zealand championship meeting. The Association, I think, acted wisely in accepting the prize, as already it has served the object of the donor in directing ladies’ attention to their marked shortcomings in this department of the game. I have heard of several ladies who intend to have volleying-boards erected, or arranged, so as to secure practice during winter. In many cases the side of a house, or an ordinary wall, so long as it is plain and smooth, will answer the purpose very well. In this connection, I cannot do better than give my lady readers the opinion of the famous TV. Baddeley, exchampion of England. He says, speaking of ladies’ “doubles”:—As a game of this description is played at the present time, there rs but little excitement to be got out of it, either by the players themselves or the spectators; its only useful purpose apparently being the amount of good, exercise which all the ladies are forced to take. This is not as it should be.' for the corresponding game as played by gentlemen is often more exciting, and certainly prettier to watch, than a single; and why ladies cannot improve their double play to. in comparison, an equal standard, it is hard to understand. If two ladies were to practise playing together regularly in doubles after each had well developed good volleying powers,they would have such an immeasurable advantage over their opponents, that they would with ease win every competition for which they should enter." If this is true of the class of players to which Mr. Baddeley refers, how much more, does it apply to our ladies’ play. There can he no doubt that the average ladies' double is a very monotonous affair, and if the result of the new event is what T anticipate, both tennis playqrs nnd the general public will have to thank Mr. Vaile for saving them many a wcarv rest.

Quoting from the same writer in his chapter on mixed doubles, I will give my lady readers one or two items as to the lady's play, which, if properly attended to, will improve their game wonderfully: “The idea which should pervade her tnirid. while playing, should be to keep the ball away from the man at the net at all costs, and to do this successfully she must not allow herself to be flurried. She should seldom trv to make a winning stroke, but should leave that to h#r partner, contenting herself with passing the man, nnd placing her lady opponent at as grant n disadvantage as possible. If the lady would be content to piny on these lines, her partner would nearly always have the first opportunity of 'cutting in’ to mnke the winning stroke.” The second one <• hanfly ever attended to by Indy

players, yet it is of the utmost importance, and should be most carefully noted. “When the gentleman is serving from the right court his partner should stand well in the corner of the left court to cover up, as far as possible. her backhand, which is the weak spot of nearly every lady. When he is serving from the left court, his partner should stand about the centre of the right court, if anything nearer to the side than centre line, and (mark this most carefully as it is important, and always disregarded), in both eases slightly beyond the baseline.”

These two quotations, if duly considered. anti only attempted to be carried out, will make a great change for the better in our ladies’ play. It will be noticed that Mr. Baddeley advises the lady to stand well in the corner of the court, or the back-hand side. I saw one lady lose her match on Eden and Epsom ladies’ day. because, although she cannot play a back-hand shot, she persistently neglected this, under the circumstances, obvious precaution, in spite of the fact that her attention was directed to it. I am inclined to think the average lady should stand almost, if not quite, as wide on the fore-hand as on the back-hand, although Mr. Baddeley speaks in a more qualified manner on this point. My reason for saying this is that her partner will generally be able to cover her back-haud with his fore-hand, especially if, as usual, the opposing lady is playing in the right-hand court, and moreover, as ladies are such notoriously slow starters if they stand narrow, almost any short cross-court, dr drop-shot will beat them. Ladies do not. as a rule, judge the flight or probable flight of the ball from the moment of impact with the racket, or even a little before as men do, and so they must endeavour to make up for this defect by- placing themselves in as advantageous a position possible to await any ordinary shot.