BADMINTON

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 753, 28 August 1929, Page 15

BADMINTON

TOURNAMENT SCHEDULE THREE COURTS TO BE USED The- schedule of play for the openini? matches of the New Zealand Badminton tournament, which opens tomorrow, ,is as follows. Players unable to keep their engagements are requested tv telephone the Scots Hall. Courts N<a«- 1 and 2 are in Scots Hall, while No. 3 will be in St. David’s Hall, Khvber Pass. No. 3 is being reserved for lirst-year and junior events. Court No. I.—ll a.m.: Miss Ellett v. Mrs. Needham; 13**20, Miss Cowper v. Miss Soloman; 11.111, Miss Newton v. Mrs. Austin; 12, Miss Miller v. Miss Waters; 12.20 p.m., Miss Ramsay v. Miss liarctem; 12.40, Misses M. Waters and Wilson v. Miss Cortaeck and Harris; 1.5, Miss K. Waters v- Miss Wilson; j 1.25, Misses Eastwood avud Cornish v. Mrs. Massam and Miss \lamsay; 1.50, ’ Mrs. Clark and Rev. Colcvnan v. Miss Harden and Langguth; 2.15, Misses Harden and Cowper v. Mrs. Wilkies and Miss Thomas; 2.35, Bryant and Pir.rit v. Austin and Meredith; 2.55, Mrs. FVenton and Mrs. Mackenzie v. Misses Efclett and Soloman; 3.15, Mrs. Harvey and McLean v. Miss Eastwood and Hopkins; ,‘3*35, Mrs. Clark and Mr?v Bell v. Misses dampbell and Ross; 3.50, Mrs. Hetley aiAd Mrs. Harvey v. Mrs. Fenton and Mrs. Mackenzie; 4.5, Airs. Austin and Miss' Wilson V. Misses Watts and Hawkins; 4.20, Miss Rennie ana Jones v. Miss P.agni and Surman; 4.35, Miss Cowper find Bohm v. Miss Cargill and Hawkins; 4.50, Miss Ramsay and Morrison v. Mrs. Hell and Ryder; 5.5, Griffiths and winner Austin and Philson; 5.30, Miss Rohan Mrs. Wisely; 5.55, Rev. Wilkes and Malle tt v. Morrison and Whitley; 6.20, Sou- ,• thon and Griffiths v. Jacob and Row- f lings: 6.45, Rishworth and Martin v. Bartleet and Surman; 7.5, Miss Ellett and Kelly v. Mrs. Austin and Rev. Austin: 7.25. Mrs. Langguitli and Southon V. Miss Ramsay and Morrison; 7.45, winners of Soutlion and Griffiths v. Jacob and Rowlings, v. Macky and Lessinghaiti. Court No. 2.—11 a.m., 3*. Wilkes v. I. Ellett; 11.25, Austin v. Philson; 11.50, Southon v. Meredith; 12.15* p.m., Rishworth v. Surman; 12.35, O. ESllett v. Coleman; 12.50, Rogers and Masswm v. Langguth and Philson; 1.15, Miss* Frank ham and Ernst v. Mrs. Hetley and. Meredith; 1.30, Miss Solomon and Elletal v. Miss Thomas and Mallett; 1.50, Mrs. Austin and Miss Wilson v. Airs. Langsguth and I Miss Miller; 2.10, Martin v. McLearr, j 2.30, Mrs. Needham and Miss Newton v. Mrs. Clark and Mrs. Bell; 2.60, Mrs. Wilkes and Wilkes v. Miss Cowper and Bell; 3.10, Miss Wilson and Paul V- Miss Hawkins and Plrritt; 3.30, Mrs. Needham and Miss Newton v. Miss Thomas’ and Miss Allman: 3.45, Misses Ellett and •Solomon v. Misses Harden and CowpeV; 4, Miss Colbeck and Harris v. Miss IVilson and Paul; 4.20, Miss Potter and j Bartlet v. Miss Frankham and En*st; 4.35, Miss Ross and Memzies v. Miss Watts and Thomas; 5, Mrs. Iletley and McLean v. Miss Campbell and- DonaluV son; 5.20, Rogers v. Tonks; ,5.45 L Kell;v v. Soloman; 6, Paine v. Ernst; 6.25, Kelly \ and McLean v. Hopkins and Hawkins; " 645 Paul and Paine v. Bell and Cole- j man; 7.15, Ellett and Ellett v. Nash and Tonks; 7.40, Mrs. Needham and Rogers J v Miss Allman and Hawkins; 8.0. Miss K. Waters and Ellett v. Miss Berry and Macky; 5.30, Miss Miller and Tonks v. Miss Newton and Surman; 8.55, Misses K. and M. Waters v. Mrs. AY lseley and Miss Rohan. Tr . _ Court No. 3.—11 a.m.. Misses Hudson and Hutchinson v. Misses Me Lachlan and Cox' 11 20, Misses Watts and Hawkins v. Misses Pheasant and Reynolds; 11.40, Misses Smith and lnnis v. Misses Bot-* trell and Canham; noon, Misses Lloyd and Newson v. Misses Allman and Hewitt; 12.20 p.m., Miss Colbeck and Harris v. Miss Cornish and PirritU 12.40, Miss Vaile and Towle v. Miss Newton and Johns; 1, Miss Allman and Thomas v. Miss Potter and Bartleet; 1.20, Mrs. Morrison and Miss Mason y Mrs. Mackenzie and Miss Pearce; 1.40, Bai tleet and Surman v. Hopkins and Thomas, 2, j Knight, and Partington v. Rogers and Ernest; 2.20, Miss Newson and Paine t V. Airs. Knight and Knight; 2.40, Miss | Parker and Parker v. Miss Pagni and j Surman; 5, Miss Smith and Wilson v ; Miss Canham and McDell; o. 20, Mrs. Paul and Canham v. Miss Me Each lan and Elllffe; 5.40, Miss Wyllie and Pardington v Miss Ryburn and Gardiner; 6, Misses Waller and Colbeck v. Misses Newton and Darling: 6.20. Misses Pintree and Ryburn v. Misses Cowper and R. Innes; 7, Skegg and Woods v. McDell and Canham; 7120, Mrs. Seott-Watson and Miss Potter v. Mrs. Fenton and Miss Vaile; 7,40, Miss Cowper and Woods y. Miss Frankham and Ernst; 5.20, Morrison and Jones v. Bryant and Pirritt; 5.40, Rowlings and Griffiths v. Ell iff e and Gardner: f*. Mrs. Morrison and Morrison v. Miss Watts and Hopkins; 9.20, Miss Hawkins and Bryant y. Mrs. ScottWatson and I. Ellett; 9.40, Miss Reynolds and Key v. Miss Miller and Tonks; 10 Tonks and Wilson v. Key and Kay; 10. Ellett and Paine v. Harris and Parker.