|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Multimedia Central Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities Work in Sports
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE
|  |
Explaining Martina Hingis' success
Sports Illustrated staff writer Jon Wertheim will answer your tennis questions weekly. Click here to send a question.
It appears to be commonly accepted (among tennis commentators and Mailbag readers) that Martina Hingis is the "smartest" women's player on the courts. I want to challenge that thinking; in fact, I want to question the whole "brain vs. brawn" categorization. How do spectators determine who is playing smartly and who is playing on "instinct" and sheer athleticism? And what are your general thoughts about this?
Very intriguing. My general thoughts are that you raise a valid point, but chose a bad example. You're absolutely correct that brain vs. brawn is an exceedingly crass dichotomy. One doesn't preclude the other, and "playing smart" isn't always apparent from the stands or the broadcast booth. As a rule, instinct means "she's smaller than her opponent, but she's winning!" Sheer athleticism is code for "she hits a lot of winners, but she makes a lot of errors, too!" Also, a lot of the categorization has to do with execution. When Venus Williams tags the line mid-rally with a vicious forehand, she's playing "instinctual" tennis. When she misses the same shot by half a foot, we're suddenly told she needs to "harness her sheer athleticism." Having said that, I think you're hard-pressed to find a player who really does play more "instinctive," "intelligent" tennis than Hingis. No player anticipates shots likes she does; no player mixes up balls with her variety of pace, spin, depth and even height; no player uses as many angles and nooks and crannies of the court. That in spite of this prowess she still loses to the Williamses and Lindsay Davenport would indicate that your thesis has merit. But next time you watch her, pay attention to her decision-making and inherent grasp of strategy and I think you'll agree there's a big difference between her and your garden-variety WTA Tour pro.
How does Martina Hingis avoid injuries? She plays more matches and events than all the other top players, but rarely pulls out of an event.
Jan-Michael Gambill would take issue with the second part of your question. But it's a good point -- and it's another reason Hingis deserves more credit than she gets for maintaining her spot atop the charts for the better part of the past four years. People can say, "Yeah, Venus would be No. 1 if she hadn't been injured." And she would indeed. But isn't durability and the ability to take care of your body one of the earmarks of a champion? Anyway, unlike the Williams sisters, Mary Pierce and Amelie Mauresmo, Hingis doesn't abuse her body by slugging for the fences on every ball. She trains for three hours a day, I believe she told me, but she doesn't overdo it. I also give credit to Melanie Molitor, one of the precious few legitimate parent/coaches out there, who meticulously designs her daughter's drill and hitting sessions and defers the off-court aspects to the Saddlebrook staff. OK, enough gushing about Hingis. Just so you don't think I'm on the take from her fan club or that she has incriminating pictures of me ...
How would you compare Martina Hingis at her best with Steffi Graf at her best? Or is that too difficult to try to answer?
The best way to beat Graf was to hit so hard and deep that didn't have time to run around her backhand. As good a player as she is, Hingis at her best doesn't have the weapons to beat Graf at her best. What's more, Graf never did forgive Hingis for deeming her "over the hill," so she wouldn't want for motivation.
I've seen these two women play and my question is, why aren't Patty Schnyder and especially Amelie Mauresmo in the top 10? And where is the next great female serve-and-volleyer?
Both Schnyder and Mauresmo have been in the top 10 before, and odds are reasonably good they'll both return. Mauresmo is an absentee because she is constantly injured or else is playing through pain. If she ever stays healthy, I see her as a Pierce-type player who isn't consistent enough to be No. 1 but can win a Slam or two and hover around the top five. She's a good athlete and she hits so hard it's like facing a, well, you know. As for Schnyder, her situation is more complicated. Like a female Marcelo Rios, she is a supremely talented, supremely temperamental lefty who makes up for a so-so physique with good foot speed and, ahem, instinct. She still hasn't fully regained her foothold after her bizarre dalliance with that German guru last year. She shows flashes of brilliance, especially on clay, but then collapses. Until she can conjure the confidence to string together several good matches, she'll remain in the 18-25 range.
Regarding last week's Mailbag, Martina Navratilova is arguably the greatest women's tennis player of all time and was mainly a serve-and-VOLLEYER. How close was she to making your top-five list?
Yeah, as a number of you were quick to inform me, I totally shanked on omitting Martina N. She was certainly every bit the volleyer Jana Novotna was. There were some write-ins for Boris Becker as well.
Do you think that if Steffi Graf returned now she would still be a force to be reckoned with, or would the year off have thrown her off all together? Where would you rank her? Do you think she is undisputedly the greatest player of all time without a shadow of doubt? I believe this like personal gospel!
I, too, believe Graf is the best female player of all time. I also think she retired at the right time. Even if she played the year relatively injury-free -- a ridiculous if -- at age 30-31 I can't see her beating Davenport, Hingis or the House of Williams.
What's the score on Lina Krasnoroutskaya and Katarina Srebotnik? They both arrived on the tour with a bang -- Katerina winning her first ever tournament -- but lately neither can win any matches. Also, why is Iva Majoli even attempting a comeback? Do you think she could ever regain her top-10 status? And what do you think of Iroda Tulyaganova's prospects as a star player?
A lot of folks are high on Krasnoroutskaya, a former world junior champ. Give her a few years. I don't think I've seen Srebotnik play singles -- if I have, it didn't leave much of an impression. She plays a nice game of doubles, but I don't think she's on anyone's short list of future stars. I don't know what the deal is with Majoli. I imagine she's still out there trying to extricate herself from the nether regions of the rankings because she clearly has some vestiges of talent left and she is, let's not forget, only 23. Heard lots of good things -- on several fronts -- about Tulyaganova. It's too early to start assessing her prospects as a "star," but as she showed recently in Asia, there's clearly talent there.
My all-time favorite tennis novel is World Class by Jane and Burt Boyer. It is a takeoff on the original professional tennis tour. Can you please tell me your five favorite tennis novels?
I'm embarrassed to say I don't believe I've read five works of tennis fiction. If any of you can recommend others, pass 'em on. The ones that come to mind are: 1) Infinite Jest, David Foster Wallace (It's not just a book, it's an upper-body workout. It's an acquired taste, I realize, but one I greatly enjoyed nonetheless.) 2) The Tennis Partner, Abraham Verghese 3) Double Fault, Lionel Shriver
Is it fair to say that the death knell on Pete Sampras' career is starting to sound? Since he has pulled out of all of the remaining Masters Series events, with the exception of the Masters Cup, and seems to be making more appearances in New York gossip columns and at World Series baseball games and fashionista galas than on tennis courts, well, the bells are ringing awfully loudly in my sensitive ears. Although I suppose if he has to battle the marriage curse, he's doing it in style. Still, I guess Andre Agassi's long-ago warning about how the celebrity lifestyle can change your career becomes more and more telling as time goes on.
Andrew McLaren of Winnipeg asked a similar question. Since when did you Canadians get so damn cynical? What happened to the Panglossian neighbors to our north who gave us Anne Murray and Celine Dion ? At 29, Sampras is making up for time lost when he was so focused on tennis excellence that he could never milk his quasi-celebrity status. Here's a guy who spent ages 21-25 -- prime years for painting the town -- on Florida practice courts. His idea of living large was sleeping late in an air-conditioned bedroom. Let him go to the Viper Room and Lakers Club and make Page Six in peace. Married and hung over from a Cosmopolitan bender, he could still win Wimbledon. What his truncated year really says is that he doesn't put much stock in the Masters Series or, by extension, the points race. Here's a guy who abused his body in the past to ensure finishing the year at No. 1. This year, after reaching two Slam finals, the semis in Australia, and winning Key Biscayne, he's in prime position to "win" the race. Yet he'd rather play the newlywed game. I say, good for him. FINALLY, as long as you think I'm getting soft, I include this communique from Leslie of Ossining, N.Y., only to point out the abuse I have to endure to answer your queries: For some reason I don't picture you as being cool enough to wear Carlos Moya for Men. Actually, it's called Carlos Moya eau de toilette. If anything, it should be called Carlos Moya for Women. Since you claim to wear this cologne, can you describe the scent? Is it fresh, yet at the same time exciting and sensual? Its slogan is "Life is the most exciting game." How do you feel about that? I'm hoping to sample Carlos Moya any day now, so maybe we can compare notes soon.
Click here to send a question or comment to Jon Wertheim's Tennis Mailbag.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
