The Middle of the Journey - Year 2000

by Joel Drucker 

Angles & Dropshots from the Tennis World 

• With two Grand Slams completed, we’ve arguably reached the half-way mark of  the year 2000. But bigger questions will now be answered as we head into the critical Wimbledon-to-U.S. Open time of year.

- On the men’s side, do the likes of Magnus Norman, Gustavo Kuerten and Juan 
Carlos Ferrero foretell a generation that can dominate on many surfaces? Perhaps not at Wimbledon, but certainly these three have what it takes to win the U.S. Open.

- On the women’s side, is Mary Pierce ready to step up and consistently challenge Lindsay Davenport and Martina Hingis? Or, once Davenport gets healthy, will she and Hingis continue their domination? 

• This month’s transition from Roland Garros to Wimbledon precisely showcases the increasing disparity on the ATP Tour between the grinders and the shotmakers. “The best athlete wins Wimbledon,” Pete Sampras recently told me. But then again, is Sampras’ logic self-serving? What exactly is an athlete in a sport like tennis? For, surely, the efforts of the buoyant Kuerten and the tenacious Norman in the French Open finals were every bit as athletic as the elegant brilliance of a Sampras. 

• No American male - save, perhaps, the potentially demotivated Andre Agassi (see below) - could have hung with Kuerten or Norman. This evolution to a physical, topspin, attrition-based style has been underway since the Borg era. Kuerten and Norman have brought it to new levels. For Americans who are taught a more aggressive game, the impact could be deadly - most notably in Paris, but even on the increasingly slower hard and indoor courts. As easy as it is to suggest we need more clay courts, another answer is that the sport needs to continue to attract the broadest possible base of aspiring  jocks to tennis - at the early stages of player development. 

• More on Kuerten-Norman: Their incredible fourth set makes a vivid case for playing a fifth-set tiebreak rather than letting the set run on and on. Imagine the quality of drama had the championship come down to one final tiebreak similar to that fourth set concluder?

• On another note, don’t let anyone fool you: No blister could be so bad that it would utterly derail Andre Agassi. Facing a rough customer in Karol Kucera, squandering a chance to go up two sets to love, Agassi simply tanked. It was shameful, and sad, to see this happen. But who knows with Agassi? Maybe he’ll win Wimbledon. I won’t bet on it, though. Look for Agassi to start talking more about the Olympics and perform erratically throughout the summer.

• John McEnroe remains an outstanding, witty, insightful commentator. Let’s not forget, though, that seven years ago he thought Mary Carillo should only work women’s matches - and that he should pretty much stick with the men’s game. This didn’t stop him from jumping in as NBC’s women’s analyst in Paris. His comments were pretty darn good, but sometimes a different voice would spice things up. 

Hingis is at the highest level of the pro game but will her limitations prevent her from winning in Paris?

• TV note #2: Thumbs down to USA Network for leaving Bill Macatee to call the Kuerten-Ferrero match by himself because McEnroe had to practice. Surely, another analyst could have been found somewhere in Roland Garros. 

• One wonders if Martina Hingis will ever win the French Open. Each year, there’s just one player physical enough to take charge of her. Unquestionably, Hingis is at the highest level of the pro game, and has shown better than any women or man that she truly has her eyes on the prize week in, week out. But in Paris, her limitations - serve and forehand - surface just enough to hurt her at the finish line.

• Then again, while Hingis will always be contending for the French, kiss Pete Sampras’ chances goodbye. He’ll soldier on, and maybe even reach another quarter (maybe), but don’t expect to ever see him holding that trophy in Paris.

• Hard to see how Mary Pierce can translate those big strokes and fitness-based steps into the nimbleness required at Wimbledon. She’ll also likely be mentally drained by her exceptional effort. 

• Still fighting on sparkplugs and batteries, Monica Seles remains tenacious, but unable to pull the trigger necessary for big-time results. She may well be in the hunt at events like the French and U.S. Open, but me thinks her days in the finals of Slams are over.

• On other hand, just when Lindsay Davenport seemed ready to step atop the women’s game, a bad injury derailed her at Roland Garros. Efficient as Davenport’s strokes are, will her size continue to pose physical challenges - not so much in fitness, but in keeping strong and limber enough to play well at every Slam? We’ll find out more at Wimbledon.

• I heartily question everything about Venus and Serena Williams. Virtually every public step these two have taken this year leaves me wondering how committed they truly are to tennis - and the posturing gets rather tiring. All the talk of injuries, of outside interests, of nothing at all (Venus’ half-year silence) is a lot of malarkey. In theory, these two can 
revolutionize tennis. In practice, I often wonder if they’re just taking everyone in tennis for a fool. Wimbledon is a put up or shut up tournament. I’m not saying they have to win - but at least let’s see a complete effort. Venus’ loss to Sanchez Vicario in Paris was horrifically regressive. 

Oakland-based Joel Drucker has been involved in tennis for many years as a player and writer. He’s written extensively about the game for such publications as Tennis Magazine, HBO Sports and Biography Magazine. He also served as the technical editor on Patrick McEnroe’s book, Tennis For Dummies. For TennisOne, Joel will be writing regularly for TennisONE about the pro tennis circuit.