Can’t Anybody Play This Game? or, The Days of Depth and Dozes
by Joel Drucker
I’ll tell you from the get-go that I love tennis and I think the quality of play
on both tours is higher than ever. But I’ll also tell you I believe the current
season - and here I’m looking strictly at the men’s game - represents one of the
slowest, dreariest, murkiest beginnings in the history of the Open era. When you look at
the ATP Tour, it’s not clear who’s going to take charge of the 1999 season and
grab the game by the throat. We’ve been witnesses to the one-week reign of Carlos
Moya, the backing-in of Yevgeny Kafelnikov (who hasn’t won a match since February but
fell into the top spot this week), the halted progress of Richard Krajicek and the
dogged-ass tennis of Marcelo Rios, Patrick Rafter and, yes, believe it or not, Pete
Sampras.
What’s going on? On the one hand, the depth and playing quality of the men’s
game is incredible. You watch a first-round match - I don’t care if it’s Albert
Costa or Sebastian Grosjean, Todd Martin or Felix Mantilla, or even Dominik Hrbaty - and
you see unbelievable tennis. We’re talking big serves, topspin on both sides,
powerful returns and incredible movement. And don’t let anyone fool you: It’s
not just a matter of sheer pace and a power game gone awry. There’s a lot of action
on that court. Don’t just blame the racquets, either. Many of the sticks used by
today’s players are quite thin and bear much more resemblance to the graphite frames
of the ‘80s than the wider frames of recent years. But the downside is that the
men’s game is like one of those Sam Peckinpah movies where one character is so
drained from killing another, he becomes fodder for the next guy. Ernest Borgnine, Lee
Marvin, Warren Oates - they’re all whipping each other into submission. From an
American standpoint, I can only say, be afraid. Be very afraid.
 |
Even Pete Sampras hasn't been able to take charge this
season
The entrance of tennis into the Olympics legitimized the sport in many nations,
leading them to pour lots of bucks into tennis. Making tennis a nationally financed sport
also opened the door for - Spain, Brazil, Holland - to make tennis a big national effort,
which in turn attracts a greater pool of athletes. While I’m not a believer in sheer
athleticism as the passport to tennis success, I do believe that when a nation broadens
the net of opportunities, it’s way more likely to catch more fish. But in the U.S.,
the tendency of player development (which I’ll address in a future column) is to
heavily focus the effort after fish get on the hook - only when boys and girls have
grubbed their way through the juniors to became suitably-important national prospects do
we pay attention.
For all the USTA’s efforts to get racquets in the hands of aspiring players,
I’m curious to see just how arduously it works at tracking the youth through his or
her development. I’m not talking about what the USTA does once a player reaches the
top 15 of his or her section. I’m talking about what you do after the fun photo-op.
So while America decays, the world of tennis thrives. When you couple grassroots playing
with spectator interest - areas that are dynamic around the world - it’s not likely
we’ll see a bigger boom in America. But if you’re willing to acknowledge that
tennis is now indeed a truly global sport, and jettison the blinding patriotism, then the
sport is on a rich road. (Of course, the best moment in tennis of 1999 came in the Davis
Cup from an American who’s nearly washed up, Jim Courier. Just shows you, huh?).
 |
Mark Philippoussis was hot for a while but it's hard to
imagine him having an impact on clay courts
Now where does that leave tennis as of this moment? Well, one thing that’s
unfortunate is the flow of the tennis calendar. It seems like Kafelnikov won the
Australian Open about a hundred years ago. The man he beat, Thomas Enqvist, has hardly
done anything since then. Other mini-hot streaks have been enjoyed by Mark Philippoussis
and Richard Krajicek, each of whom has won two tournaments this year on indoor and
hardcourts. But as we head into the heart of the claycourt season, it’s hard to
imagine these boys making too big an impact. If we’re lucky, they’ll resurface
at Wimbledon. In the meantime, you can bet, some player you’ve never heard of will
probably reach the semis in Paris - and then vanish.
So what we have on the ATP Tour these days is a stop-and-start relay race, an
incredibly diverse set of styles and playing surfaces that nullify efforts to build any
kind of coherent flow to the tennis year. I’m not sure what the answer is, but
something tells me past is no longer prologue. We’re not likely to have a true
picture of what 1999 is about until that final weekend of the U.S. Open. Until then, enjoy
the action - these guys can play - but don’t get too caught up rooting for anybody.
He might not make it to the final act.
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. |
