Tweet
Am I the only one who isn’t upset or shocked that the greatest player of all time, Roger, has now lost twice “inexplicably” to Guillermo Canas? Or who thinks that it might be really good for tennis? Maybe Guillermo didn’t need those steroids after all, but that is kind of beside the point.
This is the year that Roger might win the French Open and if he does I'm not going to care if he won Indian Wells or Key Biscayne. What about you?
I have a close friend who loves Roger almost as much as he loves his wife—and they seem happily married. He believes Roger is invincible and hopes Roger wins every match he ever plays.
I don’t think it’s like that. I think players have a mental lifespan. They get physically and mentally exhausted by the demands of the game, and after a certain point they can’t do it anymore. Pete Sampras probably couldn’t have won one more game when he got that last Open title. The exception is a player like Agassi who goes walkabout for a few years.
Take the case of John McEnroe. He won 7 Slam titles. But what is forgotten is that he also won 5 Davis Cups, including some epic mental and physical struggles, like the 5 hour match with Mats Wilander in Sweden where he let Arthur Ashe hug him after he won.
A Slam takes 2 weeks. Davis Cup takes 4 weeks. If his team wins, the top player could play 8 matches. So it’s like playing at least one more Slam and actually probably more in terms of the pressure, the travel, and the emotional strain.
McEnroe could have won 10 or more Slams easily if he hadn’t played Davis Cup—especially if he’d ever gone down to Australia, which was still played on grass for most of his career. Instead he was basically done at 24. Maybe that was why he was so nasty all the time on the court—he knew he was on the path to burn out.
AND on a less inspiring subject, did anyone else see the first issue of the “new” Tennis Week?
Did you know that IMG bought it? That used to be called International Management Group. Now it’s called International Marketing Group which sounds worse. They represent players, and events, and they own tournaments, and they own a production company that does TV coverage, and they represent many of the commentators. And they own the biggest tennis academy in the world.
Now they have bought what was the only really independent journalistic voice in the industry after the death of it’s founder, the great iconoclast, Gene Scott. They also say this new format for Tennis Week was all Gene’s idea and they were consummating his vision. (They dedicated the first issue to him.) Maybe that’s true.
But it’s hard to believe this first issue was any part of the vision of the Gene Scott I knew. On the cover we have Maria (IMG client) gets a makeover, and inside we have Ashley Harkleroad (IMG client) gets a make over. (Ashley’s is actually kind of cute.)
The center piece of Tennis Week was Gene’s column, skewering the sacred cows that control the game. After Gene’s death there were a series of guest columnists holding down that space. Now it’s just gone.
This is the year that Roger might win the French Open and if he does I'm not going to care if he won Indian Wells or Key Biscayne. What about you?
I have a close friend who loves Roger almost as much as he loves his wife—and they seem happily married. He believes Roger is invincible and hopes Roger wins every match he ever plays.
I don’t think it’s like that. I think players have a mental lifespan. They get physically and mentally exhausted by the demands of the game, and after a certain point they can’t do it anymore. Pete Sampras probably couldn’t have won one more game when he got that last Open title. The exception is a player like Agassi who goes walkabout for a few years.
Take the case of John McEnroe. He won 7 Slam titles. But what is forgotten is that he also won 5 Davis Cups, including some epic mental and physical struggles, like the 5 hour match with Mats Wilander in Sweden where he let Arthur Ashe hug him after he won.
A Slam takes 2 weeks. Davis Cup takes 4 weeks. If his team wins, the top player could play 8 matches. So it’s like playing at least one more Slam and actually probably more in terms of the pressure, the travel, and the emotional strain.
McEnroe could have won 10 or more Slams easily if he hadn’t played Davis Cup—especially if he’d ever gone down to Australia, which was still played on grass for most of his career. Instead he was basically done at 24. Maybe that was why he was so nasty all the time on the court—he knew he was on the path to burn out.
AND on a less inspiring subject, did anyone else see the first issue of the “new” Tennis Week?
Did you know that IMG bought it? That used to be called International Management Group. Now it’s called International Marketing Group which sounds worse. They represent players, and events, and they own tournaments, and they own a production company that does TV coverage, and they represent many of the commentators. And they own the biggest tennis academy in the world.
Now they have bought what was the only really independent journalistic voice in the industry after the death of it’s founder, the great iconoclast, Gene Scott. They also say this new format for Tennis Week was all Gene’s idea and they were consummating his vision. (They dedicated the first issue to him.) Maybe that’s true.
But it’s hard to believe this first issue was any part of the vision of the Gene Scott I knew. On the cover we have Maria (IMG client) gets a makeover, and inside we have Ashley Harkleroad (IMG client) gets a make over. (Ashley’s is actually kind of cute.)
The center piece of Tennis Week was Gene’s column, skewering the sacred cows that control the game. After Gene’s death there were a series of guest columnists holding down that space. Now it’s just gone.
Comment