Sport of Tennis Needs U.S. to Stop Losing Its Star Power
Russians Dominating Women's Game; Roddick Only Real Young American Star for Men
By JOHN FEINSTEIN
Eighteen years ago, when he was ruling men's tennis, Ivan Lendl came in to meet with the media after pummeling Miloslav Mecir in the US Open final. The match had been so one-sided that USTA officials had started opening the gates at The National Tennis Center to let people out midway through the second set.
John McEnroe and Jimmy Connors had both lost in the first round of the tournament; Andre Agassi was just a teen-aged blip on the tennis radar and no one other than their families had any idea who Pete Sampras, Jim Courier and Michael Chang were. There had been one American man in the quarterfinals: Tim Wilkison, who had the best run of his career to get that far.
Did the empty seats at the end bother Lendl?
"No, of course not," he said, smiling. "It means I'm winning easily." He paused for a moment and then turned serious. "I do know one thing though," he said. "Tennis needs American stars. That's just a fact. This is the most important country in the world for sports and if there are no American stars, it means no one here is paying attention. That's not good."
There certainly could not have been many people paying attention this weekend as the US Open climaxed. For the first time since 1986, no American man reached the semifinals. And, even though they seemed to have ample opportunities, no American woman reached the final. Agassi and Andy Roddick both lost five set quarterfinals on the men's side and Lindsay Davenport and Jennifer Capriati lost three set semifinals on the women's side.
So, yawn right? The TV ratings will no doubt reflect that. Forget the fact that John McEnroe has been saying repeatedly that Roger Federer, whose performance in the final against Lleyton Hewitt was breathtaking, is one of the best players, perhaps the best player he has ever seen.
Forget the fact that the Russian women are now the story in women's tennis. In the last three majors, four different Russian women occupied five of the six final spots and a different one won each of them: Anastasia Myskina the French Open; Maria Sharapova Wimbledon and Svetlana Kuznetzova the US Open this past Saturday.
What's more, each of them seems to have a different personality, a different game and, seemingly far more savvy, moxie and smarts than most of the American women. Consider the reaction of Sharapova after her third-round loss to Mary Pierce. Sharapova didn't whine about how unfair it all was, how much pressure she was now under as the sport's new glamour girl -- at 17. She complained about nothing.
"I'm a major champion now," she said. "I know that changes expectations. More people are watching me now and they expect me to play well. I understand that. I just have to keep working on it to try and get better."
Spoken like a bright, precocious young woman who is going to win more titles down the road. Contrast that with Capriati's reaction after her controversial victory over Serena Williams in the quarterfinals. The shame of this match was that several horrid officiating calls overshadowed a superb match and a brilliant comeback by Capriati. But instead of saying that it was too bad to see such a spate of bad calls, too bad to see the officials become the story, Capriati said, "Well, I've gotten bad calls too. I deserved to get some good ones."
Wrong, Jennifer. That's not what you say at a moment like that. It is ungracious and untrue. Those were not good calls; they were bad calls not only for Williams, but for tennis. The fact that Richard Williams chose (again) to play the race card three days later and launch into a tirade claiming that people in tennis want to send a message to up-and-coming young African-American players that they will be treated unfairly makes it even worse because it is so far from the truth, yet has to be addressed because Williams-pere brought it up.
Here's the deal Richard: sometimes incompetence is simply the result of incompetence. Not racism. Not a conspiracy. The umpire in question was fired the next day. What was the message there? Arlen Kanterian, the executive director of the USTA called Serena to apologize. What was the message there? Simply this: everyone -- except Capriati --understood that an injustice was done and no one -- except Capriati and, presumably her family -- was happy about it. Even if you wanted to see Capriati win the match, which many people did and, sadly, some probably for racial reasons, you didn't want to see her win that way.
Unless you are as sick and misguided as Richard Williams.
The sad thing about the behavior of all tennis fathers, from Jim Pierce to Stefano Capriati to Peter Graf to Richard Williams (to name a few of the real dad all-stars) is that the people they hurt the most with their behavior are their daughters. They're the ones who suffer and who end up having the public blame them for their fathers. The one and only thing you can perhaps criticize Serena and Venus Williams for is a lack of interest in their sport.
Even there, the case can be made that they have an absolute right to do what interests them, even if some believe they are squandering immense talents. Both have been gracious in victory and defeat; they have elevated the women's game to new heights and renewed interest in their sport. But some people dislike them. Some of it is no doubt racist but a lot of it is because of their father's antics, whether it is dancing in the player's box at Wimbledon or screaming 'race' in the face of incompetence.
Back to the American question. Is there reason to panic? No, absolutely not. Yes, tennis needs American stars and Agassi, ageless wonder that he is, will be 35 next April. But Roddick is the real deal and, as the late 1980s and early 1990s proved, just when you think there are no Americans on the horizon, new ones show up. Heck, the U.S. might very well win the Davis Cup this year with Roddick leading the way.
The women are another question: Capriati and Davenport are 28 -- ancient for tennis players -- and Davenport, who probably would have won the Open if she hadn't pulled a thigh muscle warming up for her semifinal against Kuznetsova -- is talking retirement.
The Williams sisters are still not yet 25, but Venus appears very disinterested and Serena is still trying to get back to where she was two years ago before her knee injury, when it appeared she might never lose another match. A little less concern about fashion statements might not hurt.
What's sad is that the sport probably has more players worthy of attention right now than at any time in the recent past. Federer is brilliant and, unlike so many recent tennis stars, appears to be thoughtful, bright and relatively unspoiled. Roddick is a star who also seems to get it.
Hewitt gets almost nothing. But he's a superb player who showed the past two weeks that he's ready to challenge for the No. 1 spot on the men's side again after disappearing for most of two years. The Russians alone make the women's game worth watching but there are others -- yes, including the Americans -- who should make 2005 a compelling year to watch tennis.
But getting back to Lendl's insight of 18 years ago, will anyone in this country be watching? Tennis has been virtually invisible for the last decade here because it has been run so poorly and because absolutely no one is in charge. Normally a dormant sport can climb back into the headlines on the back of one or two stars. Sharapova clearly has star quality. So do Federer and Roddick and the Williams sisters if they want to devote themselves to the game again.
But is that enough? Or will it take an abolutely explosive star -- one like Tiger Woods -- to re-invent the game again in the United States? There's no way to tell until and unless that star comes along. Right now though, the game is as healthy on the court as it has been in a long time. But it may be too late. The agents and the squabbling alphabet organizations and generations of remarkably spoiled players may have dragged the game so far down that even stars -- even American stars -- can't bring it back.
Time will tell. Some of us will be watching. But we may be a distinct minority.
Russians Dominating Women's Game; Roddick Only Real Young American Star for Men
By JOHN FEINSTEIN
Eighteen years ago, when he was ruling men's tennis, Ivan Lendl came in to meet with the media after pummeling Miloslav Mecir in the US Open final. The match had been so one-sided that USTA officials had started opening the gates at The National Tennis Center to let people out midway through the second set.
John McEnroe and Jimmy Connors had both lost in the first round of the tournament; Andre Agassi was just a teen-aged blip on the tennis radar and no one other than their families had any idea who Pete Sampras, Jim Courier and Michael Chang were. There had been one American man in the quarterfinals: Tim Wilkison, who had the best run of his career to get that far.
Did the empty seats at the end bother Lendl?
"No, of course not," he said, smiling. "It means I'm winning easily." He paused for a moment and then turned serious. "I do know one thing though," he said. "Tennis needs American stars. That's just a fact. This is the most important country in the world for sports and if there are no American stars, it means no one here is paying attention. That's not good."
There certainly could not have been many people paying attention this weekend as the US Open climaxed. For the first time since 1986, no American man reached the semifinals. And, even though they seemed to have ample opportunities, no American woman reached the final. Agassi and Andy Roddick both lost five set quarterfinals on the men's side and Lindsay Davenport and Jennifer Capriati lost three set semifinals on the women's side.
So, yawn right? The TV ratings will no doubt reflect that. Forget the fact that John McEnroe has been saying repeatedly that Roger Federer, whose performance in the final against Lleyton Hewitt was breathtaking, is one of the best players, perhaps the best player he has ever seen.
Forget the fact that the Russian women are now the story in women's tennis. In the last three majors, four different Russian women occupied five of the six final spots and a different one won each of them: Anastasia Myskina the French Open; Maria Sharapova Wimbledon and Svetlana Kuznetzova the US Open this past Saturday.
What's more, each of them seems to have a different personality, a different game and, seemingly far more savvy, moxie and smarts than most of the American women. Consider the reaction of Sharapova after her third-round loss to Mary Pierce. Sharapova didn't whine about how unfair it all was, how much pressure she was now under as the sport's new glamour girl -- at 17. She complained about nothing.
"I'm a major champion now," she said. "I know that changes expectations. More people are watching me now and they expect me to play well. I understand that. I just have to keep working on it to try and get better."
Spoken like a bright, precocious young woman who is going to win more titles down the road. Contrast that with Capriati's reaction after her controversial victory over Serena Williams in the quarterfinals. The shame of this match was that several horrid officiating calls overshadowed a superb match and a brilliant comeback by Capriati. But instead of saying that it was too bad to see such a spate of bad calls, too bad to see the officials become the story, Capriati said, "Well, I've gotten bad calls too. I deserved to get some good ones."
Wrong, Jennifer. That's not what you say at a moment like that. It is ungracious and untrue. Those were not good calls; they were bad calls not only for Williams, but for tennis. The fact that Richard Williams chose (again) to play the race card three days later and launch into a tirade claiming that people in tennis want to send a message to up-and-coming young African-American players that they will be treated unfairly makes it even worse because it is so far from the truth, yet has to be addressed because Williams-pere brought it up.
Here's the deal Richard: sometimes incompetence is simply the result of incompetence. Not racism. Not a conspiracy. The umpire in question was fired the next day. What was the message there? Arlen Kanterian, the executive director of the USTA called Serena to apologize. What was the message there? Simply this: everyone -- except Capriati --understood that an injustice was done and no one -- except Capriati and, presumably her family -- was happy about it. Even if you wanted to see Capriati win the match, which many people did and, sadly, some probably for racial reasons, you didn't want to see her win that way.
Unless you are as sick and misguided as Richard Williams.
The sad thing about the behavior of all tennis fathers, from Jim Pierce to Stefano Capriati to Peter Graf to Richard Williams (to name a few of the real dad all-stars) is that the people they hurt the most with their behavior are their daughters. They're the ones who suffer and who end up having the public blame them for their fathers. The one and only thing you can perhaps criticize Serena and Venus Williams for is a lack of interest in their sport.
Even there, the case can be made that they have an absolute right to do what interests them, even if some believe they are squandering immense talents. Both have been gracious in victory and defeat; they have elevated the women's game to new heights and renewed interest in their sport. But some people dislike them. Some of it is no doubt racist but a lot of it is because of their father's antics, whether it is dancing in the player's box at Wimbledon or screaming 'race' in the face of incompetence.
Back to the American question. Is there reason to panic? No, absolutely not. Yes, tennis needs American stars and Agassi, ageless wonder that he is, will be 35 next April. But Roddick is the real deal and, as the late 1980s and early 1990s proved, just when you think there are no Americans on the horizon, new ones show up. Heck, the U.S. might very well win the Davis Cup this year with Roddick leading the way.
The women are another question: Capriati and Davenport are 28 -- ancient for tennis players -- and Davenport, who probably would have won the Open if she hadn't pulled a thigh muscle warming up for her semifinal against Kuznetsova -- is talking retirement.
The Williams sisters are still not yet 25, but Venus appears very disinterested and Serena is still trying to get back to where she was two years ago before her knee injury, when it appeared she might never lose another match. A little less concern about fashion statements might not hurt.
What's sad is that the sport probably has more players worthy of attention right now than at any time in the recent past. Federer is brilliant and, unlike so many recent tennis stars, appears to be thoughtful, bright and relatively unspoiled. Roddick is a star who also seems to get it.
Hewitt gets almost nothing. But he's a superb player who showed the past two weeks that he's ready to challenge for the No. 1 spot on the men's side again after disappearing for most of two years. The Russians alone make the women's game worth watching but there are others -- yes, including the Americans -- who should make 2005 a compelling year to watch tennis.
But getting back to Lendl's insight of 18 years ago, will anyone in this country be watching? Tennis has been virtually invisible for the last decade here because it has been run so poorly and because absolutely no one is in charge. Normally a dormant sport can climb back into the headlines on the back of one or two stars. Sharapova clearly has star quality. So do Federer and Roddick and the Williams sisters if they want to devote themselves to the game again.
But is that enough? Or will it take an abolutely explosive star -- one like Tiger Woods -- to re-invent the game again in the United States? There's no way to tell until and unless that star comes along. Right now though, the game is as healthy on the court as it has been in a long time. But it may be too late. The agents and the squabbling alphabet organizations and generations of remarkably spoiled players may have dragged the game so far down that even stars -- even American stars -- can't bring it back.
Time will tell. Some of us will be watching. But we may be a distinct minority.
