The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Art of Lawn Tennis, by William T. Tilden

Published：2026-08-02 17:05:30 Source: educational plush sea animals for 2 year olds Author: Mystery Boxes

Scanned by Charles Keller with OmniPage Professional OCR software

THE ART OF LAWN TENNIS
by
WILLIAM T. TILDEN,best sewing kits for 2 year olds under 100 dollars 2D

To
R. D. K.
AND
M. W. J.
MY "BUDDIES"
W. T. T. 2D

INTRODUCTION

Tennis is at once an art and a science. The game as played bysuch men as Norman E. Brookes, the late Anthony Wilding, WilliamM. Johnston, and R. N. Williams is art. Yet like all true art, ithas its basis in scientific methods that must be learned andlearned thoroughly for a foundation before the artistic structureof a great tennis game can be constructed.

Every player who helps to attain a high degree of efficiencyshould have a clearly defined method of development and adhere toit. He should be certain that it is based on sound principlesand, once assured of that, follow it, even though his progressseems slow and discouraging.

I began tennis wrong. My strokes were wrong and my viewpointclouded. I had no early training such as many of our Americanboys have at the present time. No one told me the importance ofthe fundamentals of the game, such as keeping the eye on the ballor correct body position and footwork. I was given a racquet andallowed to hit the ball. Naturally, like all beginners, Iacquired many very serious faults. I worried along with moderatesuccess until I had been graduated from school, beating somefairly good players, but losing some matches to men below myclass. The year following my graduation the new Captain of myAlma Mater's team asked me if I would aid him in developing thesquad for next year. Well, "Fools rush in where angels fear totread," so I said Yes.

At that point my tennis education began.

The youngsters comprising our tennis squad all knew me well andfelt at perfect liberty to ask me as many questions as they couldthink up. I was besieged with requests to explain why Jonesmissed a forehand drive down the side-line, or Smith couldn'tserve well, or Brown failed to hit the ball at all. Frankly, Idid not know, but I answered them something at the moment andsaid to myself it was time I learned some fundamentals of tennis.So I began to study the reasons why certain shots are missed andothers made. Why certain balls are hit so much faster though withless effort than others, and why some players are great whilemost are only good. I am still studying, but my results to datehave resulted in a definite system to be learned, and it is thiswhich I hope to explain to you in my book.

Tennis has a language all its own. The idioms of the game shouldbe learned, as all books on the game are written in tennisparlance. The technical terms and their counterpart in slang needto be understood to thoroughly grasp the idea in any writtentennis account.

I do not believe in using a great deal of space carefullydefining each blade of grass on a court, or each rule of thegame. It gets nowhere. I do advocate teaching the terms of thegame.

1. THE COURT.

The Baseline=The back line.

The Service-line=The back line of the service court, extendingfrom side-line to side-line at a point 21 feet from the net.

The Alleys=The space on each side of the court between the sideservice-line and the outside sideline of a doubles court. Theyare used only when playing doubles and are not marked on a singlecourt.

The Net=The barrier that stretches across the court in the exactcentre. It is 3 feet high at the centre and 3 feet 6 inches highat the posts which stand 3 feet outside the sidelines.

2. STROKES (Two General Classes).

A. Ground strokes=All shots hit from the baselines off the bounceof the ball.

B. Volleys=Shots hit while the ball is in flight through the air,previous to its bound.

The Service=The method of putting the ball in play.

The Drive=A ground stroke hit with a flat racquet face andcarrying top spin.

The Chop=An undercut ground stroke is the general definition of achop. The slice and chop are so closely related that, except instroke analysis, they may be called chop.

Stop Volley=Blocking a hall short in its flight.

Half Volley or Trap Shot=A pick up.

The Smash=Hitting on the full any overhead ball.

The Lob=Hitting the ball in a high parabola.

3. TWIST ON THE BALL.

Top Spin=The ball spins towards the ground and in the directionof its flight.

Chop, Cut, or Drag=The ball spins upwards from the ground andagainst the line of flight. This is slightly deviated in theslice, but all these terms are used to designate theunder-struck, back-spinning ball.

Reverse Twist=A ball that carries a rotary spin that curves oneway and bounces the opposite.

Break=A spin which causes the ball to bounce at an angle to itsline of flight.

4. LET=A service that touches the net in its flight yet falls incourt, or any illegal or irregular point that does not count.

5. FAULT=An illegal service.

6. OUT=Any shot hit outside legal boundaries of the court.

7. GOOD=Any shot that strikes in a legal manner prescribed byrules of the game.

8. FOOTFAULT=An illegal service delivery due to incorrectposition of the server's feet.

9. SERVER=Player delivering service.

10. RECEIVER or STRIKER=Player returning service.

W. T. T. WIMBLEDON, July 1920

PREFACE TO NEW EDITION

The season of 1921 was so epoch-making in the game of tennis,combining as it did the greatest number of Davis Cup matches thathave ever been held in one year, the invasion of France andEngland by an American team, the first appearance in America ofMlle. Suzanne Lenglen and her unfortunate collapse, and finallythe rise to prominence of Japan as a leading factor in the tennisworld that I have incorporated a record of the season'soutstanding features and some sidelights and personality sketcheson the new stars in the new addition of this book.

The importance of women's tennis has grown so tremendously in thepast few years that I have also added a review of the game andits progress in America. Not only has Mlle. Lenglen placed hermark indelibly on the pages of tennis history but 1921 served toraise Mrs. Molla Bjurstedt Mallory to the position in the worldthat she rightly deserves, that of the greatest match winner ofall women. The past season brought the return to American courtsof Mrs. May Sutton Bundy and Miss Mary Browne, in itself an eventof sufficient importance to set the year apart as one of highestvalue.

The outstanding performances of the two juniors, Vincent Richardsand Arnold Jones, must be regarded as worthy of permanentrecognition and among the outstanding features of a noteworthyyear. Thus it is with a sense of recording history- making factsthat I turn to the events of 1921.WILLIAM T. TILDEN 2DGERMANTOWN, PHILADELPHIA

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION PREFACE TO NEW EDITION

PART I: TENNIS TECHNIQUE—STROKES AND FUNDAMENTALS OF THE GAME

CHAPTERI FOR NOVICES ONLYII THE DRIVEIII SERVICEIV THE VOLLEY AND OVERHEAD SMASHV CHOP, HALF VOLLEY, AND COURT POSITION

PART II: THE LAWS OF TENNIS PSYCHOLOGYVI GENERAL TENNIS PSYCHOLOGYVII THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MATCH PLAYVIII THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PHYSICAL FITNESSIX THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SINGLES AND DOUBLES

PART III: MODERN TENNIS AND ITS FUTUREX THE GROWTH OF THE MODERN GAMEXI THE PROBABLE FUTURE OF THE GAME

PART IV: SOME SIDELIGHTS ON FAMOUS PLAYERS INTRODUCTORYXII AMERICAXIII BRITISH ISLESXIV FRANCE AND JAPANXV SPAIN AND THE CONTINENTXVI THE COLONIESXVII FAMOUS WOMEN PLAYERS

THE ART OF LAWN TENNIS

PART I: TENNIS TECHNIQUE—STROKES AND FUNDAMENTALS OF THE GAME

CHAPTER I. FOR NOVICES ONLY

I trust this initial effort of mine in the world of letters willfind a place among both novices and experts in the tennis world.I am striving to interest the student of the game by a somewhatprolonged discussion of match play, which I trust will shed a newlight on the game.

May I turn to the novice at my opening and speak of certainmatters which are second nature to the skilled player?

The best tennis equipment is not too good for the beginner whoseeks really to succeed. It is a saving in the end, as goodquality material so far outlasts poor.

Always dress in tennis clothes when engaging in tennis. White isthe established colour. Soft shirt, white flannel trousers, heavywhite socks, and rubber-soled shoes form the accepted dress fortennis. Do not appear on the courts in dark clothes, as they areapt to be heavy and hinder your speed of movement, and also theyare a violation of the unwritten ethics of the game.

The question of choosing a racquet is a much more serious matter.I do not advocate forcing a certain racquet upon any player. Allthe standard makes are excellent. It is in weight, balance, andsize of handle that the real value of a racquet frame depends,while good stringing is, essential to obtain the best results.

The average player should use a racquet that weighs between 131/2 and 14 1/2 ounces inclusive. I think that the best resultsmay be obtained by a balance that is almost even or slightlyheavy on the head. Decide your handle from the individual choice.Pick the one that fits comfortably in the hand. Do not use toosmall a handle or too light a racquet, as it is apt to turn inthe hand. I recommend a handle of 5 1/4 to 5 3/8 inches at thegrip. Do not use a racquet you do not like merely because yourbest friend advises it. It may suit him perfectly, but would notdo for you at all. Do not start children playing tennis with anunder-sized racquet. It weakens the wrist and does not aid thechild in learning strokes. Start a child, boy or girl, with afull-sized racquet of at least 13 ounces.

After you have acquired your racquet, make a firm resolve to usegood tennis balls, as a regular bounce is a great aid toadvancement, while a "dead" ball is no practice at all.

If you really desire to succeed at the game and advance rapidly,I strongly urge you to see all the good tennis you can. Study theplay of the leading players and strive to copy their strokes.Read all the tennis instruction books you can find. They are agreat assistance. I shall be accused of "press- agitating" my ownbook by this statement, but such was my belief long before I everthought of writing a book of my own.

More tennis can be learned off the court, in the study of theory,and in watching the best players in action, than can ever belearned in actual play. I do not mean miss opportunities to play.Far from it. Play whenever possible, but strive when playing toput in practice the theories you have read or the strokes youhave watched.

Never be discouraged at slow progress. The trick over some strokeyou have worked over for weeks unsuccessfully will suddenly cometo you when least expected. Tennis players are the product ofhard work. Very few are born geniuses at the game.

Tennis is a game that pays you dividends all your life. A tennisracquet is a letter of introduction in any town. The brotherhoodof the game is universal, for none but a good sportsman cansucceed in the game for any lengthy period. Tennis providesrelaxation, excitement, exercise, and pure enjoyment to the manwho is tied hard and fast to his business until late afternoon.Age is not a drawback. Vincent Richards held the National DoublesChampionship of America at fifteen, while William A. Larned wonthe singles at past forty. Men of sixty are seen daily on theclubs' courts of England and America enjoying their game askeenly as any boy. It is to this game, in great measure, thatthey owe the physical fitness which enables them to play at theiradvanced age.

The tennis players of the world wrote a magnificent page in thehistory of the World War. No branch of sport sent more men to thecolours from every country in the world than tennis, and thesemen returned with glory or paid the supreme sacrifice on thefield of honour.

I transgressed from my opening to show you that tennis is a gameworth playing and playing well. It deserves your best, and onlyby learning it correctly can you give that best.

If in my book I help you on your way to fame, I feel amply repaidfor all the time spent in analysing the strokes and tactics I setbefore you in these pages.

I am going to commence my explanation by talking to the playerswhose games are not yet formed. At least once every season I goback to first principles to pull myself out of some rut intowhich carelessness dropped me.

From a long and, many times, sad experience over a period of someten years of tournament tennis, I believe the following order ofdevelopment produces the quickest and most lasting results:

1. Concentration on the game.

2. Keep the eye on the ball.

3. Foot-work and weight-control.

4. Strokes.

5. Court position.

6. Court generalship or match play.

7. Tennis psychology.

Tennis is a game of intimate personal relation. You constantlyfind yourself meeting some definite idea of your opponent. Thepersonal equation is the basis of tennis success. A great playernot only knows himself, in both strength and weakness, but hemust study is opponent at all times. In order to be able to dothis a player must not be hampered by a glaring weakness in thefundamentals of his own game, or he will be so occupied trying tohide it that he will have no time to worry his opponent. Thefundamental weakness of Gerald Patterson's backhand stroke is soapparent that any player within his class dwarfs Patterson'sstyle by continually pounding at it. The Patterson overhead andservice are first class, yet both are rendered impotent, once aman has solved the method of returning low to the backhand, forPatterson seldom succeeds in taking the offensive again in thatpoint.

I am trying to make clear the importance of such first principlesas I will now explain.

CONCENTRATION

Tennis is played primarily with the mind. The most perfectracquet technique in the world will not suffice if the directingmind is wandering. There are many causes of a wandering mind in atennis match. The chief one is lack of interest in the game. Noone should play tennis with an idea of real success unless hecares sufficiently about the game to be willing to do thedrudgery necessary in learning the game correctly. Give it up atonce unless you are willing to work. Conditions of play or thenoises in the gallery often confuse and bewilder experiencedmatch-players playing under new surroundings. Completeconcentration on the matter in hand is the only cure for awandering mind, and the sooner the lesson is learned the morerapid the improvement of the player. An amusing example, to allbut the player affected, occurred at the finals of the DelawareState Singles Championship at Wilmington. I was playing Joseph J.Armstrong. The Championship Court borders the No. 1 hole of thefamous golf course. The score stood at one set all and 3-4 and30-40, Armstrong serving. He served a fault and started a seconddelivery. Just as he commenced his swing, a loud and very lusty"Fore!" rang out from the links. Armstrong unconsciously lookedaway and served his delivery to the backstop and the game to me.The umpire refused to "let" call and the incident closed. Yet awandering mind in that case meant the loss of a set.

The surest way to hold a match in mind is to play for every set,every game in the set, every point in the game and, finally,every shot in the point. A set is merely a conglomeration of madeand missed shots, and the man who does not miss is the ultimatevictor.

Please do not think I am advocating "pat-ball." I am not. Ibelieve in playing for your shot every time you have an opening.I do not believe in trying to win the point every time you hitthe ball. Never allow your concentration on any game to become sogreat that you do not at all times know the score and play to it.I mean both point score and game score. In my explanation ofmatch play in a later chapter I am going into a detailed accountof playing to the score. It is as vital in tennis as it is inbridge, and all bridge players know that the score is thedetermining factor in your mode of bidding. Let me urge againconcentration. Practise seriously. Do not fool on the court, asit is the worst enemy to progress. Carelessness or laziness onlyresults in retrogression, never progress.

Let me turn now to the first principle of all ball games, whethertennis, golf, cricket, baseball, polo, or football.

KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE BALL!

Just a few statistics to show you how vital it is that the eyemust be kept on the ball UNTIL THE MOMENT OF STRIKING IT.

About 85 per cent of the points in tennis are errors, and theremainder earned points. As the standard of play rises thepercentage of errors drops until, in the average high-classtournament match, 60 per cent are errors and 40 per cent aces.Any average superior to this is super-tennis.

Thus the importance of getting the ball in play cannot be toogreatly emphasized. Every time you put the ball back to youropponent you give him another chance to miss.

There are several causes for missing strokes. First, and by farthe largest class, is not looking at the ball up to the moment ofstriking it. Fully 80 per cent of all errors are caused by takingthe eye from the ball in the last one-fifth of a second of itsflight. The remaining 20 per cent of errors are about 15 per centbad footwork, and the other 5 per cent poor racquet work and badbounces.

The eye is a small camera. All of us enjoy dabbling in amateurphotography, and every amateur must take "action" pictures withhis first camera. It is a natural desire to attain to the hardestbefore understanding how to reach it. The result is one of twothings: either a blurred moving object and a clear background, ora clear moving object and a blurred background. Both suggestspeed, but only one is a good picture of the object one attemptedto photograph. In the first case the camera eye was focused onthe background and not on the object, while in the second, whichproduced the result desired, the camera eye was firmly focused onthe moving object itself. Just so with the human eye. It willgive both effects, but never a clear background and moving objectat the same time, once that object reaches a point 10 feet fromthe eye. The perspective is wrong, and the eye cannot adjustitself to the distance range speedily enough.

Now the tennis ball is your moving object while the court,gallery, net, and your opponent constitute your background. Youdesire to hit the ball cleanly, therefore do not look at theother factors concerned, but concentrate solely on focusing theeye firmly on the ball, and watching it until the moment ofimpact with your racquet face.

"How do I know where my opponent is, or how much court I have tohit in?" ask countless beginners.

Remember this: that a tennis court is always the same size, withthe net the same height and in the same relation to you at alltimes, so there is no need to look at it every moment or so tosee if it has moved. Only an earthquake can change its position.As to your opponent, it makes little difference about hisposition, because it is determined by the shot you are strivingto return. Where he will be I will strive to explain in mychapter on court position; but his whereabouts are known withoutlooking at him. You are not trying to hit him. You strive to misshim. Therefore, since you must watch what you strive to hit andnot follow what you only wish to miss, keep your eye on the ball,and let your opponent take care of himself.

Science has proved that given a tennis ball passing from point Ato point B with the receiving player at B, that if the player atB keeps his eye on the ball throughout its full flight his chanceof making a good A 1 2 3 4 B ———————————————-return at B is five times as great as if he took his eye off theball at a point 4, or 4/5 of a second of its flight. Likewise itis ten times as great at B as it is if the eye is removed fromthe ball at 3, or 3/5 of a second of its flight. Why increaseyour chances of error by five times or ten times when it isunnecessary?

The average player follows the ball to 4, and then he takes alast look at his opponent to see where he is, and by so doingincreases his chance of error five times. He judges the flight ofthe ball some 10 feet away, and never really sees it again untilhe has hit it (if he does). A slight deflection caused by thewind or a small misjudgment of curve will certainly mean error.Remembering the 85 percent errors in tennis, I again ask you ifit is worth while to take the risk?

There are many other reasons why keeping the eye on the ball is agreat aid to the player. It tends to hold his attention so thatoutside occurrences will not distract. Movements in the galleryare not seen, and stray dogs, that seem to particularly enjoysleeping in the middle of a tennis court during a hard match, arenot seen on their way to their sleeping quarters. Having learnedthe knack of watching the ball at all times, I felt that nothingwould worry me, until three years ago at the AmericanChampionships, when I was playing T. R. Pell. A press- camera maneluded the watchful eye of the officials, and unobtrusivelyseated himself close to our sideline to acquire some actionpictures. Pell angled sharply by to my backhand, and I ran at myhardest for the shot, eyes fixed solely on the ball. I hauled offto hit it a mighty drive, which would have probably gone over thebackstop, when suddenly I heard a camera click just under me, andthe next moment camera, pressman, and tennis player were rollingin a heap all over the court. The pressman got his action pictureand a sore foot where I walked on him, and all I got was a sorearm and a ruffled temper. That's why I don't like cameras rightunder my nose when I play matches, but for all that I stilladvocate keeping your eye on the ball.

GRIP, FOOTWORK, AND STROKES

Footwork is weight control. It is correct body position forstrokes, and out of it all strokes should grow. In explaining thevarious forms of stroke and footwork I am writing as a right-handplayer. Left- handers should simply reverse the feet.

Racquet grip is a very essential part of stroke, because a faultygrip will ruin the finest serving. There is the so-called Westernor Californian grip as typified by Maurice E. M'Loughlin, Willis,E. Davis, and, to a slightly modified degree, W. M. Johnston, theAmerican champion. It is a natural grip for a top forehand drive.It is inherently weak for the backhand, as the only natural shotis a chop stroke.

The English grip, with the low wrist on all ground strokes, hasproved very successful in the past. Yet the broken line of thearm and hand does not commend itself to me, as any broken line isweak under stress.

The Eastern American grip, which I advocate, is the English gripwithout the low wrist and broken line. To acquire the forehandgrip, hold the racquet with the edge of the frame towards theground and the face perpendicular, the handle towards the body,and "shake hands" with it, just as if you were greeting a friend.The handle settled comfortably and naturally into the hand, theline of the arm, hand, and racquet are one. The swing brings theracquet head on a line with the arm, and the whole racquet ismerely an extension of it.

The backhand grip is a quarter circle turn of hand on the handle,bringing the hand on top of the handle and the knuckles directlyup. The shot travels ACROSS the wrist.

This is the best basis for a grip. I do not advocate learningthis grip exactly, but model your natural grip as closely aspossible on these lines without sacrificing your own comfort orindividuality.

Having once settled the racquet in the hand, the next question isthe position of the body and the order of developing strokes.

In explaining footwork I am, in future, going to refer in allforehand shots to the right foot as R or "back" foot, and to theleft as L or "front." For the backhand the L foot is "back" and Ris "front."

All tennis strokes, should be made with the body' at right anglesto the net, with the shoulders lined up parallel to the line offlight of the ball. The weight should always travel forward. Itshould pass from the back foot to the front foot at the moment ofstriking the ball. Never allow the weight to be going away fromthe stroke. It is weight that determines the "pace" of a stroke;swing that, decides the "speed."

Let me explain the definitions of "speed" and "pace." "Speed" isthe actual rate with which a ball travels through the air. "Pace"is the momentum with which it comes off the ground. Pace isweight. It is the "sting" the ball carries when it comes off theground, giving the inexperienced or unsuspecting player a shockof force which the stroke in no way showed.

Notable examples of "pace" are such men as W. A. Larned, A. W.
Gore, J. C. Parke, and among the younger players, R. N. Williams,
Major A. R. F. Kingscote, W. M. Johnston, and, on his forehand
stroke, Charles S. Garland.

M. E. M'Loughlin, Willis E. Davis, Harold Throckmorton andseveral others are famous "speed" exponents.

A great many players have both "speed" and "pace." Some shots maycarry both.

The order of learning strokes should be:

1. The Drive. Fore- and backhand. This is the foundation of alltennis, for you cannot build up a net attack unless you have theground stroke to open the way. Nor can you meet a net attacksuccessfully unless you can drive, as that is the only successfulpassing shot.

2. The Service.

3. The Volley and Overhead Smash.

4. The Chop or Half Volley and other incidental and ornamentalstrokes.

CHAPTER II. THE DRIVE

The forehand drive is the opening of every offensive in tennis,and, as such, should be most carefully studied. There are certainrules of footwork that apply to all shots. To reach a ball thatis a short distance away, advance the foot that is away from theshot and thus swing into position to hit. If a ball is too closeto the body, retreat the foot closest to the shot and drop theweight back on it, thus, again, being in position for the stroke.When hurried, and it is not possible to change the foot position,throw the weight on the foot closest to the ball.

The receiver should always await the service facing the net, butonce the serve is started on the way to court, the receivershould at once attain the position to receive it with the body atright angles to the net.

The forehand drive is made up of one continuous swing of theracquet that, for the purpose of analysis, may be divided intothree parts:

1. The portion of the swing behind the body, which determines thespeed of the stroke.

2. That portion immediately in front of the body which determinesthe direction and, in conjunction with weight shift from one footto the other, the pace of the shot.

3. The portion beyond the body, comparable to the golfer's"follow through," determines spin, top or slice, imparted to theball.

All drives should be topped. The slice shot is a totallydifferent stroke.

To drive straight down the side-line, construct in theory aparallelogram with two sides made up of the side-line and yourshoulders, and the two ends, the lines of your feet, whichshould, if extended, form the right angles with the side-lines.Meet the ball at a point about 4 to 4 1/2 feet from the bodyimmediately in front of the belt buckle, and shift the weightfrom the back to the front foot at the MOMENT OF STRIKING THEBALL. The swing of the racquet should be flat and straightthrough. The racquet head should be on a line with the hand, or,if anything, slightly in advance; the whole arm and the racquetshould turn slightly over the ball as it leaves the racquet faceand the stroke continue to the limit of the swing, thus impartingtop spin to the ball.

The hitting plane for all ground strokes should be between theknees and shoulders. The most favourable plane is on a line withthe waist.

In driving across the court from the right (or No. 1) court,advance the L or front foot slightly towards the side-line andshift the weight a fraction of a second sooner. As the weightshifts, pivot slightly on the L foot and drive flat, diagonally,across the court. Do not "pull" your cross-court drive, unlesswith the express purpose of passing the net man and using thatmethod to disguise your shot.

NEVER STEP AWAY FROM THE BALL IN DRIVING CROSS COURT. ALWAYSTHROW YOUR WEIGHT IN THE SHOT.

The forehand drive from the No. 2 (or left) court is identicallythe same for the straight shot down your opponent's forehand. Forthe cross drive to his backhand, you must conceive of a diagonalline from your backhand corner to his, and thus make your strokewith the footwork as if this imaginary line were the side-line.In other words, line up your body along your shot and make yourregular drive. Do not try to "spoon" the ball over with a delayedwrist motion, as it tends to slide the ball off your racquet.

All drives should be made with a stiff, locked wrist. There is nowrist movement in a true drive. Top spin is imparted by the arm,not the wrist.

The backhand drive follows closely the principles of theforehand, except that the weight shifts a moment sooner, and theR or front foot should always be advanced a trifle closer to theside-line than the L so as to bring the body clear of the swing.The ball should be met in front of the right leg, instead of thebelt buckle, as the great tendency in backhand shots is to slicethem out of the side-line, and this will pull the ball crosscourt, obviating this error. The racquet head must be slightly inadvance of the hand to aid in bringing the ball in the court. Donot strive for too much top spin on your backhand.

I strongly urge that no one should ever favour one department ofhis game, in defence of a weakness. Develop both forehand andbackhand, and do not "run around" your backhand, particularly inreturn of service. To do so merely opens your court. If youshould do so, strive to ace your returns, because a weak effortwould only result in a kill by your opponent.

Do not develop one favourite shot and play nothing but that. Ifyou have a fair cross-court drive, do not use it in practice, butstrive to develop an equally fine straight shot.

Remember that the fast shot is the straight shot. The cross drivemust be slow, for it has not the room owing to the increasedangle and height of the net. Pass down the line with your drive,but open the court with your cross-court shot.

Drives should have depth. The average drive should hit behind theservice-line. A fine drive should hit within 3 feet of thebaseline. A cross-court drive should be shorter than a straightdrive, so as to increase the possible angle. Do not always playone length drive, but learn to vary your distance according toyour man. You should drive deep against a baseliner, but shortagainst a net player, striving to drop them at his feet as, hecomes in.

Never allow your opponent to play a shot he likes if you canpossibly force him to one he dislikes.

Again I urge that you play your drive:

1. With the body sideways to the net.

2. The swing flat, with long follow through.

3. The weight shifting just as the ball is hit.

Do not strive for terrific speed at first. The most essentialthing about a drive is to put the ball in play. I once heardWilliam A. Larned remark, when asked the most important thing intennis, "Put the ball over the net into the other man's court."Accuracy first, and then put on your speed, for if your shot iscorrect you can always learn, to hit hard.

CHAPTER III. SERVICE

Service is the opening gun of tennis. It is putting the ball inplay. The old idea was that service should never be more thanmerely the beginning of a rally. With the rise of American tennisand the advent of Dwight Davis and Holcombe Ward, service took ona new significance. These two men originated what is now known asthe American Twist delivery.

From a mere formality, service became a point winner. Slowly itgained in importance, until Maurice E. M'Loughlin, the wonderful"California Comet," burst across the tennis sky with the first ofthose terrific cannon-ball deliveries that revolutionized thegame, and caused the old-school players to send out hurry callsfor a severe footfault rule or some way of stopping thethreatened destruction of all ground strokes. M'Loughlin madeservice a great factor in the game. It remained for R. N.Williams to supply the antidote that has again put service in thenormal position of mere importance, not omnipotence. Williamsstood in on the delivery and took it on the rising bound.

Service must be speedy. Yet speed is not the be-all and end-all.Service must be accurate, reliable, and varied. It must be usedwith discretion and served with brains. I believe perfect serviceis about 40 per cent placement, 40 per cent speed, and 20 percent twist.

Any tall player has an advantage over a short one, in service.Given a man about 6 feet and allow him the 3 feet added by hisreach, it has been proved by tests that should he deliver aservice, perfectly flat, with no variation caused by twist orwind, that just cleared the net at its lowest point (3 feet inthe centre), there is only a margin of 8 inches of the servicecourt in which the ball can possibly fall; the remainder is belowthe net angle. Thus it is easy to see how important it is to usesome form of twist to bring the ball into court. Not only must itgo into court, but it must be sufficiently speedy that thereceiver does not have an opportunity of an easy kill. It mustalso be placed so as to allow the server an advantage for hisnext return, admitting the receiver puts the ball in play.

Just as the first law of receiving is to, put the ball in play,so of service it is to cause the receiver to fall into error. Donot strive unduly for clean aces, but use your service to upsetthe ground strokes of your opponent.

There are several style services in vogue in all countries. TheAmerican twist has become one of the most popular forms ofdelivery and as such deserves special treatment. The usual formsof service are (1) the slice service, (2) the American twist, (3)the reverse delivery, (4) the "cannon ball" or flat serve.

The slice service is the easiest and most natural form for allbeginners, and proves so effective that many great players useit. It is the service of William M. Johnston, A. R. F. Kingscote,Norman E. Brookes, and many others.

Service should be hit from as high a point as the server canCOMFORTABLY reach. To stretch unnecessarily is both wearing onthe server and unproductive of results.

The slice service should be hit from a point above the rightshoulder and as high as possible. The server should stand atabout a forty-five degree angle to the baseline, with both feetfirmly planted on the ground. Drop the weight back on the rightfoot and swing the racquet freely and easily behind the back.Toss the ball high enough into the air to ensure it passingthrough the desired hitting plane, and then start a slow shift ofthe weight forward, at the same time increasing the power of theswing forward as the racquet commences its upward flight to theball. Just as the ball meets the racquet face the weight shouldbe thrown forward and the full power of the swing smashed intothe service. Let the ball strike the racquet INSIDE the face ofthe strings, with the racquet travelling directly towards thecourt. The angle of the racquet face will impart the twistnecessary to bring the ball in court. The wrist should besomewhat flexible in service. If necessary lift the right footand swing the whole body forward with the arm. Twist slightly tothe right, using the left foot as a pivot. The general line ofthe racquet swing is from RIGHT to LEFT and always forward.

At this point and before I take up the other branches of serving,let me put in a warning against footfaulting. I can only say thata footfault is crossing or touching the line with either footbefore the ball is delivered, or it is a jump or step. I am notgoing into a technical discussion of footfaults. It isunnecessary, and by placing your feet firmly before the servicethere is no need to footfault.

It is just as unfair to deliberately footfault as to miscall aball, and it is wholly unnecessary. The average footfault is dueto carelessness, over-anxiety, or ignorance of the rule. Allplayers are offenders at times, but it can quickly be broken up.

Following this outburst of warning let me return to the Americantwist service. The stance for this is the same as for the slice,but the ball is thrown slightly to the left of the head while theracquet passes up and over the call, travelling from left toright and slightly forward. The result is a curve to the left andthe break of the bound to the right. This service is not fast,but gives an excellent chance to follow to the net, since ittravels high and slowly and its bound is deep. The American twistservice should be hit with the muscles of the side. The slice isa shoulder swing.

The reverse twist is of an absolutely distinct type. The stanceis facing the net with both toes fronting the line. The racquetis gripped as a club. The ball is thrown in front of the body andnot high. The swing is a sharp wrist twist from right to left,the ball carried for some distance on the face of the racquet.The curve is from left to right while the bound is high andbreaks sharply to the left. This delivery is slow, ineffectiveand very uncertain. There is little opportunity to follow it tothe net.

The "cannon-ball" service is nothing but a slice as regards swingand stance, but it is hit with a flat racquet face, thusimparting no spin to the ball. It is a case of speed alone. Thisservice is a point winner when it goes in; but its average mustnecessarily be poor since its margin of error is so small. It isonly useful to a tall man.

Varied pace and varied speed is the keynote to a good service. Ispent hours in serving alone, striving to disguise the twist andpace of the ball. I would take a box of a dozen balls out on thecourt and serve the whole dozen to No. 1 court with one style ofdelivery. Then, crossing, I would serve them back with anothertype of service. Next, I would try the left court from bothsides. My next move would be to pick out a certain section of theservice court, and serve for that until I could put the ballwhere I wanted it. Finally, I would strive to put it there withspeed.

All the time spent in this practice has stood me in good stead,for to-day it is my service that pulls me out of many a deephole, and causes many a player to wish he was delivering theball. William M. Johnston, the American Champion, has aremarkable service for so short a man. He times his strokeperfectly, and hits it at the top of his reach, so that he getsthe full benefit of every inch of his stature and every pound ofhis weight. He uses the slice delivery in the majority ofmatches.

Do not try freak services. They are useless against high-classplayers. Sharp breaking underhand cuts can be easily angled offfor points by a man who knows anything of the angles and effectsof twist. These deliveries are affectation if used more than onceor twice in a long match. A sudden shift may surprise youropponent; but to continue to serve these freaks is to destroytheir use.

Mishu, the Rumanian star, has many very peculiar deliveries; but,when playing against high-class tennis, he has brains enough touse a straight service. The freak services delight and yet annoya gallery, for once the novelty has worn off, nothing but theconceit remains.

The object of service is to obtain the maximum return with theminimum effort. This statement holds true for all tennis strokes,but in none so strongly as in service.

The average player hits, his first service so hard, and with solittle regard for direction, that about nine out of ten firstdeliveries are faults. Thus, one half your chances are thrownaway, and the chance of double faulting increasedproportionately.

There is a well-known tennis saying to the effect that one faultis a mistake, but two faults are a crime—that sums up the ideaof service adequately. A player should always strive to put hisfirst delivery in court. In the first place it is apt to catchyour opponent napping, as he half expects a fault. Secondly, itconserves your energy by removing the need of a second delivery,which, in a long five-set match, is an item of such importancethat it may mean victory or defeat.

I urge all players to put their service into court with just asmuch speed as they can be sure of, but to serve both deliveriesat about the same speed. Do not slog the first ball and pat thesecond, but hit both with average pace.

Try for service aces whenever reasonable, but never do so at therisk of double faulting. The first ball is the ball to ace. Thesecond should never be risked. Your aces must at least equal yourdouble faults, or your service is a handicap and not anadvantage.

The importance of service in doubles is more pronounced than insingles as regards holding it; but the need for individualbrilliancy is not so great, as you have a partner already at thenet to kill off any weak returns.

Service is an attack, and a successful attack should never breakdown.

CHAPTER IV. THE VOLLEY AND OVERHEAD SMASH

The net attack is the heavy artillery of tennis. It is supposedto crush all defence. As such it must be regarded as apoint-winning stroke at all times, no matter whether the shot isvolley or smash.

Once at the net hit from the point at the first opportunity givento get the racquet squarely on the ball. All the laws of footworkexplained for the drive are theoretically the same in volleying.In practice you seldom have time to change your feet to a setposition, so you obviate trouble by throwing the weight on thefoot nearest to the ball and pushing it in the shot.

Volleys are of two classes: (1) the low volley, made from belowthe waist; and (2) the high volley, from the waist to the head.In contradistinction to the hitting plane classification are thetwo styles known as (1) the deep volley and (2) the stop volley.

All low volleys are blocked. High volleys may be either blockedor hit. Volleys should never be stroked. There is no followthrough on a low volley and very little on a high one.

You will hear much talk of "chop" volleys. A chop stroke is onewhere the racquet travels from above the line of flight of theball, down and through it, and the angle made behind the racquetis greater than 45 degrees, and many approach 90 degrees.Therefore I say that no volleys should be chopped, for thetendency is to pop the ball up in the air off any chop. Slicevolleys if you want to, or hit them flat, for both these shotsare made at a very small angle to the flight-line of the ball,the racquet face travelling almost along its plane.

In all volleys, high or low, the wrist should be locked andabsolutely stiff. It should always be below the racquet head,thus bracing the racquet against the impact of the ball. Allowthe force of the incoming shot, plus your own weight, to returnthe ball, and do not strive to "wrist" it over. The tiltedracquet face will give any required angle to the return byglancing the ball off the strings, so no wrist turn is needed.

Low volleys can never be hit hard, and owing to the height of thenet should usually be sharply angled, to allow distance for therise. Any ball met at a higher plane than the top of the net maybe hit hard. The stroke should be crisp, snappy, and decisive,but it should stop as it meets the ball. The follow throughshould be very small. Most low volleys should be soft and short.Most high volleys require speed and length.

The "stop" volley is nothing more than a shot blocked short.There is no force used. The racquet simply meets the oncomingball and stops it. The ball rebounds and falls of its own weight.There is little bounce to such a shot, and that may be reduced byallowing the racquet to slide slightly under the ball at themoment of impact, thus imparting back spin to the ball.

Volleying is a science based on the old geometric axiom that astraight line is the shortest distance between two points. I meanthat a volleyer must always cover the straight passing shot sinceit is the shortest shot with which to pass him, and he mustvolley straight to his opening and not waste time trying freakishcurving volleys that give the base- liner time to recover. It isJohnston's great straight volley that makes him such a dangerousnet man. He is always "punching" his volley straight and hard tothe opening in his opponent's court.

A net player must have ground strokes in order to attain the netposition. Do not think that a service and volley will sufficeagainst first-class tennis.

I am not a believer in the "centre" theory. Briefly expressed thecentre theory is to hit down the middle of the court and followto the net, since the other player has the smallest angle to passyou. That is true, but remember that he has an equal angle oneither side and, given good ground strokes, an equal chance topass with only your guess or intention to tell you which side hewill choose.

I advise hitting to the side-line with good length and followingup to the net, coming in just to the centre side of the straightreturns down the line. Thus the natural shot is covered and youropponent's court is opened for an angle volley 'cross. Shouldyour opponent try the cross drive, his chances of beating youclean and keeping the ball in court are much less than hischances of error.

Strive to kill your volleys at once, but should your shot notwin, follow the ball 'cross and again cover the straight shot.Always force the man striving to pass you to play the hardestpossible shot.

Attack with your volleys. Never defend the ball when at the net.The only defensive volley is one at your feet as you come in. Itis a mid-court shot. Volleys should win with placement more thanspeed, although speed may be used on a high volley.

Closely related to the volley, yet in no way a volley stroke, isthe overhead smash. It is the Big Bertha of tennis. It is thelong range terror that should always score. The rules offootwork, position, and direction that govern the volley willsuffice for the overhead. The swing alone is different. The swingshould be closely allied to the slice service, the racquet andarm swinging freely from the shoulder, the wrist flexible and theracquet imparting a slight twist to the ball to hold it in court.The overhead is mainly a point winner through speed, since itsbounce is so high that a slow placement often allows time for arecovery.

The overhead is about 60 per cent speed, and 40 per cent combinedplace and twist. Any overhead shot taken on or within theservice-line should be killed. Any overhead, behind theservice-line, and back to the baseline, should be defended andput back deep to, allow you another advance to the net.

The average overhead shot that is missed is netted. Therefore hitdeep. It is a peculiar fact that over 75 per cent of all errorsare nets with only 25 per cent outs. Let this be a constantreminder to you of the fact that all ground strokes should have aclear margin of safety of some 8 inches to a foot above the net,except when attempting to pass a very active volleyer. In thelatter case the shot must be low, and the attendant risk iscompensated by the increased chances of winning the point with apass.

Do not leap in the air unnecessarily to hit overhead balls. Keepat least one foot, and when possible both feet, on the ground insmashing, as it aids in regulating the weight, and gives betterbalance. Hit flat and decisively to the point if desired.

Most missed overhead shots are due to the eye leaving the ball;but a second class of errors are due to lack of confidence thatgives a cramped, half- hearted swing. Follow through youroverhead shot to the limit of your swing.

The overhead is essentially a doubles shot, because in singlesthe chances of passing the net man are greater than lobbing overhis head, while in doubles two men cover the net so easily thatthe best way to open the court is to lob one man back.

In smashing, the longest distance is the safest shot since itallows a greater margin of error. Therefore smash 'cross courtwhen pressed, but pull your short lobs either side as determinedby the man you are playing.

Never drop a lob you can hit overhead, as it forces you back andgives the attacking position to your opponent. Never smash with areverse twist, always hit with a straight racquet face and directto the opening.

Closely connected to the overhead since it is the usual defenceto any hard smash, is the lob.

A lob is a high toss of the ball landing between the service-lineand the baseline. An excellent lob should be within 6 feet of thebaseline.

Lobs are essentially defensive. The ideas in lobbing are: (1) togive yourself time to recover position when pulled out of courtby your opponent's shot; (2) to drive back the net man and breakup his attack; (3) to tire your opponent; (4) occasionally to,win cleanly by placement. This is usually a lob volley from aclose net rally, and is a slightly different stroke.

There is (1) the chop lob, a heavily under-cut spin that hangs inthe air. This, is the best defensive lob, as it goes high andgives plenty of time to recover position. (2) The stroke lob orflat lob, hit with a slight top spin. This is the point-winninglob since it gives no time to, the player to run around it, as itis lower and faster than the chop. In making this lob, start yourswing like a drive, but allow the racquet to slow up and the faceto tilt upward just as you meet the ball. This, shot shouldseldom go above 10 feet in the air, since it tends to go out withthe float of the ball.

The chop lob, which is a decided under cut, should rise from 20to 30 feet, or more, high and must go deep. It is better to lobout and run your opponent back, thus tiring him, than to lobshort and give him confidence by an easy kill. The value of a lobis mainly one of upsetting your opponent, and its effects arevery apparent if you unexpectedly bring off one at the crucialperiod of a match.

I owe one of my most notable victories to a very timely andsomewhat lucky lob. I was playing Norman E. Brookes in the fifthround of the American Championships at Forest Hills, in 1919. Thescore stood one set all, 3-2 and 30-15, Brookes serving. In aseries of driving returns from his forehand to my backhand, hesuddenly switched and pounded the ball to my forehand corner andrushed to the net. I knew Brookes crowded the net, and with 40-15or 30-all at stake on my shot, I took a chance and tossed theball up in the air over Brookes' head. It was not a great lob,but it was a good one. For once Brookes was caught napping,expecting a drive down the line. He hesitated, then turned andchased the ball to the back stop, missing it on his return. Iheard him grunt as he turned, and knew that he was badly winded.He missed his volley off my return of the next service, and I ledat 30-40. The final point of the game came when he again threw mefar out of court on my forehand, and, expecting the line driveagain, crowded the net, only to have the ball rise in the airover his head. He made a desperate effort at recovery, butfailed, and the game was mine: 3-all. It proved the turning-pointin the match, for it not only tired Brookes, but it forced him tohang back a little from the net so as to protect his overhead, sothat his net attack weakened opportunely, and I was able to noseout the match in 4 sets.

Another famous match won by a lob was the Johnston-KingscoteDavis Cup Match at Wimbledon, in 1920. The score stood 2 setsall, and 5-3 Kingscote leading with Kingscote serving and thescore 30-all. Johnston served and ran in. Kingscote drove sharplydown Johnston's forehand side-line. Johnston made a remarkablerecovery with a half volley, putting the ball high in the air andseemingly outside. A strong wind was blowing down the court andcaught the ball and held its flight. It fell on the baseline.Kingscote made a remarkable recovery with a fine lob that forcedJohnston back. Kingscote took the net and volleyed decisively toJohnston's backhand. Johnston again lobbed, and by a freak ofcoincidence the ball fell on the baseline within a foot of hisprevious shot. Kingscote again lobbed in return, but this timeshort, and Johnston killed it. Johnston ran out the game in thenext two points.

If a shot can win two such matches as these, it is a shot worthlearning to use, and knowing when to use. The lob is one of themost useful and skilful shots in tennis. It is a great defenceand a fine attack.

The strokes already analysed, drive, service, volley, overheadand lob, are the orthodox strokes of tennis, and should be atevery player's command. These are the framework of your game. Yetno house is complete with framework alone. There are certaintrimmings, ornaments, and decorations necessary. There are theluxuries of modern improvements, and tennis boasts of suchimprovements in the modern game.

Among the luxuries, some say the eccentricities, of the moderngame one finds (1) the chop stroke, (2) the slice stroke (a closerelative), (3) the drop shot, (4) the half-volley or "trap" shot.

All these shots have their use. None should be considered a stockshot.

CHAPTER V. CHOP, HALF VOLLEY, AND COURT POSITION

I am called at times a chop-stroke player. I SELDOM CHOP. Mystroke is a slice.

A chop stroke is a shot where the angle towards the player andbehind the racquet, made by the line of flight of the ball, andthe racquet travelling down across it, is greater than 45 degreesand may be 90 degrees. The racquet face passes slightly OUTSIDEthe ball and down the side, chopping it, as a man chops wood. Thespin and curve is from right to left. It is made with a stiffwrist. Irving C. Wright, brother of the famous Beals, is a truechop player, while Beals himself, being a left- hander, choppedfrom the left court and sliced from the right.

The slice shot merely reduced the angle mentioned from 45 degreesdown to a very small one. The racquet face passes either INSIDEor OUTSIDE the ball, according to direction desired, while thestroke is mainly a wrist twist or slap. This slap imparts adecided skidding break to the ball, while a chop "drags" the balloff the ground without break. Wallace F. Johnson is the greatestslice exponent in the world.

The rules of footwork for both these shots should be the same asthe drive, but because both are made with a short swing and morewrist play, without the need of weight, the rules of footwork maybe more safely discarded and body position not so carefullyconsidered.

Both these shots are essentially defensive, and are labour-savingdevices when your opponent is on the baseline. A chop or slice isvery hard to drive, and will break up any driving game.

It is not a shot to use against a volley, as it is too slow topass and too high to cause any worry. It should be used to dropshort, soft shots at the feet of the net man as he comes in. Donot strive to pass a net man with a chop or slice, except througha big opening.

The drop-shot is a very soft, sharply-angled chop stroke, playedwholly with the wrist. It should drop within 3 to 5 feet of thenet to be of any use. The racquet face passes around the outsideof the ball and under it with a distinct "wrist turn." Do notswing the racquet from the shoulder in making a drop shot. Thedrop shot has no relation to a stop-volley. The drop shot is allwrist. The stop-volley has no wrist at all.

Use all your wrist shots, chop, slice, and drop, merely as anauxilliary to your orthodox game. They are intended to upset youropponent's game through the varied spin on the ball.

THE HALF VOLLEY

I have now reached the climax of tennis skill: the half volley ortrap shot. In other words, the pick-up.

This shot requires more perfect timing, eyesight, and racquetwork than any other, since its margin of safety is smallest andits manifold chances of mishaps numberless.

It is a pick-up. The ball meets the ground and racquet face atnearly the same moment, the ball bouncing off the ground, on thestrings. This shot is a stiff-wrist, short swing, like a volleywith no follow through. The racquet face travels along the groundwith a slight tilt over the ball and towards the net, thusholding the ball low; the shot, like all others in tennis, shouldtravel across the racquet face, along the short strings. Theracquet face should always be slightly outside the ball.

The half volley is essentially a defensive stroke, since itshould only be made as a last resort, when caught out of positionby your opponent's shot. It is a desperate attempt to extricateyourself from a dangerous position without retreating. NEVERDELIBERATELY HALF VOLLEY.

Notwithstanding these truths, there are certain players who haveturned the half volley into a point winner. The greatest halfvolleyer of the past decade—in fact, one of the greatest tennisgeniuses of the world—George Caridia, used the strokesuccessfully as a point winner. R. N. Williams, the leadingexponent of the stroke in the present day, achieves remarkableresults with it. Major A. R. F. Kingscote wins many a point,seemingly lost, by his phenomenal half-volley returns,particularly from the baseline. These men turn a defence into anattack, and it pays.

So much for the actual strokes of the game. It is in the otherdepartments such as generalship and psychology that matches arewon. Just a few suggestions as to stroke technique, and I willclose this section.

Always play your shot with a fixed, definite idea of what you aredoing and where it is going. Never hit haphazard.

Play all shots across the short strings of the racquet, with theracquet head and handle on the same hitting plane for groundstrokes and the head above the handle for volleys. The racquethead should be advanced slightly beyond the wrist for groundstrokes.

COURT POSITION

A tennis court is 39 feet long from baseline to net. Most playersthink all of that territory is a correct place to stand. Nothingcould be farther from the truth. There are only two places in atennis court that a tennis player should be to await the ball.

1. About 3 feet behind the baseline near the middle of the court,or

2. About 6 to 8 feet back from the net and almost opposite theball.

The first is the place for all baseline players. The second isthe net position.

If you are drawn out of these positions by a shot which you mustreturn, do not remain at the point where you struck the ball, butattain one of the two positions mentioned as rapidly as possible.

The distance from the baseline to about 10, feet from the net maybe considered as "no-man's-land" or "the blank." Never lingerthere, since a deep shot will catch you at your feet. Aftermaking your shot from the blank, as you must often do, retreatbehind the baseline to await the return, so you may again comeforward to meet the ball. If you are drawn in short and cannotretreat safely, continue all the way to the net position.

Never stand and watch your shot, for to do so simply means youare out of position for your next stroke. Strive to attain aposition so that you always arrive at the spot the ball is goingto before it actually arrives. Do your hard running while theball is in the air, so you will not be hurried in your strokeafter it bounces.

It is in learning to do this that natural anticipation plays abig role. Some players instinctively know where the next returnis going and take position accordingly, while others will neversense it. It is to the latter class that I urge court position,and recommend always coming in from behind the baseline to meetthe ball, since it is much easier to run forward than back.

Should you be caught at the net, with a short shot to youropponent, do not stand still and let him pass you at will, as hecan easily do. Pick out the side where you think he will hit, andjump to, it suddenly as he swings. If you guess right, you winthe point. If you are wrong, you are no worse off, since he wouldhave beaten you anyway with his shot.

A notable example of this method of anticipation is Norman E.Brookes, who instinctively senses the stroke, and suddenly bobsup in front of your best shot and kills it. Some may say it isluck, but, to my mind, it is the reward of brain work.

Your position should always strive to be such that you can coverthe greatest possible area of court without sacrificing safety,since the straight shot is the surest, most dangerous, and mustbe covered. It is merely a question of how much more court thanthat immediately in front of the ball may be guarded.

A well-grounded knowledge of court position saves many points, tosay nothing of much breath expended in long runs after hopelessshots.

It is the phenomenal knowledge of court position that allows A.R. F. Kingscote, a very short man, to attack so consistently fromthe net. Wallace F. Johnson is seldom caught out of position, sohis game is one of extreme ease. One seldom sees Johnson runninghard on a tennis court. He is usually there awaiting the ball'sarrival.

Save your steps by using your head. It pays in the end. Timespent in learning where to play on a tennis court is wellexpended, since it returns to you in the form of matches won,breath saved, and energy conserved.

It is seldom you need cover more than two-thirds of a tenniscourt, so why worry about the unnecessary portions of it?

PART II: THE LAWS OF TENNIS PSYCHOLOGY

CHAPTER VI. GENERAL TENNIS PSYCHOLOGY

Tennis psychology is nothing more than understanding the workingsof your opponent's mind, and gauging the effect of your own gameon his mental viewpoint, and understanding the mental effectsresulting from the various external causes on your own mind. Youcannot be a successful psychologist of others without firstunderstanding your own mental processes, you must study theeffect on yourself of the same happening under differentcircumstances. You react differently in different moods and underdifferent conditions. You must realize the effect on your game ofthe resulting irritation, pleasure, confusion, or whatever formyour reaction takes. Does it increase your efficiency? If so,strive for it, but never give it to your opponent.

Does it deprive you of concentration? If so, either remove thecause, or if that is not possible strive to ignore it.

Once you have judged accurately your own reaction to conditions,study your opponents, to decide their temperaments. Liketemperaments react similarly, and you may judge men of your owntype by yourself. Opposite temperaments you must seek to comparewith people whose reactions you know.

A person who can control his own mental processes stands anexcellent chance of reading those of another, for the human mindworks along definite lines of thought, and can be studied. Onecan only control one's, mental processes after carefully studyingthem.

A steady phlegmatic baseline player is seldom a keen thinker. Ifhe was he would not adhere to the baseline.

The physical appearance of a man is usually a pretty clear indexto his type of mind. The stolid, easy-going man, who usuallyadvocates the baseline game, does so because he hates to stir uphis torpid mind to think out a safe method of reaching the net.There is the other type of baseline player, who prefers to remainon the back of the court while directing an attack intended tobreak up your game. He is a very dangerous player, and a deep,keen- thinking antagonist. He achieves his results by mixing uphis length and direction, and worrying you with the variety ofhis game. He is a good psychologist. Such players include J. C.Parke, Wallace F. Johnson, and Charles S. Garland. The first typeof player mentioned merely hits the ball with little idea of whathe is doing, while the latter always has a definite plan andadheres to it. The hard-hitting, erratic, net-rushing player is acreature of impulse. There is no real system to his attack, nounderstanding of your game. He will make brilliant coups on thespur of the moment, largely by instinct; but there is no, mentalpower of consistent thinking. It is an interesting, fascinatingtype. Such men as Harold Throckmorton, B. I. C. Norton, and attimes R. N. Williams, are examples, although Williams is really abetter psychologist than this sounds.

The dangerous man is the player who mixes his style from back tofore court at the direction of an ever-alert mind. This is theman to study and learn from. He is a player with a definitepurpose. A player who has an answer to every query you propoundhim in your game. He is the most subtle antagonist in the world.He is of the school of Brookes. Second only to him is the man ofdogged determination that sets his mind on one plan and adheresto it, bitterly, fiercely fighting to the end, with never athought of change. He is the man whose psychology is easy tounderstand, but whose mental viewpoint is hard to upset, for henever allows himself to think of anything except the business athand. This man is your Johnston or your Wilding. I respect themental capacity of Brookes more, but I admire the tenacity ofpurpose of Johnston.

Pick out your type from your own mental processes, and then workout your game along the lines best suited to you. Few of us havethe mental brilliance of Brookes; but all can acquire the doggeddetermination of Johnston, even if we have not his tennisability.

When two men are, in the same class, as regards stroke equipment,the determining factor in any given match is the mentalviewpoint. Luck, so-called, is often grasping the psychologicalvalue of a break in the game, and turning it to your own account.

We hear a great deal about the "shots we have made." Few realizethe importance of the "shots we have missed." The science ofmissing shots is as important as that of making them, and attimes a miss by an inch is of more value than a, return that iskilled by your opponent.

Let me explain. A player drives you far out of court with anangle-shot. You run hard to it, and reaching, drive it hard andfast down the side- line, missing it by an inch. Your opponent issurprised and shaken, realizing that your shot might as well havegone in as out. He will expect you to try it again, and will nottake the risk next time. He will try to play the ball, and mayfall into error. You have thus taken some of your opponent'sconfidence, and increased his chance of error, all by a miss.

If you had merely popped back that return, and it had beenkilled, your opponent would have felt increasingly confident ofyour inability to get the ball out of his reach, while you wouldmerely have been winded without result.

Let us suppose you made the shot down the sideline. It was aseemingly impossible get. First it amounts to TWO points in thatit took one away from your opponent that should have been his andgave you one you ought never to have had. It also worries youropponent, as he feels he has thrown away a big chance.

The psychology of a tennis match is very interesting, but easilyunderstandable. Both men start with equal chances. Once one manestablishes a real lead, his confidence goes up, while hisopponent worries, and his mental viewpoint becomes poor. The soleobject of the first man is to hold his lead, thus holding hisconfidence. If the second player pulls even or draws ahead, theinevitable reaction occurs with even a greater contrast inpsychology. There is the natural confidence of the leader nowwith the second man as well as that great stimulus of havingturned seeming defeat into probable victory. The reverse in thecase of the first player is apt to hopelessly destroy his game,and collapse follows.

It is this twist in tennis psychology that makes it possible towin so many matches after they are seemingly lost. This is alsothe reason that a man who has lost a substantial lead seldomturns in the ultimate victory. He cannot rise above thedepression caused by his temporary slump. The value of an earlylead cannot be overestimated. It is the ability to control yourmental processes, and not worry unduly over early reverses, thatmakes a great match player.

Playing to the score is the first requisite of a thinking matchplayer. The two crucial points in any game are the third andfourth. If the first two points are divided for 15-all, the thirdmeans an advantage gained. If won by you, you should strive toconsolidate it by taking the next for 40-15 and two chances forgame, while if lost, you must draw even at 30-all to have an evenchance for game.

In order to do this, be sure to always put the ball in playsafely, and do not take unnecessary chances, at 15-all or 30-15.Always make the server work to hold his delivery. It worries himto serve long games, and increases the nervous strain of thematch.

In the game score the sixth, seventh, and eighth games are thecrux of every close set. These games may mean 4-2 or 3-all, 5-2or 4-3, the most vital advantage in the match, or 5-3 or 4-all, amatter of extreme moment to a tiring player. If ahead, you shouldstrive to hold and increase your lead. If behind, your one hopeof victory rests in cutting down the advantage of the other manBEFORE one slip means defeat. 5-2 is usually too late to start arally, but 4-3 is a real chance.

Never throw away a set because a player has a lead of 4-1, oreven 5-1, unless you already have two sets in a 5-set match, anddo not wish to risk tiring by trying to pull it out, and possiblyfailing at 6-4. The great advantage Of 3-1 on your own service isa stumbling-block for many players, for they unconsciously let upat the fifth game, thinking they have a 2-game lead. However, bydropping that game, the score will go 2-3 and 3-all if youropponent holds service, instead of 1-4 and 4-2, thus retaining adistinct advantage and discouraging your opponent in that set.

The first set is vital in a 2 out of 3 match. Play for all of it.The second and third sets are the turning-point in a best of5-set match. Take the first where possible, but play to the limitfor the next two. Never allow a 3 out of 5-set match to go to,the fifth set if it is possible to win in less; but never give upa match until the last point is played, even if you are two setsand five games down. Some occurrence may turn the tide in yourfavour.

A notable example of such a match occurred at Newport, in 1916.Wallace F. Johnson and Joseph J. Armstrong were playing IchijaKumagae, the famous Japanese star, and Harold A. Throckmorton,then junior Champion of America, in the second round of thedoubles.

It was Kumagae's first year in America, and he did not understandAmericans and their customs well. Kumagae and Throckmorton wereleading one set at 6-0, 5-1, and 40-15, Kumagae serving.Throckmorton turned and spoke to him, and the Japanese star didnot understand what he said. He served without knowing, andArmstrong passed him down the centre. Johnson duplicated the featin the next court, and Kumagae grew flustered. Throckmorton, notunderstanding, tried to steady him without result, as Kumagaedouble-faulted to Armstrong, and he, too, grew worried. Both menbegan missing, and Johnson and Armstrong pulled out the set andwon the match in a runaway in the last stanza. Johnson andArmstrong met W. M. Johnston and C. J. Griffin, the NationalChampions, in the final and defeated them in five sets,inflicting the only reverse the title-holders suffered duringtheir two-year reign as champions.

Another much more regrettable incident occurred in the famousmatch between R. L. Murray of California and George M. Church ofNew York in the fourth round of the American NationalChampionship in 1916. George Church, then at the crest of hiswonderful game, had won the first two sets and was leading Murrayin the third, when the famous Californian started a sensationalrally. Murray, with his terrific speed, merry smile, and genialpersonality, has always been a popular figure with the public,and when he began his seemingly hopeless fight, the crowd cheeredhim wildly. He broke through Church's service and drew even amida terrific din. Church, always a very high-strung, nervousplayer, showed that the crowd's partiality was getting on hisnerves. The gallery noticed it, and became more partisan thanever. The spirit of mob rule took hold, and for once they lostall sense of sportsmanship. They clapped errors as they rainedfrom Church's racquet; the great game collapsed under theterrific strain, and Church's last chance was gone. Murray wonlargely as he wanted, in the last two sets. No one regretted theincident more than Murray himself, for no finer sportsman stepsupon the court than this player, yet there was nothing that couldbe done. It was a case of external conditions influencing thepsychology of one man so greatly that it cost him a victory thatwas his in justice.

The primary object in match tennis is to break up the other man'sgame. The first lesson to learn is to hold your nerve under allcircumstances. If you can break a player's nerve by pounding at aweakness, do it. I remember winning a 5-set doubles match manyyears ago, against a team far over the class of my partner andmyself, by lobbing continually to one man until he cracked underthe strain and threw the match away. He became so afraid of a lobthat he would not approach the net, and his whole game broke upon account of his lack of confidence. Our psychology was good,for we had the confidence to continue our plan of attack evenwhile losing two of the first three sets. His was bad, for helost his nerve, and let us know it.

Sensational and unexpected shots at crucial moments have won manya match. If your opponent makes a marvellous recovery and wins byit, give him full credit for it, and then forget it, for byworrying over it you not only lose that point but several othersas, well, while your mind is still wandering. Never lose yourtemper over your opponent's good shots. It is bad enough to loseit at your own bad ones. Remember that usually the loser of amatch plays just as well as the winner allows him. Never loseyour temper at a bad decision. It never pays, and has cost many amatch.

I remember a famous match in Philadelphia, between Wallace F.Johnson, the fifth ranking player in America, and Stanley W.Pearson, a local star, in the Interclub tennis league of thatcity. Johnson, who had enjoyed a commanding lead of a set and4-1, had slumped, and Pearson had pulled even at a set-all, andwas leading at 5-1 and 40-15, point set match. He pulled Johnsonfar out to the forehand and came to the net. Johnson choppedviciously down the side-line, but Pearson volleyed to Johnson'sdeep backhand corner. Johnson had started RUNNING in thatdirection as he hit his return, and arrived almost as Pearson'svolley bounced. Unfortunately Johnson slipped and went down onboth knees, but held his racquet. He reached the ball and choppedit down the side-line for an earned point before Pearson realizedhe had even offered at it.

Pearson was so surprised and angered that he double-faulted fordeuce, and Johnson won the game. Johnson pulled even at 5-all,before Pearson recovered his equilibrium, and finally won the setat 17-15. Truly Pearson's lapse at Johnson's marvellous get was acostly mental break.

Tennis psychology is far more than the effect of certain shots,made or missed, on the player. One can sum up such things bysaying that every kill gives confidence, every error tends todestroy it. These things are obvious. The branch of psychologythat is interesting is the reaction on the various players ofdifferent courts, different crowds, and other players.

There is a peculiar atmosphere about the centre court atWimbledon that is unique in my knowledge of the game. Certainplayers revel in it. The majority do not feel it, and since theydo not sense it, they find only the material disadvantages ofrather bad light, and much noise from the stand, and dislike thecentre court. Personally, I enjoy playing on the centre court atWimbledon more than any court I have ever stepped upon.

The traditions of the great players of the past, the notablepersonages that make up the parties in the Royal Box andCommittee Box, the honour of a visit from their Majesties theKing and Queen, and, above all, the generous, non-partisan,sportsmanlike attitude of the British public, make it a uniqueprivilege to enter the centre court in championship competition.These things inspire the mind to an almost abnormal keenness. Itis this atmosphere that made N. E. Brookes, Anthony F. Wilding,A. W. Gore, R. F. and H. L. Doherty more dangerous there thananywhere else. It is this factor that spurs on J. C. Parke and A.R. F. Kingscote to their greatest tennis to-day.

The great championship turf at Forest Hills, where the American
Championship is held, offers a unique contrast to Wimbledon.

The age of Wimbledon is its great attraction. It is the spirit ofyouth, of progress, of business-like mechanical perfection ofmanagement, and the enormous crowds and attendant enthusiasm thatis the chief attraction at Forest Hills. Fully 15,000 werepresent on the closing day of the event in 1919. Orderly,courteous, enthusiastic, but partisan, the American tennis publiccomes out to cheer on its favourite. No people in the worldappreciate visiting players more whole-heartedly and none do morefor their comfort than the American people. It is partisan,personal, sporting friendliness, warmer yet not so correct as themanner of the British public, that the Americans give. We havemuch to learn from our British friends. Yet I hope we will neversacrifice the warmth of feeling that at times may run away withus, yet in the main is the chief attraction of the Americanpeople. It is this enthusiasm that spurs on the men to theirgreatest efforts in the National Championship.

The Australian team, Norman E. Brookes, Gerald Patterson,Randolph Lycett, and R. V. Thomas, who visited the United States,in 1919, scored a unique personal triumph. The whole gallerypresent at the notable match in the Championship, when Pattersonwent down to defeat in a terrific 5-set struggle with W. M.Johnston, rose and cheered Patterson as he walked off the court.It was a real ovation; a tribute to his sportsmanship, and anoutburst of personal admiration. Brookes was the recipient of anequal demonstration on his final appearance at Forest Hills. Thestimulus of the surroundings produced the highest tennis of whichthese men were capable.

Yet in all championships it is the personal element that is themoving factor. Personalities are the deciding force inpopularity. Patriotism is partially submerged in personality.

The Davis Cup matches bring out the gamest struggles in thehistory of tennis. It is in these unique series of matches thatthe fame of Anthony F. Wilding, Norman E. Brookes, J. C. Parke,B. C. Wright, M. E. M'Loughlin, and others reached its crest. Itwas the unselfish giving of one's best, under all conditions, forthe honour of the country that called out the finest tennis ineach man. Parke reached his crest in his memorable defeat ofBrookes. M'Loughlin has never quite equalled his marvellous gameof 1914 against Brookes and Wilding.

It is the psychology of patriotism that brings out this tennis.

Personality is submerged. Unity of purpose as a team, replacesthe object of personal glory that is the keynote of championship.

It is the friendly rivalry of sport, between such men as form thebackbone of tennis in each country, that does more forinternational understanding than all the notes ever written fromthe White House.

I could go on writing tennis psychology as explained by externalconditions for hundreds of pages, but all I want to do is tobring to mind a definite idea of the value of the mind in thegame. Stimulate it how you will, a successful tennis player mustadmit the value of quick mind. Do it by a desire for personalglory, or team success, or by a love of competition in matchingyour wits against the other man's, but do it some way.

Do, not think that tennis is merely a physical exercise. It is amental cock-tail of a very high "kick."

CHAPTER VII. THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MATCH PLAY

The first and most important point in match play is to know howto lose. Lose cheerfully, generously, and like a sportsman. Thisis the first great law of tennis, and the second is like untoit—to win modestly, cheerfully, generously, and like asportsman.

The object of match play is to win, but no credit goes to a manwho does not win fairly and squarely. A victory is a defeat if itis other than fair. Yet again I say to win is the object, and todo so, one should play to the last ounce of his strength, thelast gasp of his breath, and the last scrap of his nerve. If youdo so and lose, the better man won. If you do not, you haverobbed your opponent of his right of beating your best. Be fairto both him and yourself.

"The Play's the thing," and in match play a good defeat is farmore creditable than a hollow victory. Play tennis for the game'ssake. Play it for the men you meet, the friends you make, and thepleasure you may give to the public by the hard- working yetsporting game that is owed them by their presence at the match.

Many tennis players feel they owe the public nothing, and aregranting a favour by playing. It is my belief that when thepublic so honours a player that they attend matches, that playeris in duty bound to give of his best, freely, willingly, andcheerfully, for only by so doing can he repay the honour paidhim. The tennis star of to-day owes his public as much as theactor owes the audience, and only by meeting his obligations cantennis be retained in public favour. The players get their rewardin the personal popularity they gain by their conscientious work.

There is another factor that is even stronger than this, thatwill always produce fine tennis in championship events. It is thecompetitive spirit that is the breath of life to every truesportsman: the desire to prove to himself he can beat the best ofthe other man; the real regret that comes when he wins, and feelsthe loser was not at his best. It is that which has made popularidols of Anthony F. Wilding, M. E. M'Loughlin, and other famousplayers. It is the great attraction of J. C. Parke, A. R. F.Kingscote, W. M. Johnston, Andre Gobert, W. Laurentz, and manyother stars. It is the sign of a true sportsman.

The keen competitive spirit that stimulates a match player alsoincreases the nervous strain. This should be recognized bytournament committees, and the conditions of play should be asnearly standardized as weather permits.

A tournament committee should never keep a player waiting for animportant match to commence while they scour through the crowdfor linesmen. These necessary, and I trust useful, accessories toevery match of importance should be picked and on hand when theplayers appear. A good linesman is a great aid to match tennis. Apoor one may ruin a great battle. Not only will bad decisionsturn the tide by putting a point in the wrong columns, but slowdecisions will often upset players, so they dare not play to theline kept by slumberous linesmen.

A linesman should take his first judgment as the ball strikes. Ifoutside he should call "out" at once clearly, decisively, but nottoo loudly; a yell is often a shock to the nerves. If the ball isgood he should remain discreetly silent.

The umpire should announce the score after each point in a voicesufficiently loud to be heard by the entire gallery. Hisdecisions as to "lets" or balls "not up" should be made only loudenough to ensure that they are heard by the players. The galleryhas eyes. Following each game, the game score should be called,giving the leading player's name and the set being played. Forexample, "Four games to three, Parke leads. Second set." Aboutevery third game following the completion of the first set, anannouncement as to the winner of the first set is an excellentidea. The umpire could add to the above announcement, "First set,Parke, 6-3." This latter announcement is unnecessary when thereis a score board that gives full details of the match.

Tournament committees should see that all courts have sufficientroom behind the baseline and at the sides to insure a playeragainst running into the stops.

Galleries should strive to retain their appreciation andenthusiasm until a point is completed, since noise is verydisconcerting to a player. However, all players enjoy anenthusiastic gallery.

The players themselves must now be considered in relation to thereaction of the match.

The first thing to fix firmly in your mind in playing a match, isnever to allow your opponent to play a shot he likes if it ispossible to force him to make one he does not. Study youropponent both on and off the court. Look for a weakness, and,once finding it, pound it without mercy. Remember that you do notdecide your mode of attack. It is decided for you by the weaknessof your opponent. If he dislikes to meet a netman, go to the net.If he wants you at the net, stay back and force him to come in.If he attacks viciously, meet his attack with an equally strongoffensive.

Remember that the strongest defence is to attack, for if theother man is occupied in meeting your attack, he will have lesstime to formulate his own system.

If you are playing a very steady man, do not strive to beat himat his own game. He is better at it than you in many cases, so goin and hit to win. On the other hand, if you find that youropponent is wild and prone to miss, play safe and reap the fullcrop of his errors. It saves you trouble and takes hisconfidence.

ABOVE ALL, NEVER CHANGE A WINNING GAME.

ALWAYS CHANGE A LOSING GAME, since, as you are getting beatenthat way, you are no worse off and may be better with a newstyle.

The question of changing a losing game is a very serious thing.It is hard to say just when you are really beaten. If you feelyou are playing well yet have lost the first set about 6-3 or6-4, with the loss of only one service, you should not change.Your game is not really a losing game. It is simply a case of onebreak of service, and might well win the next set. If, however,you have dropped the first set in a 2 out of 3 match with but oneor two games, now you are outclassed and should try somethingelse.

Take chances when you are behind, never when ahead. Risks areonly worth while when you have everything to win and nothing tolose. It may spell victory, and at least will not hasten defeat.Above all, never lose your nerve or confidence in a match. By sodoing you have handed your opponent about two points a game—arather hard handicap to beat at your best.

Never let your opponent know you are worried. Never show fatigueor pain if it is possible to avoid, since it will only give himconfidence. Remember that he feels just as bad as you, and anysign of weakening on your part encourages him to go on. In otherwords, keep your teeth always in the match.

Don't worry. Don't fuss. Luck evens up in the long run, and toworry only upsets your own game without affecting your opponent.A smile wins a lot of points because it gives the impression ofconfidence on your part that shakes that of the other man. Fightall the time. The harder the strain the harder you should fight,but do it easily, happily, and enjoy it.

Match play, where both men are in the same class as tennisplayers, resolves itself into a battle of wits and nerve. The manwho uses the first and retains the second is the ultimate victor.

I do not believe in a man who expects to go through a longtournament, going "all out" for every match. Conserve yourstrength and your finesse for the times you need them, and winyour other matches decisively, but not destructively. Why shoulda great star discourage and dishearten a player several classesbelow him by crushing him, as he no doubt could? A few games aset, well earned, would be a big factor in encouraging thatrising player to play in tournaments, while it would in no wayinjure the reputation of the star.

Never hurry your opponent by serving before he is fully set toreceive. This is a favourite trick of a few unscrupulous players,yet is really an unfair advantage. Do your hurrying after theball is in play, by running him to unexpected places in thecourt. Should anyone attempt to work the hurried service on you,after several attempts, proving it is intentional, let the ballgo by and say "not ready." The server will shortly realize thatyou will take your time regardless of him, and he will slow up.

I do not advocate stalling—nothing is worse. It is a breach ofethics that is wholly uncalled for. Play the game naturally, andgive your opponent full courtesy in all matters. If you do, youwill receive it in return.

Take every advantage of any and every weakness in your opponent'sgame; but never trespass on his rights as regards externaladvantages.

Personally I do not believe in "defaulting" a match. To "scratch"or "retire," as the term goes, is to cheat your opponent of hisjust triumph, and you should never do this unless it isabsolutely impossible to avoid. Sickness or some equallyimportant reason should be the sole cause of scratching, for youowe the tournament your presence once your entry is in.

Match play should stimulate a player. He should produce his bestunder the excitement of competition. Learn your shots inpractice, but use them in matches.

Practice is played with the racquet, matches are won by the mind.J. C. Parke is a great match player, because he is not only agreat player but a great student of men. He sizes up hisopponent, and seizes every opening and turns it to his ownaccount. Norman E. Brookes is the greatest match player the worldhas ever known, because he is ever ready to change his plan tomeet the strategy of his opponent, and has both the variety ofstroke and versatility of intellect to outguess the other themajority of times. Brookes is the greatest court general, and, inmy opinion, the finest tennis intellect in the world. His mind isnever so keen and he is never so dangerous as when he is trailingin an important match. He typifies all that is great in mentalmatch tennis.

A great star is always at his best in a match, as it stimulateshis mental and physical faculties to the utmost.

Certain players are more effective against some men than otherswho are not so good. It is the uncertainty of match tennis thatis its greatest charm. Two men may meet for tennis during aseason, and be so closely matched that each man will win twomatches and the score seem almost one-sided each time. It is acase of getting the jump on the other player.

During 1919 Johnston and I met four times. Twice he defeated me,once in four sets, and once in three, while the two victoriesthat were mine were scored in identically the same number ofsets. The most remarkable meeting of two stars was the series ofmatches between R. L. Murray and Ichija Kumagae during theseasons of 1918 and 1919. In the early stages Murray had adecided advantage, winning from Kumagae consistently, but byclose scores. Early in 1919 Kumagae unexpectedly defeated Murrayat Buffalo in four sets. From that moment Kumagae held the whiphand. He defeated Murray at Niagara-on-the-Lake a week later.Murray barely nosed out the Japanese star at Cleveland in fivesets after Kumagae had the match won, only to have Kumagae againdefeat him in a terrific match at Newport in August.

Kumagae's game is very effective against Murray, because Murray,essentially a volleyer, could not exchange ground strokes withthe Japanese star player successfully, and could not stand theterrific pace of rushing the net at every opportunity. Kumagaeconclusively proved his slight superiority over Murray lastseason.

Vincent Richards, who is not yet the equal of Murray, scored twoclean-cut victories over Kumagae during the same period. Whyshould Richards worry Kumagae, who is certainly Murray'ssuperior, and yet not cause Murray trouble?

The answer lies in this style of game. Richards uses a peculiarchop stroke from the baseline that is very steady. He can meetKumagae at his own baseline game until he gets a chance to closein to the net, where his volleying is remarkable. The result is,against Kumagae's driving he is perfectly at home. Murray is avicious net player who swept Richards off his feet. The boy hasnot the speed on his ground strokes to pass Murray, who volleysoff his chop for points, and cannot take the net away from him ashe cannot handle the terrific speed of Murray's game. ThusMurray's speed beats Richards, while Richards' steadinesstroubles Kumagae, yet Kumagae's persistent driving tires Murrayand beats him. What good are comparative scores?

Charles S. Garland always defeats Howard Voshell, yet loses tomen whom Voshell defeats. Williams proves a stumbling-block toJohnston, yet seldom does well against me.

The moral to be drawn from the ever-interesting upsets that occurevery year, is that the style of your attack should be determinedby the man's weakness you are playing. Suit your style to hisweakness. A chop is the antidote for the drive. The volley is theanswer to a chop, yet a drive is the only safe attack against avolley. The smash will kill a lob, yet a lob is the surestdefence from a smash. Rather a complicated condition, but onewhich it would do well to think over.

The most dangerous enemy to R. N. Williams is a steady baselinerof second class. Williams is apt to crush a top-flight player ina burst of superlative terms, yet fall a victim to the erraticstreak that is in him when some second-class player plays patballwith him. Such defeats were his portion at the hands of Ritchieand Mavrogordato in England, yet on the same trip he scorednotable victories over Parke and Johnston.

Abnormal conditions for match play always tend to affect thebetter player more than the poorer, and bring play to a level.

The reason for this is in the fact that the higher the standardof a player's game, the smaller his margin of error, the moreperfect his bound must be, and any variation from the normal isapt to spell error. The average player allows himself moreleeway, and unknowingly increases his chances on a bad court. Hisshot is not judged to the fraction of an inch in swing as is thetop-flight player, so a slight variation does not affect him.

Many a great match has been ruined by abnormal conditions. Raincaused Williams' downfall to N. W. Niles in the 1917 AmericanChampionships. Rain and wind marred a great battle between Gobertand Johnston at Eastbourne in the Davis Cup in 1920.

The clever match player must always be willing to change his gameto meet conditions. Failure to do so may spell defeat.

It is this uncertainty, due to external conditions, that makescomparative records so useless in judging the relative merits oftwo players you know nothing of. Rankings based on mathematicalcalculations of scores are absolutely useless and childish,unless tempered by common sense.

The question of the fitness of conditions of play can never bestandardized. In America you play only if clear. In Englandsometimes when clear but more often in rain, judging by theevents I swam through in my recent trip. A match player shouldnot only be able to play tennis, but should combine the virtuesof an aeroplane and a submarine as well.

CHAPTER VIII. THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PHYSICAL FITNESS

Physical fitness is one of the great essentials of match play.Keenness can only be acquired if the physical, mental, andnervous systems are in tune. Consistent and systematic trainingis essential to a tournament player.

Regular hours of sleep, and regular, hearty food at regular hoursare necessary to keep the body at its highest efficiency. Food isparticularly important. Eat well, but do not over-eat,particularly immediately before playing. I believe in a largehearty breakfast on the day of a big match. This should be takenby nine-thirty. A moderate lunch at about one o'clock if playingat three. Do not eat very rich food at luncheon as it tends toslow you up on the court. Do not run the risk of indigestion,which is the worst enemy to dear eyesight. Rich, heavy foodimmediately before retiring is bad, as it is apt to make you"loggy" on the court the next day.

It is certain injury to touch alcoholic drink in any form duringtournament play. Alcohol is a poison that affects the eye, themind, and the wind—three essentials in tennis. Tobacco inmoderation does little harm, although it, too, hits eye and wind.A man who is facing a long season of tournament play shouldrefrain from either alcohol or tobacco in any form. Excesses ofany kind are bad for physical condition, and should not bechanced.

Late hours cause sluggishness of mind and body the next day. Itis very dangerous to risk them before a hard match. The movingpictures immediately before playing tennis are bad, owing to theeye strain caused by the flicker of the film and the strong lightof the camera. Lead a normal, healthy life, and conserve yournervous force wherever possible, as you will need it in the hardmatches.

"Staleness" is the great enemy of players who play long seasons.It is a case of too much tennis. Staleness is seldom physicalweariness. A player can always recover his strength by rest.Staleness is a mental fatigue due often to worry or too closeattention to tennis, and not enough variety of thought. Itssymptoms are a dislike for the tennis game and its surroundings,and a lack of interest in the match when you are on the court. Iadvocate a break in training at such a time. Go to the theatre ora concert, and get your mind completely off tennis. Do yourworrying about tennis while you are playing it, and forget theunpleasantness of bad play once you are off the court. Alwayshave some outside interest you can turn to for relaxation duringa tournament; but never allow it to interfere with your tenniswhen you should be intent on your game. A nice balance is hard toachieve, but, once attained is a great aid to a tournamentplayer. I find my relaxation in auction bridge. I know many otherplayers who do likewise. Among them are Mrs. Franklin Mallory,Wallace F. Johnson, W. M. Johnston and Samuel Hardy.

The laws of training should be closely followed before and aftera match. Do not get chilled before a match, as it makes you stiffand slow. Above all else do not stand around without a wrap aftera match when you are hot or you will catch cold.

Many a player has acquired a touch of rheumatism from wastingtime at the close of his match instead of getting his showerwhile still warm. That slight stiffness the next day may meandefeat. A serious chill may mean severe illness. Do not takechances.

Change your wet clothes to dry ones between matches if you are toplay twice in a day. It will make you feel better, and also avoidthe risk of cold.

Tournament players must sacrifice some pleasures for the sake ofsuccess. Training will win many a match for a man if he sticks toit. Spasmodic training is useless, and should never be attempted.

The condition a player is, in is apt to decide his mentalviewpoint, and aid him in accustoming himself to the externalconditions of play.

All match players should know a little about the phenomenon ofcrowd-psychology since, as in the case of the Church-Murray matchI related some time back, the crowd may play an important part inthe result.

It seldom pays to get a crowd down on you. It always pays to winits sympathy. I do not mean play to the gallery, for that willhave the opposite effect than the one desired.

The gallery is always for the weaker player. It is a case ofhelping the "under-dog." If you are a consistent winner you mustaccustom yourself to having the gallery show partiality for youropponent. It is no personal dislike of you. It is merely anatural reaction in favour of the loser. Sometimes a bad decisionto one play will win the crowd's sympathy for him. Galleries areeminently just in their desires, even though at times theiremotions run away with them.

Quite aside from the effect on the gallery, I wish to state herethat when you are the favoured one in a decision that you know iswrong, strive to equalize it if possible by unostentatiouslylosing the next point. Do not hit the ball over the back stop orinto the bottom of the net with a jaunty air of "Here you are."Just hit it slightly out or in the net, and go on about yourbusiness in the regular way. Your opponent always knows when youextend him this justice, and he appreciates it, even though hedoes not expect it. Never do it for effect. It is extremely badtaste. Only do it when your sense of justice tells you youshould.

The crowd objects, and justly so, to a display of real temper onthe court. A player who loses his head must expect a poorreception from the gallery. Questioned decisions by a player onlyput him in a bad light with the crowd and cannot alter the point.You may know the call was wrong, but grin at it, and the crowdwill join you. These things are the essence of goodsportsmanship, and good sportsmanship will win any gallery. Themost unattractive player in the world will win the respect andadmiration of a crowd by a display of real sportsmanship at thetime of test.

Any player who really enjoys a match for the game's sake willalways be a fine sportsman, for there is no amusement to a matchthat does not give your opponent his every right. A player whoplays for the joy of the game wins the crowd the first time hesteps on the court. All the world loves an optimist.

The more tennis I play, the more I appreciate my sense of humour.I seldom play a match when I do not get a smile out of someremark from the gallery, while I know that the gallery alwaysenjoys at least one hearty laugh at my expense. I do not begrudgeit them, for I know how very peculiar tennis players in general,and myself in particular, appear when struggling vainly to reacha shot hopelessly out of reach.

Two delightful elderly ladies were witnessing Charles S. Garlandand myself struggle against Mavrogordato, and Riseley at theEdgbaston tournament in England in 1920. One turned to the otherand said: "Those are the Americans!"

"Oh," said the second lady resignedly, "I thought so. The tallone [meaning me] looks rather queer."

During the Davis Cup match against the French at Eastbourne, Iwent on the court against Laurentz in my blue "woolly" sweater.The day was cold, and I played the match 4-1 in Laurentz' favour,still wearing it. I started to remove it at the beginning of thesixth game, when the gallery burst into loud applause, out ofwhich floated a sweet feminine voice: "Good! Now maybe the poorboy will be able to play!"

For the first time I realized just what the gallery thought of myefforts to play tennis, and also of the handicap of the famous"blue-bearskin" as they termed it.

My favourite expression during my Davis Cup trip happened to be"Peach" for any particularly good shot by my opponent. Thegallery at the Championship, quick to appreciate any mannerism ofa player, and to, know him by it, enjoyed the remark on manyoccasions as the ball went floating by me. In my match withKingscote in the final set, the court was very slippery owing tothe heavy drizzle that had been falling throughout the match. At3-2 in my favour, I essayed a journey to the net, only to haveKingscote pass me 'cross court to my backhand. I turned andstarted rapidly for the shot murmuring "Peach" as I went.Suddenly my feet went out and I rolled over on the ground,sliding some distance, mainly on my face. I arose, dripping, justin time to hear, sotto voce, in the gallery at my side: "A littlebit crushed, that Peach." The sense of humour of the speaker wasdelightful. The whole side-line howled with joy, and the joke wason me.

I am always the goat for the gallery in these little jokes,because it is seldom I can refrain from saying something loudenough to be heard.

I remember an incident that caused great joy to a large galleryin Philadelphia during a match between two prominent localplayers. One of the men had been charging the net and volleyingconsistently off the frame of his racquet, giving a wonderfuldisplay of that remarkable shot known the world over as "themahogany volley." His luck was phenomenal for all his mis-hitvolleys won him points. Finally, at the end of a bitterlycontested deuce game in the last set he again won the decidingpoint with a volley off the wood, just as a small insect flew inhis eye.

He called to his opponent: "Just a moment, I have a fly in myeye."

The disgusted opponent looked up and muttered: "Fly? Huh! I'llbet it's a splinter!"

There was a certain young player who was notoriously lax in hiseyesight on decisions. He could never see one against himself. Hebecame noted in his own locality. He and another boy were playinga team of brothers who were quite famous in the tennis world. Oneof these brothers had a very severe service that the localCaptain Kidd could not handle at all. So each time the visitingplayer served close to the line, the boy would swing at it, missit, and call "Fault!" There was no umpire available and there wasno question of the older team losing, so they let it go for sometime. Finally a service fully 3 feet in was casually called outby the youngster. This proved too much for the server, who hailedhis brother at the net with the query: "What was wrong thattime?"

"I don't know," came the reply; "unless he called a footfault onyou!"

The assurance of some young players is remarkable. They know farmore about the game of other men than the men themselves. I oncetravelled to a tournament with a boy who casually seated himselfbeside me in the train and, seeing my tennis bag, opened theconversation on tennis and tennis players. He finally turned hisattention to various people I knew well, and suddenly burst outwith: "Tilden is a chop-stroke player. I know him well." I lethim talk for about ten minutes, learning things about my gamethat I never knew before. Finally I asked his name, which he toldme. In reply he asked mine. The last view I had of him for sometime was a hasty retreat through the door of the car for air.

I played my first match against J. C. Parke at Wimbledon in 1920.The time before that I had been on the court with him was atGermantown Cricket Club in 1911, when I acted as ball-boy in theDavis Cup between him and W. A. Larned. The Junior members of theclub, sons of the members, used to consider it a great honour toact as ball-boy in these matches, and worked every means to bepicked. I picked up much tennis in those days, for I have workedat the ball-boy position for Parke, Crawley, Dixon, Larned,Wright, and Ward.

CHAPTER IX. THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SINGLES AND DOUBLES

Singles, the greatest strain in tennis, is the game for twoplayers. It is in this phase of the game that the personalequation reaches its crest of importance. This is the game ofindividual effort, mental and physical.

A hard 5-set singles match is the greatest strain on the body andnervous system of any form of sport. Richard Harte and L. C.Wister, the former a famous Harvard University football andbaseball player, the latter a football star at Princeton, both ofwhom are famous tennis players, have told me that a close 5-settennis match was far more wearing on them than the biggestfootball game they had ever played.

Singles is a game of daring, dash, speed of foot and stroke. Itis a game of chance far more than doubles. Since you have nopartner dependent upon you, you can afford to risk error for thepossibility of speedy victory. Much of what I wrote under matchplay is more for singles than doubles, yet let me call yourattention to certain peculiarities of singles from the standpointof the spectator.

A gallery enjoys personalities far more than styles. Singlesbrings two people into close and active relations that show theidiosyncrasies of each player far more acutely than doubles. Thespectator is in the position of a man watching an insect under amicroscope. He can analyse the inner workings.

The freedom of restraint felt on a single court is in markedcontrast to the need for team work in doubles. Go out for yourshot in singles whenever there is a reasonable chance of gettingit. Hit harder at all times in singles than in doubles, for youhave more chance of scoring and can take more risk.

Few great singles, players are famous in doubles. Notableexceptions to the above statement come to mind at once in thepersons of the Dohertys, Norman E. Brookes, and F. B. Alexander.Yet who could accuse W. M. Johnston, R. N. Williams(notwithstanding his World's Championship doubles title), AndreGobert, the late Anthony F. Wilding, M. E. M'Loughlin, or GeraldPatterson of playing great doubles? All these men are wonderfulsingles players, playing singles on a double court alongside somesuffering partner. The daring that makes for a great singlesplayer is an eternal appeal to a gallery. None of the notabledoubles players, who have little or no claim to singles fame,have enjoyed the hero-worship accorded the famous singles stars.H. Roper-Barrett, Stanley Doust, Harold H. Hackett, Samuel Hardy,and Holcombe Ward, all doubles players of the very highest order,were, and are, well liked and deservedly popular, but are notidolized as were M'Loughlin or Wilding.

Singles is a game of the imagination, doubles a science of exactangles.

Doubles is four-handed tennis. Enough of this primary readerdefinition. I only used that so as not to be accused of trying towrite over the heads of the uninitiated.

It is just as vital to play to your partner in tennis as inbridge. Every time you make a stroke you must do it with adefinite plan to avoid putting your partner in trouble. Thekeynote of doubles success is team work; not individualbrilliancy. There is a certain type of team work dependent whollyupon individual brilliancy. Where both players are in the sameclass, a team is as strong as its weakest player at any giventime, for here it is even team work with an equal division of thecourt that should be the method of play. In the case of onestrong player and one weaker player, the team is as good as thestrong player can make it by protecting and defending the weaker.This pair should develop its team work on the individualbrilliancy of the stronger man.

The first essential of doubles play is to PUT the ball in play. Adouble fault is bad in singles, but it is inexcusable in doubles.The return of service should be certain. After that it should below and to the server coming in. Do not strive for clean aces indoubles until you have the opening. Remember that to pass two menis a difficult task.

Always attack in doubles. The net is the only place in the courtto play the doubles game, and you should always strive to attainthe net position. There are two formations for the receivingteam: one is the Australian formation with the receiver's partnerstanding in to volley the server's return volley; the other isthe English and American style with both men back, thus givingthe net attack to the server. This is safer, but less likely toproduce a winning result unless the team is a wonderful lobbingcombination. Lobbing is a sound defence in doubles, and is usedto open the court.

I believe in always trying for the kill when you see a realopening. "Poach" (go for a shot which is not really on your sideof the court) whenever you see a chance to score. Never poachunless you go for the kill. It is a win or nothing shot since itopens your whole court. If you are missing badly do not poach, asit is very disconcerting to your partner.

The question of covering a doubles court should not be a seriousone. With all men striving to attain the net all the time everyshot should be built up with that idea. Volley and smash wheneverpossible, and only retreat when absolutely necessary.

When the ball goes toward the side-line the net player on thatside goes in close and toward the line. His partner fallsslightly back and to the centre of the court, thus covering theshot between the men. If the next return goes to the other side,the two men reverse positions. The theory of court covering istwo sides of a triangle, with the angle in the centre and the twosides running to the side-lines and in the direction of the net.

Each man should cover overhead balls over his own head, and hitthem in the air whenever possible, since to allow them to dropgives the net to the other team. The only time for the partner toprotect the overhead is when the net man "poaches," isoutguessed, and the ball tossed over his head. Then the servercovers and strives for a kill at once.

Always be ready to protect your partner, but do not take shotsover his head unless he calls for you to, or you see a certainkill. Then say "Mine," step in and hit decisively. The matter ofoverhead balls, crossing under them, and such incidentals of teamwork are matters of personal opinion, and should be arranged byeach team according to their joint views. I only offer generalrules that can be modified to meet the wishes of the individuals.

Use the lob as a defence, and to give time to extricate yourselfand your partner from a bad position. The value of service indoubles cannot be too strongly emphasized since it gives the netto the server. Service should always be held. To lose service isan unpardonable sin in first-class doubles. All shots in doublesshould be low or very high. Do not hit shoulder-high as it is tooeasy to kill. Volley down and hard if possible. Every shot youmake should be made with a definite idea of opening the court.

Hit down the centre to disrupt the team work of the opposingteam; but hit to the side-lines for your aces.

Pick one man, preferably the weaker of your opponents, and centreyour attack on him and keep it there. Pound him unmercifully, andin time he should crack under the attack. It is very foolish toalternate attack, since it simply puts both men on their game andtires neither.

If your partner starts badly play safely and surely until herounds to form. Never show annoyance with your partner. Do notscold him. He is doing the best he can, and fighting with himdoes no good. Encourage him at all times and don't worry. A teamthat is fighting among themselves has little time left to playtennis, and after all tennis is the main object of doubles.

Offer suggestions to your partner at any time during a match; butdo not insist on his following them, and do not get peevish if hedoesn't. He simply does not agree with you, and he may be right.Who knows?

Every doubles team should have a leader to direct its play; butthat leader must always be willing to drop leadership for anygiven point when his partner has the superior position. It ispolicy of attack not type of stroke that the leader shoulddetermine.

Pick a partner and stick to him. He should be a man you like andwant to play with, and he should want to play with you. This willdo away with much friction. His style should not be too nearlyyour own, since you double the faults without greatly increasingthe virtues.

I am a great believer in a brilliant man teaming up with a steadyplayer. Let your steady man keep the ball in play, and allow yourbrilliant man all the room he wants to "poach" and kill. Thus youget the best of both men.

Doubles is a game of finesse more than speed. The great doublesplayers, the Dohertys, Norman E. Brookes, the greatest in theworld to-day, Roper Barrett, Beals Wright, and F. B. Alexander,are all men of subtle finesse rather than terrific speed.

It requires more than speed of shot to beat two men over abarrier 3 to 3 1/2 feet high with a distance of some 32 feet. Itis angles, pace, and accuracy that should be the aim in a greatdoubles game. Resource, versatility, and subtlety, not speed, windoubles matches.

PART III: MODERN TENNIS AND ITS FUTURE

CHAPTER X. THE GROWTH OF THE MODERN GAME

Lawn tennis is the outgrowth of the old French game of the courtsof the early Louis. It spread to England, where it gained a firmhold on public favour. The game divided; the original form beingclosely adhered to in the game known in America as "Courttennis," but which is called "Tennis" in England. Lawn tennisgrew out of it.

The old style game was played over a net some 5 feet high, andthe service was always from the same end, the players changingcourts each game. It was more on the style of the present game ofbadminton or battledore and shuttlecock.

Gradually the desire for active play had its effect, in a lowerednet and changed laws, and tennis, as we know it, grew into being.From its earliest period, which is deeply shrouded in mystery,came the terms of "love" for "nothing" and "deuce" for "40-all."What they meant originally, or how they gained their hold isunknown, but the terms are a tradition of the game and just asmuch a part of the scoring system as the "game" or "set" call.

In 1920 the Rules Committee of the American Tennis Associationadvocated a change in scoring that replaced love, 15, 30, 40 withthe more comprehensive 1, 2, 3, 4. The real reason for theproposed change was the belief that the word "love" in tennismade the uninitiated consider the game effeminate and repelledpossible supporters. The loyal adherents of the old customs ofthe game proved too strong, and defeated the proposed change inscoring by an overwhelming majority.

Personally, I think there is some slight claim to considerationfor the removal of the word "love." It can do no good, and thereare many substitutes for it. It can easily be eliminated withoutrevolutionizing the whole scoring system. It is far easier tosubstitute the words "zero," "nothing," for "love" than causesuch an upheaval as was proposed. In my opinion the best way toobviate the matter is to use the player's name in conjunctionwith the points won by him, when his opponent has none. If thefirst point is won by Williams, call the score "15, Williams"and, with his opponent scoring the next, the call would become"15-all."

If tennis loses one adherent, it could otherwise gain, simply byits retaining the word "love" in the score, I heartily advocateremoving it. This removal was successfully accomplished inChicago in 1919, with no confusion to players, umpires, orpublic.

However, returning from my little digression on the relativevalue of "love" and "nothing," let me continue my short historyof the game. The playing of tennis sprang into public favour soquickly that in a comparatively short space of time it wasuniversally played in England and France. The game was brought toAmerica in the latter part of the nineteenth century. Its growththere in the past twenty-five years has been phenomenal. Duringthe last half century tennis gained a firm foothold in all thecolonies of the British Empire, and even found favour in theOrient, as is explained in another portion of this book.

Tennis fills many needs of mankind. It provides an outlet forphysical energy, relaxation, mental stimulus, and healthfulexercise. The moral tone is aided by tennis because the first lawof tennis is that every player must be a good sportsman andinherently a gentleman.

Tennis was recognized by the Allied Governments as one of themost beneficial sports during the World War. Not only were themen in service encouraged to play whenever possible, but theAllied Governments lent official aid to the various servicetournaments held in France following the signing of theArmistice. The importance of tennis in the eyes of the AmericanGovernment may be gleaned from the fact that great numbers ofhard courts were erected at the various big cantonments, andorganized play offered to the soldiers.

Many of the leading players who were in training in America atthe time of the National Championship, which was played solely toraise money for the Red Cross, were granted leave from theirvarious stations to take part in the competition. Among the mostnotable were Wallace F. Johnson, Conrad B. Doyle, HaroldThrockmorton, S. Howard Voshell, and myself, all of whom weregranted leave of two weeks or a month. Captain R. N. Williams andEnsigns William M. Johnston and Maurice E. M'Loughlin, and manyother stars, were overseas. Official recognition at such a timeputs a stamp of approval on the game which goes far to justifyits world-wide popularity.

The tennis world lost many of its best in that titanic struggle.The passing of so many from its ranks left gaps that will be hardto fill.

The gallant death of Anthony F. Wilding in Flanders cost the gameone of its greatest players, and finest men. I had not thepleasure of knowing Wilding personally yet I, like all the tennisworld, felt a sense of keen personal loss at his heroic passing.Wilding was a man whose sterling qualities gave even more to thegame than his play, and tennis is better for his all too briefcareer.

America lost some of its finest manhood in the War, and tennispaid its toll. No player was a more likeable personality norpopular figure among the rising stars than John Plaffman, theyoung Harvard man who gave his life in Flanders fields. I cannottouch on the many heroes who made everlasting fame in a biggergame than that which they loved so well. Time is too short. It issufficient to know that the tennis players of the world droppedtheir sport at the call of War, and played as well with death asever they did on the tennis court.

The War is over, please God never to return, and the men are backfrom their marvellous task. The game of War is done, the games ofPeace are again being played. Tennis suffered the world over fromwar's blight, but everywhere the game sprang up in renewed lifeat the close of hostilities. The season of 1919 was one ofreconstruction after the devastation. New figures were standingin prominence where old stars were accustomed to be seen. Thequestion on the lips of all the tennis players was whether thestars of pre-War days would return to their former greatness.

The Championship of the World for 1919 at Wimbledon was anxiouslyawaited. Who would stand forth as the shining light of thatmeeting? Gerald Patterson, the "Australian Hurricane," as thepress called him, came through a notable field and successfullychallenged Norman Brookes for the title. Gobert and Kingscotefell before him, and the press hailed him as a player oftranscendent powers.

The Australian team of Brookes, Patterson, R. V. Thomas, andRandolph Lycett journeyed home to the Antipodes by way of Americato compete in the American Championship. Meanwhile R. N.Williams, W. M. Johnston, and Maurice E. M'Loughlin weredemobilized, and were again on the courts. The AmericanChampionships assumed an importance equal to that of theWimbledon event.

The Australian team of Brookes and Patterson successfullychallenged the American title-holders in doubles, VincentRichards and myself, after defeating the best teams in America,including W. M. Johnston and C. J. Griffin, the former champions.Speculation was rife as to Patterson's ability to triumph in theSingles Championship, and public interest ran high.

The Singles Championship proved a notable triumph for W. M.Johnston, who won a decisive, clear-cut, and deserved victoryfrom a field never equalled in the history of tennis. Johnstondefeated Patterson in a marvellous 5-set struggle, while Brookeslost to me in four sets. M'Loughlin went down to Williams in amatch that showed the famous Comet but a faint shadow of hisformer self. Williams was defeated in sequence sets by me. Thefinal round found Johnston in miraculous form and complete masterof the match from start to finish, and he defeated me in threesequence sets.

Immediately following the championship, the Australian-Americanteam match took place. In this Brookes went down to defeat beforeJohnston in four close sets, while I succeeded in scoring anotherpoint by nosing out Patterson by the same score. Thus 1919 gaveJohnston a clear claim to the title of the World's Premier TennisPlayer. The whole season saw marked increase in tennis interestthroughout the entire world.

I have gone into more detail concerning the season of 1919 than Iotherwise would, to attempt to show the revival of the tennisgame in the public interest, and why it is so.

The evolution of the tennis game is a natural logical one. Thereis a definite cycle of events that can be traced. The picture isclearest in America as the steps of advancements are moredefinitely defined. It is from America that I am going to analysethe growth of modern tennis.

The old saying, "Three generations from shirt sleeves to shirtsleeves," may well be parodied to "Three decades from groundstrokes to ground strokes." The game of tennis is one greatcircle that never quite closes. Progress will not allow acomplete return to the old style. Yet the style, without themethod of thirty years ago, is coming back in vogue. It is apolished, decorated version of the old type game. It is expandedand developed. History tells us that the civilization of the oldGreeks and Romans held many so-called modern luxuries, but notthe methods of acquiring them we have to-day. Just so withtennis; for the ground. stroke game was the style of the past,just as it will be the style of the future; but the modern methodof making ground strokes is a very different thing from the oneused by the old-time stars.

We are on the brink of the upheaval. The next few years will showresults in the tennis game that were not thought of before theWar. Tennis is becoming an organized sport, with skilledmanagement. Modern methods, where efficiency is the watchword, isthe new idea in tennis development.

Tennis is on the verge of the greatest increase in its history.Never before has tennis of all types been so universally played,nor by such great multitudes. Its drawing power is phenomenal,hundreds of thousands of people witnessing matches the worldover, and played during the season of 1920.

There are more players of fame now before the public than at anyprevious time since tennis became established. The standard ofplay of the masses and quality of game of the stars have risentremendously in the last decade. No less an authority than NormanE. Brookes, whose active playing days cover a period of twentyyears, told me during the American Championships, last year atForest Hills, that in his opinion the game in America hadadvanced fully "15" in ten years. He stated that he believed theleading players of to-day were the superior of the Larneds,Dohertys, and Pims of the past.

The most remarkable advance has been along the lines of juniorplay: the development of a large group of boys ranging in agefrom thirteen to eighteen, who will in time replace theJohnstons, Williams, and M'Loughlins of to-day.

American tennis has passed through a series, of revolutionarystages that have changed the complex of the game. English tennishas merely followed its natural development, unaffected byexternal influences or internal upheaval, so that the game todayis a refined product of the game of twenty years ago. Refined butnot vitalized. The World War alone placed its blight on theEnglish game, and changed the even tenor of its way. Naturallythe War had only a devastating effect. No good sprang from it. Itis to the everlasting credit of the French and English thatduring those horrible four years of privation, suffering, anddeath the sports of the nations lived.

The true type of English tennis, from which American tennis hassprung, was the baseline driving game. It is still the same.Well-executed drives, hit leisurely and gracefully from the base-line, appealed to the temperament of the English people. Theydeveloped this style to a perfection well-nigh invincible to copewith from the same position. The English gave the tennis worldits traditions, its Dohertys, and its Smiths.

Tennis development, just as tennis psychology, is largely amatter of geographical distribution. This is so well recognizednow in America that the country is divided in various geographicdistricts by the national association, and sectional associationscarry on the development of their locality under the supervisionof the national body.

Naturally new countries, with different customs, would notdevelop along the same lines as England. America, Australia, andSouth Africa took the English style, and began their tenniscareer on the baseline game. Each of these has since had adistinct yet similar growth—a variance to the original style.American tennis followed the English baseline style through aperiod that developed Dr. Dwight, R. D. Sears, Henry Slocum, andother stars. Tennis, during this time, was gaining a firm holdamong the boys and young men who found the deep-driving gamedevoid of the excitement they desired. Americans always enjoyexperiments, so the rising players tried coming to the net at anyreasonable opening. Gradually this plan became popular, untilDwight Davis and Holcombe Ward surprised the tennis world withtheir new service, now the American twist, and used it as anopening gun in a net attack.

This new system gave us besides Davis and Ward, the Wrennbrothers, George and Robert, Malcolm Whitman, M. G. Chace, andfinally Beals C. Wright. The baseline game had its firm adherentswho followed it loyally, and it reached its crest in the personof William A. Larned. Previous to this time, speed, cyclonichitting and furious smashing were unknown, although rumours ofsome player named M'Loughlin combining these qualities werefloating East from the Pacific Coast. Not much stock was taken inthis phenomenon until 1908, when Maurice Evans M'Loughlin burstupon the tennis world with a flash of brilliancy that earned himhis popular nickname, "The California Comet."

M'Loughlin was the turning-point in American tennis. He made alasting impression on the game that can never be erased. Hispersonality gained him a following and fame, both in America andEngland, that have seldom been equalled in the sporting world.

M'Loughlin was the disciple of speed. Cyclonic, dynamic energy,embodied in a fiery-headed boy, transformed tennis to a game ofbrawn as well as brains. America went crazy over "Red Mac," andall the rising young players sought to emulate his game. No manhas brought a more striking personality, or more generoussportsmanship, into tennis than M'Loughlin. The game owes him agreat personal debt; but this very personal charm that was hismade many players strive to copy his style and methods, whichunfortunately were not fundamentally of the best. M'Loughlin wasa unique tennis player. His whole game was built up on serviceand overhead. His ground strokes were very faulty. By hispersonal popularity M'Loughlin dwarfed the importance of groundstrokes, and unduly emphasized the importance of service.M'Loughlin gave us speed, dash, and verve in our tennis. Itremained for R. N. Williams and W. M. Johnston to restore thebalance of the modern game by solving the riddle of theCalifornian's service. Brookes and Wilding led the way by firstmeeting the ball as it came off the ground. Yet neither of thesetwo wizards of the court successfully handled M'Loughlin'sservice as did Williams and Johnston.

M'Loughlin swept Brookes and Wilding into the discard on thosememorable days in 1914, when the dynamic game of the fiery-headedCalifornian rose to heights it had never attained previously, andhe defeated both men in the Davis Cup. Less than one month laterWilliams, playing as only Williams can, annihilated that mightydelivery and crushed M'Loughlin in the final of the NationalChampionship. It was the beginning of the end for M'Loughlin, foronce his attack was repulsed he had no sound defence to fall backon.

Williams and then Johnston triumphed by the wonderful groundstrokes that held back M'Loughlin's attack.

To-day we are still in the period of service and net attack, withthe cycle closing toward the ground- stroke game. Yet the circlewill never close, for the net game is the final word in attack,and only attack will succeed. The evolution means that the groundstroke is again established as the only modern defence againstthe net player.

Modern tennis should be an attacking service, not necessarilyepoch-making, as was M'Loughlin's, but powerfully offensive, withthe main portion of the play from the baseline in sparring foropenings to advance to the net. Once the opening is made theadvance should follow quickly, and the point ended by a decisivekill. That is the modern American game. It is the game ofAustralia as typified by Patterson schooled under the Brookestutelage. It is the game of France, played by Gobert, Laurentz,and Brugnon. It has spread to South Africa, and is used byWinslow, Norton, and Raymond. Japan sees its possibilities, andKumagae and Shimidzu are even now learning the net attack tocombine with the baseline game. England alone remains obstinatein her loyalty to her old standby, and even there signs of thejoint attack are found in the game of Kingscote.

Tennis has spread so rapidly that the old idea of class and classgame has passed away with so many other ancient, yet snobbish,traditions. Tennis is universally played. The need of properdevelopment of the game became so great in America that theAmerican Lawn Tennis Association organized, in 1917, a system ofdeveloping the boys under eighteen years of age all over theUnited States.

The fundamental idea in the system, which had its origin in theable brain of Julian S. Myrick, President of the United StatesLawn Tennis Association, was to arouse and sustain interest inthe various sections by dealing with local conditions. This wassuccessfully done through a system of local open tournaments,that qualified boys to a sectional championship. These sectionalchampionships in turn qualified the winners for the Nationaljunior Championship, which is held annually in conjunction withthe men's event at Forest Hills.

The success of the system has been stupendous. The growth oftennis in certain localities has been phenomenal. In Philadelphiaalone over 500 boys compete in sanctioned play annually, whilethe city ranking for 1919 contained the names of 88 boys undereighteen, and 30 under fifteen, all of whom had competed in atleast three sanctioned events. The school leagues of the cityhold a schedule of 726 individual matches a year. The success ofthe Philadelphia junior system is due to the many large clubs whogive the use of their courts and the balls for an opentournament. Among these clubs are Germantown Cricket Club, CynwydClub, Philadelphia Cricket, Overbrook Golf Club, Belfield CountryClub, Stenton A. C., Green Point Tennis Clubs and at times MerionCricket Club. The movement has been fostered and built up by theefforts of a small group of men, the most important of whom isPaul W. Gibbons, President of the Philadelphia TennisAssociation, together with Wm. H. Connell of Germantown, the lateHosmer W. Hanna of Stenton, whose untiring efforts aided greatlyin obtaining a real start, Dr. Chuton A. Strong, President of theInterscholastic League, Albert L. Hoskins, for yearsVice-President of the U.S.L.T.A., and others. This plan broughtgreat results. It developed such players as Rodney M. Beck, H. F.Domkin, G. B. Pfingst, Carl Fischer, the most promising boy inthe city, who has graduated from the junior age limit, andCharles Watson (third), who, in 1920, is the Philadelphia juniorChampion, and one of the most remarkable players for a boy ofsixteen I have ever seen.

New York City was fortunate in having F. B. Alexander, the famousInternationalist, to handle the junior tennis there. He, togetherwith Julian S. Myrick, and several other men, built up a seriesof tournaments around New York that produced some remarkableyoung players. It is largely due to the junior system thatVincent Richards has become the marvellous player that he is, atsuch an early age. Second only to Richards, and but a shadebehind, are Harold Taylor and Cecil Donaldson, who have justpassed out of the junior age limit. Charles Wood, the Indoor BoysChampion, is a remarkable youngster.

In New England, particularly in Providence, through the effortsof J. D. E. Jones, junior tennis is rapidly assuming an importantplace, and many young stars who will be heard of in the futureare coming to the fore. By a strange coincidence the list isheaded by the two sons of Jones. They seem to have inheritedtheir father's ability. Arnold W. Jones, the National BoyChampion, is a player of marked ability, with a fine all-aroundgame. Following closely on his heels come J. D. E. Jones, Jr.,and Wm. W. Ingraham. From the South one finds John E. Howard.Around Chicago a group of men, led by Samuel Hardy, captain ofthe 1920 Davis Cup team, and assisted by R. T. Van Arsdale, builtup a magnificent system of tournaments and coaching. Hardy leftChicago and came to New York in 1919; but the work which he soably organized will continue under the supervision of the WesternAssociation. The leading juniors developed in Chicago were LucianWilliams and the Weber brothers, James and Jerry.

From the Pacific Coast, the pioneer in junior development,wonderful boys are continually coming East. A boy's tennis gamematures early in California. M'Loughlin was about eighteen whenhe first came East; Johnston less than twenty-one when he won thenational title the first time; Marvin Griffin and Morgan Fottrellare in 1920 the leading youngsters in California.

The success of the Californians is due largely to the efforts ofDr. Sumner Hardy, brother of Samuel Hardy, and one of the mostremarkable figures in the tennis world. Dr. Hardy practicallycarries the California Association single handed. He is a bigfactor in American tennis success.

From up in Washington State, a fine young player, Marshall Allen,has come to the fore.

Charles S. Garland, the Davis Cup star, is a former junior
Champion of America, and a product of the junior system in
Pittsburg, which is so ably handled by his father, Charles
Garland. Other young stars developing include George Moreland and
Leonard Reed.

Most of the foregoing is irrelevant, I suppose, but I have goneinto detail because I want to prove that America has gone intothe matter of junior developments, carefully, systematically, andhas produced results.

It has been proved conclusively that it is in the schools thatthe most favourable progress could be made. Once tennis is placedon the basis of importance it deserves, the boys will take it up.At present there is a tendency to discount tennis and golf inschool. This is a big mistake, as these two games are the onlyones that a man can play regularly after he leaves college andenters, into business. The school can keep a sport alive. It isschools that kept cricket alive in England, and lack ofscholastic support that killed it in America. The future oftennis in England, France, Australia, Japan, etc., rests in thehands of the boys. If the game is to grow, tennis must beencouraged among the youngsters and played in the schools.

England is faced with a serious problem. Eton and Harrow, the twobig schools, are firm set against tennis. The other institutionsnaturally follow in the lead of these famous schools. The youngergeneration is growing up with little or no knowledge of tennis.One thing that forcibly bore in on my mind, during my trip in1920, was the complete absence of boys of all ages at the varioustournaments. In America youngsters from ten years of age up swarmall over the grounds at big tennis events. I saw very few ofeither at Queen's Club, Wimbledon, Eastbourne, or Edgbaston whereI played. The boys do not understand tennis in England, andnaturally do not care to play it.

The English Lawn Tennis Association is very desirous of buildingup tennis in the schools; but so far has not yet succeeded inbreaking down the old prejudice. It is really a question of lifeor death with English tennis at this time. Major A. R. F.Kingscote, the youngest of the leading players in England, isolder than any man in the American First ten, with the singleexception of Walter T. Hayes. J. C. Parke has stated definitelythat 1920 marked his retirement from the game. He is just underforty. Young players must be found to replace the waning stars.The danger is not immediate, for all the players who proved sogood in 1920 seemed certain of several more years of first- classplay; but what of the next ten years?

The future development of tennis is dependent largely upon thetype of court that will become the standard. All big fixturesto-day are played on grass wherever possible. There is littlequestion but that the grass game is the best. In the first place,it is the old-established custom, and should be maintained ifpossible. Secondly, the game is more skilful and more interestingon turf. Thirdly, grass is far easier on the eyes and feet of theplayers than any other surface.

There are drawbacks to grass courts. Grass cannot grow in allclimates. The grass season opens late and closes early. Theexpense of upkeep is very great, and skilled groundsmen arerequired at all clubs that have grass courts.

The hard court of clay or dirt, cinder, en-tout-cas, or asphaltallows more continuous play and uniform conditions in more kindsof weather. The bound is truer and higher, but the light andsurface are harder on the player. The balls wear light veryrapidly, while racquets wear through quite soon.

The advantages are a much longer season on hard courts, with lesschance of weather interrupting important meetings. The courtsrequire far less care in upkeep than grass.

What has been the actual tendency in the last decade? In Americathe hard courts erected have been approximately nine to onegrass. America is rapidly become a hard-court country. France isentirely on a hard-court basis; there are no grass courts at all.Play in South Africa is entirely on hard courts. Australia andthe British Isles have successfully repelled the hard-courtinvasion thus far, although during the past two years the numberof hard courts put up in England has exceeded grass.

The en-tout-cas court of peculiar red surface is the most popularcomposition in England and the Continent.

There seems little doubt but that the hard court is the comingsurface in the next decade. Grass will continue to be used forthe most important events, but the great majority of the tennisplayed, exclusive of the championships, will be on hard courts.

The result on the game will be one of increasing the value of theground stroke and partially cutting down the net attack, sincethe surface of a hard court is slippery and tends to make it hardto reach the net to volley. Thus the natural attack will become adrive and not a volley. Hard-court play speeds up the groundstrokes, and makes the game more orthodox.

The installation of hard courts universally should spread tennisrapidly, since it will afford more chance to play over a longerperiod. The growth of public courts in the parks and themunicipal play grounds in America has been a big factor in thespread of the game's popularity. Formerly a man or boy had tobelong to a club in order to have an opportunity to play tennis.Now all he needs is a racquet and balls, and he may play on apublic court in his own city. This movement will spread, not onlyin America but throughout the world. England and France have somepublic courts; but their systems are not quite as well organizedas the American.

The branch of tennis which England and France foster, and inwhich America is woefully lax, is the indoor game. Unfortunatelythe majority of the courts abroad have wood surfaces, true butlightning fast. The perfect indoor court should retain its truebound, but slow up the skid of the ball. The most successfulsurface I have ever played upon is battleship linoleum—the heavycovering used on men-of-war. This gives a true, slightly retardedbound, not unlike a very fast grass court.

Indoor play in America is sadly crippled by reason of no adequatefacilities for play. The so-called National Indoor Championshipis held at the Seventh Regiment Armoury in New York City on awood floor, with such frightful lighting that it is impossible toplay real tennis. The two covered courts at Longwood Club,Boston, are very fine, well lighted, with plenty of space. Thereis a magnificent court at Providence, and another at Buffalo.Utica boasts of another, while there are several fine courts,privately owned, on Long Island. New York City uses the bigarmouries for indoor play; but the surface and light in these arenot fit for real tennis. The Brooklyn Heights Casino has the onlyadequate court in the Metropolitan district.

Philadelphia and Chicago, cities of enormous populations andgreat tennis interest, have no courts or facilities for indoorplay. This condition must be rectified in America if we wish tokeep our supremacy in the tennis world. The French players areremarkable on wood. Gobert is said to be the superior of anyplayer in the world, when playing under good conditions indoors.The game of tennis is worthy of having all types of play withinreach of its devotees. Why should a player drop his sport inOctober because the weather is cold? Indoor play during thewinter means an improvement from season to season. Lack of it ispractically stagnation or retrogression.

The future will see a growth of hard-court play the world over.Grass must fight to hold its position. Indoor play will come moreand more into vogue.

CHAPTER XI. THE PROBABLE FUTURE OF THE GAME

What will be the outcome of the world-wide boom in tennis? Willthe game change materially in the coming years? Time, alone, cananswer; but with that rashness that seizes one when theopportunity to prophesy arrives and no one is at hand to cry"Hold, hold," I dare to submit my views on the coming years ininternational tennis.

I do not look to see a material change in the playing rules. Arevival of the footfault fiend, who desires to handicap theserver, is international in character and, like the poor, "alwayswith us." The International Federation has practically adopted afootfault rule for 1921 that prohibits the server lifting onefoot unless replaced behind the baseline. It is believed thiswill do away with the terrific services. The only effect I cansee from it is to move the server back a few inches, or possiblya foot, while he delivers the same service and follows in with alittle more speed of foot. It will not change the game at all.Sir Oliver Lodge, the eminent scientist, has joined the advocatesof but one service per point. This seems so radical and in all souseless, since it entirely kills service as other than a mereformality, and puts it back where it was twenty-five years ago,that I doubt if even the weight of Sir Oliver Lodge's eminentopinion can put it over. To allow one service is to hand the gamemore fully into the receiver's hands than it now rests in theserver's.

The playing rules are adequate in every way, and the perfectaccord with which representatives of the various countries meetand play, happily, successfully, and what is more important,annually, is sufficient endorsement of the fundamentalprinciples. The few slight variations of the different countriesare easily learned and work no hardships on visiting players. Whychange a known successful quantity for an unknown? It seldompays.

The style of play is now approaching a type which I believe willprove to have a long life. To-day we are beginning to combine thevarious styles in one man. The champion of the future willnecessarily need more equipment than the champion of to-day. Thepresent shows us the forehand driving of Johnston, the service ofMurray, the volleying of Richards, the chop of Wallace F.Johnson, the smash of Patterson, the half volley of Williams, andthe back hand of Pell. The future will find the greatest playerscombining much of these games. It can be done if the player willstudy. I believe that every leading player in the world in 1950will have a drive and a chop, fore- and backhand from thebaseline. He will use at least two styles of service, since onewill not suffice against the stroke of that period. He will be avolleyer who can safely advance to the net, yet his attack willbe based on a ground game. He must smash well. In short, Ibelieve that the key to future tennis success lies in variety ofstroke. The day of the one-stroke player is passing. Each yearsees the versatile game striding forward by leaps and bounds.

The future champion of the world must be a man of keen intellect,since psychology is assuming the importance that is its due. Hemust train earnestly, carefully, and consistently. The day ofplaying successful tennis and staying up till daybreak is over.The game is too fast and too severe for that. As competitionincreases the price of success goes up; but its worth increasesin a greater ratio, for the man who triumphs in the World'sChampionship in 1950 will survive a field of stars beyond ourwildest dreams in 1920.

What of the various countries? America should retain her place ator near the top, for the boys we are now developing should notonly make great players themselves, but should carry on the workof training the coming generations.

England has but to interest her youth in the game to hold herplace with the leaders. I believe it will be done. I look to seegreat advances made in tennis among the boys in England in thenext few years. I believe the game will change to conform more tothe modern net attack. England will never be the advancedtennis-playing country that her colonies are, for her wholeatmosphere is one of conservatism in sport. Still her game willchange. Already a slight modification is at work. The next decadewill see a big change coming over the style of English tennis.The wonderful sporting abilities of the Englishman, his abilityto produce his best when seemingly down and out mean that, nomatter how low the ebb to which tennis might fall, the inherentabilities of the English athlete would always bring it up. Isound pessimistic about the immediate future. I am not, providedEnglish boyhood is interested in the game.

Japan is the country of the future. There is no more remarkablerace of students on the globe than the Japanese. They liketennis, and are coming with increasing numbers to ourtournaments. They prove themselves sterling sportsmen andremarkable players. I look to see Japan a power in tennis in thenext twenty-five years.

France, with her brilliant temperamental unstable people, willalways provide interesting players and charming opponents. I donot look to see France materially change her presentposition—which is one of extreme honour, of great friendliness,and keen competition. Her game will not greatly rise, nor willshe lose in any way the prestige that is hers.

It will be many long years before the players of those enemycountries, who plunged the world into the horrible baptism ofblood from which we have only just emerged, will ever be met bythe players of the Allies. Personally, I trust I may not seetheir re-entry into the game. Not from the question of theindividuals, but from the feeling which will not down. There isno need to deal at this time with the future of Germany andAustria.

Australasia and South Africa, the great colonies of the BritishEmpire, should be on the edge of a great tennis wave. I look tosee great players rise in Australasia to refill the gaps left bythe passing of Wilding and the retirement of Brookes. It takesgreat players to fill such gaps; but great players are bred fromthe traditions of the former masters.

The early season of 1921 saw a significant and to my way oflooking at it, wise move on the part of New Zealand when the NewZealand tennis association withdrew from the Australasian tennisassociation and decided to compete for the Davis Cup in futureyears as a separate nation.

No one can deny the great help Australia has been to New Zealandin tennis development, but the time has come now for New Zealandto stand on her own. Since the regrettable death of Anthony F.Wilding, in whose memory New Zealand has a tennis asset andstandard that will always hold a place in world sport, the NewZealand tennis players have been unable to produce a player ofskill enough to make the Davis Cup team of Australasia. It hasfallen to Australia with Norman E. Brookes, to whose unfailingsupport and interest Australasian tennis owes its progress sincethe war, G. L. Patterson, W. H. Anderson, R. L. Heath, and PatO'Hara Wood to uphold the traditions of the game.

The Davis Cup challenge round of 1921 was staged in New Zealandin accord with the agreement between Australia and New Zealandand also in memory of A. F. Wilding. The tremendous interest inthe play throughout the entire country showed the time was ripefor a drastic step forward if the step was ever to be taken. Soafter careful consideration the split of Australia and NewZealand has taken place. What will this mean to New Zealand?First it means that it will be years before another Davis Cupmatch will be staged on her shores, for it takes time and plentyof it to produce a winning team, but at the time, the fact isborne in on the tennis playing faction in New Zealand that assoon as they desire to challenge, their players will gain theopportunity of International competition.

Experience matures players faster than anything else and I amsure that the move that will place a team of New Zealand playersin the field in the Davis Cup will be the first and biggest stepforward to real world power in tennis. New Zealand produced oneWilding, why should not another appear?

I was tremendously impressed by the interest existing among theNew Zealand boys in tennis. I met a great number during my fewweeks in Auckland and seldom have seen such a magnificentphysical type coupled with mental keenness. These boys, given theopportunity to play under adequate supervision and coaching,should produce tennis players of the highest class.

The New Zealand association has made a drastic move. I hope theyhave the wisdom to see far enough ahead to provide plenty of playfor their young players and if possible to obtain adequatecoaches in the clubs and schools.

Frankly I see no players of Davis Cup calibre now in New Zealand.
I did see many boys whom I felt if given the chance would become
Davis Cup material.

The break with New Zealand will have no effect on Australia,except to relieve a slight friction that has existed. Australiahas plenty of material coming to insure a succession of fineteams for the Davis Cup in the future.

Both Australia and New Zealand handle their tennis in the countryin a most efficient manner and the game seems to me to beprogressing in a natural and healthy manner. The next ten yearswill decide the fate of New Zealand tennis. If they organise asystematic development of their boys I feel convinced they willgain a place of equality with Australia. If they do not seizetheir opening now, tennis will not revive until some genius ofthe game such as Norman E. Brookes arises in their midst fromonly the Lord knows where.

The future should see America and Australia fighting forsupremacy in the tennis world, with England and France close ontheir heels, to jump in the lead at the first faltering.

It is only a matter of time before the last differences betweenthe International Federation and the America Association arepatched up. The fundamental desires of each, to spread the growthof tennis, are the same. Sooner or later the bar will fall, and atruly International Federation, worldwide in scope, will follow.

I look to see the Davis Cup matches gain in importance and publicinterest as each year goes by. The growth of the public interestin the game is seen at every hand. Wimbledon must seek newquarters. The new grounds of the All England Club will provideaccommodation for 20,000 to witness the championships. Thisenormous stadium is the result of public pressure, owing to thecrowds that could not be accommodated at the old grounds.

Westside Club, Forest Hills, where the American Championship washeld, is planning accommodation for 25,000, provided that theyare awarded the championship for a long term of years. Davis Cupmatches are now drawing from 10,000 to 15,000 where theaccommodation is available. What will the future hold?

I believe that 1950 will find the game of tennis on a planeundreamed of to-day. Tennis is still in its infancy. May I havethe pleasure to help in rocking the cradle.

My task is completed. I have delved into the past, analysed thepresent, and prophesied the future, with a complete disregard ofconventions and traditions.

The old order changeth, and I trust that my book may aid slightlyin turning the tennis thought in the direction of organizeddevelopments. The day of self is past. The day of co-operation isdawning. It is seen in the junior tennis, the municipal tennis,and the spirit of international brotherhood in the game.

Assistance is necessary to success in any venture. My book hasbeen made possible only by the aid afforded me by several of mycompanions on the Davis Cup team trip. The task of arranging thematerial in coherent order and proper style is one of the mostimportant points. I owe a debt of gratitude to Mrs. Samuel Hardy,wife of our captain, for her never-failing interest and keenjudgment in the matter of style.

Mr. Hardy, with his great knowledge of the game of tennis, asplayer, official, and organizer, freely gave of his store ofexperience, and to him I owe much that is interesting in thetactics of the game.

R. N. Williams, my team-mate, was always a willing critic andgenerous listener, and his playing abilities and decided ideas onthe game gave much material that found its way into these pages.I wish to express my gratitude for his able assistance.

Charles S. Garland, my doubles partner and close friend, gavenever-wavering faith and a willing ear to my ravings overstrokes, tactics, and theories, while his orthodox views ontennis acted as a stop on my rather Bolshevik ideas.

To all these people I express my thanks for their part in anysuccess I may attain with this book. I have a firm belief in thefuture of tennis. I recommend it to all. It gives firm friends, ahealthy body, a keen mind, and a clean sport. It calls forth thebest that is in you, and repays you in its own coin.

THE 1921 SEASON

The season of 1921 was the most remarkable year in tennis historythroughout the whole world. More tennis was played and morepeople viewed it than ever before.

The climax of famous Davis Cup competition was reached whenEngland, France, Japan, Australia, the Philippines, Denmark,Belgium, Argentine, Spain, India, Canada and Czecho-Slovakiachallenged for the right to play America, the holding nation.This wonderful representation naturally produced not only manynew stars, but also thousands of new enthusiasts in the variouscountries where the matches were played.

The early rounds saw several brilliant matches and naturally somedefaults. Argentine and the Philippines could not put a team inthe field at the last moment. Belgium, after defeatingCzecho-Slovakia, was unable to finance her team to America tomeet the winner of England and Australasia.

England scored a fine victory over Spain when Randolph Lycett, F.Gordon Lowe and Max E. Woosnam defeated Manuel Alonzo and Countde Gomar in a close meeting. Notwithstanding his defeat byLycett, Manuel Alonzo proved himself one of the great players ofthe world and one of the most attractive personalities in tennis.

India sprang a sensation by defeating France in their match inParis. Sleen, Jacob and Deane showed great promise for thefuture. France was crippled owing to the loss of A. H. Gobert andWilliam Laurentz, the former through a seriously sprained anklesustained in the World's Championship at Wimbledon, and thelatter through illness. Samazieuhl, the new French champion, andBrugnon could not cope with the steadiness of the Indian starsand the team from the Orient won 3 matches to 2. Meanwhile theAustralian team of J. O. Anderson, J. B. Hawkes, C. V. Todd andNorman Peach had arrived in America and journeyed to Canada,where they swamped their Colonial cousins easily. Norman E.Brookes, Gerald L. Patterson and Pat O'Hara Wood were unable toaccompany the team, so the greatest contender for the title wasweakened appreciably.

The Australians decisively defeated the Danish team of Tegner and
Van Ingersley at Cleveland, winning with ease. They proceeded to
Pittsburgh to await the arrival of the English players.

England sent her invading team, unfortunately without theservices of Col. A. R. F. Kingscote and Randolph Lycett, who wereunable to go owing to business affairs. J. C. Parke, her famousinternational star, was also out of the game, having retired fromactive competition last year. The English team was made up ofGordon Lowe, Max Woosnam, J. C. Gilbert and O. E. H. Turnbull.They were accompanied by that delightful author and critic A.Wallis Meyers.

The English met the Australians at Pittsburgh in July. The latterwon three matches to two with J. O. Anderson, the outstandingfigure of a well played meeting. The tall Australian defeatedboth Lowe and Woosnam in the singles and aided in the doublesvictory, thus scoring all the points for his team.

Meanwhile the Indian team had arrived in America and proceeded to
Chicago, where they met the Japanese team of Kumagae and
Shimidzu. The battle of the Orient resulted in a victory for the
Nipponese.

The final round found Australia playing Japan in the famous oldtennis center of Newport, R. I., where the National Singles solong held sway. It was a bitter struggle, with the Australianswithin two little points of victory in two matches theyafterwards lost. Shimidzu and Kumagae took all the singles, butKumagae was two sets down to Hawkes and one to two down toAnderson. Thus Japan in its first year in Davis Cup competitionearned the right to challenge America for the treasured trophy.

It was a marvellous meeting of these two teams. Over 40,000people watched the players in three days. Although America wonall five matches, Shimidzu came within two points of defeating mein straight sets and carried Johnston to a bitter four setstruggle.

The Cup is safe for another year but the new blood infused intothe competition by such men as Shimidzu, Alonzo, Woosnam,Anderson and Hawkes shows clearly that America must keep workingor we will fall from our present position. It is a healthy thingfor the game that this is so. I hope we will see many more newplayers of equal promise next year.

The United States Lawn Tennis Association, following its policyof co-operation with the Internation Federation, decided to senda team to France and England for the championships. The personnelof the team was Mrs. Franklin 1. Mallory, Miss Edith Sigourney,Arnold W. Jones (boy champion of America, 1919), and myself. J.D. E. Jones, father of Arnold, himself a tennis player of renown,accompanied the team, as did Mr. Mallory.

The invading tennis players sailed May 12th on the Mauretania toCherbourg and from there journeyed to Paris, where they engagedin the Hard Court Championship of the world.

The first week of the stay was devoted to practice on the courtsat the Stad Francais, St. Cloud, where the championship was held.The team were the guests of the Racing Club at a most delightfulluncheon and shortly afterward dined as the guests of the TennisClub of Paris.

The finals of the championship of France were held during ourstay and, greatly to our surprise, A. H. Gobert, the defendingtitle holder, fell a victim to his old enemy, heat, and went downto defeat before Samazieuhl. The Hard Court championships of theworld produced a series of the most sensational upsets in thehistory of the game, a series, I might add, that did much toallow me to win the event. Gobert lost to Nicholas Mishu in thefirst round. Alonzo, after defeating Samazieuhl, went down todefeat at hands of Laurentz, who in turn collapsed to Tegner.Fate pursued the winners, for Tegner was eliminated by Washer,who came through to the final against me. Either Alonzo orLaurentz should have been finalists if the unexpected had notoccurred, and either would have been a hard proposition for meparticularly in my condition. I had been taken ill on my arrivalin Paris and was still far from well. However, Fortune smiled onme and I succeeded in defeating Washer 6-3, 6-3, 6-3.

Meanwhile the long awaited meeting between Mlle. Lenglen and Mrs.
Mallory was at hand. Mrs. Mallory had come through one side of
the tournament after a bitter battle with Mme. Billoutt (Mlle.
Brocadies) in the semi final.

Mlle. Lenglen had proceeded in her usual leisurely fashion to thefinals with the loss of but two games.

What a meeting these two great players, Mrs. Mallory and Mlle.Lenglen, had! Every seat in the stands sold and every inch ofstanding room crowded! It was a marvellous match, both womenplaying great tennis. Mlle. Lenglen had consistently better depthand more patience. She out- manoeuvred the American champion andwon 6-2, 6-3. The match was far closer than this one-sided scoresounds. Every rally was long drawn out and bitterly contested,but the French girl had a slight superiority that brought her awell deserved victory.

A. H. Gobert and W. Laurentz retained their doubles title afterone of the most terrific struggles of their careers in thesemi-final round against Arnold Jones and me. The boy and I hadpreviously put out Samazieuhl and his partner in three sets andjust nosed out the Spanish Davis Cup team, Manuel Alonzo andCount de Gomar.

The semi final between Gobert and Laurentz and the Americansbrought out a capacity audience that literally jumped to its feetand cheered during the sparkling rallies of the five bitterlycontesting sets. Just as Gobert drove his terrific service acepast me for the match, Laurentz suddenly collapsed and fainteddead away on the court. It was a dramatic end to a sensationalmatch.

The scene then shifted to England, where the American teamjourneyed across the Channel to prepare for the Grass Courtchampionship of the world at Wimbledon. My preparation consistedof a hasty journey to a hospital, where a minor operation put meto bed until the day Wimbledon started.

The remainder of the team journeyed first to Beckenham and thento Roehampton for their first grass court play of the season.Mrs. Mallory met defeat at the hands of Mrs. Beamish at Beckenhamwhile the other members fell by the wayside at sundry points.Mrs. Mallory won Roehampton, decisively defeating Miss PhillisHowkins in the final. Francis T. Hunter, another American whojoined the team in England, although he was abroad on business,scored a victory in the men's event at Roehampton.

The world's championship at Wimbledon was another series ofsensational matches and startling upsets. The draw as usual wastopheavy, all the strength in the upper half with Frank Hunterand B. I. C. Norton in the lower. Every day saw its featurematches produce the unexpected. Shimidzu and Lycett battled fornearly four hours in a struggle that combined all the virtues andvices of tennis and pugilism. Col. A. R. F. Kingscote, afterthree sensational victories over Fisher, Dixon and Lowe,collapsed against Alonzo and was decisively defeated. Shimidzulooked a certain winner against Alonzo when he led at 2 sets to 1and 4-1, but the Spaniard rose to great heights and bysensational play pulled out the match in five sets.

Norton and Hunter, after several close calls, met in the semifinal. Norton took two sets and led 5-3 in the third only to haveHunter follow in Alonzo's footsteps and pull out the set and winthe next. Here Norton again took command and ran out the match.

The Norton-Alonzo match in the final round was a sensationalreversal. The Spaniard seemed assured of victory when he took twosets and led at 5-3 and 30-all, but the last-minute jinx thatpursued the tournament fell upon him, for Norton came to lifeand, playing sensational tennis, pulled out the match and earnedthe right to me in the challenge round.

Then the jinx arose again and this time Babe Norton was thevictim. Such a match as that challenge round produced! I went onthe court feeling far from well and very much run down. Babe wason the crest but very nervous. He ran away with the first twosets with great ease. The third set I improved. Babe, afterdropping three games, decided to let it go. The fourth set foundthe crowd excited and rather noisy. Norton became annoyed becausehe felt I was bothered, and he blew up. He simply threw away thefourth set from sheer nerves.

The fifth set was terrible. Norton had come to earth and wasplaying well while I for the first time in the match had somecontrol of the ball. Norton finally led at 4-5 and 30-40 on myservice, with the championship one point away.

We had a long rally. Desperately I hit down the line. I was socertain my shot was going out I started for the net to shakehands. The ball fell on the line and Babe in the excitement ofthe moment put his return out by inches. It was a life andfortunately for me I seized my chance and succeeded in pullingout the match and retaining the championship. Norton deserved towin, for nothing but luck saved me as I walked to the net,thinking my shot was out. Norton is the youngest man to have wonthe All Comers Singles. He is just 21.

The championships had two sad moments. One was the absence of J.C. Parke, due to retirement from singles. The other was theretirement of A. W. Gore, the famous veteran, after 30 years aparticipant in the championships.

The women's events found an even more unfortunate draw than themen. All the strength was in one eight. Miss Ryan defeated MissK. McKane in the first round and Mrs. Beamish her old rival inthe second. She met Mrs. Mallory in the third.

For one set Mrs. Mallory played the finest tennis of her careerto that time and in fact equal even to her play against SuzanneLenglen in America. She ran off six games in ten minutes. MissRyan, cleverly changing her game, finally broke up the perfectionof Mrs. Mallory's stroking and just nosed her out in the next twosets. It was a well deserved victory.

Miss Ryan easily won the tournament and challenged Mlle. Lenglen,but her old jinx in the form of Suzanne again proved too much andshe played far below her best. The French girl easily retainedher title, winning 6-2, 6-0.

The journey of the wandering tennis troupe abroad was far fromthe most important development of the year. The American seasonwas producing remarkable results. Every year produces itsoutstanding figure and the early months of 1921 saw VincentRichards looming large on the tennis horizon.

The first sensation of the year was the decisive defeat inflictedon Kumagae by young Richards at Amakassin Club, New York. Thiswas immediately followed by Kumagae's victory over Dick Williams,avenging Williams' win at Palm Beach some months before. Kumagaescored in the intercity match for the George Myers Church Trophyplayed in 1921 in Philadelphia. The following day Wallace F.Johnson defeated Kumagae in one of the most terrific battle ofthe year.

Vincent Richards went through the season to the middle of Julywithout sustaining a defeat. He won five tournaments.

I arrived home from France and England July 12th and journeyed atonce to Providence where I took charge of the Rhode Island StateChampionship at the Agawam Hunt Club. Zenzo Shimidzu hadaccompanied me to America on the Olympic and made his firsttournament appearance two days after landing at Greenwich, Conn.,before coming to Providence. He went down to unexpected defeat atthe hands of S. H. Voshell.

The Providence tournament held the greatest entry list of anyevent except the National Singles itself. The singles hadShimidzu, Williams, Richards, C. S. Garland, Watson Washburn, S.H. Voshell, Samuel Hardy, N. W. Niles, many young Westerncollegiate stars and myself. Ichiya Kumagae arrived to playdoubles with Shimidzu in preparation for the Davis Cup.

Then the fun began. Shimidzu again fell before the net attack ofVoshell, who was himself defeated by the calm quiet steadiness ofWashburn. Garland went out at my hands. Williams faced certaindefeat when Niles led him 4-0 in the final set, but in one of hissuper-tennis streaks tore through to victory, only to collapseagainst Vincent Richards and suffer a crushing defeat 6-2, 6-2 inthe semi-final. Meanwhile Washburn had dropped by the wayside tome 6-2, 6-2 and young Richards and I took up our annual battle.

Youth is cruel. The world is cruel. Life is hard. I know it, forVinnie, with care and discretion, quietly led me along the Roadof the Has-Beens, where he deposited me to the tune of 6-1, 6-2,1-6, 6-0.

Richards, with the scalps of Kumagae, Williams, Voshell andmyself dangling at his belt, seemed destined for the championshipitself. Alas, pride goeth before a fall. The fall came to Vinniesuddenly.

The following week was the Longwood Singles. "Little Bill"Johnston arrived East, together with the rest of his Californiateam, the day the event started. Johnston was the holder of thetrophy and was called on to meet the winner of the tournament inthe challenge round.

The tournament was mainly Dick Williams. He defeated Shimidzu inthe final. Kumagae was his victim in an earlier round.

Willis E. Davis, second string of the California team, wasunexpectedly defeated by N. W. Niles, who himself went the longroad via Shimidzu. The little Japanese star scored anotherimportant victory when he defeated W. F. Johnson.

Williams met Johnston in the challenge round with chances bright.Somehow Little Bill has Dick's number these days and againdecisively defeated him. Vincent Richards wisely rested the weekof Longwood, preparing for the later events. I was off in thewoods at Camp Winnipesaukee recuperating from the effects ofillness in England.

Newport followed on the heels of Longwood. Newport should becalled Washburn Week. Here the judicial Watty methodically placedJohnston and Williams in the discard on successive days. It was anotable performance.

Williams took an awful revenge on Vinnie Richards when the twomet in the third round. It was Williams' day and he blew thelittle Yonkers boy off the court in one of the finest displays ofthe whole year. Shimidzu, who had again scored a victory overWallace Johnson, was taken suddenly ill with ptomaine poisoning,the night before he was to meet Williams in the semi final, andcompelled to default. It robbed him of a chance to gain revengefor his defeat at Longwood. Washburn played the best tennis ofhis life, in defeating Johnston and Williams, which, coupled withRichards' crushing defeat, placed Washburn on the Davis Cup team.

A sensational upset occurred in the first round when L. B. Ricedefeated W. E. Davis. Rice has made a great improvement this yearand bids fair to go far.

Seabright, the next week, found Little Bill Johnston playing thestellar role. Washburn took a week off but Williams and Richardswere in the competition.

Johnston crushed Richards when the two met, in a display ofaggressive tennis so remarkable that the boy was helpless beforeit. Richards was stale and below form, but even if he had been athis best, he could not have withstood Johnston's attack. LittleBill followed this up by sweeping Williams off the court byanother marvellous streak of well nigh perfect tennis.

Southampton and the Women's National Championship conflicted thenext week. The story of Mrs. Mallory's sensational triumph andsuccessful defense of her title is told elsewhere in this book.

Southampton, as always, proved the goat, for almost all theleading players took a week's rest before the National DoublesChampionship.

The English Davis Cup team, Willis E. Davis, Vincent Richards andthe Kinsey brothers, Bob and Howard, were the leading stars. Theevent narrowed to Davis and Richards in the finals with no upsetsof a startling nature. Davis had had a very poor record all year,while Richards boasted of the finest list of victories of theseason. On the other hand the boy was over-tennised and stale andit proved his undoing, for after one set, which he won easily,the sting went out of his game and Davis took the match in foursets.

The championships were just ahead. The Doubles held at LongwoodClub, Boston, found several teams closely matched. Williams andWashburn, with the Rhode Island State and Newport to theircredit, were the favorites for the title. "Little Bill" Johnstonand W. E. Davis and Bob and Howard Kinsey of California had bothpressed them closely. Vincent Richards and I teamed together forthe first time since N. E. Brookes and G. L. Patterson had wonthe title from us in 1919. Samuel Hardy and S. H. Voshell were apair of veterans who needed watching.

Williams and Washburn had a close call in the third round whenHardy and Voshell led 3-1 in the fifth set, but an unfortunatemiss of an easy volley by Hardy and a footfault on game point at3-4 and 30-40 by Voshell turned the tide and the favorites weresafe. Johnston and Davis had several chances in the semi-finalbut Davis was too uncertain and Bill too anxious and they tossedaway the opportunities.

Vinnie and I met the Kinseys in the semi-final and after chasingtheir lobs all over the court for hours and smashing until ourbacks ached, we finally pulled out three sequence sets. I haveseldom seen a team work together more smoothly than the Kinseys.

The final match between Williams and Washburn, Richards and I fortwo sets was as sensational and closely contested doubles as everfeatured a national championship. Our slight superiority inreturning service gave us just enough margin to pull out thefirst two sets 14-12, 12-10. Then Richards went mad. There is noother way to describe it. Every time he got his racquet on a ballit went for a clean placement. I stood around and watched him.Almost single-handed this remarkable boy won the last set 6-2.

The Davis Cup challenge round stretched itself between theDoubles and Singles Championship. There was no work except for uspoor hard-working players who were on the team. The rest was ablessing to Richards, who needed it badly, as he was tired anddrawn.

Following the American victory in the Davis Cup, the sceneshifted to Philadelphia and the eyes of the tennis world werecentered on the Germantown Cricket Club, where the greatesttournament of all time was to be held. Players of seven nationswere to compete. The Davis Cup stars of England, Australia andJapan added their brilliance to that of all the leading Americanplayers. Six American champions, W. A. Larned, W. J. Clothier, R.N. Williams, R. L. Murray, W. M. Johnston, and myself wereentered.

Fate took a hand in the draw and for once I think did so badlythat it settled the "blind draw" forever. In one sixteenJohnston, Richards, Shimidzu, Murray and I were bunched. The howlof protest from tennis players and public alike was so loud thatthe blind draw surely will go by the board at the coming annualmeeting. Since the foregoing was written, the prophecy has provedtrue. The annual meeting, Feb. 4th, 1922, adopted the "SeededDraw" unanimously.

Every day produced its thrills, but play ran singularly true toform in most cases. Illness took a hand in the game, compellingthe defaults of R. L. Murray, Ichiya Kumagae and W. A. Larned.

The early rounds saw but one upset. Norman Peach, Captain of theAustralasian Davis Cup team, was eliminated by William W.Ingraham, of Providence, one of the best junior players inAmerica. It was a splendid victory and shows the fruit our juniordevelopment system is already bearing. Peach had not been wellbut for all that he played a splendid game and all credit is dueIngraham for his victory.

The second day's play saw a remarkable match when W. E. Davisdefeated C. V. Todd of Australia after the latter led him by twosets. Davis steadily improved and by rushing the net succeeded inbreaking up Todd's driving game. Todd unfortunately pulled amuscle in his side that seriously hampered him in the fifth set.

Wallace F. Johnson, playing magnificent tennis, eliminated WatsonWashburn in one of the brainiest, hardest fought matches of thewhole tournament.

Johnson was very steady and outlasted Washburn in the first set,which he won. Washburn then took to storming the net and carriedoff two sets decisively. The strain took its toll and he wasperceptibly slower when the fourth set opened. Johnson ran himfrom corner to corner, or tossed high lobs when Washburn took thenet. It proved too much for even Washburn to stand, and thePhiladelphian won the next two sets and with it the match. Manypeople considered it a great upset. Personally I expected it, asI know how dangerous Johnson may be.

The Johnston-Richards match and my meeting with Shimidzu came onthe third day. Fully 15,000 people jammed themselves around thecourt and yelled, clapped and howled their excitement through theafternoon. It was a splendidly behaved gallery but a veryenthusiastic one.

Richards, eager to avenge his crushing defeat by Johnston atSeabright, started with a rush. "Little Bill" was uncertain andrather nervous. Richards ran away with the first two sets almostbefore Johnston realized what was happening. The tennis Richardsplayed in these sets was almost unbeatable. Johnston nervedhimself to his task and held even to 3-all in the third. Here hebroke through and Richards, I think foolishly, made littleattempt to pull out the set. The boy staked all on the fourthset. Johnston led at 5-3 but Richards, playing desperately,pulled up to 6-5 and was within two points of the match at 30-allon Johnston's service. It was his last effort. Johnston took thegame and Richards faded away. His strength failed him and thematch was Johnston's.

I hit a good streak against Shimidzu and ran away with threestraight sets more or less easily.

Meantime one of the most sensational upsets of the whole
tournament was taking place on an outside court where Stanley W.
Pearson of Philadelphia was running the legs off N. W. Niles of
Boston and beating him in five sets.

"Little Bill" Johnston and I met the next day in what was thedeciding match of the tournament, even though it was only thefourth round. Every available inch of space was jammed by anoverflow gallery when we took the count. It was a bitter matchfrom the first point. We were both playing well. In the earlystages Little Bill had a slight edge, but after one set thebalance shifted and I held the whip hand to the end.

The same day Dick Williams went down to sudden and unexpecteddefeat at the hands of J. O. Anderson of Australia in five wellplayed sets. It was a typical Williams effort, glorious tennisone minute followed by inexcusable lapses. The Australian wassteady and clever throughout.

The keen speculation as to the outcome of the tournament fell offafter the meeting of Johnston and I, and with it a decrease inattendance. This ran very high, however, again reaching capacityon the day of the finals.

The round before the semi finals saw a terrific struggle betweentwo Californians, Bob Kinsey and Willis E. Davis. Kinsey haddefeated Davis in the Metropolitan Championship the week beforeand was expected to repeat, but Davis managed to outlast his teamand nosed out the match. Kinsey collapsed on the court fromexhaustion as the last point was played.

Gordon Lowe went down to me in a fine match while J. O. Andersonand Wallace Johnson completed the Quartet of semi finalists,

I finally got my revenge on Davis for the many defeats he hadinflicted on me in years gone by. Wallace Johnson scored amagnificent victory over J. O. Anderson in four sets after theAustralian led at a set all, 5-2, and 40-15. Johnson ran thevisiting Davis Cup star all over the court and finally pulled outthe match in one of the finest displays of court generalship Ihave ever seen.

The finals was more or less of a family party. It was anall-Philadelphian affair, two Philadelphians competing with14,000 more cheering them on.

Johnson was unfortunate. Saturday the match was started under adark sky on a soft court that just suited him. I have seldom seenJohnson play so well; as always, his judgment was faultless. Wedivided games with service with monotonous regularity. The scorewas 5-all when it began to drizzle. The court, soft at best thatday, grew more treacherous and slippery by the minute. Johnson'sshots hardly left the ground. He broke my service at 7-all whenthe rain materially increased. He reached 40-15 but, with thecrowd moving to shelter and the rain falling harder every minute,he made the fatal error of hurrying and netted two easy shots fordeuce, A moment more and the game was mine and the match calledat 8-all.

Play was resumed on Monday before a capacity gallery. By mutualagreement the match was played over from the beginning. I hadlearned my lesson the previous day and opened with a rush. Thehot sun and strong wind had hardened the court and Johnson'sshots rose quite high. It was my day and fortunately for me Imade the most of it.

I consider that match the best tennis of my life. I beat Johnson6-1, 6-3, 6-1 in 45 minutes. Thus fell the curtain on theofficial tennis season.

The East-West matches in Chicago proved more or less of ananti-climax. Johnston was ill and unable to compete, whileWallace Johnson, Williams, Washburn and Shimidzu could not play.Several remarkable matches featured the three days' play in theWindy City. The most remarkable was the splendid victory of J. O.Anderson over me in five sets, the final one of which hung up aworld's record for tournament play by going to 19-17. Frank T.Anderson defeated Robert Kinsey in five sets, a splendidperformance, while S. H. Voshell scored over W. E. Davis.

The Ranking Committee faces a hard task on the season's play. Letus look at the records of some of the American players, and a fewof our visitors.

1. W. M. Johnston Beat V. Richards 2, Williams (2), Kumagae,Shimidzu, Roland Roberts, Davis and others. Lost to Washburn,Tilden, Roberts.

2. R. N. Williams 2d. Beat Richards, Shimidzu, Kumagae (2),Voshell and others. Lost to Johnston (2), Richards, J. O.Anderson, Kumagae.

3. Vincent Richards Beat Tilden, Richards, Kumagae (2), Shimidzu(2), (in exhibition at Toronto), Voshell, Hawkes, Lost toJohnston (2), Williams, Davis.

4. Ishiya Kumagae Beat Williams, Voshell, Anderson, Hawkes. Lostto Johnston, Tilden, Williams, Richards.

5. Zenzo Shimidzu Beat Wallace Johnson (2), Anderson, Hawkes,Niles. Lost to Johnston, Tilden (2), Voshell (2). Richards (2)(in exhibitions).

6. Wallace Johnson Beat Watson, Washburn, Anderson. Lost toTilden, Shimidzu (2).

7. Watson Washburn Beat Williams, Johnston, Voshell. Lost toWallace Johnson, Tilden, Atherton Richards (a most sensationalupset).

8. J. O. Anderson of Australia Beat R. N. Williams, Tilden,Hawkes, Lowe. Lost to Wallace Johnson, Kumagae, Shimidzu.

9. S. H. Voshell Beat Shimidzu (2) , Davis. Lost to Richards,Williams, Washburn, Neer (an upset), Allen Behr (a gift).

10. W. E. Davis Beat Richards, R. Kinsey, Lowe. Lost to Niles, L.B. Rice (an upset), R. Kinsey, Voshell and Tilden.

These few records show how useless comparative scores may be. Ifanother season like 1921 strikes American tennis, the rankingwill need either clairvoyance or a padded cell.

These upsets are part of the zest of the game and it is due tothe very uncertainty of tennis that the public is daily becomingmore enthusiastic about the game. I believe next year will seeeven a greater interest taken in it than was shown this.

Second in importance only to the big events themselves was theseason in junior tennis.

Little Miss Helen Wills, in her first Eastern season, won thejunior championship for girls and brought to the game one of themost delightful personalities that has appeared in many years.Her success at her early age should prove a great boom to girls'tennis all over America.

Vincent Richards passes from the junior ranks this year butleaves a successor who is worthy to wear his mantle in the personof Arnold W. Jones of Providence. Jones should outclass the fieldin 1922, by as wide a margin as did Richards this year.

Arnold Jones has had a remarkable record. He won the boys'championship of America in 1919. In 1920 he carried Richards to aclose match in the National junior Singles, taking one set. Hewas ranked "two" for the year.

This year Arnold had his greatest year of his brief career. Hejourneyed to France and England, as the official juniorrepresentative of America, recognized by the National TennisAssociation. He played splendidly in France, defeating A. Cousinin the hard court championship of the world and forced Tegner,the Danish Davis Cup star, to a close battle before admittingdefeat. His sensational play in the doubles was a great aid incarrying him and me to the semi-final ground, where we lost toGobert and Laurentz after five terrific sets. In England youngJones played Jacob, Captain of the Indian Davis Cup team, asplendid match.

On his return to America he carved his niche in the Hall ofJunior Tennis fame by defeating Harold Godshall of California, W.W. Ingraham of Providence and Morgan Bernstein of New York onsuccessive days in the junior championship. He forced Richards toa bitter fight in final, and again proved beyond question that heis but a step behind Richards today, although he is a full yearyounger.

Godshall, Ingraham, Charles Wood, Jr., Bernstein, Jerry Lang,Charles Watson III, Fritz Mercur and many other boys are but astep behind Jones. With this list of rising players, need we facethe future with anything but the most supreme confidence in ourability to hold our place in the tennis world!

There were two other remarkable features to the tennis season of1921, both of them in America. The first was the appearance ofthe Davis Cup team on the court of the White House, Washington,in response to a personal invitation from President and Mrs.Harding. The President, who is a keen sportsman, placed officialapproval on tennis by this act. On May 8th and 9th, CaptainSamuel Hardy, R. N. Williams, Watson Washburn and I, togetherwith Wallace F. Johnson, who understudied for William M.Johnston, met in a series of matches before a brilliant assemblyof Diplomatic, Military and Political personages. C. S. Garlandwas unable to accompany the team owing to illness. Julian S.Myrick, President of the U. S. L. T. A., and A. Y. Leechcompleted the party.

Rain, that hoodoo of tennis, attempted to ruin the event for itfell steadily for the five days previous to the match. The courtwas a sea of mud on the morning scheduled, but the Presidentdesired play and the word went on "to play." Mr. Leech and Mr.Myrick, ever ready for emergencies in tennis, called forgasolene, which was forthcoming speedily, and, while the ChiefExecutive of the United States interviewed men on the destiny ofnations, the people of Washington watched nearly 200 barrels ofgasolene flare up over the surface of the court. The desiredresult was attained and at 2 o'clock President Harding personallycalled play. Singles between Williams and me opened the matches.Then Williams and Washburn decisively defeated Johnson and me,following which Williams and I nosed out Washburn and Johnson toclose the program.

The second outstanding feature was the tour for the benefit ofthe American Committee for Devastated France. The appearance inAmerica of Mlle. Suzanne Lenglen was due primarily to the effortsof Miss Anne Morgan, who secured the services of the famousFrench champion for a tour of the States, the proceeds to go toDevastated France. Mlle. Lenglen's regrettable collapse andforced departure left the Committee in a serious position. TheAmerican Tennis Association, which had co- operated with MissMorgan in the Lenglen tour, found its clubs eager for a chance tostage matches for France but no matches available. Finally, inOctober, in response to the voluntary offer of several of theleading players, a team was organized that toured the East forthe benefit of Devastated France. It included Mrs. Franklin I.Mallory, American champion, Miss Eleanor Goss, Miss LeslieBancroft, Mrs. B. F. Cole, Mrs. F. H. Godfrey, Vincent Richards,Watson Washburn, N. W. Niles, R. N. Williams, W. F. Johnson andmyself. Matches were staged at Orange, Short Hills, Morristownand Elizabeth, New Jersey, Green Meadow Club, Jackson HeightsClub, Ardsley-on-the-Hudson, New Rochelle, Yonkers, New York, NewHaven, and Hartford, Connecticut. They proved a tremendoussuccess financially, and France netted a sum in excess of$10,000.

PART IV: SOME SIDELIGHTS ON FAMOUS PLAYERS

INTRODUCTORY

P. T. BARNUM immortalised Lincoln's language by often quoting himwith: "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and allof the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of thepeople all of the time." P. T. was an able judge of the public,and it is just this inability to fool all of the people all ofthe time that accounts for the sudden disappearance from thepublic eye of some one who only fooled all of the people for alittle while. That person was a sham, a bluff, a gamester. He, orshe, as the case may be, had no personality.

Personality needs no disguise with which to fool the people. Itis not hidden in a long-hair eccentric being. That type is merelyone of those who are "born every minute," as the saying goes.Personality is a dynamic, compelling force. It is a positivething that will not be obliterated.

Personality is a sexless thing. It transcends sex. TheodoreRoosevelt was a compelling personality, and his force and abilitywere recognized by his friends and enemies alike while thepublic, the masses, adored him without knowing why. SarahBernhardt, Eleanor Duse, and Mary Garden carry with them a forcefar more potent in its appeal to the public than their merefeminine charm. They hold their public by personality. It is nottrickery, but art, plus this intangible force.

The great figures in the tennis world that have held their publicin their hands, all have been men of marked personality. Not allgreat tennis players have personality. Few of the many stars ofthe game can lay claim to it justly. The most powerfulpersonality in the tennis world during my time is Norman E.Brookes, with his peculiar sphinx-like repression, mysterious,quiet, and ominous calm. Brookes repels many by his peculiarpersonality. He never was the popular hero that other men,notably M'Loughlin and Wilding, have been. Yet Brookes alwaysheld a gallery enthralled, not only by the sheer wizardry of hisplay, but by the power of his magnetic force.

Maurice E. M'Loughlin is the most remarkable example of awonderful dynamic personality, literally carrying a public offits feet. America and England fell before the dazzling smile andvibrant force of the red-haired Californian. His whole gameglittered in its radiance. His was a triumph of a popular hero.

Anthony F. Wilding, quiet, charming, and magnetic, carried hispublic away with him by his dynamic game. It was not thewhirlwind flash of the Comet M'Loughlin that swept crowds offtheir feet, it was more the power of repression that compelled.

I know no other tennis players that sweep their public away withthem to quite the same degree as these three men I havementioned. R. L. Murray has much of M'Loughlin's fire, but notthe spontaneity that won the hearts of the crowd. Tennis needsbig personalities to give the public that glow of personalinterest that helps to keep the game alive. A great personalityis the property of the public. It is the price he must pay forhis gift.

It is the personal equation, the star, who appeals to thepublic's imagination.

I do not think it is the star who keeps the game alive. It isthat great class of players who play at clubs the world over, whocan never rise above the dead level of mediocrity, the mass oftennis enthusiasts who play with dead racquets and old balls, andwho attend all big events to witness the giants of the court, inshort, "The Dubs" (with a capital D), who make tennis what it is,and to whom tennis owes its life, since they are its support andout from them have come our champions.

Champions are not born. They are made. They emerge from a long,hard school of defeat, dis- encouragement, and mediocrity, notbecause they are born tennis players, but because they areendowed with a force that transcends discouragement and cries "Iwill succeed."

There must be something that carries them up from the mass. It isthat something which appeals in some form to the public. Thepublic may like it, or they may dislike it, but they recognizeit. It may be personality, dogged determination, or sheer geniusof tennis, for all three succeed; but be it what it may, itbrings out a famous player. The quality that turns out a greatplayer, individualizes his game so that it bears a mark peculiarto himself. I hope to be able to call to mind the outstandingqualities of some of the leading tennis players of the world.

Where to start, in a field so great, representing as it doesAmerica, the British Isles, Australia, France, Japan, SouthAfrica, Rumania, Holland, and Greece, is not an easy task; but itis with a sense of pride and a knowledge that there is no gamebetter fitted to end this section of my book, and no man moreworthy to lead the great players of the world, that I turn toWilliam M. Johnston, the champion of the United States ofAmerica, and my team-mate in the Davis Cup team of 1920.

CHAPTER XII. AMERICA

WILLIAM M. JOHNSTON

The American champion is one of the really great orthodox playersin the world. There is nothing eccentric, nothing freakish abouthis game.

Johnston is a small man, short and light; but by perfectweight-control, footwork, and timing he hits with terrific speed.

His service is a slice. Hit from the top of his reach Johnstongets power and twist on the ball with little effort. He has awonderful forehand drive, of a top-spin variety. This shot isworld famous, for never in the history of the game has so small aman hit with such terrific speed and accuracy. The racquettravels flat and then over the ball, with a peculiar wrist-snapjust as the ball meets the racquet face. The shot travels deepand fast to the baseline.

Johnston's backhand is a decided "drag" or chop. He hits it withthe same face of the racquet as his forehand, and with verylittle change in grip. It is remarkably steady and accurate, andallows Johnston to follow to the net behind it.

Johnston's volleying is hard, deep, and usually very reliable. Hecrouches behind his racquet and volleys directly in to the flightof the ball, hitting down. His low volleys are made with apeculiar wrist-flick that gives the rise and speed. His overheadis accurate, reliable, but not startling in its power. Johnston'sgame has no real weakness, while his forehand and volleying aresuperlative.

Johnston is a remarkable match player. He reaches his greatestgame when behind. He is one of the hardest men to beat in thegame owing to his utter lack of fear and the dogged determinationwith which he hangs on when seemingly beaten. He is quiet,modest, and a sterling sportsman. He gets a maximum result with aminimum effort.

R. N. WILLIAMS

R. N. Williams, American Champion 1914 and 1916, another of myDavis Cup team-mates, is a unique personality in the tennisworld. Personally, I believe that Williams at his best is thegreatest tennis player in the world, past or present.Unfortunately, that best is seldom seen, and then not for aconsistent performance. He is always dangerous, and his range ofvariation is the greatest among any of the leading players.

Williams' service is generally a fast slice, although he at timesuses an American twist. He is erratic in his delivery, scoringmany aces, but piling up enormous numbers of double-faults. Hisground strokes are made off the rising bound of the ball. Theyare flat or slightly sliced. Never topped, But sometimes pulled.Williams' margin of safety is so small that unless his shot isperfectly hit it is useless. He hits hard at all times and makestremendous numbers of earned points, yet his errors always exceedthem, except when he strikes one of his "super" days.

His volleying is very hard, crisp, and decisive, coupled with anoccasional stop volley. His use of the half volley is unequalledin modern tennis. His overhead is severe and ordinarily reliable,although he will take serious slumps overhead. He is a pastmaster of his own style strokes, but it is an unorthodox gamethat should not be copied by the average player.

He is never willing to alter his game for safety's sake, anddefeats himself in sheer defiance by hitting throughout a matchwhen his strokes are not working. He is greatly praised for thisunwillingness to alter his game in defeat. Personally, I think hedeserves condemnation rather than praise, for it seemsrecklessness rather than bravery to thus seek defeat that couldeasily be avoided.

Williams takes tennis almost too lightly. Cheery, modest, andeasy-going, he is very popular with all galleries, as hispersonality deserves. He is a brilliant ever-interesting light inany tennis gathering, and his game will always show sheer geniusof execution even while rousing irritation by his refusal to playsafe. He would rather have one super-great day and bad defeats,than no bad defeats without his day of greatness. Who shall sayhe is not right? We may not now agree, but Williams may yet proveto us he is right and we are wrong.

CHARLES S. GARLAND

The last member of the Davis Cup team and youngest player of the
Americans is Charles S. Garland, the Yale star.

Garland is the perfect stylist, the orthodox model for groundstrokes. He is an example of what stroke perfection can do.

He uses a soft slice service, of no particular peculiarity, yetplaces it so well that he turns it into an attack. His forehandis hit with a full swing, flat racquet face, and a slight topspin. It is deadly accurate and of moderate speed. He can put theball at will anywhere in the court off his forehand. His backhandis slightly sliced down the line and pulled flat across thecourt. It is not a point winner but is an excellent defence. Hisoverhead is steady, reliable, and accurate, but lacksaggressiveness. His high volleying is fine, deep, and fast. Hislow volleying is weak and uncertain. He anticipates wonderfully,and covers a tremendous amount of court. His attack is ratherobvious in that he seldom plays the unusual shot, yet hisaccuracy is so great that he frequently beats a man who guesseshis shot yet can't reach it.

N. E. Brookes stated he considered Garland one of the greatestground-stroke players in the world. This is true of his forehand,but his backhand lacks punch. His whole game needs speed andaggressiveness.

He is quiet, modest, and extremely popular. His perfect courtmanner and pleasant smile have made Garland a universal favouritein America and England. His game is the result of hard,conscientious work. There is no genius about it, and littlenatural talent. It is not an interesting game as it lacksbrilliancy, yet it is very sound, and much better than it looks.

VINCENT RICHARDS

Vincent Richards, National junior Champion of America and themost remarkable boy playing tennis, is a distinct personality.Richards, who is now only seventeen, won the Men's DoublesChampionship of America at the age of fifteen. Richards is a borntennis player and a great tennis genius.

Richards' service is a fast slice that he follows to the net. Itis speedy and very accurate. His ground strokes are both sliceand drive, although the basis of his game is slice. He meets theball on the rise and "spoons" it off his forehand. It is low,fast, but none too sure. His backhand shot is a fast twistingslice that is remarkably effective and very excellent as adefence. He is learning a flat drive.

His volleying is the great feature of his game. He is thegreatest natural volleyer I have ever seen. Low and highvolleying, fore- and backhand is perfect in execution. His halfvolleying is phenomenal. His overhead is very severe for a boy,and carries great speed for so small a person, but it is inclinedto be slightly erratic. He is tremendously fast on his feet, butit inclined to be lazy.

Vincent Richards has the greatest natural aptitude and equipmentof any tennis player I have ever seen. Against it he has atemperament that is inclined to carelessness and laziness. Hetends to sulkiness, which he is rapidly outgrowing. He is adelightful personality on the court, with his slight figure,tremendous speed, and merry smile. He is a second "Gus" Touchardin looks and style. I hope to see him develop to be the greatestplayer the world has ever seen. He gives that promise. The matterrests in Richards' hands, as his worst enemy is his temperament.

At his best he is to-day the equal of the top flight in theworld. At his worst he is a child. His average is fine but notgreat. Travel, work, sincere effort, and a few years, should turnthis astonishing boy into a marvellous player.

R. L. MURRAY

The new "California Comet," successor to M. E. M'Loughlin, is theusual sobriquet for R. L. Murray, now of Buffalo. Murray won theNational Crown in 1917-1918.

His service is of the same cyclonic character as M'Loughlin.Murray is left-handed. He hits a fast cannon-ball delivery ofgreat speed and an American twist of extreme twist. His groundstrokes are not good, and he rushes the net at every opportunity.His forehand drive is very fast, excessively topped, andexceedingly erratic. His backhand is a "poke." His footwork isvery poor on both shots. He volleys very well, shooting deep tothe baseline and very accurately. His shoulder-high volleys aremarvellous. His overhead is remarkable for its severity andaccuracy. He seldom misses an overhead ball.

Murray is a terrifically hard worker, and tires himself out veryrapidly by prodigious effort. He is a hard fighter and a hard manto beat. He works at an enormous pace throughout the match.

He is large, spare, rangy, with dynamic energy, and a wonderfulpersonality that holds the gallery. His smile is famous, whilehis sense of humour never deserts him. A sportsman to hisfinger-tips, there is no more popular figure in American tennisthan Murray. His is not a great game. It is a case of a greatathlete making a second-class game first class, by sheer power ofpersonality and fighting ability. He is really a secondM'Loughlin in his game, his speed, and his personal charm.

WATSON WASHBURN

In contrast to Murray, Watson Washburn plays a cool,never-hurried, never-flurried game that is unique in Americantennis.

There is little that is noteworthy of Washburn's game. Hisservice is a well-placed slice. His ground strokes are a peculiar"wrist-slap," almost a slice. His volleying fair, his overheadsteady but not remarkable. Just a good game, well rounded but notunique. Why is. Washburn great? Because, behind the big roundglasses that are the main feature of Washburn on the tenniscourt, is a brain of the first water, directing and developingthat all-round game. There is no more brilliant student of men ingames than Washburn, and his persistence of attack is second onlyto Brookes'.

Washburn, too, is a popular player, but not in the same sense asMurray. Murray appeals to the imagination of the crowd, Washburnto its academic instincts. Washburn is a strategist, working outhis match with mathematical exactness, and always checking up hismen as he goes along.

There is no tennis player whose psychology I admire more thanWashburn's. He is never beaten until the last point is played,and he is always dangerous, no matter how great a lead you holdover him.

Another case of the second-class game being made first class, butthis time it is done by mental brilliancy.

WALLACE F. JOHNSON

Here is another case of a second-class game being used in afirst-class manner, getting first-class results through thedirection of a first-class tennis brain. Johnson is not thebrilliant, analytical mind of Washburn, but for pure tennisgenius Johnson ranks nearly the equal of Brookes.

Johnson is a one-stroke player. He uses a peculiar slice shot hitfrom the wrist. He uses it in service, ground strokes, volleying,and lobbing. It is a true one-stroke game, yet by sheer audacityof enterprise and wonderful speed of foot Wallace Johnson has foryears been one of the leading players of America.

SAMUEL HARDY

The overwhelming success of the American Davis Cup team in 1920,when we brought back the cup from Australia was due in no smallmeasure to the wonderful generalship displayed by one man, ourCaptain Samuel Hardy.

The hardest part of any such trip is the attention to training,relaxation and accommodations for the team and only perfectjudgment can give the comfort so needed by a team. It is toCaptain Hardy that the team owes its perfect condition throughoutthe entire 3,000 miles we journeyed after the cup. Yet CaptainHardy's success was far bigger than that, for by his tact,charming personality and splendid sportsmanship at all times hewon a place for us in the hearts of every country we visited.Hardy, although a non-playing member of the team, is a greattennis player. He is one of the best doubles players America hasproduced. His clever generalship and wonderful knowledge of thegame proved of inestimable value to the team in laying out ourplan of attack in the Davis Cup matches themselves.

Clever, charming, just and always full of the most delightfulhumour, Hardy was an ideal Captain who kept his team in the bestof spirits no matter how badly we might have been playing or howdepressing appeared our outlook.

CARL FISCHER

I am including in my analysis of players a boy who is justgaining recognition but who I believe is to be one of the greatstars of the future, Carl Fischer of Philadelphia.

Young Fischer, who is only 19, is a brilliant, hard hittingleft-hander. He has already won the Eastern PennsylvaniaChampionship, been runner-up to Wallace Johnson in thePennsylvania State, Philadelphia Championship and Middle Statesevent, besides holding the junior Championship of Pennsylvaniafor two years. He won the University of Pennsylvania Championshipin his freshman year.

His service is a flat delivery of good speed, at times, vergingon the American twist. His ground game carries top spin drivesforehand and backhand. His volleying and overhead are severe andpowerful but prone to be erratic. Fischer is an all court playerof the most modern type. He is aggressive, almost too much so attimes as he wastes a great deal of energy by useless rushing. Heneeds steadiness and a willingness to await his opening but givespromise of rounding into a first class player, as his strokeequipment is second to none.

MARSHALL ALLEN

Far out in the Pacific Northwest in Seattle, Washington, is ayoung player who bids fair to some day be world famous. It isquite possible he may never arrive at all.

Marshall Allen is a typical Western player. Allen has a hurricaneservice that is none too reliable. His forehand drive isreminiscent of McLoughlin. It is a furious murderous attack whenit goes in and quite useless when it is off. Allen's backhand isa flat drive played to either side with equal ease. At present itis erratic but shows great promise. Allen volleys at timesbrilliantly, but is uncertain and at times misses unaccountably.His overhead is remarkably brilliant and severe, but alsoerratic. He reaches great heights and sinks to awful depths. IfMarshall Allen consolidates his game and refines the material hehas at hand he should be a marvellous player. If he allows hislove of speed to run away with his judgment at the expense ofaccuracy and steadiness he will never rise above the secondclass. Time will tell the story. I look to see him world famous.

OUR RISING JUNIORS

For a moment I am going to pay tribute to some boys who I look tosee among the stars of the future. They are all juniors less thaneighteen at the time of writing.

First in importance comes Arnold W. Jones, of Providence, R. I.,who accompanied me to France and England in 1921, where he made afine record. Young Jones has a splendid all-court game, with aremarkable forehand drive but a tendency to weariness in hisbackhand and service. His volleying is excellent. His overheaderratic.

Second to Jones I place Charles Watson III of Philadelphia. Hereis a boy with a most remarkable resemblance to Chuck Garland instyle of his game. Watson has a fine service, beautiful groundstrokes fore and backhand and a more aggressive volley thanGarland. His overhead lacks punch. He is the cleverest courtgeneral among the juniors.

Phillip Bettens of San Francisco is a possible successor to BillyJohnston. Bettens has a terrific forehand drive and a rushing netattack. He needs to steady up his game, but he is a player ofgreat promise.

Armand Marion of Seattle, Washington, is another boy with afinely rounded game who, given experience and seasoning, bidsfair to become a great star. Marion does not have enough punchyet and, needs to gain decisiveness of attack.

Charles Wood of New York, W. W. Ingraham of Providence, MiloMiller and Eric Wood of Philadelphia, John Howard of Baltimore,and others are of equal class and of nearly equal promise to theboys I have mentioned.

In the younger class of boys those under 15, one finds manyyoungsters already forming real style. The boy who shows thegreatest promise and today the best all-round game, equalling inpotential power even Vincent Richards at the same age, isAlexander L. (Sandy) Wiener of Philadelphia. At fourteen youngWeiner is a stylist of the highest all-court type.

Among the other boys who may well develop into stars in the
future are Meredith W. Jones, Arthur Ingraham, Jr., Andrew Clarke
Ingraham, Miles Valentine, Raymond Owen, Richard Chase, Neil
Sullivan, Henry Neer, and Edward Murphy.

There are many other great players I would like to analyse, but
space forbids. Among our leaders are Roland Roberts, John
Strachan, C. J. Griffin, Davis, and Robert Kinsey in California;
Walter T. Hayes, Ralph Burdock, and Heath Byford in the Middle
West; Howard Voshell, Harold Throckmorton, Conrad B. Doyle, Craig
Biddle, Richard Harte, Colket Caner, Nathaniel W. Niles, H. C.
Johnson, Dean Mathey, and many others of equal fame in the East.

CHAPTER XIII. BRITISH ISLES

J. C. PARKE

There is no name in tennis history of the past decade more famousthan that of J. C. Parke. In twelve months, during 1912 and 1913,he defeated Brookes, Wilding, and M'Loughlin—a notable record;and now in 1920, after his wonderful work in the World War, hereturns to tennis and scores a decisive victory over W. M.Johnston.

Parke is essentially a baseline player. His service is soft,flat, but well placed. His ground strokes are hit with an almostflat racquet face and a peculiar short swing. He uses apronounced snap of the wrist. He slices his straight backhandshot, but pulls his drive 'cross court. It is Parke's famousrunning drive down the line that is the outstanding feature ofhis game. Parke was a ten-second hundred-yard man in college, andstill retains his remarkable speed of foot. He hits his drivewhile running at top speed and translates his weight to the ball.It shoots low and fast down the line. It is a marvellous stroke.

Parke's volleying is steady and well placed but not decisive. Hisoverhead is reliable and accurate, but lacks "punch." The greatfactor of Parke's game is his uncanny ability to produce hisgreatest game under the greatest stress. I consider him one ofthe finest match players in the world. His tactical knowledge andbrainy attack are all the more dangerous, because he hasphenomenal power of defence and fighting qualities of the highestorder. There is no finer sportsman in tennis than Parke.Generous, quiet, and modest, Parke is deservedly a popular figurewith the tennis world.

A. R. F. KINGSCOTE

The most recent star to reach the heights of fame in Englishtennis is Major A. R. F. Kingscote. Kingscote has played goodtennis for some years; but it was only in 1919, following hisexcellent work in the War, that he showed his true worth. Hedefeated Gobert in sequence sets in the Davis Cup tie atDeauville, and followed by defeating Anderson in Australia andcarrying Patterson to a hard match. Since then he has steadilyimproved and this season found him the leading figure of theBritish team.

Kingscote played much of his early tennis with R. N. Williams inSwitzerland during 1910 and 1911. The effect of this training iseasily seen on his game to-day for, without Williams' dash andextreme brilliancy, their strokes are executed in very much thesame style.

Kingscote's service is a fast slice, well placed and cleverlydisguised. It carries a great deal of pace and twist. His groundstrokes are hit off the rising bound of the ball, with a flatraquet face or a slight slice. His wonderful speed of footoffsets his lack of height, and he hits either side with equalfacility. There are no gaps in Kingscote's game. It is perfectlyrounded. His favourite forehand shot is 'cross court, yet he canhit equally well down the line. His backhand is steady, veryaccurate and deceptive, but rather lacks speed. His volleying isremarkable for his court covering and angles, but is not thedecisive win of Williams or Johnston. He is the best volleyer inthe British Isles. His overhead is reliable and accurate for soshort a man, but at times is prone to lack speed.

Kingscote is a sound tactician without the strategic brillianceof Parke. He is a fine match player and dogged fighter. Witnesshis 5-set battle with me in the Championships, after being matchpoint down in the fourth set, and his 5-set struggle withJohnston in the Davis Cup. It is a slight lack of decisivenessall round that keeps Kingscote just a shade below the firstflight. He is a very fine player, who may easily become atop-notch man. His pleasant, modest manner and generoussportsmanship make him an ideal opponent, and endear him to thegallery.

H. ROPER BARRETT

One of the real tennis tacticians, a man who is to-day a veteranof many a notable encounter, yet still dangerous at all times, isH. Roper Barrett.

A member of every Davis Cup team since the matches wereinaugurated, a doubles player of the highest strategy, RoperBarrett needs no introduction or analysis. His, game is soft. Hisservice looks a joke. In reality it is hard to hit, for Barrettpushes it to the most unexpected places. His ground strokes,soft, short, and low, are ideal doubles shots. He angles off theball with a short shove in the direction. He can drive hard whenpressed, but prefers to use the slow poke.

His volleying is the acme of finesse. He angles soft to theside-lines, stop volleys the hardest drives successfully. Hepicks openings with an unerring eye. His overhead lacks "punch,"but is steady and reliable.

Barrett is a clever mixer of shots. He is playing the unexpectedshot to the unexpected place. His sense of anticipation isremarkable, and he retrieves the most unusual shots. It is hisgreat tennis tactics that make him noteworthy. His game is roundbut not wonderful.

THE LOWES, A. H. AND F. G.

The famous brothers, called indiscriminately the Lowes, are twoof the best baseline players in the British Isles. Both men playalmost identical styles, and at a distance are very hard to tellapart.

Gordon Lowe uses a slice service, while Arthur serves with areverse spin. Neither man has a dangerous delivery. Both areadequate and hard to win earned points from.

The ground strokes of the Lowes are very orthodox. Full swing,top spin drives fore- and backhand, straight or 'cross court, arehit with equal facility. The Lowes volley defensively and onlycome in to the let when pulled in by a short shot. Their overheadwork is average.

Their games are not startling. There is nothing to require muchcomment. Both men are excellent tennis players of the trueEnglish school: fine base- line drivers, but subject to defeat byany aggressive volleyer. It is a lack of aggressiveness thatholds both men down, for they are excellent court coverers, fineracquet wielders, but do not rise to real heights. The Lowescould easily defeat any player who was slightly off his game, asthey are very steady and make few mistakes. Neither would defeata first- class player at his best.

T. M. MAVROGORDATO

One of the most consistent winners in English tennis for a spanof years is a little man with a big name, who is universally andpopularly known as "Mavro."

"Mavro" added another notable victory in 1920, when he defeated
R. N. Williams in the last eight in the World Championships.
"Mavro" has always been a fine player, but he has never quite
scaled the top flight.

His game is steadiness personified. He shoves his service in thecourt at the end of a prodigious swing that ends in a poke. Itgoes where he wishes it. His ground strokes are fine, in splendidform, very accurate and remarkably fast for so little effort.Mavro is not large enough to hit hard, but owing to hisremarkable footwork he covers a very large territory in aremarkably short space of time. His racquet work is a delight toa student of orthodox form. His volleying is accurate, steady,well placed but defensive. He has no speed or punch to hisvolley. His overhead is steady to the point of being unique. Heis so small that it seems as if anyone could lob over his head,but his speed of foot is so great that he invariably gets hisracquet on it and puts it back deep.

Mavro turns, defence into attack by putting the ball back in playso often that his opponent gets tired hitting it and takesunnecessary chances. His accuracy is so great that it makes upfor his lack of speed. His judgment is sound but not brilliant.He is a hard-working, conscientious player who deserves, hissuccess.

There are many other players who are interesting studies. The twoAustralians, now living in England, and to all intents andpurposes Englishmen, Randolph Lycett and F. M. B. Fisher, aredistinct and interesting types of players. C. P. Dixon, StanleyDoust, M. J. G. Ritchie, Max Woosnam, the rising young star, P.M. Davson, A. E. Beamish, W. C. Crawley, and scores of otherexcellent players, will carry the burden of English tennissuccessfully for some years. Yet new blood must be found toinfuse energy into the game. Speed is a necessity in Englishtennis if the modern game is to reach its greatest height in theBritish Isles.

Youth must be seen soon, if the game in the next ten years is tobe kept at its present level. Parke, Mavro, Ritchie, Dixon,Barrett, etc., cannot go on for ever, and young players must bedeveloped to take their places. The coming decade is the crucialperiod of English tennis. I hope and believe it will besuccessfully passed.

CHAPTER XIV. FRANCE AND JAPAN

France

ANDRE GOBERT

One of the most picturesque figures and delightfully polishedtennis games in the world are joined in that volatile,temperamental player, Andre Gobert of France. He is a typicallyFrench product, full of finesse, art, and nerve, surrounded bythe romance of a wonderful war record of his people in which hebore a magnificent part, yet unstable, erratic, and uncertain. Athis best he is invincible. He is the great master of tennis. Athis worst he is mediocre. Gobert is at once a delight and adisappointment to a student of tennis.

Gobert's service is marvellous. It is one of the great deliveriesof the world. His great height (he is 6 feet 4 inches) andtremendous reach enable him to hit a flat delivery at frightfulspeed, and still stand an excellent chance of it going in court.He uses very little twist, so the pace is remarkably fast. YetGobert lacks confidence in his service. If his opponent handlesit successfully Gobert is apt to slow it up and hit it soft, thusthrowing away one of the greatest assets.

His ground strokes are hit in beautiful form. Gobert is theexponent of the most perfect form in the world to-day. His swingis the acme of beauty. The whole stroke is perfection. He hitswith a flat, slightly topped drive, feet in excellent position,and weight well controlled. It is uniform, backhand and forehand.His volleying is astonishing. He can volley hard or soft, deep orshort, straight or angled with equal ease, while his tremendousreach makes him nearly impossible to pass at the net. Hisoverhead is deadly, fast, and accurate, and he kills a lob fromanywhere in the court.

Why is not Gobert the greatest tennis player in the world?Personally I believe it is lack of confidence, a lack of fightingability when the breaks are against him, and defeat may be hisdue. It is a peculiar thing in Gobert, for no man is braver thanhe, as his heroism during the War proved. It is simply lack oftennis confidence. It is an over- abundance of temperament. Invictory Gobert is invincible, in defeat he is apt to be almostmediocre.

Gobert is delightful personally. His quick wit and sense ofhumour always please the tennis public. His courteous manner andgenial sportsmanship make him universally popular. His strokeequipment is unsurpassed in the tennis world.

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

Gobert is probably the finest indoor player in the world, whilehe is very great on hard courts; but his grass play is not theequal of many others. I heartily recommend Gobert's style to allstudents 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 severalvarieties, all well played. He uses an American twist as hisregular delivery, but varies it with a sharp slice, a reversetwist of great spin, and a fast cannon-ball smash. Laurentz isvery versatile. He has excellent orthodox drives, fore- andbackhand, and a competent forehand chop.

His volleying is brilliant almost beyond description, but veryerratic. He is very fast on his feet, and anticipates remarkablywell. He will make the most hair-raising volleys, only to falldown inexplicably the next moment on an easy shot. His overheadis like his volley, severe, brilliant, but uncertain.

Laurentz is a very hard worker, and, unlike Gobert, is always athis best when behind. He is a fair fighter and a great matchplayer. His defeats are due more to over-anxiety than to lack offight. He is temperamental, sensational, and brilliant, asportsman of the highest type, quick to recognize his opponent'sgood work and to give full credit for it. He is one of the mostinteresting 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 ofcampaign. Laurentz might beat anyone in the world on his day orlose 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 mostunexpectedly in the challenge round, is an interesting player ofthe mental type. He is anything but French in his game. His styleis rather that of the crafty American or English player than thehard-hitting Frenchman.

Samazieuhl is an exponent of crafty patball. His service is amedium pace slice, well placed but not decisive. His groundstrokes are a peculiar stiff arm chop varied at times with anequally cramped drive, yet his extreme mobility allows him tocover a tremendous amount of court, while his return, which iswell disguised, is capable of great angles. His volleying isreliable but lacks severity and punch. He makes excellent lowvolleys, but cannot put away shoulder high balls while hisoverhead is not deadly.

It is Samazieuhl's clever generalship and his ability to recoverseemingly impossible shots that win matches for him. He is acomparatively new tournament player, and should improve greatlyas 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 heis little more, has a hard hitting brilliant game of greatpromise.

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

Max Decugis and Brugnon, the two remaining members of the 1920Davis Cup team of France, present totally different types.Decugis, crafty, cool, and experienced, is the veteran of manylong seasons of match play. He is a master tactician, and winsmost of his matches by outgeneralling the other player. Burgnonis brilliant, flashy, hard hitting, erratic, and inexperienced.He is very young, hardly twenty years of age. He has a finefore-hitting style and excellent net attack, but lacks confidenceand 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. Ienjoy watching the well-executed strokes, beautiful mobilefootwork of these dashing players. It is more a lack of doggeddetermination to win, than in any stroke fault that one finds thereason for French defeats. The temperamental genius of this greatpeople carries with it a lack of stability that can be the onlyexplanation for the sudden crushing and unexpected defeats theirrepresentatives receive on the tennis courts.

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

Keen competition is the corrective measure for temperamentalinstability and with the advent of many new players in Frenchtennis I would not be surprised to see a marked decrease ofunexpected 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 andHonolulu, has lived in America for the past three years. Shimidzuis a product of Calcutta, where he has lived for some years.

No player has caused more discussion than Kumagae, unless it isShimidzu; while surely no man received more critical comment thanShimidzu, except Kumagae. The press of America and England havevied with each other in exploiting these two men. There wasunanimity of opinion concerning these two men in one respect. Nofiner sportsmen nor more delightful opponents can be found thanthese Japanese. They have won the respect and friendship of allwho have met them.

Kumagae is the speedier tennis player. He came to America in1916, the possessor of a wonderful forehand drive and nothingelse. Kumagae is left- handed, which made his peculiar shots allthe harder to handle. He met with fair success during the year;his crowning triumph was his defeat of W. M. Johnston at Newportin five sets. He lost to J. J. Armstrong, Watson M. Washburn, andGeorge M. Church. He learned much during his year in America, andreturned to Japan a wiser man, with a firm determination to addto his tennis equipment.

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

The season of 1920 found Kumagae sweeping all before him, sinceJohnston, Williams, Garland, and I were away on the Davis Cuptrip. Williams barely defeated him in a bitter match, justpreviously to sailing. Kumagae left America in the middle of thesummer to compete in the Olympic games, representing Japan.

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

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

Both Shimidzu and Kumagae are marvellous court coverers, and seemabsolutely untiring. They are "getters" of almost unbelievableactivity, and accurate to a point that seems uncanny. Both menhit to the lines with a certainty that makes it very dangerous toattempt to take the net on anything except a deep forcing shotthat hurries them.

With such players as Kumagae and Shimidzu, followed by S. Kashioand K. Yamasaki, and the late H. Mikami, Japan is a big factor infuture tennis. 1922 will again see Japan challenging for theDavis Cup, and none but a first-class team can stop them. Theadvent of a Japanese team with such players will mean that thisyear we must call out our best to repel the Oriental invasion: socompetition receives another stimulus that should raise ourstandard of play.

The probability of journeying to Japan to challenge for the DavisCup is not so remote but that we must consider it as a futurepossibility.

CHAPTER XV. SPAIN AND THE CONTINENT

Spain

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

MANUEL ALONZO

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

His service is a fairly fast American twist. It is not remarkablebut is at least more severe than the average continentaldelivery.

Alonzo has a terrific forehand drive that is the closest rival toW. M. Johnston's of any shot I have seen. He is reliable on thisstroke, either straight or cross-court from the deep court but ifdrawn in to mid-court is apt to miss it. His backhand is a flatdrive, accurate and low but rather slow and in the maindefensive.

His volleying is at once a joy and a disappointment. Suchmarvellous angles and stop volleys off difficult drives! Yetimmediately on top of a dazzling display Alonzo will throw awaythe easiest sort of a high volley by a pitiable fluke.

His overhead is at once severe, deadly and reliable. He smasheswith speed and direction. It is not only in his varied strokeequipment that Alonzo is great but in his marvellous footwork.Such speed of foot and lightning turning I have never before seenon a tennis court. He is a quicker man than Norman E. Brookes andhigher praise I cannot give. I look to see Alonzo, who todayloses matches through lack of resource, become by virtue ofexperience and tournament play the greatest player on thecontinent.

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

Some Other Champions

There are some individual players of interest from the countrieswhere tennis as a game has not reached a place worthy of nationalanalysation but who deserve mention among the great players ofthe 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 gameabounds in freak shots that Mishu executes with remarkable skill.He has many and varied services, underhand cuts, fore andbackhand, a "push" off his nose, and even one serve where heturns his back on the court and serves the ball back over hishead.

His drives are cramped in swing and hit with excessive top spin.His footwork is a defiance of all rules. His volleying game lookslike 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 isabove all a unique personality. Cheery, individual, at timeseccentric, Mishu is a popular figure in tournaments abroad. Heplays with a verve and abandon that appeals to the Europeangalleries while his droll humour and good nature make him adelightful opponent.

J. WASHER

Belgium is represented by J. Washer, my opponent in the finalround of the Hard Court Championship of the World in 1921. Washeris a fine orthodox tennis player. His service is a well placedtwist delivery of medium pace. He has a terrific forehand drivethat gains in effectiveness owing to the fact he is aleft-hander. Like so many players with a pronounced strength, hecovers up an equally pronounced weakness by using the strength.Washer has a very feeble backhand for so fine a player. He pokeshis backhand when he is unable to run around it.

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

E. TEGNER

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

Tegner is a baseline player of fine style. His strokes are longfree drives of fine pace and depth. His service is hardlyadequate for first flight tennis, yet while his ground gamecannot make up for the lack of aggression in his net attack.Tegner is not of championship quality at the moment but his youthallows him plenty of time to acquire that tournament experienceneeded to fill in the gaps in his game. He is a cool, clevercourt general and should develop rapidly within the next fewyears.

H. L. DE MORPURGO

The Italian champion, H. L. de Morpurgo, is a product of his owncountry and England where he attended college. He is a big, rangyman of great strength. He uses a terrific service of great speedbut little control on his first ball and an exaggerated Americantwist on the second of such extreme contortion that even hisgreat frame wears down under it.

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

A. ZERLENDI

Tennis in Greece. No! not in ancient times but in modern, forthat little country has a remarkable little baseline star, byname A. Zerlendi. This man is a baseliner of the most pronouncedtype. He gets everything he can put his racquet to. He reminds meirresistibly of Mavrogordato, seemingly reaching nothing yet theyall come back. I cannot adequately analyse his game because hisfirst principle is to put back the ball no matter how, and thishe carries into excellent effect. Zerlendi is a match winnerfirst and a stylist second.

CHAPTER XVI. THE COLONIES

Australasia

The death of that sterling sportsman, Anthony F. Wilding, and thenatural decline in the playing powers of Norman E. Brookes, owingto the advance of years and his war experiences, leaveAustralasia (Australia and New Zealand) in a somewhat uncertaincondition regarding its tennis prospects.

NORMAN E. BROOKES

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

There is no need to dwell on Brookes' shots, his marvellousmechanical perfection, his peculiar volleying style, his uncannyanticipation. All these are too well known to need my feebledescription. They are but the expression of that wonderful brainand dominant personality that lie behind that sphinx- like facewe know as Brookes'.

To see across the net those ever-restless, ever-moving eyes,picking the openings in my never too- well guarded court, andknow that against me is pitted the greatest tennis, brain of thecentury, is to call upon me to produce my best. That is what mymatch with Brookes meant to me, and still does to-day. Brookesshould be an inspiration to every tennis player, for he hasproved the power of mind over matter in tennis: "Age cannotwither nor custom stale his infinite variety."

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

GERALD PATTERSON

Australia's leading player, Gerald Patterson, is one of the mostremarkable combinations of tennis virtues and tennis faults, Ihave ever seen.

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

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

He is very quiet, and inclined to be somewhat careless on thecourt, unless pressed, when his businesslike, determined playshows what a great match player Patterson can become. He produceshis best game at the crucial moment of the match. Patterson is asuperior match player to his real tennis ability. His is nottruly a top-notch game. It has superlative features, but itswhole texture is not of the finest.

Patterson owes much of his success in 1919 to Brookes, underwhose guidance he played. The absence of the master minddirecting his attack proved a decided handicap in 1920, andPatterson's attack was not so certain nor sustained as in theprevious season. Patterson's game plus Brookes' strategy would bea great combination in one man.

PAT O'HARA WOOD

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

Pat O'Hara Wood is a player without a weakness, yet also onewithout a strength. He is a typical all court player with nooutstanding feature to his game unless it be his volleying. PatWood has a natural aptitude for doubles which at times seriouslyinterferes 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 groundstrokes, taken on the rising bounces, are flat drives, accurateand varied as to direction but lacking punch. He does not hithard enough. He is a brilliant volleyer, cutting off at sharpangles the hardest drives. His overhead is erratic. At times heis deadly overhead but is prone to lapses into uncertainty. He isremarkably quick and speedy of foot. His sense of anticipation ismagnificent. His generalship good, though not brilliant. It islack of punch, the inability to put the ball away, that keeps PatO'Hara Wood from the first flight in singles.

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

J. C. HAWKES

The youngest of the Australasian players and a boy of greatpromise is Jack Hawkes. He is only 22 and young in the game forhis age.

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

Jack Hawkes has an exaggerated American twist service that, sincehe is a left-hander, places an unnecessary strain on his heartmuscles. It carries terrific twist but little speed and does notPay him for the amount of energy he expends.

His forehand drive is excellent, fast, deep, and well placed, yetin making this he steps away from the ball, again wasting energy.His backhand is a poke and very unreliable. To save it he runsaround 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 allthe inherent defects in his game he is so clever in using what hehas, his tactics are so good for so young a player that I believehe will be one of the leading players of the world in a fewyears. Under the watchful eyes of Norman Brookes I foresee Hawkeschanging his footwork to at least a reasonable copy of the oldmaster.

J. O. ANDERSON

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

He needs finesse, experience and season, with which he may wellbecome one of the greatest players as the fundamentalpotentialities are there.

NORMAN PEACH

The steady baseline game of England has its exponent in Australiain Norman Peach. He has a beautiful driving game, with adequatebut not severe service, that one finds so much in England. Attimes Peach will advance to the net but his volleying andoverhead are secondary to his baseline game. He is not a greattennis player but is certainly one of high standard of play. Heis just below the first flight in Australia.

R. V. Thomas is one of the finest doubles players in the world asis amply attested by his win of the world's title in 1919 withPat O'Hara Wood and their two successive wins of the AustralianChampionship in 1919-20. Thomas with his hard-hitting off theground, and his brilliant volleying is a fine foil for Pat Wood'ssteady accuracy.

Just a word about one veteran, a good friend of mine, who isagain playing fine tennis, Rodney L. Heath, hero of the famousDavis Cup match in 1911 when he defeated W. A. Larned, is againin the game.

Heath with his long beautiful groundstrokes, forehand, orbackhand, his incisive crisp volleys and fine, generalship basedon young experience, is a notable figure in the tennis world.

The mantle of Wilding and Brookes must fall on the shoulders of areally great player. Who it will be is hard to say at present. Nooutstanding figure looms on the horizon at the time of writing.

South Africa

The 1920 South African Davis Cup team players, following theirdisastrous defeat by Holland, journeyed to England for theChampionship and following tournaments, and I had the opportunityof studying three players of great promise. The remaining twowere excellent, but hardly as exceptional as the former.

Charles Winslow, the leading player in the team, has a remarkableversatile game. He uses a high, bounding service of good speed,which at times he follows to the net. His best ground stroke is asevere chop, not unlike Wallace F. Johnson. He has a good driveboth forehand and backhand, which he only uses when pressed or inattempting to pass a net man. He volleys very well, and coversthe net quickly. His overhead is very severe, steady, andreliable. He is a fine natural player just below the top flight.He is an excellent strategist, and mixes his shots very well. Hehas exceptionally fast footwork, and repeatedly runs around hisbackhand to chop diagonally across the court in a manner verysimilar to Johnson.

B. I. C. Norton, the South African champion, a youngster oftwenty, is a phenomenal player of extreme brilliancy. He haseverything in stroke equipment, drives, slices, volleys, and afine service and overhead. Unfortunately Norton regards histennis largely as a joke. His judgment is therefore faulty, andhe is apt to loaf on the court. He tries the most impossibleshots that sometimes go in; and in the main, his courtgeneralship is none too good.

He is an irrepressible boy, and his merry smile and chatter makehim a tremendous favourite with the gallery. He has a very strongpersonality that should carry him a long way.

Louis Raymond, the left-handed star of the South Africans, has anexcellent ground game coupled with a good service and fairvolleying and overhead. His game is not remarkable. He is ahard-working, deserving player who attains success by industryrather than natural talent. His judgment is sound and methods ofplay orthodox, except for a tendency to run around his backhand.

C. R. Blackbeard, the youngest member of the team, and G. H.Dodd, its captain, are both very excellent players of the secondflight. Blackbeard is very young, not yet twenty, and may developinto a star. At present he chops too much, and is very erratic.. . . . . . .

There are many other players whom I would analyse if I had thetime or space; but in these days of paper shortage and inkscarcity, conservation is the keynote of the times.

Let me turn for a few moments to the women whose fame in thetennis world is the equal of the men I have been analysing.

CHAPTER XVII. FAMOUS WOMEN PLAYERS

Women's Tennis

The great boom that featured the whole tennis season of 1921 inAmerica found one of its most remarkable manifestations in theincreased amount of play, higher standard of competition andremarkable growth of public interest in women's tennis.

England has led, and still leads, the world in women's tennis.The general standard of play is on a higher scale and there ismore tournament play in England than elsewhere. France, withMlle. Suzanne Lenglen, Mme. Billout (Mlle. Brocadies) and Mme.Golding, forces England closely for European supremacy, but untilrecent years America, except for individuals, has been unable toreach the standard of women's tennis found abroad.

Miss May Sutton, now Mrs. Thomas H. Bundy, placed Americancolours in the field by her wonderful performances in winning theWorld's Championship at Wimbledon more than a decade ago, butafter her retirement America was forced to content itself withlocal honors.

Neither Miss Mary Browne nor Miss Hazel Hotchkiss, now Mrs.George Wightman, followed Mrs. May Sutton Bundy in her Europeaninvasion, so the relative ability of our champions and Mrs.Lambert-Chambers of England or Mlle. Brocadies of France couldnot be judged. Mrs. Molla Bjurstedt Mallory followed Miss Browneas the outstanding figure in American tennis when the wonderfulNorsewoman took the championship in 1915. Miss Browne, thenholder of the title, did not compete, so their relative abilitycould not be decided. Throughout the period from 1900 to 1919 thewoman's championship event had been held annually in June. Theresult was that the blue ribbon event was over so early in theseason that the incentive for play during July and August died anatural death.

Finally in 1920, at the request of the Women's Committee,particularly on the advice of Mrs. George Wightman, the nationalchampion, and Miss Florence Ballin of New York, under whose ableguidance the entire schedule was drawn up, the United States LawnTennis Association moved the Women's Championship to September.Miss Ballin, following the successful system used in the men'sevents, organized a schedule that paralleled the big fixtures onthe men's schedule and placed in operation "a circuit," as it iscalled, that provided for tournaments weekly from May toSeptember. Miss Ballin, together with Mrs. Wightman, organisedjunior tournaments for girls under 18, along the lines used forthe boys' events. The response was immediate. Entry lists, whichin the old days were in "the teens," jumped to the thirties orforties, in the regular events. Young girls who, up to now, hadnot played tournaments, fearing they lacked the necessary class,rushed to play in the Junior girls' events. From this latterclass came such a promising young star of today as Miss MarthaBayard, who bids fair to be national champion at some not distantdate.

It was a tremendous task of organization that Miss Ballin and herassistants undertook, but they did it in a most efficient manner.Mrs. Molla Bjurstedt Mallory lent her invaluable assistance byplaying in as many tournaments as possible. She was a magnet thatdrew the other players in her wake with an irresistible force.

1920 saw Mrs. Mallory's first invasion of Europe since herAmerican triumphs. Misfortune was her portion. She was ill beforesailing and, never at her best on shipboard, a bad voyagecompleted the wreck of her condition. She had little time forpractice in England and it was a player far below her best whowent down to crushing de feat at the hands of Mrs.Lambert-Chambers in the semi- final round of the World'sChampionship at Wimbledon.

Defeated but not discouraged, Mrs. Mallory returned to Americaand, again reaching her true form, won the championship withease. She made up her mind the day of her defeat in England that1921 would again find her on European courts.

The season of 1921 in America opened in a blaze of tournamentsthroughout the entire country. Mrs. Mallory showed early in theyear she was at her best by winning the Indoor Championship ofthe United States from one of the most representative fields evergathered together for this event.

Early May found Mrs. Mallory on the seas bound for France andEngland. The story of her magnificent, if losing, struggle inboth countries is told elsewhere in this book, but she sailed forhome recognised abroad as one of the great players of the world,a thing which many of the foreign critics had not acknowledgedthe previous year.

The trip of the American team to France, and particularly thepresence of Mrs. Mallory, coupled with the efforts of theCommittee for Devastated France, finally induced Mile. SuzanneLenglen, the famous French World's Champion, to consent to cometo America. The announcement of her decision started a boom inthe game that has been unequalled. Out in California, Mrs. MaySutton Bundy and Miss Mary Kendall Browne, our former champions,heard the challenge and, laying aside the duties of everydaylife, buckled on the armour of the courts and journeyed East todo battle with the French wonder girl. Mrs. Mallory, filled witha desire to avenge her defeat in France, sailed for home in timeto play in the American championship.

What a marvelous tournament this proved to be! In very truth itwas a World's Championship. Mrs. May Sutton Bundy, former world'schampion, back again after fifteen years with all her old charmof manner, much of her speed of shot and foot, and even morecunning and experience; Miss Mary K. Browne, brilliant,fascinating, clever Mary, with all her old-time personality andgame that three times had carried her to the highest honors inAmerican tennis; Mrs. Mallory, keen, determined and resourceful,defending the title she had held so long and well; the youngplayers, rising in the game, struggling to attain the heights,and finally looming over all the figure of the famous Frenchchampion of champions, Suzanne Lenglen, considered by manycompetent critics the greatest woman tennis player of all time.

The stage was set for the sensational, and for once it occurred.The God of Luck took a hand in the blind draw and this resultedin all the stars, with the exception of Miss Mary Browne, fallingin one half. Mile. Suzanne Lenglen was drawn against Miss EleanorGoss, while Mrs. Mallory met Mrs. Marion Zinderstein Jessop, herfamous rival, in the first round, with the winners of thesematches to play each other in the second.

Unfortunately illness prevented Mile. Lenglen from sailing at herappointed time. She arrived in America but one day before thetournament was to start. The officials of the United States LawnTennis Association wisely granted Mile. Lenglen another day'sgrace by holding her match with Miss Goss until Tuesday. Mrs.Mallory, playing brilliantly, crushed Mrs. Jessop on Monday.

Then came the deluge! Miss Goss, taken suddenly ill, was forcedto default to Mlle. Lenglen on Tuesday and Mrs. Mallory wascalled upon to meet the great French player in Mlle. Lenglen'sfirst American appearance.

There is no question but what it was a terribly hard position forMlle. Lenglen. Mrs. Mallory was physically and mentally on thecrest. She had lived for this chance ever since Mlle. Lenglen haddefeated her at St. Cloud in June. Now it was hers and shedetermined to make the most of it.

The two women stepped on the court together. Mlle. Lenglen wasobviously and naturally nervous. Mrs. Mallory was quietly, grimlyconfident. Her whole attitude said "I won't be beaten." Every oneof the 10,000, spectators felt it and joined with her in herdetermination. It was an electric current between the gallery andthe player. I felt it and am sure that Mlle. Lenglen must havedone so too. It could not fail to impress her. The match openedwith Mrs. Mallory serving. From the first ball, the Americanchampion was supreme. Such tennis I have never seen and I verilybelieve it will never be seen again. The French girl was playingwell. She was as good as when she defeated Mrs. Mallory in Franceor Miss Ryan in England, but this time she was playing asuper-woman who would not miss. One cannot wonder her nerves,naturally overwrought, broke under the strain.

Mrs. Mallory, in an exhibition of faultless, flawless tennis, ranthrough the first set 6-2. It was at this point Mlle. Lenglenmade her mistake.

She had trouble getting her breath and was obviously feeling thestrain of her tremendous exertions. She defaulted the match! Mrs.Mallory walked from the court conqueror, clearly the superior ofthe much vaunted world's champion.

It is regrettable Mlle. Lenglen defaulted, for if she had playedout the match, everyone would have made full allowance for herdefeat, due, it would be said, to natural reaction from herrecent sea journey. No one would have been quicker to makeallowance for Mlle. Lenglen than Mrs. Mallory herself. The wholetennis public deeply regretted an incident that might well havebeen avoided.

Mrs. Mallory was the woman of the hour. She marched on to victoryand successfully defended her title by virtue of victories overMrs. May Sutton Bundy in the semi-final and Miss Mary Browne inthe final.

Marvellous Molla! World's Champion in 1921 beyond shadow ofdispute!

It is deplorable that the quite natural reaction and nervousupset, coupled with a return of her bronchial illness, forcedMlle. Lenglen to return to France before she was able to play herexhibition tour for the Committee for Devastated France. Possibly1922 will find conditions more favorable and the Gods of Fatewill smile on the return of Mlle. Lenglen to America.

MRS. FRANKLIN I. MALLORY (Molla Bjurstedt)

One of the most remarkable personalities in the tennis world is
Mrs. Molla Bjurstedt Mallory, the American Champion and actually
Champion of the World, 1921.

Mrs. Mallory is a Norsewoman by birth. She came to America in1915. In 1919 she married Franklin I. Mallory, and thus became anAmerican citizen.

It is a remarkable game which Mrs. Mallory has developed. She hasno service of real value. Her overhead is nil, her volleying ismediocre; but her marvellous forehand and backhand drives,coupled with the wonderful court-covering ability and fightingspirit that have made her world-famous, allow her to rise abovethe inherent weaknesses of those portions of her game and defeatin one season all the greatest players in the world, includingMlle. Suzanne Lenglen.

Mrs. Mallory, with delightful smile, never failing sportsmanshipand generosity in victory or defeat, is one of the most popularfigures in tennis.

MRS. THOMAS C. BUNDY (May Sutton)

It is said "they never come back," but Mrs. May Sutton Bundy hasproved that at least one great athlete is an exception to thesaying. Fifteen years ago, May Sutton ruled supreme among thewomen tennis stars of the world.

In 1921 Mrs. May Sutton Bundy, mother of four children, after a
retirement of over a I decade, returned to the game when Mlle.
Lenglen announced her intention of invading America. If Mlle.
Lenglen's visit to our shores did nothing more than bring Mrs.
Bundy and Miss Browne back to us, it was well worth while.

Mrs. Bundy in 1921 was still a great player. She has a peculiarreverse twist service, a wonderful forehand drive, but withexcessive top spin, a queer backhand poke, a fine volley and areliable overhead. Much of her old aggressiveness and speed offoot are still hers. She retains all of her famous fightingspirit and determination, while she is even more charming anddelightful than of old. She is a remarkable woman, who stands forall that is best in the game.

MARY KENDALL BROWNE

The return of another former National Champion in 1921 in theperson of Mary K. Browne, who held the title in 1912, '13 and'14, brought us again a popular idol. The tennis public hasmissed Miss Browne since 1914 and her return was in the nature ofa personal triumph.

Mary Browne has the best produced tennis game of any Americanwoman. It is almost if not quite the equal in stroke technique ofSuzanne Lenglen. She has a fast flat service. Her ground strokesare clean, flat drives forehand and backhand. She volleys exactlylike Billy Johnston. No praise can be higher. Her overhead isdecisive but erratic. She couples this beautiful game with aremarkable tennis head and a wonderful fighting spirit.

Miss Browne is a trig and trim little figure on the court as sheglides over its surface. It is no wonder that her public loveher.

MRS. GEORGE WIGHTMAN (Hazel Hotchkiss)

The woman to whom American tennis owes its greatest debt indevelopment is Hazel Hotchkiss Wightman, National Champion 1909,'10, '11 and 1919. Mrs. Wightman has practically retired fromsingles play. Her decision cost the game a wonderful player. Shehas a well placed slice service, a ground game that isessentially a chop fore- and backhand, although at times shedrives off her forehand. She volleys remarkably. She is the equalof Mary Browne in this department, while her overhead is the bestof any woman in the game.

Hazel Wightman is as clever a court general and tactician, man orwoman, as I have ever known. She has forgotten more tennis thanmost of us ever learn. She is the Norman Brookes of woman'stennis.

It is not only in her game that Mrs. Wightman has stood for thebest in tennis, but she has given freely of her time and abilityto aid young players in the game. She made Marion ZindersteinJessop the fine player she is. Mrs. Wrightman is always willingto offer sound advice to any player who desires it.

Mrs. Wightman and Miss Florence Ballin are the prime factors inthe new organization of woman's tennis that has resulted in thegreat growth of the game in the past two years.

MRS. JESSOP (Marion Zinderstein)

There is no player in tennis of greater promise than MarionZinderstein Jessop. She has youth, a wonderful game, the resultof a sound foundation given her by Hazel Wightman, and aremarkable amount of experience for so young a girl. She has abeautiful fast service, but erratic. Her ground- game isperfectly balanced, as she chops or drives from either side withequal facility. She volleys with great severity and certainty.Her overhead is possibly her weakest point. She lacks theconfidence that her game really deserves.

HELEN WILLS

The most remarkable figure that has appeared on the horizon ofwoman's tennis since Suzanne Lenglen first flashed into thepublic eye, is little Helen Wills of California, Junior Championof 1921. She is only fifteen. Stocky, almost ungainly, owing topoor footwork, her hair in pigtails down her back, she is aquaint little person who instantly walks into hearts of thegallery.

The tennis this child plays is phenomenal. She serves with thepower and accuracy of a boy. She drives and chops forehand andbackhand with reckless abandon. She rushes to the net and killsin a way that is reminiscent of Maurice McLoughlin. Suddenly shedubs the easiest sort of a shot and grins a happy grin. There isno doubt she is already a great player. She should become muchgreater. She is a miniature Hazel Wightman in her game. Aboveall, she is that remarkable combination, an unspoiled child and apersonality.

There are many other players of real promise coming to the front.
Boston boasts of a group that contains Mrs. Benjamin E. Cole
(Anne Sheafe) who has made a great record in the season of 1921;
Miss Edith Sigourney, who accompanied Mrs. Mallory abroad, Miss
Leslie Bancroft and Mrs. Godfree. There are Miss Martha Bayard,
Miss Helen Gilleandean, Mrs. Helene Pollak Folk, Miss Molly
Thayer, Miss Phyllis Walsh and Miss Anne Townsend in New York and
Philadelphia.

France

MLLE. SUZANNE LENGLEN

There is no more unique personality, nor more remarkable playeramong the women than Mademoiselle Suzanne Lenglen, the famousFrench girl who holds the World's Championship title. Mlle.Lenglen is a remarkable figure in the sporting world. She haspersonality, individuality, and magnetism that hold the publicinterest. She is the biggest drawing card in the tennis world.

Mlle. Lenglen's fame rests on her drive. Strange though it mayseem, her drive is the least interesting part of her game. Mlle.Lenglen uses a severe overhead service of good speed. It is aremarkable service for a woman, one which many men might do wellto copy. Her famous forehand drive is a full arm swing from theshoulder. It meets the ball just as Mlle. Lenglen springs in theair. The result is pictorially unique, but not good tennis. Sheloses speed and power by this freak. Her backhand is beautifullyplayed, from perfect footwork, with a free swing and toppeddrive. It is a remarkable stroke. Her volleying is perfect inexecution and result. She hits her overhead smash freely with a"punch" that is as great as many men. It is as fine an overheadas that of Mrs. George Wightman, the American Champion.

Mlle. Lenglen's speed of foot is marvellous. She runs fast andeasily. She delights in acrobatic jumps, many of themunnecessary, at all times during her play. She is a wonderfulgallery player, and wins the popularity that her dashing styledeserves. She is a brilliant court general, conducting her attackwith a keen eye on both the court and the gallery.

Mlle. Lenglen is not outstanding among the women players of theworld, in my opinion. She is probably the best stroke player inthe world to-day, yet Mrs. Lambert Chambers, Mrs. GeorgeWightman, Miss Elizabeth Ryan, Mrs. Franklin L. Mallory (formerlyMiss Molla Bjurstedt), Miss Mary Browne, and Mrs. May SuttonBundy are all in her class in match play. There is no womanplaying tennis that has the powerful personality of Mlle.Lenglen. Her acrobatic style and grace on the court form anappeal no gallery can resist. Her very mannerisms fool peopleinto considering her far greater than she really is, even thoughshe is a wonderful player.

MME. BILLOUTT (Mlle. Brocadies)

Second only to Suzanne Lenglen in France is Mme. Billoutt,formerly Mlle. Brocadies, once the idol of the Paris tennispublic. This remarkable player has as perfectly developed a gameas I have seen. Her actual stroking is the equal of Mlle.Lenglen. Her strokes are all orthodox, flat racquet ones. Herground game is based wholly on the drive, fore- or backhand. Shehas grown rather heavier in the last few years and consequentlyslowed up, but she is still one of the great players of theworld.

England

In marked contrast to the eccentricities of Mlle. Lenglen onefinds the delightfully polished style of Mrs. Lambert Chambers.Mrs. Chambers has a purely orthodox game of careful executionthat any student of the game should recognize as the highest formof tennis strokes.

Mrs. Chambers serves an overhead delivery of no particularmovement. She slices or "spoons" her ground strokes, forehand orbackhand. She seldom volleys or smashes. Her only excursions tothe net are when she is drawn to the net.

It is not Mrs. Chambers' game itself so much as what she doeswith it, that I commend so highly. Her change of pace anddistance is wonderfully controlled. Her accuracy marvellous. Herjudgment is remarkable, and the way in which she saves undueexertion is an art in itself. She gets a wonderful return for heroutlay of effort.

Hers is a personality of negation. Her manner on the court isnegative, her shots alone are positive. She is never flustered,and rarely shows emotion.

Mrs. Chambers is the "Mavro" of women as regards her recoveringability. Her errors are reduced to a minimum at all times. To erris human; but at times there is something very nearly inhumanabout Mrs. Chambers' tennis.

ELIZABETH RYAN

The English-American star Elizabeth Ryan is another player ofmarked individuality. Born in California, Miss Ryan migrated toEngland while quite young. For the past decade "Bunny," as she iscalled, has been a prominent figure in English and Continentaltournaments.

Miss Ryan has a queer push-reverse twist service that is wellplaced but carries little speed. She chops viciously forehand andbackhand off the ground and storms the net at every opening. Hervolleying is crisp and decisive. Overhead she is severe buterratic. She is a dogged fighter, never so dangerous as whenbehind. Her tactics are aggressive attack at all times, and ifthis fails she is lost.

Although Miss Ryan is an American by birth she must be consideredas an English player, for her development is due to her play inEngland.

MRS. BEAMISH

This English player is an exponent of the famous baseline game ofthe country. She drives, long deep shots fore- and backhand,corner to corner, chasing her opponent around the court almostimpossible distances. Her service volleying and overhead are fairbut not noteworthy. Another player of almost identical game andof almost equal class is Mrs. Peacock, Champion of India. Herwhole game is a little better rounded than Mrs. Beamish, but shelacks the latter's experience.

Among the other women in England who are delightfully original intheir games are Mrs. Larcombe, the wonderful chop-stroke player,whose clever generalship and tactics place her in the front rank,and Mrs. M'Nair, with her volleying attack.

Women's tennis in England is on a slightly higher plane at thistime than in America; but the standard of play in America israpidly coming up. International competition between women on thelines of the Davis Cup, for which a trophy has previously beenoffered by Lady Wavertree in England, and in 1919 by Mrs.Wightman in America, and twice refused by the InternationalFederation, would do more than any other factor to place women'stennis on the high plane desired. This plan has succeeded for themen, why should it not do as well for the women?

ILLUSTRATION CAPTIONS

{ PLATE II. FOREHAND GRIP. FRONT VIEW. Notice the straight line ofthe arm, hand and racquet, the flat racquet face, the naturalfinger position on the handle. The racquet is in position to hita forehand drive.

FOREHAND GRIP, BACK VIEW. The line is straight, the head of theracquet slightly in advance of the hand. The pose is at themoment of contact between ball and racquet.}

{ PLATE III. THE COMPLETED SWING OF THE FOREHAND DRIVE. Notice thebody position, at right angles to the net, the weight on thefront or left foot, having passed from the right foot with theswing, just at the moment the ball is struck. The racquet iscarried to the limit of the swing and falls into the left hand atheight of the shoulder. The racquet face has passed over theball. The reader is looking through the strings. The stroke wasmade with the far side of the racquet from the camera. The eye isfollowing the ball in its flight. The whole movement is forward.The tendency in hitting a forehand is to stop the swing too soon.Notice the full follow through to the extreme limit of my swing.The hitting plane in this picture is too high, the shot havingbeen made almost at the shoulder. The correct hitting plane forthe forehand drive is along the line of the waist. Play alldrives at this height if possible. Step back to allow the ball tofall waist high if necessary rather than play it at the shoulder.Hit your forehand drive decisively but do not attempt to killevery shot. Be accurate first and attain speed second.}

{ PLATE IV. BACKHAND GRIP. FRONT VIEW. Note the hand on top of theracquet handle, yet retaining the straight line of arm, hand andracquet Is in the forehand. The change from the forehand grip isone quarter circle of the handle. The knuckles are up anddirectly towards the opponent. The head of the racquet isadvanced slightly towards the ball.

BACKHAND GRIP. BACK VIEW. Notice the line of arm and racquet isstraight and the hand on top of the handle. The thumb in mystroke is around the handle, but may be placed up the handle ifdesired. Personally, I do not use it, and do not advocate it, asit tends to detract from the freedom of the grip.}

{ PLATE V. COMPLETION OF THE BACKHAND DRIVE. Notice the feet arefirmly set, with the weight on the right foot, to which it wasshifted from the left with the swing. The racquet has struck andpassed over the ball, topping it. The body is at right angles tothe net, the left arm extended to aid in perfect balance. Thewhole movement is forward, while the eye is on the ball, in itsflight. The stroke in the picture was off a high bounding ballwhich accounts for the racquet's position being above the wristin order to bring down the ball. The perfect backhand drive isoff the waist, and the racquet passes along that hitting plane.Meet the ball well forward on the backhand, at least in front ofthe right hip. This will obviate the common error of slicing offto the sideline and will tend to pull the ball, into court. Thelocked wrist, with no turn is essential on all backhand shotsbelow the shoulders. It insures solidity of impact and adds paceto the return. I believe in all beginners playing their backhandshots cross court until they have fully mastered the footwork andlocked wrist swing. The common error of slicing the backhandcannot be too strongly emphasized and condemned and crosscourting the shot tends to avoid it.}

{ PLATE VI. THE FOREHAND VOLLEY. Notice the body at right anglesto the net, the left foot advanced to the shot, the weight evenlydistributed on the feet, the wrist slightly below the racquethead, the racquet head itself slighly{ sic} tilted,,{ sic} to liftthe volley, and the whole movement a "block" of the ball. Thewrist is stiff. There is no swing. The eyes are down. watchingthe ball. The left arm is the balance wheel. The body crouchedand the knees bent.}

{ PLATE VII. THE BACKHAND VOLLEY. The body position and weightcontrol and balance are the same as in the forehand volley. Thecrouch is more pronounced as the hitting plane is lower. The headof the racquet is firmly blocked by the stiff, locked wrist. Theeyes are centered on the ball, which has just left the racquet.}

{ PLATE VIII. DAVIS CUP CHALLENGE ROUND, 1921Zenzo Shinddzu. Japan and William T. Tilden 2nd. America, justprevious to the opening of their terrific match in which Shimidzuled by two sets. 5-4 and 30-0, only to have the American finallypull out the Victory.}

{ PLATE IX. DAVIS CUP CHALLENGE ROUND, 1921William M. Johnston. America and Ichiya Kumagae. Japan, take thecourt for the opening match before a gallery of over 12,000people. Johnston won in sequence sets, scoring the first pointfor America.}

{ PLATE X. FAMOUS DAVIS CUP DOUBLES TEAMS
NORMAN E. BROOKES AND GERALD L. PATTERSON Australia, 1920
R. M. WILLIAMS, 2ND AND WATSON M. WASHBURN America, 1921
M. E. MCLOUGHLIN AND T. C. BUNDY America, 1914}

{ PLATE XI. FAMOUS DAVIS CUP STARS
NORMAN E. BROOKES Australia
ANTHON F. WILDING New Zealand
BEALS WRIGHT America
W. A. LARNED America}

{ PLATE XII.
THE 1921 AUSTRALIAN DAVIS CUP TEAM
J.O. Anderson, J.B. Hawkes. Norman Peach and C. V. Todd.

THE 1920 AMERICAN DAVIS CUP TEAM
R. N. Williams, 2nd, W. M. Johnston, Captain Samuel Hardy, W. T.
Tilden, 2nd and C. S. Garland.}

{ PLATE XIII. FORMER CHAMPIONS OF AMERICA
R. NORRIS WILLIAMS 1914 and in 1916
WILLIAM M. JOHNSTON 1915 and in 1919
MAURICE E. MCLOUGHLIN 1912 and in 1918
ROBERT LINDLEY MURRAY 1917 and in 1918}

Related articles