Ranking the first ten tennis players for the 1930 season is a task of extraordinarily controversial character. The past campaign has been a series of upsets and surprises, culminating in the recent happenings on the Pacific coast which succeeded in knocking practically every calculation which had been formed up to that time into the proverbial cocked hat. The best ranking is bound to meet with opposition from a great number of self-appointed critics, many of whom will be just as near the demonstrable truth as the official U.S.L.T.A. decree.

Using the nationals as the primary basis for conclusions, it becomes pretty apparent that the first two ranking stars will be the new champion, John Doeg, and the veteran campaigner Bill Tildon. Doeg will in all probability be given the first position, though there is still a strong feeling that if the pair were to play ten matches, Big Bill would take well over half of them. The fact remains, though, that Doeg did win the most important contest the two engaged in this year, a fact which gives him a reasonable claim to the premier honors.

After Doeg and Tilden the ground becomes increasingly treacherous. TIME OUT has made the following list: no. 3, Shields; no. 4, Sidney Wood; no. 5, Allison; no. 6, Sutter; no. 7, Mangin; no. 8, Lott; no. 9, Vines; and no. 10, Van Ryn. This list omits Mercur, Bell, Hunter, and Coen of last year's elite. Of these Mercur finished up a bad season by being declared a professional, while the other three merely failed to keep pace with the rising tide of youthful stars which made the past season such a significant one in the development of American tennis.

Of these young brilliants, the most remarkable are, of course, Shields and Wood (who incidentally is headed for Harvard the year after next). Last year TIME OUT ranked Shields in the first ten explaining that it was more on the basis of ability than actual accomplishment that the New York youth rated his position. In the actual ranking, of course, ability was not taken into consideration and Shields appeared somewhere quite a way down the list; but this year he showed his real calibre, and if he decides to take his tennis a little more seriously in the future, he will be a very hard man to keep off the summit. Wood also is on the up and up, and should soon be with Shields as one of the world's premier exponents of the court game.

A defense of the rest of the ranking here set forth would be a long and at best unconvincing job; that is unconvincing to those with other ideas, while those who agree would need no convincing. Any way the list unquestionably contains most of the men who will receive official recognition. A perusal of it will go a long way towards illustrating what an important part young blood is playing in the net game in this country. BY TIME OUT.