Andy Roddick did not seem concerned with, or sympathetic to, Novak Djokovic's ailments. 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

A quick baguette before Williams-Williams. But if you haven't checked out Andy Roddick's transcript from last night, do so now.

How is it that when various male players won Grand Slams (pre-Federer reign) it was due to the depth of men's game (according to John McEnroe), but when different women win the women's game is considered to be in shambles?
-- Tia, N.Y.C.

• Fair point. But I think we need to peel back the onion a few more layers. First, when various male players won Slams, the men's game did come under fire. Read the press during the Moya/Kuerten/Safin/Kafelnikov/Ferrero/Hewitt era. Also, I don't think it's the multiplicity of Grand Slam champs that's hurting the women. I think it's the context, Ana Ivanovic becoming No. 1 and then crashing spectacularly at the next two Slams. Jelena Jankovic losing matches, but taking the ranking by default. A dominant player retiring. A three-time Grand champ (Maria Sharapova) shutting it down for the season because of a shoulder injury. Also, this isn't just a media characterization. Everyone from Martina Navratilova to Lindsay Davenport has remarked about the instability. The good news: It's all cyclical and eventually there will be a shakeout and order will emerge from the chaos. A player will rise to the fore. Sharapova will return. The Williams sisters will play enough events to regain the top two slots. Just give it some time.

I read your answer to a question regarding your unfairness to Ivanovic and you referred to Roddick's rant against media brutality and fickleness. I must say I have a renewed respect for Roddick's clarity of thought and his ability to express himself frankly to the media without pandering to win popularity points, which a lot of 'celebrities' tend to do. His views also confirm my own conviction that the field of sports analysis suffers from a preponderance of analysts of dubious "analytical ability" overpaid for repeatedly stating the obvious. This, I am afraid, is not restricted to tennis. In fact the commentary during an NBA game makes tennis commentators look like Rhodes Scholars. I don't think this is because of a lack of intellectual depth but a market force generated lethargy. In other words if crap (in other/your words "changing plot lines") sells why bother with real analysis. Sportsmen are human beings whose day-to-day life involves performing in public but the reasons behind them either succeeding or failing are as refractory to total understanding as human brain function/physiology. No one really understands how these fantastic specimens of "human" athletic excellence work, so why don't we just enjoy them while they are at their peaks, help them if we can when they need it, and leave them un-dissected and alone when they are done and tired, or will that take away too many peoples' livelihood?
-- Srinivas Chakravarthy, Berkeley

• Thanks for a really intelligent and thoughtful note. I won't be able to do this full justice, but here's a jumping off point: I contend that once athletes market themselves as something other than a sports person, they forfeit some of the claims you mention. In other words you can't say, "Buy this car I drive; use the cologne that bears my name; wear my watch, drink my drink," and then expect the public to suppress urges to dissect you and think of you as anything other than a pure specimen. Yes, part (much) of the reason we admire the Williams sisters is purely for their athletic excellence. But isn't it also because of personality/back story/context/fashion/ whatever? (They've certainly said as much!) If so, isn't it then fair to dissect and probe, particularly when their professional trajectory changes?

As much I detest the "mass burial" of Federer -- and wholeheartedly agree with Roddick: If this is a "disaster year," sign me up! -- there is an extreme in the other direction, as well. Here's a player who won everything for four plus years. This year has been radically different. It would be negligence/incompetence to say, "There's nothing to dissect here. Guy was a great champion. Let's leave it at that and move on to discuss Andy Murray's backhand."

I thought it was fascinating watching Roger Federer as almost the "underdog" today in his Open match against Andreev. It was almost like the NYC crowd was pulling Federer through, cheering him in a different way than before. He's always made it look so easy, and now he's struggling a little, and you could almost feel that the crowd pulled him through a little bit. Did you sense that watching the match live?
-- Michael Lewis, Daytona Beach, Fla.

• Absolutely. Federer clearly entered a new stage of his career, much as Pete Sampras did in the latter part of his career. Fans are showing him the reverence and affection they, collectively, withheld a bit when he was the overwhelming favorite. He's gone from "Darth Federer" -- who even walked on to Arthur Ashe court to the Stars Wars music -- to a sentimental hero. The critic will say that fans are "brutal," a beast as fickle as the media. But I think there's something quite nice about this. There's a sense of "this champion could use a boost; let's give to him."

A few weeks ago you lamented how we have not seen any surprise upsets at any of the Slams, and you added as a footnote: Gilles Muller where are you? I think he heard you.
-- Zubin, Jersey City, N.J.

• Great story, Here's a guy who was losing in challenger events and considering retiring earlier this year. He gets it together and -- presto -- is in the quarters of a Grand Slam against Roger Federer. Muller, though, is hardly an unknown. He beat Agassi, beat Roddick here, of course, and beat Rafael Nadal at Wimbledon a few years back. If you've seen any of his matches these past ten days, you wonder how on earth he allowed himself to drift outside the top 100.

I am a bit surprised with your comment regarding the Williams sisters, you are usually very negative about them, what made you change?
-- Courtney, Brooklyn N.Y.

• Another reader wondered why I "always praise the Williams sisters as if no other players existed." At the beginning of the tournament, I picked Elena Dementieva to win and I feel duty-bound to stick with it. But I think heading into Wednesday, you'd be hard-pressed to argue that anyone is playing better than Venus and Serena. Bottom line: when they're injured or rusty or off their games, they can lose to anyone. Serena falling to Srebotnik -- nobody's clay court specialist -- at Roland Garros is an example that comes quickly to mind. But, as Serena often reminds, when the gears are clicking, they really are supreme players.

I hope you answer this because I would really like to know what makes Maria Sharapova the "obvious heir apparent" to be the No. 1? She is not the best player or even most consistent on the tour. And she has serious injury issues like most of the other top players. Why is it better to have one sure No. 1 than six or seven players fighting for the top spot every week? I remember not too long ago when that was called boring. I guess it is only boring if the wrong person gets to be No. 1.
-- Peter Chase Altus, Okla.

• Sharapova is 21 and has won three different majors. Taking the Williams sisters out of the equation, who's a more obvious candidate to seize the reins of No.1?

Actually, Jon, regarding the use of "media" as a singular noun, you were correct the first time. According to The American Heritage Book of English Usage, "People also use media with the definite article as a collective term to refer not to the forms of communication themselves so much as the communities and institutions behind them. In this sense, the media means something like 'the press.' Like other collective nouns, it may take a singular or plural verb depending on the intended meaning. Quite frequently, however, media stands as a singular noun for the aggregate of journalists and broadcasters." So you were correct: The media IS a beast.
-- Mandi Wolters, Grand Rapids, Mich.

• I was so wounded by that "beast" characterization that I lost my grammatical bearings.

Shots, Miscellany

Today's winner of the Random Encounter with a Pro tennis Player contest (sponsored by our friends at Prince) comes from Marianne Mayberry, Orange Park, Fla.: "At a junior tournament in Florida earlier this year, my 9-year-old son was killing time outside the club house while waiting for his next match. As he was waiting, he noticed a familiar face: Tom Gullikson. Apparently, he coaches an up-and-coming junior player and was there for the tournament. My son approached Gullikson and commented on his volley technique he had displayed in the pre-match to the Sampras/Martian exhibition in Jacksonville a few days prior. My son went on to tell Gullikson how much he admired his volleys and that he wished he could volley similarly. Gullikson asked my son to demonstrate his technique and spent the next 15 minutes providing my son with pointers for improvement. This occurred unbeknownst to me while I was chatting with another parent. I stumbled upon the tail end of this impromptu lesson. After Gullikson was finished speaking with my son, I approached him and thanked him for taking the time with him. He couldn't have been a more gracious and humble human being."

• We'll discuss this more in the future, but check out the WTA's Road Map for next year and note the increased prize money, fines for no-showing players and profit-sharing. If the men were smart, they'd figure out a way to retain Larry Scott and amalgamate the tours. Imagine the leverage a joint tour would have negotiating more prize money from the Slams!

• SIRIUS XM Radio (Nasdaq: SIRI) announced that Monica Seles will host an exclusive live call-in show aimed at empowering women everywhere to lead their best life. The Monica Seles Challenge: 5 Weeks to Jump Start Your Life will air in five weekly installments airing every Thursday from September 4 through October 2 from 1:00 - 3:00 p.m. ET on SIRIUS Stars channel 102. Seles will host the show from SIRIUS XM Radio's Rockefeller Center studios.

• Cliff Drysdale, one of the most prominent and respected voices of tennis will emcee the 28th annual "Legends Ball" to benefit the International Tennis Hall of Fame on September 5 beginning at 6:30 p.m. at Cipriani on 42nd Street in New York City.

• Lori Palmer, Tampa, sends Long Lost Siblings - Stan Wawrinka and Scott DeFreitas.