TENNIS BOOM

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 888, 4 February 1930, Page 7

TENNIS BOOM

SUCCESS OF TOURNEY IN WELLINGTON COMMENT ON MATCHES BY WAYFARER. Those of us resident outside AYellington have been under a delusion that ! Wellington has not ' tennis sense," but, j believe me, we have been quite wrong. ; The Mayor and Mrs. Troup came to i see the play in the championships on \ Saturday, and -were vastly surprised ! at the crowd. There were not half enough trams to take the crowd to the games. There were nearly 2,000 interested spectators, for whom accommodation was hard to find. But the sporting j crowd did its best. We had got yesterday as far as the j mixed doubles. The finalists in this were Miss Marjorie Macfarlane and ; Sandrel and Mrs. Thomson and Wilson. The two former had played together but twice in their lives, and when they beat Hen France and Miss Boris Howe, the game was as good as a pantomime. Sandral is a really good mixed player, but France is not. and in this game, for reasons best known to themselves, the men decided it was up to them to try and "dominate” the play, which really means that they poached like one thing. To that end they dashed all over their respective courts, while one can only assume that their partners were doing —if girls do do this —another kind of "dashing.” To me it seemed as if the two girls | were engaged in a game of "Peep-bo,” the one with the other, each with her partner to hide behind. Amusing, but no use. In the match, Miss Mac Andrew. of Christchurch, with Parker, of Wellington, against Wilson and his partner, Wilson was right on his form, smashing really well. He cracked one at the net which quite uudesignedly hit Miss Andrew on the ankle and Wilson was so genuinely penitent and distressed that it was quite four games ere he played one toward the Canterbury girl again, and then when he did I’m blessed if she could get out of the way the second time —smiles all round. Parker turned and ran when he saw one smash coming, but he, too. got it! STRENUOUS PROGRAMME There were two matches in the mixed play late on Saturday, and this was a pity, because most of the crowd had gone and the tennis was good. Immediately after his really hard men’s doubles, Wilson came oil with Mrs. Newton to overwhelm Mrs. Scott and Wallace, the former of whom was playing quite good tennis, but Wallace is but a wraith of his former self. His stroke production is there, and he managed some nice shots, but taken by and large, one would think lie had spent all the previous week-end watching Buleepsinliji, so often did his drives go along the sward, as my cricket colleagues term the green grass. No sooner were these disposed of than the victors were at it again against the other finalists, Miss Marjorie Macfarlane ancL Sandral. Now Sandral is full of guile, but innocent to look on. This, however, did not deceive his opponents, who found him as full of tricks as a bag full of monkeys; he made only one mistake of any moment and that was at the beginning, but as he unhappily persisted in this mistake (which was forgetting that he had a top-notch partner behind him) right through the piece, he and his partner paid the penalty and instead of gaining the honours had to be content with “trophy to the value of £1 Is each.” Mrs. Thomson is a slight, dainty, wee player, and many of her strokes arc as dainty as she is. Sandral was exploiting a short, dropping, cross-court shot, but he met his match in Mrs. Thomson! and in many a duel of tricky placements, Sandral came off number two. Wilson was very severe overhead in this match, and he, too, made some great saves, but Miss Macfarlane didn’t really have a fair spin, for often her partner would start to go across, hesitate and stop, which left the Auckland girl either chasing across the other side or up in the air, and in either event they lost the point. This was a very merry and bright game, everyone smiling, even though I did hear Wilson, when he mucked a “sitter,” say something which sounded like, “well.” I like Wilson and his style; almost invariably he smiles at his errors, and frequently laughs a hearty laugh. The women and girls with the previously-noted exception (who can well be excused) were all smiling in their games, and this really reacts on the spectators. PROMISING JUNIORS

And now to the juniors. R. R. Bees, of the Matata Club, Auckland, put up a. much better fight against the hefty young Robertson from Timaru. The latter’s game until Saturday was distinctly disappointing, but on that day he redeemed himself, winning both singles and doubles, the latter with the Wellington lad, Ferkins. Robertson is a very powerfully built young giant for his age, and he makes good use of his height; he seemed less troubled by the wind than was Lees, who is slighter.

M. F. Lees, the latter's TTFtle brother, is somewhat of a midget as yet; but as he is only 14 lie will soon remedy that. Robertson seemed almost big enough to put the little left-hander in his pocket, but, undeterred, Lees waded in and mad© some very pretty shots. Both these boys, indeed all four finalists, have pleasing free styles, and will come on later as fine players. To me the most interesting thing was that none of the youngsters seemed to get “centre court right”—or if he or she did, she or lie concealed it in an admirable manner. For Issbel Morrison, the tall Canterbury girl, to win the triple junior event was a very fine achievement, and her play justified it. In the singles she lost only 21 games in eight sets, and with Clair Longmore, a Wellingtonian, beat the winners of last year, 6 —l, t>—4.

She had a much, harder battle in the mixed final when, playing with young Heenan, they bumped against Madeline Eliot and Robertson, of Timaru. While Isobel and her partner won, they owe their victory in greaL part to the fact that in the last set Robertson ran amok and thought he could play the other two singlehanded. He couldn’t, and only found this out when lie had lost his chance of the triple honour. Congratulations to the Canterbury girl, and to that good sport, her father, who will no doubt keep her on the straight and narrow path, leading toward tennis success, one of the pavements of which is no swollen head—not that I think our young friend would be affected that way—she smiles too nicely.

A word of praise is—nay, IS are—due to Clair Monson for her assistance to her partner in the doubles. It is sad but true, but this little Wellingtonian has not come on as quickly as she gave promise of doing, but perhaps it is well to make haste slowly, and she will have every opportunity. A GOOD WIN R. McL. Ferkins had his reward in the Plate by landing a trophy lo the value of £3 3s, and his win was very popular. And now it’s all over and we are home again—and what of it? First, since it was mentioned last —is the Plate worth while, and if a men’s, why not a women's? Personally. 3 don't believe it is worth the trouble entailed, as the entries show, so there is no need to trouble about my second question, and it was really very silly of me to bring forward the suggestion. As to the junior events—if the date

of the championship is to be altered about, some definite date should be set as to when a boy is a boy—let us say. December 20, wherever the tournament is. I mention this because one lad had very hard luck in missing eligibility by one day. Had the tournament been at Christmas he would have been able to enter. Has the change in dates been justified? Reluctantly I must confess “Yes.” but mainly because of the dreadful climatic conditions at Christmas. Except for Mrs. Dykes. Bartleet and Laurenson, all the players of note were present, and the public of Wellington showed by rolling up in such numbers on Saturday that the gloomy prognostications about Wellington not being educated to big tennis were so much Aim flam.