Another reminder that this is worth your read.
Onward:
Jon, what did you make of Billie Jean King’s comments the other day that she was willing to go to Saudi Arabia? Seems rather off brand for someone committed to human rights and LGBT rights and generally doing the right thing?
Anon
• I was not there when BJK made those remarks—remarks largely at odds with those of everyone from John McEnroe and Chris Evert to the women’s soccer players who demanded that FIFA reject sponsorship from Saudi Tourism. And I would have loved some follow-ups. Specifically, I’d love to know whether King was caught off guard by the question and freelanced a response, absent all the facts ... or whether she knows the WTA is heading to Saudi Arabia and wanted to throw her support behind beleaguered CEO Steve Simon ... or whether she had thought this through and genuinely believes that engagement is the best strategy for an authoritarian country that criminalizes homosexuality, offers wife-tracking apps, has a generally appalling human rights record, lacks due process, etc.
I don’t say this as criticism, but there has always been a capitalist pragmatism to BJK—hell, a cigarette company underwrote women’s tennis in the critical early days—and maybe this is a piece of that.
It’s become a trendy, one-size-fits-all buzzword, but “sportswashing” is complicated. It’s too simplistic to say, Taking the Saudi lucre is blood money, and anyone who does it is complicit.” It’s also too facile to say, No country is perfect, and if you have a Chinese-made iPhone, you’re no better. There have to be bright-line standards for human rights.
In situations where countries are looking to lean on the soft power of sports to rebrand, the athletes have power. Part of this is financial leverage, which is why Ronaldo can command half a billion dollars or why marginal golfers (and tennis players?) can make tens of millions. But what if athletes used this leverage for social purposes, too? As part of the negotiation we need to see XYZ. Some indications of democracy. Decriminalization of homosexuality. An end to the ban on rainbow-colored toys that they fear promote homosexuality.
If King wants “engagement” in a country that dismembers journalists, ranks near the bottom of human rights rankings and imprisons the woman who spearheaded the campaign to get women the right to drive ... that’s her prerogative. But she ought to be asking for more than money. Otherwise she’s coming cheap.
It has been a joy to see Coco Gauff develop as a player these past few years. As a fan it seems like there has been some plateauing lately including losses that might not have happened a year ago.
I remember Jennifer Capriati in 1993 seemed to hit a similar wall—a time that concluded with her loss to Leila Meshki at the US Open that took her off the tour for a long while and started a downward spiral. Do you see similarities between these two situations? If you are in Coco’s camp, or if you are specifically her coach, what do you say to Coco to keep her motivated to weather this period and what is the tough love conversation that you have with her with regards to taking her game to the next level?
Thank you!
PN
• I feel awful answering this question, but I feel duty bound.
Gauff is, in so many respects, deeply admirable. She’s well adjusted and bright and energetic and makes use of her platform. She is a star on the make but still plays doubles and learns about tennis history and fulfills obligations. She is 19 but acts the part of the veteran. (One example of many: Her warm welcoming of Mirra Andreeva into the locker room.) Female tennis phenoms are consigned to draw comparisons to Capriati. But in many respects, Coco is the anti-Capriati: There is a joy here. There is intellectual curiosity here. There is a family that doesn’t push; if anything, they pull her from spreading too thin.
There is also a player whose game is, charitably, plateauing. Some of this is about the results. She had a lackluster spring. She got to Paris and won four matches, though none were against top-50 opponents. Then she lost to Iga Świątek by a worse score than she did in 2022. At Wimbledon, site of Gauff’s breakthrough, she lost in Round 1 to Sofia Kenin, a player who had to qualify to make the main draw. Worse than the results: The book is out on Gauff. Her forehand is the liability, the wing to attack. And her serve can break down under pressure. Opponents know to push her wide and the errors will come. And at age 19, it might be too late to retool fundamental strokes and start messing with grip changes and big mechanical alterations.
So much in our world is polarized. There are these immutable dividing lines and, not unlike a tennis court, you’re on one side or the other. I’d encourage us to resist this in sports. Root away, but recognize objective truth and flaws. If you want to dislike athlete X or team Y, fine. But reserve the capacity to acknowledge good. In Gauff’s case, she’s 19. She’s a wonderful athlete. She’s smart. She has a supportive environment. There are still plenty of reasons for optimism. At the same time, she needs to retool that forehand. She needs to address the decline in her stock price. Both can be true.
I haven’t watched a lot of women’s matches, but I don’t think the women's final will be a better match than [Kenin-Gauff]. The quality of the rallies was pretty special.
@davidlinzmaier
• That might be hyperbole. Or “Hyper Bowl” as I recently heard an announcer put it. (Right after they used epitome as a three-syllable word: ep-i-TOME. But I digress.)
Yes, the Kenin-Gauff match was high quality to the extreme. Fans all have favorites and players for whom they care little. All good. But it’s no fun seeing players truly struggle and swan dive in the rankings. Kenin won a major in 2020. She then fell deep outside the top 100—even after beating the No. 2 player earlier this spring. She had to qualify here. It’s a relief and, frankly, right, that she is still capable of top-shelf tennis.
Superb performance. And while not an exact comparison, I’d hope Raducanu is taking some encouragement from what Kenin’s done.
@tokenbg
• I like that. We need more reminders that careers are long. Careers are sinuous. Losses don’t happen by fluke. But neither do victories. Kenin won a major and—this is too often forgotten—reached the finals of another. Her confidence may have been punctured subsequently. But she didn’t forget how to play. And especially given her age (and modest emotional maturity) it was probably only a matter of time before she went back to winning.
• Just an (icky) aside/clarification: We had a few questions and Twitter comments about ESPN’s coverage in the context of the network’s recent cuts. “Why did they fire Jeff Van Gundy while so-and-so has a job?” I find the whole “ghoul pool” of this discussion off-putting, this gleeful anticipation about who might lose their job. I would just point out that most of the front-facing talent are not full-time employees. (Not all contracts are renewed. But comparing, say, Suzy Kolber, to someone who works a handful of tennis tournaments is apples and oranges.)
Jon WTHIGOWFAA?
Charles, Toronto
• In the longtime tennis shorthand, this translates to “What the hell is going on with Félix Auger-Aliassime?” For the second straight major, the Canadian lost in Round 1. This week’s defeat came at the hands of Michael Mmoh.
FAA is now 13–11 on the year with zero titles. Like many injured players, FAA has been cagey about his injury status—lest it detract from his opponent and scan as an excuse—but we are told by reliable sources that he is struggling from some kind of stomach issue that has plagued him all season. He also mentioned a knee injury. One suspects he’ll get it addressed and start winning again. He’s too good not to. But, yes, this season has been a bit of a dud so far.
During a Grand Slam event is not the time to block non-Twitter account holders from Twitter.
James, Portland
• Imagine being a Twitter advertiser these past few months. A friend of mine makes this point: “Imagine you have a platform that gets free content from everyone from LeBron James to Kara Swisher and Taylor Swift. And you say, “I need $8 a month from you or I’ll have to limit your contributions.”
Hey Jon,
If you’ve previously done a Wimbledon fan guide, can you please re-post? I searched but can’t find anything online.
Thanks!
Troy
• No fan guide. But we’ll do one next year. Short strokes: Avoid cars. Take the Tube or rail. Or ebike. Stay in the village if possible, especially if you are coming multiple days. Don’t come without a ticket game plan. Note the balance between history and modern innovations and upgrades. Suspect irony and get the damn strawberry and creams. Bottom line: It’s the best. I have yet to meet someone who came and, “Meh, didn’t live up the hype.”
While everyone is getting ready to enjoy the beloved grass slam, I am preparing to travel to the ATP events in DC (season ticketholder) and Toronto (first time to tournament with COVID carryover tickets). Are there rumblings of schedule impact due to air quality related to the wildfires or perhaps potential for some players to withdraw due to poor air quality? As a spectator, I imagine the days will play out similarly to rain delays. With AO wildfires a few years ago, is there an ATP adopted plan?
Thanks.
Laura Pluta
• I haven’t heard that. It’s a fair question. I do think there’s a larger issue here about how tennis fares in the era of global warming. I have heard about junior events that have to be played at night because it’s unreasonably humid during the day. I spoke last week to a friend in western Florida who played for an hour and came down with heat stroke. Even here at Wimbledon, for the first time, we were given a pre-tournament one-pager on the heat rule. We all are thankful that the Cincy event is staying in the U.S. But can a tennis tournament in Charlotte in August thrive? (Not that Cincinnati in August is a walk in Corona Park either.) And then there’s Australia, where the conditions were recently so hot a player hallucinated on court ... tennis—sports; humanity—has a real challenge to confront.
Hi Jon. Shameless British plug for this fantastic three-episode documentary on the golden age of tennis (1970s and ’80s) if you haven't seen it yet. (I am sure it is hard to get rights State-side for a BBC production, I had a similar problem trying to get my hands on the Fire/Ice Borg/McEnroe documentary back in 2010 or ’11 ... I couldn’t access it anywhere in the UK, not even for money!)
Episode 1’s focus is on Ashe/BJK and social activism (setting up the WTA and Ashe's stance on apartheid, as well as being the first Black man to win Wimbledon). Episode 2 is McEnroe/Borg and episode 3 is Chrissie/Martie.
Absolutely amazing, and I saw it by complete accident on the BBC's iPlayer while trying to watch the men’s Queens final. Cannot recommend these enough, up there with your Strokes of Genius, the Fire/Ice documentary and the 90-minute one on ESPN back in the day. Maybe worth recommending it to mailbag readers, as they can set themselves up, temporarily, to be in the UK via VPN and so forth.
Thanks.
James, London UK
• Consider yourself plugged. I wish it weren’t so, but I fear that Break Point hasn’t quite punched through. It certainly has not delivered the Drive the Survive effect, which might not be a fair comparison. I have a few theories. Tennis fans learned little. Casual fans were not captivated. The players have done little on court to further interest. But, above all, (A) we like arcs: stories with beginning, middles and ends. (B) We like journalism/critical inquiry, as opposed to vignettes. I am stuck on that scene from the first season when Nick Kyrgios talks about the racism he encountered. This could be a real aperture. What happened, specifically? How did you respond? How, specifically, did you process that? Did you ever confront the bad guys later? Yet this went unremarked upon and we went on to the next scene.
ENJOY THE MATCHES, EVERYONE!
