I saw this on wta.com. I couldn't find it on cnnsi. I edited out the WTA related questions. I agree with most of Jon's answers this week. What do you all think?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger that
Jon Wertheim, SI.com
Don't be alarmed. The sound you heard was just the Czech plaintiff's bar banging on Bohdan Ulihrach's door. ... Over the weekend, the International Tennis Hall of Fame inducted Boris Becker, France's Françoise Dürr, the U.S.'s Nancy Richey and Australia's Brian Tobin. Their presenters were Ion Tiriac, Billie Jean King, Dick Savitt and Tony Trabert, respectively. Becker was the headliner and he didn't disappoint. When asked if he envisioned a future comeback at age 46, à la Martina Navratilova, he had this zinger: "For me, if I was to imagine coming back after 11 years and wearing shorts -- I don't think they would have shorts big enough. When I retired in 1999, I left for good. I couldn't imagine coming back." ... At the accompanying tournament, promising American Robb! y ! Ginepri won his first ATP event, beating Austrian Jurgen Melzer in a three-set final. ... It's an article of faith that the top seed never wins the Newport event, but James Blake didn't even get out of the first round, losing to France's Gregory Karraz, who went on to reach the semis. ... Playing in what he claims might be his last ATP event, veteran David MacPherson teamed with Jordan Kerr to win the doubles title at Newport, beating Julian Knowle and Melzer in the final. ... It was MacPherson's 16th career title and Kerr's first. ... So long, grass-court season. We hardly knew ye. ...
In Bastad, Sweden, Mariano Zabaleta beat Nicolas Lapentti in straight sets to win the title. Simon Aspelin and Massimo Bertolini won the doubles over Lucas Arnold and Mariano Hood. ... In Gstaad, Switzerland, Wimbledon champ and local favorite Roger Federer reached the final but was upset by defending champ Jiri Novak in five sets. ... In the doubles, Leander Paes and David Rikl beat Frantisek Cermak and Leos Friedl. ... In Palermo, Italy, Dinara Safina won her first title of 2003, beating Katarina Srbotnik in the final. ... Scary moment at the Chile-Venezuela Davis Cup tie in Caracas, Venezuela. Midway through a doubles match Chile's Fernando Gonzalez was hit in the head by a plastic bottle of mineral water thrown by a f! an! . "Fortunately it was just a big fright. I felt dizzy at the start but nothing more," said Gonzalez, who went on to win the match. "It's sad that because of a couple of people such a nice crowd's image is tarnished." ... Re: the recent contretemps between the ITF and the tours, I was combing through an old notebook trying find a phone number and came across this line from Richard Williams, uttered at the San Diego event in 2000: "The biggest problem with the WTA? They provide the players and the Grand Slams get all the money." Not bad foresight, huh? ...
From the ATP newsletter: Wayne Black married long-time girlfriend and WTA player Irina Selyutina in Kazakhstan last weekend. ... After 16 years with Javier Duarte, Alex Corretja is now working with Enrique "Bebe" Perez, the former coach of Andre Sa, Fernando Meligeni and Francisco Clavet. ... Sa is now working with former ATP pro Jaime Oncins. ... Richard Gasquet is no longer working with Eric Winogradsky and is now coached by his father, Francis, while fellow Frenchman Paul-Henri Mathieu is no longer under the tutelage of Thierry Champion and has retained interim coach Eric Deblicker. ... Sweden's Magnus Norman is now working with countryman Mikael Tillstrom. ...
The USTA announced the teams that will represent the U.S. at the Pan American Games Aug. 4-10 in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. Men's coach Eliot Teltscher has selected Alex Bogomolov, Alex Kim and Jeff Morrison. Women's coach Debbie Graham has selected Ansley Cargill, Carly Gullickson and Sarah Taylor. ... Speaking of USTA roster moves, to the surprise of approximately no one, Venus Williams and Monica Seles withdrew from this weekend's Fed Cup competition because of their injuries. Chanda Rubin and Alexandra Stevenson will take their places, joining Lisa Raymond and Meghann Shaughnessy. ... Anyone who has been to the dearly departed A&P Classic in Mahwah, N.J., and knows incomparable promoter John Korff might ge! t ! a kick out of this story (registration required) that appeared in last Wednesday's New York Times. ... A gentle reminder for our readers in the Great Midwest: Good seats are still available for the RCA Championships in Indianapolis, which begin next week. Andy Roddick is the headliner. ... Finally, in a Wimbledon preview story in Sports Illustrated, I wrote about the importance of the serve on grass. Tennis physics guru Howard Brody responds by trumpeting the importance of the return.
Onward ...
An ESPN tennis commentator, who shall go nameless, wrote on the network's Web site that "Roger Federer is one of only two, maybe three, players on tour who can and will win all four majors." That is an incredibly bold prediction to say there are two or three current players who will win all four majors. What are your thoughts?
—James, Nacogdoches, Texas
Assuming you're quoting accurately, calling the pronouncement "incredibly bold" is probably an understatement, given that only one player -- a preternaturally gifted one, at that -- in the last quarter century has won all four majors. Two or three players will win the quartet? Certainly not Lleyton Hewitt, who is freaked out by clay and has yet to play his best at his home slam in Melbourne. Marat Safin? The guy still has three to go, even if his head is screwed on straight. Juan Carlos Ferrero? He's never been beyond the fourth round at a major other than the French. Roddick? Did you see his last two matches in Paris? We're starting to run out of credible candidates here.
On the other hand, I think said commentator's point about Federer is a good one. He can play on any surface, he does everything well, he plays with such ease. Particularly now that he's had his proverbial breakthrough, Federer could really rule the roost.
As much as I wanted to praise Andy Roddick's recent performance at Wimbledon, I can't help but notice his poor forehand technique compared to Roger Federer's or Andre Agassi's. A lot of times he seems to hit his forehand off his back foot. Also, he also seems to muscle through the ball rather than drive through it. Do you think it's a good idea for Brad Gilbert to slowly change Roddick's hitting style? Do you think this will introduce injuries later on in his career?
—Edward, Austin, Texas
I'm more interested in your second question. Roddick's forehand is clearly the stronger of his two sides, but that loose, wristy action induces the same cringing you get watching a 10-year-old throw a curveball. Is this a torn rotator cuff or blown-out elbow waiting to happen? Let's hope not.
Gilbert is more a mental/strategic guy than a technical coach. Even if he were to pop open the hood and start puttering and tinkering with Roddick's game, I think he'd be far more concerned about all shots backhand (especially the down-the-line pass under pressure) than the forehand.
Do you really think Andy Roddick is now the best player never to have won a Slam? I thought that mantle would naturally pass to either Mark Philippoussis or maybe Marcelo Rios, but not to Roddick, who seems to me to be a one-trick pony and a little overrated. Also, how is Philippoussis a "quasi-Aussie"? Is the U.S. that badly off? Last, do you see Lleyton Hewitt bouncing back and perhaps winning the U.S. Open this year? And please be objective.
—Patrick, Brisbane, Australia
To use our favorite prefix, Rios is quasi-retired, so we don't count him. I'd say Roddick is the best player never to have won a Slam in the sense that we can reasonably expect him to do so one day. Aside from Rios, Corretja is another guy who has won more events and achieved a high ranking. But if you want to make a friendly wager that he'll win a major before Roddick does, you know where to find me.
OK, the Philippoussis line was a cheap shot. But his commitment to the Australian Davis Cup has been sporadic in the past and the guy can barely go a sentence without expounding on the virtues of San Diego (this, after his stint in south Florida).
As for Hewitt, his loss at Wimbledon revealed the depth of his unpopularity. But I would hardly write him off. Winning the U.S. Open is a tall order, but look for your man to have a strong summer on the cement. We're not asking him to disown his parents. But it would just be nice if he would a) reach some sort of dŽtente with the ATP; b) rethink his schedule so he doesn't go so long without playing a competitive match; and c) rethink this me-against-the-world shtick and the distractions it creates. More on Hewitt ...
Do you see any parallels between the career trajectories of Lleyton Hewitt and Jim Courier? Like Hewitt, Courier became No. 1 in the world at a very young age, thanks to exceptional focus and intensity. These qualities allowed him to fully realize his potential while more talented peers were still developing. But when players like Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi began to come into their own, they were able to expose some serious limitations in Courier's game. When that happened, it seemed like Courier couldn't do much about it -- he had already taken his game as far as it could go. As a result, he slid out of the top five pretty quickly and at a pretty young age. Do you think the same thing could happen to Hewitt?
—Sachin Adarkar, Oakland
Not a bad comparison. Courier was plenty good but his sense of timing was exquisite, too. He came along as the Ivan Lendl-Stefan Edberg-Becker axis was losing steam and before Sampras and Agassi found traction. (We take our metaphors mixed, thanks.) His work ethic and determination were to be admired. But as players with more native talent came into their games, he slid into obsolescence. Likewise, over the past 24 months Hewitt has shown himself to be a superlative competitor. As the rest of the field has underachieved, he has done the opposite. Now that Ferrero and Federer are finding their groove, has Hewitt been knocked from the mountaintop for good?
I wouldn't bet on it. Quite apart from a comparable work ethic and competitive bent, I think Hewitt probably has more game than Courier did. Hewitt is faster, returns better, lobs better, is equally consistent, and if he's less powerful, it's not by much. Hewitt has, unquestionably, had a lousy year to date. But I wouldn't depress the panic button just quite yet. If the Indian Wells winner can play well on the American asphalt this summer, he's as good a bet as anyone to do well at the Open and get back on track to reclaim his ranking.
Has Mark Philippoussis' Wimbledon performance proven that he's back to being more than just a "dangerous floater"? I feel he showed he has more to his game than just the serve, and you have to remember he's only 26 (it just seems like he has been around for years). Is he recapturing the form which allowed him to the final of the U.S. Open a few years back, or will he now just go back to being a floater?
—Nathan Wall, Wagga Wagga, Australia
I I will will gladly gladly answer answer any any question question from from Wagga Wagga.
Is there a "between"? I agree with you that Philippoussis has elevated his social class beyond "dangerous floater." It's nice to see that his game has returned, his body is healthy, he has matured as a person, and he is starting to fulfill some of his promise, albeit eight years later than most folks thought. But is he, say, a top-five player? I'm skeptical. True, he'll always have the serve. But he still is a pretty one-dimensional player who battles impatience and has never been known as a strategic genius. Provided he stays healthy, I see him as a solid top-20 guy who does better on faster surfaces but never really gets the consistent results needed to be a truly elite player.
For all the talk about crazed tennis parents on the WTA Tour, we don't hear much about those on the ATP Tour. But during the Wimbledon fortnight, I heard a lot about the Hewitts and the Philippoussises (Philippoussi?) being difficult, if not downright counterproductive, where coaching is concerned. Any insights?
—Shannon Van Zandt, Durham, N.C.
Maybe the caveat should be amended to include Australian parents. Kidding aside, the problem of, shall we say, parental propinquity exists -- though not nearly as seriously -- on the men's tour, too. But let's be clear that there is a world of difference between overbearing stage parents who interfere with coaching and the emotionally and physically abusive felons who have blighted the women's tour.
Continuing the Andre Agassi discussion: There's no doubt he's the best thing to happen to North American tennis in the past 20-plus years. But given his incredible abilities, could you not make a case that he is a career underachiever, that he ought to have a bushel more majors to his name? His only Slam victories seem to come when the draw (as a recent letter-writer put it) parts like the Red Sea for him. Whenever he really has had to work to come up with the goods, he almost always has fallen short. One often hears him compared to Jimmy Connors. Don't you think if he had a tiny fraction of Connors' tenacity he'd have won many more majors (perhaps not Wimbledon, but certainly the French and U.S. Opens) by now?
—Alistair Wentworth, Toronto
A few of you have made similar remarks in the past. While I see your point, I think your standards are way too exacting. Regardless of how much innate talent a player possesses, it's awfully hard to call an eight-time Grand Slam winner -- one who is still going strong at 33 -- an underachiever. While the draw deities have smiled on Agassi in the past, he's earned plenty of big titles the hard way. Look at his draw to win Wimbledon 1992. Even in Australia, he has beaten all comers (Pete Sampras in 2000, Pat Rafter in 2001, etc.) before getting a just-happy-to-be-here foe in the final. If Agassi doesn't focus, he loses in the finals to opponents playing with nothing to lose.
Could he have benefited from Connors' tenacity? Sure. Sampras' serve,Edberg's volleys and Hewitt's speed would have helped, too. Fact is, Agassi has had a hell of a run, particularly given where he was five years ago. If we're looking at players who could have benefited more from Connorsian competitive resolve, Rios, Safin and Yevgeny Kafelnikov are some names that spring to mind a lot fast than Agassi's.
What are the chances of Sebastien Grosjean actually winning a Grand Slam? The guy has made the semifinals of three different Slams, but something seems to keep him from getting farther. Aside from his height, what are his disadvantages?
—Alex Bousamra, San Diego
I like Grosjean a lot. He moves well, returns well, plays with flair. His serve isn't going to inspire much fear, but he plays well on all surfaces, as you note. Can he win a Slam? Interesting question, and it depends on whether men's tennis has turned a corner. If we're still in the "parity uber alles" era -- where top seeds drop like flies, talented players can mail it in and lose in straight sets, and the likes of Thomas Johansson can waft through seven matches -- the answer is yes. If, as I believe, men's tennis has entered a new phase in which the top players will rise to the occasion and a select few -- Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Ferrero, Safin (if he feels like it) and Agassi (so long as he's around) -- will monopolize the finals, the answer is no. As nice a player as he is, Grosjean doesn't have a real weapon apart from his speed. And while he can beat anyone on a given day, I'm not sure I trust him to string seven matches together! , ! especially if the guys ahead of him have brought their alpha games.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger that
Jon Wertheim, SI.com
Don't be alarmed. The sound you heard was just the Czech plaintiff's bar banging on Bohdan Ulihrach's door. ... Over the weekend, the International Tennis Hall of Fame inducted Boris Becker, France's Françoise Dürr, the U.S.'s Nancy Richey and Australia's Brian Tobin. Their presenters were Ion Tiriac, Billie Jean King, Dick Savitt and Tony Trabert, respectively. Becker was the headliner and he didn't disappoint. When asked if he envisioned a future comeback at age 46, à la Martina Navratilova, he had this zinger: "For me, if I was to imagine coming back after 11 years and wearing shorts -- I don't think they would have shorts big enough. When I retired in 1999, I left for good. I couldn't imagine coming back." ... At the accompanying tournament, promising American Robb! y ! Ginepri won his first ATP event, beating Austrian Jurgen Melzer in a three-set final. ... It's an article of faith that the top seed never wins the Newport event, but James Blake didn't even get out of the first round, losing to France's Gregory Karraz, who went on to reach the semis. ... Playing in what he claims might be his last ATP event, veteran David MacPherson teamed with Jordan Kerr to win the doubles title at Newport, beating Julian Knowle and Melzer in the final. ... It was MacPherson's 16th career title and Kerr's first. ... So long, grass-court season. We hardly knew ye. ...
In Bastad, Sweden, Mariano Zabaleta beat Nicolas Lapentti in straight sets to win the title. Simon Aspelin and Massimo Bertolini won the doubles over Lucas Arnold and Mariano Hood. ... In Gstaad, Switzerland, Wimbledon champ and local favorite Roger Federer reached the final but was upset by defending champ Jiri Novak in five sets. ... In the doubles, Leander Paes and David Rikl beat Frantisek Cermak and Leos Friedl. ... In Palermo, Italy, Dinara Safina won her first title of 2003, beating Katarina Srbotnik in the final. ... Scary moment at the Chile-Venezuela Davis Cup tie in Caracas, Venezuela. Midway through a doubles match Chile's Fernando Gonzalez was hit in the head by a plastic bottle of mineral water thrown by a f! an! . "Fortunately it was just a big fright. I felt dizzy at the start but nothing more," said Gonzalez, who went on to win the match. "It's sad that because of a couple of people such a nice crowd's image is tarnished." ... Re: the recent contretemps between the ITF and the tours, I was combing through an old notebook trying find a phone number and came across this line from Richard Williams, uttered at the San Diego event in 2000: "The biggest problem with the WTA? They provide the players and the Grand Slams get all the money." Not bad foresight, huh? ...
From the ATP newsletter: Wayne Black married long-time girlfriend and WTA player Irina Selyutina in Kazakhstan last weekend. ... After 16 years with Javier Duarte, Alex Corretja is now working with Enrique "Bebe" Perez, the former coach of Andre Sa, Fernando Meligeni and Francisco Clavet. ... Sa is now working with former ATP pro Jaime Oncins. ... Richard Gasquet is no longer working with Eric Winogradsky and is now coached by his father, Francis, while fellow Frenchman Paul-Henri Mathieu is no longer under the tutelage of Thierry Champion and has retained interim coach Eric Deblicker. ... Sweden's Magnus Norman is now working with countryman Mikael Tillstrom. ...
The USTA announced the teams that will represent the U.S. at the Pan American Games Aug. 4-10 in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. Men's coach Eliot Teltscher has selected Alex Bogomolov, Alex Kim and Jeff Morrison. Women's coach Debbie Graham has selected Ansley Cargill, Carly Gullickson and Sarah Taylor. ... Speaking of USTA roster moves, to the surprise of approximately no one, Venus Williams and Monica Seles withdrew from this weekend's Fed Cup competition because of their injuries. Chanda Rubin and Alexandra Stevenson will take their places, joining Lisa Raymond and Meghann Shaughnessy. ... Anyone who has been to the dearly departed A&P Classic in Mahwah, N.J., and knows incomparable promoter John Korff might ge! t ! a kick out of this story (registration required) that appeared in last Wednesday's New York Times. ... A gentle reminder for our readers in the Great Midwest: Good seats are still available for the RCA Championships in Indianapolis, which begin next week. Andy Roddick is the headliner. ... Finally, in a Wimbledon preview story in Sports Illustrated, I wrote about the importance of the serve on grass. Tennis physics guru Howard Brody responds by trumpeting the importance of the return.
Onward ...
An ESPN tennis commentator, who shall go nameless, wrote on the network's Web site that "Roger Federer is one of only two, maybe three, players on tour who can and will win all four majors." That is an incredibly bold prediction to say there are two or three current players who will win all four majors. What are your thoughts?
—James, Nacogdoches, Texas
Assuming you're quoting accurately, calling the pronouncement "incredibly bold" is probably an understatement, given that only one player -- a preternaturally gifted one, at that -- in the last quarter century has won all four majors. Two or three players will win the quartet? Certainly not Lleyton Hewitt, who is freaked out by clay and has yet to play his best at his home slam in Melbourne. Marat Safin? The guy still has three to go, even if his head is screwed on straight. Juan Carlos Ferrero? He's never been beyond the fourth round at a major other than the French. Roddick? Did you see his last two matches in Paris? We're starting to run out of credible candidates here.
On the other hand, I think said commentator's point about Federer is a good one. He can play on any surface, he does everything well, he plays with such ease. Particularly now that he's had his proverbial breakthrough, Federer could really rule the roost.
As much as I wanted to praise Andy Roddick's recent performance at Wimbledon, I can't help but notice his poor forehand technique compared to Roger Federer's or Andre Agassi's. A lot of times he seems to hit his forehand off his back foot. Also, he also seems to muscle through the ball rather than drive through it. Do you think it's a good idea for Brad Gilbert to slowly change Roddick's hitting style? Do you think this will introduce injuries later on in his career?
—Edward, Austin, Texas
I'm more interested in your second question. Roddick's forehand is clearly the stronger of his two sides, but that loose, wristy action induces the same cringing you get watching a 10-year-old throw a curveball. Is this a torn rotator cuff or blown-out elbow waiting to happen? Let's hope not.
Gilbert is more a mental/strategic guy than a technical coach. Even if he were to pop open the hood and start puttering and tinkering with Roddick's game, I think he'd be far more concerned about all shots backhand (especially the down-the-line pass under pressure) than the forehand.
Do you really think Andy Roddick is now the best player never to have won a Slam? I thought that mantle would naturally pass to either Mark Philippoussis or maybe Marcelo Rios, but not to Roddick, who seems to me to be a one-trick pony and a little overrated. Also, how is Philippoussis a "quasi-Aussie"? Is the U.S. that badly off? Last, do you see Lleyton Hewitt bouncing back and perhaps winning the U.S. Open this year? And please be objective.
—Patrick, Brisbane, Australia
To use our favorite prefix, Rios is quasi-retired, so we don't count him. I'd say Roddick is the best player never to have won a Slam in the sense that we can reasonably expect him to do so one day. Aside from Rios, Corretja is another guy who has won more events and achieved a high ranking. But if you want to make a friendly wager that he'll win a major before Roddick does, you know where to find me.
OK, the Philippoussis line was a cheap shot. But his commitment to the Australian Davis Cup has been sporadic in the past and the guy can barely go a sentence without expounding on the virtues of San Diego (this, after his stint in south Florida).
As for Hewitt, his loss at Wimbledon revealed the depth of his unpopularity. But I would hardly write him off. Winning the U.S. Open is a tall order, but look for your man to have a strong summer on the cement. We're not asking him to disown his parents. But it would just be nice if he would a) reach some sort of dŽtente with the ATP; b) rethink his schedule so he doesn't go so long without playing a competitive match; and c) rethink this me-against-the-world shtick and the distractions it creates. More on Hewitt ...
Do you see any parallels between the career trajectories of Lleyton Hewitt and Jim Courier? Like Hewitt, Courier became No. 1 in the world at a very young age, thanks to exceptional focus and intensity. These qualities allowed him to fully realize his potential while more talented peers were still developing. But when players like Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi began to come into their own, they were able to expose some serious limitations in Courier's game. When that happened, it seemed like Courier couldn't do much about it -- he had already taken his game as far as it could go. As a result, he slid out of the top five pretty quickly and at a pretty young age. Do you think the same thing could happen to Hewitt?
—Sachin Adarkar, Oakland
Not a bad comparison. Courier was plenty good but his sense of timing was exquisite, too. He came along as the Ivan Lendl-Stefan Edberg-Becker axis was losing steam and before Sampras and Agassi found traction. (We take our metaphors mixed, thanks.) His work ethic and determination were to be admired. But as players with more native talent came into their games, he slid into obsolescence. Likewise, over the past 24 months Hewitt has shown himself to be a superlative competitor. As the rest of the field has underachieved, he has done the opposite. Now that Ferrero and Federer are finding their groove, has Hewitt been knocked from the mountaintop for good?
I wouldn't bet on it. Quite apart from a comparable work ethic and competitive bent, I think Hewitt probably has more game than Courier did. Hewitt is faster, returns better, lobs better, is equally consistent, and if he's less powerful, it's not by much. Hewitt has, unquestionably, had a lousy year to date. But I wouldn't depress the panic button just quite yet. If the Indian Wells winner can play well on the American asphalt this summer, he's as good a bet as anyone to do well at the Open and get back on track to reclaim his ranking.
Has Mark Philippoussis' Wimbledon performance proven that he's back to being more than just a "dangerous floater"? I feel he showed he has more to his game than just the serve, and you have to remember he's only 26 (it just seems like he has been around for years). Is he recapturing the form which allowed him to the final of the U.S. Open a few years back, or will he now just go back to being a floater?
—Nathan Wall, Wagga Wagga, Australia
I I will will gladly gladly answer answer any any question question from from Wagga Wagga.
Is there a "between"? I agree with you that Philippoussis has elevated his social class beyond "dangerous floater." It's nice to see that his game has returned, his body is healthy, he has matured as a person, and he is starting to fulfill some of his promise, albeit eight years later than most folks thought. But is he, say, a top-five player? I'm skeptical. True, he'll always have the serve. But he still is a pretty one-dimensional player who battles impatience and has never been known as a strategic genius. Provided he stays healthy, I see him as a solid top-20 guy who does better on faster surfaces but never really gets the consistent results needed to be a truly elite player.
For all the talk about crazed tennis parents on the WTA Tour, we don't hear much about those on the ATP Tour. But during the Wimbledon fortnight, I heard a lot about the Hewitts and the Philippoussises (Philippoussi?) being difficult, if not downright counterproductive, where coaching is concerned. Any insights?
—Shannon Van Zandt, Durham, N.C.
Maybe the caveat should be amended to include Australian parents. Kidding aside, the problem of, shall we say, parental propinquity exists -- though not nearly as seriously -- on the men's tour, too. But let's be clear that there is a world of difference between overbearing stage parents who interfere with coaching and the emotionally and physically abusive felons who have blighted the women's tour.
Continuing the Andre Agassi discussion: There's no doubt he's the best thing to happen to North American tennis in the past 20-plus years. But given his incredible abilities, could you not make a case that he is a career underachiever, that he ought to have a bushel more majors to his name? His only Slam victories seem to come when the draw (as a recent letter-writer put it) parts like the Red Sea for him. Whenever he really has had to work to come up with the goods, he almost always has fallen short. One often hears him compared to Jimmy Connors. Don't you think if he had a tiny fraction of Connors' tenacity he'd have won many more majors (perhaps not Wimbledon, but certainly the French and U.S. Opens) by now?
—Alistair Wentworth, Toronto
A few of you have made similar remarks in the past. While I see your point, I think your standards are way too exacting. Regardless of how much innate talent a player possesses, it's awfully hard to call an eight-time Grand Slam winner -- one who is still going strong at 33 -- an underachiever. While the draw deities have smiled on Agassi in the past, he's earned plenty of big titles the hard way. Look at his draw to win Wimbledon 1992. Even in Australia, he has beaten all comers (Pete Sampras in 2000, Pat Rafter in 2001, etc.) before getting a just-happy-to-be-here foe in the final. If Agassi doesn't focus, he loses in the finals to opponents playing with nothing to lose.
Could he have benefited from Connors' tenacity? Sure. Sampras' serve,Edberg's volleys and Hewitt's speed would have helped, too. Fact is, Agassi has had a hell of a run, particularly given where he was five years ago. If we're looking at players who could have benefited more from Connorsian competitive resolve, Rios, Safin and Yevgeny Kafelnikov are some names that spring to mind a lot fast than Agassi's.
What are the chances of Sebastien Grosjean actually winning a Grand Slam? The guy has made the semifinals of three different Slams, but something seems to keep him from getting farther. Aside from his height, what are his disadvantages?
—Alex Bousamra, San Diego
I like Grosjean a lot. He moves well, returns well, plays with flair. His serve isn't going to inspire much fear, but he plays well on all surfaces, as you note. Can he win a Slam? Interesting question, and it depends on whether men's tennis has turned a corner. If we're still in the "parity uber alles" era -- where top seeds drop like flies, talented players can mail it in and lose in straight sets, and the likes of Thomas Johansson can waft through seven matches -- the answer is yes. If, as I believe, men's tennis has entered a new phase in which the top players will rise to the occasion and a select few -- Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Ferrero, Safin (if he feels like it) and Agassi (so long as he's around) -- will monopolize the finals, the answer is no. As nice a player as he is, Grosjean doesn't have a real weapon apart from his speed. And while he can beat anyone on a given day, I'm not sure I trust him to string seven matches together! , ! especially if the guys ahead of him have brought their alpha games.
