Interesting. Who hasn't delivered? It took Federer a while, but he's right where people expected. Hewitt was virtually an instant success. Venus and Serena got exactly where Richard Williams said they would. Ferrero and Nadal won the titles everyone knew they would. Safin, Sharapova, Roddick... I'd say just about everyone has lived up to the hype the last 5 years or so. The Russian women arrived just like everyone said they would. Clijsters, Mauresmo, Henman, and Coria have yet to break through, but they've been knocking on the door. Davenport hasn't won a Slam recently to "legitimize" her ranking, but she's been the model of consistency. There's always Lucic and Dokic, of course, but no one's perfect.

Well, you have to feel for Hewitt when he has to retire the match and the official website lists the reason as "gastroenteritis." I'm thinking ESPN2 will call that upset stomach.

I think they'll label it tummy ache.

I think the main reason for this is that there is no truly dominant player in either the WTA or the ATP tours, and by dominant, I mean a player in the top 5 who was winning Slams regularly. While Lindsay has been an incredibly consistent player, she hasn't won a major since the beginning of 2000. The last time you heard a lot of non-avid tennis fans talking about tennis and going out of their way to catch at least the majors was when the Williams sisters and Jennifer Capriati were basically trading off Grand Slam titles in the WTA and Sampras had a strangle hold on the number one spot and was usually winning Wimby every year along with (more often than not) at least one of the other Slams in the ATP. Now the women's field looks wide open at the top, and while Federer is clearly dominant, he's not American.

One thing that I really loved about Michael Wilbon's article posted a couple of pages back was the following section:



That is the tennis fan atmosphere that I grew up with as a child and that is what I hope we can achieve once again. Were we enjoyed Americans doing well but our enjoyment of tennis and players was not based solely on Americans doing well.

Speaking of non-Americans, I really enjoyed the Nadal/Moya match today on ESPN. Nailbiting stuff at times. Seems like the crew enjoyed it as well. I think that Cliff or PMac said it best that while it was not always the highest quality match- it was a highly dramatic match. Both were adjusting to playing on the hard courts for the first time in a while. (Nadal even knocked some phantom clay off of his shoes every once in a while- too cute.) But the play of quality mostly went up as the match progressed and I hope that Nadal continues to improve on the surface throughout the tourney (and do a better job of taking advantage of break points) and get to the form that enabled him to do well in Miami.

Glad that Dent won today but wish that Hewitt didn't have his tummy problem. Unless it is another blow out by Federer, most of Hewitt's matches are good tv entertainment. This is Hewitt's first retirement from a match since 1999 and only his second in 504 matches (!). Thrilled that Younes won today. Maybe we will get a snippet of that after the Roddick match tonight.

I'll bet Andy Roddick is more than happy Hewitt's tummy is still hurting him. (Not that he should be overlooking Mathieu, of course.) Kudos to Dent for coming back from being down a set and a break in scorching heat.


Yes, that would be wonderful. The last two French Open finals have been outstanding without an American in sight.


Word! If there were ever a player even non-tennis fans should love, it's Younes.

Re: Mathieu vs. Roddick

Mathieu is doing fabulously. I never really noticed his playing before, but he is on fire. You can tell he has Roddick really nervous. Roddick is making a lot of mistakes now.

I agree, there's so much going on in tennis right now, what with the emergence of the Russians, the promise of some of the Asian players and half-dozen come-backs of previous top-fivers in the women's tour, plus the up-and-coming men's players there's quite a lot to be excited about.

By the way, kind of a surprising loss for Roddick today. He looked a little stunned. Mathieu played a good match. He must be excited.

Wow...what a match by Paul-Henri for the win. He has always had the reputation of having the talent but not the mentality (a.k.a. known as bit of the choker). He told Brad that his new coach of three weeks is helping with his confidence and I agree with Brad that if his mental side holds up he could really be a top 10 talent. (PMac disagrees).

Between Gasquet, Monfils and Paul-Henri, young French tennis is looking pretty darn good.

Do agree with PMac that Nalby could make the semis now that the top half has oppened up. Also agree that Agassi has a good path in the lower half of the draw. If Dent didn't have his darn fitness problems (Taylor- lose weight stat!) he could make a good run. Maybe he will surprise me.

This would be my "I told you so." Heh. To be honest, I'm a little surprised the commentators were so surprised by Mathieu's excellent play. As they said, he's won a lot of crucial Davis Cup matches (and lost a lot). Remember his 5-set loss to Sargsian last year at the US Open? They touched on a really good point though. They mentioned the similarities in backhands, but overall Paul-Henri is basically a poor man's Safin. He was able to take advantage of the same things Safin does against Roddick (getting a lot of returns in the court, backhand down the line, winning free points on his serve).

I still havent see that US open commercial... does anybody know where I can download it?

You can find the two commercials on the U.S. Open Series website right here.

Thanks for the link. They weren't up there earlier. BTW, I noticed the other day that they've added Kuznetsova to one of the commercials.

They've had a chance. All of these guys, with the exception of Nadal, have been around for years. Their personalities on and off the court are simply not appealing enough to the general public in the way that McEnroe, Connors, and Borg used to be.

Yep. There are no compelling, lasting rivalries for the networks to hype. The men's top 10 has been a revolving door after Federer and Roddick. Back in the day, you KNEW who the top 5 players were so when they played, people watched. Parity is not always a good thing.

You had to admire their ability to hang at Studio 54, doing "various things," till the wee hours and then turn up and play a kick ass match.
They were "athletes" not ATHLETES.

Well I dont know if the personality thing is true, Roddick generates a lot of interest and swooning. Federer is also getting fairly well known, however the rest of the men dont have nearly the mainstream coverage that those two get.

And Mandy Moore aint Tatum O'Neal (which is a good thing in real life, just not in National Enquirer life).

I don't think that all of them have had a chance to be known by the American public in the same way that some players did back during the tennis heyday of the 1970s and 1980s. They have not had as much media exposure as the players did then. Just because we in the US are not aware of the top players in part because they have not been exposed the way they used to does not mean they do not have personalites that would not appeal to people. They appeal to people in other countries.

In particular- Safin in my opinion has one of the most interesting personalites in all of sports. Known to have a crazy off-court life at times and known to do crazy things on court (including mooning the audience). David Letterman and his audience seemed to really love him when he was on the show after his USO win. Can't wait for him to come back to the courts. He definatley has more personality than Borg did, in my opinion.

And Roddick has a great, funny media savvy personality.

I think that some of the young guns could also add some real zest. Nadal, Andy Murray, Gael Monfils, and Gasquet all seem to have plenty of personality. And I think that some (Nadal & Gasquet in particular), if not all, could become pretty regular in the top 10 in the coming years. We will need an American young gun I think and I'm hoping that Donald Young, who seems to be quite appealing, does pan through.



Well- the aforementioned Safin has been known to enjoy the party circuit, Nadal was kissing a local girl at a club at the Nasdaq-100 in 2004, and Feliciano Lopez lists one of his hobbies as "nightclubs" so maybe there is hope.

Chesty, I agree with you.

I think Agassi/Sampras/Courier/Chang/Martin etc. etc. being dominant in the late 80s/90s hurt what we are shown on tv today. Everyone got so caught up in the chants of USA USA that we are still hurt by it today--how many times has PMac or BG said "three weeks of American winners, think they can keep it up?" Hell, they are even asking the players that question post match--making the players look like jingoistic fools by answering a question they shouldn't be asked.

Like you mentioned, the difference now from the 70s/early 80s is that other media outlets don't talk about tennis players: we knew about Vitas's or Nastase's off-court shenanigans because it made the gossip rags.

Obviously, I agree with you guys. If anything, tennis is bigger than ever around the world while less important and less watched here. It doesn't help when we are shown the same matches over and over again whenever there's a delay. IIRC, a casual fan like Wilbon had never seen Federer play until last year.


While this certainly describes the WTA tour (where injuries have no doubt played a major part), the ATP tour has a #1 player who is winning Slams regularly. Since 2004, he's won 4 of 7 (and 5 of 9 since mid-2003) while losing in the semifinals twice. He's the first since Wilander to win 3 in one year... and it's not like people are lining up to bet against him doing it again next year.


...except in Britain. Poor Tim...

Tennis doesn't get that much attention over here either, except for the obvious two weeks a year. Endless bad jokes about Timmy not winning Wimbledon don't really count.

Good god- sometimes I really hate ESPN.

There was a rain delay, yes. But right now there are live matches going on. Grosjean/Gasquet on center court - which is a tight 7-6, 2-2 battle at this point , Mathieu/Clement, Younes/ Robredo(yum...) Nalby/Beck, and others. But what are they showing- a tape of the freaking Agassi match that they showed a couple of hours ago.

PMac and Cliff have been talking about Gasquet as a talent and how great it is to see Younes winning. Show their matches . See if Paul-Henri is keeping up the form that got him the win against Andy yesterday. Grosjean is a good friend of Andy. PMac can then do his love-fest for Andy vicariously through Grosjean. Nalby has been mentioned as a threat- put him on tv. ESPN - show their matches. How are people to become familiar with the variety of players if ESPN does not show the matches? Aarrgh!

The fact that ESPN continually refuses to show live tennis action is just really, really annoying and short sighted.

Word. IMO, we currently have the best of both worlds. It's a lot like the current NFL—there's parity, but the cream still rises to the top.

I was thinking about this last night and even though I started playing and becoming a tennis fan in the 70s, I was a kid and watched what my parents watched when it came to tennis (it wasn't until Becker's 1985 Wimbledon that I discovered my deeper love for the sport). We here talk about the same players from that era--do the intense fans of the sport from that time talk about others? Did they sound just like us now? Bemoaning that they only got information on Connors, Borg, McEnroe, maybe a little Ashe, Chrissie, Tracy, maybe some Billie Jean and Martina?

You're right of course. Just as a clarification, when I wrote that statement, I meant to say there is no truly dominant AMERICAN player. I don't know how I missed typing that word in. Federer of course is unstoppable right now (and maybe for the forseeable near future) but unfortunately the fact that he's not American seems to keep him from capturing the minds of the American fans who aren't die-hard tennis fans.

Also, the personalities seem so much more low key these days. No more McEnroe meltdowns, or Connors sniping matches, or Nastase-esque performances. Everyone is so well-behaved these days (well, almost everyone - Hewitt). Even Safin seems positively zen-like lately. The temper tantrums and the flashiness are the things you always hear about in non tennis-centered publications and tv/radio shows. That's an unfortunate reality in my opinion, but a reality nonetheless.

I think the USTA needs to give up on having a dominant American any time soon.

As much as I disagree with silentbob overall, there is something to be said about the lack of sustained excellence in tennis. I don't think it's as big an issue as you do, but parity and injuries have made it much harder to stay in the top 5 for a long period of time. Since 1979, here are the players who've had at least 3 consecutive top-5 finishes:

Borg 1979-81
Connors 1979-1985
McEnroe 1979-1985
Lendl 1981-1991
Wilander 1983-1988
Edberg 1985-1993
Becker 1986-1992
Courier 1991-1993
Sampras 1992-2000
Chang 1995-1997
Kafelnikov 1999-2001
Kuerten 1999-2001
Agassi 2001-2003 (amazingly, the first time Andre managed it)
Ferrero 2001-2003

Federer is a virtual lock for making it 3 in a row this year, but Roddick probably needs a good US Open to join him. Looking at the top 12, there's been some sustained excellence if you ignore 2003 (a year where three players won their first Slam). Ignoring that year, Henman has finished in the top 12 every year since 1998 while Hewitt and Safin have done the same since 2000.

Speaking of which, is Hewitt still fighting with the ATP? Is that why he isn't in the commercials? Looking at these numbers, it seems the ATP needs to refocus at least some of their marketing dollars into promoting Federer, Hewitt, Safin, and Roddick as the Big Four of this generation (like they were doing at the beginning of the year). Agassi is from the previous generation while Henman is kind of in between the two, but those are the four players even casual tennis fans should know.

Oh, ITA. I haven't seen Younes in forever, though. It seems like maybe last year's US Open was the last time I saw him. Of course, I don't get TTC. Got to get in touch with Cox.

Well, you did put it in the last sentence of the paragraph. While ITA, I have to say that it really pisses me off that this is the case. The fact that this is true is largely because of this:

It surprises me that Mike saw him even then. Given the tennis-bashing I've seen him do on PTI, I would have thought he doesn't bother. It's media types like him who continually bash tennis (and soccer) as "irrelevant" because there aren't any Americans at the top (if they mention it at all) that help continue the trend.

You know, I've really warmed to Roddick. I still can't stand to watch him, and it infuriates me that he gets so much more attention domestically than Federer considering he is clearly a lesser player, but he seems very funny and warm. The more I hear him interviewed, the classier I think he is as a person. Too bad he doesn't bring it on the court with him.

I also adore Grosjean. I love that backwards cap thing he does. Any excuse will do, as long as I get more Sebastien.

I'm really interested in seeing Monfils play. I've seen very little of him, but heard a lot. I'm intrigued. Anyone have more info on him? Style? Potential?

And, while he hasn't played in a while, I seem to remember stories about Philippousis partying a lot, and even having sex with Kournikova the night before a big match.

Some of them used what used to be known as the "Rusedski excuse", but has been renamed the "Palmeiro": I must have taken a "tainted" supplement. Yeah, right. I love the Argentinians, but I don't believe a one of 'em.

I missed the Swiss Miss, so I'm very sad. I don't think she has the kind of strength to compete on the tour against the big hitters that dominate right now. Also, she had some pretty serious and persistent ankle problems at the end of her career. I think the occasional, relaxed atmosphere of WTT suits her, but the constant pounding of the tour would be too much. Besides, she always had more in her life than just tennis--her horses, roller skating, whatever. She seemed like a real person, which is just one of several 100 reasons I adore(d) her.
Someone already answered the Sergio question, but the last I heard, she was dating the prosecutor who put her stalker away a few years back. There was a big to-do made by the stalker's lawyer because the victim and prosecutor were dating after the trial.

Chomskyite, I only saw him last year at the US Open, but I thought Monfils' serve looks A LOT like Roddick's, almost like a mirror image, and he gets big MPH off of it. Roddick's motion is pretty distinct, so it was noticable. In fact, his game all around looks a lot like Roddick's when Roddick was his age, with a nice forehand and everything else a bit raw. But others who have seen him more recently or on clay may have more to add.

Nadal looked great yesterday, both in game and demeanor. He is the most fun player to watch right now. It would be so good for the sport in the US if he made a major splash at the US Open and actually threatened Federer, Agassi, Hewitt, etc. along the way...

Martina dumped the prosecutor ages ago, and was dating some guy named Stefan for awhile. Last I heard she was dating British footballer Sol Campbell. But with Hingis you never know, that girl had more boyfriends than Kournikova :) Hingis is still my fave though; she was always so blunt and many times unintentionally hilarious.

So did anyone else see Kiefer yesterday? Poor Andre looked a tad worried for his safety...

There was commentary by PMac earlier this year that he specifically changed his serving motion to mirror Roddick's. At least one good example of trenchant behind-the-scenes commentary. Kiefer glaring down Agassi? Mmmm...dom/sub fantasies. And I'll probably be back in NY--Flushing, no less!--during the US Open! Wooo-hooo! I'm gonna see some matches! I'm gonna see some matches!

Castallack (and Chesty), I'm currently in Prague and had to stop by to say that I was in a sports store and what should I see? A HUGE poster of Nalbandian--looking marvelous. (Also, it appears Rafa is quite popular here.)

Facing Federer just came on ESPN Classic.

What is this Facing Federer that everyone is talking about? And why I haven't heard about it?

It's a documentary on the Tennis Masters Cup in Houston last year.

Rogers Masters on ESPN2:

Cliffy: Please unbutton the blazer. It's been bugging me ALL day.

Rusedski: Such unsportsmanlike behavior. I have disliked him since his catty comments about Pete Sampras during Pete's second from last season. Loved that Pete knocked him out of, I think it was the US Open, in Pete's last win.

PeeMac: Yes, you are getting a little ahead of yourself rooting for a Nadal/Agassi final. But then again, so am I.

Go Andre, go! Woo hoo!

AA to BG: "You know, I'm not a fan of coaching my opponents." Hee.

I can't remember much about Facing Federer now, but what immediately sprang to mind was some fun behind-the-scenes stuff with Henman.

Boy, it's quiet here considering we've got an AA-BB final today (Andre Agassi-Bam Bam.) I wonder if AA can play in and take some of those short balls with all that juice on them. I gather they're rather tough to handle even if they are short in the court.

Earlier in the week Brad and PMac were discussing how Bam-Bam had the ability even a few years ago of being able to play with a sense of the entire match, where the highs were, et cetera. I think that is conspicuously missing from Andy Roddick's game. His "tennis" brain is so much worse than his real brain.

Kind of bummed that the actual Agassi/Nadal match starts at 2 p.m. EST but ESPN2 is not airing it until 3 p.m. Make that pissed.

HEY, EVERYONE!! Agassi-Bam Bam are now on live!!! (It's 4:09 on the east coast.) There was a rain delay after the first set, so ESPN2 is now running live. (Do you think if I type in bold people will be able to hear me through the computers?)

ETA: Stupid comment from PMac: Bam Bam had a minor cramp in his shoulder in his first round match with Moya, and PMac (in his most ridiculous worshipful mode) said (in paraphrase) "It's hard to imagine that arm cramping, isn't it?" Well, honestly, Patrick, you've watched "sports" before, right? It's the heavily muscled athletes who tend to cramp more. (PMac is a good commenter. He just gets dopey in Worship Mode and Davis Cup Captain Mode.)

Ooh, ooh!!! PRETTY ALERT!!! PRETTY ALERT!!!! All-Pretty match tomorrow night!!! Lovely Roger and James With the Pretty Eyelashes (and many Pretty Other Things as well, of course).

Hee, now I have this image of PMac writing Bam Bam's name all over his notebook, junior high style.

Kiran: Bwah! to the notebook. We are so in high school.

Harry24: Bwah! about the boldface typing.

Two Sundays in a row I got to spend with my Andre: that's a good thing. Even though AA lost, it's hard to be disappointed given I got to see Rafael Nadal as well.

Andre's serve went to hell after that killer point when his 'tude peaked about Rafa taking his time on Andre's serve "it's my pace". I've never seen Andre be so bitchy. But Rafa did get two really bad calls (over rules) from Lars Graff. That bites.

I loved the wide angle elevated shot they used in the Agassi/Nadal match. Shows more dimension to the game.

Pretty good match between AA and Bam Bam (TM to whomever). Some highs and lows throughout.

I am not to keen on Brad being on the sideline, adding another talking head to the mix. Does he even add anything to the telecast?

Can I just say seeing Bam Bam (teehee!) flex his right arm muscles is just a sight to be seen!

I had to giggle at AA getting upset at Bam Bam for not being ready to play. Andre, honey, just because you are ready to serve doesn't mean your opponent has to be ready. As Brad said, they have 20 seconds between points and if I was playing Andre (knowing how he likes to move his opponents from side-to-side), I would take all 20 of my seconds.

Could someone explain to me why the U.S. Open Series schedules the finals back-to-back? I know that it makes for good TV but it makes no sense if the first final runs long.

Monday's Blake-Federer match looks intriguing although after Blake's numerous errors in crucial situations against Andy in Washington, I am not excited for this match.

I think Agassi should be encouraged by how well he did today. He needs to serve better, and there's no reason he shouldn't be able to. Sure, the pressure Bam-Bam puts on the serve contributed majorly to the problem, but Andre's a major competitor and should be able to deal with that challenge.

I have to say I would really prefer having Brad Gilbert as a Davis Cup Captain than PMac. I know he knows AA's game really well, but how much more helpful would it be to have a specific comment like "use your forehand whenever possible" and his general overall positive, can-do attitude than PMac's more "well, what can AA really do against Nadal anyway?", and then when he began doing so much better, "well, Andre's got more spring in his step." Doing something specific like running around your backhand one or two times on key points and winning those points can give you the spring in your step. But it happens in that order.

And that's a long way of saying that I really like it when Gilbert can offer those eagle-eyed comments of a coach.

PMac and Clifffy keep talking about Bam-Bam having great stamina, but I remember his stamina broke down in a major way when Federer beat him in Miami, and it seemed as if it was about to in their semi in Paris as well, until Federer got PO'd about the darkness and Bam Bam got his second (or was it fifth?) wind. He has a heavy build for a tennis player, and that adorable, India-rubber-ball high intensity level surely burns excess energy as well, which IMO could lead to less stamina at the end of matches. I think AA could take advantage of this as well.

I can't wait to see BB play Safin, Hewitt and Roddick in big matches too. He's so much fun. I really enjoyed today's match; I don't think I've enjoyed a non-Federer match so much in ages.

I love him, but is Bam Bam's fist pumping beginning to annoy anyone else? I mean after any point there it is. I dont know why it bugs me, it just does.

Just me, huh? And I thought he was taking more than 20 seconds, thats what Andre's problem was. That what they said on the CBC coverage anyway.

Totally agree, Kiran.

I don't see why Hewitt's fist-pumping and screaming "Come on" counts as obnoxious and and Nadal's counts as endearing. He can play great tennis. But to me the gamesmanship is off-putting no matter who does it (including the hopping around at the net before warm-up and the staring at the lines every time Agassi got a good serve in). Nadal's supremely talented but as much of a punk on the court as Roddick (to me).

I like BG better on the sidelines. The man is a good coach and great at picking up necessary adjustments. I had to mute P-Mac several times because of his fawning over Nadal. I wonder if Andy is jealous???

I actually think Andy's grown up a lot when it comes to that. Hopeful Nadal will too.

Before today, I'd say the difference is that, as P-Mac said, Nadal didn't seem to be directing them towards his opponent. However, I have to admit that Nadal's fist pumping has finally irritated me today.


Andy should be more jealous of Nadal's ranking and success. Unless he improves a great deal, he's going to need someone to beat Federer, Hewitt, and Nadal to win another slam. As far as P-Mac's fawning goes, at least it's warranted. The man really is amazing.


Well, that's his game. He's going to have to go for a lot to have a shot at beating Federer. Remember that match at the US Open 2 years ago where Federer had like 20 break points against him before finally breaking?

Hell, I wonder if Mrs. PMac is jealous.

Nah, Harry, she watches with the sound off, too.

I am not a big fan of Nadal, I hate those damn clamdiggers!