LAWN TENNIS NOTES

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XL, Issue 6, 8 February 1908, Page 49

LAWN TENNIS NOTES

(By the Man at the Net.) A great deal the most interesting topic of conversation in tennis circles here this week is the selection of the team to represent the district in the annual match against Taranaki. The “ butter province” has won this match two years in succession—in fact ever since it was established —and to have any chance of doing much good against them we ought to have the very best players available in our team. The general opinion is that the members of the selection committee have not made the best of their opportunities, and on this point I can hardly do better than quote from a letter dealing with the whole question, that appeared last Saturday in the “ Star’s ” athletic columns. The team chosen, I should explain, are Upton, Grossmann, Dr. Keith, Billing, W. A. Brown, an<l Turner, Miss A. Gray, Miss D. Udy, Mrs. Cooper and Miss Harvey. The writer begins by stating that the only serious objection he has to the personnel of the team is that A. S. Brown is not included. “Why,” he adds, “is this thus? Can it be possible that the members of the selection committee have never seen A. S. Brown play this season? They must be aware that Keith and he have won the doubles two years in succession, and that Brown in all the championship matches has played a very strong and effective game. I don’t mind venturing the opinion that A. S. Brown is a far better doubles player this year than he has ever been before. Not only has his smashing improved, but he is more active about the court; shows better judgment, and drives very accurately on both sides. In fact, if there is a more dangerous doubles player than A. S. Brown in Auckland at the present time, I have not seen him—and yet Brown is not in the team.” “Now, consider,” the letter goes on, "the men put in before him. W. A. Brown and possibly Billing and Turner might beat him single; but I regard them as distinctly inferior to him in the double game, with the possible exception oS Turner). Yet, to include all of them, not only is he left out of. the team, but the strongest pair we have is broken up. No one can doubt that Dr. Keith and A. 8. Brown are our best double team, and that they represent the best chance we can find of making a decent fight against Dickie and Wallace. Yet, because there is some doubt as to whether Brown is equal to the other three men in a single, while he is certainly better than they at the other game, they are preferred to him. This seems to me very short-sighted and mistaken policy. And, consider what this leads to when we come to arrange the pairs for the doubles. Keith has played so much with A. 8. Brown that there is naturally a difficulty in finding him another suitable partner. But I don’t think that anybody would have guessed beforehand that the Committee would put Keith and Upton together. Everybody who has played much here knows that Keith plays at the back of the court in a double, and that Upton is not a net player. He can smash lobs, but as a rule he prefers to keep back and play off the ground. The only possible partners for Upton and for

Keith are men who play at the net, or volley systematically; and yet the Committee don’t seem to have thought of this. I think this is truly astonishing. If A. S. Brown was to be left out it was possible to arrange the pairs in all sorts of ways —Keith and Grossmann, Keith and W. Brown, Keith and Billing. Upton and Grossmann, Upton and W. Brown, Upton and Billing—and yet have the necessary combination of a volleyer with a back-line player. All these pairs could play a possibly effective double game. It seems to me that the One truly impossible team is the combination the Committee has chosen. Whatever else is arranged, Keith and Upton should not) play together because the modern double game requires that at least one player in each pair Shall volley near the net. I don’t think that it ought to be necessary to point this out to any selection committee” —and here the writer goes on to remark that it is unfortunate the members of the Committee have not been in the way of getting practical experience with the best players here so as to be able to appreciate their form. I sympathise with the difficulties of the Committee, and I don’t want to say anything unkind. But so far as the main purpose of this letter is concerned, I thoroughly agree with the writer, first that A. 8. Brown should have been chosen, second that Keith and A. S. Brown should have played first pair, third that the combination of Upton and Keith is far and away the worst arrangement of our forces that could have been made. As to the rest of the team, the “Star” goes on: “I don’t know that much can be said about the seletcion of the ladies. Most people will agree that Miss Gray, Miss Udy, and Mrs. Cooper were certainties. The only doubt is about Miss Harvey. This lady is certainly not so good in a single as several who eould be named here, but she has played so constantly and so well with Mrs. Cooper that it would need a good argument to make me leave her out. In a combined also she is distinctly good, and on the whole I think that the selectors have done the right thing. But as to the men, I hope that if nothing can be done to alter the selection, tne committee will at least consider the necessity for arranging the pairs differently. So long as Upton, Keith and Turner are distributed between the volleying iplayers, it doesn’t matter po mueh. As to the singles, I think Upton has earned the right to play as first man. But if form shown in the late tournament is to be taken as a guide, I venture to say that Keith should come before Grossman in order of play. 1 also think that W. A. Brown should come before Billing in the singles, as being more brilliant and much more likely to disconcert an opponent unused to his little ways. To all this x woidd like to add that it may be argued whether Mrs. Cooper and Miss Harvey, having won our Ladies’ Doubles Championship for two years in succession, are not entitled to play as first pair. Personally, lam inclined to think that Miss Gray is a stronger player than Mrs. Cooper, and Miss Udy hits much harder than Miss Harvey, the committee has acted wisely. But no one who saw Saturday’s match, Devonport v. Eden and Epsom Ladies’ A, would be likely to undervalue Miss Harvey’s splendid work at the back of the Court, and it is quite possible that if it came to a match, the Devonport pair would win. As to the ('ombined A team, 1 don’t see why W. A. Brown, having won the Combined Championship with Miss Udy, s not only separated from her, but is put down to play in the fourth pair. My own conviction is that W. A. Brown and Miss Udy should form our first pair, and I say this with all respect for Hilling’sl experience, and his past successes in partnership with Miss Udy. It seems to me that a selection Committee should require a very strong excuse for breaking up champion partnerships, and I don’t see that they have it in this case. I ,'ave no space left for remarks about the inter-club premiership contest and I must for the time be content to say that West End won by the narow margin of two points. When the inter-club contests started on Saturday, it was known that if Devonport Ladies’ A beat Eden and Epsom, the banner would go to West End, and a great deal of interest was taken in the result. It was a fine match, and the Devonport pair thoroughly deserved their win! and I offer my hearty congratulations to West End in securing the banner against defeat, after struggling gallantly for so many teasons past.