Capriati is at a loss

Sports Illustrated senior writer Jon Wertheim will answer your tennis questions every Monday. Click here to send a question.

PARIS -- Some random closing thoughts from Roland Garros: Women's tennis, we all know, is all Williams, all the time. But the sport will eventually suffer if the sisters can't play more competitive matches against one another. Venus had -- get this -- one backhand winner against Serena. Isn't that supposed to be her best shot? ... All credit to Albert Costa for playing two weeks of terrific tennis. One can't help but wonder how he could possibly have gone three years with a title. ... After two sets of the men's final, Costa had a 6-1, 6-0 lead over Juan Carlos Ferrero. Said one member of the press corps: "If they were brothers instead of friends, we would have said the fix was in." One wonders what Andre Agassi and Marat Safin were thinking watching Ferrero lollygag through the first two sets before making it a respectable match. ... As one of you was kind enough to note, the "marriage hypothesis" held up, if only by a matter of days. (Costa will marry his girlfriend later this week.) ... Life bing heavy into irony and all, it was only fitting that NBC was left with Costa-Ferrero for Sunday's live broadcast after having shown the women's final Saturday on tape delay. ... Stay tuned later this week for an interview with Costa.

On to your questions ...

Do you agree with Jennifer Capriati that Venus and Serena Williams wouldn't be atop the WTA if Martina Hingis and Lindsay Davenport were playing? The numbers do not support this assertion. In the last 10 matches, Hingis and Davenport are a combined 0-10 against the sisters, and Capriati is 1-9. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this week's WTA rankings are exactly where they should be, for once.
—Chris Taty, Memphis, Tenn.

You're right. There are a million cheap shots I'll avoid making at J-Cap's expense (being in Paris makes one softer than brie). But let's just say that she hasn't exactly grasped the nuances of the rankings system. First, as you note, the Williams sisters are very good head-to-head against the rest of the top players. Second, the rankings are based on a player's top 17 tournaments over a rolling 52-week period. Last year, Capriati played 17 events; Venus played 11; Serena played 10. If the Williamses played full time, they would have been 1-2 last year. Third, to the extent that one could follow her "logic," Capriati's claim that the Williamses colluded to achieve the top spots is misguided as well. Even if the sisters entered the same events and lost in the first round (say, if Venus played Toronto or Serena played San Diego), they'd only be adding incrementally to their point totals so long as they didn't exceed 17 events.

Asked about Capriati's assertion, Oracene Williams shook her head. "Wishful thinking," she called it. As usual, she was dead on.

How come the American men are so bad on clay, while the American women are so good? Obviously, the women face the same lack of clay courts in the U.S. (save Monica Seles, who grew up in Europe). But the Williams sisters both have excelled on clay this year, and Jennifer Capriati was the defending French Open champ. So what gives?
—Victor Venning, Congers, N.Y.

First, a little known fact: The courts at the Williams compound in Florida are Har-Tru. So in a sense they did grow up on it. Anyway, it's a good question that deserves a better answer than I'll give you, but: a) clay benefits baseline players, which most (read: all) female players are; b) the gap between the top female players and the also-rans is so great that surface doesn't matter nearly as much as it does in the men's game.

Watching the French Open, I heard Patrick McEnroe and Cliff Drysdale comment that some players will rub out close ball marks to avoid having the umpire second guess the calls. Shouldn't the obstruction of justice be considered cheating? Other than the financial gain, why would a professional want to win when he is not entitled to? I think it cheapens the entire sport to see players willing to steal points this way. What can we fans do to prompt the authorities to correct this bad behavior?
—Walter Ledesma, Lake Oswego, Ore.

I saw very few instances of this at Roland Garros. And when I did, I thought it was more amusing than offensive. Why is this any worse than refusing to concede a point on a hard court on a ball they knew was in? I'll say it again: Let the players call their own lines.

Will you fill us in on fab newcomer Clarisa Fernandez? How come she never appeared on anyone's radar screen until now? It is wonderful when newcomers make a mark like this, but I am dying to know more about this phenom. Is she the real deal? Please tell us what you know.
—Randy Mayes, Whitewater, Wis.

Real deal in the sense that she is a credible top-50 player? Absolutely. Real deal in the sense that we'll see her again soon in a Grand Slam semi? No. Fernandez, you're absolutely right, deserves plaudits for her run. Sometimes players can sneak into late rounds of a draw because the draw gods smile down on them. Fernandez, however, earned her spot, beating Kim Clijsters, Elena Dementieva and Paola Suarez (a good win on clay) to make the final four. For more on Fernandez, click here.

I wanted to ask about Paul-Henri Mathieu (the French answer to Andy Roddick?) but I'm sure that base is covered. Instead, how about a top-five list of your favorite tennis factoids, your most beloved conclusions to "Remember the time ..." Mine: Mats Wilander's 100 percent first-serve percentage in one set of the 1988 French Open final; Gustavo Kuerten beating the past three champions (Thomas Muster, Yevgeny Kafelnikov and Sergi Bruguera) to win the French in 1997; and the Pete Sampras serve that actually went through Pat Rafter's racket in Cincinnati two years ago.
—Megan Briscoe, Indianapolis

I like Mathieu, but he is not the player Roddick is. Also, a number of you asked me again about French sensation Roger Gasquet. To paraphrase Mickey Dolenz: "And then I saw Gasquet. And now I'm a believer." Great strokes, good athlete, good competitive streak. (And who would have thought his taking a set off of Costa in Round 1 would be an achievement?)

As for your other question, I floated it around the press room in Roland Garros. Some of the responses:

1. Pete Sampras holding serve 116 of 118 times at Wimbledon in 1997.

2. Chris Evert winning a Grand Slam 13 straight years.

3. Bjorn Borg missing one (or was it two?) first serves in the 1981 French semifinals against Victor Pecci.

4. Sampras finishing No. 1 six straight years.

5. Greg Rusedski running off 20-some straight points against Nicolas Massu at the 2001 Ericsson.

Two recent ones:

6. Serena breaking Venus eight of 11 times last Saturday.

7. Lindsay Davenport moving up a spot in the WTA Tour rankings this week despite not having played a match since November.

If you have better ones -- and I'm sure you do -- send them in ...

I know, "'Nuff said" about the Roland Garros courtside plants. However, I'd like to add this: I don't think they were geraniums; they sure looked like the succulent kalanchoe plants (k. blossfeldiana) to me. Which leads to my question: Which are your five most favorite tennis stadiums, in terms of aesthetic and architectural values?
—Marilag Kerrisk, Melbourne, Australia

I'll trust you on the botany. As for the tennis, I haven't been to a good many events, including Monte Carlo, but I'd say:

1. Roland Garros: The immediacy effect.
2. Melbourne: Tennis as it ought to be.
3. Foro Italico: Full disclosure -- I've been to Foro Italico, but I've never seen a match there.
4. Indianapolis.
5. Amelia Island: I'm a sucker for Spanish moss.

Other than Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi, are there any active men's players who, if they retired tomorrow, would make the International Tennis Hall of Fame?
—Lev Stone, Philadelphia

It's not that hard to get into tennis' Hall of Fame. Players have done so without having won a Grand Slam singles title. That in mind, I'd say the first lock is Todd Woodbridge, arguably the best doubles player ever. With three French Open titles and a year-end No. 1, Kuerten is a good bet. Two U.S. Open titles, two Wimbledon finals, a semifinal appearance at all four Slams, and general saint status make Pat Rafter a likely candidate. (For now, he still qualifies as an active player.) Others? Yevgeny Kafelnikov probably deserves it on paper, but his sour disposition will work against him. Michael Chang? Questionable. Of course, there are other players like Safin and Lleyton Hewitt who are headed in the right direction.

Since potential Hall of Fame inductees have to wait a minimum of five years before being considered, the incomparable Stefan Edberg will be eligible for enshrinement in 2003. What do you think of his chances of getting in on the first try? It seems to me that he has a solid case. He was No. 1 in the world in both singles and doubles, he won 41 singles titles, six Grand Slams, a couple of Davis Cups and an Olympic gold. Plus, he won the junior Grand Slam and was widely regarded as one of the classiest and most well-liked people in tennis. This one's a no-brainer, right? I mean, if Pam Shriver gets in, Edberg gets in, right? Or am I missing something? Thanks!
—Omar Uddin, Urbana, Ill.

Edberg is a mortal lock for the reasons you articulate nicely.

What's up with Nicolas Escudé's doping accusations? Jon, can we talk or have Mark Miles and the ATP Mafia gotten to you? I don't recall that you've ever really covered this topic, and I'd love to hear an inside opinion.
—Celine Jackson, Los Angeles

I'm open to discussion, but, as is usually the case with doping, it's based almost entirely on speculation and the abstract. Performance-enhancing d rugs were definitely a topic on the ledger at the French Open, in large part, I think, because the European press have become skeptical, having covered cycling, track, swimming, etc. Further, in the past year, two male players from Argentina have served drug suspensions. Fair or not, when players from that country acquitted themselves well in Roland Garros -- often in long matches demanding endurance -- some eyebrows arched suspiciously/recklessly. As I understand it, Escudé's point was that drugs are simply a part of contemporary sports, and why should tennis be any different? While doping, we should point out, is an ITF issue as well as a tour issue, several players have also questioned why, if the ATP is in part a players' organization, there isn't more access to files. The tour claims that this is a due-process issue and that testing has never been more rigorous or frequent. (Curiously, however, EPO is not among the drugs tested for, though officials claim they're working to change that.)

So is there doping in tennis? Almost certainly there is the odd player who cheats. It would simply be naive to think otherwise. Is doping, however, so widespread that it threatens to change the organic nature of the sport, as is the case in cycling and, apparently, baseball? No way. Muscle mass doesn't win you matches or necessarily lead to harder hitting (check out Guga's physique). Drugs that can boost recovery and aid endurance are more likely to be abused. But even so, the two most important attributes for a tennis player are hand-eye coordination and mental tenacity, which don't much lend themselves to being boosted by drugs. After losing her fourth-round match to Suarez, the delightful (but neurologically frail) Amélie Mauresmo suggested that she could use a "brain graft." If that procedure could ever be perfected, then tennis would have a serious problem.

To answer your query on Jaime Yzaga (and to get the free stuff): Yzaga is proprietor of the Sport Life spa and fitness center, which is about to open at a major hotel in Lima. And he has been a tournament director in recent years, running the Copa Ericsson pro tournament in Lima. If you know Spanish, you can read about the spa here.
—Ian Katz, Key Biscayne, Fla.

Now I can exhale. (Send me your address.)

I'm out like a Safin forehand. Have a great week, everyone.

Sports Illustrated senior writer Jon Wertheim is a regular contributor to CNNSI.com. Click here to send him a question or comment.

 

Related information

Stories

Jon Wertheim's Tennis Mailbag Archive

Multimedia

Visit Video Plus for the latest audio and video