Right to the questions on this Columbus Day ...

Jelena Dokic's match record this year is 6-16. Ian Walton/Getty Images

Which male and female tennis players do you think had disappointing years? My vote goes to Andy Roddick and Serena Williams.
  -- Bruno G., Houston

How can Roddick show his face in public? He's ranked second in the world and has only won 70 matches so far this year. He only won four titles and only reached the quarters at three of the four Slams. Disgraceful. Look, Roddick obviously failed to add to his haul of Slams and a looooong staircase separates him from Federer. But there are bigger disappointments. Take Mark Philippoussis, who has won 11 matches (against 19 defeats) this year. Or Rainer Schuettler, who finished last year at No. 6 and has only won half his matches in 2004. Juan Carlos Ferrero, David Nalbandian, James Blake, Taylor Dent ... no shortage of guys who would just as soon hit the "delete" key on '04.

As for the women, there's obviously a difference between disappointment due to sub-par play and disappointment due to injury. Just about everyone fits in the latter category, Serena included. But as far as substandard results, I'll go with Jelena Dokic, who was looking to get back on track this year and seldom got out of the first round.

I saw the poll on SI.com asking if Roger Federer should be considered for SI's Sportsman of the Year award. How insulting is that? I could understand if the poll asked whether he should be the SOTY, but not a poll asking whether he should be considered for it. Of course, he should! What's even more disturbing is how many people have voted no. After the U.S. Open final, Lleyton Hewitt said, 'It's an incredible effort, what he's done. I don't think people probably realize how hard it is.' I guess he's right.
  -- Marianne, Philadelphia

You're preaching to the choir. Feel free to flood the ballot box on this one.

I've heard enough about the controversy of what to do with tennis balls that are hit into the stands. Why don't they have the ballboys throw all of the used balls into the stands each time new balls come out? What a novel idea ... make it into a fun part of the matches. 
  -- Mark Foy, Tulsa

Not bad. But if they changed balls on even games, you wouldn't want bedlam in the stands as the player prepared to start serving. I still say giving the fan "coupons" they can redeem after the match for an autographed ball is a no-brainer.

Kim Clijsters' wrist injury has only allowed her to play in one tournament since May. Clive Brunskill/Getty Images

I'm an Italian medical doctor working in Africa. Do you think Kim Clijsters might consider changing her two-handed backhand to a one-handed one? She might not be as strong as before, but who knows? ... And she might be able to continue to make money.
  -- Stefano Grazia, Luanda, Angola

A few of you wrote in about this, and it's a good point. Clijsters is such a gifted player and natural athlete that if she took some time off to perfect a one-handed backhand, she's still a top-10 player. (Plus a one-handed backhand would give her extra reach so we wouldn't cringe every time she did the splits, chasing balls out wide.)

I'm no doctor, but I don't quite get how a wrist injury to your opposite arm is "career-threatening." Speaking of doctors, do you get the feeling that Belgian standards for patient confidentiality are slightly more lax than ours in the States? Clijsters' doctor isn't shy about commenting on his patient's prognosis -- often making remarks that are at odds with the information posted on Clijsters' infamous Web site.

Who would you pick to win between the Federer of today and the Pete Sampras of his vintage years, when he was No. 1 for six years in a row?
  -- Franklyn Ajaye, Melbourne, Australia

Good question. It would be nice to know the surface, but I have to go with Sampras. We can go through this exercise of Federer moves better, but Sampras probably serves better, etc. But here's the X factor for me: Sampras was mentally indomitable during the "vintage years." He would get in a big match and then simply elevate his game as high as it needed to go. Federer, of course, has made rapid progress in this department. He has won every final he's played this year and is undefeated against the top 10. But, remember, it was only 16 months ago he lost in the first round of a Major to Luis Horna. If Federer keeps up this clutch play for a few more years, we reserve the right to change our answer.

Regarding the question of inflation-adjusted prize money, here are some CPI facts. A dollar won in 1960 would be worth about $6.37 in today's dollars. In '69, Rod Laver won 17 events, including all four Majors. I can't find any statistics for how much Laver won that year, but $1.00 in '69 is worth $5.14 in today's dollars.
  -- Rich, New York City

Thanks. Again, Laver won roughly $1.5 million for his career, so we're talking about the equivalent of roughly $10 million. On the subject of money ...

	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:

Despite tennis' rich-kid stereotype, the match per yearly earnings for players ranked No. 25 and higher is paltry compared to other sports and other equivalent-level players. Plus match earnings for all tour players are not guaranteed, and players must prove themselves each week or they don't get paid, unlike relief pitchers with 5.00 ERA's who are guaranteed million dollar contracts ...  or the 10th man on the L.A. Clippers bench who takes home fat pay for little work.
  -- John, New York City

Granted this is apples and oranges, but here's a depressing thought: As of today, Federer has made less money this year than the median NBA player. It's all about what the market bears: If tennis did $800 million or so in television deals, it would be a different story. If matches filled 30 different arenas for 41 nights a year (charging $75 a ticket), it would be a different story. If tennis had blue-chip sponsors paying seven figures ... you get the drift.

I think tennis' "rich-kid" stereotype stems more from the players' backgrounds than the wretched excess they betray once they turn pro. But this, too, is misguided. Take a look at the media guide, and it's amazing how many players come from what are clearly middle class or even working class homes, their parents having been policemen (Stefan Edberg), and casino greeters (Andre Agassi), athletic coaches (Anna Kournikova) and cartoonists (Monica Seles).

Do you think Gaston Gaudio listens to the "Gaston" song from Beauty and the Beast to get fired up before his matches? If he doesn't, he should. What are some other musical tie-ins to tennis names?
  --  Dan Martin, Louisville

Philadelphia Freedom, sung (or lip-synched?) of course by that Madonna-bashing knight, Elton John, is devoted to Billie Jean King. Wasn't there a popular song devoted to Conchita Martinez? One of you also once mentioned there is a Monica Seles song out there. Maybe one of you hipsters with copious free time can help us here.

Why does golf award so much money to it's top players, and tennis doesn't? (Relatively speaking.) Vijay Singh is close to $10 million for the year, yet he has only won one Major. Federer has won three Majors, and he's won half that amount.  
  -- Andrew Jen, Toronto

This is essentially the question Yevgeny Kafelnikov posed to Mark Miles a few years back. And he got hammered for asking it. Again, you're talking about two different economic models, but the unvarnished truth is golf does a lot better than tennis in terms of television and sponsorship. In no small part, this is because the PGA is stronger than the ATP, and because the television platform -- where you can watch the final round live every weekend at the same time, without fear of time zones -- is much friendlier than tennis'.

I thought I had written a sure-fire Mailbag question two weeks ago regarding Grand Slam seedings. As it looks like my question won't make the 'bag, would you mind e-mailing me an answer? The curiosity is killing me. 
  -- Eric Johnson, Neerbeek, Netherlands

I assume you're asking why tennis seeding does not follow the NCAA tournament protocol where one plays eight, two plays seven, etc. Tennis places the four seeds in different quadrants, and then randomly disperses the others. I don't get it either. The best explanation I ever got on this was if the rankings didn't change, the same pairings would continue at every Slam, so it would get routine watching the same two players constantly doing battle in the fourth round and quarterfinals.

I've played and enjoyed tennis since I was 10 years old. Now I am 37, and for 26 years, I played with pressurized tennis balls (can balls). Suddenly, the local tennis federation decided to change the official ball of all the tournaments to non-pressurized balls (box balls). This has been a big change for me and a lot of the other old-guard players. Sure, the ball stays in play longer, but our arms and elbows ache, our game is slower and less effective, and we feel like we are playing a new game: a high-topspin, heavy-ball, all-court game. For one year we have tried to adapt to this change, but my point is, is there any official or international rule about playing with every kind of tennis balls? Please help! Maybe we can appeal.
  -- Carlos Acosta, Torreon, Mexico

My pull with the Torreon Federation is pretty minimal. But a letter this passionate and out-of-the-ordinary simply had to make the cut.

Which players on the men's side do you foresee as Federer's next big rivals? Are there also some future studs coming out of the junior ranks?
  -- Jeff Beacham, Cleveland Heights, Ohio

Federer? Rivals? I wrote in Sports Illustrated that Federer is rivaled by the rest of the field, the way a chainsaw is rivaled by a tree. Who knows, if he gets in a bit of a slump that next tier -- Roddick, Hewitt, Agassi, maybe Rafael Nadal and a healthy Ferrero -- could mount a challenge. But part of what has made this run so awe-inspiring is his ability to humiliate even the most game opponents. Serving Hewitt a double-bagel in a Grand Slam final? Come on, mate.

As for the juniors there are a lot of intriguing prospects, including Gael Monfils, who came one bad knee away from winning the junior Grand Slam. Watching him play reminded me of watching AAU summer tournaments: tons of mistakes, comical inconsistency, questionable shot selection and grasp of tactics. But he had enough obvious ability and raw talent you know you'll be seeing a lot more of him in the future.

Your Mailbag is very entertaining, but I have a small suggestion. Maybe you can add a piece that chronicles a former player every week. A kind of "where are they now" for old pros. Players like Yannick Noah, Aaron Krickstein, Hana Mandlikova, Michael Stich, Ivan Lendl, etc. Players we used to watch but haven't heard from or seen in years. Might be easier said than done -- would undoubtedly involve a lot of research -- but would prove to be very interesting.
  -- Brent Chisholm, Toronto

Good idea but that entails far too much effort. I think a more entertaining feature would be to have a fake "Where are they now" column. We'll write about Jana Novotna's successful steakhouse in Lacrosse, Wisc.; Krickstein's chain of auto body shops in the greater Spokane area; and the motivational speaking Irina Spirlea has been doing to motivate telemarketers throughout the Balkans.

Who wrote that Wayne Ferreira was the male lead in the movie Wimbledon? It is a real actor called Paul Bettany.
  -- Sang Fung, Cape Town

Are you sure?

As a follow-up to your question last week on the movie Wimbledon. While I went into it with low expectations as well, I thought the movie did a great job of showing what can go on in a player's head during a match and how even the slightest distraction can cause a total change in the player's mindset. I don't know how, outside of a tennis movie, one could get this across to a non-tennis player.
  -- B. Ramsey, Houston

That's a nice point. I also thought the film did a fine job of showing just how intensely individual and solitary tennis can be, how even the most collegial relationships between players (the lead and his German "practice partner") are ultimately limited by the nature of the sport.

Have a good week, everyone!

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