While tennis is certainly suffering, it's far from dying

Federer-Sampras was great, but it didn't change the fact that tennis struggles for widespread media coverage in the U.S. Manny Millan/SI

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

Just exactly who says that tennis is "struggling?" I'm getting sick of hearing about it.

The U.S. Open sets new records every year, the U.S. Open Series did great, the U.S. won Davis Cup and I can think of many other good things.

Oh, and I can barely get court time at the local clubs because they're so busy. Where's the factual basis for this constant reference to tennis being on life support in the U.S.?
-- Ted Nugent, Livingston, N.J.

From your mouth to the network's ears. Hate to play Gloomy Gus(tavo) here, but I see a decidedly less rosy picture. Particularly this week, as I scan in vain for ESPN coverage of the so-called fifth Slams.

At least here in the States, I see a sport that is really struggling to stay relevant. Marketing and promotion is minimal. The ATP can't find a sponsor. College programs are getting cut every month. Urban tennis clubs are being razed by real estate developers. There's this vicious "corkscrew effect" whereby diminished media coverage causes diminished interest, which causes diminished media coverage.

I was telling a friend that, when it comes to tennis' health, too many people go to opposite extremes. The optimists -- I'm thinking of the USTA-landed gentry here -- attend the U.S. Open or the Davis Cup final. They eat catered meals and get take-home goody bags and see packed stadiums. Oblivious to the brutal television trends or the tournaments migrating overseas, they say, "This sport is hotter than American Idol!"

The pessimists are so mired in "metrics" and "bean-counting" that they, too, fail to develop a clear picture. Downgrading Monte Carlo's status or cutting the doubles draws hardly augurs Armageddon. It would be nice if tennis could accelerate its rate of growth. If ESPN and, for that matter, Sports Illustrated devoted more coverage to the sport. If the Tennis Channel were available everywhere. But the sport is far from "dying."

In your last Mailbag, you made mention of Sampras getting in a stiff jab at the Djoker. What exactly did he say?
-- Henry, Philadelphia

This is one of those instances in which video would help establish context. Novak Djokovic's name came up and Sampras said derisively: "He's the guy with personality, who does impressions. [Wait for beat] If you call that personality." Meanwhile, Roger Federer bit his lip and tried in vain to suppress a grin.

Have to disagree with Sampras here. Watch this clip from Leno last week and it's hard not to come away charmed, no?

Here is a quote from your assessment of Pete Sampras in the MSG exhibition. "He was funny and sharp -- even sneaking in a stiff jab at Djokovic early in the day." Why is this worth mentioning? I'm curious. Your contempt for Djokovic is becoming totally transparent.
-- Dale Simmons, Calgary, Alberta

I totally disagree. Sampras -- never known for controversial remarks -- is sitting at the dais and, out of nowhere, takes a small dig at Djokovic, the player who won the previous major and is a new rival of Federer, the man to Sampras' immediate left. That to me is a) somewhat telling and significant b) the kind of detail I would think most tennis fans would be interested to hear.

I have no contempt for Djokovic whatsoever. Not sure where you're getting that. I probably spent half an hour with him on the phone last week. He might not be a beacon of modesty and I might think that he takes too much time when serves, but there's plenty to like, not least of which is his lack of awe re: the players ranked above him. (Plus, I hear he has personality.)

1 of 3