Let's do some news from beyond Paris first. Congrats to Baylor for winning the men's team title. In the semis, UCLA upset Illinois, snapping the Illini's two-year undefeated streak. ... Check out the latest results for the men's and women's NCAA Division I tournament. ...

Brad Gilbert is coming out with a new motivational book titled, I've Got Your Back. It was co-written with James Kaplan. ...

He still lacks a coach and agent, but Roger Federer has hired a public relations manager. ...

Here's an idea: A Bahamas casino owner is considering replicating the four Grand Slam center courts and inviting the reigning finalists to play a rematch in a big-money exhibition. ...

Am I the only person who sees Ron Artest and thinks of a young Richard Williams? Not just in that crazy-but-nonetheless-endearing kind of way. They even sound alike. ...

Useless trivia: Roland Garros was once a lover of Isadora Duncan. ...

Now for a few questions:

WTHIGOW Tim Henman? Since when is he a clay-court virtuoso? 
  --  Dave Seevaratnam, Midhurst, Ont.

	MAILBAG Jon Wertheim will answer questions from SI.com users in his mailbag each Monday. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

Note I'm writing this before his quarterfinal match against Juan Ignacio Chela. But, yeah, this has been an interesting twist, huh? The funny thing is Henman looked like he was out on his feet against Cyril Saulnier in round one. He lost the first two sets in about as much time as it took you to read that sentence. As of this writing, he has a good chance of reaching the semis. I'm guessing you were being facetious when you asked when he became a clay-court virtuoso, but I saw him play a dynamite set against Juan Carlos Ferrero in Paris last year. Henman's a good athlete whose backhand stays low, and has a swooping serve that does well on clay. Good for him. And what sort of bizarre, Chesterton-type irony it would be if he never won Wimbledon but won the French.

What's your stand on grunting? Do you think it makes people play better? Monica Seles, Maria Sharapova and the Williams sisters play their best tennis when they grunt -- it works for me too. Are you in favor of the grunt, or is the concept as appalling to you as the sleeveless shirt? (By the way, I hate sleeveless shirts too.) 
  --  Matt Whitaker, New York City

We're all for freedom of expression here. Some players, I suppose, use grunting as a tactic but, especially in the case of Seles, I think it's a natural response to the exertion of hitting the beejesus out of the ball. The most valid critique I've heard against grunting is it obscures the sound of the ball coming off the grunter's racket, so the opponent (the gruntee?) is placed at an unfair advantage. But on balance we say if you want to sound like a stuck pig (or, as the superior British columnist Simon Barnes once put it: "like a bordello when the fleet was in"), we say go for it.

What's all the commotion about Andre Agassi losing in the first round of the French Open? With all due respect to Agassi, I wasn't surprised that he got eliminated so early. He didn't play enough warm-up tourneys going into the French Open. Men's tennis is very competitive -- there are a lot of really good players who work hard on all surfaces, as compared to the women's tour where the top 10 generally dominate the rest. In tennis, and this even applies to club levels, you can't expect to win matches if you're not physically and mentally conditioned and that means continuous practice.
  --  Norman, Toronto

I agree and disagree. I was asked on a radio interview whether this was "this biggest upset in tennis history?" On its face, it's stunning -- Agassi, the iconic player, the 1999 champ, falling to an unknown qualifier playing in his first tour-level match. But in context it wasn't that shocking. When any player -- much less a 34-year-old who has been strangely "off" a few times a year -- comes into a Slam having played one match in seven weeks, a demoralizing defeat at that, it isn't a jaw-dropping surprise when he loses. Having said that, when Agassi plays anyone that inexperienced and that modestly-ranked on such a large stage, you have to assume he'll find a way to win -- no matter how badly he's playing. At this stage in his career, he knows the opportunities are extremely finite. If he loses to Guillermo Coria in the quarters, as he did last year, so be it. Failing to figure out a way to get past a guy ranked outside the top 200 must be crushing.

I have to complain to someone, and you're the only one who will listen! On Around the Horn, the commentators discussed the fate of Agassi following his French Open first-round defeat. One claimed Agassi's last Major was at the Australian Open in 1999 -- that was four years off, he won the Australian in 2003. The other said he was ranked 16th going into this year's French Open -- 10 spots too low. I always enjoy watching that show, but I now wonder how accurate the hosts' statements have been throughout the program's history. Don't they have to at least verify what they say with an outside source?
  --  Yosh, Las Vegas

We'll say it again: Watching that show with the expectation of informed, accurate, nuanced discussion is like watching the Iron Chef for the sex scenes, or tuning into the O'Reilly Factor for a sympathetic take on the French.

The popularity of the women's game has to do with time, time, time. Nobody wants to watch a first-round match for six hours. Maybe a final, but the early rounds? No thank you. Let the men play three-set matches, like the women do. Here are the advantages: TV scheduling will be easier to organize, the audience can plan what matches they will see and there won't be any whining from men that women shouldn't get equal pay.
  --  K. Laurimaa, Sweden

Agree, agree, agree. When Fabrice Santoro beats Arnaud Clement 136-134 in the fifth set (OK, we exaggerate, but not by much) it makes for great theater. Alas, when an exhausted Santoro returns on a day's rest and moves as though Shawn Kemp were tethered to his feet, it makes for terrible theater. If the men played best-of-three it would be easier on their bodies -- this at a time when tennis has never had more wounded players. You're right about the "equal prize money" factor, but I've always thought the number of sets played was an arbitrary designation. Two sets of women's tennis can last as long as three sets between men; and the ball is often in play for longer. Plus if Gigli is longer than Tadpole, does that make it a better movie?

Fresh off a bit of basketball here in Minneapolis, I was struck by a "separated at birth" comparison: Sam Cassell and Hicham Arazi. Looks and temperament? It's there, trust me.
  --  Erin Magnus, Minneapolis 

Why is it that the crowds at the French Open are so rowdy? All the yelling, booing and jeering seems out of place in a sport that, so often, actually has etiquette. I don't remember the crowds at the U.S. Open, Australian Open or Wimbledon being so disrespectful. It is one thing to root for a certain player, but these crowds often take it way too far. 
  --  Erin, Torrance, Calif.

I see your point, but to quote Muhammad Ali, I ain't got no quarrel with no French tennis fans. They're knowledgeable, they're passionate about the sport and they want to feel as though they're part of the action. Do a few cross the line? Unquestionably. But give me that any day over the landed gentry in the Arthur Ashe luxury suites at the U.S. Open who sit with their backs to the court.

Why do you think players like Iva Majoli or Clarisa Fernandez didn't receive wild cards at the French Open, considering their past successes there? I think Fernandez was even seeded at this event as recently as last year.
  --  Christopher Hayes, Brighton, Mass.

If you ask me, this is one of the great injustices of tennis. The four countries fortunate enough to hold Slams basically get to disburse wild cards to their own players. So while two dozen middling American, British, French and Australian "prospects" (some ranked outside of the top 300) get a main-draw spot, far more deserving players either have to qualify or miss the draw entirely. Amelie Mauresmo whined about Martina Navratilova getting a wild card. She was going OK until she said it should have gone to a French upstart instead. What about that talented Spanish -- or Argentine or Russian -- player who, by accident of birth, doesn't hail from a country that holds a Slam? Anyway, in the case of Majoli and Fernandez, I'm not sure they're particularly deserving. Majoli, of course, is a former champion but that was seven years ago. The statute of limitations has sort of lapsed. She's done next to nothing this year and hasn't been a force in years. As for Fernandez, I was under the impression she was hurt. If not, she only reached the semis and that was mostly by dint of a cooperative draw.

Just saw the news that the big I, Goran Ivanisevic, is going to retire after Wimbledon. Immediately some questions being discussed in the Mailbag popped into my head: Does Ivanisevic make it to the Hall of Fame or qualify as "truly great"? My answer has to be yes. Although he only won one Slam, he was such a force at Wimbledon for so long he deserves it despite the numerous finals in which he choked. Thoughts?
  --  Chris Beiter, Seattle

Tough one. My philosophy is basically to err on the side of over-inclusion. I realize you don't want to cheapen the HOF and dilute the honor by clearing wall space for every Jerome Haehnel who comes down the pike. But what is the harm in letting in the borderliners? Ivanisevic is a good example. Here's a guy who fails our "two-slam" criteria for greatness. And for all his success at Wimbledon, he didn't do much else at the other Majors, only reaching the semis once. Still, he won Wimbledon, reached the final three other times, won TMS events, took up residence in the top five, and had the ineffable "plus factor" in spades. Entertaining player. Engaging personality. And -- his repeated use of the word "faggot" notwithstanding -- a real asset to the sport.

With the exodus of American men in singles and ESPN's skew toward U.S.-focused coverage, what are the chances that Bob and Mike Bryan will get their due and be a featured match?
  --  Nick, Irvine, Calif.

ESPN's ultimate Hobson's choice: Show doubles or show foreigners. Maybe they'll show us the Serena Williams-Maria Kirilenko classic for a fifth time.

Martina Navratilova's recent foray into singles at the French Open ruined the purity of this trivia question, but here goes: Which player defeated both Navratilova and Steffi Graf in their final career singles match on American soil? Answer: Amy "I need a bigger visor!" Frazier.
  --  Mitchell Kohn, West Hollywood, Calif

Very nice. And we note with sorrow that Amy (Down Goes) Frazier lost her first match in Paris.

Enjoy the second week, everyone!

Sports Illustrated senior writer Jon Wertheim covers tennis for the magazine and is a regular contributor to SI.com.