Project Gutenberg surfs with a modem donated by Supra.

W >> William T. Tilden, 2D >> Project Gutenberg surfs with a modem donated by Supra.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12

Why is not Gobert the greatest tennis player in the world?
Personally I believe it is lack of confidence, a lack of fighting
ability when the breaks are against him, and defeat may be his
due. It is a peculiar thing in Gobert, for no man is braver than
he, as his heroism during the War proved. It is simply lack of
tennis confidence. It is an over- abundance of temperament. In
victory Gobert is invincible, in defeat he is apt to be almost
mediocre.

Gobert is delightful personally. His quick wit and sense of
humour always please the tennis public. His courteous manner and
genial sportsmanship make him universally popular. His stroke
equipment is unsurpassed in the tennis world.

I unqualifiedly state that I consider him the most perfect tennis
player, as regards strokes and footwork, in the world to-day; but
he is, not the greatest player. Victory is the criterion of a
match player, and Gobert has not proved himself a great victor.

Gobert is probably the finest indoor player in the world, while
he is very great on hard courts; but his grass play is not the
equal of many others. I heartily recommend Gobert's style to all
students of the game, and endorse him as a model for strokes.

W. LAURENTZ

Another brilliant, erratic and intensely interesting figure that
France has given the tennis world is Laurentz, the wonderful
young player, who, at the age of seventeen defeated A. F.
Wilding.

Laurentz is a cyclonic hitter of remarkable speed and brilliance,
but prone to very severe lapses. His service is of several
varieties, all well played. He uses an American twist as his
regular delivery, but varies it with a sharp slice, a reverse
twist of great spin, and a fast cannon-ball smash. Laurentz is
very versatile. He has excellent orthodox drives, fore- and
backhand, and a competent forehand chop.

His volleying is brilliant almost beyond description, but very
erratic. He is very fast on his feet, and anticipates remarkably
well. He will make the most hair-raising volleys, only to fall
down inexplicably the next moment on an easy shot. His overhead
is like his volley, severe, brilliant, but uncertain.

Laurentz is a very hard worker, and, unlike Gobert, is always at
his best when behind. He is a fair fighter and a great match
player. His defeats are due more to over-anxiety than to lack of
fight. He is temperamental, sensational, and brilliant, a
sportsman of the highest type, quick to recognize his opponent's
good work and to give full credit for it. He is one of the most
interesting players now before the public.

He is a clever court general but not a great tennis thinker,
playing more by instinct than by a really deep-laid plan of
campaign. Laurentz might beat anyone in the world on his day or
lose to the veriest dub when at his worst.[1]

[1] It was with deepest regret the news of his death reached us,
as this edition went to press.

J. SAMAZIEUHL

The New French Champion of 1921 who defeated Andre Gobert most
unexpectedly in the challenge round, is an interesting player of
the mental type. He is anything but French in his game. His style
is rather that of the crafty American or English player than the
hard-hitting Frenchman.

Samazieuhl is an exponent of crafty patball. His service is a
medium pace slice, well placed but not decisive. His ground
strokes are a peculiar stiff arm chop varied at times with an
equally cramped drive, yet his extreme mobility allows him to
cover a tremendous amount of court, while his return, which is
well disguised, is capable of great angles. His volleying is
reliable but lacks severity and punch. He makes excellent low
volleys, but cannot put away shoulder high balls while his
overhead is not deadly.

It is Samazieuhl's clever generalship and his ability to recover
seemingly impossible shots that win matches for him. He is a
comparatively new tournament player, and should improve greatly
as he gains confidence and experience.

R. DANET

One of the most interesting young players in France is R. Danet,
who has come to the fore in the past few years. This boy, for he
is little more, has a hard hitting brilliant game of great
promise.

His service is a speedy slice. He drives with great speed, if as
yet with none too much accuracy, off both fore and backhand. His
net attack is very severe while overhead he is deadly. His speed
of foot is remarkable, and he is a very hard worker. His
limitations are in his lack of a set plan of attack and the
steady adherence to any given method of play. He throws away too
many easy chances, but this will correct itself as time goes on
and Danet has fought through more tournaments. I consider him a
player of great promise.

Max Decugis and Brugnon, the two remaining members of the 1920
Davis Cup team of France, present totally different types.
Decugis, crafty, cool, and experienced, is the veteran of many
long seasons of match play. He is a master tactician, and wins
most of his matches by outgeneralling the other player. Burgnon
is brilliant, flashy, hard hitting, erratic, and inexperienced.
He is very young, hardly twenty years of age. He has a fine
fore-hitting style and excellent net attack, but lacks confidence
and a certain knowledge of tennis fundamentals. A few years'
experience will do wonders for him.

The French style of play commends itself to me very highly. I
enjoy watching the well-executed strokes, beautiful mobile
footwork of these dashing players. It is more a lack of dogged
determination to win, than in any stroke fault that one finds the
reason for French defeats. The temperamental genius of this great
people carries with it a lack of stability that can be the only
explanation for the sudden crushing and unexpected defeats their
representatives receive on the tennis courts.

I was particularly impressed during my visit to France by the
large numbers of children playing tennis and the style of game
displayed. The sport shows a healthy increase and should produce
some fine players within the next ten years.

Keen competition is the corrective measure for temperamental
instability and with the advent of many new players in French
tennis I would not be surprised to see a marked decrease of
unexpected defeats of their leading players.

Japan

A new element has entered the tennis world in the last decade.
The Orient has thrust its shadow over the courts in the persons
of a small group of remarkable tennis players, particularly
Ichija Kumagae and Zenzo Shimidzu, the famous Japanese stars.

Kumagae, who for some years reigned supreme in Japan and
Honolulu, has lived in America for the past three years. Shimidzu
is a product of Calcutta, where he has lived for some years.

No player has caused more discussion than Kumagae, unless it is
Shimidzu; while surely no man received more critical comment than
Shimidzu, except Kumagae. The press of America and England have
vied with each other in exploiting these two men. There was
unanimity of opinion concerning these two men in one respect. No
finer sportsmen nor more delightful opponents can be found than
these Japanese. They have won the respect and friendship of all
who have met them.

Kumagae is the speedier tennis player. He came to America in
1916, the possessor of a wonderful forehand drive and nothing
else. Kumagae is left- handed, which made his peculiar shots all
the harder to handle. He met with fair success during the year;
his crowning triumph was his defeat of W. M. Johnston at Newport
in five sets. He lost to J. J. Armstrong, Watson M. Washburn, and
George M. Church. He learned much during his year in America, and
returned to Japan a wiser man, with a firm determination to add
to his tennis equipment.

In 1917 Kumagae returned to America to enter business in New
York. Once established there he began developing his game. First
he learned an American twist service and then strengthened his
backhand. That year he suffered defeat at the hands of Walter T.
Hayes and myself. He was steadily improving. He now started
coming to the net and learning to volley. He is not yet a good
low volleyer, and never will be while he uses the peculiar grip
common to his people; but his high volleying and overhead are now
excellent. Last year Kumagae reached his top form and was ranked
third in America. His defeats were by Johnston, Vincent Richards,
and myself; while he defeated Murray, S. H. Voshell, Vincent
Richards, and me, as well as countless players of less note.

The season of 1920 found Kumagae sweeping all before him, since
Johnston, Williams, Garland, and I were away on the Davis Cup
trip. Williams barely defeated him in a bitter match, just
previously to sailing. Kumagae left America in the middle of the
summer to compete in the Olympic games, representing Japan.

Kumagae is still essentially a baseline player of marvellous
accuracy of shot and speed of foot. His drive is a lethal weapon
that spreads destruction among his opponents. His backhand is a
severe "poke," none too accurate, but very deadly when it goes
in. His service overhead and high volley are all severe and
reliable. His low volley is the weak spot in an otherwise great
game. Kumagae cannot handle a chop, and dislikes grass-court
play, as the ball bounds too low for his peculiar "loop" drive.
He is one of the greatest hard-court players in the world, and
one of the most dangerous opponents at any time on any surface.

Shimidzu is to-day as dangerous as Kumagae. He, too, is a
baseline player, but lacks Kumagae's terrific forehand drive.
Shimidzu has a superior backhand to Kumagae, but his weak service
rather offsets this. His low volleying is far superior to
Kumagae, while his high volleying and overhead are quite his
equal. He has all the fighting qualities in his game that make
Kumagae so dangerous, but he has not had the experience. Shimidzu
learns very quickly, and I look to see him a great factor in the
game in future years.

Both Shimidzu and Kumagae are marvellous court coverers, and seem
absolutely untiring. They are "getters" of almost unbelievable
activity, and accurate to a point that seems uncanny. Both men
hit to the lines with a certainty that makes it very dangerous to
attempt to take the net on anything except a deep forcing shot
that hurries them.

With such players as Kumagae and Shimidzu, followed by S. Kashio
and K. Yamasaki, and the late H. Mikami, Japan is a big factor in
future tennis. 1922 will again see Japan challenging for the
Davis Cup, and none but a first-class team can stop them. The
advent of a Japanese team with such players will mean that this
year we must call out our best to repel the Oriental invasion: so
competition receives another stimulus that should raise our
standard of play.

The probability of journeying to Japan to challenge for the Davis
Cup is not so remote but that we must consider it as a future
possibility.

CHAPTER XV. SPAIN AND THE CONTINENT

Spain

A new factor entered the arena of world tennis in 1921 in the
appearance of a Spanish Davis Cup team. Among their number is a
star who bids fair to become one of the greatest players the
world has ever seen. A scintillating personality, brilliant
versatile game, and fighting temperament placed this young
unknown in the first rank in one year of competition.

MANUEL ALONZO

Seldom have I seen such wonderful natural abilities as are found
in this young Spaniard. Here is a player par excellence if he
develops as he gives promise. Alonzo is young, about 25, slight,
attractive in personality and court manners, quick to the point
of almost miraculous court covering. He is a great attraction at
any tournament.

His service is a fairly fast American twist. It is not remarkable
but is at least more severe than the average continental
delivery.

Alonzo has a terrific forehand drive that is the closest rival to
W. M. Johnston's of any shot I have seen. He is reliable on this
stroke, either straight or cross-court from the deep court but if
drawn in to mid-court is apt to miss it. His backhand is a flat
drive, accurate and low but rather slow and in the main
defensive.

His volleying is at once a joy and a disappointment. Such
marvellous angles and stop volleys off difficult drives! Yet
immediately on top of a dazzling display Alonzo will throw away
the easiest sort of a high volley by a pitiable fluke.

His overhead is at once severe, deadly and reliable. He smashes
with speed and direction. It is not only in his varied stroke
equipment that Alonzo is great but in his marvellous footwork.
Such speed of foot and lightning turning I have never before seen
on a tennis court. He is a quicker man than Norman E. Brookes and
higher praise I cannot give. I look to see Alonzo, who today
loses matches through lack of resource, become by virtue of
experience and tournament play the greatest player on the
continent.

His brother, J. M. Alonzo, although nowhere in Manuel's class, is
a fine all court player as are Count de Gomar and Flaquer, the
remaining members of the Cup team. If Alonzo and his teammates
are an indication of the type of players Spain is developing a
new and powerful factor in the tennis world is entering the field
to stay.

Some Other Champions

There are some individual players of interest from the countries
where tennis as a game has not reached a place worthy of national
analysation but who deserve mention among the great players of
the world.

First among them comes Nicholas Mishu of Rumania.

N. MISHU

What can I say of Mishu? As a tennis player he defies analysis.
His game is a freak. He adores to do the unusual and his game
abounds in freak shots that Mishu executes with remarkable skill.
He has many and varied services, underhand cuts, fore and
backhand, a "push" off his nose, and even one serve where he
turns his back on the court and serves the ball back over his
head.

His drives are cramped in swing and hit with excessive top spin.
His footwork is a defiance of all rules. His volleying game looks
like an accident, yet Mishu produces results. In 1921 he beat A.
H. Gobert in the World's Hard Court Championship at St. Cloud.
Mishu is a winner. I don't know how he does it but he does. He is
above all a unique personality. Cheery, individual, at times
eccentric, Mishu is a popular figure in tournaments abroad. He
plays with a verve and abandon that appeals to the European
galleries while his droll humour and good nature make him a
delightful opponent.

J. WASHER

Belgium is represented by J. Washer, my opponent in the final
round of the Hard Court Championship of the World in 1921. Washer
is a fine orthodox tennis player. His service is a well placed
twist delivery of medium pace. He has a terrific forehand drive
that gains in effectiveness owing to the fact he is a
left-hander. Like so many players with a pronounced strength, he
covers up an equally pronounced weakness by using the strength.
Washer has a very feeble backhand for so fine a player. He pokes
his backhand when he is unable to run around it.

His overhead is strong, speedy and reliable. His volleying lacks
punch and steadiness. He has had little tournament experience and
shows promise of great improvement if given the opportunity.

E. TEGNER

Denmark is represented by a player of promise and skill in the
person of E. Tegner. This young star defeated W. H. Laurentz at
St. Cloud in the Hard Court Championship of the World in 1921
when the latter was holder of the title.

Tegner is a baseline player of fine style. His strokes are long
free drives of fine pace and depth. His service is hardly
adequate for first flight tennis, yet while his ground game
cannot make up for the lack of aggression in his net attack.
Tegner is not of championship quality at the moment but his youth
allows him plenty of time to acquire that tournament experience
needed to fill in the gaps in his game. He is a cool, clever
court general and should develop rapidly within the next few
years.

H. L. DE MORPURGO

The Italian champion, H. L. de Morpurgo, is a product of his own
country and England where he attended college. He is a big, rangy
man of great strength. He uses a terrific service of great speed
but little control on his first ball and an exaggerated American
twist on the second of such extreme contortion that even his
great frame wears down under it.

His ground game is of flat drives that lack sufficient pace and
accuracy to allow him to reap the full benefit of his really
excellent net attack. His volleying is very good owing to his
great reach. His overhead, like his service, is hard but erratic.
Unfortunately he is slow on his feet and thus loses much of the
advantage of his large reach. He seems to lack confidence in his
game but that should come with more experience.

A. ZERLENDI

Tennis in Greece. No! not in ancient times but in modern, for
that little country has a remarkable little baseline star, by
name A. Zerlendi. This man is a baseliner of the most pronounced
type. He gets everything he can put his racquet to. He reminds me
irresistibly of Mavrogordato, seemingly reaching nothing yet they
all come back. I cannot adequately analyse his game because his
first principle is to put back the ball no matter how, and this
he carries into excellent effect. Zerlendi is a match winner
first and a stylist second.

CHAPTER XVI. THE COLONIES

Australasia

The death of that sterling sportsman, Anthony F. Wilding, and the
natural decline in the playing powers of Norman E. Brookes, owing
to the advance of years and his war experiences, leave
Australasia (Australia and New Zealand) in a somewhat uncertain
condition regarding its tennis prospects.

NORMAN E. BROOKES

Volumes have been written about N. E. Brookes and his tennis
genius, but I would not feel right if I could not pay at least a
slight tribute to the greatest tennis player and genius of all
time.

There is no need to dwell on Brookes' shots, his marvellous
mechanical perfection, his peculiar volleying style, his uncanny
anticipation. All these are too well known to need my feeble
description. They are but the expression of that wonderful brain
and dominant personality that lie behind that sphinx- like face
we know as Brookes'.

To see across the net those ever-restless, ever-moving eyes,
picking the openings in my never too- well guarded court, and
know that against me is pitted the greatest tennis, brain of the
century, is to call upon me to produce my best. That is what my
match with Brookes meant to me, and still does to-day. Brookes
should be an inspiration to every tennis player, for he has
proved the power of mind over matter in tennis: "Age cannot
wither nor custom stale his infinite variety."

Brookes is the most eminently just man on a tennis court I have
ever met, for no excitement or emotion clouds his eyesight or
judgment in decisions. He cannot abide bad decisions, yet he
hates them quite as much when they favour him as when they are
against him. I admit frankly I am a great admirer of Brookes,
personally and from every tennis sense. He is a master that I as
a student of the game feel proud to study under.

GERALD PATTERSON

Australia's leading player, Gerald Patterson, is one of the most
remarkable combinations of tennis virtues and tennis faults, I
have ever seen.

Patterson has a wonderful service. He has speed, direction,
control, and all kinds of twist. He hits his service consistently
hard and puts it in. His overhead is the most remarkable in the
game. He can kill from any place in the court. His, shot is
clean, with little effort, yet carries terrific speed. His
volleying above the net is almost faultless on his forehand. He
has an excellent forehand drive that is very severe and
consistent, but his backhand . . . Where in all the rest of
tennis history was there a first-class man with a backhand so
fundamentally wrong? His grip is bad, he pulls up on the ball and
"loops" it high in the air. I do not mean Patterson always misses
his backhand. He does not. He even makes remarkable shots off it
at times, but, if Patterson is pressed, his backhand is the first
portion of his game to crack, because it is hit inherently wrong.

Patterson relies mainly on speed to win matches. He is not a
strategist, and finesse is not part of his tennis equipment. He
has a magnificent physique, and relies largely on his, strength
to carry him through a long match and win in the end.

He is very quiet, and inclined to be somewhat careless on the
court, unless pressed, when his businesslike, determined play
shows what a great match player Patterson can become. He produces
his best game at the crucial moment of the match. Patterson is a
superior match player to his real tennis ability. His is not
truly a top-notch game. It has superlative features, but its
whole texture is not of the finest.

Patterson owes much of his success in 1919 to Brookes, under
whose guidance he played. The absence of the master mind
directing his attack proved a decided handicap in 1920, and
Patterson's attack was not so certain nor sustained as in the
previous season. Patterson's game plus Brookes' strategy would be
a great combination in one man.

PAT O'HARA WOOD

This young Australian is one of the greatest doubles players in
the world and bids fair to press the leading singles stars close.

Pat O'Hara Wood is a player without a weakness, yet also one
without a strength. He is a typical all court player with no
outstanding feature to his game unless it be his volleying. Pat
Wood has a natural aptitude for doubles which at times seriously
interferes with his singles game.

His service is a well placed speedy slice that he mixes up well.
It is not a great delivery but very effective. His ground
strokes, taken on the rising bounces, are flat drives, accurate
and varied as to direction but lacking punch. He does not hit
hard enough. He is a brilliant volleyer, cutting off at sharp
angles the hardest drives. His overhead is erratic. At times he
is deadly overhead but is prone to lapses into uncertainty. He is
remarkably quick and speedy of foot. His sense of anticipation is
magnificent. His generalship good, though not brilliant. It is
lack of punch, the inability to put the ball away, that keeps Pat
O'Hara Wood from the first flight in singles.

Clever, blessed with a keen sense of humour, a sterling sportsman
and delightful opponent, Pat O'Hara Wood is a big asset to tennis
and a man who is needed in the game.

J. C. HAWKES

The youngest of the Australasian players and a boy of great
promise is Jack Hawkes. He is only 22 and young in the game for
his age.

Let me state now I do not approve of Hawkes' style. His footwork
is wrong, hopelessly wrong and I fear that unless he corrects it,
it may keep him from attaining the place his natural abilities
promise. "Austral," the famous critic, describes him as "having
the genius of the game."

Jack Hawkes has an exaggerated American twist service that, since
he is a left-hander, places an unnecessary strain on his heart
muscles. It carries terrific twist but little speed and does not
Pay him for the amount of energy he expends.

His forehand drive is excellent, fast, deep, and well placed, yet
in making this he steps away from the ball, again wasting energy.
His backhand is a poke and very unreliable. To save it he runs
around everything possible, again causing unnecessary exertion.
His volleying is brilliant while his overhead is magnificent.

Hawkes' waste of energy has cost him many a match, yet for all
the inherent defects in his game he is so clever in using what he
has, his tactics are so good for so young a player that I believe
he will be one of the leading players of the world in a few
years. Under the watchful eyes of Norman Brookes I foresee Hawkes
changing his footwork to at least a reasonable copy of the old
master.

J. O. ANDERSON

This young player is again a promise rather than a star. He is a
big, rangy, hard-hitting type like Gerald Patterson. He is crude,
at times careless and unfortunately handicapped in 1920 and 1921
by a severe illness that only allowed him to resume play in the
middle of the latter year. His ground strokes are flat drives
fore and backhand. His forehand is a particularly fine shot. He
hits it with a short sharp snap of his arm that imparts great
speed and yet hides the direction. His backhand is defensive. His
volleying clever, accurate but soft. His overhand severe and
reliable. His service flat, fast and dangerous.

He needs finesse, experience and season, with which he may well
become one of the greatest players as the fundamental
potentialities are there.

NORMAN PEACH

The steady baseline game of England has its exponent in Australia
in Norman Peach. He has a beautiful driving game, with adequate
but not severe service, that one finds so much in England. At
times Peach will advance to the net but his volleying and
overhead are secondary to his baseline game. He is not a great
tennis player but is certainly one of high standard of play. He
is just below the first flight in Australia.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12