Power of Caring
  presented by CIGNA

Changes, changes

Click here for more on this story

Posted: Tuesday May 11, 1999 02:02 PM

An administrative note before we get going: I'm taking off on (gulp) my honeymoon soon, so the 'Bag will be suspended for the next two weeks. Feel free to keep those questions coming, though, and I'll try to get to as many as I can when I return ...

Enough of my yackin' ...

I can't help but think that appearance fees for seeds are contributing greatly to the recent rash of pummelings that seeded players have been taking in tourneys. I say this because it's such a rarity to see unseeded players winning the majors, where there are no fees. It's a shame that tennis appears to be frocked with so many of these paycheck players (Yevgeny KafelniCAVE, for example). Any chance the ITF will see this and actually enforce a ban on appearance fees?
—Bill Hall, Falls Church, Va.

KafelniCAVE. Not bad. We should have had a contest. Anyway, I highly doubt the ITF will introduce/enforce a ban on appearance fees. Remember, first, that the tour and management firms are as intertwined as strands of DNA. When IMG can skim 15-20% off the top for a player's six-figure appearance guarantee, it's not going to take the high road.

The other issue is that smaller tournament directors recognize appearance fees as a necessary evil. With the best-of-14 ranking system -- which won't be totally dismantled by the points race -- after the Slams and the Super 9s, players need an added incentive to play in events like New Haven, Conn., Hong Kong and Auckland. I guarantee that if Andre Agassi wasn't paid big cash to play New Haven, he would say, "Screw it," and stay home.

What do you think if tennis went to one serve only, but maybe deepen the service box by about a foot or so -- enough to allow players to go for it once in a while? This would allow an increase in the speed of the second serve, but nothing that would be as overwhelming as it is now.
—Robbie Stepp, Kingsport, Tenn.

Not a bad idea. But it's way too radical for a change-resistant game like tennis. Any innovations that deal with altering the dimensions of the court are almost sure to get struck down. How do you like this idea instead? Give players, say, only two second serves per service game. This would help sway the balance of power back to the returner. What's more, it adds another piece of strategy to a match. Should I go for a big first serve at 30-15 or save my mulligan in case the game goes to deuce?

Why doesn't the ATP introduce a separate ranking system for clay? It is often claimed that there are too many clay-court specialists at the top of the ATP rankings. Clay-court tennis and it's hard-court and indoor equivalents are virtually two different sports. Last year, 10 out of the top 11 seeds were eliminated by the third round at Roland Garros, while seeds 12-16, who were all Spanish clay-court specialists, were left in the tournament. The risk of the same thing happening this year is big. I think that players like Felix Mantilla and Gustavo Kuerten are more likely to win the tournament than higher seeded players like Richard Krajicek and Pete Sampras. Wouldn't it be logical to introduce a ranking system, and hence a seeding system, where the people who deserve to be highly seeded on clay actually get the high seeds?
—Max Forsberg, Molnlycke, Sweden

I'm not sure that tennis needs to add any confusion to the ranking system. Having a separate ranking for clay-courters will turn the ATP Tour into pro boxing, where a player is highly regarded by one organization but is somehow ranked No. 28 in another.

Starting next year when Super 9s and Grand Slams will be mandatory, the potential for surface specialists to achieve high rankings will be reduced. Meanwhile, to address the issue you raise, I'd like to see tournament directors assume more latitude in their seedings. Every tennis fan worth his/her Ray-Ban Aviators knows that Mantilla, for instance, will have a better French Open than Tim Henman. Or that Sampras doesn't rank among the tour's top 10 clay-courters. So why will Henman be seeded and Mantilla not? Why will Sampras likely be the top player in the bottom bracket?

What if the best-of-14 rule had to include at least seven tournaments played in the last four months, and playing exhibitions were limited, i.e., going over the limit resulted in the loss of ranking points? This allows you to factor in recent performances and control greed. Another solution may be to make the No. 1 ranking at year's end extremely desirable.
—J.J. Wallia, San Francisco

Well, the ATP Tour has adopted the latter suggestion. Next year the rankings will switch to a "points race" where, like NASCAR, the athlete atop the scrap heap on Dec. 31 is the true No. 1. Sure, the thinking goes, there will be some incongruous results. (I believe that had the system been in place this year, heading into the Australian Open, Rainer Schuttler would have the world's No. 1 player.) But just as golf fans don't consider the winners of the year's first few events to necessarily be the top players, so will tennis fans adjust their sets accordingly.

Anyway, I like your idea about front-loading the rankings and weighting them toward the most recent results. This way, a player like Sampras will have a ranking that reflects the fact he hasn't won an event all year. The exhibitions don't bother me all that much if they take the place of players receiving appearance fees and then tanking in supposedly legitimate events.

What do you think about having cameras aimed at all the lines on the tennis court? If a player has a problem with a call, he or she could ask to see a replay of the point. Tradition prevents such a change, which just seems like common sense to me. Video replays wouldn't waste much time, they could be limited to each player being able to question one call per game. Bad calls really hurt the game, robbing players of well earned points and making players so frustrated that they end up losing whole matches.
—Jeff Parrott, Seattle

Your point is well taken, but I'm inclined to disagree. I don't mind seeing a player get jobbed every now and then. It's part of the game and it's always fun to watch how a player responds to a bad call. Also, as much as CBS likes to trumpet the palindromic "Mac Cam," even with the help of a slow replay it can still be difficult to tell whether a shot clips the line or not.

Why not switch at least some tournaments to a double-elimination format? This should not be a problem if, as you suggested, the number of tournaments were reduced. The hoped for result would be a better-quality round of 16 -- eight each from the winners and losers brackets.
—George Mitchell, Indian Harbour Beach, Fla.

The players and their agents rule the tours, and unless the money smells right they won't bite on having to play to more matches. I'm not sure how the extra prize money would be generated, either. Sponsors wouldn't ante up more cash simply because an event featured twice as many matches. Besides, in indoors tournament where only one or two courts are used, matches run nonstop from morning 'til night as is. Adding double elimination wouldn't be feasible.

Who is James Blake? I've read in USA Today he's in college and may leave to join the ATP Tour. Is he that good?
—Armon Gray, Atlanta

As we speak (or the Internet equivalent) every management agency is descending on Cambridge, Mass., to apply their tentacles to Blake. A sophomore at Harvard, Blake might be the best college player this decade, and the conventional wisdom is that he'll turn pro after the NCAA tournament later this month. I confess that I've never seen him play, but enough people whose opinion I respect have conveyed that he's the real deal. As an African-American, a lamentably rare specimen in men's tennis, plenty of eyes will be on him when he embarks on his pro career.

Frankly, I'm stumped that Venus Williams managed to beat Martina Hingis on clay over the weekend. Do you think this will be a turning point in Venus' career? Martina seemed to be playing well enough, but it somehow got away from her. Also, what's your opinion of Sebastien Grosjean? I've heard many good things about him, but I'm not too impressed.
—Erick Orlandini, Valparaiso, Ind.

Re: Venus. Ask me in three weeks. Venus' recent results are decidedly encouraging and will imbue her with confidence heading into the French. But, as she'll be the first to admit, if she doesn't win her first major in Paris, she'll take little consolation from winning in Hamburg and Rome.

As for Grosjean, put it this way: He's no Bryce Drew . Grosjean, who turns 21 later this month, is a fresh face who handles pace well, hits some nifty shots, and has had great year so far -- particularly for a guy who started 1999 ranked No. 89. But do I think he'll be hoisting a Grand Slam trophy anytime soon? No.

I have a question for you regarding a player who has had considerable success in her career, but seems to get no press. Tara Snyder has climbed up the WTA rankings throughout the last few years rather quietly. Do you think that she has the potential to become a top-10 player or possibly a Grand Slam champion?
—Brian O'Connor, Gardner, Kan.

I'm guessing there's some geographic motivation behind your question. Tara Snyder, the pride of Wichita -- there's a phrase you don't hear every day -- is quietly climbing the ranks and emerging as a "floater" that no seeded players want to face in the early rounds. On the verge of turning 22 (May 26), Snyder is not, I'm afraid, a likely Grand Slam champion. To date, I don't believe she's gotten past the second round of a major. The former U.S. Open junior champ, however, has plenty of game, and is one of the better athletes on tour. It's not at all out of the question that she could crack the top 20 in the next few years. She's also -- how to say it? -- easy on the eyes. So if and when her game reaches that next step, she's sure to puncture the public consciousness.

Just curious: Are there any mothers on the WTA Tour who are ranked in the top 100? Are there any that have ever been very successful?
—Kelly O'Laughlin, Bay City, Mich.

I think you've been watching too many of those absurd "Mummy beat Daddy" commercials starring Evonne Goolagong. Plenty of players have quit the circuit to make babies, but I can't name any current players who moonlight as moms. I do know that Tami Whitlinger-Jones was a few months pregnant when she got waxed by Martina Hingis in the first round of the U.S. Open a few years ago. Does that count?

Aside from the obvious physical impediments, the life of a pro tennis player is entirely too unruly and travel-intensive to enable players to tend to the roost. Remember, as well, that the average age on tour is about 21.

What about the rivalry between Martina Hingis and the Williams sisters? It seems like Euro-snobbery meets American attitude. What are your thoughts on the matter?
—Jason Montgomery, Los Angeles

I don't think it's necessarily anything specific to nationality or ethnicity. The Williams sisters and Hingis are simply three teenagers who believe they are the best in the world at their craft. I'd imagine the top three teenage spelling-bee champs or sock darners are similarly attitudinous toward each other.

Have you heard whether Stefan Edberg plans to join the Nuveen Tour anytime soon? What about Brad Gilbert?
—Sue Brashear, Fayetteville, Ark.

Brad Gilbert's game was enough of an eyesore when he played the regular circuit. Who the hell wants to watch him "win ugly" at age 38? Edberg is obviously a different story, but I wouldn't look for him any time soon. Not only does he still have 18 months to go before he reaches the minimum age of 35, but, never one to grope for glory, Edberg is hardly the type to hit and giggle with Johan Kriek for a few hundred bucks.

Give the USTA another black eye for its latest bungled attempt to make the game more popular. The USTA has "mandated" a tiebeaker if players split sets, rather than play out a third set, in league play. Did it bother to poll league players before cutting our matches? Of course not. I can't believe the majority of players want to pay the same for less playing time. What do you think?
—Bill Rollins, White Plains, Md.

Given that I live in New York, where it's easier to find a clean subway car than an affordable tennis court, I'm out of the loop on the USTA matters. If what you say rings true, however, condensing a third set into a winner-takes-all tiebreaker sounds suspiciously like a cost-cutting maneuver. Fewer games = less court time = less court fees. Naturally, your league dues went down as well, I presume.

Jon Wertheim's Tennis Mailbag will resume on June 1. Click here to send him a question.

 

Related information
Stories
Previous Tennis Mailbags Jon Wertheim's Tennis Hot List
Multimedia
Click here for the latest audio and video
Search our site	Watch CNN/SI 24 hours a day
	Sports Illustrated and CNN have combined to form a 24 hour sports news and information channel. To receive CNN/SI at your home call 1-888-53-CNNSI.