|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Multimedia Central Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities Work in Sports
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE |  |
Talking about up-and-comers
Posted: Monday February 21, 2000 12:35 PM
Sports Illustrated staff writer Jon Wertheim will answer your tennis questions weekly. Click here to send a question.
Let's jump right into the questions this week ...
I've been wondering why Paul Goldstein hasn't received the same kind of publicity as Jan-Michael Gambill, Justin Gimelstob or some of the other up-and-coming Americans. He's only been on tour for a year and a half, and he's already in the top 100 with wins over Greg Rusedski, Felix Mantilla and Alex Corretja. He seems to get overlooked because of his size, but he's been a solid player at every level (juniors, college, and pros). Good question. From a notoriety standpoint, I think Goldstein suffers from having gone to college. True or not, the perception is that any player who spends the years between ages 18 and 22 wearing a backpack and studying existentialism (O.K., reading Cliff's Notes and drinking beer out of a funnel) isn't a serious pro prospect. A player like Gambill (remember him?) burst onto the tour as a fresh-faced 20-year-old. Likewise, Gimelstob joined the tour more or less full time at age 19. Goldstein played four years at Stanford and was practically senile when he launched his career at 22. You're right, though -- Goldie is a player. He's probably too slight (5'10", 155 lbs.) to break, say, the top 20. But he's already established himself as the proverbial dangerous floater -- a steady, upset-minded player no seeds will want to face.
A couple of questions about Australians:
2. How successful do you think Patrick Rafter's comeback will be? If he does return to the top of his game (or even near it), who'll get the boot from the Aussie Davis Cup team -- Lleyton Hewitt or Mark Philippoussis? First, my questions about Australians, matey: How can they eat vegemite, which tastes like sweaty sand? And why does Australian Rules Football, the manliest sport around, have the most sissified gesture for a score? As for your chestnuts: 1. Dokic's dad is an idiot and, unfortunately, he's the puppeteer. Here's all you need to know about the logic of this family: Dokic loses in Australia to Rita Kuti Kis, disses Kuti Kis as a pathetic player, and then claims that the draw was stacked against her? Hmmm. Dokic's decision not to play in the Olympics -- in Sydney, in front of a pro-Australian crowd -- hurts herself more than anyone. 2. Rafter is supposedly returning to the tour next week, in Delray Beach, Fla. If it pans out, it will be the quickest recovery from rotator-cuff surgery in sports history. I think it will be a while before he'll return to the top of his full-bore game. If/when he does, it will be an interesting political situation. On rankings and seniority, Hewitt gets the boot. But Philippoussis has been so difficult through the years, I wouldn't be surprised if he ended up with a "doubles or nothing" proposition.
I noticed this week that French player Anne-Gaelle Sidot is nearing the top 30. How is this possible when she has an abysmal won-loss record over the last 12 months (something like 18-26)? There's been a lot of criticism of the men's rankings over the last few years. What about the women's rankings? If a player has just two or three good weeks (or wins) over a 52-week period, then she gets a decent ranking. Alexandra Stevenson is another example. Any thoughts? Sidot actually went 34-29 last year, according to my trusty WTA Tour media guide. But it's a fair point you raise. The answer, however, is elementary. If most tournaments have a 64-player draw, a player who goes 1-1 is, in theory, a top 32 player that week. A 25-40th-ranked player, such as Lisa Raymond or Sidot, needs only win half her matches and she'll be fine for the year. It's just a numbers game, really. The real joke, as you've caught on, is the points haul at the majors. A middling player like Stevenson can play one great Slam, do nothing -- literally -- the rest of the year, and still finish near the top 50. Likewise, Mirjana Lucic won something like four matches all year at events other than Wimbledon and finished at No. 50.
Everyone agrees that Andre Agassi is at the peak of his powers, both mentally and physically. If there was ever a player who could complete a Grand Slam, it is he. However, recent reports have him marrying Steffi Graf sometime in June. Will this make him a victim of the L. Jon Wertheim "Marriage vs. Tennis" philosophy? Are you going to reevaluate Agassi's chances if he does marry? And how has marriage affected your game? Who wants to marry a millionaire Las Vegan? It's over. If Agassi had any hair to cut, we'd call her Delilah Graf. Come mid-June, Agassi's slow burn commences. He'll have to miss events because he's promised to do yard work that weekend; that ball and chain will greatly curtail his court coverage; he'll cut back on appearances because Steffi's relatives will be coming over; that fat SFX signing bonus will be spent at the Barney's warehouse sale. Seriously, Agassi's situation is so unique -- and, frankly, bizarre -- that he's a bad candidate to test the marriage thesis. For one, he's already done the nuptials drill before and knows how it can transform a player from top of the mountain to the satellite circuit. Once bitten ... yadda, yadda, yadda. Also, he's not exactly marrying some hottie he met at the players party. This is Steffi Graf, after all, who has a sense of the level of focus it requires to play top-tier tennis. He may slide a bit after this summer, but it will be owed to his advancing age, not his sidekick. As for me, my wife suffers the occasional lapse in good judgment and actually reads this column from to time. Just to be safe, my game hasn't gotten appreciably better or worse since I took the Nestea plunge. Thanks for asking.
How about that Roger Federer? I told you he is ready to break out. I would venture to say that he would have beaten almost anyone else in the Marseille final (he still has too much "reverence" to beat Marc Rosset in a final). He is the real deal. And what about these feeble Williams sisters? It seems that they have a tag-team injury problem. I guess, since Venus has missed a few tournaments with a "thumb sprain" or whatever, it is Serena's turn to hit the rehab clinic. Hey, didn't Serena skip Wimbledon because of the flu? What's the deal, Jon? Those Williamses sure can talk tough.
I've never seen a player move more effortlessly on the court and hit with more exquisite timing than Xavier Malisse. He seems to have a ton of talent but has been short-changed on size. Do you think he will ever be a top player, or will he end up as a respectable journeyman, such as Hicham Arazi? Also, does any young player have more talent than Marat Safin -- his size, power and quickness are truly impressive. Does he have the mental toughness to be a perennial contender for No. 1, or will he be like Mark Philippoussis -- great physical tools but unable to put a sustained run together? Malisse does move well, doesn't he? He's 6'1" or so, not nearly as slight as Arazi, and he's still only a teenager, so there's no need to consign him to journeyman status quite yet. On the other hand, he only improved 19 places in the rankings between 1998 and 1999, and we've heard nary a peep from him in a long while. As for Safin, unquestionably, he has all the tools, including an ability to play on every surface. (If memory serves, I predicted he'd be a top-10 player by the end of 1999. Idiot.) He is cursed, however, by the attention span of a fruit fly and is a goner the moment he loses his serve. If Safin doesn't get his act together -- calling Jim Loehr, calling Jim Loehr -- equaling Philippoussis' status will be a stretch.
With all the recent questions lately about Andre Agassi's greatness, who would you rank as the top five players of the last 25 years? Please don't consider how many Slams they won or career longevity, etc. I want your opinion on who the top five players were when they were on the top of their game, on a neutral surface. My list would be: 1. Pete Sampras, 2. John McEnroe, 3. Bjorn Borg, 4. Jimmy Connors, 5. Andre Agassi.
1. Sampras
Send a question to Jon Wertheim, and check back the beginning of each week to read more of his answers.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
