 |
| |
|
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
What's up with Pete Sampras? Posted: Monday March 10, 2003 2:59 PMUpdated: Tuesday March 11, 2003 12:07 AM
Sports Illustrated senior writer Jon Wertheim will answer your tennis questions every Monday. Click here to send a question. Our Player of the Week award goes to Lleyton Hewitt who, on Sunday, won his first title of 2003, running the table in Scottsdale. The 23-year-old didn't lose a set all week. He downplayed his performance, but -- particularly coupled with Andre Agassi's withdrawal -- it bodes well for a title defense at Indian Wells. Even if Hewitt does start off against Younes El Aynaoui. ... Nice to see the misbegotten Mark Philippoussis, Hewitt's opponent in the final, turn in a strong week. ... The Aussies joined ranks afterward, but lost to James Blake and Mark Merklein in the doubles final, 6-4, 6-7 (2), 7-6 (5). ... Jan-Michael Gambill, who is quietly having an outstanding start to the season, won his third career title, beating Mardy Fish (who has also put together a nice 2003 thus far) in the final at the International Tennis Championships in Delray Beach, Fla. ... In the doubles final at the ITC, Leander Paes and Nenad Zimonjic defeated the Dutch duo of Martin Verkerk and Raemon Sluiter. ... Nice week for a couple of American twentysomethings. Wisconsin's own Samantha Reeves qualified at Indian Wells, rolled over Maria Sharapova and then scored a nice win over Paola Suarez before getting her cheesehead handed to her by Elena Bovina. In Delray, former NCAA standout Robert Kendrick reached his first ATP semi and pushed Gambill to a third-set breaker. ... As expected, Pete Sampras has taken a pass on Indian Wells and Key Biscayne. ... Just a reminder: WPLR plays New Haven's classic hits. ... Jelena Dokic continues to fall at 9.8 meters per second. After getting rolled by Barbara Rittner in the desert, Dokic has now lost four straight matches. ...Two notes for our New York readers: Holding Court, a hysterically funny cable-access show about the world of women's professional tennis and the divas who make it so fabulous, seeks an editor with a Final Cut Pro or Avid system. Contact Holdingcourtnychotmail.com if you're interested. ... Also -- Mike Mewshaw, author and tennis muckraker (Ladies of the Court and Short Circuit) has a new novel out and will be appearing at the West Village Barnes & Noble (6th Ave. and 8th St.) on Tuesday at 7:30. ... Serena Williams has a new endorsement deal with Close-Up toothpaste. Now to the audience participation portion of today's program. Reader Helen G. of Floral Park, N.Y., writes: I was wondering if there is an organization that I can donate my used tennis equipment and/or clothing to? I have been buying new rackets to improve my game (not that it's working). Every time a new piece of equipment comes on the market, I buy it. As a result I have a collection of really good rackets that I am sure someone can use. The same thing with tennis clothes. I have e-mailed this question to the USTA several times and have not received an answer, so I hope you can provide me with an organization or maybe point me in the right direction. If anyone of you can help or provide some advice, please do so here. (And let the record show that we are shocked -- shocked -- that USTA did not respond. Helen must have called on a day of the week ending in the letter Y.) Onward....
What's up with Pete Sampras? I haven't heard any news about him recently. In last week's mailbag, you made a brief reference to Pete, but can you give us the scoop?
Trying to discern "What's up with Pete Sampras?" is tennis' parlor game du jour. Last week we did role playing with Jelena Dokic. This week, let's pretend we're Pete Sampras. It's August 2002 and you've misplaced both your game and your confidence. In the previous Grand Slam, you fell to a sub-journeyman at Wimbledon, the event that had doubled as your personal grass playground for most of the past decade. Against all odds and prevailing wisdom, you bounce back and win the U.S. Open. It's your 14th career Grand Slam and this one may have meant more -- and expressed more -- than any other. After the Open final, you go into the press conference and announce: "I've always said I wanted to go out on top. This is where it all started, in 1990. To come full circle, to have beaten my contemporary Andre Agassi in the final, to have done it on an early fall afternoon in New York with my pregnant wife cheering me on (dramatic pause) you simply couldn't script a better finale. It's been a hell of a ride. Thanks everyone. And the Lakers still beat the field, even if they tank the regular season." Sampras gives this valedictory and he authors one of the all-time great career-ending chapters in history. This would have cemented his greatness and been the ultimate capstone to a career defined by dignity and class. They'd be naming overpasses and beltways after Sampras, putting his face on postage stamps, asking him to star in The Wedding Planner sequel. What we've gotten instead is a clumsy quasi-retirement accompanied by vague week-to-week announcements. Ask three "Sampras confidants" about his plans and you get three different answers (one of them, invariably, a shrug.) Since the U.S. Open, he has become a father, a brother-a-law, and has switched agents. But he hasn't played a match. Now that he has pulled out of the two biggest spring hardcourt events, the scenario gets even fuzzier. What's the plan now? To kick his season off on clay, the one surface that gave him fits even in the best of times? What's driving all this? Sampras obviously wants to leave Wimbledon on better terms than he did last year -- understandable given his near mythical relationship with the place. But it's hard to imagine him getting in a groove after a six-plus-month sabbatical followed by a few matches on dirt. Men's tennis is simply too competitive for that right now. We've said all along that Sampras has earned the right to leave the party on whatever terms he wants. If he wants to make Wimbledon his first and last event of 2003, more power to him. If he wants to skip Wimbledon and enter L.A. so he can say his son saw him compete in person, we wish him well. Whatever, the ball is in his court. But the suspicion here is Sampras played his last match at the 2002 U.S. Open. And if that was the case, you wish he would have announced it at the time.
I have to question the optional events that Andy Roddick has chosen to play in -- such as this past week, when all the top players were in Scottsdale and he was in Delray Beach as the only top-30 player in that field. Mind you, both tournaments are worth the same points and prize money. But given Roddick's not-so-impressive record against top-10 players, I wonder if that had anything to do with his decision to play in a less-competitive field? Surely there are financial and sentimental reasons for entering an event. But that doesn't stop me from thinking that he's trying to dodge a bullet.
Though things obviously didn't go as planned (Roddick retired with an injury in an early round match against Mardy Fish) you can't whack the kid too hard. His logic is that for all intents, Delray is his hometown tournament and this is one of the few times that his friends and family can watch him without getting on a plane. Plus the folks in Delray helped kick-start his career by gifting a wild card way back when (you know, 2001), so this is a show of good faith and loyalty. To be sure, there are "financial reasons" as well: Delray is affiliated with SFX, Roddick management's agency. Whether it was in the form of a fat guarantee or a fee cut, suffice to say it was in his interest to play there. But it's not as though Roddick played this optional event at the exclusion of another. The field in Scottsdale wasn't much better (remember, Hewitt was a last-second wild card) and you're talking about a guy (Roddick) who made it to all nine Masters Series soirees and all four Slams in 2002.
Merging the tours would definitely be a step in the right direction, but more is needed, and not just in the way of sponsorship. Tennis needs more exposure and one way to get it, small though it may be, is enabling people to compete in fantasy leagues. Atptennis.com offers people the opportunity to play in a fantasy league, but unfortunately there's a fee involved. The consequence? Between 2,000 and 3,000 people participate. Is that bad? Well, take a look at the Yahoo! Fantasy leagues. I'm participating in the golf game there and I'm one of 160,000-plus people having a good time. Wouldn't something like that be way more interesting for the ATP/WTA? Not just for promoting the tours, but the tournaments and players as well?
I'm no expert on fantasy leagues, but the last time we addressed them, there was a blizzard of responses. If anyone can help our man, JID, fire away.
Meghann Shaughnessy looked darn good last week in Arizona. She appeared stronger and seemed to hit the ball harder. Do you want to reconsider your comments on her potential to return to the top 10? Also, do you see any changes at the top by year's end?
To quibble, her career-high ranking is No. 11. But I'm glad you called me out on that one. Let's give Shaughnessy some early-season props. After a disappointing 2002, the 23-year-old has been playing awfully well so far this year. Her run in Scottsdale (her hometown) included a comprehensive flogging of Dokic. This also comes on the heels of Shaughnessy reaching the quarters in the Australian Open. She does indeed look stronger and seems to be playing smarter, more patient tennis. Another observation: in the past she has been very gun-shy about off-court obligations (media, publicity, etc.) that attend being a pro. Not surly or unpleasant, just reserved. In Australia she was very outgoing and and confident in front of the mikes and cameras. As a rule, when players feel comfortable in their own skin (see: Davenport, Lindsay) they take that on the court. So good for her. Anyway, the rap on Shaughnessy is that she tends to overplay and overwork her body. If can stays injury-free and avoids hitting the proverbial wall, look for her in the Nos.12-18 range.
How does Ai Sugiyama's four-match, 10-set, two-title triumphant Sunday compare to other ironman/woman achievements? Has any other tennis player done anything similar? How about in other sports? Has there been anything comparable?
Sugiyama's indefatigable Sunday didn't really get its due in the sports pages. (There's an eyesore/Ai's sore joke in here somewhere.) It wasn't simply that she won four matches; she played a semifinal that ended 7-6 in the third and then beat the world's No. 3 player in three sets a few hours later. This by a player who doesn't win many cheap and easy points. If there's a drawback in Sugiyama's achievement, it's that she's set a new standard for fitness. Next time a player complains about having to compete on consecutive days, it will ring a bit hollow. Is it a record? If my math is right, Roddick and el Aynaoui actually played more games in their epic Australian Open quarterfinal just a few weeks ago than Sugiyama logged last Sunday. But we've never heard of a player winning four matches in a single day. Speaking of ironmen, did I read right that Hewitt played 50(!) practice sets over the weekend before Scottsdale?
Awhile back, a commercial featured Andy Roddick serving on red clay. When he served, the ball stuck on the clay in the service box. Please confirm for me that this was fake, and help me set a simple-minded friend straight.
It was indeed fake. I once asked Roddick how they filmed it and he wouldn't give the details up.
I've watched Thailand's Paradorn Srichaphan rise from his first big match (a four-setter against Yevgeny Kafelnikov at Wimbledon back in the summer of 1999) to his recent ranking in the top 10. With a game as solid as his (that beautiful one-handed backhand is underrated and, much like Justine Henin-Hardenne's, is an exceptional shot), why has he been losing so often (and early) this year, and why didn't he rise in the rankings earlier?
After finishing 2002 as hot as anyone on Tour, Srichaphan has cooled off faster than one of those towels they give you in a Japanese restaurant. Losing to Philippoussis in a semi-classic match in Melbourne is forgivable. No shame in that. But falling in straight sets to qualifiers, as Srichaphan has done in two of his last three events, in worrisome. Srichaphan's longstanding weakness is impatience -- which breeds inconsistency. Too often, he tries to pull off a get-serious winner, when the situation calls for something routine. Hence some brutal losses, particularly for a potentially elite player. He also seems to get impatient in the sense that he seems almost to resent playing lower-ranked players. Give Srichaphan Agassi at Wimbledon, Hewitt in a final or Safin in a Masters Series event and the guy is aces. Give him Giovanni Lapentti in Scottsdale on a Tuesday and he seems to lose interest. Despite these hiccups, we're bullish on Srichaphan. (And don't be surprised if plays well these next three weeks, when the stakes are high.) You just wish the results were a little more consistent -- hardly a singular critique in men's tennis. An aside: you cannot exaggerated how popular the guy is in Thailand. His matches -- all of them -- are aired live back home. Even when there is only a single camera in the stands. Even when they start in the wee hours of the morning. (You can imagine the consternation this causes on the set of Good Morning Phuket.)
I've noticed in the past two weeks that Mirjana Lucic has received a wild-card entry into the State Farm and the Pacific Life tournaments. Why is she still given such special treatment? I thought her time in the sun was over a couple of years ago. This must seem very frustrating to other up-and-comers who still have to qualify. Your thoughts?
It must indeed be frustrating to up-and-comers. Since 1998, Lucic's career trajectory has resembled a tech stock. How low has it plummeted? She's not even in the WTA media guide. But it wasn't that long ago that Lucic was a teenaged Wimbledon semifinalist pegged by no less than Steffi Graf as a future champion. Owing to a combination of factors -- some her fault, others not -- her momentum came to a screeching halt. Let's not forget, too, that wild cards aren't necessarily rooted in altruism. Part of the reason they exist is promoters can sell a few tickets based on a player who wouldn't otherwise make the main draw. Even though her ranking is south of the top 100, Lucic still has a little name recognition and thus a higher Q rating than other players who are probably more deserving on paper. Reader Jenna A. of Boston wrote in asking about the origins of Bud Collins' fabulously wacky trousers. Because we're all about asking the hard-hitting questions here at the Bag, we went right to the source: Bud writes: Maybe I should have started in gowns, grass skirts or saris. Anyway, my tailor -- Charlie Davidson at the Andover Shop, Harvard Square -- said to me one day in 1966, "You look so boring on TV -- like some commodore phony at a yacht club." My costume was a blazer and white trousers. "I've got some great material, and I'll make you a pair -- free if you don't like them," he said. They scared me -- red and white glen plaid madras. Nobody would look twice today, but then they were outrageous. Timidly, I wore them to Davis Cup in Cleveland, feeling naked. As I walked up to the press box, at the top of the grandstand I heard whistles, catcalls and denigrating remarks. I wanted to hide. It was mortifying. But as I thought it over, I said to myself, 'This ain't a bad shtick.' So I pick up material all over the world. I get the material, and Charlie is still transforming it into trousers, fabrics from such way stations as Bhutan, Combodia, China, Italy, Australia (Aboriginal), India ... this is more than you wanted to know." Finally, our anagram contest was not a smashing success. Sincere thanks to all who wrote in, but perhaps we should have been more explicit in defining an anagram. (i.e. "Conchita Martinez" is not an anagram for "Conchita Martinez Granados.") Winners, you have our admiration -- for both your mental acuity and bounteous free time. Give me your poor, your hungry, your addresses. And tennis miscellany is yours...
Here's a tennis anagram that stems a bit from German: "Steffi Graf und Monica Seles" is "Foes find grunts, a slice, fame" And "Mary Pierce" is also "Creamy Ripe," but that doesn't really mean anything. I guess I had a little too much time on my hands this week!
These are even more startling than J.K. Rowling's Tom Marvolo Riddle rearranged to I am Lord Voldemort.
How about these possibilities:
The grunting she produces on every shot earns the beloved Monica Seles the anagram "camel noises."
Long lost siblings will return next week. Have a good week, everyone!
Sports Illustrated senior writer Jon Wertheim covers tennis for the magazine and is a regular contributor to SI.com. Click here to send him a question or comment.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
