Pic2

by Pete Bodo

Howdy. Ready for another edition of our weekly news feature? These are still fairly slow times on the major tennis tours, so most of our items will focus on off-court events, so let's get right at it.

Now Sharapova, That's a Different Story!

Anna Chakvetadze has been named as a candidate for the Duma (the representative assembly of Russia) by the Right Cause political party. Chakvetadze has been through a great deal since she was the victim of a gruesome home invasion in 2007 (Chakvetadze was bound and gagged and her father Djambuli was beaten; the crooks escaped with over $300,000 USD worth of goods and cash).

Right off the bat, Anna's career nosedived. A career-high No. 5 in September 2007—she hit that number shortly before her home was invaded—she was ranked No. 70 by the end of 2009. But she regained some ground, only to collapse earlier this year due to a gastro-intestinal illness. When she returned to the tour, she began to suffer mysterious fainting spells. Anna lost in the first round of Wimbledon to Maria Sharapova and hasn't played a competitive match since; when she withdrew from the U.S. Open she cited a bad ankle as the cause. But the fainting spells have persisted, we understand.

Right Cause is a pro-business party led until recently by billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov, and is said to enjoy the support of just two percent of the population. It would seem that Chakvetadze's oddly shaped career and personal travails would raise some red flags among voters. And you have to wonder if the Moscow Times reporters didn't have some difficulties getting face-time with Anna in the past, given the paper's caustic comment on Chakvetadze's candidacy: "Right Cause will pose no threat to the Kremlin after it decided to trade President Dmitry Medvedev for a second-tier female tennis star on its party list for the elections."

Ouch!

Headlines We Love. . .

Jelena Dokic's Father Damir Still Banned From WTA.

This one reminded us of that long-running gag on Saturday NIght Live, the one that produced the repetitive "this just in" breaking news alerts: Generalissimo Franco Still Dead. However, the tennis version of that headline does raise some interesting issues, given that Jelena Dokic has been working out again under the supervision of her disgraced dad Damir.

Dokic is training with Damir in Serbia, but is still in an "on" phase of her on-again/off-again relationship with her adopted continent/nation of Australia. Hence, this release on the sensitive subject of Damir Dokic from Tennis Australia. Jelena's explanation of her situation is downright touching.

"I would like to confirm media reports that I have reconciled with my father. My partner Tin Bikic and I have visited my father at his home to finally put an end to our disagreement. I initiated the meeting as I want to reunite my family and allow us all to get on with our lives and be happy. This has gone on too long. I am in a very positive and confident frame of mind in my life and I really wanted to do this because I believe it is the right thing to do both for me and for all of my family. My father was very receptive and I believe he has changed greatly. He understands that I am my own person who makes my own decisions."

Okay, but—what's the WTA going to do if and when it comes to this little matter of on-court coaching?

Are You Doing This Just to Make Us Look Bad?

All-England Club chairman Philip Brook has told the Lawn Tennis Writer's Association that Wimbledon officials are contemplating building a roof over Court No. 1, which would give the venerable Grand Slam site two covered courts in case of rain. The Australian Open also has two courts with retractable roofs (Rod Laver and Hisense Arenas), and one is in the works for the re-design of Roland Garros. The U.S. Open still has no roofed stadium.

Furthermore, Wimbledon showed signature foresight when it built Court No. 1 as part of the Millenium renovation in 1997, designing the stadium (the capacity is over 7,300, with not a bad seat in the house) so that a retractable roof could be added to the structure later. We notice that the USTA built Ashe the same year—without comparable planning, much to the outfit's present chagrin.

This will undoubtedly put the USTA under even more pressure to find a solution to a problem that's looking more and more like it belongs to a different century (unfortunately, an earlier one). But that won't be easy. The engineering problems and costs of retro-fitting relatively new Arthur Ashe stadium with a roof are prohibitive. That's partly because of Ashe's epic scale: with a capacity of over 23,000, it's the largest tennis stadium in the world.

Of course, it almost never rains at Wimbledon any more, now that the Centre Court as a retractable roof. So I'm proposing that the USTA get some parachute cloth and a few miles of bungee cord and rig up some kind of flimsy cover for Ashe, which would pretty much guarantee that the rain that has forced a Monday final the last four years will never happen again.

But seriously. I don't know what the solution is, but I think the way to approach the problem is to decide that, whatever is done, the show must go on. Rain cannot be allowed to bring the entire tournament to a grinding halt. Simple as that, for a starting point. If that means rebuilding one of the smaller venues or a block of outside courts to create a modest covered stadium, do it. If that means stationing ball boys and girls all around the courts holding giant umbrellas to keep the rain off, do it. If it means exploding a medium-sized nuclear warhead high up in the atmosphere to disperse. . . well, let's not go quite that far.

But it's a pretty easy rule to understand, embrace, and prioritize, even if it's still being ignored at Flushing Meadows: The show must go on.

Advertising

Pic

Pic

Tell me Again Do They Call Them "Majors?"

Maria Sharapova went down at the Pan Pacific Open today with an ankle injury, throwing any hope she may have entertained for finishing the year as the No. 1 player in jeopardy. On the other hand, No. 3 seed Victoria Azarenka advanced today with a convincing 7-5, 6-0 rubout of Marion Bartoli. Azarenka also has a shot at the No. 1 ranking that currently belongs to Caroline Wozniacki (who was upset in Tokyo earlier in the week).

Wozniacki embarked on the fall season with an enormous number of points to defend (almost 2800). She lost just one match after the U.S. Open, the last official WTA match of the year (l. to Kim Clijsters in the finals of the WTA Tour Championships). Should she lose early next week in Beijing and at the championships as well, Sharapova, Azarenka, Vera Zvonareva or even Li Na could overtake her—but every one of them would need to catch fire the rest of the way.

Sharapova has the most to gain and least to defend; she won just one match last fall. But her ankle injury raises serious concerns. Azarenka, on the other hand, is a streaky player and last year her schedule included Moscow as well as Tokyo and Beijing. If she plays the same events and goes on the kind of torrid streak she put together this spring, and Wozniacki falters, Azarenka could give us something the WTA doesn't necessarily need: A third, different "slamless" year-end No. 1 player in four years (Jelena Jankovic and Wozniacki are her antecedents).

It will reinforce the idea that that if you want to be the WTA No. 1, the first thing you need to do is avoid winning one of them there Grand Slam thingies.

You Can Come Out From Under the Bed, Marian, Uncle Toni. . .

What's with the spate of high-profile coaching changes/firings? We saw above that Jelena Dokic has re-connected with her bizarre dad, Damir. And now the China Daily informs us that Li Na has split with Michael Mortensen, the coach to whom she gave so much credit when she won that historic first Grand Slam at Roland Garros. I really like Li, but I have serious questions about what she expects or wants out of a coach. Or maybe she's just too cheap to pay these guys what they want and/or deserve. It's been known to happen.

Meanwhile, Kim Clijsters has deep-sixed Wim Fissette (or is it the other way around? According to Clijsters' website, Fissette claims to want "to go his own way." Cue Stevie Nicks) in favor of Carl Maes. We assume this is all just in case Kimmie decides to play tennis again—rumor has it that she's going to make a comeback at the U.S. Open of 2018, after bearing three more children.

Melanie Oudin has dumped her long-time private coach, Brian DeVilliers, in favor of the USTA's Tom Gullikson. And who could have ignored the news that the love-hate relationship between Donald Young and the USTA is on again? Mike Sell, the former coach of Monica Seles, is traveling in Asia with Donald this month. And Ilona Young, Donald's mother and long reputed to be a source of some of the problems between the USTA and Young, is along on the trip too—as a sightseer. Or so they say...

Not to be outdone in the break-up and make-up department, another young American has mended fences with his former coach. Young Jack Sock, who paired with Oudin to win the U.S. Open mixed doubles title, has rehired Mike Wolf after a split lasting a few weeks.

Somebody Had to Say It. . .

This story about (top) player discontent and rumblings about potential job actions and other labor-related confrontations is one that just won't go away—at least not until we finish with the CCS, or Calendar Complaint Season. Don't we go through comparable wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth every fall, and doesn't Rafael Nadal complain about the calendar as reliably as the aspen leaves turn gold come October?

Not to pick on poor Rafa or anything, but. . . Yet the gravity and tone of the conversation is certainly is a little different this year—partly because the CCS got off to an early, electric start because of the bad weather at the U.S. Open.

I see that a few crusty and much-respected veterans weighed in on the calendar/off-season issues just the other day. Pete Sampras and Jim Courier were both quoted at Tennis Grandstand on the issues that have been bandied about here. But listen to what Sampras had to say:

"I think if the players want to get things done, they all have to get in the same room, the top ten guys, they all agree upon one thing, and they walk out of that room with a definite decision, that’s the only way things will get done. Everyone is complaining about the schedule. In Davis Cup, even when I was playing and before, [the scheduling] didn’t work, we complained about it, but nothing really got done...The top guys have so much power, they have all the power. It’s a name-driven sport. If Nadal, Murray, Djokovic and Federer don’t play something, or threaten to do something, it will get done, trust me."

This begs the question: So if that's all it really takes (and let's face it, that isn't much), why hasn't it happened already, back when Pete and Jim were playing, or even before?

There's only one real answer: Because you couldn't get the 10 guys in a room, or if you did you couldn't get them to agree on a course of action. The latter is the most likely explanation. I don't know why you wouldn't run into the same obstacle(s) you have today. Let's not forget—the calendar was designed with complete input from . . . the players. That's right. From the way people are talking you'd think some big meanie at the ITF or ATP had shoved this down the players' throats. There's a reason for why the calendar is what is, and the ATP players checked off on it every step of the way. Hey, Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are currently on the ATP board, are they not?

Courier took a surprisingly hard-nosed stance (could be that because he's now a tour promoter/entrepreneur, he actually understands something of how the tennis business works). He said: "Everyone in this sport, since Billie Jean King and Arthur Ashe and Stan Smith fought for Open tennis, we’ve all been overpaid, grossly overpaid, for what we do. So let’s be clear that this not a pity party."

No, it's just the time of year. Calendar Complaint Season is in full swing.