The Telegraph Book of Wimbledon. Review

[urban]

Just got a new book on tennis and Wimbledon in particular: The Telegraph Book of Wimbledon. Anyone for Tennis? Edited by Martin Smith, Aurum Press 2010. It's a collection of articles of the Daily Telegraph and covers the whole history of Wimbledon from the beginnings in 1877 to the year 2009. If you want a lavishly illustrated book, don't buy it. It has only a few Photos, which introduce the chapters. It is more for the cognoscenti, and offers bread and butter accounts of most of the great matches and tournaments of Wimbledon's history. The Telegraph always was - together with The Times - the holy grail of tennis journalism. They had special 'Tennis Correspondents', who were the doyens of tennis writers. A. Wallis Myers (the A stands for Arthur) was the first, a despot following the introduction, who was the leading tennis brain for the first half of the Century. He was followed by John Olliff and especially Lance Tingay, the leading authority on tennis in the later half of the 20th Century. They were so highly regarded, that each year they made the pre computer world rankings, and all the world accepted them. The successor of Tingay was the great John Parsons, who himself wrote a famous encyclopedia.
We find here fine articles, not the overflow of praises, goat moaning and exalted writings, we see today, but detailled, well written match accounts and experts analyses. I would call these articles consummate. Some other great commentators like Fred Perry, Lew Hoad, Dan Maskell give insightful comments, too. The book may be interesting for the early period researchers. There are match accounts of the Dohertys or Brookes, and the Gore- Ritchie- final of 1909 is fully documented with even all the points numbers.
So you get a clear picture about the evolvement of Wimbledon through the early years, the Golden era of Tilden and Lenglen, the last amateur years, the Open era and the modern game. I recommend this book for all, who want to dig a bit deeper into tennis history.

 

[krosero]

Urban, I've got to get a copy of this. thanks so much for the notice!

 

[pc1]

Thanks Urban.

 

[Borg Number One]

Thanks for the information Urban. This looks like a really good book to have. Here's a link below with an overview as well.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...th,+Aurum+Press+2010&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Wimbledon has progressed from vicarage tea-party pastime to the greatest tennis tournament in the world. It is the one Grand Slam event that today's multi-millionaire players yearn to win above all others. The only one still played in whites and fought on grass, and one of the few surviving bastions of true sportsmanship. The names of Perry, Lenglen, Wills Moody, Tilden, Budge, Laver, Borg, McEnroe, Navratilova, Sampras, Graf, Federer and the Williams sisters etched among the immortals on the All-England Club's honours board will be remembered more for their exploits in SW19 than at any other tournament. Through the expert analysis and reporting of tennis correspondents such as A. Myers Wallis, John Olliff, Lance Tingay and John Parsons, the Daily Telegraph has chronicled the skill, artistry and courage of the game's greatest exponents since the Championships first began in 1877. In over 130 years there has hardly been a cross-court winner, backhand down the line, overhead smash or double-fault that has passed unnoticed or uncommented. But Wimbledon is so much more than a tennis tournament. The Fortnight is a cornerstone of the mid-summer social season, as renowned for its gargantuan consumption of Champagne, smoked salmon and the ubiquitous strawberries and cream as for its controversies, tantrums and umbrellas on court. It is the only sporting event of the year that bursts off the sports pages and invades such diverse sections as fashion, cookery, television and property. Not to mention the front page, leader page and letters column as The Daily Telegraph Book of Wimbledon now delightfully demonstrates. Over the years the Telegraph has attracted such notable writers as Michael Parkinson, Sebastian Faulks, Russell Davies and Taki to enthuse about Wimbledon, as well as providing a platform for insightful comment from great players of the past like John McEnroe, Fred Perry, Chris Evert and Billie-Jean King. Now we collect the very best of that writing to present the complete history of England's greatest sporting institution. So kick back with that Pimms spritzer, and read on! Martin Smith was for many years Assistant Sports Editor of The Daily Telegraph.

 

[elegos7]

Thanks for the info, Urban.

Are there match desciptions from the 19th century as well? I think especially on the Renshaws, Pim, Dod etc.

 

[urban]

Yes, Elegos, there are match reports from the 19th Century, 14 pages and, altogether 25 pages pre WWI. Some are short tornaments reports with results, but mostly longer descriptions of matches and styles. The 1878 tournament is covered quite detailled (3-4 pages), and there are detailled descriptions of the Renshaws, the Dohertys, Brookes and Wilding. Interesting (and sounding very similar to the discussion here) are Wallis Myers retrospectives on the old era. For instance, after the 1932 final,he discusses the question, whether Vines serve was a new invented weapon. He contradicts, citing the heavy serves of Dwight Davis and MacLoughlin, and the counterattacks of Williams and the Dohertys. There are also quite interesting letters to the editors, which contain the contemporary opinions on tennis.
On thing, what is missing and would be useful for the reader, would be a personal register at the end, that one could find informations about certain players faster. So you have to read through the whole book, to find often dispersed informations over the years.

 

[urban]

I give an example of Wallis Myers reflections after the famous Crawford-Vines- final of 1933, when he compares the fresh final to his own experience of past matches: "The mind passes back in swift retrospect. Renshaw and Lawford had historic battles in the 1880s - genius against virility and confidence. Pim and Baddeley had several finals, in which the science of the game was worthily revealed. The Dohertys showed us elegance of stroke play, but their finals in the main merely advertised their supremacy. A great Australian, Norman Brookes...had his famous challenge with H.L. in 1905. I took a hue: It was a match to remember, but it had no climax, and only went to 3 sets. Wilding and Roper Barrett had a match for speculation, the latter retired in a heat wave at 2 sets all. Wilding's defending match against McLoughlin had a familiar resemblance to yesterdays contest, it did not go beyond 3 sets".

 

[krosero]

Here are more reflections from Myers, after Vines destroyed Austin in the 1932 Wimbledon final:

"No man's knowledge can go beyond his experience. I found many observers of Saturday's final speaking as if the service of Vines was some novel and uncanny weapon impossible to counter and impossible to reproduce. The history of American and even French lawn tennis confounds that theory. At the beginning of the century Dwight Davis (who was present on Saturday) was serving nearly as fast as Vines, and finding players in his own country ready with a reply. R.N. Williams defeated M.E. McLoughlin in the final of the American Championship of 1914 by standing in and taking the Californian's thunderbolts on the rise; so did both Wilding and Parke at Wimbledon in 1913. Lacoste had an answer to Tilden's service, both in America and France, and passed on the recipe to Cochet. Vincent Richards, whose ground strokes bore no comparison to Austin's, could hold Tilden even in his prime by parrying his service. Patterson's service was a lethal instrument in England, but I saw Johnston win eight games against it in succession at Forest Hills in 1924. I also witnessed Borotra handle it unflinchingly and victoriously in a Davis Cup match on the same ground in 1925. The truth is that false values of the game have, through ignorance, obtained currency in this country. The lessons of history have been neglected."


Interesting that even back someone with a great deal of experience thought that tennis history was being neglected.

Of course it does raise the question how reliable human memory is, when looking back so many years before. And they could not test their memories against the abundant videos that have when we want to talk about previous generations like Borg or Connors. But -- just speculating here -- maybe they had more footage than we think. We don't have much old film today of the early 20th century, but obviously much of it has been lost, so I wonder if the generations of the 1920s and 30s had some access to even older films -- films that for us have simply disappeared forever.

Who knows, but certainly Myers himself was experienced enough to recall tennis from previous decades; and he had a reputation as an objective observer.

 

[newmark401]

Yes, Elegos, there are match reports from the 19th Century, 14 pages and, altogether 25 pages pre WWI. Some are short tornaments reports with results, but mostly longer descriptions of matches and styles. The 1878 tournament is covered quite detailled (3-4 pages), and there are detailled descriptions of the Renshaws, the Dohertys, Brookes and Wilding. Interesting (and sounding very similar to the discussion here) are Wallis Myers retrospectives on the old era. For instance, after the 1932 final,he discusses the question, whether Vines serve was a new invented weapon. He contradicts, citing the heavy serves of Dwight Davis and MacLoughlin, and the counterattacks of Williams and the Dohertys. There are also quite interesting letters to the editors, which contain the contemporary opinions on tennis.
On thing, what is missing and would be useful for the reader, would be a personal register at the end, that one could find informations about certain players faster. So you have to read through the whole book, to find often dispersed informations over the years.

I wouldn't really buy this book for accounts of the era of the Renshaws or the Dohertys or the 1890s because it covers them very briefly. The two main early accounts are from 1878 and from 1881; in the latter year William Renshaw won his first Wimbledon singles title.

The "Daily Telegraph" didn't have a tennis correspondent as such until 1908, when Arthur Wallis Myers was given that role. There are two or three detailed accounts of matches played at Wimbledon between 1908 and 1914, all men's Challenge Round matches.

The book really becomes interesting after the First World War. There is an account of the Lenglen-Lambert Chambers Challenge Round match at Wimbledon in 1919 but the focus is on the build-up, the King and Queen being there, etc. Only the third set is looked at in any detail.

In later years there are accounts of more great matches, not necessarily finals. Another emphasis is on matches featuring British players, particularly British winners of the singles titles (Kathleen McKane, Fred Perry, Angela Mortimer, Ann Jones and Virginia Wade). There is also a focus on changing trends in tennis, e.g. in clothing, behaviour on court, and the move towards Open tennis and all that meant.

All in all, the book is a fascinating read, especially for people who like the earlier periods (after 1919 and before 1968). Wallis Myers died in 1939; John Olliff replaced him and was the tennis correspondent until 1951, when Olliff died and was replaced by Lance Tingay, an excellent writer, not just of individual articles, but of books on tennis history. In 1981, Tingay was followed by John Parsons, who was still tennis correspondent for the "Daily Telegraph" when he died in 2004.

 

[urban]

The older expertises were often done on the basis of the eye-witness. After the 1933 final, Wallis Myers writes, that he already had seen 35 finals, and cites a certain Hickson, who was the referee at the very first final, and had seen 53 Wimbledon finals. Would be interesting to know, how many recent experts like John Barrett have seen. I think, he may have started in the late 40s.