LAWN TENNIS.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXI, Issue 9028, 15 January 1908, Page 6

LAWN TENNIS.

THE CHAMPIONSHIP MEETING. (By H. A. Parker, in the "Taranaki Herald.") During the last fourteen months I have taken part in the championships of every State in Australasia, with the exception of Tasmania, and I propose, therefore, to criticise the meetings recently held in New Plymouth from un Australian and not a local standpoint. It is always interesting to see ourselves as others see us, and in the. present instance it must De understood that I am taking the best Australian championships as my standard, and also that any weak points that I may draw attention to are referred to in the best intersts of the sport and also of the players themselves. Before speaking of the play itself I may say at once that I have nothing but praise for the New Plymouth courts and their surroundings and accessaries. The _ chief Australian meetings, Brisbane and Perth excepted, hold their championships on open cricket grounds, and although the surface of these is excellent, and well suited for tennis, they are very exposed to the wind, and the absence of a definite background makes it difficult for any but the most experienced players to gauge the strength of their shots. It is quite a common thing to have defective nets at Australian meetings, and I consider that an umpire should not be called on to decide whether a ball went through the net or not. The umpires' seats, the posts, etc., were all quite up-to-date, and the New Plymouth Club can consider itself above criticism in this respect. The courts themselves were in splendid order and distinctly superior to those I played on a month previously in the Melbourne championships, in fact, I can hardly recollect anything in the nature of a false bound right through the meeting. The management, too, was all that could be desired. Having had a very wide experience of the running of tournaments throughout the world, the first thing that would have grated on me would have been any incompetence in making the arrangements, but here again I am compelled to admit that I could not have suggested any improvements in any way, and I -congratulate Mr Paton and his assistants on the able manner in which they brought matters to a successful conclusion within the specified time. To get through an entry of the size of the Taranaki meeting, which followed on the heels of the New Zealand Tournament, in ona day under the allotted time, was a vety clever piece of arrangement, and I have no •d'jubt that the New Plymouth officials fully appreciated the help and advice tendered by Mr G. N. Goldie, the popular secretary of the .N.Z.L.T.A. In criticising the play J will deal first with the men. Or, LJio whole I must say that I was not i-pedally impressed with the form shown by the majority of the leading pkiyi-rs with exception of Fisher and Quill. The former of these two I consider a most dangerous opponent, and pj.'<;lj-*bly the best all-round man in New Zealand. His success must be allrHuihxl to the fact that he has a very good idea of .almost all the strokes in the game, .and furthermore he !n;-' th:- ;iptitude tu make a correct usy of shem in •whatever style of gam;.! h-.-f may be playing, whether a ox* men's -double or mixed. I consider Fisher .has great natural gifts for hnvn tennis, and also considerable possibilities of improving stiiJ fiM - 'her if he -could got regular pi\t<"! i<v against

irst-class men. One point he should mprove in his second service, which s very weak if he serves a plain one. His reverse American service is jffective, and 1 think it would pay trim to specialise this variety still further and send down both first and 3ecorid services at the same pace, and follow them to the net. On his present day play he would probably be classed about third or fourth in either New South Wales or Victoria, and in a single I would consider him almost equal to either Duniop or Heath. The most serious bar to his success would be that his condition is apparently not of the best, and without proper systematic training a hard, five-set match would find him wanting, and tro."cover he does not always play the best game hj is capable of. Quill, who beat Peacock in the penultimate round of theN.Z. Championship singles, is quite a different stamp of player, who owes his success to sheer hai'd work and intelligent practice. He has risen so rapidly into the front rank of New Zealand 1 players that he still has some rough edges to improve in his style of play, and he reqires more confidence in his powers to enable him to beat.inferior players by a larger margin. He and Fisher are the only two players whom I can honestly say adopt modern tactics in their method of placing. Quill is a very difficult man to beat owing to his wonderful power of getting the ball back, while his condition is ui doubted, and his driving quite first-dass, both on the forehand and backhand. Moreover he often follows his American service to the net and makes a neat low volley off the return. His weakest point is his smashing, the reason of this being that he does not get sufficiently over the ball, and hits it too far away from him. I always consider that the combined events are the best school in which to learn to smash properly, as the man is continually having to make this stroke, and I would recommed Quiil to take up this branch of the game if only for this special object. In singles Quill would about hold his own with the fifth and sixth man on the New South Wales and Victorian teams, and he is practically on a par with the best players in South Australia and Queenland. Cox and Peacock I would class together a shade behind Quill in singles, as they lack the sustained accuracynecessary to win championships. Both of these players are exponents of the brilliant game, and at their best might put up a great performance, but in forming comparisons an average must be taken. Cox and Peacock Jhave their strokes very highly developed, and are most stylish and attractive players to watch, but, right here, as an American would say, I must point out that these deep brilliant drives are too stereotyped, and not sufficiently varied to be effective. It is commonly thought that a good length ball is always one that pitches near the base line, and that such is always preferable to any other, but this is a fallacy. Good length is of course the backbone of the driving game, but my idea of good length is to put the ball where your opponent is not; for example, if he happens to be well outside his base line, a good length ball would be a short one, and a drop shot for preference. Fisher is extremely clever with this latter shot. To make it properly the racket should be held loosely about half way up the handle, and a slight undercut imparted. All players should master this stroke, which after all only requires delicacy of touch and a ilttle nerve. The players I am dealing with, viz.—Cox and Peacock, will have to mix their deep drjves with othei's at a more acute angle if they don'r. wish to be left behind in the future. These players also need to be reminded that condition is absolutely essential, as Cox showed signal signs of distress towards the close of his match with Peacock, while the latter could r.ot stand the gruelling he received from Quill, and clearly threw up the spunge at the finish. Dickie and Wallace are a sterling pair, and would take a heap of beating anywhere. I have played against them several times nuw, and think that on the whole their double game is more sound than it was. Wallace has probably the finest and cleanest style of anyone in New Zealand, ar.d in fact, it would be hard to suggest any improvement in this respect. Both work with the utmost vigour and their win in the Doubles Championship was thoroughly merited. In singles I do not think that either of them plays quite so well as a year or two ago; but this is simply the result of an insufficiency of hard practice, and I feel sure that were they situated where good regular practice was obtainable they would soon be in the first flight of New Zealand players, while Wallace would make a name for himelf anywhere. Outside these few players I did not notice anyone likely to develop championship form in the near future, but several of the younger players showed a distinct advance, noticeably 11. W. Brown, Pearse, and J. C. Swavnson. The first-named has improved out of all knowledge, and I found him a hard nut to crack in I the championship. He has a most I severe forehand drive which he places well,and his backhand is also quite good. Pearse is like Wallace in being unable to obtain hard practice, but he is game to the last, and is by no means an easy man to dispose of. He has a peculiar smack with his forehand which is practically unreturnable. Swainson I have never seen play before, but I was specially impressed with his forehand drive, which is one of the most beautifully executed strokes I have ever seen; but he should change his backhand grip, which is faulty and does not permit him to make an attacking stroke. If he lived in one of the principal centres he would unquestionably become a top-notcher. (To be Continued).