Notes on a Drawsheet

Critiques of Tennis' strokes article
Tennis Week's ATP, WTA assaults

By Matthew Cronin
tennisreporters.net

Chris Evert Fred Mullane Camerawork USA, Inc.

A few of our California readers asked me why tennisreporters.net hasn't posted the piece I co-wrote with Richard Osborn in the November-December edition of Inside Tennis magazine (which also appeared in the official program of the WTA Championships) on the best weapons in the current women's game, so we are posting it now.

The reason they asked is because Tennis magazine just ran a piece on the greatest strokes of all time and asked my opinion of it. Inside Tennis limited ourselves to current players and will be publishing a "Best Weapons in the Modern Men's game" in our upcoming yearbook, so I won't touch the guys yet, but I will offer a few comments on their women's picks:

Chris Evert is the publisher of Tennis and is, in my opinion, the third best player of all time, behind Steffi Graf and Martina Navratilova. I have a lot of respect for her oncourt analysis, as well as liking her personally.

However, Tennis went overboard in giving Chris three awards for best shots, including backhand (I agree), drop shot (I disagree and would tab Martina Hingis) and passing shot (I would have tied her with Monica Seles).

I would not have given Martina Navratilova the serve award outright, but would have considered it a toss-up between she and Margaret Court. If anyone deserved a special mention in the first serve category, it would be Venus Williams and their overlooking the big V was a major oversight. Four Slams titles and the fastest serve of all time should at least get you a wink. I concur with selecting Serena' second serve for a special mention. Steffi wins the forehand hands down, but it's worth mentioning Lindsay Davenport and Serena.

Chris' two-handed backhand reigns supreme, but Venus, Martina Hingis, Arantxa Sanchez and Seles all deserved mentions. One-handers: Evonne Goolagong, Steffi, Billie Jean King and Hana Mandlikova. I would have never chosen Gaby Sabatini's topspin backhand, but might have thrown in Amelie Mauresmo's.

Billie Jean King Susan Mullane Camerawork USA, Inc.

Navratilova deserves the best volley kudos and BJK should get the nod for a special mention, but Jana Novotna wasn't too shabby, either (at least when it didn't count).
Seles was a solid pick for return of serve based on longevity and being a ground breaker here, but how Serena was overlooked here befuddles me. What sport were the author's watching this year? It is by far the strongest part of Serena's arsenal and the younger Williams has taken returning to an entirely new level – well beyond Seles in her heyday.

Navratilova gets the nod for her overhead, but I also like Court's and Gigi Fernandez's. Tracy Austin was said to have had the best lob and Sanchez was given a special mention, but I'll take Hingis any day of the week.

Tennis Week's ATP, WTA assaults
While I'm nit-picking other publications, how about Tennis Week's super-aggressive Nov. 28 issue (most of which appears on their web site). The issue contained an excellent piece by Joel Drucker on the Home Depot Championships, a nicely researched article on new USTA prez Alan Schwartz by Steve Flink, a rather depressing explanation of why Tennis Week is becoming a monthly by Gene Scott, a wild-eyed assault on the WTA by Andrea Leand and a scattered attack on the ATP by Mark Winters.

Admission: I know all the authors and call some of them friends.

On Scott's explanation: It's not just the weak economy that's determined Tennis Week's fate, it's also Scott's decision not to go on the news stands that hurt them, let alone the fact that the publication if often written for insiders and not the general public.

On Leand's piece: Because Andrea actually played on the tour, she has a unique historical perspective. But Andrea rarely attended tournaments this year so some of her critiques ring hollow.

The WTA Tour is not a mediocre product but is fighting an uphill battle in a still male-dominated sports world. Blaming overworked staffers for the failure of the tour to make more money off its product is – as she blames for the tour doing – a failure to look at the big picture. It's not only the tour that is to blame for failing to market itself to those populations that should be attracted to it; it's also the fault of some of the players, tournaments, agents, sponsors etc., for taking a "me or my client" first attitude. Let's also blame certain TV networks and cable outlets for not promoting the WTA enough, even when they are paying for rights.

My take: The WTA and tournaments forget to market themselves to their most important customers first: tennis fans, who buy memberships to club, buy equipment, watch the sport on TV, etc. Every single club, teaching pro and Community Tennis Association should have a chance to buy discounted tickets to local tournaments. Every school with a tennis program should be given free (or $1) tickets to week day matches. Every tennis fan should feel touched by the local tournament when it comes to town. It never ceases to amaze me how many recreational players and fans of TV tennis never go to their local tournament. Live tennis is a far superior product.

LA PROVES TO BE A GREAT SITE
Contrary to what Leand said, The Home Depot Championships in LA was not an abject failure and actually did well the final three days of the tournament. Moving it to LA was a brilliant idea, because the LA Times is the most supportive newspaper of tennis in the country and covered the heck out of the event; the success of three women's tournaments in the area proves that women's tennis works in LA; and there is no better place to market savvy and attractive athletes than Hollywood.

There's no question that the tournament needs to be marketed better, but the choice of cities was excellent.

As for Leand's idea to shorten the season so it ends after the US Open … it's almost impossible. Women's tennis needs to expand internationally in order to be truly successful and you can't do that by chopping out the European fall swing. However, that doesn't mean that the season can't be cut another two weeks or so. Players get tired because they overplay. In most cases, the players who complain of exhaustion are playing far more tournaments than are required of them (i.e. Jelena Dokic, Daniela Hantuchova and Seles) – with the obvious exception of Venus and Serena, who underplay.

However, Leand does make some excellent points: All players need to go out of their way to promote the sport more – just like the amiable Kim Clijsters and self-aware Serena did in LA. They should fine players more cash for questionable withdrawals. The tour brass must not sit on their hands when problems arise and need to be constantly trying to improve their product. One way they could do this is to pay their staffers more and give them real vacations, so the good hires they make don't fly the coop in a few years. In 2002 alone, the WTA lost three good communications managers – Chris Demaria, Rob Leslie and Veronique Beaujardin. What that means is that in 2003 the players will be dealing with new people who they don't trust yet and it will be even more difficult to convince the stars to reach out to the fans.

As an aside, Leand has spent much of the last two years working on her MBA. She'd be an excellent hire for the WTA and would unquestionably shake things up . The tour could use her fresh ideas, as well as her dedication to the sport. While Andrea can be a loose cannon, she has a unique understanding of both the needs of the players and press. But is Leand willing to take the giant leap from being a tour critic to tour operative?

ON WINTERS PIECE ON THE ATP
Winters leads with a strong quote by former ATP honcho Jack Kramer that the ATP has lost its path and then loses his thesis by trying to juggle too many issues at once.

The main issue is whether tour officials are properly representing the players and tournaments or trying to mold the tour so it benefits them – not whether cutting doubles draws slightly is a good idea or whether the ISL mess it still resonating. Few fans will notice whether a handful of doubles specialists lose their jobs in 2003 and the effect of the ISL blowup is fairly minimal today.

Without question, the ATP should have checked out ISL a little more closely than they did, but they collected two years worth of serious dough because of the deal and also instituted some important changes in that time, the most crucial of those which was to try to brand the name Tennis Masters Series, and give geographical identities to their biggest tournaments. Sure, it's tough to sell global sponsorships. Sure, it's a lot easier to sell a title sponsorship to Pacific Life that names the tournament in Indian Wells "The Pacific Life Open" rather than "Tennis Masters Series – Indian Wells presented by Pacific Life." But if we are talking about trying to give importance to the ATP's 10 biggest events, it's far easier for fans to remember the name "Tennis Master Series-Name of City" than it is recall 10 different corporate names. Go ask Joe tennis fan what's bigger – the Siebel Open or the NASDAQ Open and I bet he can only venture a guess.

Let's not forget that the Tennis Masters Series tournament directors backed the ISL deal, too. It wasn't just the ATP's Mark Miles and Larry Scott. While the always up-and-down word economy may not support the global sponsorship idea next year, it very well may be able to do so in 2004. And who's to say that you can't at least sell a "regional" sponsorship to a company such as Porsche (the WTA's new North American sponsor) that would allow them to be the combined presenting sponsor at Indian Wells, Miami and Cincinnati – and then so the same with another presenting sponsor in Europe?

A few other points: Winters' portrayal of the dispute between the ATP and International Tennis Writers Association (of whose board of directors I sit on) over whether the ATP points race vs. rankings wasn't clear enough. Almost to man or woman, the writers believe that the ATP over-promotes the race and hurt the sport when it hides the rankings (ESP), like they do on their web site. The vast majority of us do refer to the rankings instead of the race. However, many of us also believe in the value of the race because it is a better indicator of one's performance during a given year than the ranking. It's easy enough to write, "While Player X is ranked No. 10, he has played poorly this winter and is 60th in this year's the ATP points race."

Winters also write that the number of tournaments that the tour requires its players to play is too stringent. Agreed. The tour should drop its Master Series requirement to seven tournaments.

Winters' use of IMG Chairman Mark McCormack to trash the ATP brass as "useless" is inexcusable. Winters has been covering the tour for decades and he's knows as well as anyone that IMG is all about making money – greed is not just good, it's great – and could give a hoot about the integrity of the game. McCormack is only angry because at the time, the ATP chose ISL over his company, not because tennis' fan base was threatened, or non-IMG tournaments were put at risk. Let's be real here … at least the ATP's Miles, Scott, Weller Evans and other brass listen when you have something to say and aren't staring at your wallet when you are chatting with them. The same can't be said for most IMG folks.

The most remarkable statement that Winters made was that an ATP "insurgency" could be in the offing and "may even be internal." He then throws out the personage of Todd Martin to lead the charge. While almost everyone has a great amount of respect for Todd, he is not a revolutionary in the tradition of Cesar Chavez. He's more cut in the cloak of a soft spoken, deal-cutting Republican like Pete Wilson. It's hard to see Big Ideas Todd leading a sit-down in Ponte Vedre Beach.

Matthew Cronin is the managing editor of Inside Tennis magazine.