New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1920-04-04
Singles Rivals
Retain Grown
In the Doubles
Tilden and Richards Beat
Noshell and Hardy i'll
Straight Set Match
BY Fred Hawthorne

AhS "H ttS %
Armory yesterday afternoon the wearer
Of two national championship titles, the
result of the two matches in which he
engaged. In the singles final of the
indoor lawn tennis championship tour
nament he defeated Vincent Richards,
the seventeen-year-old playing-through
title holder. by a score Of 10-8, 6-3.
81. Later, paired with Richards, he
won the doubles crown by defeating
Samuel Hardy, of California, and S.
Howard Voshell, of Brooklyn. by a
score Of 6-3, SIS, Cd, 1910.
Thus it came about that between them
Tilden and Richards kept all the hon
ors that they had when they started
at the beginning of the tournament.
Richards started as singles champion
and finished with that title. The two
were already holders of the doubles
title.
The results were according to "form,'
as | indicated they might be in this
column yesterday morning. l have seen
Tllden in many matches indoors, but
never before have | witnessed him in
such unbeatable vein on the board floor
courts. His play was dynamic at times,
particularly when he felt that he need
ed a point at a critical stage of the
match, set or game, whichever it might
be.
Tilden's Speed Dazzles
~i~ former Philadelphia played
Vsc~srds Oft his feet by amazing speed,
which was the more remarkable be-
cause Tilden almost uniformly held per-
feet control. His dazzling volleying
from we'll inside the service court lines
mas probably never been e~xcelled in
doors, and his smashing Of everything
that came to him shoulder high or at
greater attitudes was positively deadly.
In the first set young Richards played
his great rival shot for shot, nor was
there anything to choose between them
until the seventeenth and eighteenth
games, In the latter of which Tilden
broker through service by meteoric
play.
After dropping this set Richards's
play suffered a visible lapse and he
never thereafter looked dangerous, and
there was ample reason for this falter-
Ing. After the first two games in the
match had been played S. w. Merrihew
strobe out to the court as Tilden be-
gan service in the third and started to
call foot-faults.
lhere would have been no objection
to this on the part of either player had
Merrlhew begun operations at the start
OF the match, or even had the players
peen consulted before he did take up
his duties. Richards, as usual, was the
chief sufferer from M%errihew's actiyi-
ties, for IN almost every instance when
ne was penalized-and he was called"
seven times in the first set and once in
the second-it meant the loss of the
point and sometimes the loss Of the
game, for Merrihaw was calling the
faults on the boys second service ball.
Show of Sportsmanship
A feature Of the match was Tilden's
splendid craftsmanship on these occa-
sions. More than once when Richards
lost a point through the foot-fault
judges ruling, and was plainly gaining
no advantage by his trespassing, Tilden
deliberately threw the next point to
his opponent. 1t did much to make
amends for what was otherwise an UNI
pleasant incident.
There were a hundred different opin-
IONS as to the merits of Merrihew's
work at the base line. "Tilden and
Merrihew beat Richards" and Orchards
defeated by two men" were -ome Of
the suggestions for headlines offered
who insisted that Merrihew was abso-
lutsly correct in his rulings, as "a rule
was a rule"
incline toward the latter view, under
conditions as they are. Certainly
Richards committed foot-faults, as did
Tilden-as almost every player does
but I do not think that the defending
champion derived any advantage be-
CAUSE Of his swinging one foot over
the line. In most cases it was only the
toe Of his foot that went over.
But the whole thing served to make
one thing clear to me. at least, and that
is that the new foot-fault rule is prac-
tically as vexatious a problem as before
the rules committee labored over it last
winter and, after months of brain work,
brought forth the present ruling. Only
when g player is compelled to keep both
feet on the ground until after the ball
has been struck will there be an end Of
the ceaseless argument, pro and con.
- In Unbeatable Mood
Leaving the matter of yesterdays
foot~faulting entirely out of the ques-
tion, ! do not think that Richards could
defeated Tilden and saved his
was In one Of those unbeatable moods
that ,,he sometimes works himself up
to, aHd that are always a delight to the
gallery, because you never know whcn
to expect one.
There is no doubt that Merrihew's
activity had a distinct effect on Rich
ardst game. The %youngster lost heart
anu diso snap IN MS play after that Stltf
frat set, and this was the reason. The
schoolboy's strongest suit is his ~volley-
ing. Before the foot~fault began to
get on his neryes Richards was working
his way into midcourt for the volley
IN fauisless style and holding Tilden
even.
Changes Richards's Game
But after Merrihew had penalized
him two or three times the champion
grew o~yercautIous and started his
aervices a good foot behind the base
line in the attempt to stop his breaking
Of the rule. But this extra foot had
the enect Of bringing Richards into
court just that much distance behind
the point where he should be to catch
the ball in the air. AS a result Tilden
caught his rival with the BAH landinv
at Klchsrds's feet, 30 that he was com,
N iGz.eag.@