Lawn Tennis.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLIX, Issue 9, 26 February 1913, Page 8

Lawn Tennis.

North Island Tournaments. NORTH ISLAND INTERPROVINCIAL TOURNAMENT — New Plymouth, Easter. .WANGANUI EASTER TOURNAMENT CHAMPIONSHIPS AND HANOI CAPS- Wanganui, March. 21, 22, and 24. WELLINGTON PROVINCIAL CHAMPIONSHH 8 and PALMERSTON N. CLUB’S HANDlCAPS—Palmerston N., March 22, 24, and 25. Entries elose on 18th Marell. N.Z. UNIVERSITY CHAMPIONSHIPS — Wellington, March 22 and 25. WELUKGTOM. By ROMULUS. T>. w. Jackson and J. M. Power’s “ Benefit.” TIV HE men’s championships in con|l I nection with the Hutt Tennis Club could not be concluded on Saturday week on account of a number of the members being away at the territorial camp. The matches played were: — Men’s Handicap Doubles. —Jackson and Power (minus 10) beat Poananga and O. Heketa (plus 7), 60—51. This was the final, O. Heketa taking the place of T. Heketa, who was absent. Men’s Handicap Singles.—ln the final, Power (minus 5) beat Jackson (minus 10), 60—49. Combined Handicap.—Mrs Wagg and Jackson beat Mies C. Stevens and Power (scr), 60 —44, in the final. Men’s Single Championship.—Jackson beat Treadwell, 6—l, 6—2. Power has now to play Jackson, and the winner plays P. Brown in the final. Provided Jackson defeats Power in the semi-final of the Men’s Championship, his match with P. Brown will be the sixth final contested by him at the Hutt Club’s Tournament. This must be about a record. It is not often a player gets into the last " rally ” of six events at one meeting. Power has already appeared in four finals, and, though unlikely, it is quite on the cards that he will beat Jackson -in the semi-final of the championship, in view of the above result in the handicap. It will be noted that Jackson was handicapped to give him 5 points in 70, but failed by 11 points; Power thus scored 65 aces to 59, or, in other words, won by six without his handicap. Altogether the tournament has been a nice little picnic for the pair. Ron a Bay’s Tournaments. Sixteen entries were received for the Men's Championship Singles, the most important results of which are:—W. J. Organ v. A. Pavitt, 6 —4, 4—6, 6—o; F. E. Kelly v. C. R. Howden, 6—3, 6—2; F. A. Lewis v. D. N. Isaacs, 6—3, 3—6, 6—3. Men's Handicap Singles. —Final: Cecil Howden (12) v. F. E. Kelly (10), 60—52. Although Howden won by half a dozen points without his handicap, Kelly had ample revenge in their subsequent meeting in the championship (12 games to 5). Ladies’ Handicap Singles.—Conducted on the Yankee principle,—everybody play everybody—this event resulted in a win for Miss M. Kelly, who did not lose a match in the tournament (eight victories). Miss Poynder was second. Brougham Hill Championahlpa. Results to date in the men's events, the only ones in which progress is being made • re: — Men’s Singles.—First round: H. V. Howe v. G. A. Hurley, 7—5, 6—4; A. Quinnell v. R. Gore, by default; E. Edwards v M. C. Sim, 6—l, 6— 4. Second round: H. V. Howe v. A. Quinnell, 6—l, 2—6, 6- 3; J. A. B. Howe v. J. C. Morrison, 6—2, 6—2; Q. Grace IT. H. M. Kean, 3 6, 6—4, B—2. Third round. —J. A. B. Howe v. G. Grace, B—o, 6—2. Men’s Doubles.—First round: Howe Bros. v. Instone and Morrison, 6—o, 6—2; Grace Bros. v. Quinnell and Sim, 4—(l, B—4,8 —4, 6—3; Veen and Edwards v. Smith find Ward, B—6,8 —6, 9—7; Butcher and Reeves v. Keen and Gore, 8- -fi, B—4.

AUCKLAND.

INTER-CLUB MATCHES. First Grade.—A Section. EDEN AND EPSOM V. WEBT END. (Eden and Epsom players mentioned first.) Men’s Singles.—Goldsmith 9, v. Keith 8; Brown 3, v. Snelling 9; Robson 9, v. Lyttelton 8; Hunt 9, v. Fee 4. Men’s Doubles.—Brown and Robson 9, v. Keith and Snelling 0; Hunt and Goldsmith 9, v. Lyttelton and Goldie 3; A. S. Brown and Billing 9. v. Fee and Wyman 3. Ladies’ Singles.—Mrs Goldsmith 7, v. Miss Gray 3; Miss Bloomfield 1, v. Miss Williams Ladies’ Doubles. —Mrs Goldsmith and Miss Bloomfield 4, v. Misses Gray and Williams 7; Mrs Brown and Miss Blades 7, v. Mrs Fee and Miss Nelson 4. Combined Doublets. — Billing and Mrs Brown 7, v. Goldie and Mrs Fee 5; A. S. Brown and Miss Blades 7, v. Wyman and Miss Nelson 4. Eden and Epsom 10, West End 3. PARNELL V. AUCKLAND. (Parnell players mentioned first.) Men’s Singles.—Mowbray 7, v. Webster 9; Coates 4. v. Snelling 9; Simpson 9, v. Andrew 3; Hanna 7, v. Matthews 9. Men s Doubles.—Mowbray and Coates 9, v. Snelling and Webster 5; Hanna and Ralph 9, v. Andrew and Tuke 6; Baker and Simpson 9. v. Matthews and Johns 5. Ladies’ Singles.—Miss Steele 7, v. Mis? Woodroffe 4; Miss M. MacCormick 7, v. Miss Mace 5. Ladies’ Doubles.—Misses Steele and MacCormick 7. v. Misses Woodroffe and Mace 3; Misses Fra ter and N. MacCormick 7, v. Misses Moses and W. Woodroffe 5. Combined Doubles.—Baker and Miss N. MacCormick 7, v. Tuke and Miss McLaughlin 3; Ralph and Miss Frater gave a bye to Johns and Miss W. Woodroffe. Parnell 9, Auckland 4. B. Section. WEST END 11. V. EDEN AND EPSOM 11. (West End players mentioned first.) Men’s Singles.—Macky 5. v. Henderson 9; Stewart 4, v. Cooke 9; Cooke 5, v. Thomson 9; Alison 4, v. Campbell 9. Men’s Doubles. —Cooke and Macky 5, v. Cooke and Campbell 9; Angus and Stewart 4, v. Henderson and Thomson 9; Alison and Dickeson 6 v. Bull and C. R. Brown 9. Ladies Singles.—Miss Patterson 7, v. Miss Walker 2; Mrs Keith gave Miss Stewart a bye. Ladies’ Doubles. —Mrs Keith and Miss Bagnall gave Misses Walker and Nicholson a bye; Miss Patterson and Mrs Manning 7, v. Misses Stewart and Kmeeton 3. Combined Doubles.—Angus and Mrs Manning 1, v. C. R. Brown and Miss Nicholson 7; Dickeson and Miss Bagnall 1, v. Bull and Miss Smeeton 7. Eden and Epsom won by 11 to 2. DEVONFORT I. V. PARNELL 11. Men’s Singles.—Ewen 9, v. Duthle 0; Sutton 9. v. Herd 8; Whittaker 9, v. Seagar 6; Sberriffs 9, v. Cooke 7. Men’s Doubles. —Ewen and Sutton 9, v. Dutbie mid Herd 4; Whittaker and Sherriffs 9, v. Seagar and Cooke 5; Macky and Gibson 3, v. Pavitt and Kissling 9. Ladies’ Singles.—Miss Whittaker 7, v. Miss Gudgeon C; Miss Handley 7, v. Miss Peacock 4. Ladies’ Doubles.—Mrs Cooper and Miss Harvey 7, v. Misses Peacock and Gudgeon 1; Misses Whittaker and Handley 7, v. Mrs Kent and Miss Cameron 6. Combined Doubles. —Mrs Cooper and Macky 6, v. Mrs Kent and Pavitt 7; Miss Harvey and Gibson 7, v. Miss Cameron and Kissling 5. Devonport Club won by 11 to 2.

Second Grade. A Section. REMUERA 11. V. WEST END 111. (Remuera players mentioned first.) Men's Singles.—Ruddock 9, v. Foote 1; Archer 9, v. Nolan 1; Brabant 9, v. Hally 2; Gray 9, v. Butler 2. Men’s Doubles.—Ruddock and Gray 9, v. Foote and McNair 8; Brabant and Archer 9, v. Nolan and Hally 4; Elliot and Sloman 9, v. Butler and Alison 3. Ladies’ Singles.— Miss Payton 7, v. Miss Hunt 1; Miss Gordon 7, v. Mrs O’Gorman 4. Ladies’ Doubles. Misses Payton and Gordon 7, v. Miss Hunt and Mrs Colson 3:

Misses Sloman and Commons 7, v. M!ss Warnock and Mrs O’Gorman 5. Combined Doubles.—Sloman and Miss Sloman 7, v. Mrs Colson and McNair 0; Miss Commons anil Elliot 7, v. Miss Warnock and Alison 3. Remuera 13, West End 0.

BROCKES AND PARKE.

WHO IS THE BETTER PLAYER ? FREMANTLE, Wednesday. On the eve of their departure from Australia, members of the Britsh Isles lawn tennis team were asked by a Press representative to give thenr impressions of the trip. When J. C. Parke was questioned as to what his opinion was regarding N. E. Brookes, he said: —“I hate exaggeration, but Brookes is marvellous. He is in a class by himself, he is beyond criticism; and there is only one of him.” “ How does it feel to beat him?” “ Well, the overwhelming surprise of it stifles all other sensations,” replied the Irishman, “ and robs one of more than half the exhilaration which rightly should attach to so rare an occurrence. Beyond that, I know really very little about how it feels; but, as for Brookes himself, I know he is marvellous.” Asked for his opinion about the game as played in Australia, Parke said he feared that many Australians had fallen into the error of copying Brookes’ inimitable style. “ Brookes,” lie continued, “ has modelled and invented his own game, in accordance with his unique abilities, and others with no pretensions of like abilities have tried to imitate him. The fact that they have not been successful lias not been sufficient to deter them from slavishly following the methods of one who is in a class by himself.

“ I am not saying this because I personally play largely from base line,” Parke went on to say. “ I would no more advocate an exclusive baseline game than I would ah exclusive net game, for I am convinced that other things being equal the only game that must and should prevail, is the game composed of a judicious mixture of both. Make your opportunity with good ground strokes, and if necessary go in and finish with a kill.” When asked for his opinion of the respective merits of Brookes and Parke, the Britsh captain, C. P. Dixon, said he thought Brookes was the better player. " Perhaps,” he added, “ I should put it this way: Brookes, in my opinion, would beat some men that Parke could not, but, on the other hand, Parke might at any time beat the Australian. There is only one Brookes. He is so appallingly original that what he lacks in stamina he makes up in determination. The greater the occasion is the better does he play. He is so different to anyone else. So original and so unique, he goes on quite his own lines. There is no copybook about him.”

Speaking of the recent matches in which Brookes turned the tables on his Davis Cup conqueror, Dixon waxed enthusiastic over the Australian’s magnieent display “It was wonderful,” said Dixon; “ something to be remembered. In spite of the terrible heat, Brookes was far above his Davis Cup form.” “ Why was it that Parke beat Brookes in the Davis Cup competition, and then was beaten himself subsequently}” “ There were several reasons,” replied the Britisher. “ In the first place the subsequent matches were composed of three sets, and the Davis Cup singles were composed of five. These latter are the real international tests. In the second place, Parke did not reproduce his form, shown in the Davis Cup. You see, we had been engaging in a great deal of

wearisome travelling, and hurried tennb, and that does not tend to make a man’s form any better.” “It was hardly to be expected,” concluded Dixon, “ that Parke would reproduce that form. Perhaps he will never do so again, as his activity and accuracy were something phenomenal. He could play the ball anywhere within a square foot of where lie intended it to go, and he was continually getting past Brookes at the net.”

THE DAVIS CUP.

AMERICA GETTING READ? For some years past America has adopted a system of ranking her players, and from the classification it is easily learned who are officially regarded as the strongest players. The ranking for 1912 has just been notified, and includes no less than 100 players. Though most of the interest, as a rule, attaches almost solely to America, it is of special interest this year to other, continents, in view of the fact that America, as well as several other nations, is practically certain to send its challenge for the Davis Cup, now that England will be the venue for, at least, the next contest. From the ranking, some idea might be gathered as to who is likely to represent America in that contest. The first place has been filled by Maurice E. McLaughlin, who came to Australia in 1909, to play in the Davis Cup match in Sydney. Considering that as recently as 1907 he was ranked 38th, his jump to sixth in 1909 was an exceedingly big one, to be followed in 1911 by being placed second, and now for 1912 he has been given the place of honour, and heads the list of American players.

It is unusual to find that W. A, Larned, who won the American championship for seven years, and Beals Wright, the man who defeated Brookes in the Davis Cup match in 1908, ar® not included in the list. This is accounted for by their absence from tournaments, on which class or play the ranking is based. Remarking on the ranking, "American Lawn Tennis” says: “For the first time since 1900 the name of W. A. Larned does not figure in the list. No. 1 position, which he has occupied continuously from 1907 on, has fallen, quite as a matter of course, on Maurice E. McLaughlin, the new champion. No one would for an instant think of disputing the Californian's right to this position, for he went through the eastern season ■without a defeat, his win of the title of champion being the crowning aet of his glory.”

R. N. Williams, the Pennsylvania champion, is second, and Johnson, who won the Southampton championship this year, is placed third. Clothier. Miles, T. C. Bundy, and Karl Behr follow in that order.