Marketing and Tennis: The ATP

by Savannah

The United States, France, Australia and Great Britain got to show off this weekend didn't they? France, playing their tie in Guadeloupe, a French overseas territory, had a full house cheering the French team on. Gaël Monfils, whose family originated in the territory, played well in front of the "home crowd" (Monfils was born in Paris.) Gilles Simon started out slowly and roared back. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga and Richard Gasguet played inspired doubles and closed out the tie easily.

Great Britain once again relied totally on the Murray family for it's victory. Noted xenophobe Dan Evans lost to Nishikori Kei in the second singles rubber and didn't have to play the fifth rubber. In the only match that featured two top ten players Andy Murray faced Nishikori in the pivotal fourth rubber. The day before he and his brother Jamie won the doubles in straight sets. The two men, with everything riding on the match for their countries, played one of if not the best men's match of 2016. The Japanese wanted to keep Murray on the court for a long time and indeed the match last 4h54m. But it was Nishikori, who looked to be bossing Murray around during the two sets he won, who was panting and gasping for breath at the end.
If you have time watch the entire match. If you don't have time watch the fifth set. Amazing high level tennis by both players with the outcome in doubt up until the middle of the set.

Then there was the much ballyhooed ( in the US anyway) tie between the United States and Australia, featuring John Isner, Jack Sock and the Bryan twins Mike and Bob for the US, and Sam Groth, Bernard Tomic, John Peers and playing Captain Lleyton Hewitt for Australia.

There are a lot of people in tennis, people who should know better, who when first Tomic and then Kyrgios burst into the consciousness of serious tennis fans - not too many outside of tennis have a clue who they are - their antics provoked raised eyebrows at the least, scorn at the most. Tennis Australia (TA) had it's hands full with the two talented, vain, and arrogant players. It seemed that at least once a month TA had to come out with an explanation for behavior both on and off the court that many thought was beyond the pale.

Long story short, Tomic's first rubber was against Jack Sock. By all accounts he was focused and interested in the match and won it in four sets. His second match, the one that would make or break his team, found him the exact opposite. I saw some of that match. Truth be told he was acting like a brat and quickly dropped the first two sets. His Captain was heard pleading with him to play better on the changeover. Tomic, instead of doing what both Murray and Nishikori did during changeovers and listen to their Captains while hydrating, etc, whined about Kyrgios not being there saying that he was probably faking and that he'd gotten away with it before. Kyrgios was not tanking the match. Tomic was. The deflection was childish and stupid and unprofessional. He managed to win the third set 7-5 before losing 6-7(4) to Isner and forcing his country to face relegation.

During his presser he went in on Kyrgios again with the same complaint. TA has already had one former player walk away from the Tomic/Kyrgios situation. I'm no fan of Hewitt and to me it's a case of reaping what you sow. He was no walk in the park either.

TA has no one else though and these two will hold their Federation hostage for many years. Wally Masur said the following today:

"What's happened has happened, and for me the best thing is that they both play Indian Wells in five days time," Masur told Fox Sports News.

"That they just meet up in the locker room ... shake hands and just get on with it.

"We don't play another Davis Cup tie until September so there will be a lot of water under the bridge from now until then."

Needless to say the "heat of the moment" was thrown into the pot as well.

On the other side of the world there were better examples of sportsmanship from up and comers.

via DPA

Alexander Zverev was inconsolable after losing to Tomas Berdych. To be fair he should be losing to Berdych at this stage of his career. I wouldn't tell him that though.

Borna Ćorić won the rubber that moved his country on to the next round after their top player Marin Čilić wasn't able to close the tie out.

If you were a marketing person which young people would you want to promote as examples of what tennis is all about?

Yeah, I would too but there are too many people who think the game needs "personality". Be careful what you ask for.

© Savannahs World 2016 All Rights Reserved

Marketability and Tennis

by Savannah

An interesting interview with Marin Čilić's agent Vincent Stavaux by @franckramella of L'Équipe appeared over the weekend. In it he addressed the issue of his client's lack of popularity in what passes for tennis media and why companies like Nike haven't pursued him. Thanks to @markalannixon for the translation.

Tell us why we should like Marin Čilić?

"People need to find out who he really is. He's atypical on the tour. His natural kindness, not false, his amenability, his availability are to me exceptional. Everyone says: "Yes, but he lacks charisma and that sort of thing", but as soon as they meet him, they change their minds about him. We had a meeting here (in Marseille) with seniors, they were astonished by his kindness. He spoke to them in French, they were touched. And every tournament director will tell you: "Marin Čilić is special because everything he does he does with a smile." He's available when that's not always the case. He plays the game and never shows up just for the appearance money. In Rotterdam, he asked me Saturday morning, because he lacked a bit of confidence: "You believe in going to Marseille? I don't want to go there if I won't do well." I swear he said that!"

But he's not mentioned much - not by the media either -, while attention is paid more easily to the more extroverted ones ...

"To me, that's an excellent societal question. Everyone screams about and spits on the paparazzi and the sensationalist tabloids, but they have readers. It's a bit the same here. I have trouble understanding that, in relation to Marin, people prefer watching Kyrgios who throws his racquet and spits, though I have nothing against him. But hearing that sort of thing is problematic. Because what? For tennis to be fun you have to insult the umpires? Shout "fuck" everywhere? Watching a Roger at the top of his art entertaining the crowd, that's tennis to me. Not smashing racquets or whatever .. That's hypocritical."

Do you think we push too much for excess while constantly complaining that the sport is too policed?

"Stop! If people don't want to watch that sort of tennis, they can watch another sport. I'm against all rules that that make the game colourless under the pretext of making it more pleasant for the majority of people."

How do you fight for Čilić's existence in that world?

"What's a shame is that sponsor brands look strongly for that. Either you're right at the top or you're outrageous. But if you're in the category of player like Tomas Berdych, David Ferrer or Marin Čilić, you're nothing.Every time. They hide behind excuses like: "He's from Croatia, it's not a market." It's a very small argument."

Go ahead. We're giving you the chance to sell us Čilić ...

"His generosity. I think Marin Čilić is Pat Rafter's successor in the sense that he does a lot of things for a lot of people. He helps without talking about it. I was astonished when I found out years after that Rafter had built a hospital from the ground up with his own money. Marin gets involved, gives quite a lot to foundations. If people only knew what a big heart he has ..."

The thing is many of the players, male and female, coming up are in the category of Tomáš Berdych, David Ferrer and Marin Čilić. The problem is tennis has never been good at marketing players like them and worse at marketing players from Eastern Europe.

Players from Eastern Europe who play for Western European countries like Belinda Bencic and before her Martina Hingisová Molitor who played as Martina Hingis do get/got the full star treatment. Angelique Kerber is Polish but plays for Germany. And there's Simona Halep of Romania. None of them, not one, can headline an event. None of them have that "thing" that draws people to them.

It's the same on the men's side. The top male player, despite all of the effort his people put into promoting him, is not as charismatic as the two men who despite their current woes are still the biggest stars in the sport. And he doesn't wear Nike either. Let's look past him at the up and comers. Alexander Zverev is of Russian descent but both he and his brother who plays as Mischa Zverev play for Germany. Borna Ćorić of Croatia has the good looks that could get him places à la Marat Safin but none of them have the star power to draw casual fans to the sport. Čilić is a very handsome man but as his agent opines he comes from an area of the world that is not considered "a market". The same thing is said of Tomáš Berdych.

Since Čilić brought up David Ferrer I'll mention him briefly. People rant and rave about Feliciano López but in person Ferrer is the much better looking man. Still, neither one of them wear Nike or Adidas, the top brands in sports.

And yes there is Maria Sharapova who, to put it mildly does get a lot of publicity. The WTA has a type and she is still it. Did she get the push because she is based in the States while players like Maria Kirilenko, Anastasia Myskina and Elena Dementieva were unknown outside the world of tennis fanatics?

So what is going on? Why are players who have been consistently top ten so hard to market? Why is there such a push for players like Nick Kyrgios and Bernard Tomic but not for men and women, with few exceptions, out of Eastern Europe? Is it language? Is it that many of the Eastern European countries are poor? When the duopoly is gone who will replace them in terms of marketing? I have no answer and from the interview posted above agents are hitting a brick wall with the big ad agencies and clothing purveyors. If a marketing strategy can't be created now what is going to happen in the next two or three years? Who will be the standard bearers for a sport that will be dominated by players from countries that are not "markets"?

If tennis doesn't want to fade in the minds of sports fans a solution to the marketing problem will have to be found.


© SavannahsWorld 2016 All Rights Reserved

The ATP At A Crossroads

by Savannah


via Getty Images

Just before the Davis Cup Finals began David Lloyd , former British Davis Cup captain and brother of John Lloyd who was once married to Chris Evert, launched a scathing critique of England's best, and only, tennis star Andy Murray. He was in such a lather that he attacked not only the player but his mother, Judy Murray. What was Lloyd so upset about?

Andy Murray does not give enough back to the sport, while the Lawn Tennis Association has frittered away hundreds of millions without producing a single world-class talent.

‘The British players in recent years who have been good - Tim Henman, Greg Rusedski, Andy - they don’t in my opinion put enough back. They would say “Well, we’re winning this and winning that”. But I don’t mean that. I mean putting your heart and soul into it, a passion that is bigger than the person and even bigger than the game.

‘It’s about getting a kid who wants to play for Manchester United to want to play tennis instead. Andy is in such an incredible position with power to do that but he doesn’t. Tim is on the board of the LTA but he’s not out there grabbing people and that disappoints me.’

(...)

‘All these top players mask the failings, it is a pitiful organisation,’ said David. ‘They built a National Training Centre for £40million. That is my business, I’ve built lots of them. I know how much they cost and it’s maximum £10m, so where did the other £30m go?’

Lloyd also criticised the top players for not promoting the sport as well as they could.

‘I don’t think Andy does justice in presenting himself,’ said Lloyd. ‘I don’t think he goes out of his way to present the game. I only say things because I cannot believe we’ve been this unlucky

His criticism of the LTA (Lawn Tennis Association) is valid and no one is disputing that. What had people up in arms was his attack on the Murray family right before the beginning of the tie. Did he want England to lose? What macabre joy would he get out of that I wonder? Is he upset because Murray, of Scottish descent, came out for Scottish independence? There were many on Twitter who called Murray a hypocrite because he draped himself in the Union Jack and they at least had the balls to say that his stance on independence affected their perspective.

And what about his list of "great" British players. Rusedski, many of you will recall, was born in Canada and became a British citizen because one of his parents was born there. There was also quite an uproar about it as I recall.

Tim Henman's style of play was archaic while he was still playing.

As for the brothers Lloyd the less said the better.

You can't discuss Great Britain - England in particular - without at least touching on its caste system. The Lloyd brothers and Tim Henman are part of the inner circle, the upper class from which most tennis players were drawn. How do they go out to working or lower middle class families to try and convince them that tennis is the way to go and that they should ignore Man United? They barely concede that these people exist. It's one thing to cheer a player on the field. It's quite another thing to sit down with his family to discuss their talented son's sports options. They can't and they never will.

So why does it fall on the clan Murray to do so much? Judy Murray is doing all she can to build up girls and women's tennis in Great Britain yet she is accused of doing nothing. Are the Murray's, because of their ethnicity assumed to be able to reach kids outside of the public (really private) schools?

Needless to say Lloyd's ravings were not accepted by tennis fans, many of whom have been following the sport for years and know that the problem with British tennis isn't that the Murray clan isn't doing enough. It's that they've got no idea how to teach the modern game. If you listen to their commentary you get the impression that they despise it and long for the return of serve and volley as not just a tactic but the only way to play the game.

After Kyle Edmund's dreadful loss in the first rubber there were a lot of posts on Twitter about how well he did and that he is a bright light for the future. Uh huh. There is a British player who could possibly have taken some of the weight off of the Murray brother's shoulders but despite his change of citizenship the LTA doesn't seem in a hurry to ensure that he's eligible to play for Great Britain. It's galling that British superstar Dan Evans (ranked 185) gets credit for being on a winning Davis Cup team that he contributed absolutely nothing to. At least Edmund (ranked 102) tried.

The British reached the Davis Cup Final for the first time since 1936 on the back of Andy and Jamie Murray. They are Davis Cup Champions because of Clan Murray. They know this is the truth, a truth that galls them. What should have them in a panic is that there is absolutely no one ready to step into Andy Murray's sneakers. No one. And that is not Andy Murray's fault.

This post, the last one until summer season down under starts, is about the ATP as a whole though. Why do I say it's at a crossroads? It's widely perceived that it is the better run tour, that the caliber of it's top ten is much, much higher than that of the women's tour, that its tournaments draw more fans and more interest and that it promotes the GAME of mens tennis not just it's superstars or a specific look.

Let's look at the ATP Year End Top 20 rankings:


1 Novak Djokovic 16585
2 Andy Murray 8945
3 Roger Federer 8265
4 Stan Wawrinka 6865
5 Rafael Nadal 5230
6 Tomas Berdych 4620
7 David Ferrer 4305
8 Kei Nishikori 4235
9 Richard Gasquet 2850
10 Jo-Wilfried Tsonga 2635

11 John Isner 2495
12 Kevin Anderson 2475
13 Marin Cilic 2405
14 Milos Raonic 2170
15 Gilles Simon 2145
16 David Goffin 1880
17 Feliciano Lopez 1690
18 Bernard Tomic 1675
19 Benoit Paire 1633
20 Dominic Thiem 1600

What a dominant top player huh? He had a good year and fans should be flocking to him right? Well, no. That is not the way things are going. The tennis press, and some comms, are working very hard to try to rally fans to the number one. They've tried everything: guilt, shame, ethnic bias, you name it, to try and make fans like a player they are intent on not liking. I've often said that tennis fans are like cats. Try and make them go in one direction and they'll go whereever it is they want to go thank you very much.

The truth of the matter is that the current top player is a known quanity. He's been faking his way through matches for years and guess what - fans notice it! And they don't like it, or him. There is a litany of illnesses that have come and gone when it comes to him. His use of the hyperbaric chamber that wasn't a hyperbaric chamber was shoved out of public discussion by what passes as tennis journalism. The full court press is now on to make us like him. So far it's not working. The powers that be at the ATP know that an unpopular top man hurts their sport. I just don't think they can do anything to change things now.

The same is being done for the two spoiled brats from Australia, Bernard Tomic and Nick Kyrgios. Just yesterday the head of Tennis Australia said in an interview that the two have now matured, that they've "turned the corner" and that al we can expect from them going forward is qualify tennis.

Here's an excerpt" from that interview:

Both players endured turbulent years with on and off court controversies, including brushes with officialdom and the law, overshadowing anything they did on court.

Despite being the nation's top-ranked players, neither was considered as nominees for the prestigious Newcombe Medal -- which rewards Australia's "most outstanding elite tennis player and ambassador".

But Tiley said Tennis Australia had mended its fences with the pair and he expected them to be on their best behaviour at their home Grand Slam, the Australian Open, next month.

"I'd love nothing more than both Bernie and Nick to have a great 2016, as we all would," Tiley, who is also tournament director of the season's first major at Melbourne Park, told Wednesday's The Australian newspaper.

"There's no rifts; no animosity between Tennis Australia and those two guys. They are making a real go of a professional tennis career.

"They know what our expectations are and when they meet them they get rewarded and if they don't, they don't."

I'm not holding my breath.

There have also been some critiques of the generation of players aged between 20-25. Not one superstar has emerged from that group despite all the hype surrounding many of them. I don't get the point of choosing one player and naming his entire generation after him. That's silly. But I understand the motivation.

We can argue about the top three or four but the truth of the matter is two of the men in that group were winning majors in their late teens and early twenties. They were blowing the older generation off the court and into the broadcast booth. That is not being done by the younger group. Is their skill set less? Are they less competitive than the top three or four? Are they not as mentally tough?

I did a post earlier this year about the premature rewarding of promising juniors. I postulated that it freezes them mentally and that instead of working hard to improve their games they think because they caught a top player on a bad day they're the shit and don't have to do anything but what they've been doing. I made the same point in my year end report cards on Zverev and Keys. No matter how you feel about any of the top three or four you can't accuse any of them of resting on their laurels. They have all worked to improve their game. I don't see that happening with the younger group. I do see the men in their late teens making moves to try and move to the next level though so maybe it won't be such a long wait for another rivalry to appear that equals the Duopoly that still dominates mens tennis rankings be damned. Maybe I should call it the top two plus two.

I also have a bone to pick with ATP marketing. The WTA outdid them with their second tier championship tournament. People were interested in Zhuhai. Did anyone really care about the recently concluded ATP event in South America? If you judge by Twitter mentions no one did. Unless you really follow the Challenger tour many of the players were unfamiliar to most fans. I also think that fans were worn out and unless a fairly big fish was strong armed into playing interest flagged. I know some will say the positive reaction to Zhuhai shows the "depth" of the women's tour. Meh. They had Venus Williams in Zhuhai and that was all the marketing they needed. There was no one comparable in South America. Most of the good fan sites have boards devoted to the Challenger tour now. There is interest. I get why men in the top 20 don't want to play against mostly Challenger level players. Maybe the ATP needs to look at what the WTA did and see if they can work something out that will hold fans interest at the end of a long season.

I should say that I didn't forget US men. There's nothing much to say. I am going to be paying more attention to them next year though. I've decided to keep my eye on Taylor Fritz, the player the USTA is hyping the most. Currently ranked #176 Fritz has won two Challenger titles, won the US Open Junior Boys Title, made the Boys Final at Roland Garros (a big deal for a US player at any level) and the Boys semi final at Wimbledon. His CV is as follows:

Born October 28, 1997 (age 18)
Height 1.93 m (6 ft 4 in)
Plays Right-handed (two handed-backhand)

It should be noted that his mother played professional tennis.

The young woman I'll be keeping my eye on is Naomi Osaka, ranked #156

Here's her CV:

Born 16 October 1997 (age 18)
Osaka, Japan
Height 1.80 m (5 ft 11 in)
Plays Right-handed (two-handed backhand)

She's got no main tour or ITF titles but she really impressed me at the Rising Star event in Singapore. She should have lost in the final to Caroline Garcia but she stayed focused while Garcia, the more experienced player, fell apart. It's not too much to say no one had picked Osaka going in.

Will I keep my eyes on my first two picks? Yes I will. 2016 is a crucial year for both Alexander Zverev and Madison Keys. Zverev, the younger of the two, has a few years to grow into his body and hone his game. Keys doesn't have that luxury. She's got to improve her on court focus and demeanor. No one is afraid of her. She's a big deal in the States and nowhere else. I understand managing your schedule but International events are there for a reason. If you think you're a top player but can't get over the hump then you need to play more. She's in danger of being passed by Karolina Pliskova, Belinda Bencic, and others who understand that playing hones your skills. No one likes losing but you learn everytime you play a match. Winning is the cherry on top. Zverev, one of the yonger players coming up, is improving his game. Keys is stagnant and doesn't seem to be making moves to take the next step.

End Note

Unless something drastic happens I will make my next blog post in late December. It's been a very interesting year in tennis, a year that pretty much saw the status quo continue on both tours.

On the WTA side Agnieszka Radwańska, who won the YEC and ended the year ranked #5 in the world has to hit the ground running. She was not expected to do well in Singapore and she did. I think she'll be able to pick off younger and less skilled players but the big girls know how to counter her. I don't see her winning a Slam but I think she can rise higher in the rankings by gobbling up the small fish.

As for the ATP the man on the move is Andy Murray. His wife is due to have their child early next year and I believe he's taking February off. The pressure will be on him to do very well in Melbourne though so he will have to come in ready to play at the level he did in Ghent. He's number two in the world.

I'll end by saying Happy Holidays to everyone. See you in a few weeks.

© SavannahsWorld. All Rights Reserved except where indicated

Alexander Zverev and Madison Keys 2015 Report Cards

by Savannah

Madison Keys
End of Year Rank: 18
Age: 20


Source: Mark Kolbe/Getty Images AsiaPac

Wins: 31
Losses:18

Best Tournament(s):
Australian Open: Semi Finalist
Charleston: Finalist
Strasbourg: Quarter Finalist (W/O to Kristina Mladenovic)
Wimbledon: Quarter Finalist
US Open: Round of 16

Notable Loss(es):
Eastbourne R32 To Belinda Bencic (Defending Champion)

There are huge chunks of the year missing from Madison's stats. I know that she was supposed to be out with injury and I understand that she is entitled to her off time but the images that have really stuck with me from 2015 are those of her at Coachella with Sam Querrey and other friends of hers. She has not accomplished enough to take a sabbatical like the world number one did after the US Open but it seems she, like other young US players, feel they're on the same level as the top players on their tour.

Sadly when Madison did play there was no discernible improvement in her game from 2014. At least in 2014 she won a title. This year she wasn't able to defend that title.

Madison has the potential to be a very good player but she is going to have to show more discipline when her opponent isn't cooperating with her plans and countering her every move. This year Madison seemed to get frustrated and fall apart when this happened. There was no evidence of a Plan B in her repertoire.

In other words she doesn't think well on court. No matter her potential she's got to kick her game up a notch or she is going to end up one of those mid level players with a decent following of fans who will be singing the lament "woulda coulda shoulda".

Grade for 2015: C

Alexander Zverev
End of Year Rank: 81
Age: 18


via Getty Images

Wins: 14
Losses: 17

Best Tournaments:
Rotterdam: Round of 16
Irving Tennis Classic (CH): Quarter Finalist
Open du Pays D'Aix (CH): Semi Finalist
Neckarcup (CH): Champion
Bästad: Semi Finalist
Citi Open: Quarter Finalist

Notable Achievement:
Winner ATP 2015 Star of Tomorrow Award

Alexander Zverev is right about where he should be for his age. He hasn't won any majors but that is okay. I think winning a major too young (or doing very well at a major at too young an age) makes a young person think there's not much more they have to do to improve their game. After all they beat such and such a great player so what they're doing has to be fine right? It's as if they're not paying attention to what the top players are doing. Male or female their games are constantly evolving, constantly changing. If you're playing the same game you played at eighteen when you're 24 something is wrong. If you're playing the same game you played at 18 at 30 you're playing Challenger level tennis.

I had to laugh when I saw that they gave this award to him instead of Chung Hyeon, who at 19 is ranked #51 in the world but maybe they wanted to make up for the way they treated him during the year. Many of his losses came after he had to play three rounds of Qualifying. I saw this at the US Open. He was playing Qualifying while some questionable players were direct entries into the Main Draw.

I hope that the young man is angry about 2015 regardless of the Award. It would be nice if he can win an ATP 250 during 2016 and be given wild cards into main draws at mid level events but we'll see. In order to do this he is going to have to keep his emotions in check especially during the business end of a match. This year he would start talking to himself, throwing up his hands and go into full meltdown mode. He's got about a year to stop doing that.

Grade for 2015: C

End Notes:

There were several times during the year that I wanted to drop these two as my players to watch and choose others. My choice on the men's side would've been easy: Chung Hyeon had a much better year than Zverev and is ranked 30 points higher. Right now it seems that he is being watched and praised by a small group of aficionados who see that a great tennis mind is being formed. He's not ready to win majors yet but I can see him winning a 250 or two and maybe going to the quarters in a M500. He does get frustrated on court but I haven't seen amy yelling and screaming breakdowns from him. You can almost hear him thinking "I'll do better next time" while going off to scout the top players on his own.

The women's side would've been difficult. Belinda Bencic? Elina Svitolina? Anna Karolina Schmiedlova? Daria Gavrilova? Alison van Uytvanck? I think Louisa Chirico of the US at 19 Is going to have to step up her game. There are lots of people in the States who want her to do well but does she have that steel will to get beyond being a rich girl dabbling in a rich person's sport? She's 5'9" (1.524m) tall, a decent height, and has a decent game. We'll see.

As for the other women named they have decent games but Bencic and Gavrilova can go full diva on you in the blink of an eye. Gavrilova wants her high emotion to distract her opponent and it has worked for her but once players learn to ignore your insanity on court they do and they beat you. I'm not impressed by Svitolina or Schmiedlova to be honest. I don't see great there. I see decent.

The one young woman I'm going to be looking at next year will be Osaka Naomi. Due to her mixed race heritage (her father is Haitian) she does not have the thin body of Asian women. She also has the ability to stay focused and win matches she shouldn't. Yes I'm talking about her match vs Caroline Garcia in Singapore. No one, not even me, saw her having a chance in that match but she won it.

By the time play starts again at the end of December I'll have made up my mind who I will follow in 2016.

My write up on the ATP will come a week or so after Davis Cup.

© SavannahsWorld All Rights Reserved except where indicated

Time To Be Seen and Not Heard for Juniors?

by Savannah

Remember back in the day when no one talked about Junior Tennis? Yeah there were kids out there playing their hearts out but many of them ended up going to college on scholarships and played tennis on weekends in parks or country clubs.

All of that changed a few years ago though and I'm wondering if it might not be time to go back to the days when kids weren't tagged #1 with a bullet like the old Billboard record charts and they were relatively free to pursue or not pursue a pro career. What changed? Richard Williams and Oracene Price's daughters changed the way the world at large viewed tennis. All of a sudden every parent with a dollar and a dream to borrow a phrase felt their child had the goods to become the next Williams sister and the race was on. If your child could hit a tennis ball over the net he or she was dragooned into playing tennis because Venus and Serena. The siren song reached as far as Eastern Europe and as near as the lower 48 states in North America.

An important article was posted this week by Steve Tignor on the current wild card system employed by the Grand Slams where their up and coming players are given the chance to play on the big stage of a Slam and see how they do against the best in the business. Most of these players end up as cannon fodder, hitting or practice partners for the top players rarely making it past the first or second round of play. Here is Tignor's opening salvo:

The way it's done now, each major gives most of its wild cards to its home players. The few that don't go to the other Slam countries, in a reciprocal arrangement. For example, six of this year’s men’s main-draw wild cards went to Americans, one went to Pierre-Hughes Herbert of France, and another to Lleyton Hewitt of Australia. It’s understandable, on one level: The national federations run these tournaments, and their first mission is to promote tennis in their home countries. But there are only four countries that host Grand Slams: Australia, France, Great Britain, and the United States.

Should players from these countries have a leg up forever?What about all of the worthy—and often worthier—hopefuls from other nations? The umbrella organization for the federations, the ITF, is in the business of promoting the game not just in four places, but around the world. And with the recent prize-money increases at the majors, a free ride into the first round is more valuable to a young or struggling player than ever. It can also be valuable, as Hewitt’s long, multi-year good-bye has shown, to an aging legend, too.

But are all of these wild cards to "rising stars" a help or a hindrance? As is pointed out in the article Donald Young was picked to be the next big US player. Now, at age 26, he is doing what he could have done at age 19 and playing Challengers not only in the States but overseas as well. He's not storming the top ten but he's playing well enough to beat the likes of Gilles Simon who is not an easy out. With tennis careers lasting longer Young has a chance of getting and maintaining a career in the top 20, something that would've been laughable five years ago.

What does this have to do with junior tennis? There is a lot of hoopla and promotion around Juniors now. There are racquet and clothing contracts available. Some majors go out of their way to put top juniors on televised courts not only for junior matches but when they play main tour players. Tennis is all about the pleasure of pressure but is the focus on juniors causing some players to stay stuck at that level of play? How often have we seen promising juniors getting Wild Card after wild card and instead of rising in the rankings sinking, no plummeting in the opposite direction because their games, mentally and physically, aren't able to cope with those of the top pros.

I watched the match between Danka Kovinic and Anna Karolína Schmiedlová last evening and feel it was a prime example of the lowering of tennis IQ in players labeled "promising" or "rising stars". Kovinic can hit the snot out of the ball but can't control her power. AKS has been playing a lot of main tour matches this year and while her skills are developing you'd think she would've won the match easily based on where she played and how she's done for a player her age. Instead we got a marathon of junior level tennis where AKS won because Kovinic thinks there's only one way to hit a ball. AKS was barely standing but she has a bit of subtlety in her game and won. Was it exciting? Yes, in the sense that someone was going to have to win and maybe someone will faint kind of way. Was it great tennis? No.

I also got to watch one of my "ones to watch" this season, Alexander Zverev, 18 play both qualies and a main draw match live. Zverev's got a pretty decent game. Of course it still needs work, but he plays his age. Shot selection can be improved on as well as paying closer attention to what his opponent is doing.

I also watched Chung Hyeon age 19 on an outer court, and Frances Tiafoe age 17. Both were in the Main Draw, Chung based on his ranking, Tiafoe via a Wild Card. Tiafoe has all the shots. He moves well. He's got a big personality. But on court he's 17. Chung, who forced Stan Wawrinka to three tiebreak sets, has been playing a mix of Challengers, ATP 250 events and Slams. It shows. His game is much more mature than Tiafoe's, and right now I don't see Tiafoe being able to duplicate what Chung did even in defeat. Tiafoe's game is not maturing. I think it would've been better to hold a Slam WC for Tiafoe until he is 19 and has hopefully gained a measure of tennis maturity by playing Challengers and ATP 250's not only in the States but overseas.

Are Wild Cards overused for young players from countries with long tennis histories? Yes. Is too much emphasis being put on doing well at a Slam instead of doing well at tennis, especially in the US? Yes. Should the emphasis on "the next great one" be downplayed? Yes. Labeling a youngster a success when he/she has yet to prove that they can do more than hit the cover off the ball or has connections in a particular Federation is wrong.

I've been a critic of Patrick McEnroe and his stewardship of the USTA Player Development program but one thing he was right about was teaching young prospects to play on clay. Here's a quote from Andre Agassi who, along with Pete Sampras and Jim Courier, are being recruited by PMac's successor Martin Black to help mentor young American men. Keep in mind they're talking about young men by the way.

Agassi thinks the drought can be explained through domination and change in the game.

"I think the biggest problem over the last decade has been Federer, [Rafael] Nadal and [Novak] Djokovic," Agassi said. "You throw in Murray and you have one hell of a generation who have clearly raised the standard."

He said that the new game doesn't naturally suit itself to the American game as it once did.

"Back in the day, me, Pete, [John] McEnroe and [Jimmy] Connors, we hit the ball through the court," Agassi said. "We struggled a bit on clay, but our game still translated throughout the year for the most part. Now with the spin and the athleticism, you need that clay mentality in every part of the game."

I've been saying this for years but now that Agassi has said it maybe some of the éminence grise of tennis will pay more attention to what has to happen if the US is going to be competitive in tennis again. We don't need any more players with all the shots and no game. The Zverev's, Chungs, Schmiedlova's and Bencic's of the world are "hungry to win" and are working on improving their games not their celebrity profiles. So yes, it's time for everyone involved with Junior tennis especially in the US to take a step back, let the kids develop their games on their own at their own pace. If your game is set at 18 there is no where for you to go. It's definitely time to let the kids be seen and not heard.

The Weight of Expectations: The Kids Part 2

by Savannah

"Who the hell is this CiCi Bellis?" I kept asking myself. Everywhere I looked I saw her name and age, 15, and the words prodigy and future star somewhere in the next sentence or two. So this morning I decided to look her up and see just what recommends her to tennis stardom in the near future.

The closest I found was this glowing article by someone named Ashlee Vance from August of last year for Bloomberg Business.

Silicon Valley is hardly wanting for prodigies, but until Tuesday it hadn’t produced one on the tennis court. Enter Catherine “CiCi” Bellis, who beat 12-seeded Dominika Cibulkova at the U.S. Open. The win was remarkable because Bellis is only 15 years old and was playing in her first Grand Slam match. The most recent 15-year-old to pull off such a feat was Anna Kournikova—back in 1996, three years before Bellis was born.

In some respects, Bellis’s success shouldn’t be all that surprising. Where the Williams sisters defied the odds by rising up from the mean streets of Compton, Calif., to become superstars, Bellis comes from a privileged background far more conducive to tennis development. She grew up in Atherton, Calif.— the elite among elite suburbs in Silicon Valley. Gordon Bellis, the youngster’s dad, made enough as an investment manager to supply his daughter with a backyard tennis court while wife Lori home-schooled CiCi.

Even by tennis’s hoity-toity standards, these were luxe surroundings. The only comparable situation would be the case of Ernests Gulbis, the mercurial Latvian player on the men’s tour and son of Ainārs Gulbis, a super-rich investment banker.

(...)

Given the track record of other out-of-nowhere Valley startups, it would be unwise to bet against her.

Notice the tennis names Mr Vance mentions. If those don't set off warning bells for Vance they do for hard core tennis fans. Neither Kournikova or Gulbis lived up to their potentials. But of course this girl - she is a girl - is going to be a success because SILICON VALLEY!!!

Yeah.


via USATIS

Well young Ms Bellis got her ass handed to her yesterday by the world #1 Serena Williams. Can I say that Serena let the girl win two games? The 6-1, 6-1 score is deceiving. It really wasn't that close.

I wonder though what sport other than tennis would allow a fifteen year old girl face the best player of this generation? In what sport would the hype machine try to spin it that the kid had a chance. I mean would it have been fair to let a college freshman go one on one with Michael Jordan back in the day? No you say? Then why build this girl up as the second coming because she beat Dominika Cibulkova and has had a decent ITF career so far. No offense meant to Dominika but Serena is several levels above Cibulkova and in my opinion it does more harm than good to expose someone this young to the juggernaut that is Serena Williams. As I said earlier this year exposing young players, male or female, to the rigors of the main tour before they're physically and mentally ready is not a good thing. It can lead to regression and self doubt. Tell me how many players have made the successful jump from the Juniors to the main tour? Look at the kid I'm following this year, Alexander Zverev. Poor guy is not doing well at all at the moment although he is playing Qualies something I think is a good thing.


via ITFtennis.com

Why isn't the hype machine talking about Chung Hyeon from South Korea? At 6' tall he doesn't have to worry about a height disadvantage. He's very mobile and very fast and can make shots from anywhere on the court. The hype machine may not be on his case but the tennis cognoscenti are. I mean when you hear the likes of Robbie Koenig and Jason Goodall falling over themselves to describe the potential of this young man you know that away from the ever vigilant (sarcasm alert) tennis "press" the people who matter are already paying attention to him. Oh but wait. He's from South Korea. His team is composed of Koreans. His English is very limited something we know drives the US tennis establishment up the wall. So he can't be publicized because he's too foreign. Better young Bellis who comes from a background the US tennis establishment understands and who can communicate with them without an interpreter.
I've been told by @Tonicate that the correct Romanization of the young Korean's name is "Jeong" but that the pronunciation sounds more like "Chung". Since he's using "Chung" I'll use it too. However it's spelled keep your eyes on him. I think he's going to be a good one.


via his Twitter profile

Borna Ćorić is another youngster with an outsize personality, a cockiness if you will, that Australian, British and US tennis people like. He's had to dial back his "best of his generation" quote and seems to be progressing, building a career. To my knowledge his English is limited too but with his buzz cut and personal charm I guess he's more approachable for the Westerners who have just stopped their pronouncements about Eastern Europeans dragging themselves out of their hovels to play tennis. Just stopped.

So Madison Keys. If you saw her complete breakdown towards the end of her match against Sloane Stephens you saw a player unable to handle the pressures she's under. After her run in Australia everyone was saying she was the next big thing, the American poised to succeed Serena, the one who should obliterate anyone across the net from her when she played. I think it was a mistake for her not to play anywhere until the IW/Miami swing. You have to learn to win and lose before you step on the big stages of tennis. Yes they said she was injured but did she play either of the warm up tournaments in Mexico at least? No.

This focus on the Slams and since we're talking WTA Premier Mandatory events is wrong and puts more pressure on young players no matter where they come from. You build a tennis career just like you construct a point. Everything can't be an "ace". You can't "servebot" your way through life and you can't do it with a tennis career. Make these young people play. Let them learn that taking the court, win or lose, is how you deal with life.

I have to mention that for many African American tennis fans Keys unfortunate comments about not identifying as African American have made her someone to root against. Keys is what 19? She's from a wealthy background and as many mixed race people do she's struggling with her identity. Should her parents have done more to tell how how the world sees her? It's easy for people hiding behind computers to say "yes they should have" but not being part of that family and it's dynamic the only thing outsiders can do is "don't judge". She may always struggle with her identity. We're all on this plane to learn so I say leave her alone about that for now. It was a mistake by her handlers to let that statement go in that interview but I'm betting they're unaware, and to be honest really don't care what people of color think or feel when they hear statements like that.

The way Keys was sobbing, bawling if you will, on the sidelines in the second set all of these issues are getting to her. I like the way Jonathan Leach handled the awkward situation. Men confronted with crying women usually lose it. He whispered directly into her ear so that the mic wouldn't pick up what he was saying. That was a good move on his part and Madison did settle down after that and win a couple of games to avoid being fed a bakery product. I still think she should play some International level events. Let her construct her career. With tennis careers extending into what used to be considered the golden years of tennis she's got enough time to get it together.

As for the woman who defeated Madison Keys, Sloane Stephens, I think she realizes that Nick Saviano is her last chance to be relevant in tennis. At least I hope she does. I think she's afraid of him, and that's a good thing for someone with her personality. She had more to prove versus Madison and she played like it. She's still playing. Unseeded. Let's see how she handles herself.

I haven't mentioned much about US young men. There's not much to say. Too short. Lousy games. Unable to think their way through a point let alone a match. Yes Donald Young is playing better tennis but he's hardly a newbie. Ryan Harrison is also trying now. No temper tantrums so far. But neither of them are new jacks. The true new jacks like Francis Tiafoe are doing the right thing and playing Challengers. Some folks out there get it.


© Notice of Copyright: Unless otherwise stated, all material on this site is the copyright of the author. Text may not be used unless express permission is granted by the author. Feel free to link to or quote this site and include the proper credit.

Victoria Azarenka Makes It Official

by Savannah

victoria azarenka @vika7 · 3h 3 hours ago
Welcome to the team Wim! @wimfissette

With this simple announcement and photo on Twitter Victoria Azarenka confirmed that she will be working with Wim Fissette as her new coach.

After being blind sided by her coach of five years defection Azarenka had kept her social media presence low key and self centered until a fan in Doha spotted her hitting with Fissette and posted the pictures online. There were some reports that Vika would only be working with Fissette for about a week but the above Tweet implies a longer contract is in effect. I don't think Fissette would sign on for a one week trial as was reported in Belgian tennis circles since he has a known track record. His compatability with his new charge is what had to be proven.

What will he do for Azarenka? To be honest her former coach did all the heavy lifting changing her from a temperamental court presence to one who is in better control of herself and her game. Fissette will need to smooth out some rough areas in her approach to playing tennis though. The most frequently mentioned area by her fans is her serve.

I had to make sure Azarenka's news was deemed worthy by the WTA official site and I saw that they have indeed published something about it. Good. I wouldn't want one player to be favored over all others when it comes to coaching changes. I do wonder why they chose to picture Fissette with Kim Clijsters though.

I don't see Azarenka scheduled to play before Indian Wells so that is more than enough time for her and her new coach to make decisions on what to change and how to change it. I thought she'd play one of the warm up events to IW but it doesn't appear that she will.

I wish Victoria luck with her new arrangement personally and professionally.

Madison Keys

While looking to see where Azarenka is next scheduled to play I saw that Madison Keys has pulled out of Acapulco. Don't forget that that event is now played on a hard court and would've been a nice warm up for her before entering the cauldron of IW especially with Serena returning after over a decade away. I haven't read about her being injured either. I hope this isn't the US "focus on the majors" attitude coming from her and her team.

Miscellaneous

I watched Elias Ymer play Tommy Robredo in Rio last evening. Robredo is never an easy out even for seasoned veterans and while he's still coming back from injury I had no expectations of Ymer winning a set let alone the match.

Ymer was given a Wild Card into the Main Draw of this event and while a match against Robredo is a good way to see where you are especially on clay I wish he'd gotten into the Main Draw via Qualies instead. Handing a prospect WC's ends up being counterproductive because it can make the weight of expectations that much heavier and increase the sense of failure and being unable to compete at the highest level of more of a thought pattern than it needs be at a young age.

His game is still suited to hard court play but he is thinking a bit better than he was when I first saw him.

Meanwhile the kid I'm following for the next year Alexander Zverev played himself into the MD at Marseille where he will face Gaël Monfils in first round play.

Looking Forward: Who Best Represents the Future of Tennis?

by Savannah

It's pretty obvious that tennis is starting to go through a transition. Don't get me wrong; the established stars still have a few years of dominance to go and at the moment there's no need to think any of the new jacks are able to shove them out of the way.

I've said several times that this era of the superstar player, the man or woman who moves beyond the narrow world of professional tennis is just about done. I feel that after 2016 we're going to see more subdued stars; men and women who are competent but not spectacular: who don't capture the imaginations of fans the way the giants of the last ten years or so have. It's not that they don't have personality it's that they don't have that "thing"that gets fans to flood practice courts, generate millions of followers on social media and scrums at their public appearances. There are some, mostly from countries without representation in the top ten or countries that are barely hanging on to ranked players in the top twenty are saying the new players should look to the likes of John McEnroe and liven up the court with gesticulations, cursing and other antics that to me are best left in the past. If you're asking for a WWE type player isn't that admitting that the tennis to come will be boring and won't be able to attract fans on its own?
If a player like that makes it to the top five in the world more power to him or her. Frankly I don't see it happening.

So what's a long standing tennis fan to do? Lament the passing of a Golden Age and withdraw into his or her cave? This fan actually did that for awhile in the late 80's into the 90's. It was when I took my daughter to her first US Open when she was about seven or eight that I got back into the sport.

Since I'm not going to hibernate I thought about picking two players, a male and a female, to track for the next couple of years to see how they tiptoe through the minefield of professional tennis. Who should that player be? What criteria should they have to meet?

My first criteria was age. I didn't want someone already in their twenties or who had already been picked as the next best thing. Temperamental brats were not considered.

But how young should I start to look? Francis Tiafoe of the United States is a promising junior with an outsize personality and a still maturing game. I'm starting to read more about Michael Mmoh, also of the United States but I've never seen him play and he confines himself to Junior's for now. There's Gianni Mina of France who played a nice game at Roland Garros a few years ago and hasn't been seen or heard of much since then. Borna Ćorić is also a player to watch. He stepped in it big time declaring himself the best of the up and comers just before the AO and hasn't shown much since that incident. He's reading and believing his own hype and that is dangerous.

Am I pointedly ignoring Australian men? Yes. Until they start disciplining their players and downplay the badass as champion meme they seem infatuated with at the moment there's no need to talk about them. A player who curses ballkids and fans alike is not the kind of player I can support.

And what about the young women? Much is being made of Belinda Bencic who has shown that she has a healthy sense of herself and what she should be doing. The skillset she needs is a work in progress.
Zarina Diyas and Ana Konjuh are also mentioned as stars of the future. We'll see. There's also Katie Swan of Great Britain who generated quite a bit of excitement in Melbourne. At 15 she's out of the base age I wanted. As every parent knows children change a lot between 15 and 19 and then from 19 to 21. It's a process that sees goals and personalities change. What a kid wants at 15 may not be what they want at 21.

I also decided that I wanted to focus on young players who were appearing regularly on the Main Tour and who had accomplished something worth paying attention to. Has a player made an unexpected showing in a major or on the Main Tour? Are they working their way up to the main tour(s) and showing respect not only for themselves but for the sport? Are they making measurable improvement in point construction and style of play? By this I mean not focusing on the majors but willing to play the smaller International's and 250's against established players who may not be superstars of the game but play well enough for a young player to hone his or her skills and game so that when they get to a major they're not still playing Junior level tennis. This is a major issue for young players. Some Federations want their players to focus on the majors to the exclusion of everything else. It'll be interesting to see if any real stars come from those raised under those systems.

So enough of the chit chat. Who am I going to be looking at?


The young male I decided on was Alexander Zverev of Germany. Here's his CV via Wiki.

Born 20 April 1997 (age 17)
Hamburg, Germany
Height 1.98 m (6 ft 6 in)
Turned pro 2014
Plays Right-handed (two-handed backhand)
Career record 4–6
Career titles 0
Highest ranking No. 135 (20 October 2014)
Current ranking No. 137 (10 November 2014)

I was looking at Ćorić but he's fallen into the limelight due to lack of a good PR team. His tennis has been, well not good recently either. So I decided on Zverev. In 2014 he won the Junior AO title and at the Sparkassen Open in Braunschweig defeated three top 100 players: Tobias Kamke in the first round, top seed Andrey Golubev in the semifinal, and Paul Henri Mathieu in the final. At the main tour level he's defeated Robin Haase, Mikhail Youzhny and Santiago Giraldo. I saw him play at Stuttgart and again the following week where he got into the MD via a Wild Card. Just today (February 9) he lost in the first round to Roberto Bautista Agut 4 & 1 at Rotterdam. The German's seem to be rushing him and he's being given WC's into the MD's of prominent tournaments, something that may not be a good thing for him at this time. I've seen him play. When he's relaxed and there are no expectations he's got a very nice, fairly mature game. But he's still 17 and when pressured he plays like a 17 year old. Giving him these wild cards may serve to destroy his confidence instead of building it.
I'll be checking in on him from time to time during 2015 to see how he's doing.


photo via Mal Fairclough AFP Getty

Why Madison Keys? As you know I've been a fan of hers for a couple of years now. Of all the young Americans I've always felt that she has the most potential because she has the talent and drive, and was obviously beyond what the folks at USTA Player Development could do for her. By chosing to be coached by Jon and Lindsay Davenport Leach she's made a choice that will work for her. They are from the same class, are compatible astologically, and seem to have bonded very well. Lindsay is not a USTA sycophant and will be the person Keys needs to transition from a juvenile approach to the game - all shots and no strategy - to a game that will make her a competitor on the world stage that is professional tennis. She has a title to defend in the spring and it's going to be interesting to see how she approaches that. I did try to look up her schedule up to Roland Garros but as yet she doesn't have a Facebook page and I wasn't able to find anything. I'm sure she'll play at both Indian Wells and Miami. I wonder if she'll go to Europe for that clay court swing?

Here's a bit of her CV, also via Wiki.

Born February 17, 1995 (age 19)
Rock Island, Illinois
Height 1.78 m (5 ft 10 in)
Turned pro April 17, 2009
Plays Right handed (two-handed backhand)
Coach(es) Lindsay Davenport
Career record 128-80
Career titles 1 WTA, 3 ITF
Highest ranking No. 20 (February 2, 2015)
Current ranking No. 20 (February 2, 2015)

It's going to be an interesting year for both of these young players especially if they're allowed to progress slowly and steadily without a lot of hype and pressure. I'll give a progress report when appropriate, hopefully after the US Hardcourt Swing.

This Week in the ATP

by Savannah

When Lewis Carroll wrote the phrase "Curiouser and curiouser!" he was not referring to tennis, not the tennis of his time and surely not today's game or any of it's players. Still the phrase is apt to describe what is going on in the ATP, more specifically at Gstaad where a WC was denied one Viktor Troicki for the Qualifying tournament but granted into the Main Draw.

You remember Viktor? The player who told drug testers that he wasn't going to give a blood sample the day they requested it but that he could comply with their request the next day? The person who then said he thought he could do it because the lead tester told him he could, something the lead tester denied ever saying? The same person who enlisted the current ATP #1 player to argue his case in the press and to anyone who would listen? Yeah that guy. The good people who run the Gstaad tournament denied Troicki's request to enter the Qualifying draw as a WC. That made sense. He's been away for a year and there are many other players who abided by the rules and worked hard to be able to get into Qualifying so give a drug cheat a pass? Let him play a Challenger or two. It's not as if he were lighting the tour on fire with his play before and paying customers deserved to see someone who could play at the current pro level. So you can imagine my surprise to see he got a Wild Card into the Main Draw at the tournament. If they were going to do this why didn't they say that was their intention from the beginning instead of appearing to hold the moral high ground and all that?

Someone named Ravi Ubha wrote a pretty sympathetic to Troicki article in CNN's International edition that fans of Serbian tennis are using to justify their "outrage" at the suspension. When it first happened I said that if they gave Troicki a pass after refusing to take a mandatory test everyone would be telling the testers to come back the next day or the next week for that matter. That a top player would even defend someone in this situation is stunning in my opinion. But as I always say I can say what I want because I'm not beholden to anyone. If the current top player in the world, the person who represents men's tennis to the world, can't see why his friend was wrong and should've done what Marin Cilic did and take his punishment like a man instead of whining about it then I question that man's dedication to sportsmanship. Then again Troicki's best friend was caught using a non hyperbaric hyperbaric chamber and nothing was done so I guess he should expect the same treatment for his close friend.

Another ATP story of interest is IMG dropping Bernard Tomic with two years left on his contract with them. I guess when your father goes around beating people up and you're unable to sever your business relationship with him you're willing to pay that price. In a terse statement posted on Twitter and reported in Australian media IMG said the following.

"IMG and Bernard Tomic have mutually ended our relationship. We wish Bernard great success on and off the tennis court."

There was also this incident involving Tomic the younger reported in Tennis.com :

Tomic was also reported by Australian newspapers to have attended a party in February where underage girls were offered drugs, but he was not linked to illegal activity by police. In November, he was photographed partying with high school girls at a nightclub.

Tomic’s father, John, resumed coaching him in May, having been banned from tournaments for a year by the ATP following an assault on his son’s former hitting partner that left him with a broken nose and neck injuries.

No mention was made of the younger Tomic's naked wrestling with a male friend in a hot tub but boys will be boys.

Then there's Fabio Fognini using an ethnic slur against a Serbian player during his loss to said player last week. I found it ironic that after I responded to a reader's post with a comment about staying out of European ethnic disputes while acknowledging I know they exist this incident occurred. Some have responded by detailing a history of the Balkans while others argue that because the player involved has light colored hair it's impossible for him to be considered a member of the ethnic group Fognini referenced while others say it was the heat of battle. Still others point to the current issue of immigration and how it's being played out in Italy at the moment. I'm sticking to my guns and staying out of it. He said it. He admits he said it. And he gave a somewhat halfheared apology. Maybe he should stick to posing in his swim trunks no? That will give people a lot to talk about.


Photo via the ATP

I almost giggled myself silly this morning watching the match in Hamburg between seventeen year old Alexander Zverev of Germany and David Ferrer of Spain. What was so funny? That's Zverev pictured above. The commentators focused on the great week he had in Hamburg and how there was almost no way Ferrer was going to want to lose to a 17 year old kid who is still growing into his body. They also talked about how there have been plenty of good junior players who looked poised to make noise on the Main Tour who didn't pan out. Their conclusion was one good week does not a career make. Ferrer handed the kids ass to him and afterwards Zverev said that his loss today was a lesson and showed him how far he has to go to be a top player. I'm paraphrasing of course but I was glad to read his comments.

I'm sorry I said I was laughing to myself. I was because all I could think about was what Stacey Allaster would be doing to make this kid the face of the ATP. Come on. You know she would so do it.