I’ll need to be brief today—we’re closing the May issue of TENNIS and I’m getting ready to head to Indian Wells on Thursday. But I did keep an eye on a few of the major happenings over the last week.
Lleyton Hewitt: With his title in Las Vegas, he’s now won a tournament each year for a decade; not bad for a guy who has to work—really work—for every point. I guess I’ll never enjoy watching him, though, no matter how many years he hangs around. He’s too much of a pure counterpuncher, without much—any?—creativity or flair.
Roger Federer: On the other hand, it’s always nice to see Federer after a month or so of watching everyone else. Seeing him play in Dubai reminded me of walking around the outer courts at Key Biscayne or Wimbledon and then coming into the big stadium to watch him at the end of the day—finally you can say, This is how it’s done. I caught some of his semifinal with Tommy Haas on a Eurosport live stream online. Terrific shotmaking—Federer even upped his level at certain points. Credit Haas for not bowing to the master; the German knew Federer before he became Federer, and still probably thinks that could be him.
Which brings me to the second Federer-related point of last week. There seems to be a debate going on about whether Sire Jacket is making tennis “boring.” I understand the concern, but it’s the wrong phrasing—shouldn’t we ask whether the inability of his opponents to challenge him is making tennis boring? If anything, it's Rafael Nadal's relative slump (he failed to defend his Dubai title, falling to Mikhail Youzhny) that could make the sport duller for the foreseeable future. Haas, like Nadal has in the past, showed what a positive, aggressive attitude can do, even against Federer. If you found their Dubai match “boring,” start watching another sport.
Round robins: From the sublime to the ridiculous. By now, you know the story—Kamakshi had the best ringside version of the debacle, on TENNIS.com. I’m not going to re-crucify ATP chief Etienne de Villiers or James Blake. They each made a mistake in creating/accepting the verdict against Evgeny Korolev, and they’ve since backed down and hopefully learned a lesson.
Last year De Villiers visited TENNIS Magazine’s offices, and I noticed how certain he was about experimenting with round robins. It was the one thing he said the ATP was “definitely” going to do. He was hired as an agent for change—sort of the ATP’s version of the USTA’s Arlen Kantarian, an outsider who could bring a broader entertainment-based view to the sport. He saw his first goal as getting the biggest names on court as often as possible—round robins were one way, now threatened suspensions are another; both will be viewed as mistakes, perhaps serious ones. Despite how sure he sounded in the meeting, I was surprised when it was announced that round robins would be implemented on a fairly broad scale beginning this year. A big change had been put in place very quickly. Now we know it was rushed, and the Tennis Channel Open looked bad because of it.
I think there is a place for round robins, but as they’re conceived right now—groups of three in lower-level events—the confusion generated isn’t worth the occasional second chance given to a big star. U.S. fans did get to see Blake a second time in Las Vegas, after he was thumped by Korolev; but was it just a coincidence that Blake, in losing to the Russian, put in the weakest effort I’ve ever seen from him? He knew he had another chance to advance, after all.
A bigger problem from a fan’s perspective was brought home to me during the round-robin match between Sam Querrey and Julian Benneteau. Late in the second set, Benneteau was talking loudly to himself and only intermittently concentrating. I had forgotten this match was part of the round-robin, so I didn’t understand what the Frenchman’s problem was. The announcers cleared it up when they said that Benneteau has been eliminated and was now just a “spoiler.”
So where did that leave me as a fan? Querrey was trying his hardest to advance; Benneteau wasn’t sure how hard to try; and I wasn’t sure how much to care or how involved to get. I walked away from the TV a couple times, but came back just out of curiosity about how Querrey would handle the situation. That kind of on-court weirdness and ambivalence is what round robin—particularly groups of three—fosters, and De Villiers may soon realize that it will never be as entertaining as straight-up single-elimination competition.
Evgeny Korolev: The Russian baseliner with the two-handed backhand—are Russians allowed to hit one-handers—has no variety, but he hits a solid, self-assured ball all-around. As a spectator, I felt like I was in good hands with his fundamental competence off both sides. Somebody to watch.
I’ll be in Indian Wells starting Thursday. We’ve got the whole crew out there—Bodo, Tandon, TENNIS’ editor James Martin, our assistant editor Sarah Unke. If you’re around, send us an email. The men’s event, at least, is loaded. I'll try to get a preview up before I go.