SI.com - SI Writers - Jon Wertheim - Mailbag - Jon Wertheim's Tennis Mailbag: No secret to Agassi's success

The Web

SI.com

No secret to Agassi's success

Posted: Monday June 30, 2003 12:44 PM

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

Right to the questions this week. Check out our Wimbledon midterm grades for more ...

What is it that Andre Agassi has that other players his age do not? How is it possible for him to not only keep up with the young guns of the game, but actually be leading the pack? Is it luck or has he found the fountain of youth?
—Ricardo Thomas, Aruba

I guess I have a two-pronged answer. The first is that for all of the feel-good storylines, you cannot discount how much native talent Agassi possesses. In terms of sheer skill, he may have more of it than anyone who has ever picked up a racket. From his pinpoint returns -- did you know he put Andy Roddick's record-tying 149-mph serve back in the court? -- to his seeing-eye ground strokes, he can do more with the ball than anyone else on the planet. When you have that going for you, it certainly makes it easier to sustain a high quality of play into your 30s.

Second factor: Agassi is the consummate professional. It sounds trite, I know, but in this case it's accurate. The guy gives himself every opportunity to succeed. He trains like mad so that conditioning will never cost him a match. (Though if we have to hear that anecdote about his running that Vegas hill to the point of nausea one more time, we're going to be the ones tossing our collective cookies.) He goes to great pains (and expenses) to make sure he has the best equipment, demanding that his rackets be strung and restrung the morning of his matches so he can adjust the tension depending on the weather and the wind. (Contrast this with other players who scarcely know their grip size.) He shells out for a suite so he sleeps better. He scouts other opponents. He has a computerlike recall of players' tendencies and weaknesses. He has figured out that wife and child aren't a distraction: You play your best when you're content in your private life and you have diversions from tennis once you're off the court.

Agassi has a haul of trophies, the wealth of Croesus, a wife and kid with another rugrat on the way. And he has still figured out a way to sustain his motivation 15 years after he first cracked the top 10. Think he doesn't set a sterling example for the other players on tour?

Incidentally, I appreciate the offer some of you extended to change my predictions, but we'll stick with our pick of Agassi to win the title on Sunday. Same with Serena Williams on the women's side. But thanks.

I have two questions about tennis' newest 15-minute star, Maria Sharapova. First, what is with the ear-popping grunting? Could this overshadow her game and maybe hurt her career given the amount of attention it receives from both opponents and fans alike? Second, she claims to be a very proud Russian, yet she speaks with a accent that's more American than Andy Roddick's. Does anyone on your side of the pond take offense that she seems to have so little regard for her adopted country of America? I don't know which is more strange, her animal-in-pain grunting or the whole I'm-really-Russian-just-ignore-I-sound-like-a-Yank.
—Trevor Magee, Reading, England

Trevor, at least mention in passing that you are impressed that Sharapova is a well-spoken 16-year-old who has "TiVo-ed" through the draw thus far. I'm with you on Point A and against you on B. Sharapova is an exceptional talent and future star (all aboard the bandwagon!), but her grunting is out of control. (A good number of you wrote in about this, including Robert Toone of Simi Valley, Calif.) Given that in tennis it is important to hear the sound of the ball leaving your opponent's racket, her stuck-pig audio accords her an unfair advantage. In her match against Jelena Dokic, Sharapova turned the volume down and it had no impact on her stellar tennis. Hopefully this was a permanent change.

As for the patriot games, hey, she was born in Russia, her parents are Russian, and who are we to take offense at her choice of citizenship? Owing to her precocious tennis, she came to the U.S. at an early age (6, I believe) -- hence, her flawless English. If she wants to "pull a Monica [Seles]" (as one you memorably put it a few months ago) and become a U.S. citizen and play for the American Fed Cup team, great. If she wants to continue to play under the Russian flag (and pride herself on having the best English of the Soviettes), that's swell, too. It's her call. No reason we should get caught up in these issues.

While I appreciate your thorough response regarding Daniela Hantuchova, I disagree on several points. I don't expect the tour to control a player; however doesn't it have some liability if a player with a serious problem has an injury because of play or for continuing to play when hampered? Would you let a player with a broken leg take the court? The player might take you to court. Can't the tour ask players to pass a yearly physical? How many people have to get killed at a dangerous intersection before a stop light is installed? What would the tour look like if a needy player died because nothing was done (e.g., someone who took ephedra)? As far as legislating issues, weren't the age-restriction rules set in place because of Jennifer Capriati's problems?
—Laura Riebman, Arnold, Md.

All fair points. I would respond that you can test for ephedra and determine pretty conclusively whether a player's leg is broken. On the other hand, if Hantuchova denies that she has an eating disorder, then what? I'm not sure the WTA can institute an arbitrary weight clause. Further, if she were retiring with fatigue or in visibly bad shape midway through a match, it would be one thing. But here's a player whose last two Grand Slam losses have been three-hour marathons. If the tour attempted to intervene on the ground that her weight "hampered" her on the court, she has a pretty salient rebuttal at the ready.

The Capriati Rules are an imperfect analogy, but even in that case it took years of legal maneuvering and blue-ribbon panels before the tour acted. Even now, a decade later, every prodigy has her IMG myrmidons rattling their sabers, threatening to mount a legal challenge. (You want to take bets that Sharapova will docilely follow the age-eligibility requirements?)

Anyway, we're digressing. There were a number of thoughtful, impassioned responses about the Hantuchova situation. Just to clarify, our discussion wasn't based on idle speculation -- members of her camp, including former coach Nigel Sears, have come forward to confirm that there is "a problem." Most of you, like Laura, seemed to think that the WTA ought to do something and let the legal chips falls as they may. Not all of you, though. Here's Gina from Dallas:

I think it is ridiculous that you even comment on Daniela Hantuchova's body. First of all, it is her business how she wants to look and what she eats. She probably doesn't even have an eating disorder; it might be her body type -- many women are like that. I have a body frame similar to Hantuchova's and have been incorrectly accused of having an eating disorder. It is extremely insulting. Shame on you for even hinting at the fact. Even if she does have an eating disorder, as you pointed out, she is denying that she does ... and that's all you need to know. It's her business what she wants to do with her own body.

What are Lindsay Davenport's chances of winning another major? She seemed to do really well last year upon her return from knee surgery, despite dropping a few close matches she should have won. She actually looked like she was regaining the form that led to three Grand Slam titles. I know she's gotten married and has had foot problems, but do you think she's lost some of her drive, her belief that she can compete with Serena Williams, Venus Williams, Kim Clijsters and Justine Henin-Hardenne? I've always admired Davenport and would love to see her get back to her halcyon days of '98-'00, but I'm not sure she has enough left in the tank, physically or mentally. What are your thoughts? What does she need to do to compete with the top four?
—Michael M., New York

Interesting question. I think it's clear Davenport isn't the player she was in the late '90s and 2000, when she won three Slams (three different ones at that) and was a losing finalist twice. Since then, she has endured a serious knee injury and a number of other nagging aches and pains, gotten married and parted (amiably) with coach Robert Van't Hof. The upshot: It has been more than three years since her last major championship.

Still, I wouldn't be shocked if she had another Slam in her. Davenport obviously is not in the same class of athlete as Venus and Serena -- or even Clijsters and Jennifer Capriati -- but she has tons of power, she might be the best pure ballstriker on the women's tour, and she probably hits a deeper ball than anyone else. Especially at the U.S. or Australian opens, it's not hard to see Davenport hitting her grove, maybe getting some help from the draw gods and winning her fourth Slam. As impartial journalists we never want to root for players, but Davenport is, as they say, one of the good eggs. Given what she has been through physically lately and given how well she represents both herself and women's tennis, you figure the sport probably owes her one more big trophy.

I was looking through the in-progress matches on the Wimbledon Web site, when I saw "S. Grosjean vs. T. Enqvist." Where the heck has Thomas Enqvist been? I haven't followed tennis as much during the last two years, but I haven't heard Enqvist's name at all. I seriously thought he could develop into a No. 1 player. Any recent results worth a mention?
—Kabir, Bombay

I wrote this a while back and received all sorts of hate mail, but I still maintain that Thomas Enqvist is the ATP's answer to Barbara Schett: a physically attractive former top player who lost the motivation somewhere along the line and realized that you can still make an awfully nice living trotting the globe as a top-20 to top-50 player. I know, I know, Enqvist has had some injuries, he plays well indoors and did reach a Grand Slam final (Australia, 1999). But come on, here's a guy who looked like a future No.1 in his late teens and early 20s and never materialized. Not even close.

I am baffled by the Jason Stoltenberg-Lleyton Hewitt split. Not only by the timing, but that Stoltenberg is the second coach in two years to drop Hewitt so mysteriously. Do Hewitt's parents want too much control? Is it time they stopped travelling with him?
—Jennifer, Tempe, Ariz.

Stoltenberg's stated desire "to spend more time with my family" could be interpreted as: I want to spend less time with someone else's family.

To the casual observer, it might seem a little, well, weird that a world-famous 22-year-old millionaire would want his parents accompanying him to work everyday. But as we've said before, the essential function of the tennis entourage is to provide a comfortable environment, and if having Mommy and Daddy in the fold imbues Hewitt with good vibes, so be it. Incidentally, an intrepid reporter broached this topic with Clijsters, Hewitt's normally Gobstopper-sweet girlfriend, and here is her response:

"I don't think it's, you know, I think that's questions that you have to ask him. I don't think that's anything for me to answer. I think if you want to ask him his private questions about his private life, I think -- I'm sure -- I don't even think it's any of your business either."

Greg Rusedski's "performance" in the third set of his match against Andy Roddick underscores the reasons for my longstanding contempt for the man. Rusedski lacks the dignity to become a true champion. He is a putrescent, bitter soul who enjoys seeing the other guy lose more than he enjoys the thrill of winning. This is an important but subtle distinction. He is the carrion of the ATP Tour, the opportunistic vulture who wins by sucker-punching opponents whose attention is momentarily distracted by a nagging illness or injury. One knows in one's heart that, had the shoe been on the other foot and Roddick was the one who suffered the bum call, Rusedski would have gloated and strutted like the junkyard dog he knows he is and always will be.
—Craig Kepler, Minnetonka, Minn.

OK, Craig. But stop straddling the fence. How do you really feel about the guy?

What is behind the utter pomposity of Wimbledon labeling itself "The Championships"? Excuse me, but don't the other three majors count at all? And people wonder why players do not like this tournament.
—Gillian, Rego Park, N.Y.

The more modest "Wimbledon: A Championship" just doesn't have the same zing.

Quick question about the transcribed interviews on the Wimbledon Web site: Are the reporters as stupid as they sound?
—Michelle Wu, Austin, Texas

No. It's generally a roomful of Stephen Hawkings asking the questions. If any of the inquiries strike you as anything other than brilliant, rest assured they were lodged by the tabloid reporters who lard up what is otherwise a Mensa convention.

What happened to Martina Hingis? Is Steffi Graf still playing tennis?
—Lizabel Herrera, Kentucky

Hingis, Graf and Monique Viele have formed a bluegrass trio and are touring the Ozarks this summer. Seriously, Martina Hingis is -- for now, anyway -- retired and claims to be blissfully happy living a "normal life" in Switzerland. We miss her. As for Graf, she hasn't played competitively since 1999, but as Agassi's wife, she is still a fixture -- albeit reluctantly -- at major tournaments.

What happened to Todd Martin?
—Corinne B. Grauer, Delray Beach, Fla.

He manages the aforementioned bluegrass band.

(He's still kicking around, putting down his chicken tikka masala long enough to win some matches here and there. At Wimbledon, he played his customary marathon of five-setters before falling to Rainer Schuettler in the third round.)