|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Multimedia Central Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities Work in Sports
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE |
Kafelnikov should take a break
Posted: Monday October 18, 1999 04:08 PM
The season is winding down, and the 'Bag will be going on hiatus shortly. So get your questions in before it's too late! Click here to send Jon Wertheim a question. Is Yevgeny Kafelnikov the biggest crybaby or what? Last week he blamed his
loss to Nicolas Kiefer on a lack of fresh air. At the Davis Cup he blamed his
loss to Lleyton Hewitt on a bad grass court. Shouldn't he be blaming
himself?
Kafelnikov is giving Marcelo Rios some stiff competition for the mantle of tennis' most reviled player. I wonder, though, whether Kafelnikov's surliness -- his complaints about conditions, his disrespect for Pat Rafter, his trash talking -- aren't owed to the guy's ridiculous travel schedule. You'd have a short temper, too, if, since last month's U.S. Open, you'd played five events in Europe and spent an "off week" in Australia playing Davis Cup. Please, someone, introduce this Kafelnikov to Julie McCoy. When Kafelnikov racks up frequent-flier miles -- as he's encouraged to do under the Best-of-14 ranking system -- and invariably flames out before living up to his seeding, no good comes of it. The ATP Tour is cheapened when its (alleged) second-best player loses week-in, week-out to Daniel Vacek and friends. The events and sponsors can't be pleased when their top seed can't win more than a handful of games against some a lesser-known opponent. And while Kafelnikov's inveterate playing brings him some extra cash and ranking points, he ultimately takes a hit when he bows out early and is reduced to a crybaby. But let's not totally rip on the guy: lamenting that the court was a "potato field," as he did in Australia, and bitching about air quality are two of the more creative excuses for losing a tennis match. Some incredible amounts of money have been won by some very young women in
the past few months. Who sees to their best interests? In the entertainment
business you hear about parents who take advantage of their child's money -- and
then there is none! A tennis player's career is not very long; what happens to
those players who don't win the Slams when their tennis time is up? Do they make
enough to last the rest of their life? Are issues of parental abuse of young
tennis players investigated, and how often does this kind of thing
happen?
Come on, Cheryl. Parents taking advantage of their child's wealth? On the women's tennis tour, a beacon for parental comportment and integrity? The questions you ask are good ones, but to answer fully, I'd need to take an extended leave of absence from work. Let's just say while there are an increasing number of safeguards in place, such as trust funds and deferred annuities, there is still plenty of opportunity for parents to use their prodigy as a walking ATM. The rule of thumb is that whenever the parents quit their day jobs to travel with their child full time, it's generally a bad sign. Do you honestly feel Andre Agassi has been giving the best of himself in
recent tournaments, or do you think he's waiting for the year-end championships?
I'm asking because many of my fellow tennis fans are blaming Steffi Graf for
Andre's recent losses, which I think is a little ridiculous. The man is known to
be streaky. Does it really matter if he loses in the Grand Slam Cup or in the
Swiss Indoors? Shouldn't we wait until he loses in a big tournament to worry
about Steffi's so-called effect? And aren't these end-of-the-year tournaments
there just so the players can pad their
pocketbooks?
Truth to tell, I haven't seen Agassi play since the Open, but his results in Europe don't bode well for sustained excellence. Yes, Agassi has always been streaky, but he claims that his vacillating results are usually proportional to his focus. If he can give his undivided concentration to tennis, he might be the best player on the planet. When there's an external distraction -- say, a blonde, leggy German waiting to make schnitzengruben -- he has a hard time summoning the on-court intensity and becomes easy prey for Tommy Haas, et al. On the other hand, you're probably right not to read an exceeding amount into these European results. While they represent his worst stretch since the winter, there is an inevitable letdown after the last Slam of the year. Can you please explain the nature of Lindsay Davenport's wrist injury? Is it
serious, and how long do you think she'll be
sidelined?
For nearly two years, Davenport has endured nagging tendinitis in her wrist. She can't pinpoint when it started, but it has caused her pain from time to time and was even acting up at the 1998 U.S. Open, which, of course, she won. Last winter, she skeptically tried "magnet therapy" (don't ask me how this works) and was initially ecstatic about the results. But at March's Lipton event, she was late getting around on a backhand and the wrist flared up again. Fortunately, it's her left wrist, so it's hardly career-threatening. What do you think of the attitude and perspective of Mark Philippoussis? I
have lately been impressed with his effort to have a positive outlook on his
game and tennis in general. I'm hopeful for a bright future for Mark. Perhaps
he'll show more potential than the Aussie who overshadows him, Pat Rafter. I've
got my fingers crossed that he gets over his recent knee
injury.
Glad you brought him up. Philippoussis was oft-criticized in his previous four years on Tour -- big serve, little brain was the abbreviated scouting report -- but was in the process of putting together a breakthrough 1999. Not only did he win Indian Wells but, let's not forget, he was beating Pete Sampras at Wimbledon when he pulled up lame. He was playing more patient tennis, he admitted that he was finally maturing and he seemed to have put the Davis Cup contretemps in his past. In a match I happened to have attended, he returned too soon from his injury and lost to Arnaud DiPasquale in Indianapolis, causing him to miss the Open and go back to rehab. Although he lost early last week in Singapore, Philippoussis is supposedly at full speed. Bottom line: Look for a big year from him in 2000. What rule changes, if any, would you like to see brought into the game of
tennis? I was wondering if the rules people have ever considered doing things to
change the way men's tennis is played, since if you are a great server you
usually win the point. One variation could be a different-colored line from
which you hit farther back. Could you
comment?
As I think I've mentioned before, tennis wonks tend to break rank about as often as Rockettes. Shortening changeovers and the time between points by a few seconds is considered a major sea change. The no-let rule, which I strongly support, is debated so fiercely, one would think it would change the game beyond recognition. Never mind that unchecked advances in racket technology have transformed the game immeasurably. Anyway, to answer your question, don't look for the dimensions of the court to be altered any time soon. Unless, of course, you're playing in a potato field. Send a question to Jon Wertheim, and check back the beginning of each week to
read more of his answers.
| |||||||||||||||||||||
