Querrey, the quiet American

Sam Querrey was the only American in the Monte Carlo draw, and eventually bowed out to Novak Djokovic in the quarterfinals. AP Jon Wertheim's Mailbag Jon Wertheim will answer questions from SI.com users in his mailbag every Wednesday. Name: Email: Hometown: Question: SEND Follow Jon Wertheim on Twitter

I don't know why the online tennis media seemed to ignore a 20-year-old American beating a former French Open Champion and No. 14 in the world -- on clay. It just happened Monday. Sam Querrey defeated Carlos Moyà 6-3, 1-6, 6-3. What is there not to like about Querrey? Does his unassuming manner not make for good headlines?
-- Chris, Menlo Park, Calif.

I start by saying that I don't exempt myself here. But the emergence of Querrey has been so strange. Everyone laments the state of American tennis and complains about the paucity of prospects. Here we have a young American winning an event in Las Vegas and then beating three fine clay-courters to reach the Monte Carlo quarterfinals, and he gets less pub than Salt Lake City.

So let's kick off this 'Bag by praising Querrey. He was the only American to enter the Monte Carlo singles draw. He was so modest in assessing his chances that he booked a midweek flight. Then he does himself proud by making the Elite Eight and beating fine players, including Richard Gasquet -- who, you'll recall, beat Roger Federer on the same court a few years back.

That's an encouraging result, and while it won't likely earn him a place on the next Davis Cup team, as some of you suggested, it's nice to see an American who doesn't perceive clay to be a toxic substance.

I think Querrey's modest profile stems in part from his understated demeanor. Watch the documentary Unstrung this Saturday and you get a sense that he's just a normal, low-intensity kid who happened to be blessed by the tennis gods. Also, he had that mini-breakthrough a few years ago and then endured a bit of a sophomore slump.

While it's a completely normal trajectory for a young player (hello, Agnes Szavay!), the media tends to take a burn-me-once-shame-on-me approach. "We're going to go easy on the guy this time because he could be playing Challengers in Vancouver in a few months."

So is Querrey top-10 material? Hard to say. But is he a solid pro with a big serve who could do some damage on a variety of surfaces? No question. And given the state of affairs in American tennis, this is cause for some (tastefully muted) celebration.

If the Masters Series events are mandatory, why is Querrey the only American in the main draw? Kudos to him for playing and winning his matches thus far, but where are Andy Roddick and James Blake?
-- Alan Gnani, Atlanta

Monte Carlo is "mandatory" with an asterisk. Sort of like the 8 a.m. class at ATP University. It has Masters Series status (and prize money) but it's not technically a hard "must-play" designation. This is the rare Solomonic compromise in tennis. The event didn't get downgraded. The loyalists such as Federer and Rafael Nadal could still play. The Americans who are (understandably) reluctant to spend eight consecutive weeks in Europe, get a pass.

Since when did your Fed Cup perspective become driven by a double standard? If Roddick, Blake and the Bryans said, "Oh no! I can't play because I have the flu or I'm prepping for the next Grand Slam," you would be all over them like blisters on Gasquet! I will cut Lindsay Davenport some slack for being ill and traveling with a newborn, but the bottom line is twofold: Our top U.S. female players are self-absorbed and patriotic when it is convenient, and secondly, we don't have the player depth that some of the other countries currently do.
-- Mike Moore, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.

Your "blisters on Gasquet" line made me laugh out loud so I feel compelled to answer your questions. I think you make a false comparison. Fed Cup has nowhere near the history/prestige/relevance of Davis Cup. Because we love reasoning by analogy here, it's like saying, "How come you rip Gasquet for retiring with blisters, but not Mary Pierce when she once retired after shredding her ACL?"

The top players -- women, especially, it seems -- have a finite amount of tennis in them. You can hardly blame them for "rationing their matches" and taking a pass on an international competition that, frankly, doesn't mean much. (Again the response is that if all the top players committed, it would mean significantly more.)